this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
1134 points (98.7% liked)
Greentext
4368 readers
2236 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That word is used to express the feeling you get when some better socialized, but not particularly smart or competent or educated or understanding people disrespect your hobbies/expertise/opinions/feelings while you don't disrespect theirs.
I use it sometimes. More often in periods after once again forcing myself to believe that maybe I shouldn't look at people this way and maybe I'm wrong, and then getting wounded once again.
Just call em what they are. Ignorant.
Not quite the word. I'm often ignorant too. It's rather about ignorance coupled with arrogance and habit of underlining one's better socialization.
So calling someone a normie kinda implies that they are proud of being a normie, they just would use other words to say it.
I'm a bit of that myself. Not as much about green stuff, global warming etc, but it doesn't require much specifics to remember that there are "a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together".
You say you're not disrespecting their expertise or opinions...while in the same breath, calling them "not particularly smart or competent or educated." Even if, from your point of view, those things are factually true, the fact that you describe people that way makes it instantly clear to me why you're being disrespected. Maybe that makes me a normie, or "better socialized", but I wouldn't be surprised if you were (intentionally or not) disrespecting those "normies" first. I've grown up around people who talk like you do, and I've seen the responses they get for their actions, rightfully so.
Your comment doesn't make sense, I'm calling them that after the fact, not during the fact, and order of the sequence matters.
EDIT: Which means that you both failed to understand a simple sentiment and yet showed the typical arrogance to talk about "rightfully so". So yeah, I'd say you are not particularly smart. After you showed that, again. Not before.
You're the one failing to understand. I'm drawing an inference about how you treated them before and during the interaction you're complaining about, based on how you're speaking about them after the fact. I'm saying that the fact that you're willing to dismiss people as "not particularly smart" after a single interaction is very indicative of you being generally judgemental and rude, traits that will increase the probability that people will be disrespectful to you. This second comment of yours has only further convinced me.
You have no information at all to draw anything on that.
On that neither.
Now - yes.
The saddest thing is that people IRL respect me more when I'm in this mood. Including romantic interests. And when I'm respectful, ready to believe in people and so on, it's different.
That's the key actually - one doesn't trust a dog not to eat chocolate left on the table unsupervised. One doesn't trust friends with known errors not to err this way again. I think this is the root problem, but too lazy to elaborate.
You've assumed too much (see above) to pretend that it was my comment which convinced you of anything. You came with your opinion without any intent to change it. You got what you wanted. That, of course, reduces the value of your comments to virtually zero.
Your comment looks like it should be smart. But the dude you're replying to isn't wrong. You just sound condescending, and of this is how you talk in real life, I get why some people don't react positively.
This particular thread started about people being incorrect and arrogant to the degree that they, for example, consider correctness less important than socialization, and thus there being a niche for using the word "normies".
If pointing out confident incorrectness is condescending, then so it is.
If you think people should treat you as being correct when you are incorrect out of wish to be perceived as more sociable - then you are wrong, tone is bearable, incorrectness just makes it waste of time.
Actually they do react positively, because I usually communicate IRL to people who look at the meaning, not the tone, quite often smarter than me. I actually happen to be the polite one. My social problems are in a different dimension.
You expect people to communicate only by interpreting meaning correctly. And that's simply not how most people operate. Tone IS important. Socialization IS key when communcating with a lot of people. I am not saying being stubbornly incorrect is a good trait, but the fact that you think there are a lot of people who are, is probably part of your problem here.
Any person just wants to be treated decently, which doesn't include getting called 'normie'.
Yes, but failure in choosing more pleasant tone is not fatal, it can be, eh, possibly endured, while pretending that a mistake is not a mistake certainly poisons everything in the conversation after it.
"Normie" is an insult for those who say or behave the way implying that you yourself are not normal. It's not as if it was hard to find people matching the criterion.
And frankly for socialization people dance, tell anecdotes and do other similar things. In an argument correctness is the goal.
I do. I have the way you're describing people afterwards. I have a lifetime of experience dealing with people who talk the exact same way about people.
That quote is self-contradictory.
Your experience isn't worth anything as an argument. What does it even mean, we all have lifetime experiences of dealing with people.