I think a few people were laughing about me feeling intimidated and being submissive to cranky county fair volunteers yesterday. Found it pretty funny, myself.
In real life, I’m mostly just a person who’d rather get along or talk things out than make a scene — until you really offend my sense of right and wrong. Once you get my righteousness up, you’d best get out of my way.
I’m dealing with an IRL situation like that this very minute.
On Sunday I mentioned a Bad Thing I’d been told (not asked) to keep confidential. It already felt wrong to keep shut about it since it potentially affected a lot of people.
Then late yesterday I learned that the few of us who thought we were in the know had been lied to. In one very, very, very important, not to say absolutely crucial, aspect, we’d been shined on. We’d been led to believe that the Bad Thing had one very good aspect.
It does not. Someone apparently decided to invent that one allegedly good point for reasons unknown. To keep the natives from getting restless, perhaps? I don’t know. But we were lied to.
Now … no more Ms Nice Guy.
Either these people back down from their nefarious plans — and put that in writing. Or it’s warpath time.
I’m trying to be constructive. I’ve been working on possible solutions with some of the others involved. People (other than those responsible) are diligently and intelligently trying to route around the damage. There are excellent colleagues ready not only to fight back but to build for the future. We’re taking practical steps, discussing alternatives. There’s hope in sight.
But now that we know we’ve been lied to, I’ve gone from “OMG, how can this be happening? What can we do about it?” to “If the people responsible for the Bad Thing don’t back off and get the hell out of the way ASAP, there’s going to be blood.”
Well, blood on the blogs, at least. Figuratively speaking.
With no firm ground to stand on, I demand that plans undone. I want resignations. I call for public disclosure.
Of course, that’s useless. I’m impotent. Powerless. I have absolutely zero ability to fix this mess by demanding, wanting, and calling. But I’m mad as bloody damned hell and certainly not going to take this Bad Thing or stand by quietly as it’s imposed on others.
Of all the things I angrily demand, public disclosure is the only one I have any control over. And I will use it.
Also, it’s just a plain fact that making this wretched business public is the right thing to do. It gives a greater chance of having new people come up with new solutions.
So far, all I’ve managed to do is make myself look like a pushy b*itch. Which I hate. But you know, there are signs it might actually work. We’ll see.
I’m holding to confidentiality — well, the threads of confidentiality — still today because a lot of innocent people are involved and because solutions still seem possible at this point without public ruckus raising. I do apologize for talking to you about the mess twice now without actually saying anything. It’s eating my guts out and it’s hard to find the right line to walk.
But if certain perfidious, secretive, lying authoritarians have not taken their plans and agreed to creep away in the next day or two …
Attn.: Whomever – You’ve just been told. Best pay attention.
Ya know the old saying it’s the quiet ones you have to watch out for? That is very true. 🙂 It’s not how often one should get loud, it’s about the quality that one rants so loudly about.
I hope it all works out ok for you, Claire, and the others it may effect too. Whatever it is…..Hope it turns out all for the best.
Awaiting disclosure with bated breath. I’ve got a guess or two; be interesting to see how wide of the mark I am.
Well, now I’m all curious.
You write an intriguing mystery, Claire. Just one correction…
“On Sunday I mentioned a Bad Thing I’d been told (not asked) to keep confidential.”
No, you were asked, even if the grammar was ostensibly declarative. This is because of a simple Truth, one which if understood would fix about 90% of the madness out there, maybe more: “There is no such thing as an unchosen obligation.”
Should anyone even think of denying this, there’s also my add-on: “You can verify this fact by examining your own.”
Thank you, guys. And sorry to tease. Jim Klein, you’re right. I didn’t sign any confidentiality agreements and to the extent I’ve kept my mouth shut so far it’s only out of courtesy to someone I respect — and in hopes that disaster could be averted quietly, rather than noisily.
Those who are doing the Bad Thing had better watch out, because not only does Claire have a blog, she also has friends who have blogs and would love to spread the news even farther, if the Bad Thing isn’t backed down from. It’s how things work in a free society- publicize the violations of those who prove they can’t be trusted so others will know to not deal with them in any way.
Everybody’s a Bitch, Claire. Don’t worry about being a Bitch. Sticking up for yourself and/or others is necessary sometimes. Unfortunately that makes people think Bitch sometimes.
Now me? I’m nobody’s Bitch! ; )
Jim B. — LOL!
Kent — Bless you and ain’t that the truth? Not only do I have friends and blog friends, but people would be upset in their own right if they knew. There are bloggers who might say, “Claire who???” but whose blogs would go bloody if the Bad Thing becomes known.
I’m getting angrier by the minute, but it’s the kind of anger that accomplishes things rather than just festering.
I’m impressed that you’re looking for possible solutions or end runs around The Bad Thing and the perpetrators in the midst of the turmoil – cool, calm and calculating. Foiling the b@$tards would be sweet revenge. I’m slow to provoke, but attack me or mine and I just go all bitch wolf mother and chew someone a new one. I mostly regret doing that when it happens and think it would be so much more satisfying to outsmart them and then gloat.
Well, dang it. The whole lying thing just screws the pooch right there. I guess the people involved didn’t consider how that can have a permanently detrimental effect on any future business dealings? Irrespective of how this gets resolved?
Fingers crossed for you, Claire. (And everyone else caught up in the mess)
Oh, you’ll do the right thing, Claire. I doubt you even know how not to. FWIW it took me more than half a century to understand that it NEVER pays to be angry, so IMO you should eliminate that part right quick. I won’t bore you with all the reasons why…the ONLY exception is when engaged in a literal, physical fight, and even then only for its (hopefully short) duration.
There’s a reason that’s the only exception, and the two are related. The only real evil in the world is the destruction of the Self, which evil people accomplish by trying to destroy others.
it NEVER pays to be angry
I’ll have to disagree. Of course we might be using different definitions. It doesn’t pay to get so angry you lose control of yourself, for instance.
OTOH my parents were both calm and reasonable people. But I remember a handful of times when they got righteously angry, usually over something someone did to us kids. Both of them tended to get quieter when they got angry, and both were able to use the anger in constructive ways.
never did get the back=story. Sorry .. guess you had to be there.
Okay, LarryA; believe what you wish. There’s no such thing as “lose control of yourself” either, except in the cases of convulsions or seizures, drugs or extreme dysfunction that impairs muscular action, and perhaps sleepwalking. I’d say even the drugs don’t qualify, since a person must willingly take ’em in the first place.
Dictionaries won’t help you with these identifications. I understand that it FEELS like righteous anger, and it FEELS like losing control. I’m only talking about what is. We are not volitional part-time, though pretending that we are is the easiest way to ignore what we’ve allowed to happen. Upon close consideration, that alone makes the point.
@Jim & Larry
I can see both of your sides. But Jim, I think you go a bit too far when you say “it never pays”.
My last encounter with a cop, I got angry, unlike my usual submissive posture.
I was driving in my van and getting sleepy and I pulled off looking for a place to nap. The exit turned out to be a state park and going through the gate annoyed me already. I was driving through, looking for a tree to park under (hot day) and a cop pulled me over. I got my papers ready but now I was really annoyed. He came up and told me I was speeding and didn’t have my seatbelt on. I might have drifted above the absurdly slow speed limit (15 I think) but the seatbelt charge was bogus; I told him I had just taken it off to lean over and open the glove box for my papers. He said no, that I did not have it on when he saw me. Now he was calling me a liar. There was a bit more back-and-forth and then raised my voice and, obviously angry, said, “I’m not going to argue about it. Do whatever the hell you want!”
He looked surprised, walked back to his car a few minutes, and then came back and gave me my papers and said to just keep the speed down, then let me go. I think he realized it’s sometimes hard to see if a belt is attached, my shirt was dark, tinted windows, etc.
What if he had been one of those sadists you see so often on youtube? I am too old to care, and I was heavily armed and ready.
That’s the first cop encounter I had where I got away with my self-respect intact, rather than hating myself for fearing the bastards and for being disciplined like a child. The anger served to cancel out my usual submissive posture. So, while I agree anger *usually* doesn’t help, I think “never” is not correct.
Sorry, Paul, no dice. First, it wasn’t being angry that got you the so-called benefit, but rather appearing angry.
Next, it wasn’t being angry that caused you to lose the fear; it’s the other way around. You were undoubtedly angry even when you had a submissive posture in previous encounters. My guess is more, for the reason I note near the end, below.
Then, there’s the rather intricate question of exactly what “benefit” or “payoff” you received at the behest of an armed man who ordered you around. Personally I don’t see a ton of genuine benefit going on anywhere in the whole scenario. “Less bad” doesn’t mean “good.”
But even if you find none of that persuasive, considering that it was one armed and controlling person interacting with a different armed and angry person, maybe it qualifies for the exception I noted!
—————
Far more importantly…if ANYTHING that another person does, let alone an armed tyrant wannabe, is ANY source of self-respect for you, then I’d suggest that you’re talking about something other than actual self-respect.
And that goes to the real key. ALL emotions are internally derived, exclusively. We like to say we’re angry “AT so-and-so,” but really we’re just “being angry,” regardless of what got us there.
“Being angry” as a result of what someone else does, is a form of submission and submission is never beneficial.
YOU OWN YOU—it’s never happened in your entire life, that another person made you angry. I know this because it CAN’T happen.
While I agree that acting out of anger is seldom beneficial, there are times when suppressing anger can cause more damage than feeling it.
Anger is a natural reaction to some things.
I’d say more but my sleepy pills are kicking in. Nighty-nighht all!
Jim Klein — I think Paul is saying that he anger led him to take better care of himself and be stronger than he might otherwise have been. He’s not saying he got a “benefit” from a cop, but that he made his own situation better.
Since this whole anger topic started with me I’ll also say that if I weren’t angry right now, I wouldn’t be trying to undo the rotten plans that some authoritarian fools are trying to impose. I’d just be standing by letting them get away with it — in which case I’d be enabling a disaster.
Anger is a perfectly normal human emotion and like other feelings can be used for good or ill. Anger as a response to evil can do great things.
Yeah, Jim, I don’t know where you got the idea I thought it was a benefit. About the best you can get out of an interaction with a state thug is a minor annoyance. Although after all that, I no longer needed a nap, so maybe there’s your positive. 🙂
[We like to say we’re angry “AT so-and-so,” but really we’re just “being angry,” regardless of what got us there.]
A distinction without a difference.
[“Being angry” as a result of what someone else does, is a form of submission and submission is never beneficial.]
No, this is not entirely correct. I would say it depends on how well you control your anger. If you get mad because someone cut you off in traffic, I would agree that you are not in very good control, and that MIGHT be thought of as a form of submission (it’s a stretch, though). But if you are about to go to war, for very good reasons, you might as well go ahead and build up some anger first.
I think we have emotions like fear and anger for survival reasons – they are in our genes and they can be beneficial – otherwise we wouldn’t have them! They can also be debilitating if we have no conscious control of them. Fearing a boogyman under your bed is not going to help you sleep…
Claire, I agree anger is perfectly normal. So are envy, greed, avarice, depression, mania, obsession and so on. Contra Paul, the mere existence of an emotion doesn’t tell us whether it’s good or bad, let alone whether it’s a survival function.
To the current instance…if you introspect closely, I think you’ll find that the anger is an outgrowth of your judgment of the situation as being immoral. This judgment arises from your identification of the facts of the matter, combined with your existing moral hierarchy. The two collide—the facts don’t jibe with what you believe to be decent human behavior. So, perfectly normally, you’re “angry at” or “upset with” the people who engage that immoral behavior.
I’m not challenging or denying those judgments or conclusions. They’re plenty rational, after all. Here’s the thing, though…your anger is only in you. Your error IMO is believing that it’s the anger itself that’s causing you to act a certain way and handle the situation properly. That’s wrong—your judgment of the situation is doing that, /and additionally/ causing your anger.
All I’m saying is that the effect of the anger itself is wholly in you, and that it’s not beneficial. It can be physically detrimental–increased pulse and blood pressure, for example–and it can cloud your thinking. Even here, you’re claiming that you’re being driven by the anger. It so happens that’s false IMO but if it were true, surely you’ll agree that being driven by emotionalism is less preferable than being driven by logic and reason. In a nutshell, that’s one big ill of it.
Underlying all of this is my current pet peeve, which I believe is going to take us all down the crapper if it doesn’t change. And that, simply, is the false belief that others can cause something in us, and that the way to fix ourselves is to go about fixing others. So please believe that in no way was I trying to “fix you” or even tell you what you ought to do. I was just trying to share something I’ve learned in order to save you the years it took me to learn it. Very contra Paul, had I not learned it, I likely might have died already.
In a way, it’s the same lesson to which you’ve devoted a lot of your own time and effort. Our lives on Earth are too short, and there’s too much good to be had, to allow the actions of others to either physically or emotionally control us.
“… your anger is only in you. Your error IMO is believing that it’s the anger itself that’s causing you to act a certain way and handle the situation properly. That’s wrong—your judgment of the situation is doing that, /and additionally/ causing your anger.”
Oh, I know my anger is only in me. Actually you’re the only one here who seems to think anyone is claiming otherwise. I think everybody here knows that other people/situations don’t “make us” angry. Our anger is ours alone.
However, you’re wrong that my moral/ethical judgment alone motivates me to fight against a situation. An intellectual judgment alone wouldn’t motivate me to throw my whole self into trying to right a wrong. It takes emotion for that.
If you were previously living your life in such anger that the physical effect of it might have killed you, it’s definitely a good thing you found a way to handle it better. I’ve seen the destructive kind of anger. I’ve watched it ruin lives. But that doesn’t mean that all anger is destructive.
Okay; thanks, Claire. I don’t care to argue about whether there’s anything else there besides “intellectual judgment.” I’d say there isn’t technically, but that strikes me as an esoteric epistemic point, and this is boring enough as it is. Sorry about that part of it.
Just to clarify, the life-threatening part was less that I was ever so angry, than that my physical situation was so tenuous. For a whole host of causes, I’m in the interesting position of not being able to survive many errors at all; I just can’t figure out whether that’s good or bad!