Are these studies of male vs male conflict? Because I know several women who are quick to cry ... they can cry on demand ... whenever they are losing the argument. The person they are having the disagreement with often backs down. Or a third person takes up their position. They can get a consensus that 'nothing is worth making me feel that bad' in their social group. So they are bullies. The defence for this is to mock them for their antics. Play the "air violin". Refuse to accept their tears as a genuine expression of distress...this is just another round of deceit. It's wearying to call them out, but not as bad as being bullied.
So I finally got around to reading the paper. And it's a hodge-podge. Conflicts between neighbours and employees and roommates and what gave you. Men and women. This may be overbroad. But the real problem is that they determined whether or not a person lost respect by how people answered a questionaire. And that is a setup that is perfect for "preference falsification". Seems tough to design an experiment which shows revealed preferences as distinct from stated ones, though.
Whatever the intent is does not come out well for them or the other person or group.
I think because it puts in extra barriers to solving and resolving the issue, event, or situation.
I think yelling and crying gets you and the other off to chasing a rabbit / off the subject and then it is very hard to circle back around to the real subject being discussed.
If we manage our own self /response we have a better change of solving something OR we find out where to put someone on our "boundary line" because they don't actually want to solve things. They just want to be right or they are very insecure people; everything is about them.
Many historians believe one of the greatest generals, if not the greatest general of the Civil War, is actually a pretty much unknown general, General George Henry Thomas, who was in charge of the Army of the Cumberland (basically soldiers from the Midwest). The single most reason, historians believe he was a great general is because of his calm, stoicism in battle.
One of the best examples of this calmness, this stoicism is the battle of Chickamauga. The northern line completely broke at one point, and all of the soldiers from different northern regiments were retreating in absolute panic. It was utter mayhem with southern General Longstreet's men pouring into the broken line.
Gen. Thomas calmly rode his horse along the men who were retreating in a panic and calmly commanded them to turn around and go back and defend the broken line, which they did and this is what stopped the battle of Chickamauga from being a total defeat. It's specifically stopped the entire army of the Cumberland from being surrounded and defeated. Moreover, it kept the Southerners from getting into Chattanooga, which, among other reasons, was a critical train line.
Afterwards, many soldiers stated it was Gen. Thomas calmness that snapped them out of it and made them determined to hold the line. One of the soldiers stated that Gen. Thomas was, "standing there like a rock, and we all stood around him." And from this Gen. Thomas was attributed the title of, "the Rock of Chickamauga".
My father sparingly raised his voice at his 4 children, 3 of them rowdy boys. So on the rare I occasion that he did, we took it seriously. Calm all the time can sometimes be annoying. It makes me question something about the person. Same as someone who is love and peace all the time...
I think it is not "milk-toast" calm but secure "comfortable in my own-skin" calm. I can be assertive and discuss or ask for what I need without losing it (cry or yell) to get my point across to you.
I've noticed something like this in moderated television debates involving two speakers who are ideologically opposed. If one side, usually a Democrat nowadays, launches a tirade against the other which includes flagrant falsehoods, whereas I personally would have a hard time not objecting on the spot, the ones who do best just sit there quietly until it is their turn to speak.
Are these studies of male vs male conflict? Because I know several women who are quick to cry ... they can cry on demand ... whenever they are losing the argument. The person they are having the disagreement with often backs down. Or a third person takes up their position. They can get a consensus that 'nothing is worth making me feel that bad' in their social group. So they are bullies. The defence for this is to mock them for their antics. Play the "air violin". Refuse to accept their tears as a genuine expression of distress...this is just another round of deceit. It's wearying to call them out, but not as bad as being bullied.
So I finally got around to reading the paper. And it's a hodge-podge. Conflicts between neighbours and employees and roommates and what gave you. Men and women. This may be overbroad. But the real problem is that they determined whether or not a person lost respect by how people answered a questionaire. And that is a setup that is perfect for "preference falsification". Seems tough to design an experiment which shows revealed preferences as distinct from stated ones, though.
Whatever the intent is does not come out well for them or the other person or group.
I think because it puts in extra barriers to solving and resolving the issue, event, or situation.
I think yelling and crying gets you and the other off to chasing a rabbit / off the subject and then it is very hard to circle back around to the real subject being discussed.
If we manage our own self /response we have a better change of solving something OR we find out where to put someone on our "boundary line" because they don't actually want to solve things. They just want to be right or they are very insecure people; everything is about them.
Excellent article!
Many historians believe one of the greatest generals, if not the greatest general of the Civil War, is actually a pretty much unknown general, General George Henry Thomas, who was in charge of the Army of the Cumberland (basically soldiers from the Midwest). The single most reason, historians believe he was a great general is because of his calm, stoicism in battle.
One of the best examples of this calmness, this stoicism is the battle of Chickamauga. The northern line completely broke at one point, and all of the soldiers from different northern regiments were retreating in absolute panic. It was utter mayhem with southern General Longstreet's men pouring into the broken line.
Gen. Thomas calmly rode his horse along the men who were retreating in a panic and calmly commanded them to turn around and go back and defend the broken line, which they did and this is what stopped the battle of Chickamauga from being a total defeat. It's specifically stopped the entire army of the Cumberland from being surrounded and defeated. Moreover, it kept the Southerners from getting into Chattanooga, which, among other reasons, was a critical train line.
Afterwards, many soldiers stated it was Gen. Thomas calmness that snapped them out of it and made them determined to hold the line. One of the soldiers stated that Gen. Thomas was, "standing there like a rock, and we all stood around him." And from this Gen. Thomas was attributed the title of, "the Rock of Chickamauga".
My father sparingly raised his voice at his 4 children, 3 of them rowdy boys. So on the rare I occasion that he did, we took it seriously. Calm all the time can sometimes be annoying. It makes me question something about the person. Same as someone who is love and peace all the time...
I think it is not "milk-toast" calm but secure "comfortable in my own-skin" calm. I can be assertive and discuss or ask for what I need without losing it (cry or yell) to get my point across to you.
I think it more like that kind of calm.
I've noticed something like this in moderated television debates involving two speakers who are ideologically opposed. If one side, usually a Democrat nowadays, launches a tirade against the other which includes flagrant falsehoods, whereas I personally would have a hard time not objecting on the spot, the ones who do best just sit there quietly until it is their turn to speak.
Nice information to write about; thanks for the observation.