-Author: anonymous
Alternate Title: The Really Really Really Long Post
So I have a lot of totally un-researched, unproven, scientifically-supportless theories about how things work. Whether it be my theory:
1) that men are taught to be constantly sexual to the highest degree (by movies, magazines, music, and bad parenting, etc), so whether they are or are not, they act that way to be accepted socially (since a male who does not act like a sexual predator is deemed inept/gay/irregular); and women are taught to not be base enough to give in to the animal urge for sex (by latent Victorian standards, "studies" on how often women desire sex, "studies" saying women do not think of sex in the same way men do, etc), so whether or not they are overly sexual, they pretend to not care about it. This then results in men who are not overly sexual acting like they are and women who are at least moderately sexual acting like they are not and the two of them clashing when, in reality, they are much more like each other than they realize...
or 2) that many who claim to be oppressed end up (accidentally or intentionally) oppressing others...i.e. atheists who say "don't push your views of God on me" but fight to have their view be the only view taught in science/history classes thereby pushing their view of there being no God on every child in the educational system; or any group (be it women, blacks, illegal immigrants, etc) who at one time in the past (or even now, in the present) were/are put down upon, only to be angry that the equality effort on their behalf did not put them above those who oppressed them (thereby desiring oppression of others even though their anger is spawned from oppression in the first place). I.E. Feminists who are (rightly so) angry that women could not vote in the past and were treated as maids who reared the children; but then in an attempt to gain 'equality' demand jobs doing things like firefighting even when unqualified thereby causing the system to lower standards (and possibly put people in danger). Addendum to the last paragraph: I am NOT saying that women can't do jobs like front-line military service or fighting fires. I know that the upper 25th percentile of women have no problem meeting the same standards as men. I'm using this as an example that is sometimes true.
You'll have to forgive me, I'm a horrible hypocrite. I get easily angered when someone with no background in philosophy attempts to make a philosophical argument and completely ignores the entire field/dialog on the topic they are discussing in order to push their ignorant views; however, I'm more than willing to enter a field I have little background in (i.e. psychology) to tell everyone that I am right.
So...my point is that I am not formally educated in the field that would properly discuss this topic, yet, if one uses common sense, the point I am going to make is at lease valid and worth discussing. So I hope you'll read on and not dismiss this as ignorant.
::
::
The funny thing is that my entire point is very, very simple. Yet,I don't think too many people have put much credence in the idea. Here it goes:
The things that people hate in others are often things they hate in themselves,
Yeah, I know I need to qualify that statement.
Differentiation between different scenarios where I see this:
1. The Capacity Argument
We all have certain capacities to do certain things. Whether or not these capacities are ever realized, they are there. Easy example, I have the capacity to learn Spanish almost fluently. Will I ever? Who knows, but I have the capacity to. Capacities can be good, bad, or neutral. The capacity to learn Spanish is neutral. The capacity to become more compassionate and become the head of a non-profit organization would be viewed by many as good. The capacity to become an addict would usually be seen as bad.
You've heard people say, "I have an addictive personality, I need to be careful." This kind of person sees the possibility of becoming addicted to anything from caffeine to painkillers to video games. You've also heard people say, "That guy who [takes pain killers every day/drinks a ton of coffee/etc] is SO pathetic. He has no self-control." This often comes across as angry, adamant, and incredibly condescending. I would wager that those two comments are often said by the same person. The addictive personality person hates those addicted to something because he is restricted (at least personally) from doing them. Whether or not he wants to drink absurd amounts of coffee, he desires on some level to do the things he knows he can't. It's a red button and we all love pushing red buttons.
This is tricky, because the person is usually the opposite of the thing they hate:
The girl who works out 3 hours a day and has 5% body fat who hates obese people (because she sacrifices so much to not be like them). The guy working a minimum-wage job who hates rich people who blow their money on golden toilets (because he would love to live extravagantly but can't even afford toilet paper). The girl who hates religious people and rants about how stupid anyone following a religion is (because she, deep down, sees something in religion that seems right). And the list goes on.
2. The Actualized Argument
The next set of people are living the thing they hate. A prime example is the stand-up comedian. What do comedians make the most jokes about? Themselves. The fat ones make fat jokes. The gay ones make gay jokes. The ugly ones make ugly jokes. And so on and so on. People always have qualms with themselves. And seriously, how many times have you heard the question: "If there was one thing about yourself you could change, what would it be?" The easiest way to deal with disappointment is to mock it. This is the group of people who have some flaw (whether public or private) and relentlessly mock it when they see it in other people.
3. The Jealousy Argument
This is the type of person who shows extreme disdain for some trait/action/etc in others; but they secretly wish they could be like that person. For example, a person might hate people who live minute-to-minute (the kind who would up and move to another country at a whim) because "that kind of person is irresponsible." Yet the one hating wishes they could be that lacking in responsibility. But they have made a decision to accomplish something that does not allow for such spontaneity. Most people see something in others that they sometimes wish they could have, but for one reason or another disdain that quality.
Now trust me, I understand that this is not a universal evaluation. I might genuinely hate people who kill others and feel no remorse; but that does not mean I necessarily wish I could do the same or even have the propensity to do the same. I mean this in general. Also, there is the problem of the over-use of the word "hate"...so much so that the word hardly means anything anymore. Yeah, I hate eggplant, but that does not mean I want to be one. I'm speaking of "hate" on a deeper level.
Anyway, there's yet another unproven (and likely unprovable) assumption I have about humanity. Take it as you will.
