General
08 Sep 15
09 Sep 15
Originally posted by FMFYou imagining she didn't give it a moments thought before typing rings false to me, as do many of your musings and 'questionings'. If you weren't so concerned with keeping up appearances (and fearful of rejection) you might have something interesting to say now and and then.
This rings false to me, but ~ seeing as it's your bog-standard scorn ~ I don't imagine you gave it even a moment's thought before typing it. 🙂
Originally posted by lemon limeHer thought-free swing-and-a-blurts are much in evidence on the Spirituality Forum.
You imagining she didn't give it a moments thought before typing rings false to me, as do many of your musings and 'questionings'. If you weren't so concerned with keeping up appearances (and fearful of rejection) you might have something interesting to say now and and then.
I've lived in several different cultures around the world and worked in different contexts and, it has to be said, her sweeping jaundiced blurt about politeness hasn't been generally true anywhere. It smacks of some degree of both paranoia and default-setting misanthropy on her part ~ also much in evidence on the other forum.
I am saying this in this civil manner in the hope that she can digest it and give it some thought, and not because I am concerned with "being seen as polite".
You can stick with your sweeping generalizations by all means - it's your prerogative. 🙂
09 Sep 15
Originally posted by FMFUnless you can identity what 'facts' you choose to acknowledge (ignoring other facts) then your statement fits the definition of a "sweeping statement"... so either you meant this as a joke, or the joke is on you.
Another sweeping statement with little basis in fact. 🙂
09 Sep 15
Originally posted by lemon lime'..."those with only a modicum of common sense" agree with lemon lime' is not much a contribution to a discussion. The assertion that 'all people who are polite are concerned with 'being seen' as being polite' is surely not substantiated by anyone's real life experience, least of all mine. Sure there is "fake" politeness, but to suggest that all politeness is for appearance's sake only seems to be sweeping nonsense. I've seen no evidence to substantiate it in 30-40 years of interacting with 'politeness'.
Unless you can identity what 'facts' you choose to acknowledge (ignoring other facts) then your statement fits the definition of a "sweeping statement"... so either you meant this as a joke, or the joke is on you.
09 Sep 15
Originally posted by KewpieAgreed, and it makes just as little sense to ask which is the sexier sex...
Politeness to me equates with civility, to strangers as well as people known to you.
I don't think you can generalise about a whole gender group, in respect of individual behaviour.
So the original question has no point.
Except there might actually be an answer to that question, so...
... um
Aw heck, I don't know! I suppose it depends on who you ask. But this much I do know, common sense and intelligence are not unrelated... common sense is distilled intelligence, so in my opinion it's better than raw unguided intelligence... because it packs more of a punch.
uh oh... is that smoke blowing from FMFs ears?
Originally posted by lemon limeThe topic here is "politeness" and the sub-topic, since you mention me, is the banal generalization that Suzianne has blurted out and your freestanding blurt that "a modicum of common sense" would lead people to agree with it.
Aw heck, I don't know! I suppose it depends on who you ask. But this much I do know, common sense and intelligence are not unrelated... common sense is distilled intelligence, so in my opinion it's better than raw unguided intelligence... because it packs more of a punch.
09 Sep 15
Originally posted by FMFIn your own estimation of yourself do you believe you are mostly a 'polite' person? If so then do you believe your 'politeness' has anything to do with (your) gender?
The topic here is "politeness" and the sub-topic, since you mention me, is the banal generalization that Suzianne has blurted out and your freestanding blurt that "a modicum of common sense" would lead people to agree with it.
On a scale of 1 to 10 how polite do you think you are? 10 being supremely polite, and 1 being a horrid stinky rude little troll.
09 Sep 15
Originally posted by lemon limeWhen I am polite and/or impolite it only has to do with "appearances" in certain cases and for certain purposes. At other times it is genuine, serves important and sincere purposes, and reflects the actual nature of certain relationships. In one of my work environments, it is simply diplomatic to be polite even in situations or with certain people where it would probably be quite satisfying to dispense with politeness. However, the assertion that "there are 'fake' polite people, and there are 'truly' polite people, but all of them are concerned with 'being seen' as being polite" is a terribly flawed sweeping generalization that amounts to little more than nonsense.
In your own estimation of yourself do you believe you are mostly a 'polite' person? If so then do you believe your 'politeness' has anything to do with (your) gender?
On a scale of 1 to 10 how polite do you think you are? 10 being supremely polite, and 1 being a horrid stinky rude little troll.
Originally posted by FMFCan you give me an example or circumstance where someone might be polite (for whatever reason) but isn't at all concerned over whether the person they are being polite to perceives them as being polite or not? And do you think women (or men) are generally more polite or less polite than men (or women) who are generally not polite?
When I am polite and/or impolite it only has to do with "appearances" in certain cases and for certain purposes. At other times it is genuine, serves important and sincere purposes, and reflects the actual nature of certain relationships. In one of my work environments, it is simply diplomatic to be polite even in situations or with certain people where it would ...[text shortened]... ite" is a terribly flawed sweeping generalization that amounts to little more than nonsense.[/b]
Originally posted by lemon limeCan you give me an example or circumstance where someone might be polite (for whatever reason) but isn't at all concerned over whether the person they are being polite to perceives them as being polite or not?
People who are polite by nature, for whom it is the default setting regardless of circumstances and regardless of what the 'recipients' of the politeness might think.
And do you think women (or men) are generally more polite or less polite than men (or women) who are generally not polite?
I pretty much agree with you and Kewpie in so far as... "I don't think you can generalise about a whole gender group, in respect of individual behaviour" and that the OP is kind of pointless.
