andrewducker (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2009-07-15 10:58 pm
andrewducker) wrote2009-07-15 10:58 pm
Empathic Failure
One of the strange attitudes on the spoilers post is that of people who seem insistent on telling me how I should enjoy movies. That I pay too much attention to plot, or that I just shouldn't enjoy a movie less if I know how it's going to turn out.
This seems to be a common thread in discussion on the internet - one person says "I don't like X." and a bunch of people say that not enjoying X is immature, or that it's not that bad, or that they like X a lot, or that they can't see X at all.
And they don't seem to be providing this information for general cultural reasons, but in denial that the original person is "correct" to feel the way they do in the first place.
It's something I've seen repeatedly, that if unhappy people would just stop being unhappy then everything would be fine. That they shouldn't complain about people doing things they don't like - because if they'd just learn to like people doing things they didn't like then nothing would have to change, and everyone would be happy.
You don't have to agree with people who complain - if you feel differently then you feel differently. You don't have to stop doing the thing they feel unhappy about - that's your judgement to make. But to hear people expressing their feelings on something and then express anger, disbelief or scorn because they have those feelings strikes me as a basic lack of empathy.
It's an attitude that completely baffles me.
This seems to be a common thread in discussion on the internet - one person says "I don't like X." and a bunch of people say that not enjoying X is immature, or that it's not that bad, or that they like X a lot, or that they can't see X at all.
And they don't seem to be providing this information for general cultural reasons, but in denial that the original person is "correct" to feel the way they do in the first place.
It's something I've seen repeatedly, that if unhappy people would just stop being unhappy then everything would be fine. That they shouldn't complain about people doing things they don't like - because if they'd just learn to like people doing things they didn't like then nothing would have to change, and everyone would be happy.
You don't have to agree with people who complain - if you feel differently then you feel differently. You don't have to stop doing the thing they feel unhappy about - that's your judgement to make. But to hear people expressing their feelings on something and then express anger, disbelief or scorn because they have those feelings strikes me as a basic lack of empathy.
It's an attitude that completely baffles me.
probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my say
Andy, I haven't read the original post yet (although I will) but I agree. It simply astounds me the way in which people seem to enjoy willfully deflating people when - and this is the key thing - it causes them basically little to no inconvenience.
I mean, it's a matter of degrees, and about managing expectations against what is rational to expect against what is convenient or reasonable or not that big a deal.
For example:
Person A doesn't want you to spoil the end of Titanic for them. Person A is a moron. The disaster was nearly a hundred years ago. If they don't know what happens, they deserve to be spoiled.
Person B doesn't want to know the end of Season 3 BSG. This was over a year ago now, and honestly, if you talked openly about it you could be forgiven for saying "really, if you care that much you should know by now." However we all know that we didn't want to be spoiled ourselves in our day, and it would be easy and not a huge fuss to chuck it behind a cut or, in the case of 'real life' go "Oh, wait, have you seen it? Oh, cover your ears..." before continuing. And maybe keeping the information general rather than specific would be nice too, just in case - after all, unless it's an in-depth discussion, which a spoiler-phobe can probably be trusted to avoid, then you probably don't need to make mention of, say, the status of specific characters.
Then Person C doesn't want to know the end of, say, Season 2 Ashes to Ashes, which finished a matter of weeks ago if that. If you mess this up for someone who hasn't quite managed to see it yet you are just being a prick. No, they don't have to read your journal. Yes, they could avoid the whole internet for fear that everyone is as much of an arsehole as you. Or you could stop being such a smug cock.
/my 2p
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
All I contend is that maintaining someones opinion is wrong does not indicate a lack of empathy. Sheer bloody mindedness perhaps but will that person care less if a small child is kicked? Doubtful.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
The stuff in my original comment is a result of being empathetic and needing to find a reason to acknowledge why you weren't.
If someone is arsey about having inadvertently spoiled something for you it doesn't indicate a lack of empathy. A lack of empathy would be indicated by a more apathetic response. A shrugging off as oppossed to a (to varying degrees of arseyness) "don't take things so seriously" kinda thing.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
The irony is that your post seems to fufil the same function as someone how is "insistent on telling you how to enjoy movies" only from the other side. It's justifying your position that this is not ok and taking this as a given. I think most people would agree that given the way is written, as a disregard for individual autonomy and emotion, most people would agree with you. However I reckon most people would also agree with a post detailing how much someone overreacted just because you'd let slip the ending to something or another - "I mean it's only a movie yeah? In the grand scheme of things it's not actually important... Jesus kids are starving in Africa what a self important arse".
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
And of course there are more important things. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have some importance. If someone punches you in the face and then says "It could be worse, there's genocide in Darfur" then that's not really a good excuse...
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Well put. That was my initial thought on reading this post.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
I hate the idea that someone might think a person would do it on purpose - it's dumb, and yeah causes them basically little to no inconvenience to shut up to please someone else. Particularly bothered as marrog just mentioned Ashes to Ashes, which we were talking about at the weekend...
I'm also paranoid that disagreeing with people or discussing something is gonna offend someone. I totally respect that someone can have an opinion about something that I disagree with. Generally I'm not bothered, but might want to discuss it heatedly, with no offence intended in the long term. I like dicsusing stuff and don't get to do it often in a meaningful way.
I used an example of a friend never having seen Empire, so not getting a cultural reference in another movie - I was "shocked" she'd neer seen it, but only becuase I assumed everyone had been made to watch it when they were wee, like me. I wasn't all that bothered she'd not seen it or not, or whether she'd have liked it if she had.
I wish I could be bothered about differences of opinion and not take it personally. I think/hope I'm getting better at it.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Nobody's perfect, so long as you're trying you're doing well!
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
I couldn't agree more. My (original) context for the discussion was that a friend considered that "everyone dies in the end" was an unacceptable spoiler for a Shakespearean tragedy (it's also not strictly true, given that Fortinbras and Horatio both survive). I believe that Hamlet is cultural common knowledge, and thus fair game for discussion without spoiler warnings; even if people haven't seen or read the play, they will most likely be able to quote one or more lines from it, and many will have a rough idea of the basics of the plot.
I agree with your judgements on the three cases you list. The person who spoiled C is being a twit. In the case of B, I might err on the side of caution, but if I were spoiled I'd consider it at least partly my fault for not getting around to watching it. Person A has unreasonable expectations, quite clearly, and seems to believe that the world revolves around them.
In the previous discussion, I suggested a couple of rules of thumb for judging whether spoiler warnings were necessary based on whether there were places in popular culture where knowledge of a particular was clearly assumed. For example, if Family Guy runs a parody of the original Star Wars trilogy, it's clear that they expect the majority of their audience to get the references. Similarly, a general knowledge pub quiz question that asked the name of the sledge in Citizen Kane would suggest that this particular fact about CK was trivia that people might be expected to know (I can't remember who suggested pub quizzes as a yardstick, but they were spot-on).
Andy and I appear to differ on this. Whether this makes me a child-kicking unempathic sod, or merely someone who has decided that he is tired of pandering to the unreasonable demands of delicate flowers is for others to judge.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
That depends. I'm not clear on whether you don't believe the act hurts me (unempathic) or do believe me, but have decided that the effort of posting spoiler warnings is greater than you are willing to put in (tired).
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Don't take this as an attempt to tell you what you should be thinking, but rather as the suggestion that your expectations of the degree to which others will change their behaviour to suit you is unreasonable.
Consider an analogy with veganism. It's quite reasonable for a vegan dinner party guest to ask that I provide them with food that isn't derived from animals. It's unreasonable that they should demand that I *and my other guests* should submit to their self-imposed dietary constraints so as not to offend their sensibilities. I would argue that a vegan guest in the latter situation was indeed displaying a lack of empathy.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
I don't find my views overly sensitive. Dead simple so they are - I don't want to be told the endings of things I haven't seen. Now, I know people who don't want to be told _casting_ for upcoming things. To me _that_ is too sensitive. But meh, people feel how they feel, who am I to tell them that their feelings are wrong?
If you want to post spoilers in your own journal then that's totally your choice. I then have to decide whether having you on my friends list is worth it.
To give an example of this, dougs removed me for 24 hounts until the animated lion/bear cub was off his front page. I can choose to keep posting animated gifs, and eventually he'll get fed up and take me off his friends list entirely (presumably), or I can choose to avoid doing so (and not post some things that amuse me).
I'll probably continue to post the occasional one - but I'll bear in mind that it makes Doug unhappy when I do it, and it'll probably mean I post them less - or post larger ones under a cut.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
That's a pretty absolute position, and one that you're displaying little flexibility over.
Several of us have argued that context plays a role, and that there's a spectrum of points after which common knowledge could be assumed and therefore after which uncut spoilers become fair game (one of my colleagues holds that spoilers are fair game after first terrestrial broadcast - I personally feel that this is a little harsh, but I accept his reasoning). Your view seems to be more along the lines of "once a spoiler, always a spoiler", and you don't seem to have engaged with any more liberal interpretations.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
But, although I personally would, I wouldn't think you were a bad person for not cutting something that was made a long time ago - I'd more likely think that it probably really just didn't occur to you, perhaps in the same way it would never occur to me not to mention that Macbeth or Hamlet are Shakespearean Tragedies. Because along with it being nice to be nice, it's nice to think the best of people.
My line is drawn where something finished tonight, or last week, or even in the last month. It's fresh in your mind, therefore it must occur to you that it's a spoiler, therefore you are a prick not to cut it.
This comment was just a pointless reiteration, wasn't it? Oh well.
To add something new, I think it's very interesting that the tradition used to be, before going to see a play, opera or musical, and particularly if it was a famous one, the convention was to familiarise yourself with the plot before you went so that you were able to appreciate the artistry of the performance without having to struggle to follow the plot. I still expect to see (and will read if I don't know) a plot synopsis in programmes at the theatre for opera or musicals - and for historical plays/films I certainly read up on the history before I go to see them.
I'm sure people have already said before (as it always comes up) that your enjoyment of a really good film/whatever shouldn't be decreased materially by knowing the end. I don't know that that's true. Perhaps what we should say is that modern entertainment now depends on its 'twist' so heavily that it has become a part of the media in a way that, in the past, it never was. I don't know whether that's a shame or not.
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
This is, by the way, one of the things that's getting to me a bit. I don't believe people can be "too sensitive". People may be more or less sensitive than each other, but I don't believe that any particular level of sensitivity is "right".
(Not having a go at you specifically, you're just the fourth person to say it today)
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
(no subject)
(no subject)
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
So yes, I agree that there are narrative forms where intentional plot spoilers are not only considered to be the norm, but also advantageous.
And yes, my line is drawn in pretty much the same place as yours. For much older stuff, I take more of a hard line (which may or may not make me a bad man).
Re: probably repeating things that have already been said, but can't be bothered transplanting my sa
+1