featherynscale | Question of the day:

Current Mood: anxious

Question of the day:

It is my understanding that in this culture, the proper response to random verbal abuse is to yell back, "Well, fuck you, then!" or some such brilliant retort.

wolfieboy made a post about the tendency to do this about a week and a half ago.

So, my question is this: If you are the recipient of random verbal abuse and you have no particular urge to respond in the socially acceptable manner, i.e. by throwing it right back, is it more likely that you're enlightened/polite, or that you're apathetic/inured to abuse?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

How about enlightened/apathetic? Apathetic essentially means "feeling or showing little or no emotion" and that certainly seems the enlightened response to "random" abuse. The abuser has failed on many levels when they get no response from a drive-by profanity. Lack of response could even be seen as a direct, frontal attack on their gender-hood. Of course, when viewed in that light, the "enlightened" part starts to slip away somewhat, but I feel the satisfaction is worth the slippage.

I'll second this. Watching some rage impotently may not be enlightened, but it certainly makes for good stories later (see below).

I think that's really a personal opinion. I often refuse to rise to the bait when someone does throws verbal abuse my direction. That may make the other person believe that I'm apathetic or weak, but I feel that it's better than letting a situation spiral out of control.

Was going south on Holmes and had pulled into the right lane to get around a turning car, and a jeep behind me pulled forward past me and I pulled back into the main flow of traffic right there where Holmes chokes off to two lanes again, south of Minor Park. Again; I was behind her.

I know this because just as we crested the hill, she turns 180° around in her seat and gives me a protracted view of her middle finger and Angry Face™. I wasn't following particularly close (certainly no closer than she was to the vehicle in front of her, which may have been why I was making her nervous (no braking room).

I was dumbfounded. I'm not exactly prone to the "WFYT" response, but I actually had an RCA dog moment; I just tilted my head to the side to peer at her until she turned around several breathtaking seconds later. Then I started laughing at the absurdity of it, especially given the huge smiley-face wheel cover she had on the back of her jeep.

My Blue print for arguing was found in "The Dance of Anger" I had found that when you go to the level or the volume of your verbal attacker You empower them more often than not and loose the battle. I have found calm and asking a question or two goes further towards resolution
Of course I am a mortal in this life So there have been a time or two When the standard response has indeed passed my lips LOL

I would say that for me, it's a case of not wanting to escalate the situation. If I respond in kind, I'm showing that what this person thinks is important to me and the interaction could last past the one bit of verbal abuse. I don't think it's actually worth the energy.

I guess you could call this a little bit of both although I, personally, don't think it's either apathy or enlightenment just a conservation of energy for things that actually matter.

just a conservation of energy for things that actually matter.

So, enlightened apathy, then? :)

Enlightened apathy is effective. Belligerent apathy can be fun.

And, since becoming a Mom, I've managed to perfect the "Oh, you misbehaving child. Why should I take your tantrum seriously?" look...which is best delivered in complete silence.

As always, I choose my weapons carefully -- and not all of those weapons happen to be words. Plus, I usually arrange for an alibi.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Question of the day:

no subject

I can't get no...

no subject

Had one of these last week

no subject

Re: responses to verbal abuse

Re: responses to verbal abuse

Re: responses to verbal abuse