The Kind of Comment I love/need. Thanks Goodwab

[femmeappeal]

Happy birthday. (Insert Sally O'Malley gif here.)

Thanks.

 

[femmeappeal]

That's not necessarily true, and very often it is not true at all. Criticism, regardless of the critic's intentions (to be helpful or to tell or anywhere in between), can only be as constructive as it is received.

That is your opinion. I have very good reasons to disagree. And that we are entirely responsible for how we receive what another person said, is proven categorically wrong by years of psychological research. We can spend many years doing CBT, DBT, etc., trying to change how we respond to toxic garbage from other people, but when an attitude is toxic we are not somehow responsible for taking it any other way. And we do NOT control immediate reactions to triggers - not without the previously mentioned years of behavioral therapy training, or a few thousand dollars worth of ketamine-infusions. If a person's language is manipulative, belittling, patronizing, infantilizing, racist, sexist, ableist... that is on the person using the language.

The person who does the communicating has to take some responsibility for how they communicate. and they certainly don't get to scrape that off by gaslighting others when they respond to nastiness in kind. Communication is a 2-way street and anyone claiming otherwise is again ignoring a lot of very good research, and some very well drawn out academic theories on the roles of both speakers and listeners.

When we stop taking that responsibility, when we act like it's everyone else's job to shape the good and bad of a discussion so we should be able to say whatever we want however we want, without any consequences, we turn into the asshole who thinks they're just "telling it like it is," when what they're actually doing is expressing their own opinion while being a disrespectful prick about it. And frankly, I have little interest in hearing the opinions of people who don't care what they say or how they say it.

 

[femmeappeal]

And part of it is that I'm not so starved for feedback that I need to unwrap the shit-smeared bag to see if there's a gold nugget inside, any more than I need to invoke ChatGPT to randomly generate an opinion about my work. Because I have no shortage of people who understand the kinds of things I'm trying to do with my stories and can give me frank feedback about whether I'm succeeding in that aim, but who also have the emotional intelligence to do that without making their feedback smell like shit.

Well put. And given that I have never, will never, invoke ChatGPT to give me anything more important to my day than a weather forecast, I second that rejection of their usage.

Anyone using an LLM to give them praise might as well be asking the opinion of one of those old Elvis séance websites.

 

[filthytrancendence]

one of those old Elvis séance websites.

Might I suggest, The Wisdom of Peterson?

 

[pink_silk_glove]

That's absolutely true. HOWEVER, there is an old saying, "You can get more cooperation with a carrot than a stick."

Absolutely, but the point that I've been trying to make rises above that. My point is that it is entirely up to the writer to get the info out of the feedback. If it was intended to discourage, who cares? No one can discourage me from writing if I truly love to write. The reason that the stick helps less than the carrot is 100% up to the WRITER dependent on his attitude. The writer cannot control the feedback that he gets nor the shit envelope that it comes in. However, if he dismisses the info based on the envelope, that's 100% on the WRITER - not the critic, so don't blame the critic.

So my point is, if we stop caring about pretty bows and ego-stroking encouragement, we can actually get more feedback, and feedback is precious found money around here. If we stop caring about being 'respected' we realize that the stick is just as valuable as the carrot, because it is. That's 100% on us the writers. Fuck respect, fuck my ego stroke, gimme the goods.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

You are correct that sound criticism can only be as constructive as it is received, but you consistently ignore the human factor. Most people are not robotically inclined to ignore hurt, ignore hate, ignore egotistical rants no matter how many nuggets of good stuff are buried in them.

I'm not ignoring the human factor. I'm trying to explain how that 'human factor' is simply a choice. Most people don't understand that it's a choice. They think that being offended is something outside of their control. Well it is only outside of our control if we let it be outside of our control - which is still just our choice 100%b a simple choice.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

That is your opinion. I have very good reasons to disagree. And that we are entirely responsible for how we receive what another person said, is proven categorically wrong by years of psychological research. We can spend many years doing CBT, DBT, etc., trying to change how we respond to toxic garbage from other people, but when an attitude is toxic we are not somehow responsible for taking it any other way. And we do NOT control immediate reactions to triggers - not without the previously mentioned years of behavioral therapy training, or a few thousand dollars worth of ketamine-infusions. If a person's language is manipulative, belittling, patronizing, infantilizing, racist, sexist, ableist... that is on the person using the language.

That is not true also. We can totally be responsible for how we take things. As for triggers, sure, they are real and always a result of trauma. But we can also step back, acknowledge the trigger, let the anxiety subside and go back with an honest second look.

The person who does the communicating has to take some responsibility for how they communicate.

Only insofar as he cares about how it might be received. The critic also has no control whatsoever over how the criticism will ultimately be received, so in that sense, no he has no responsibility. One cannot give someone responsibility of something that they can't control.

When we stop taking that responsibility, when we act like it's everyone else's job to shape the good and bad of a discussion so we should be able to say whatever we want however we want, without any consequences, we turn into the asshole who thinks they're just "telling it like it is," when what they're actually doing is expressing their own opinion while being a disrespectful prick about it. And frankly, I have little interest in hearing the opinions of people who don't care what they say or how they say it.

Actually it's the opposite. As above, no one can be responsible for something that they can't control. And no one has control over someone else's feelings/reactions/triggers or anything like that. Trying to force someone to be respectful is futile. The 'arsehole' as you put it is in the eye of the beholder. Just as I know that there are several people who think I'm a cunt just for typing this. I can't stop them from thinking that. I have no control over that no matter how politely/eloquently/delicately I put it.

 

[Comshaw]

Absolutely, but the point that I've been trying to make rises above that. My point is that it is entirely up to the writer to get the info out of the feedback. If it was intended to discourage, who cares? No one can discourage me from writing if I truly love to write. The reason that the stick helps less than the carrot is 100% up to the WRITER dependent on his attitude. The writer cannot control the feedback that he gets nor the shit envelope that it comes in. However, if he dismisses the info based on the envelope, that's 100% on the WRITER - not the critic, so don't blame the critic.

So my point is, if we stop caring about pretty bows and ego-stroking encouragement, we can actually get more feedback, and feedback is precious found money around here. If we stop caring about being 'respected' we realize that the stick is just as valuable as the carrot, because it is. That's 100% on us the writers. Fuck respect, fuck my ego stroke, gimme the goods.

Yes it is up to the writer to get the info out. However, when does it become apparent that finding a tiny bit of useful information doesn't counterblance the degradation of sifting through tons of pig shit? Why wade through a pig sty when there is a field of daisies right next to it you can walk through?

While you might be able to ignore a stick used on you, many can't for any number of reasons. I can't and don't intend to. Why? Simply because in my experience, a stick is used for one reason: intimidation. The tiny bit of good advice that can be found in a shit envelope isn't worth the effort or the stroke to the commenters ego when there are so many that want to help and do so with a smile and gentle hand.

I'm not ignoring the human factor. I'm trying to explain how that 'human factor' is simply a choice. Most people don't understand that it's a choice. They think that being offended is something outside of their control. Well it is only outside of our control if we let it be outside of our control - which is still just our choice 100%b a simple choice.

You do ignore the human factor consistently. It is a choice for sure, however the old saying "once bitten, twice shy" applies here. People respond differently. You claim to have the capacity to shrug and ignore the impact of a stick. Okay, cool. I can't. A stick (of any kind) used on me wakes a part of me that is better left sleeping. Yes I can keep that part caged if I so desire, but most times I don't.

There are others that can't tolerate such treatment for many reasons. And being an asshat as a critic does nothing but wakes the pain they have experienced. The thing is they shouldn't have to endure that, ever. There is no reason to be that way other than the ego or evil intent of the person doing so.

So yeah you do ignore the human factor. You assume everyone should be able to respond the way you claim to or think they should. You assume everyone has the capacity to jump right up every time they get knocked down.

At the base and in the end I think Bramblethorn said it best:
"Life's too short to coddle arseholes by pretending they're rough diamonds."

I can't, I won't. And the tiny, minute amount of good advice I miss by not doing that would barely fill a pixie's thimble.

Comshaw

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Yes it is up to the writer to get the info out. However, when does it become apparent that finding a tiny bit of useful information doesn't counterblance the degradation of sifting through tons of pig shit? Why wade through a pig sty when there is a field of daisies right next to it you can walk through?

When the attempt at degradation fails because the ego is pushed aside when reading the feedback. Whenever one is offended, it's the ego, always. Push it aside, you can't be offended.

While you might be able to ignore a stick used on you, many can't for any number of reasons. I can't and don't intend to. Why? Simply because in my experience, a stick is used for one reason: intimidation. The tiny bit of good advice that can be found in a shit envelope isn't worth the effort or the stroke to the commenters ego when there are so many that want to help and do so with a smile and gentle hand.

Yes, many don't ignore it, but they can. They just don't realize that yet. I'm here to tell you that you can. It's simply a choice. The stick might intimidate but it's not a real stick. It can't break your bones. It's just words.

You do ignore the human factor consistently. It is a choice for sure, however the old saying "once bitten, twice shy" applies here. People respond differently.

You make it sound like people have no control over their own reactions. That's simply not true at all. People react differently from one another because they simply do not realize that they can choose to change their reaction. Most have never really tried. They keep choosing to be offended and butthurt over and over, not realizing that they can choose not to be. I have not ignored the human factor at all. The human factor here is simply to err - not understanding that their reaction is 100% their choice. When someone chooses to be offended, they give up control of their reactions/emotions. We don't have to do this. We just don't realize the options available. Such is the human error.

There are others that can't tolerate such treatment for many reasons. And being an asshat as a critic does nothing but wakes the pain they have experienced. The thing is they shouldn't have to endure that, ever. There is no reason to be that way other than the ego or evil intent of the person doing so.

You are fully entitled to let someone else be responsible for your feelings, but if they don't comply for whatever reasons, you will lose all control of your feelings. Again, that is your choice.

So yeah you do ignore the human factor. You assume everyone should be able to respond the way you claim to or think they should. You assume everyone has the capacity to jump right up every time they get knocked down.

No, I do not ignore it. Everyone is capable of doing this. They just don't realize that they are, mostly due to a society that drums it into them that they can't.

At the base and in the end I think Bramblethorn said it best:
"Life's too short to coddle arseholes by pretending they're rough diamonds."

I can't, I won't. And the tiny, minute amount of good advice I miss by not doing that would barely fill a pixie's thimble.

He is correct, but there is a better way to deal with it than dismissing. Just ignore the crap and pick out the good stuff. You cannot make the statement about not enough good advice to be worth it (pixie's thimble). How can you know that the amount is minimal when you have dismissed the feedback - unless you have actually read it deeply, which means that you have not dismissed it. ; )

 

[Comshaw]

When the attempt at degradation fails because the ego is pushed aside when reading the feedback. Whenever one is offended, it's the ego, always. Push it aside, you can't be offended.



Yes, many don't ignore it, but they can. They just don't realize that yet. I'm here to tell you that you can. It's simply a choice. The stick might intimidate but it's not a real stick. It can't break your bones. It's just words.



You make it sound like people have no control over their own reactions. That's simply not true at all. People react differently from one another because they simply do not realize that they can choose to change their reaction. Most have never really tried. They keep choosing to be offended and butthurt over and over, not realizing that they can choose not to be. I have not ignored the human factor at all. The human factor here is simply to err - not understanding that their reaction is 100% their choice. When someone chooses to be offended, they give up control of their reactions/emotions. We don't have to do this. We just don't realize the options available. Such is the human error.



You are fully entitled to let someone else be responsible for your feelings, but if they don't comply for whatever reasons, you will lose all control of your feelings. Again, that is your choice.



No, I do not ignore it. Everyone is capable of doing this. They just don't realize that they are, mostly due to a society that drums it into them that they can't.



He is correct, but there is a better way to deal with it than dismissing. Just ignore the crap and pick out the good stuff. You cannot make the statement about not enough good advice to be worth it (pixie's thimble). How can you know that the amount is minimal when you have dismissed the feedback - unless you have actually read it deeply, which means that you have not dismissed it. ; )

I'm sorry but you are insistent on things that make no sense in a human world. You consistently ignore emotions, feelings and the complicated mental makeup of people, insisting that everyone can do what you think is the best thing to do by just being a robot. You advocate for a flat, emotionless response. Well people aren't flat, aren't emotionless and do feel things in different ways.

I think we are at an impasse. It feels to me like I'm spinning my wheels and I have more productive things to do. I will say adieu and leave you with the belief that you are correct in your supposition.

TA


Comshaw

 

[filthytrancendence]

Alright, I'm feeling masochistic tonight so I'll wade back into this one, too.

The critic also has no control whatsoever over how the criticism will ultimately be received, so in that sense, no he has no responsibility.

This is just... a wild thing for a writer to say.

In order for this statement to be true, we would all have to have absolutely no way of knowing how our tone might affect other people. Seeing as how that's obvious nonsense, the critic absolutely has a lot of control over how their criticism will be received. Because we have a lot of control over our tone. You might even say, as writers, we have much higher than average control over our tone.

Now, I imagine you're going to fire back with something like "I'm just saying that the critic doesn't have control over being misunderstood."

And I would agree with you. Except that's just not what you're saying. Because you're also saying this:

So my point is, if we stop caring about pretty bows and ego-stroking encouragement, we can actually get more feedback, and feedback is precious found money around here. If we stop caring about being 'respected' we realize that the stick is just as valuable as the carrot, because it is. That's 100% on us the writers. Fuck respect, fuck my ego stroke, gimme the goods.

The problem with your view is you seem to have a baked-in assumption that a critic caring about the tone of their critique is a barrier to them giving that critique.

That may very well be a barrier for you. That's not for me to say. But I can assure you it is not a universal barrier.

Look, I'm putting my money where my mouth is. Is there somebody else that's been spending more time giving feedback around here lately? If somebody asks for it, I give it. Because I like doing it, it helps me grow as a writer myself, and I enjoy helping other people grow. I'm not talking out of my ass.

And if you'll take a look at my very first post in this thread, the first thing I said was that I agree with the spirit of what you were saying. That, as a writer, it is within your control to learn things from bad criticism.

To take that starting point and arrive at "fuck respect" in the context of how to deliver criticism is wild. Just because you as an individual can choose to be the bigger person and pull a tarnished fools gold nugget out of the coprolite that is bad criticism, does not mean that the entire field of art criticism should bend itself around your disregard for other people's feelings.

 

[Bramblethorn]

You make it sound like people have no control over their own reactions. That's simply not true at all. People react differently from one another because they simply do not realize that they can choose to change their reaction. Most have never really tried. They keep choosing to be offended and butthurt over and over, not realizing that they can choose not to be.

Now and then in this forum we talk about things we dislike in stories. I remember that you and I both dislike when a writer shows female characters as being attracted to a guy who has no discernible attractive traits.

But statements like this make me wonder: why do you choose to dislike those stories? Wouldn't you have more fun if you just chose to have a different reaction to that trope?

He is correct, but there is a better way to deal with it than dismissing. Just ignore the crap and pick out the good stuff. You cannot make the statement about not enough good advice to be worth it (pixie's thimble). How can you know that the amount is minimal when you have dismissed the feedback - unless you have actually read it deeply, which means that you have not dismissed it. ; )

When you get an email from a stranger that begins by telling you that you're the heir to a million dollars of Nigerian oil money, do you feel the need to read it deeply before dismissing it as a scam?

Or are you willing to make a judgement based on a well-established pattern?

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I'm sorry but you are insistent on things that make no sense in a human world. You consistently ignore emotions, feelings and the complicated mental makeup of people, insisting that everyone can do what you think is the best thing to do by just being a robot. You advocate for a flat, emotionless response. Well people aren't flat, aren't emotionless and do feel things in different ways.

That's not what I'm saying at all. Emotions are a very important part of being human. But when someone offends you, it is simply your choice to be offended. Ultimately you do have control of your emotions whether you realize it or not. Most people go through their entire life not realizing this. So ask yourself, do want to give up control of your life to your emotions or do you want to keep control of your life and make the best decisions possible for your own well-being health and desires?

 

[lliicckkss]

That's not what I'm saying at all. Emotions are a very important part of being human. But when someone offends you, it is simply your choice to be offended. Ultimately you do have control of your emotions whether you realize it or not. Most people go through their entire life not realizing this. So ask yourself, do want to give up control of your life to your emotions or do you want to keep control of your life and make the best decisions possible for your own well-being health and desires?

i been saying this forever i dont know why its so hard for some people honestly ♡

 

[pink_silk_glove]

In order for this statement to be true, we would all have to have absolutely no way of knowing how our tone might affect other people. Seeing as how that's obvious nonsense, the critic absolutely has a lot of control over how their criticism will be received. Because we have a lot of control over our tone. You might even say, as writers, we have much higher than average control over our tone.

It's not nonsense at all. Ultimately the critic has no control over how he is received. Yes often he influences the reaction, but only so far as the other party allows it. What I have been saying all along is that as the writer receiving criticism, you have the ability to 100% control that reaction. All that you have to do is take control of it. If you let your emotions take you to conclusions (based on tone or anything else), that is fine, that is also your choice. It is your choice to give up control of your emotions to someone rude, a bully or whomever. If you had the choice to control your own reactions or let someone else dictate them (in whole or in part) would not the wise choice be to choose control? Well ultimately, you do have control.

It comes down to self-esteem. How we measure ourselves. The more that we measure ourselves by the standards of others, the more control of our emotions we give up to others. If you don't like rude criticism, this means that you care about what a rude critic thinks of you or your work. This in turn means that you are measuring yourself by the standards of another. Which in turn means that you are giving up control of your self-esteem to a rude critic bully.

Once you stop caring what he thinks of you, you can separate yourself from the work and glean the neutral info - the facts.

The problem with your view is you seem to have a baked-in assumption that a critic caring about the tone of their critique is a barrier to them giving that critique.

No, actually I state the opposite. Separate the tone from the ideas.

To take that starting point and arrive at "fuck respect" in the context of how to deliver criticism is wild

No you misread, and maybe in this case that's on me for a hasty typing. I did not mean that a critic should not be respectful. I meant that a writer taking criticism should not be looking for respect in the criticism. The heart needs no respect. Only the ego goes looking for respect. It's a dead giveaway where the motives are when someone is looking for or expecting respect. Shove that desire for respect aside. It frees you.

Just because you as an individual can choose to be the bigger person and pull a tarnished fools gold nugget out of the coprolite that is bad criticism

And here, a fatal flaw in your interpretation of the criticism. You have pre-determined that the criticism is bad. You claim that I can pull nuggets out of shit. That is because I look at the criticism neutrally, rather than judging it. If you decide that the criticism is bad, you won't find much good. And if I actually find a nugget or two in it, then it can't be bad after all, see?

 

[pink_silk_glove]

But statements like this make me wonder: why do you choose to dislike those stories? Wouldn't you have more fun if you just chose to have a different reaction to that trope?

Because I usually find the male characters boring and also find the females that are hot for them unrelatable. And that is my choice.

When you get an email from a stranger that begins by telling you that you're the heir to a million dollars of Nigerian oil money, do you feel the need to read it deeply before dismissing it as a scam?

The Nigerian email scam is not critiquing me or judging me in any way and there is nothing in it that I wish to glean. In a critical comment there is stuff in there that I hope that I can glean. Bad example.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Because I usually find the male characters boring and also find the females that are hot for them unrelatable. And that is my choice.

Why choose to feel bored when you could choose to feel enjoyment instead?

The Nigerian email scam is not critiquing me or judging me in any way and there is nothing in it that I wish to glean.

But how do you know that if you haven't read the whole letter "deeply"?

Sure, every other email from some Nigerian political widow offering you millions of dollars has been a worthless scam. But what if this time is different?? You could be throwing away a fortune! For all you know, there could even be a paragraph of insightful critique on your stories at the bottom of the email. You'll never know unless you read the whole thing.

...or we could perhaps acknowledge that sometimes it's reasonable to pass summary judgement on such things without bothering to hear them out.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

But how do you know that if you haven't read the whole letter "deeply"?

Sure, every other email from some Nigerian political widow offering you millions of dollars has been a worthless scam. But what if this time is different?? You could be throwing away a fortune! For all you know, there could even be a paragraph of insightful critique on your stories at the bottom of the email. You'll never know unless you read the whole thing.

...or we could perhaps acknowledge that sometimes it's reasonable to pass summary judgement on such things without bothering to hear them out.

Do you want feedback or not? No one ever asks for a Nigerian scam email. There are very very very few writers here in lit who do not want feedback. You put your story out there you are basically asking for feedback. Then you get some, you are going to read it. How facetious do you want to get with your examples?

 

[Bramblethorn]

Do you want feedback or not? No one ever asks for a Nigerian scam email.

Do you want money or not? No one ever asks for abusive "feedback" comments.

There are very very very few writers here in lit who do not want feedback. You put your story out there you are basically asking for feedback. Then you get some, you are going to read it. How facetious do you want to get with your examples?

There are very very very few people in the world who don't get hungry. So why is nobody eating that hot dog bun in the dumpster?

Still curious about this one, BTW:

Why choose to feel bored when you could choose to feel enjoyment instead?

 

[lliicckkss]

There are very very very few people in the world who don't get hungry. So why is nobody eating that hot dog bun in the dumpster

because they are just hungry, now ask the starving if they will ..people eat out the trash everyday unfortunately

 

[filthytrancendence]

And here, a fatal flaw in your interpretation of the criticism. You have pre-determined that the criticism is bad. You claim that I can pull nuggets out of shit. That is because I look at the criticism neutrally, rather than judging it. If you decide that the criticism is bad, you won't find much good. And if I actually find a nugget or two in it, then it can't be bad after all, see?

You can look at shit neutrally and pull nuggets out of it. Doesn't make it not shit.

Arguing so doggedly that shit is not shit makes you look very silly.

 

[iwatchus]

I struggle some days, but several of the comments I have gotten on my nude day entry are doing a good job of buying me up right now

I posted a different one in another thread that I thought commented on exactly what i was trying to focus on in my writing. But this one, form the ever present anon, hits closer to the heart.

"It isn’t often these days that I read a really honest to God ‘tear jerker’ on here that I give a heartfelt 10 stars to… but this is one of them. And yes, I hope that you’re hinting that Jason and Ellie will get back together for their final years…

There should be many more Ellies out there."

That last line makes me think about tearing up every time I read it. Mostly happy tears, or maybe nostalgic tears.

 

[filthytrancendence]

That last line makes me think about tearing up every time I read it. Mostly happy tears, or maybe nostalgic tears.

How dare you come back in here and try to get this thread back on topic with something touching and heartfelt!

 

[Comshaw]

That's not what I'm saying at all. Emotions are a very important part of being human. But when someone offends you, it is simply your choice to be offended. Ultimately you do have control of your emotions whether you realize it or not. Most people go through their entire life not realizing this. So ask yourself, do want to give up control of your life to your emotions or do you want to keep control of your life and make the best decisions possible for your own well-being health and desires?

Do you ever reread what you write? Ever? You state: "Emotions are a very important part of being human." Then you go on to detail how a person can and should just ignore them. I'm sure you try and succeed most of the time. I've witnessed that here in this forum. The disturbing thing is you expect, almost demand that everyone else react the same way you do. You make no allowances for individualism. You make no allowances for humanism. The gist of what you are saying in your post is that most people aren't strong enough or smart enough to do what you believe they should be doing. That is arrogance coupled with intentional ignorance of the human condition.


The thing is, you appear not to understand people, their makeup, their motivations, their weaknesses and their strengths at all. You try to discount emotion as a peripheral thing when in reality it's the biggest motivating factor in humans.


I will attempt to answer your last question: "...do want to give up control of your life to your emotions or do you want to keep control of your life and make the best decisions possible for your own well-being health and desires?


Do I? Yes I do. Emotion is the spice that makes life worth living. Friendship, love, hate, joy, anger, fear, elation, on and on, emotion is the thing that makes life palatable, makes the things we do worth it. Humans aren't driven by logic or a cold analysis of what path to take because it might be "better". We are primarily driven by emotion. I have no problem using that, enjoying that as one of the best parts of life.


The other thing you are ignoring is that taking care of our emotional well-being IS taking care of our health. You do know that desire is an emotion, yeah? There are lots of things we desire, but shouldn't, because it's an emotional response to those things we want.


This can be extrapolated into the discussion about writing, about "bad stories" getting good ratings. I know you have voiced your opinion that the readers are just low-brow troglodytes and that's why they vote high on a badly written story. Did you ever stop to think that the story, even though it lacks technical sophistication, touched readers on another level? One that you are blind to? Most people don't look at a painting by Monet or Augusta Savage and judge it on the technical merits. Most judge it from the heart, an emotional response.


I've lived my time in a cold insular "logical" shell. I broke out of that sometime ago. Logic has its place, yes indeed it does. But for my money, it is behind and in support of my emotional being.


Comshaw

 

[Comshaw]

i been saying this forever i dont know why its so hard for some people honestly ♡

And here we have the problem in a nutshell: lack of understanding and curiosity. Rather than try to figure out or understand why someone else doesn't want to, or can't bring themselves to wade through a pig sty for a maybe, it's easier to project our way of doing things onto others. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Comshaw