Annoyance!


Crap, do you know that, when someone calls you, keeps talking about whatever, and starts one useless discussion after the other? Making up arguments to counter one of your statements, but picking arguments that don't lie in the same plain as yours? Like, you say something about skiing sites being environmentally critical and thus shouldn't be maintained, and he states as a defense, that, should you think so, you shouldn't have a christmas tree either, or eat chicken??? Heeellllooooooo - those trees/chicken are GROWN for that (but it's an entirely different matter!). A hillside is there, it doesn't get grown in a backyard every year! My short version: Every hillside gained back is good, it shouldn't be the goal "only" to avoid opening new ones. But that's not what my mood is about, so let's leave it here.
Hate that baby discussion crap. We're not in school anymore. I love to discuss, but I despise not-constructive, plainly useless discussions, just for the discussion's sake. Not. With. Me. I don't need to talk just to listen to myself anymore. Yes, I've grown out of it. Grrr!

Well I'm aware that's all pretty simplified and not professional, but I'm currently angry. Angry equals NOT happy.
Holy Jeebus! I'm not in the mood to produce a coherent good statement. Rather, in the mood I'm in I'm not able to. I found the talk really unprofessional, annoyingly so, furthermore it was pointless, drawn out too long, not on the same level; I don't appreciate people arguing with generalisations; things were discussed that shouldn't have been discussed, all on cost of my nerves. I had better things to do, seriously. Like sleeping. Anything. I didn't want to discuss, yet I had to. A mistake I won't repeat. I demand my request not to discuss to be respected without need for justification. It's not like I'd say that to a professional/official matter. Just private. Retrospectively I was trying to be friendly and resisted the urge to hang up, but it would have spared me a lot of trouble.
One year ago I met this insisting guy on a party, lets call him André. He was feeling superior and behaving like he was the smartest ass in town, and we lead a, what I can only call tasty, discussion about several things. I genuinely liked it, it was fun. Now I realize why. We were on the same level. We both did a good job in bringing our points across and scoring. He's still not my type and probably a bit of an ass, smoking and all, but it wasn't about him or me anyway. Actually I find him sympathetic, he was a worthy opponent and likely a nice guy to have around when taken not too seriously.
Someone told me today that one shouldn't think of his interlocutor as opponent, it wouldn't be a war. But I say, in a good discussion, you two are opponents, no matter what you say! You're opponents in conviction, you have a statement that you defend. It's a rhetorical battle! I say so! And despite that fact, it can still be constructive, and a gain for all participants. I was schooled to fight on the battlefield of rhetoric. Be coequal, or fall. Unless you reach an equation, only one remains standing.
~fin~

Posted: Mi - Dezember 1, 2004 at 01:55 Uhr      

©