It's Just My/Your Opinion: A Self-Destructive Way of Life / A Culture Of Weakness

JReitan said:
Please understand this isn't a post on gay rights, it's a post discussing the CULTURE and ENVIRONMENT of this forum -- a direct expression of modern day culture, (particularly in the US and other like countries). Do NOT discuss gay rights in the comments.

"For example: A conversation on gay rights; In which a poster replies by saying "It's not my business; If they're happy then that's fine! We should not interfere with other people's personal business, that's what freedom means! That's what this country is based on! They have their own preferences, their own opinions, and I have mine!"

Moog- said:
It should be obvious that it's your own opinions, so mention it comes off as defensive and a way to get your points across while avoiding confrontation.

Afshar said:
The thing is that if you don't leave comments like "its just my opinion" or "im just generalising", people will immediately dismiss your points and instead focus on saying shit like "everyone's different" ;|
Therefore, an individual is almost required to point it out themselves in order to stimulate productive discussion.
I don't like it but that's pretty much how it is a lot of the time.

Afshar said:
Also i'm pretty sure that not many people on MAL are looking for serious debates all of the time?

JReitan said:
95% of the people on this forum say this. Not surprisingly, 95% of the people on this forum are immature/legitimately underaged children (under 18).

JReitan said:
For example: A conversation on gay rights; In which a poster replies by saying "It's not my business; If they're happy then that's fine! We should not interfere with other people's personal business, that's what freedom means! That's what this country is based on! They have their own preferences, their own opinions, and I have mine!"

The core of this argument is the significance of respect for others' opinions. After all, we were taught every since we were little kids, "Respects others' opinions!"

JReitan said:
Does the above argument address the fact that most gays have mental disorders? Or that they are spreading a virus which KILLS? Or that they are more likely to participate in unsafe sex more than any other group of individuals? KNOWING full well that they carry a fatal disease? Does it discuss the effects on young adopted children who may grow up with no mother?

Kousoku11 said:
Where did you pull these statistics from, if I may ask?

Afshar said:
But these are public forums, you can't stop people from responding, but my point is that you can restrict them. It's almost like dissociating yourselves from them.

Afshar said:
Though I do agree that it may be a 'buffer zone' for some; for others it's more like a filter for the respondents (i.e. getting rid of the idiots)

JReitan said:
I hope you realize by now that I'm saying that this behavior breeds idiots, not filters them.

Red_Keys said:
The core of this argument is to not be a controlling asshole who meddles with other people's personal lives.

Red_Keys said:
Good lord, do you have to make it so obvious?

Afshar said:

It's a cycle. One of those things that won't end until both parties (readers and writers) stop at once.

Afshar said:
You sound like you have a serious superiority complex going on

Red_Keys said:
For somebody who writes a lot, you sure can't read very well.

Ckan said:
Seems buzzword is now a buzzword.

JReitan said:

You're using a buzzword: Controlling asshole; Notice how it's extremely vague and provides no new meaning to the discussion. That is, how do you define "controlling asshole".

Emnay said:
controlling adjective
: having a need to control other people's behavior

: having the power to control how something is managed or done

: giving someone the power to control how something is managed or done

ass·hole noun ˈas-ˌ(h)ōl
1
usually vulgar : anus
2
a usually vulgar : a stupid, incompetent, or detestable person

I think I figured it out.

JReitan said:

For example: A conversation on gay rights; In which a poster replies by saying "It's not my business; If they're happy then that's fine! We should not interfere with other people's personal business, that's what freedom means! That's what this country is based on! They have their own preferences, their own opinions, and I have mine!"

The core of this argument is the significance of respect for others' opinions. After all, we were taught every since we were little kids, "Respects others' opinions!"

Afshar said:
Are you not able to comprehend any argument but your own?

Kousoku11 said:
Where did you pull these statistics from, if I may ask?

Astros477 said:
I thought it was to respect other's freedom. *shrug* Though you'll probably despise my signature.

JReitan said:
that you know are self-destructive

Afshar said:

But they're not.
Rather, it is you who believes that this is self-destructive and it is you yourself who is still partaking in the community

JReitan said:

I can also simply call it a word which lacks a proper definition, yet seems to make sense (faslely) by the state of the context it is in. I.e. if Red_Keys indirectly calls me (or others who share my argument) a controlling asshole, it would seem at first that I am a "bad guy", yet at second glance, you would notice that he does not refute any of my points directly.

JReitan said:

Freedom, opinion, same thing, same concept. It's a buffer zone (read post #8).

And yes, I do hate your signature. You've probably been browsing these forums for more than I ever have and will (almost 3k posts) and conditioned yourself to the extent that you don't even care about other people's opinions anymore.. You just want your voice to be heard on some relatively remote part of the internet. It's a sign of desperation, not strength as it was intended to be.

Furthermore, try one thing: After reading a reply on this forum, look at the number of posts the replier has. Over a good amount of time, you will see certain behaviors which correlate with the number of posts each of these users have, such as indifference, jester, "lol randomness" etc. For example, post #25. His jester can be said to correlate with the fact that he has almost 4k posts. I could be wrong, but it is a significant observation.

JReitan said:
95% of the people on this forum say this. Not surprisingly, 95% of the people on this forum are immature/legitimately underaged children (under 18).

JD2411 said:
I actually started this trend on MAL

Ckan said:

See, the thing is that I don't necessarily disagree with where you're coming from, and Keys was obviously being confrontational and dismissive (I have been too!), but if we look at the manner in which you've been presenting your arguments (and now retorting Keys, for example) - it appears to me as if you're utilisng this thread as a platform to validate your views. This, I don't mean in the simple and common sense of presenting one's viewpoint and then asking for discussion, instead, your post reads as a demagoguery: you state a viewpoint that is clearly affrontive to members of this forum - you use it in the guise of an "example", yet why would you do so? It's a clear provocation that any "mature" poster would not go by without noticing its controversial nature. If you did not intend to inflame and aggravate, then surely this is a giant misstep on your part - or a confidently chosen tool with which to enthrone your opinion.

You begin your post by deriding 95% of this forum as if (according to your profile), you yourself were not barely "of age". Certainly, there is validity in drawing attention to the age and demographic of users in relation to the nature of the forum - and yet, is there any need to mock and badmouth the very community and readers who you are appealing to? Let's also mention here your use of "immature" and "underaged" which are themeselves common internet buzzwords - though that may have been something you were ignorant of, but that's alright, we all make mistakes in youth.

Honestly, I would go on, but it makes me rather uncomfortable taking your contemptuous and disparaging dialogue at face value. Unpleasant for me, because I can see merit in your wider-discussion of particular word-usage and the mentality of the commnity - its aforementioned "culture" - but that while I see this, and would like to engage with it, your method of discussion is offensive, elitist, and unproductive.
Given this case, I now run away from further confrontation as an insecure member of this weakling culture.

Charles-Ingalls said:


I stopped reading here. Where are you getting this "95%" statistic?

Astros477 said:

While somewhat similar in concept they are far from the same thing.

Astros477 said:
I only take interest in someone's opinion if it interests me. More often then not it agrees with my own opinion. Though this doesn't mean I've "conditioned" myself to be this way. I won't lie and say I don't want my voice heard, though it's more for having someone understand my perspective in life. Along with possibly helping someone with problems.

While it's true post count does usually signify someone who is more carefree with their posts I fail to see the relevance in it. Though apparently you've abandoned replying any further so I guess it doesn't matter. Though I think I see your point in this thread. Basically in a simpler manner of saying, "If someone is offended by an opinion. Using the excuse that it's "only their opinion" helps some cope with it better." Correct?

JReitan said:
Does the above argument address the fact that most gays have mental disorders? Or that they are spreading a virus which KILLS? Or that they are more likely to participate in unsafe sex more than any other group of individuals? KNOWING full well that they carry a fatal disease? Does it discuss the effects on young adopted children who may grow up with no mother?

JReitain said:
Please understand this isn't a post on gay rights.

Zeally said:

Was it really necessary to use these examples.........

JReitan said:

I answered your question in the reply just above your post. Please refer to it.

Zeally said:
fooling no one

Kousoku11 said:

I agree with the general idea of your statement. Your solution to it, not so much.

As far as I understood your post, you're suggesting that people should abandon forums (or communities just in general) that contain large quantities of certain detrimental behaviors. A person can make a decision to do so only after they realize that the community, and possibly they as well, are behaving that way.

However, since in this scenario the person in question now knows what the proper way of doing things is, why should they leave with this knowledge? Shouldn't they instead stay and try to convert people away from such behavior, much like you seem to be trying to do with this very thread?

Zeally said:

Protip: If you want to engage in a civil discussion do not use highly charged examples that may be interpreted the wrong way. It's not practical. It's retarded.

Iri said:
I'm not sure why it's such a contentious issue. Those who use it properly know exactly what that phrase ("just my opinion") is and what its purpose is: as a social lubricant and as a condescending filter, as was suggested earlier, to sort out the people who cannot make a distinction between fact and opinion.


It doesn't matter what level you're talking about, when the discourse reduces to values (as any non-factual dicussion will), you need to be mindful that a significant amount of people see challenging their values as insulting them personally. So, you have two options: Attack them head-on (which tends to make them irrationally dig deeper into their position) or indirectly, in a sort of good cop/bad cop kind of persuasion. If your goal is to re-convince yourself and the people who already agree with you, the former position is fine. If you actually want to try to win over those on the opposite side, the latter strategy can be effective.


Now, of course, this assumes ideal, rational, one-on-one debate, but if you're using this board for an example, then group psychology phenomena become more prevalent. The group dynamic present on the board as a whole is somewhat different than the individualized human interchange that will be most helpful to most younger people in their future careers and real personal relationships.

Iri said:

In the end, "it's my opinion" is really no more socially destructive than people going around saying "Good Morning" to other people when they really don't care, as long as you understand what's behind it.

"Good morning" is sometimes code for "There you are. Since I have to say something, there it is."

"In my opinion" is sometimes code for "Since you are unable to rationally discern fact from opinion, here is your baby-talk qualifier."

JReitan said:
In the end, your view on the phrase is correct, but I do not believe this view is shared by most people, even here on MAL.

JReitan said:
With that said, you either work with a lot of business partners (who are experts in covert aggression) or you severely overestimate the strength and intelligence of the common internet user.

JReitan said:

Sorry, I meant same context. That is, both words are usually used as buzzwords/buffer zones here, meaning my argument is automatically good if I use the two words in my post, whether it's "personal freedom" or "personal opinion". The only time the phrase "personal freedom" should ever be used is when discussing philosophy, law, and politics.

JReitan said:

Your conclusion is generally correct. If someone uses the word "opinion" in their argument here, it usually implies some form of insecurity on the part of the poster. This would not be a big deal if such behavior wasn't contagious, but the saying goes, "You're only as good as your friends are", and we all learn from our peers.

JReitan said:

It's simply by logic that I would hypothesize that a user with more posts would therefore be more in-tune with the social dynamics of this community, meaning he/she would be more likely to use buzzwords, make "opinion" comments, or spout meaningless jokes/memes. I don't believe this hypothesis is a ridiculous one.

Also, it just takes a while for me to respond to every post. I'm trying to avoid double-posting so I'm doing a lot of editing instead.

Iri said:
I think you're probably correct here, although, in my personal experience, it's not so much that the phrase means "I am creating a buffer zone" but rather "this really means so little to me that I'll just write it off to 'protected opinion' rather than actually having to put in the effort to justify it." (i.e., intellectually lazy rather than intellectually cowardly.)

Astros477 said:
Hmm, well when used as such I can see that. Though that's based on the generalization that they're used mainly as buzzwords. Speaking of which I've never heard of that term till now.

JReitan said:
The argument ends here.

For the record, I stopped being an active participant of this community around my 700th post. I regret my time spent here, because ever since I moved on to better things (and reduced my anime consumption to a reasonable level) I've discovered some nice things, particularly some nicer social dynamics and circles I can be a part of instead of this one. I only came back temporarily to share some of these ideas with a community around my age.

Tachii said:
Read the entire thread. Frankly MAL is a place primarily for shallow discussions. If you did get into better circles which reinforce serious discussion, all the power to you. I wouldn't call this self-destructive however. It makes it seem like they're hurting themselves or something, when it doesn't really affect anything aside from what you assume to be the case.

Verumir said:
This "self-defense mechanism" is not self-destructive, unless the person in question takes this kind of attitude seriously, hell it may even work out as a way of stress relief giving someone a false sense of control, and a safe way to express themselves and feel a little more free, I don't know about you, but I'm sure that many users in here don't go in "CD" with the intention of having large intellectual discussions with others.

MaiTai said:


TL;DR: Thought of general thoughts of this thread and OP: "Why won't anyone fight with me? Even if most of you are underaged and therefore still developing your stance on hot topic issues and how to go about debating them....fight with me!"