Good Manners

[KoPilot]

I know you're not saying you'd marry a guy just 'cause he's opened a door for you.
I think that part of the disconnect on the thread comes from what we perceive as being respectful. Those of us opposing old school manners see them as being presumptuous and frankly disconsiderate of the other person. If I'm opening the door for you, ordering for you, being "nice" to you because it's what I was taught, then my actions are mindless automatisms designed to make me feel good, without taking you into consideration at all. Pardon me, but that's rude.

Aren't manners a question of acknowledging the other person and respecting them? Well, all these pre-imposed guidelines are possibly hindering you from doing just that, in which case, your manners don't amount to squat, and may well wind up insulting someone whether you meant for it to happen or not- see Stella being squirted in the eye above.

/thread

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

I know you're not saying you'd marry a guy just 'cause he's opened a door for you.
I think that part of the disconnect on the thread comes from what we perceive as being respectful. Those of us opposing old school manners see them as being presumptuous and frankly disconsiderate of the other person. If I'm opening the door for you, ordering for you, being "nice" to you because it's what I was taught, then my actions are mindless automatisms designed to make me feel good, without taking you into consideration at all. Pardon me, but that's rude.

Aren't manners a question of acknowledging the other person and respecting them? Well, all these pre-imposed guidelines are possibly hindering you from doing just that, in which case, your manners don't amount to squat, and may well wind up insulting someone whether you meant for it to happen or not- see Stella being squirted in the eye above.

Mindless is not needed in front of automatisms because automatism refers to a set of brief unconscious behaviors. So the definition of automatism is stating that it's a mindless action. It's like saying dead corpse.

Also, if it is an automatism then it's not designed to do anything and the person would be incapable of deriving any happiness from it because they would have no idea they are even doing it. It's also impossible to take anyone into consideration because it's an unconscious behavior.

 

[JMohegan]

A mini-hijack and interesting aside. I was listening to a syndicated FM radio show on the way to work this morning. Actually it is more correct to say the three 12 year old girls in my car demanded to listen to it..but I digress. The topic of the "feminization" of men came up. The entire cast consisting of three men and two women all agreed that men are being conditioned to be defer to women and be somewhat milquetoast. Then women did not like this trend and commented they wanted a "man to be a man" though they didn't do a lot of elaborating on what that meant. I found it interesting in light of the discussion on this thread.

I find that fascinating, too. And I wonder what exactly it is that those women want their men to do.

Kill more spiders? Be more forceful in the bedroom? Have the balls to say no to the kids when they want to tune in to inappropriate or inane radio shows?

If the women are complaining about being deferred to, does that mean the women would rather be the ones doing the deferring? If so, why don't they address their own behavior?

It's a mystery.

Another mystery is why such women never complain when "feminized" is equated with becoming "milquetoast." What does all of this say about the women's view of themselves?

A final mystery (and, to me, the biggest one of all) is why some people claim that guys, who had allegedly once been so firm and forceful, could so easily be conditioned to behave otherwise. The second point belies the first, and renders the entire claim nonsense.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Morning shows.

And the women sidekicks who toady to the male morning show hosts.

 

[teknight]

Mindless is not needed in front of automatisms because automatism refers to a set of brief unconscious behaviors. So the definition of automatism is stating that it's a mindless action. It's like saying dead corpse.

You're right. I was emphasizing a point, but stupidly.

Also, if it is an automatism then it's not designed to do anything and the person would be incapable of deriving any happiness from it because they would have no idea they are even doing it. It's also impossible to take anyone into consideration because it's an unconscious behavior.

What are you talking about?

</thread jack>

ETA: I've modified the previous post. If you still think the point above needs explaining, please do so in my teknically correct thread. The link to it is in my sig. I'd like to avoid a threadjacking, if it's not too much trouble.

 

[JMohegan]

Morning shows.

And the women sidekicks who toady to the male morning show hosts.

That's why Callinectes needs a real man in her car! To say no to the 12 year olds who demanded turning it on.

 

[YourCaptor]

Oh look, the chivalrous men are worried about the delicate sensibilities of the poor weak females. How thoughtful and well mannered!

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Wow, I didn’t realize Canada was so backwards. You’d think they’d at least keep up with fashion, or science.

I must agree though, those men were so well mannered and chivalrous. I want to be in that frat

 

[callinectes2]

Dayum. I was just telling y'all what was said on the show, I wasn't taking a personal position on it. My point was this perception, valid or not, is not limited to some posters on this forum.

I am sure y'all were listening to NPR when you were 12.

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

What are you talking about?

</thread jack>

ETA: I've modified the previous post. If you still think the point above needs explaining, please do so in my teknically correct thread. The link to it is in my sig. I'd like to avoid a threadjacking, if it's not too much trouble.

You said:

my actions are automatisms designed to make me feel good

How can an action, that a person does not know they are doing and have no memory of afterwards, make them feel good?

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

Dayum. I was just telling y'all what was said on the show, I wasn't taking a personal position on it. My point was this perception, valid or not, is not limited to some posters on this forum.

I am sure y'all were listening to NPR when you were 12. (roll eyes)

What radio show was it?

 

[callinectes2]

Kidd Kraddick.

There's nothing inappropriate about it, it is G to mild PG material. We aren't talking Howard Stern or Lex and Terry type of stuff.

 

[teknight]

You said:


How can an action, that a person does not know they are doing and have no memory of afterwards, make them feel good?

Alright, threadjack it is: do you find that you have no recollection of opening doors, ordering food, etc? You're using your own definition for automatism, which is why it fits in like a round peg in a square hole.

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

Alright, threadjack it is: do you find that you have no recollection of opening doors, ordering food, etc? You're using your own definition for automatism, which is why it fits in like a round peg in a square hole.

Then how is it an automatism?

I'm just using the definition of the word you used. It's not my definition. It's the accepted definition of the word.

What's your definition of the word in this context?

 

[teknight]

Then how is it an automatism?

I'm just using the definition of the word you used. It's not my definition. It's the accepted definition of the word.

What's your definition of the word in this context?

I'll use the examples I initially used:
Opening a door for someone, or ordering their meal for them, just because that's what you were taught to do. Since you are reacting to your conditioning, and not giving any actual thought to the other person, then you are acting automatically (making your behavior an automatism). Furthermore , you derive pleasure from the act because you're not breaking your own sets of rules, and are behaving in what you perceive to be the proper way.

This happens to be rude because you wind up ignoring the purpose of manners, which is to be considerate and respectful of other people, through the actions you undertake. However, if all you're doing is reacting to your own behavior, then you are giving no thought to the other person, so you're being rude even though you're displaying what you consider to be the height of manners.

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

I'll use the examples I initially used:
Opening a door for someone, or ordering their meal for them, just because that's what you were taught to do. Since you are reacting to your conditioning, and not giving any actual thought to the other person, then you are acting automatically (making your behavior an automatism). Furthermore , you derive pleasure from the act because you're not breaking your own sets of rules, and are behaving in what you perceive to be the proper way.

This happens to be rude because you wind up ignoring the purpose of manners, which is to be considerate and respectful of other people, through the actions you undertake. However, if all you're doing is reacting to your own behavior, then you are giving no thought to the other person, so you're being rude even though you're displaying what you consider to be the height of manners.

But how do you know what the person is deriving pleasure from?

And if it is an "automatism", then isn't the person more misguided (by acting automatically with good intentions) than rude?

 

[teknight]

I happen to hold the belief that one (who is not mentallly ill) will behave in a way which they will find pleasurable most, if not all, of the time; in the extreme cases, they will find that pleasure by trying to lessen negative consequences. You might now harp on pleasurable- I don't mean "orgasmic" or "nirvana like" 24-7. However, one can enjoy (and derive pleasure from) even the small acts in life.
In this very specific context: why would you hold a door open for a woman, or order for her, or whatever, if you found the concept abhorrent? What's more, if you are acting in that manner, then you are upholding your code of behavior, which I would think would make you happy, at least a little bit. Do you derive no pleasure from behaving as you think you should behave?

As for the second part, it seems to me that you're not seeing the forrest for the trees. I've said this already: if the purpose of manners is to be considerate and respectful of others, then being misguided winds up being rude, 'cause you're disregarding the other person. Being respectful involves and centers around the other person, thus your misguided actions wind up being rude.

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

I happen to hold the belief that one (who is not mentallly ill) will behave in a way which they will find pleasurable most, if not all, of the time; in the extreme cases, they will find that pleasure by trying to lessen negative consequences. You might now harp on pleasurable- I don't mean "orgasmic" or "nirvana like" 24-7. However, one can enjoy (and derive pleasure from) even the small acts in life.
In this very specific context: why would you hold a door open for a woman, or order for her, or whatever, if you found the concept abhorrent? What's more, if you are acting in that manner, then you are upholding your code of behavior, which I would think would make you happy, at least a little bit. Do you derive no pleasure from behaving as you think you should behave?

If it's an automatic behavior that I've been doing my whole life then at some point it becomes neither abhorrent nor pleasurable. It's just something I do. And if no one has voiced their displeasure at my actions then I would see no reason to change.

As for the second part, it seems to me that you're not seeing the forrest for the trees. I've said this already: if the purpose of manners is to be considerate and respectful of others, then being misguided winds up being rude, 'cause you're disregarding the other person. Being respectful involves and centers around the other person, thus your misguided actions wind up being rude.

But if the person has never been told their actions could be considered are rude, how are they to know?

Is it possible that some people don't bring it to their attention because they don't want to be seen as being rude?

Quite the conundrum.

 

[teknight]

If it's an automatic behavior that I've been doing my whole life then at some point it becomes neither abhorrent nor pleasurable. It's just something I do. And if no one has voiced their displeasure at my actions then I would see no reason to change.

I guess I hadn't considered habituation.

But if the person has never been told their actions could be considered are rude, how are they to know?

Well, then they're not following manners at all then, are they? They're displaying behaviors that some would see as representing manners, but, like I've said a billion times over, the whole purpose is to consider the other person. Ignorance is not a good excuse: ignorance of the law excuses no one.

Is it possible that some people don't bring it to their attention because they don't want to be seen as being rude?

And...your point is?

All you've shown is that people don't think and therefore they can't be considerate. Thus I say they're rude, regardless of their intention. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, after all.

Stella, SB, KoPilot, since you didn't seem to have any qualms with what I said, perhaps you can explain differently, and thus better.

 

[JMohegan]

Dayum. I was just telling y'all what was said on the show, I wasn't taking a personal position on it. My point was this perception, valid or not, is not limited to some posters on this forum.

I am sure y'all were listening to NPR when you were 12.

Nope. Music.

I was kidding about needing a real man to change the channel. Hence the wink!

And yes, I'm aware that the perception is not limited to some posters here. It's a common meme spread by Limbaugh and his ilk.

For the record, I do see a marked shift in the male role in this country, one that has taken place over the course of my lifetime. A quick search turns up the fact that "labor force participation rates among married women have increased dramatically in recent decades, rising from 35 percent in 1966 to 61 percent in 1994." In addition, the broader economic shift from manufacturing to service industries, as well as the current recession clobbering manufacturing and construction, mean that traditionally male-dominated industries have been taking it on the chin.

The shift from male role as primary provider, to joint provider, to provider with tenuous job security or possibly even unemployed status, has an enormous impact on male self-perception. All this whining about men allegedly being conditioned to become feminized milquetoast misses the point entirely.

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

I guess I hadn't considered habituation.


Well, then they're not following manners at all then, are they? They're displaying behaviors that some would see as representing manners, but, like I've said a billion times over, the whole purpose is to consider the other person. Ignorance is not a good excuse: ignorance of the law excuses no one.

And...your point is?

All you've shown is that people don't think and therefore they can't be considerate. Thus I say they're rude, regardless of their intention. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, after all.

Stella, SB, KoPilot, since you didn't seem to have any qualms with what I said, perhaps you can explain differently, and thus better.

I get what you're saying. Just being difficult.

 

[teknight]

I get what you're saying. Just being difficult.

*grumble, grumble, grumble...I'll...give you...difficult.....grumble, grumble*
Could you at least offer a cup of coffee if you're gonna be difficult? It'd obviate the aggressive tendencies....or hasten them....one of the two

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

*grumble, grumble, grumble...I'll...give you...difficult.....grumble, grumble*
Could you at least offer a cup of coffee if you're gonna be difficult? It'd obviate the aggressive tendencies....or hasten them....one of the two

I don't want to be rude p), but I don't drink coffee. I can offer you a nice cup of green tea instead.

 

[intothewoods]

I know you're not saying you'd marry a guy just 'cause he's opened a door for you.
I think that part of the disconnect on the thread comes from what we perceive as being respectful. Those of us opposing old school manners see them as being presumptuous and frankly disconsiderate of the other person. If I'm opening the door for you, ordering for you, being "nice" to you because it's what I was taught, then my actions are automatisms designed to make me feel good, without taking you into consideration at all. Pardon me, but that's rude.

Aren't manners a question of acknowledging the other person and respecting them? Well, all these pre-imposed guidelines are possibly hindering you from doing just that, in which case, your manners don't amount to squat, and may well wind up insulting someone whether you meant for it to happen or not- see Stella being squirted in the eye above.

I basically agree with this -- although I think manners are more about comfort and a sense of order rather than pleasure. I think manners and social etiquette are really designed for all parties in a given scenario, but it's inevitable that there will be a mismatch from time to time. People from other countries or different parts of the same country go by a different code. I wouldn't call the mismatch rude, just something of a miscommunication. The man ordering on a woman's behalf has been taught that is polite. It's only rude if he knows the woman's preferences are otherwise and yet he insists on pursuing the same path. There seems to be disagreement in this thread over whether or not the man in the OP is asking what sounds good in order to determine what her order is. Why else is he asking? But anyway. That aside, I don't know why anyone would assume he is this complete boor, rather than assume it's a misunderstanding.

I find that fascinating, too. And I wonder what exactly it is that those women want their men to do.

Kill more spiders? Be more forceful in the bedroom? Have the balls to say no to the kids when they want to tune in to inappropriate or inane radio shows?

If the women are complaining about being deferred to, does that mean the women would rather be the ones doing the deferring? If so, why don't they address their own behavior?

It's a mystery.

Another mystery is why such women never complain when "feminized" is equated with becoming "milquetoast." What does all of this say about the women's view of themselves?

A final mystery (and, to me, the biggest one of all) is why some people claim that guys, who had allegedly once been so firm and forceful, could so easily be conditioned to behave otherwise. The second point belies the first, and renders the entire claim nonsense.

Kill more spiders! I totally agree with your perspective and find it a shame that we often don't get to a substantive conversation about what it means to be a man or a woman over the chest-thumping chatter.

 

[rosco rathbone]

A final mystery (and, to me, the biggest one of all) is why some people claim that guys, who had allegedly once been so firm and forceful, could so easily be conditioned to behave otherwise. The second point belies the first, and renders the entire claim nonsense.

I once read this book:

http://books.google.com/books?id=szm-8WgGjWgC&dq=gerda+lerner&source=gbs_navlinks_s

And wondered the exact same thing, except with respect to women.

1. Golden Age of matriarchy
2.....????
3. Men in charge

 

[JMohegan]

I once read this book:

http://books.google.com/books?id=szm-8WgGjWgC&dq=gerda+lerner&source=gbs_navlinks_s

And wondered the exact same thing, except with respect to women.

1. Golden Age of matriarchy
2.....????
3. Men in charge

Ha! Yeah, 2 is the question. How the heck did that happen?