Tuesday, August 15, 2006

Big Mouth, small mind

So, three's this guy who just finished reading a book by the Scottish author Irvine Welsh that he enjoyed very much, and he happens to mention it to me and a casual acquaintance, whose ancestry is Scottish (though he, himself, was born here). The acquaintence proclaims that he thought the book was droll, and that the author was a hack. Fair enough, I think, but offer my feeling that the story was quite engaging, and that I found the author’s previous work to also be worthwhile.

The acquaintance then looks at me, and loudly proclaims that I am wrong, that I was a jackass for expressing an opinion contrary to his, and that I simply was incapable of understanding why since I was not Scottish, and that Welsh is considered to be a traitor to real Scots everywhere anyway.

Now, normally I would simply ignore this sort of nonsense, and give the acquaintance the benefit of the doubt, letting him babble his ignorance until he gets tired, except he has done this before … many times, to many people … and I am just tired of his hollow belligerence. So, I mention this to him, pointing out that his accusations of intolerance and name calling are hypocritical, after which he begins to froth-at-the-mouth about how I could dare react that way. His expletive filled rant continues and grows, focusing on how if I can’t take the criticism I should never have dared to express my opinion, and how I should just grow up and be a man.

Which makes me chuckle because once again the acquaintance has not only entirely missed the point, but is developing a rage embolism over a straw-man issue in order to pound his chest and make himself feel somehow superior. He uses the same insipid insults about pride and guts that boys have been throwing around since 2nd grade (“You won’t eat that bug cause you are a chicken!”), and basically proclaims himself not only the supreme victor, but also the arbiter of taste because he shouted the loudest, all the while questioning both my heritage and sexuality.

Now, I could have opted to continue to squabble with the acquaintance, I suppose. I mean, I don’t mind a good old fashioned row now and again, but there really would be little point, since the acquaintance is too shit-all stupid to understand the nature of the argument. Somehow it has morphed from his saying I can’t comprehend Welsh because of my lack of Scottishness to my fear of engaging in a shouting match. So, while I would point out that his claim that since my Grandpa didn’t wear a kilt I couldn’t understand Scot literature was one of the most ludicrous and condescending things I’ve heard, he would only hear the blood pounding in his ears, and do something childish and ridiculous … like pose holding a gun (to show his potency or incredible macho-ness -- I really haven't figured that silly thing out). His ability to understand the point has been totally obscured by a rapidly encroaching peripheral blindness caused by an internal eruption of hysteria and anger.

What the acquaintance will never understand is that getting into shouting matches with people just for the sake of shouting is just dumb, and my lack of desire to continue in his infantile name-calling and finger pointing isn’t because I am afraid of him at all, but simply it is not worth my time. I mean, why bother arguing with an idiot? In the end you’ll just be out of breath and the idiot will still be an idiot.

So, in the end, the acquaintance walks off happily, patting himself on the back for teaching me a thing or two about being macho and for having the last word in the matter … even though he has no understanding at all of the nature of the initial dust-up, and he has been in a tirade over yet another of his many straw men. Still, if it makes him happy, I suppose it’s fine. I mean, the acquaintance isn’t the only one to use a barrage of volume and insults to compensate for lack of understanding.

Yes, I know ... this post was very subtle.

Ook ook

9 comments:

Tim said...

He must be a Republican...

Anonymous said...

I've seen it at a lot of blogs, and I don't get it myself. Why do people equate name calling and character assassination with strangth, and politeness and courtesy while arguing an issue as weakness> Seem like it would be just the opposite to me.

O' Tim said...

He must be a Republican...

Ohno you deedn't ! !


vol. 2 - yes, much more subtle.

Shiny Blue Black said...

"big mouth small mind" - yes well, would that not apply to the majority of the human population as of late?

Perhaps you should one up him on the macho-ness and buy a Hummer. Then, you know, unlike in the ad, use it at it's full potential by running him over with it in order to limit his reproductive ability.

The Fez Monkey said...

Tim: Possibly. Certainly the acquaintance's narrow minded view and inability to engage in thought are republican traits.

Joe: I think the whole conflation of which form of behavior is preferred is more a reflection of the individual. Perhaps the same level of low self-esteem that would prompt someone to, say, pose for a picture holding a rifle. I know, I've mentioned that a lot lately, but it really was so incredibly stupid!

O'T: That's me ... subtle as a shovel to the back of the head.

SBB: I know the whole Big Mouth small mind thing likely can also often apply to me. But in this case ... well. As for the Hummer ... I am dead sure the acquaintance already has his big ole 4x4 as compensation for ... well ... you know.

Anonymous: Now, whatever gave you that idea?

Ook ook

Anonymous said...

Cheese Louise, you clearly have an Asshole Magnet in you, or is the same person? (So out of the loop in your arena.)
Dearheart, this is just a cross that you have to bear, you threaten the bulldozing self-validaters merely by existing. You're the big brother that gets all the chicks and on some level they must know that and proceed to become NJ.

The Fez Monkey said...

Rager: Thanks for the ego boost. I suppose that whole chick thing may have some validity to it - if it's applied euphamistically, of course.

As far as the a-hole magnet ... there are many who would say I am the a-hole, and they'd probably be right in most cases. But in this instance, I think the acquaintance beats me in the a-hole category by a wide margin.

Ook ook.

Anonymous said...

I disagree with Mark lots of times (like in this instance) and agree with him sometimes. One point he and I would agree on is this: naming someone as a "fuckwad" in an anonymous post is pretty weak. If you can't stand behind your comment, don't make it. That's the adult way.

The Fez Monkey said...

Joe: I understand the frustration about getting an anonymous post (even when it claims to be vanilla ice cream). But I always try to, at least initially, give everyone the benefit of the doubt over their comments. It's only after they show they no longer deserve it that I get snippy.

As far as this anonymous goes, he/she commented in the prior post as well, and mentioned why they were anonymous. I understand, and have no problems with it. Especially considering the topic and the subject.

Now, if anonymous continues to post and to turn out to be a prick, things may change.

Ook ook