Published on 12, July, 2020
The years I’ve been accused of a lot of things a lot of different times. Mostly in relation to things driven by aspects of my autism that people took objection to. Looking back and reflecting I started to notice that the way I’ve dealt with these situations has changed over the years.
My first reaction to an accusation used to be to give some one what I call a bruised toe apology. as if you were apologising to someone who’s toes you’d had just stepped on. It’s not really intended as an admission of culpability. You didn’t mean for it to happen and you couldn’t possibly have foreseen it happening and wasn’t as if you were unusually careless. It’s more an expression of regret your actions inadvertently caused somebody else pain.
But I have discovered that as the years have gone on and I’ve been attacked more and more and accused more and more I’ve stopped giving these apologies. Too often they are interpreted as some sort of admission of guilt and people will turn around and say well he admits it therefore we’ve every reason to punish him and blame him and censure him and kick him out.
There are some people who just don’t want to be reasonable and who will never be satisfied with an apology or an explanation. They’re too many people out there who will judge you guilty as soon as the accusation is made and will admit no latitude for any consideration on your behalf.
It’s been my experience that if you make an apology these individuals will jump on it and use it as grounds to try and convince everybody else that you are guilty as charged; must be excommunicated as soon as possible. Conversely if you make no apology they will accuse you of being completely uncontright, incorrigible and therefore completely unworthy of any consideration. You can’t win with these people, but if instead of apologising you start by attacking the substance of the accusations as soon as possible and as directly as possible you at least have a chance to stop them shutting down the debate before it starts.
If your defence is that your autism occasionally causes you to come off as a bit of an arsehole adopting an argumentative approach that makes you seem needlessly belligerent is not actually that harmful to your case. Afterwards after you’ve made all your arguments, inserted all the caveats, then you can make your apology. just make sure that no one could mistake it for an admission of culpability.
The important thing is to get your foot in the door in the argument so those open to the possibility of autism as an excuse can actually get to hear your side of the story
So I’m really curious to hear how you deal with being accused? Have you noticed the way you handle it has changed over time?
you can probably guess how id deal with being accused. id smack them back down and challenge their accusation, take offence to it and then id point out how they are closer to what they are accusing me of or some other flaw in their logic to highlight any hypocrisy in their position. if a person wishes to attack me they have to have sure footing and not be throwing stones from a glass house, that is for sure. no one is so perfect though.theyd have to be telling the utmost truth and have evidence, id have to agree to it if its truth. if its a truthful thing they accuse me of what i have done i will agree to it. id agree it happened, im not sure if i would apologise.... i wont feel like apologising if the thing they accused me of doing if truth, but yet i still stand by that truth. i wouldnt feel need to apologise for it... such as how i got in trouble for criticising my boss, i agreed that i said the things i said about him and how he runs the place, i didnt apologise for it as i stood by my words rather than surrendered them because i believed in what i said and believe how he treats people needs improvement and how he views a workforce is silly because he wants people to do long hours and just a body to take a space rather than have them be hard workers and do like 24 hours worth of work in 8 hours. hed rather have cardboard cutouts claiming attendance standing around doing nothing for the long prolonged time period instead of getting the work done... i said that, i got caught for it, i stood my ground on it as i believe my words and wont apologise for it because its truth
Caelus said:theyd have to be telling the utmost truth and have evidence, id have to agree to it if its truth
You sound as though you may think the scientific method with its empirical data as evidence is absolute while waving aside other possibilities that could be way beyond our perceptive capabilities. Your interpretation of the "truth" is subjective.
nah scientific things are never truth, even scientists agree to that, they are theories, educated guesses of which any good scientists hope and dream that someone comes along and proves it false or modifies it slightly. science gets warped by politics these days to mean utmost truth.my truth that i rely on however is different... if someone accuses me of stealing cookies, but i didnt do that... then thats not truth, they are lying with false accusations... if someone accuses me of it and i did do it though, thats truth, and i admit it....whether im sorry or not depends on alot of factors though. but in the case of stealing cookies i think all factors likely would stand for a apology, the only way id be stealing cookies if i thought they was free and offered to the public, which would be a mistake which requires a apology and payment for them.ofcourse if i were the type to have stolen cookies, but then lied to deny it, then the truth in that matter would be security camera footage.... there is no guesswork in absolute truth, it is something you have been caught doing, something seen, something known. so my interpretation of truth isnt subjective really.... there is just many layers and definitions. but absolute utmost truth is something seen and evidenced that you cant deny, like seeing video footage of a person stealing cookies. you cant deny that if you see it on camera no?....although to be fair, these days probably maybe can if the accuser went so far as to edit the video to make it out to be that way, its a shame we can no longer trust camera footage as it maybe modified these days. but that takes alot of effort and going out of the way to do for such a trivial matter.all in all theres many layers... a thing you did, you know what you personally did so you have the truth of what you did due to having done it yourself... unless you were drunk or under the influence of drugs which may have blanked your memory then you wouldnt know. people can deny your truth, deny your account of what you did... but then i dunno, who cares? they can doubt you and assume your lying for all they want but you know what you did, and whether you actually did it or not and whether your lying about it. so you know the truth in this situation of what you did right? so its not really subjective then in these cases.
Thanks man, I appreciate it, we have balance..
OK---I get it, so we all have our own personal issues. If sitting on the fence is your way of dealing with your perceptions --- that's cool !
What? And expend myself to be a blip on the radar to a society that has considered me an outcast since I was introduced to it, for the sake of being a sub-par opposition to an insurmountable threat, to be English is to be prepared and to be moderate and steadfast. Our society hobbled me long before I became a hermit. The first to be sacrificed in a tyranny is the poor, I think you’ll find that plenty of Englishmen have been sacrificed in the run-up to the desolation of the culture, by the culture itself. The most-English thing to do in these circumstances is to survive in a rightly-manner and rise in a rightly-manner. I’ve got plenty of fight within me, but I’ll give none of it to save those who refuse self-punishment, Blighty’s saviour I am not, I’ll save my seeds of wisdom for the ashes..
There’s nothing wish-washy about survival. How’d you like that bias? How’d you like that compound? It’s hard to grasp the truth in this without picking-out the pips isn’t it..?
Indeed.....although I don't worry about not "having that job" (frigging thankless damn task - I'm not trying to save everyone!).....but I really do miss being able to talk to MOST people as they seem now already to be loudly entrenched in one position or the other. It's hard for any of us to grow, learn and evolve safely in this type of febrile environment. It doesn't bode well for our delicate civilisation, in my opinion.
Sounds wishy-washy to me. Stop mediating by sitting on the fence. What is right for the kind of country you wish to live in should dictate your views.
I think the error occur when empowered persons silence an opposing view, this means that the contest is shutdown, and the extreme cannot be humbled. For those of us mediating, we can find ourselves without a job, because there is only one view being voiced..
Point taken. Their web of infiltration throughout our social fabric has been achieved---schools, Parliament, banking, industry, media---where do I stop. The writing is on the wall !
Caelus said:ideally a system of direct democracy where everyone votes on every tiny little change by their tv sets maybe a idea to do.
There is a late 1960's or early 1970's film with that idea at it's core. It didn't end well !!! It would be great is someone knows the name of that film? -- Definitely British
they dont really need power, if we get centralists in power the radicals still take media, take the house of lords, take the supreme court, and then slip in or force changes in policy under our noses even when they dont have the actual power. makes them hard to deal with, perhaps we need more political reforms and locks on policy changes and idea implementation... ideally a system of direct democracy where everyone votes on every tiny little change by their tv sets maybe a idea to do.
Only if we allow them to take power!
the radicals hate centralists and the radicals are loud so it makes it seem everyone hates centralists.... but the majority of people are actually central. radical is loud minority.a good example of this... labour... under corbyn they tried to go radical far left, everyone rejected that despite them being very loud and sounding like they had alot of support. when it came to voting they lost historically in labours entire history.... then kier starmer takes over, he tries to deradicalise and centralise the party, hes gained all the support back and he will likely win next election.people dont like radical sides in the uk at least... we like sensible central sides. the radicals are a loud minority but they manage to manipulate and take power and change things without anyones consent.
Well said. Goal posts with perceptions have been shifted to the left
A good point. I am a "middle-of-the-bell-jar-curve" type of being. I can normally see things from most angles and understand the principles, logic and passions driving diametrically opposed positions.
In the old days, this made me a diplomat. These days, it seems to make me an asshat !!
All "my" people in the middle ground are now scared into silence or are forced to one extreme or the other.
The bell jar is upside down. There is no balance these days - it all seems like shouting to me !!!
The place that was inhabited by the "balanced middle" (or fulcrum if you will) is now a void...both "arms" seem to be "falling off" as a result.
Sorry but radical troublemaking is inconsistant with balance in my view
It’s part of THE balance, as is the opposing viewpoint, when they are contesting each-other balance is achieved.
Bias?? After having already covered the variability of perceptions. Others are very welcome to express their own perceptions as you are. My own perception of this matter just happens to hit a chord in what I believe to be a truth. Marxism from my viewpoint is a failed concept . Why it has risen again? Radical troublemakers that's why. Is that part of your "balance"?
I hate how people tend to compound their bias with the truth, so that others have a hard time of agreeing or disagreeing to the various items of a conversation, I don’t think people can actually establish the balance of a matter without applying a foundation of rhetoric to it..
Well said I could not agree more!
i always felt the odd one out too... but ofcourse marxist thought says thats impossible because im white, or its not the same as to a minority.... which is why i dont like that or the people who follow that mindset because to me i saw minorities get accepted while i was still the odd one out... the popular kids had minorities in their gangs, i was never allowed with anyone though.i always just me, alone. if there was any forced pick a partner event, even now... even now in the kickboxing i do... i am the one standing alone, picked last, no one goes to me, and if there is me and 1 other person left that one person left still refuses to pick me as a partner lolso i really hate the simpleton marxist mindset that judges me based on my skin colour and says i cannot be treated this way and i am lying or i still have it better just because my skin is white.... i find it madness, its one reason why anyone that bleats out that ideology offends me on a existential level as it goes against my experience and says that i do not exist or i am a liar.
I Sperg said: it is our human limited perceptions that cause us to see and hold different truths.
Therein lies the rub. My perception of truth may not be yours which does make truth very subjective in my view, and also creates great doubt with humanities ability to play its collective parts in harmony over global issues. We here in the UK can take the high moral ground over many issues and smugly think this is how it ought to be done. However in the short term we are economically cutting our own throats while the UN has members states who will veto any global proposition they disagree with. Now there is an accusation!