How to argue in a weasel-ey manner, or...

[chargirlgenius]

...How I learned to stop worrying and be disingenuous when I was losing on substance

“Honey, if you think that was insulting I’d hate to see how you handled a real insult!”

Closely related to: “I’m not insulting you. Believe me, when I’m insulting you, you’ll know it.” (In other words, I can say whatever the hell I want, and you’re not allowed to take offense at it.)

“I’m only talking about you if my completely insulting post describes you.” (In other words, if you’re offended, it’s still your own fault.)

“My post wasn’t about you, even though enough of the pertinent details are eerily close to you.” (In other words, I can say whatever the hell I want, and you’re not allowed to take offense at it.)

“I just tell the truth as I see it.” (In other words, when it’s me against the world, *obviously* the whole world is wrong.)

And especially, remove the offending post/comment so you can say “I didn’t say that!” when people try to actually argue the points with you down the road.

The nice part about these phrases, is that it's a pretty nice cue for knowing when the person has totally lost all the substance of their original point.

PS: And why, OH WHY, does every time somebody suggests some quick and dirty things that people *could* do to improve their look, do people feel like it’s an attack upon them? Folks, there’s no reason to defend why you do things the way you do. It’s *fine*. It’s really fine. You make your own choices for whatever your reasons are. However, if you WANT to look a little more medieval, then read the list. If you don’t, then just go read something else.

Comments

[math5.livejournal.com]

However, if you WANT to look a little more medieval, then read the list. If you don’t, then just go read something else.
You want to force people to READ!!!111!!

(sorry)

[isabelladangelo.livejournal.com]

Oh noes! What about those of us that are il-lit-er-ate? How dare anyone discriminate against us!!!!!!!!

:-)

[chargirlgenius.livejournal.com]

Do you want to read this, or that? It's like asking Henry, "do you want the tractor shirt, or the bulldozer shirt?"

[thatpotteryguy.livejournal.com]

Like the donkey that starved between two bales of hay?

Fun with semiotics.

[strawberrykaren.livejournal.com]

Original post lacked context of "Here's some simple steps to look more historically accurate." It just said, "The Best, Easiest Things To Avoid or Remove from your SCA Kit," without suggesting why one might want to remove them. Why is it "better" or "easier" if the alternative is the acquisition of more stuff?

I can see why people thought it was an attack on them. See the word "you" in the title of the original post? A reader could easily take that to mean him (or, in general, the organization which is represented by the readership of that forum).

Dunno. I guess I've got dogs on both sides of the fight, really, and it leaves me with an overall sense of "meh." Everybody makes compromises. Some people just set their standards at a different series of compromises.

Re: Fun with semiotics.

[chargirlgenius.livejournal.com]

I guess I’m tired of having to walk on eggshells and pick my words so carefully so as to not offend anybody who might be hurt at the idea that I’m suggesting ways to “improve” their look. As if it’s not good enough already! How dare you suggest that I even need improvement! Etc. etc. etc. When can we just start posting things honestly? If you want to look more accurate, do xyz. If you don’t, just move right along…

And if somebody wants to argue with me, I’d just appreciate if they didn’t weasel out of everything and keep changing the parameters of the discussion. Ugh.

Re: Fun with semiotics.

[bunnyjadwiga.livejournal.com]

Once you've been in a discussion with someone you really like who finds people wearing non-period clothing and sleeping in nylon tents messes with her SCA experience, it's all kinda emotionally draining one way or another.

I mean, I have sympathy for the fact that some people's experience is damaged by my lack of visible authenticity; but I don't want to give up what I do in order to do what they do, and I've not found a way to make it otherwise. When they complain, I find it hard not to get defensive. Which sucks for everyone.

On the other hand, there are some people who just like to be snarky and bullying who use one side or the other -- sometimes both sides at the same time-- of the authenticity debate to be nasty, and that makes it really awful.

Re: Fun with semiotics.

[reabhecc.livejournal.com]

See, I'm fine with "you play your way and I'll play mine" to an extent (public near-nudity and really loud drunken parties at 2am in the quiet zone = bad).

I just don't get the people who take offense at a suggestion. Snark, sure. Order from on high, okay. But a "hey, here are some good ideas"? that's just someone being too tetchy for sense.

Re: Fun with semiotics.

[strawberrykaren.livejournal.com]

I'm not saying that you have to choose your words carefully. I can understand why someone would think that the "you," in that instance, means "you-the-reader."

(See? Was not necessarily talking about you-chargirlgenius, but an abstract you.)

Post things honestly. No skin off my nose. But negative reactions happen, and scratching one's head and wondering why negative reactions happen from an apparently-benign stimulus is pot-stirring, even if the reaction does seem to boil down to trolling. Negative reaction happened because of "you," not because of you. ;)

At no point in the original posting was there anything about "improving" one's look. Just what's easy & good to remove from your kit. I understand the intended connotation, as did you-chargirlgenius. Others -- who may have so many beloved belt-favors that it looks like they're wearing raggedy tutus over their T-tunics -- might not.

Organizationally, the SCA supports the gamut; interpersonally, longer-term participants generally observe that how they are perceived comes from a set of choices, or paths. It's the individual participant who chooses his or her own path. I personally think it's best to keep the cheerleading towards one's path on a subliminal level (that is, leading by example), rather than explicitly popping up and telling people what they should or should not do, regardless of whether or not they want the advice.

Re: Fun with semiotics.

[chargirlgenius.livejournal.com]

By saying "I wish I didn't have to walk on eggshells", I do mean the abstract "I", as in, anybody who wants to ever talk about this.

I personally think it's best to keep the cheerleading towards one's path on a subliminal level (that is, leading by example), rather than explicitly popping up and telling people what they should or should not do, regardless of whether or not they want the advice.

Generally speaking, I agree. And it is the path that I personally take.

I do, however, think it's important to differentiate between generic "here's what you can do"s, and people going up to individuals at events, or even on their journals, and telling them what specifically they need to do differently. The latter is absolutely unacceptable. The former might generate a negative reaction, but although some act like it's the same thing, it's definitely not.

Fortunately or unfortunately, the original comment to which we're all objecting to is screened. Honestly, if she'd come out and said "I have a problem with you telling people what to do", it wouldn't have generated the traffic that it did. Instead, she said that anybody who wished to be "period" should use a tampon as their badge. Whether or not Corby was right to post, HER comment rightly generated a VERY negative reaction.

Re: Fun with semiotics.

[strawberrykaren.livejournal.com]

Perhaps she has a puckered starfish for a badge. She's chosen her path.

[greta-k.livejournal.com]

Ahh - I saw the post to which you (and a number of others) refer.

Some people are just assholes and really, really need a life. As a friend of mine says, "The only things you HAVE to do in life are die and go to the bathroom." No one is holding a gun (or a blunderbus) to anyone's head and forcing him/her to do anything.

And the original poster still talks to me, although I always wear modern magnetic clip sunglasses at events (and will continue to do so, until I get Transition lenses :-).

[isabelladangelo.livejournal.com]

I keep reading all of that thread and it's really interesting to me. I'm trying to figure out why, if you aren't into history, why are you in the SCA? Why not go to LARP or another fantasy based role playing where you can get the fighting but don't get the need for historical based items? Then again, most of the arguments against making suggestions over there have been hurting my head. Suggestions are perfectly fine; you don't HAVE to take them. ...oh well. I just feel really sorry for the OP over in that thread...

[reabhecc.livejournal.com]

Because the SCA isn't about history, it's a 42 year old Fantasy Costume Party, didn't you know that?

*rolls eyes*

[isabelladangelo.livejournal.com]

...so I can wear my requiem gown to 12th night? And claim I'm Arwen? Woohoo!!! ;-)

Hey, I totally have the hair for it...now to find some pointy ears...

[chargirlgenius.livejournal.com]

See, LARPs have rules.

I see a big difference between making general, generic suggestions on a list, and telling one person that they have to change. The former is, and should be, ok. The latter, not so much.

Preaching to the Choir, but...

[shalmestere.livejournal.com]

if you aren't into history, why are you in the SCA?

Because the SCA is where your social life is?

When I was in college, I ran into a lot of people who played SCA because their S.O./friends/housemates did. Or they were in one of the campus clubs whose membership overlapped the local SCA (like the gamers, or the Film Society), and they found the SCA a pleasant enough diversion that they would put on their one T-tunic and go to the local group's annual event [back in the days when local groups only held one event a year ;-D]--but not engaging enough that they'd go to anything out-of-town.

Many people come to/stay in the SCA for the subculture--it's just that most of them don't pick fights about it :-> (After all, one could conceivably become a Peer in the SCA without even a rudimentary interest in "history"....)

[luscious-purple.livejournal.com]

Oops! The comment counter just went from 519 to 518. Somebody deleted something!

(Either that, or my non-period eyeglasses are deceiving me...)

[reabhecc.livejournal.com]

Well, I decided to dis-engage both the Woman Wielding Feminine Hygiene Products and the "The SCA is a costume party, not a historical organization kthxbai" person. So two of those deletes were mine.

* disingenuous mode on*

[bunnyjadwiga.livejournal.com]

Well, yes, but I realize just because angry fringies are funny doesn't mean it's ok to hurt their feelings...
(in re: a completely different dhramha)

[thatpotteryguy.livejournal.com]

What really truly honestly amazed me were the people who came to her defense. I never saw anything Corby said as attacking anyone, or in fact expecting anyone to undergo any deprivation whatsoever. Her (and others') insistence that he was somehow exclusionary and spiteful came as a surpise to me.

Redsonja suggests that people who took offense at her post cannot be anything other than vicious, spiteful Authenticity Nazis, and that anyone else could not possibly find fault with her meek-and-mild, butter-won't-melt-in-my mouth helpful suggestion. She was only insulting those who so desperately need to be insulted.

Perhaps we can look at the other side of this equation; those who so strongly took offense at Sir Corby's post are so deply defensive because they have something to be defensive about. It gets harder and harder to pretend that you are a contributing memeber of the SCA when the level of authenticity as a whole progresses, and you wilfully refuse to progress with it. Instead, you cling to a ring belt, a peasant blouse, and a broomstick skirt out of a spiteful refusal to do anything other than the bare minimum, and when someonme calls you on it, you go spare.

There's no sense in arguing with someone that tetched.

Lalalalalalalalala....

[shalmestere.livejournal.com]

Going to my Happy Place....

[spanish-peacock.livejournal.com]

My new user pic for dealing with people like the one being discussed

[chargirlgenius.livejournal.com]

I like that. Very much.

[baronessadriana.livejournal.com]

Oooh! I found Achmed's puppy (http://ihasahotdog.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/funny-dog-pictures-i-kill-you.jpg).

[spanish-peacock.livejournal.com]

Now I know what ate your whipcord bobbin!

[thatpotteryguy.livejournal.com]

Major Icon Envy...

[rwday.livejournal.com]

How dare you use logic and expect grown people to act like grownups? Totally unreasonable. *snorts*