21–30 of 66 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jerk has been synonymous with "rude person" as long as I've been alive. If there was a shift, it wasn't all that recent.
And yet "rude" itself has also changed -- from meaning "unsophisticated" to meaning something more along the lines of "obnoxious".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet "rude" itself has also changed -- from meaning "unsophisticated" to meaning something more along the lines of "obnoxious".
Is not saying hello when you see someone that you would normally be expected to say hello to not considered "rude"? It is to me, but it's not obnoxious...
In any event, I'm sure you can agree that "rude" no longer means simply "unsophisticated".
It's not that they don't care why the waiter messed up their order, it's that they think the waiter messed up because they're a jerk.
I don't agree that jerks are people who don't care about other people's individual circumstances. Jerks are people who think that everyone else is a jerk, which is how they excuse their behaviour. It's not that they don't care why the waiter messed up their order, it's that they think the waiter messed up because they're a jerk.
I don't agree that jerks are people who don't care about other people's individual circumstances. Jerks are people who think that everyone else is a jerk, which is how they excuse their behaviour. It's not that they don't care why the waiter messed up their order, it's that they think the waiter messed up because they're a jerk.
One interesting quip I've heard from a psychologist recently, is that communication only really works well going down the dominance hierarchy. (I think it can work across.) I see a lot of the outrage driven viral media of today as being "punching down" by aspirant upper-echelon socioeconomic people onto lower-echelon people. Also, if communication only really works well going down the dominance hierarchy, doesn't thi…
It's known that "communication can only happen between equals." Otherwise it's order giving no matter the semantics.
"Third, I’ve called the jerk ‘he’, for reasons you might guess. But then it seems too gendered to call the sweetheart ‘she’, so I’ve made the sweetheart a ‘he’ too." Absolutely hilarious. I guess one point he's making is that men have a problem with noncompliance, but seems to have forgotten the upside entirely
I think the reason is that if he had used 'she', there would have been a shitstorm. If you do a word-replace of all instances of 'he' with 'she' and 'his' with 'her', it becomes an entirely different article.
One interesting quip I've heard from a psychologist recently, is that communication only really works well going down the dominance hierarchy. (I think it can work across.) I see a lot of the outrage driven viral media of today as being "punching down" by aspirant upper-echelon socioeconomic people onto lower-echelon people. Also, if communication only really works well going down the dominance hierarchy, doesn't thi…
It's known that "communication can only happen between equals." Otherwise it's order giving no matter the semantics.
I don't agree that jerks are people who don't care about other people's individual circumstances. Jerks are people who think that everyone else is a jerk, which is how they excuse their behaviour. It's not that they don't care why the waiter messed up their order, it's that they think the waiter messed up because they're a jerk.
This strikes me as circular.