frelling_tralk (
frelling_tralk) wrote2011-04-02 11:33 am
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
(no subject)
I'm kind of over this "tone argument" tbh. I was always brought up to believe that, however angry or upset someone makes you, the way you choose to speak to them in response does matter
no subject
No one is saying you HAVE to be polite, but... it's not a bad idea to try, you know? "You catch more flies with honey" is a famous saying for a reason.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I mean, I've been on the receiving end of a genuine "tone argument". After a particularly angry feminist post, a commenter derailed by bringing up how very mean I was being and how my message would be better if I were calmer. That? Textbook tone argument. (especially as the commenter was a man)
However, it often seems that people use the specter of a preemptive tone argument to justify being overtly hostile to...everybody. I understand anger in response to offense. However, there is a line between justified anger and abusiveness. Plus, it often feels like point-scoring as to who can come up with the most biting, snarky response to a person. I don't think anger should be competitive in such a fashion.
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)