it’s common to get the phrase pitched “i just don’t understand”
and that’s to be expected
i haven’t the time and neither have you
to sit down
and have me show you everything i’ve seen/read/heard/experienced
and without that it’s difficult to gain an accurate conception of the why questions.
why i think what i think
why what i’ve experienced means what it means to me
this is the handicap from the beginning
and many times becomes the impasse in the end
further still some are more than willing to verbalize their lack of interest or curiosity about my reasons for what i think
and many will tout it as their innate right
well in response i believe it to be fair play if they would accept my right to have nothing to do with them.
this world is complex enough without having to deal with people bent on wielding their individual rights as weapons in staunch defense of the world they create by reveling in their escapism and entertainment and filtering out anything that threatens their comfort without discretion. Though i’ve yet to find a “right to ignorance” or “right to avoidance” in the bill of rights, it’s a pretty common tactic of survival at this point for many people.
If it’s all well and good to avoid things they don’t like or would otherwise frustrate them, should i not also be able to do the same.
because i mean really, if you can only speak to me about things that don’t pose the threat of making living in a bubble of self imposed ignorance impossible, then i’m probably not going to be able to say much. I mean how am i to know what’s “ok” to say and what’s not? It’s ludicrous to attempt to communicate while awkwardly feeling out what’s ok and what’s not.
So if all that is in the acceptable column is random chit chat that doesn’t have the remote possibility of leading to conflicting opinion or stance, i’d just as soon take a play from your book and opt out. How the weather is, your status on FB, who’s falling on their ass in this season of Dancing with the Stars are about as appetizing a subject to me, as an open debate on politics or religion is to most people. that being said, if you wish to reserve full rights to avoid talking to people about certain topics, simply be prepared to avoided in kind. Again i’m finding difficulty locating the “right to live in your own world”, but i’m sure it’s in there though right? But if you’re busy defending your rigid stance and i’m busy trying to evolve my perspective, then why are we trying to do this complicated dance? Aren’t there other things we should each be doing? …
because really, at that rate….
i don’t have the time, and neither do you.
i once heard listening defined:
as entering into a dialog with the possibility of change
this gives me a yardstick by which i measure the “listener”
if they come in with a rigid and unmovable mindset, they are not listening.
there are waiting for their turn to talk.
i’d prefer people to realize that they needn’t lock themselves into one way of seeing the world. That instead of asserting my intention to replace their views with mine, if they would set my views next to theirs and thus gain an extra perspective which is never hurtful to understanding.
i’d prefer to sit down with them and explain myself, and indeed i have tried this many times. but apparently i don’t have enough time to spare. And neither do they.