![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hearthstoneFirst off, I'd like to preface this by saying that I understand that most people who say this, say it because it is empowering--it symbolizes a refusal to be a doormat--and I can stand behind that.
But when I hear it, that's not what I think of. What I think of is those people (and we all know a few) who--if they've had a bad day, or they're in a bad mood--will take it out on anyone around them until everyone is having a bad day. Including people who have nothing to do with whatever pissed them off. What it sounds like to me is just another variation on kicking the dog because the boss yelled at you. What is sounds like to me is a "funny" way of describing the sort of person whose friends and family walk on eggs around them for fear of setting them off on a tirade.
And yes, I hate this. I hate it when someone so clearly resents it when other people are not miserable and angry that they can't let it happen. They have to share their misery and anger. If they're not happy, no one is happy.
Another similar statement I see around the net goes something like this: "If you can't handle me at my worst, you don't deserve me at my best." Again, while I see the underlying principle behind it (that friends and lovers should tolerate a little crap from each other once in a while), it also reads as license to be nasty and mean, and that's okay because whatever good qualities you have make up for it. That's potentially abusive.
Why is it that people take such pride in being that brand of high-maintenance? (Nothing against high-maintenance, some of my best friends are high-maintenance, but they're not the mean, self-centered kind of high-maintenance. It is possible to value oneself without devaluing others.) Why is it a good thing to be a bitch? Why does strength have to mean aggression?
But when I hear it, that's not what I think of. What I think of is those people (and we all know a few) who--if they've had a bad day, or they're in a bad mood--will take it out on anyone around them until everyone is having a bad day. Including people who have nothing to do with whatever pissed them off. What it sounds like to me is just another variation on kicking the dog because the boss yelled at you. What is sounds like to me is a "funny" way of describing the sort of person whose friends and family walk on eggs around them for fear of setting them off on a tirade.
And yes, I hate this. I hate it when someone so clearly resents it when other people are not miserable and angry that they can't let it happen. They have to share their misery and anger. If they're not happy, no one is happy.
Another similar statement I see around the net goes something like this: "If you can't handle me at my worst, you don't deserve me at my best." Again, while I see the underlying principle behind it (that friends and lovers should tolerate a little crap from each other once in a while), it also reads as license to be nasty and mean, and that's okay because whatever good qualities you have make up for it. That's potentially abusive.
Why is it that people take such pride in being that brand of high-maintenance? (Nothing against high-maintenance, some of my best friends are high-maintenance, but they're not the mean, self-centered kind of high-maintenance. It is possible to value oneself without devaluing others.) Why is it a good thing to be a bitch? Why does strength have to mean aggression?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-11 04:12 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-12 08:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-11 04:03 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-11 08:22 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2010-09-11 08:27 pm (UTC)However, I feel that the world in general deserves me at my best (I can be, and often better) unless a specific individual proves otherwise in a certain circumstance.