Behaving in public, and public derision [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Newman

2011-12-22, 08:38 AM

Some people asked me why I told them not to post their own photographs on the dressing page. Here's my answer.

I just don't want some idiots on some other forum or imageboard to start ripping off your style and copiously insult you. I've seen some terrible things, and I just don't want them to happen to others.

Why do you think most people dress in bland clothing, have bland conversations on bland topics, and never do anything unusual (except when they have the excuse of being drunk, and even then there are limits), why celebrities are extremely noncommital in interviews, etc? Whatever you do in public, there will be people to judge you. They will take what little information you give, and interpret it in the worst possible light.

People are expected to be selective about the information they give about theirselves, to always show their best profile. Behaving naturally is something you can/should/are-expected-to-do only in private company, and even then, you will only show as much umpleasant-side of yourself as you expect your friends to tolerate. You don't tell them the worst or strangest stuff, the stuff you'd be reluctant to share even with a paid therapist. You only show your socially-most-status-worthy side in public.

Therefore, whenever you show something "bad", it is understood that either you "slipped", and that it's only the tip of the iceberg, or that you just don't have the common sense to keep this to yourself, which would betray either a poor understanding of what's socially acceptable, or an outright defiance of it. Either way, you make a poor(if not outright dangerous) social cog, and the public will feel a sponateous compulsion to either beat you into conformity or beat you out of society.

At least, that's what I understand happens with normal public mockery.

But the Internet is much, much worse. The behaviors I've seen there are nothing like what I've seen in Real Life. And I just don't get it. Where do people keep so much hatred? How can they keep generating it, how can they be so keen on spending time deriding people and things they don't like?

Serpentine

2011-12-22, 08:51 AM

*Ahem*

...

http://fastcache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/7/2008/11/meh_cat.jpg

http://cdn.head-fi.org/a/ac/1000x500px-LL-ac25a7d9_23983-fluttershymacro.jpg

Heliomance

2011-12-22, 08:59 AM

Serpentine

2011-12-22, 09:00 AM

Frankly, I think a lot of people on this forum'd be pretty chuffed to be a meme.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2011-12-22, 09:02 AM

You probably haven't been here long enough to really get an idea of this place.

In my opinion? This is the last bastion of niceness and manners in the internet.
It really is a great community.

missmvicious

2011-12-22, 09:07 AM

Anonymity?

Yeah. I think it's anonymity.

In public, we cap our brutality to within the limits of our wit and that which is socially acceptable (i.e. passive aggressive mockery and "friendly" jibing) knowing that crossing the line makes us a "w"itch and therefore subject to another subtext of passive aggressive mockery and "friendly" jibing.

However, with the veil of the web covering our ego/superego better than any "real-world" false persona could, we can be as mean as we wish without risking retributive consequences from our daily social environments: jobs, schools, places of worship, etc.

Still... that's why I prefer boards with good mods. I like this place, because it has a zero tolerance policy for trolling, and the people here put up with the fact that, 75% of the time I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about D&D-wise and tend to ask comparatively stupid questions about build mechanics.

Still... I think you're being a bit harsh on humanity. Your post suggests that people are inherently mean (evil), but I think we are just inherently ego-centric (neutral). The hurt people give is reflective of the hurt that they have received. Likewise with the gentleness people give. Be patient enough with a bitter angry troll, and they may indeed come around (I've seen this happen on ponychan) or just understand the rage for what it is, and either ignore it or move on to greener pastures.

Heliomance

2011-12-22, 09:14 AM

You probably haven't been here long enough to really get an idea of this place.

In my opinion? This is the last bastion of niceness and manners in the internet.

Nope. Try the Brass Goggles steampunk forum, they're even better mannered. I've never seen a flame on there to be scrubbed, and addressing one another as "Sir" or "Madam" is commonplace :P

Brother Oni

2011-12-22, 09:42 AM

But the Internet is much, much worse. The behaviors I've seen there are nothing like what I've seen in Real Life. And I just don't get it. Where do people keep so much hatred? How can they keep generating it, how can they be so keen on spending time deriding people and things they don't like?

As missmvicious mentioned, it's partly anonymity, but there are several other factors.

It's known as the Online disinhibition effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect), colloquially known as GIFT, and has been studied to some degree.

Newman

2011-12-22, 09:59 AM

Yeah, but "disinhibition" means they had it in them in the first place, which is the part that amazes me. I mean, is it extreme conformism? Does people expressing opinions they don't like trigger an irrepressible need to silence them? Is it the same sort of deep-seated anger you feel when you see someone having, say, bad table manners, wondering "I've been beaten up/insuted/bullied into following these rules, like everyone else, why would he get away with doing this forbidden thing?"

Of course, this sort of bullying isn't the only strange expression of that. People getting extremely angry and bilious about videogames or tv shows is also similar. You'd expect this sort of behavior in politics, where there is more at stake than the truth and lies and slander are acceptable parctice, but what are these people trying to achieve? It's not as if they're even self-appointed moral guardians, cause in that case you'd expect them to have other priorities.

Knaight

2011-12-22, 10:43 AM

Why do you think most people dress in bland clothing, have bland conversations on bland topics, and never do anything unusual...
They don't. While stating that most people have bland conversations on bland topics is probably true when you look specifically at the subset of conversations where these people are talking to strangers, and "bland clothing" is generally true where bland is defined as "in some accordance with the modern style" the rest of this is abject nonsense. People have interesting conversations on interesting topics, people do unusual things, and basically nobody fits the generalized average. At most, one can state that people project blandness, and in doing so have bland conversations on bland topics - which is technically within the quote above, though the subtext is very much one of "people always do this", particularly given the "never do anything unusual" line and unquoted parts of the post - because they want to dole out knowledge of the interesting parts about them on their own terms.

Starscream

2011-12-22, 11:19 AM

If I didn't want people to know I'm a dork, I wouldn't dress like one. Or have this haircut. Or dance, ever. Seriously, when I dance the dorkiness registers from 500 feet away, through a lead sheet. People in adjacent buildings look up, sniff the air, and say "something dorky is happening".

The Monks of Cool, whose tiny and exclusive monastery is hidden in a really cool and laid-back valley in the lower Ramtops, have a passing-out test for a novice. He is taken into a room full of all types of clothing and asked: Yo, my son, which of these is the most stylish thing to wear? And the correct answer is: Hey, whatever I select.
-Terry Pratchett

Atreyu the Masked LLama

2011-12-22, 11:43 AM

You cannot stop people from making fun of you or mocking you for being different. All you can do is control how you handle it when it happens. Trust the Pro-Wrestling fan who is also a Christian Furry. I'm the most mocked man on the Internet!

thubby

2011-12-22, 11:55 AM

have you ever worn bland clothing? it's so comfortable.

Dallas-Dakota

2011-12-22, 12:17 PM

Frankly, I think a lot of people on this forum'd be pretty chuffed to be a meme.
Actually I am on memebase.:smallwink::smalltongue:

Newman

2011-12-22, 12:50 PM

They don't. While stating that most people have bland conversations on bland topics is probably true when you look specifically at the subset of conversations where these people are talking to strangers, and "bland clothing" is generally true where bland is defined as "in some accordance with the modern style" the rest of this is abject nonsense. People have interesting conversations on interesting topics, people do unusual things, and basically nobody fits the generalized average. At most, one can state that people project blandness, and in doing so have bland conversations on bland topics - which is technically within the quote above, though the subtext is very much one of "people always do this", particularly given the "never do anything unusual" line and unquoted parts of the post - because they want to dole out knowledge of the interesting parts about them on their own terms.

Yeah, sorry, I guess I sounded like Naota back there. What I meant is that, specifically, in public, and when dealing with strangers, co-workers, and other people willing and able to hurt you, people try to keep as low a profile as possible, because the nail that sticks out gets beaten in. This is especially frustrating to me because I can't seem to achieve that discretion. I get remarked wherever I go. I've just learned to run along with it and play it up for "adorable" points rather than shell up into a resented crumple, but it's still frustrating not to be able to be "like everyone else".

As an amateur actor, I find this poor performance depressing: even on stage, I only seem to pull either open large hams or closet hams that burn with silent intensity. And I know this "melding" can be done. I know a girl who managed to pull the role of The Libby (despite her extreme nerdiness) throughout her teenage years, dropping it only upon joining college, and who managed to pull it perfectly (although by the end of the week the stress wore her down greatly).

But it's really the "willing and able" bit that frustrates me. Being accused of "Special Snowflake Syndrome", and then being told that the accusation isn't that you're faking it for attention, but that you're demanding acceptance, which somehow is something unforgivable. Apparently, they couldn't care less how different you are and in what ways, as long as you behave normatively in public. What offends them is that you want your weirdness to be accepted as normal.

And you know what? That's persecution, right there. I come from a country where, as everywhere, there have been gay people. Nobody really cared that they were gay, so long as they kept it to themselves. You still couldn't publicly come out, and you were still expected to get married, and if you didn't, there would be talk. But they even have special temples with little pagan cults ("adapted" to the current mainstream religion, but only cosmetically). This is changing now. The change is painful. People get stoned. People didn't used to get stoned for this before. Before they started wanting to be acknowledged.

Maxios

2011-12-22, 12:55 PM

Nope. Try the Brass Goggles steampunk forum, they're even better mannered. I've never seen a flame on there to be scrubbed, and addressing one another as "Sir" or "Madam" is commonplace :P

The only reason I don't talk that on here is because I don't want anybody to think I'm doing it to mock them/be sarcastic. I do however, talk that way in real life.

Edit: Also, what's this Dressing page?

Sylvre Phire

2011-12-22, 12:56 PM

You probably haven't been here long enough to really get an idea of this place.

In my opinion? This is the last bastion of niceness and manners in the internet.
It really is a great community.

Anonymity?

Yeah. I think it's anonymity.

In public, we cap our brutality to within the limits of our wit and that which is socially acceptable (i.e. passive aggressive mockery and "friendly" jibing) knowing that crossing the line makes us a "w"itch and therefore subject to another subtext of passive aggressive mockery and "friendly" jibing.

However, with the veil of the web covering our ego/superego better than any "real-world" false persona could, we can be as mean as we wish without risking retributive consequences from our daily social environments: jobs, schools, places of worship, etc.

Still... that's why I prefer boards with good mods. I like this place, because it has a zero tolerance policy for trolling, and the people here put up with the fact that, 75% of the time I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about D&D-wise and tend to ask comparatively stupid questions about build mechanics.

Still... I think you're being a bit harsh on humanity. Your post suggests that people are inherently mean (evil), but I think we are just inherently ego-centric (neutral). The hurt people give is reflective of the hurt that they have received. Likewise with the gentleness people give. Be patient enough with a bitter angry troll, and they may indeed come around (I've seen this happen on ponychan) or just understand the rage for what it is, and either ignore it or move on to greener pastures.

Both of these 1000%.

I left another place... a purple place... a while back... While I was there I championed it as a bastion of civility amongst RPG forums in light of several other forums I found to be less civilized after the shiny finish wore off... I have to honestly say this is definitely a better place than any of those, including the purple one...

To be honest, if anybody goes out of their way to pull pics from this site in order to make someone the target of derision and ridicule either here or on another forum, they've got some serious issues.

Pax et bonum,

Dale

The Succubus

2011-12-22, 12:59 PM

And you know what? That's persecution, right there. I come from a country where, as everywhere, there have been gay people. Nobody really cared that they were gay, so long as they kept it to themselves. You still couldn't publicly come out, and you were still expected to get married, and if you didn't, there would be talk. But they even have special temples with little pagan cults ("adapted" to the current mainstream religion, but only cosmetically). This is changing now. The change is painful. Partly because, now that they've started coming out, everyone is under suspicion. Cue tons of "gay bravado", gay insults, and the like.

I really hope I'm reading this the wrong way but the gist I'm getting from this is that you're saying gay, lesbian, etc should basically shut up about their sexuality because it's unwelcome?

I've had plenty of hetero people making out right in front of my face on the train and that's not a welcome sight either. Besides, if you've ever hung around with the LGBT crowd, you'll know those guys & gals are *fun*. Provided they're not smooching right in front of me, I couldn't care less whether they sing it from the rooftops or not, as long as it's well choreographed. :smallwink:

Newman

2011-12-22, 12:59 PM

Both of these 1000%.

I left another place... a purple place... a while back... While I was there I championed it as a bastion of civility amongst RPG forums in light of several other forums I found to be less civilized after the shiny finish wore off... I have to honestly say this is definitely a better place than any of those, including the purple one...

To be honest, if anybody goes out of their way to pull pics from this site in order to make someone the target of derision and ridicule either here or another forum, they've got some serious issues.

Pax et bonum,

Dale

I definitely agree. I love this place. It can get boring at times, but I'll gladly sacrifice the excitement for the peace. But there's lurkers from elsewhere, and those people will read you, will watch your pics, will twist your words and ridicule your image with vice and passion and flair.

Yeah, ignoring them isn't just the best option, it's the only option. But I can't help but keep them in the back of my head.

Weezer

2011-12-22, 01:24 PM

And you know what? That's persecution, right there. I come from a country where, as everywhere, there have been gay people. Nobody really cared that they were gay, so long as they kept it to themselves. You still couldn't publicly come out, and you were still expected to get married, and if you didn't, there would be talk. But they even have special temples with little pagan cults ("adapted" to the current mainstream religion, but only cosmetically). This is changing now. The change is painful. People get stoned. People didn't used to get stoned for this before. Before they started wanting to be acknowledged.

So we should hide our sexuality/creed/ethnicity/whatever just because we're afraid to be persecuted? Thats a horrific outlook. By that logic people who are homosexual should be content to have less rights, not be able to kiss their SO in public, not be able to get married, be afraid that their coworkers and friends will find out about their orientation. **** that.

Knaight

2011-12-22, 01:32 PM

Yeah, sorry, I guess I sounded like Naota back there. What I meant is that, specifically, in public, and when dealing with strangers, co-workers, and other people willing and able to hurt you, people try to keep as low a profile as possible, because the nail that sticks out gets beaten in.
I wouldn't generalize that far. There are taboos, many of which have no reason to exist, and people frequently have to work around them. That much is reprehensible - your example being a case where it was particularly bad. Still, mere oddity is usually fine. Outside of actual uniforms (including de facto uniforms) one can have a lot of variance in how they choose to dress, wear their hair, etc. Most hobbies can be openly talked about, regardless of how weird they are, and while the topics may be mundane the conversations can very well be interesting. It is often socially acceptable to analyze culture to some extent. Keeping a low profile is an activity that only appears in the context of hiding certain traits, and in many cases the traits only need to be hidden in very particular circles. Often, the traits don't even need to be hidden, and people are merely embarrassed about them, where openly mentioning them without embarrassment would be entirely fine.

I'm not saying there is perfection. Taboos and degrees of conformity applied to certain traits in certain circles both exist, and both are problems in many cases (though not all). Demands of uniforms and the social equivalent are all to prevalent. Still, the situation is not so bad that, in the general public society demanded conformity to blandness is the norm.

Atreyu the Masked LLama

2011-12-22, 01:32 PM

Sylvre Phire

2011-12-22, 02:48 PM

I definitely agree. I love this place. It can get boring at times, but I'll gladly sacrifice the excitement for the peace. But there's lurkers from elsewhere, and those people will read you, will watch your pics, will twist your words and ridicule your image with vice and passion and flair.

Yeah, ignoring them isn't just the best option, it's the only option. But I can't help but keep them in the back of my head.

I can't escape the feeling I need to clarify my stance on all this. Despite your agreeing with me, I do not agree with your stance on homosexuality, public derision, and the idea that mistreatment of minorities stems from them wanting to be accepted as normal.

I'm not going to debate this with anyone because I've seen far too many debates degrade into mudslinging, chest-thumping bouts online where nobody changes their minds. I'm bone-tired of that sort of stuff and it makes me seriously consider leaving fandom entirely... :smallmad:

Part of the reason I left the purple place and came to frequent these boards more often is because of the distinct lack of bile here. The community on the purple place, despite being tightly modded, opened itself up to a bile flood by discussing this and other things unrelated to its central purpose (RPG discussion).:smalleek::smallfrown::smallyuk:

For the record, I'm definitely going to take my own advice on this issue.

Dale

AtlanteanTroll

2011-12-22, 03:28 PM

Weezer

2011-12-22, 03:56 PM

Nobody should kiss in public, hetero or otherwise ... Or, not intimately, at least. PDA is nasty. I feel bad for High School teachers. As my English teacher once basically said, "I know what you're thinking is all lovely dovey, but think of it this way, would you want to see your teachers making out in the hallway?"

:smallyuk:

I wasn't talking about a full on make out session in a mall, but instead a quick peck on the lips, or really any casual display of affection.

DeadManSleeping

2011-12-22, 04:16 PM

When I was in college, my fedora got me entered TWICE in a campus-area paper's "Fashion Police" section. I proudly scanned and posted both articles to Facebook, and even kept the hard copies around for a while.

So people might think I'm ripe for mockery. That I'm ugly or unfashionable. That I'm stupid. That I'm completely unlikable in every way. That's fine. Because there are people who don't think that. And I like them more than I like strangers.

That's not to say my friends don't make fun of me, but they do it with love. That's just the human condition.

I encourage all of you to take a stand. Hold hands with someone of your sex. Dress outlandishly. Dance badly. Because however much it hurts to be made fun of, it hurts more to try to not be yourself.

Winter_Wolf

2011-12-22, 04:46 PM

I act like myself when I'm out and about, regardless of what's "acceptable behavior" in the culture/location I'm residing in/visiting. Because I have that level of confidence in myself and my decision making skills.

That said, I'll certainly try out local customs as long as they're not personally offensive or go against my personal code of conduct (is that redundant?). I'll also attempt to be pleasant with people until and unless they decide they want to "joust". I'll even try to be pleasant with people I hate on sight--which is actually less a sight based thing than that certain kind of energy some people seem to emit--because why should I let them ruin my day?

I still dress how I want to dress, talk how I want to talk, and more or less do what I want to do. I won't be walking into a restaurant or children's hospital and lighting up a doob, but I'm fairly comfortable with who I am regardless of people trying to mock me. I find smiling cordially and sincerely and confidently saying something to the effect of "damn straight" usually stops/confounds would-be mockers/deriders/other assorted candies.

I think most people live bland lives (hey, if you want to act, dress, speak, and pretend to be bland, then I'd say your actions speak for you pretty clearly) because they are bland (some people are); because they're scared; or because they actually have no idea who they are. I personally know a lot of people who just have not and quite possibly will not spend some time to find out who they are and what makes them tick.

TLDR version: See Serp's post. :smalltongue:

Also, fedoras rock. I'm getting one for Christmas. Actually I'm just not allowed to wear it until Christmas, so it's sitting there with a bow on it under the tree waiting for me.

Newman

2011-12-22, 05:01 PM

I act like myself when I'm out and about, regardless of what's "acceptable behavior" in the culture/location I'm residing in/visiting. Because I have that level of confidence in myself and my decision making skills.

I think most people live bland lives (hey, if you want to act, dress, speak, and pretend to be bland, then I'd say your actions speak for you pretty clearly) because they are bland (some people are); because they're scared; or because they actually have no idea who they are. I personally know a lot of people who just have not and quite possibly will not spend some time to find out who they are and what makes them tick.

TLDR version: See Serp's post. :smalltongue:

Also, fedoras rock. I'm getting one for Christmas. Actually I'm just not allowed to wear it until Christmas, so it's sitting there with a bow on it under the tree waiting for me.

You provably can't trust yourself. (http://lesswrong.com/lw/t8/you_provably_cant_trust_yourself/)

It's not so much that I want to be actually bland, more like I want to be able to fake it convincingly, turn it off and on on demand. I know quite a few people who are not bland, but you'd never know it if you hadn't met them in more intimate circumstances (get your minds out of the gutter... although that too).

I wuv fedoras too. Why do people assume I'm trying to emulate Bogart? They just look good on me, is all. Now that I think of it, I dress a lot like this guy (http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DuiH4BFTELME&v=uiH4BFTELME&gl=DE). But taller. And with a fedora.

Mina Kobold

2011-12-22, 05:32 PM

Ah, human social behaviour, always so conformist. So sad. ;_;

I am a bit too socially awkward and phobic to dress all that out of the ordinary offline, but I am certainly not planning on it staying that way.

I have already gotten away with wearing a Trilby and colourful dress shirts without anything negative (plenty of people wanting to borrow said Trilby, though. Eep!)! Soon none will be able to stop me from cosplaying as Link! MWAHAHAHA!

dehro

2011-12-22, 06:48 PM

I'm a bit stumped
how do I reply to this without being offensive...I don't think I can.
I don't really know how to answer this except to say that I've rarely read a bigger pile of self-loathing/mysoginistic horse-crap.
to imagine that the world at large has nothing better to do than to cramp my style and make fun of me...meh.. it would have been a gross exageration even when I was in high school and actually had a few people who routinely made fun of me.
yes, I've seen more than a few online bullies and wannabies..and I've kicked them out of those forums I was admin or mod of because nobody likes a troll or a flamewar..but hey... that only happens now and then and frankly, who cares if somebody thinks it's funny to make fun of me? in the end it's their loss, because I've got no time for them.
there are 99.9% chances of me never meeting them or indeed having any interaction with them beyond the sharing of a few threads on a forum..and that's about as important as those individuals are ever going to be to me, in the grand scheme of things.
it helps that I have never given a crap about fashion, clothes or what people thought of my looks.

all I can think about your post is that you must have ambled in a forum where there's a clique of "old forumites" who are clearly immature and treat anybody who isn't "in" as a target...and you've let them get under your skin...which, all said and done, is your fault and no-one else's.
if said forum had no proper moderation or if the clique included the moderators..then you should have left. there are better forums out there. this is one of them.
there are so may more important things to worry about, both on the net and IRL..that well.. being worried about posting one's image for fear of being mocked is... well.. it just HAS to be played down because otherwise you might as well not leave your room... ever.

Vacant

2011-12-22, 07:14 PM

Frankly, I think a lot of people on this forum'd be pretty chuffed to be a meme.

My friend was a reddit meme for a while. Sure, reddit is to memes what daytime soap operas are to great cinema, but I was still a little jealous.

I'm more inhibited online than in person, generally. Being mean to someone who can't punch you in the face just isn't the same.

Jack Squat

2011-12-22, 07:20 PM

When I was in college, my fedora got me entered TWICE in a campus-area paper's "Fashion Police" section. I proudly scanned and posted both articles to Facebook, and even kept the hard copies around for a while.

You're college had a "Fashion Police" section? Where I go, it's commonplace for people to walk around in a hoodie, pajama pants, and flip flops.

It's not so much that I want to be actually bland, more like I want to be able to fake it convincingly, turn it off and on on demand. I know quite a few people who are not bland, but you'd never know it if you hadn't met them in more intimate circumstances (get your minds out of the gutter... although that too).

Why? People don't like bland, they like personality. Maybe people will be a little more reserved until they find some common ground, but they're generally not bland. Some people may try and make fun of your quirks, but who cares - anyone worth knowing is going to have a few of them.

Brother Oni

2011-12-22, 07:21 PM

Yeah, but "disinhibition" means they had it in them in the first place, which is the part that amazes me.

The link I posted goes into more detail about possible motivations and causes of GIFT, which you may find useful in understanding the dis- inhibition.

Heliomance

2011-12-22, 07:42 PM

I'm a bit stumped
how do I reply to this without being offensive...I don't think I can.
I don't really know how to answer this except to say that I've rarely read a bigger pile of self-loathing/mysoginistic horse-crap.

Nitpick: pretty sure you mean misanthropic, not misogynistic. Misongynistic specifically refers to anti-female, and there was nothing specifically anti-female in the OP. Misanthropic, OTOH, is anti people in general.

Newman

2011-12-22, 07:45 PM

My friend was a reddit meme for a while. Sure, reddit is to memes what daytime soap operas are to great cinema, but I was still a little jealous.

I'm more inhibited online than in person, generally. Being mean to someone who can't punch you in the face just isn't the same.

A man after my own heart, who ain't afraid of a good fight.

I don't really know how to answer this except to say that I've rarely read a bigger pile of self-loathing/mysoginistic horse-crap.

Sorry, I missed that post. However, you've got the wrong idea. I'm among the most philanthropic people you'll meet (no, seriously). I'm not particularly prone to self-loathing, but I think there's clearly always room for improvement. That's why every time I take a level the perk I take is Intensive Training. But being well-intentioned towards your neighbor doesn't mean you aren't disillusioned with the way they think. Actually, in the OP, I went out of my way to be morally neutral and not make any value judgements. I prefer to understand rather than to judge.

Mixt

2011-12-22, 07:50 PM

Newman

2011-12-22, 08:02 PM

{Scrubbed}

Weezer

2011-12-22, 08:07 PM

THAC0

2011-12-22, 08:30 PM

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

I would very strongly recommend that you refer to the laws in your particular jurisdiction as these laws vary from state to state. As a blanket statement, this is not entirely correct.

Vacant

2011-12-22, 08:34 PM

Foucault is the man.

Newman

2011-12-22, 08:50 PM

^You should try René Girard. Eliezer Yudkowsky is also nice, and rather more accessible.

^^Sorry for the inaccuracy. Indeed, you should check your state's law. No point in getting arrested for manslaughter or something.

Jack Squat

2011-12-22, 09:13 PM

"Oh hey look at that kid Mixt, he's different, he's got some kind of mental disorder! GET HIM!"

That's pretty much what i have to put up with if i dare make it clear that i'm not normal in public.

Oh yes, school was soooo much fun, i attracted the bullies like flies to garbage.
It hasn't gotten much better, turns out people outside of school are just as willing to inflict bodily harm on me the moment they realize there's something wrong with the way my brain works :smallyuk::smallmad:

There's a reason i almost never set foot outside the house.
People are too goddamn violent towards anyone who doesn't fit the social norm.

I'm really hoping i have just had bad luck and that people in general are not actually such overly violent sick cruel bastards. (The overabundance of evidence is making that very hard to believe unfortunately :smallfrown:)

I haven't run across that outside of school, both as someone who's "a little off" and as someone who's been around and knows people who work with people with moderate to heavy mental disorders*. I'm sorry you have. Maybe I'm particularly lucky in that I've been able to successfully work my own quirks into a somewhat likable personality via humor. I also make a point to not associate with the types of people who need to belittle others to validate themselves.

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

You can realize that they don't actually have any power over you, and not let it get to you. Sly Stallone normally doesn't have a way with words, but I think a quote of his actually has some pertinence to this thread:

The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It is a very mean and nasty place It will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me or nobody is going to hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard you hit, it is about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward, how much can you take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done! Now, if you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hit, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you are because of him, or her, or anybody.

*Now, I've been less than kind to someone who deliberately annoyed people then pulled the "I have aspergers, so I'm not responsible for my actions" card. But I've never personally seen anyone single out someone just because they had a disorder.

Brother Oni

2011-12-23, 02:48 AM

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

That's if you know their name or remember what they look like in a photokit/composite image and can identify them in a lineup.

You're also a bit optimistic about how much the police can do as these often degenerate into "he said/they said", or they end up with a 'slap on the wrist' punishment and they go straight back to tormenting you (or worse since they're often after revenge now).

With regard to behaving odd, on initial appearances you don't look out of place at least. Ethnic minorities often don't even have that.

Vacant

2011-12-23, 03:04 AM

I read a ton of Yudkowsky for one of my cognitive science classes, since I was in a debate about rationality for one of the projects. I'm still not sure what my opinion about Girard is, especially in his critique of Strauss, but I think the fundamental elements of the theory of mimetic desire are sound, at least.

dehro

2011-12-23, 05:38 AM

Nitpick: pretty sure you mean misanthropic, not misogynistic. Misongynistic specifically refers to anti-female, and there was nothing specifically anti-female in the OP. Misanthropic, OTOH, is anti people in general.

derp...
yeah...that's what I get for staying up late, I guess. you're right, of course

Newman

2011-12-23, 07:39 PM

That's if you know their name or remember what they look like in a photokit/composite image and can identify them in a lineup.

You're also a bit optimistic about how much the police can do as these often degenerate into "he said/they said", or they end up with a 'slap on the wrist' punishment and they go straight back to tormenting you (or worse since they're often after revenge now).

With regard to behaving odd, on initial appearances you don't look out of place at least. Ethnic minorities often don't even have that.

Does "looking incredibly Jewish" count? Then again, historically Jews are the proto-geeks, along with monks, so I guess there's some overlap with "looking incredibly geeky". One might even say that antisemitism has lots of "jock VS nerd" undertones if you read between the lines.

As for the cops, I know they are sometimes useless. But sometimes they aren't. They're a tool available to me, and I try to get as much mileage as I can out of them.

ORione

2011-12-23, 10:26 PM

Coidzor

2011-12-23, 11:39 PM

Does "looking incredibly Jewish" count? Then again, historically Jews are the proto-geeks, along with monks, so I guess there's some overlap with "looking incredibly geeky". One might even say that antisemitism has lots of "jock VS nerd" undertones if you read between the lines.

Ahh, that might explain a thing or two then. I always wondered why people assumed I must be more geeky than I was. Still leaves the question of why people think I'm Jewish though.

SDF

2011-12-24, 12:06 AM

Does "looking incredibly Jewish" count? Then again, historically Jews are the proto-geeks, along with monks, so I guess there's some overlap with "looking incredibly geeky". One might even say that antisemitism has lots of "jock VS nerd" undertones if you read between the lines.

Why are jocks always the villains? It just seems you are perpetuating a stereotype of intolerance toward a group as a metaphor for your own perceived victimization. If you don't like it when people are unaccepting of others that are different, it doesn't help to equate the jock subculture to an inherent discriminatory point of view.

Serpentine

2011-12-24, 06:45 AM

Newman

2011-12-24, 10:02 AM

Conformity is for chumps, basically, and you seem incredibly paranoid and hyper-concious of what other people think.

Well, I'm still in the process of maturing. People liking me and appreciating me for who I am still comes as a bit of a surprise. I've found that the key was mostly to sincerely expect them to like you, while genuinely not caring much that they don't, and showing that you yourself like them. "Not caring" seems to be an important part of "coolness". People who are too intense about things are intimidating.

Knaight

2011-12-24, 06:46 PM

Conformity is for chumps, basically, and you seem incredibly paranoid and hyper-concious of what other people think.

And even among these "chumps" conformity is usually a strategy for dealing with strangers up until a common interest is found.

Mina Kobold

2011-12-28, 01:44 PM

People in this thread should read History of Madness (also entitled in some editions as Madness and Civilization) by Michel Foucault, it's a great examination of how western society has dealt with "abnormal" behavior over time. Fascinating book and Foucault is one of my favorite philosophers so I never can pass up a chance to plug his work.

Interesting, will be reading that if possible. :smallsmile:

Why are jocks always the villains? It just seems you are perpetuating a stereotype of intolerance toward a group as a metaphor for your own perceived victimization. If you don't like it when people are unaccepting of others that are different, it doesn't help to equate the jock subculture to an inherent discriminatory point of view.

I believe it has come to have the connotation of arrogance and bullying behaviour, but other than that there does not seem to be a reason to be particularly opposed to the subculture.

So you have a good point. :smallsmile:

I once went around a camp-convention-thingy hugging everyone I saw, all complete strangers. In reterospect I'm terribly embarassed, but in practice it won me a couple of friends and I never saw anyone else again so who cares what they thought about it?

Most of my friends are extremely weird, and don't go out of their way to hide it. Maybe you've been incredibly unlucky in your personal experience with others, but neither I nor any of my friends has ever gotten abused for the way they look or act in public - or at least not seriously, and not to any extent that it might worry them (maybe a bit of name-calling or catcalling out of windows or whatever).

Conformity is for chumps, basically, and you seem incredibly paranoid and hyper-concious of what other people think.

I wish I dared do that... ;_;

Do you take disciples? :3

Tyndmyr

2011-12-28, 02:01 PM

And even among these "chumps" conformity is usually a strategy for dealing with strangers up until a common interest is found.

Common interests, while a good way to have a conversation, are certainly not the only way to strike up a chat or relationship with a stranger. Frankly, all you have to do is be interesting. Faking conformity is mostly a way to avoid attention, not a way to garner positive attention.

Interesting can be done in any number of ways. I've had conversations with people who have never been in the military, for example, but are curious about what I've done in the air force, or by means of some odd gadget I'm fidding with. Back when they were shiny and new, I grabbed one of those shirt that detects wifi(and shows signal strength via lights on the front), and had all manner of interesting conversations with complete strangers as a result on a simple grocery trip. Find things you enjoy that others find interesting, and go nuts with them.

Winter_Wolf

2011-12-28, 03:26 PM

I've noticed lately that people just try very, very hard to be as unnoticed as possible. I make a point of trying to look everyone I interact with in the eyes (with a smile usually, I'm not trying to stare anyone down 99% of the time), and the sheer number of people who will actively go out of their way to avoid meeting another person's gaze is mind numbing.

It's kind of sad, really. How long has this been going on? Naturally I could just be starting to notice it because sometimes I'm not quick on the uptake, but people seem to be increasingly afraid of human contact of any type. And then they turn around and bitch to their friends about how they're being treated like they're not even there. :smallannoyed:

Newman

2011-12-28, 06:14 PM

inb4 Socially Awkward Penguin (http://****yeahsociallyawkwardpenguin.tumblr.com/)

Coidzor

2011-12-28, 06:16 PM

The sad thing is that there are degrees. I know some people who think of me as the most charismatic person evar and others who think I'm of the type of person who should be killed for being too socially awkward to risk reproducing.

DeadManSleeping

2011-12-28, 08:25 PM

Knaight

2011-12-29, 05:01 AM

Common interests, while a good way to have a conversation, are certainly not the only way to strike up a chat or relationship with a stranger. Frankly, all you have to do is be interesting. Faking conformity is mostly a way to avoid attention, not a way to garner positive attention.
Faking conformity is more effective at avoiding attention, however I'd posit that actual use is to avoid attention being taken in situations outside of specific conversations. It's not about "not being noticed" as much as "not being noticed until deliberately opening communications with someone that one has gauged to be interesting". It's controlled socialization, where actively portraying being interesting is more about uncontrolled socialization. Both options have validity, and most people will use both, with the mix depending on situation and community.

Don Julio Anejo

2011-12-29, 05:27 AM

You know, this would be a much more interesting conversation if we had an operating definition of conformity...

One that's not "being the same as everyone else," which would require a dozen other definitions like what exactly does it mean to be like everyone else.

Mikhailangelo

2011-12-29, 06:00 AM

The world is a terrible place. Terrible people make it a terrible place. There are not proportionately more truly terrible people than nice, but the vast majority of people have the capacity to be banally terrible.

It is not invariable that terrible people always float to the top of society, or the prescribed hierarchy, but it is almost always certain that the person who finds that they now have power and status and that their thoughts are actually listened to will be corrupted by their own circumstance, and so shall become terrible.

It is like Mill said in relation to nation-states - 'Wherever there is an ascendant class a significant proportion of that countries morality is derived from that class's interests.'

The above statement is no doubt far larger in scale than the confines of the OP. However, it is no less applicable to what could be considered the 'smaller scale'. It is undeniable that in all social instances there is an ascendant class. To use the archetypical American '80's Movie, the 'Jock'. The 'ascendant' have the power to determine the norm. The norm that is determined will be whatever the ascendant themselves enjoy. However outlandish and mad their 'norm' may appear to the external observer, it is a 'norm' nonetheless, and shall, after a time, become banal.

As, however, most have the capacity within to become terrible, and becoming a part of the ascendant class brings out this less than desirable trait, the means which are utilised to protect the norm, which is now externally banal, yet no less important to the ascendant class that possesses an interest in defending it, are equally terrible and cruel.

The problem here is, of course, that while there are many persons who choose to forgo the whims of society and the banal, should they find themselves in the position to create the norms of their own, the conception of the norms, the sanctions and the harsh methods utilised would not at all change, despite the constitution of the banal being, perhaps even radically, overhauled. The best example here may be a hypothetical subculture, such as goths, (I am not at all picking on you, hypothetical gothic reader! Hypothetical scenario, remember! :P) as while they externally reject the 'norms' of greater society, they nevertheless have 'norms' of equal force, and equally harsh sanctions which follow their breach.

Another example may be to take the divergence of the past and the present. I refer here only to the experiences of my own country, and I have no doubt that others may find their own nations at entirely different spots in the timeline, but the principle nevertheless holds.

To go back one hundred years ago and advocate homosexual rights would be a sure fire way to gain very prompt social rejection and status as a pariah, for vehemently moving against the norm of society.

In the present day, advocating the re-criminalisation of homosexuality, or the removal of homosexual rights would gain one the status of pariah equally quickly, as society again sees one challenging its norms.

This example, I hope, shows that while it may indeed be desirable to challenge the norms of society, simply changing said norms will not be sufficient to change human nature. It will more often than not be the empirical evidence, or human reason, which leads to history judging whether a 'right' change has been made or not. If it finds that the 'right' change has indeed been made, the new norm shall be offered protection by society, which is guided by the ascendant class. If one challenges the new norm, it shall make one open to the penance of the sanction. If the 'wrong' choice is made, defending the attempts of the proposed proto-norm shall open one to the penance of societal sanctions.

Thus, I believe it can be concluded that there is no 'objective' right or wrong course of action, as normative behaviour is determined and enforced by an ascendant class which is, by its nature, almost entirely always comprised of terrible people willing to utilise terrible means to protect itself, that the nature of the norm is eternal as a result of human nature, and that the actual constitution of what exactly the norm is can be held utterly irrelevant (ie. The norm may be that all must wear funny hats, or equally that all must abstain from doing so. This is utterly irrelevant, as the method of the creation of the norm and its enforcement is the same.)

Thus, the world being as such, unless one is actually a part of the ascendant class, to whom the norm sits perfectly well, what real reason is there to not challenge the norm? Societal pressure is, of course, the prime reason, but as many throughout this thread have shown, the majority of society conform to the banality only to 'keep their head down', and personally have their own tastes, preferences and enjoyments. While most know that everyone, even those 'educated under the same government and imbibed with the same prejudice', hold differing opinions and taste, few can be said to honestly understand this, and hold to what is the same, rather than exploring the differences, if we confine discussion entirely to a single social group. Differences are, obviously, the focal point of factors such as rivalry and warfare, but where we look at a social organism such as a clique, we find that humanity is just as desperate to cling to the most fleeting similarities, even if said similarity arises only because the group manages to tolerate the whims of the norms of the ascendant class, as to turn against them would be too much effort.

It is possible, however unlikely, that all could be made to realise that simple expression of their own tastes and enjoyments would be sufficient to tear down the walls of societal pressure, and destroy the fortress of the norm, and ultimately raze the entire sordid institution to the ground. I believe that if one sees this eventuality as a desirable state, then one must act towards it. And the best way to do so is to quite simply be yourself.

Tyndmyr

2011-12-29, 11:01 AM

To go back one hundred years ago and advocate homosexual rights would be a sure fire way to gain very prompt social rejection and status as a pariah, for vehemently moving against the norm of society.

Oddly enough, a hundred years ago would put you just before the roaring twenties. Social norms changed a fair bit then, and they were not particularly uptight about such things then. Had history gone a bit differently, perhaps that would have happened. I'd put the WW2 era as a much harsher time to champion the same idea.

Newman

2011-12-29, 09:26 PM

It is possible, however unlikely, that all could be made to realise that simple expression of their own tastes and enjoyments would be sufficient to tear down the walls of societal pressure, and destroy the fortress of the norm, and ultimately raze the entire sordid institution to the ground. I believe that if one sees this eventuality as a desirable state, then one must act towards it. And the best way to do so is to quite simply be yourself.

In fact, this has been realized, to a degree, as arguments in the form of "Nobody actually cares if you do X, what infuriates me/us is that you rub it in our faces and speak about it out loud and thrive for it to be accepted as a legitimate topic of discussion."

A common accusation against those who dare to transgress is that the motivations can be reduced to "vying for attention" without significant loss of information. In other words, transgressors are attentions whores, and this automatically disqualifies anything they say.

A thing that amazes me is the promptness of conformists to disualify one and one's opinions on the flimsiest of grounds. You are caught transgressing or supporting a transgressor once, and suddenly you are one of them, and not one of us.

Interestingly enough, the "No True Scotsman" fallacy can be extended so far as to call the socially disqualified No Longer Human (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Longer_Human).

Mikhailangelo

2011-12-30, 05:30 AM

I'm well aware that the eccentric are often derided for simply 'looking for attention'. I am the first in line to admit that, quite often, I do try to become the centre of attention. But that's irrelevant to the point raised - Perhaps looking for attention is a part of who you are.

In fact, this has been realized, to a degree, as arguments in the form of "Nobody actually cares if you do X, what infuriates me/us is that you rub it in our faces and speak about it out loud and thrive for it to be accepted as a legitimate topic of discussion."

You've missed what I was trying to convey. I am not suggesting that if everyone acted like themselves all interests would instantly become appealing to everyone. I'm not saying that at all. Rather, what I was trying to articulate is that the fact that society gets so aggressive that one attempts to act like oneself should not at all be a deterrent to doing so, because quite frankly, everyone is different. If everyone exhibited their own differences, everyone one know who and what they like and dislike far quicker than otherwise.

Since I view this state as rather desirable, I am not afraid to be myself. I advocate that everyone should, if they do not actually agree with societies dictates, willingly go against them, and as such where I find that I would rather do something that society would frown upon, I do it anyway. Live what you preach, et cetera.

I hid myself for around four years at high school. It didn't stop be getting bullied. It didn't make me happy. In fact, it led me into a suicidal depression, which is hardly an original tale.

In late fourth year, through to my sixth year I gradually began to allow my true self out, as a result of a rather predictable turning point. And I was bullied just as much. I was shunned, often beaten and mocked. In short, I was treated exactly the same as I had been for the past four years of my life. But there was a difference - I was myself. And by being myself, I managed to make few, but lifelong, friends. I knew, not happiness, but a contentment. One which I would never have possessed had I hidden.

It's for that reason I advocate being yourself. By doing so, you can make real, genuine friends, and cut out all undesirables rather quickly. You can face a despicable, cruel world every day knowing, not that anything will change, not that anything may or may not get better, but knowing yourself. And knowing that you can deal with whatever ****e is shovelled in your direction over the next block of endless hours before you can go back to bed.

I don't know what stage anyone else is at in their lives, I don't know what countries, or states or principalities that you live in, so what I say now may not hold true for all, but nothing will ever be as cut-throat, as scheming and as ostensibly evil as social life in school. For me, at least, university, and every job I have ever had, has been filled with at least enough decent and mature people that you can avoid the shallow, the bland and mundane, and the best way to ensure that you do so early is to always be yourself, and don't wall yourself in by arbitrary dictates and whims.

GolemsVoice

2011-12-30, 06:52 AM

Since I view this state as rather desirable, I am not afraid to be myself. I advocate that everyone should, if they do not actually agree with societies dictates, willingly go against them, and as such where I find that I would rather do something that society would frown upon, I do it anyway. Live what you preach, et cetera.

I hope you do realize that "being yourself" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free-card for everything. Because if you're being annyoing while being yourself, people around you will still react unfavourably, and honestly, the mistake lies with you, not with them. Because the world isn't composed of only individuals, so one always has to account for the eddect of ones own behaviour on others. So if you're acting in a way that can reasonably (not unfairly, such as wearing different clothes, being homosexual or any such things) be described as annoying, well, why should other people not react to communicate the fact? I think tolerance goes both ways, if you demand to have your way with what you do (and you'd be right often) isn't there also a time when one has to accept that certain things aren't accepted by certain people under certain circumstances?

Oh, and, by the way, how comes that people still regard society as one, single oppressive body trying to ruin your fun? How would you define "society", because here in Germany, you can get away with pretty much anything inside the boundaries laid down by law and consitution. Sure, you'll see people shake their heads, but that's their right, nust as it is your right to do what you do. Because forcing people to not only accept what you're doing, but also like it would be oppression in the other direction, no?

Newman

2011-12-30, 08:36 AM

Tyndmyr

2011-12-30, 09:15 AM

Being annoying isn't a property of the subject, it's a perception by the onlooker. What one will find annoying, another will find indifferent, or endearing. "Don't be annoying" is useless advice. "Try to make others feel better around you" is much more sound.

No, it can be quite valid. For example, I know a fellow who never, ever stops talking. It can be during a movie, and he will, non stop, make guesses as to what the plot will turn out to be(many of them, each contradicting with the next). If one turns out to be even marginally correct, he will celebrate this exuberantly. He'll also narrate the events happening on screen as if you were not there watching the exact same movie. Also, he has no indoor voice.

Pretty much everyone finds this annoying after a very short period of time. I and other friends have frequently told him "(name), don't be yourself. Shut up. Copy others, and stop annoying everyone." Also, everyone tends to limit the amount of time they spend around him because he's frigging annoying.

"Being yourself" is not an open ended license to ignore all social conventions. At least, not if things like people liking you or allowing you around them is important to you.

Mikhailangelo

2011-12-30, 09:16 AM

I hope you do realize that "being yourself" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free-card for everything. Because if you're being annyoing while being yourself, people around you will still react unfavourably, and honestly, the mistake lies with you, not with them. Because the world isn't composed of only individuals, so one always has to account for the eddect of ones own behaviour on others. So if you're acting in a way that can reasonably (not unfairly, such as wearing different clothes, being homosexual or any such things) be described as annoying, well, why should other people not react to communicate the fact? I think tolerance goes both ways, if you demand to have your way with what you do (and you'd be right often) isn't there also a time when one has to accept that certain things aren't accepted by certain people under certain circumstances?

Oh, and, by the way, how comes that people still regard society as one, single oppressive body trying to ruin your fun? How would you define "society", because here in Germany, you can get away with pretty much anything inside the boundaries laid down by law and consitution. Sure, you'll see people shake their heads, but that's their right, nust as it is your right to do what you do. Because forcing people to not only accept what you're doing, but also like it would be oppression in the other direction, no?

I absolutely understand your first point. There's little else to say on the matter. Almost everything about myself is entirely passive - Fitting entirely within the confines of what you yourself would describe as 'unfairly' labelled as annoying. I do not at all advocate deliberately annoying anyone through provocation - Like you say, it works both ways.

And you misunderstand what I mean by society entirely - Perhaps I was not clear in my preceding posts. Society is not a single entity, it is layers upon layers of everything. On one level, society can be the entire nation, on another it can be students in a class, friends in a group or colleagues in a workplace. Each level has its own dictates, its own requirements. For example, I am about to go out to lunch. Presently I am wearing a bow tie, dress coat and striped trousers. When I leave my flat, few members of 'greater' society will pass comment, or even look twice, but if I was to run into a different level of society, for example, my workmates (if they didn't know me as well as they do, and know of my habits) would perhaps see fit to comment on my unusual attire.

Again, in my view it is not something out to ruin your fun - If you agree with its conception of fun. What I am saying is that quite often what one considers 'fun' may be frowned upon, or disliked by a part of society. If one agrees with societal norms, there is no reason to fight against them

Mina Kobold

2011-12-30, 09:31 AM

Uhm, If I may suggest something, I think that one should be allowed to do what one wants as long as it does not unnecessarily infringe upon others' ability to do so. :smallsmile:

Essentially, doing something that is considered annoying but is not difficult to avoid for a short period of time would be bad in a bus or classroom where those around oneself can not leave without consequences, but would be perfectly fine within one's home or somewhere where people can just avoid oneself.

Assuming that "Having many friends" is not one of the activities one wants to do, of course. In that case, it is a question of how interests should be prioritised. :3

I am probably wrong, but it sounded a bit like the argument was whether one should always do what one want or always compromise. Did I misunderstand? I hope not. :smallsmile:

GolemsVoice

2011-12-30, 09:39 AM

But still, my point was that there are so many societies, that it is very hard to find the definitive norm that one has to adhere to. While I would say that there still IS some overarching "conception of fun", these are so vaguely designed that almost anything fits in. I could imagine few activities that people would find fun that are not forbidden by law, but discriminated against by society at large (safe for those we already named and considered unjustly discriminated against, but even most of them have lobbies and are more or less slowly gaining acceptance.) Keep in mind that "not discriminated against" doesn't mean that there won't be people who'll call you stupid for doing what it is you do, but it's hard to find any activity that isn't opposed by some segment of society. But society isn't one monolithic body dictating one conception of fun, but rather several conceptions of fun that apply to the given part of society you're moving in.

So if you're saying that there will always be a part of society that will frown upon your chosen activity, than yes, I fully agree with you, but that's only natural, isn't it? There are even people in society who frown upon what traditionally would be considered "conform" values and ways of thinking.

If I sounded somewhat aggressive (which wasn't my intention), this is because the vibe that only non-conformity is good and the measure of an emancipated human being, or rather the notion that all who are not non-conform (as defined by those who label themselves people who have broken a mold that I often find they have constructed themselves only to break it) are sheeple that sometimes flows through such discussions annoys me to no end.

EDIT:

Uhm, If I may suggest something, I think that one should be allowed to do what one wants as long as it does not unnecessarily infringe upon others' ability to do so.

Essentially, doing something that is considered annoying but is not difficult to avoid for a short period of time would be bad in a bus or classroom where those around oneself can not leave without consequences, but would be perfectly fine within one's home or somewhere where people can just avoid oneself.

Absolutely. In your home you can do whatever the hell you want (as long as it isn't illegal), and even if you do so in public you mostly have a right do to it, but others have the right to not like what you do, and critize you for it. Their right of critique stops when they either overstep certain boundaries of personal conduct (saying that you don't like what one wears is fine, since the person has chosen to wear the clothes, and therefore has made his choice public, but insulting somebody because of what he wears is out of the question) or infringe on your right to do whatever you do,