Category: Current Event

[Intramuralist Note: Today features Guest Writer #1 in our annual summer series; the opinions expressed may or may not be held by me, but I value the writer’s expression and their commitment to respect. Enjoy!!]

A Respectful Dialogue of Current Events… a guiding principle of the Intramuralist is to express one’s opinion while respecting those who hold an alternative perspective. Such is the essence of civil discourse. If the mission of this website is to lead by example so that others will debate the issues of the day in a civil manner, is anybody following that example?

Not so much, I’m afraid. Take a look at these events over just the last 12 months since the last Guest Writer Series:

• An employee was fired from his job for a memo he wrote challenging the effectiveness of his company’s diversity programs.
• A white separatists rally in Charlottesville, VA turned deadly when a man intentionally drove his car into a crowd of protesters.
• Football fields turned into political battlegrounds pitting players against fans over protests during the National Anthem.
• A tenured law school professor was removed from teaching mandatory first-year courses after challenging racial preferences in college admissions.
• A left-leaning magazine hired a writer away from a right-leaning magazine and then fired him after one column due to backlash from its readership.
• Protesters hounded a cabinet member at a private dinner and another restaurant refused to serve the White House press secretary.
• A congresswoman advocated for further harassment of administration officials.
• The congresswoman herself was harassed in response.
• A comedienne used vulgar profanity on her TV show to insult the president’s daughter. (She apologized, but only to women.)
• An opinion website was hounded into deleting a column defending an actress cast to play a transgender role, leading to the columnist’s resignation.
• Trump supporters organized a boycott of a retailer for selling “Impeach 45” clothing on its website even though it was placed online by a third party.

I could go on. It seems we can’t even get to “live and let live.” Not only do we feel the need to tell those with the opposing viewpoint how wrong they are, many of us want to hurt (either physically or financially) those on the other side. They need to pay a price for disagreeing with us. It should go without saying that is not a healthy attitude to have.

So what to do about it? A few humble suggestions:

1. Recognize that we are all part of the problem – Your incivility may not be as bad as others’, but are you as civil as you could be? If not, you are escalating the rhetoric which can lead to harmful outcomes.
2. Acknowledge that everyone has biases (even you) – We are all inclined to focus on (or ignore) certain data points based on our perspective. As such, we don’t always see the world as it really is.
3. Admit that you are not always right – Even if you think you are right 99% of the time, maybe this time is part of the 1%. Allow for that possibility, and it will be easier to retract your words if you have to.
4. Disconnect from social media – Personally, I deleted my Facebook and Twitter accounts a couple years ago. I find myself to be a much happier person. Even if you don’t want to totally disengage from those platforms, try going without it for a few days and experience how little you miss it.
5. Don’t type anything you wouldn’t say to someone’s face – Why is it that we are much crueler when we type things than when we’re speaking in person? Imagine that the person you’re communicating with is in the room with you when you type.
6. Read some opinion you disagree with – Find some civil writers from the opposite side of the political spectrum and try to understand the issues of the day from their point of view. It may not change your mind, but it should change the way you interact with those you disagree with.
7. Be honest with your self-assessment – There are some people who get an emotional high from arguing. There can be an addiction to adrenaline that comes from debating controversial issues just like any drug. If you think that might be you, seek professional help to preserve your personal relationships.
8. Consider that Trump is a symptom, not the problem – I know, I know… some of you really, really hate Donald Trump. I’m not a big fan myself, but here’s the thing. He could not have risen to power were it not for the toxic political environment that existed before he was elected. He knows how to take advantage of uncivil discourse, but it did not start with him, and it will not go away after his presidency unless we do something about it.

Bottom line… before you speak, THINK! Is it True? Is it Helpful? Is it Inspiring? Is it Necessary? Is it Kind?

Respectfully…

PJM

Ok, ok… just rambling today, but questions I have that no one has answered yet to any degree of satisfaction… most of which have been shared or first offered by others…

What happened to Amelia Earhart?

How moral was John F. Kennedy?

Who was truly responsible for killing him?

Why is it that we often romanticize celebrities after their death?

Why do psychics have to ask you your name?

What don’t we know about 9/11?

Why do many refer to porn actors/actresses as “adult film stars”?

Why can’t we listen better?

Are all individuals valued under socialism?

What exactly is a “Buckeye”?

Has Facebook jumped the shark?

What about “Grey’s Anatomy”?

Why did they ever let Derek die?

Why do professional athletes get paid more than teachers?

Why do some feel that faith and science are contradicting?

Why do we resist God, especially if he knows what’s best?

If money doesn’t grow on trees, why do banks have branches?

Why do we feel like one political party is so much more moral than the other?

Can a funeral home raise the cost of burial and then blame the increase on the cost of living?

Where are each of us judgmental, but (most likely) don’t know it?

Great questions. I do love the question.

Remember that the question mark is the only punctuation piece that begs a response… that actually invites a reply.

I’m thus inclined to believe that if we were intentional about inviting a reply, our conversations and dialogue would be vastly improved…

We would listen better… hear better… and work more efficiently toward solution…

… even if discussing the actual whereabouts of Amelia Earhart.

Where is she by the way?

Respectfully…

AR

What do you lead with?

If there’s space between you and me, what do you lead with?

I’ve thought of this many times… if there’s space between you and me, something has to fill it…

If there’s space between a father and a son…

… between a husband and wife…

… between a girlfriend and boyfriend…

… between an employer and employee…

… between friends…

… between coworkers…

… between Facebook “friends” or Instagram “followers”…

What fits in the so-called in between?

What do you lead with?

One of my favorite sayings in the healthy community we have become a part of since our recent move, is that: “we will fill the gap with trust.”

That means when there is space between us…

… when I don’t understand…

… when I don’t know what’s going on… 

… when my perspective is limited…

… when their perspective is limited…

… when we disagree…

When any of those things are between us, I choose not to fight… to offend nor be offended…

I choose not to judge, point fingers, or criticize… even when that’s easiest to do.

Let’s note that it is suspicion that leads to judgment and criticism. So do I fill the gap with suspicion… or with trust? It’s either one or the other.

Say the wise words of Atlanta’s Andy Stanley:

“We have a tendency to put suspicion in the gap. Patrick Lencioni, in the book ‘The Advantage,’ talks about the fundamental attribution error. ‘It is the tendency to attribute the negative or frustrating behaviors of colleagues to their intentions and personalities.’ So if someone does something to create a gap, this error leads us to believe that it is something that is fundamentally wrong with their personality or character. (He was late because he is lazy.) On the other hand, when we do something to create a gap, we attribute it to environmental issues. (I am late because traffic was bad.) You cut yourself slack but not others.”

[emphasis mine]

It seems to me we are living in a culture where many are encouraging the placing of suspicion in the gap; many cut slack only for self and the likeminded.

Yet wisdom calls us elsewhere; wisdom calls us to fill the gap with trust.

Granted, as Stanley shares, sooner or later, “Trust runs out. At that point, something has to change. Conversations have to take place sooner rather than later. If you find yourself driving home having imaginary conversations in your head with the other person about these trust gaps, it is time to have a conversation in real life. You need to sit down and tell the person about the existence of the trust gap and understand the cause. Lencioni writes, ‘When there is trust, conflict becomes nothing more than the pursuit of truth in an attempt to find the best possible answer.’”

I thus so desire the conversation.

I so desire finding a better way.

I desire deflating the intensity of the conflict.

And I desire filling the gap with trust.

Respectfully…

AR

Some sweet, extended family members went out Friday evening for dinner and a quick errand. Dinner was great, but then, after venturing in and out of Pet Smart, one of them started to back up the truck…

… and he hit her.

“Her” was a young gal in her lower-sitting sedan. 

Daily, no doubt, conflict exists. We run into trouble with people who get in our way, who inconvenience us… hit us… hurt us… even cause damage.

Maybe the damage is minimal — just a fender bender, perhaps — but maybe it’s more… it can feel so harsh! Maybe, in fact, it’s simply their existence that we find so damaging to what we are trying to do or where we are attempting to go.

In so many places and pockets these days, we find persons unwilling to tolerate even the existence of another. How many times have we read a social media thread where someone calls someone else out, simply saying, “STOP!”…

I’m offended! … you and your opinion are not welcome here.

I’m offended! … that is not an angle I will allow to be discussed.

I’m offended! … you are ignorant; no need for civility with you.

The sequence starts with offense.

Observe once more our family members and their accident…

The damage was minor, but damage nonetheless; both parties had cause — justified grounds — for offense. But notice what they chose…

As they awaited for the police to arrive, my family members began to converse with the twenty-something female driver of a car that was “pretty blue and fairly new.”

While engaging in interactive, listening-oriented dialogue, they quickly found common ground. The gal works at my family’s doctor’s office.

The common ground brought trust, and so they spoke more. And more. Even though the setting had all the potential for opposition and offense, they chose otherwise, knowing the issue would be mended faster and better if they could see something good or common in the other.

After all information was exchanged and the police had finished making record of the accident, see the reaction of those involved, before they resumed their evenings as planned:

“… she said she felt like us literally running into each other was a ‘God-thing,’ as she loved having the opportunity to talk with us. She said she felt like God allowed that little accident to happen just so we had that time together.

The policeman even told us both how nice it was to deal with people who weren’t all irate and screaming at each other…”

So often we choose to be offended. We have grounds; our offense is justified. 

But what if we chose otherwise?

Said the family:

“Their comments touched my heart, and it just goes to show you how our words and reactions to a situation can make all the difference in the world. This turned out to be a positive experience rather than a negative one, because of their reactions…

An experience I will never forget… it brought tears to my eyes.”

Choosing not to be offended… finding common ground… listening… still dealing with the issue but in an honoring-of-all kind of way…

What a positive experience.

Respectfully…

AR

Becoming prevalent in the ’80’s, primarily employed by rappers and comedians, note Wikipedia’s following definition:

“A mic drop is the gesture of intentionally dropping one’s microphone at the end of a performance or speech to signal triumph. Figuratively, it is an expression of triumph for a successful event and indicates a boastful attitude toward one’s own performance.”

In other words, a person stops speaking and releases whatever tool made his voice possible to hear — believing there is no need to continue the conversation.

My question today, no less, centers around how comfortable we’ve become with dropping the mic. Remember, based on Wikipedia’s definition, the act “indicates a boastful attitude” toward self.

… How many times does a person in social media have to have the last word?

… How many times can they seemingly not allow any opinion other than their own to stand?

Hence, if only their opinion is acceptable — and if they have to always have the last word — I come to two questionable conclusions:

One, they probably are not the most skilled at respectful dialogue.

And two, they’ve gotten way too comfortable with the mic drop.

So how do we proceed?

It would be wonderful if all on social media would band together to dismiss with this dropping, so-to-speak. Sadly, no less, I’m thinking that might be incredibly challenging. Too many too quickly enjoy “amen-ing” the act.

And so we must instead ask ourselves how to wisely respond.

In processing this question for the day, I kept coming to a quote my mother has long repeated:

“You don’t have to attend every argument to which you are invited.”

(Now there’s an “amen”…)

As elaborated upon by author, speaker, and psychiatrist Leandro Herroro:

“This quote is from an unknown author. He or she must have known a thing or two about the futility of engaging in every single discussion that comes your way. The quote is also a proxy for ‘pick your battles’. There are battles worth fighting and battles that are not…  

… a better angle is ‘What will make the difference?’

… [You] don’t have to attend to every argument to which you are invited, you don’t have to get involved in everything, and certainly, you do not have to spend your time fighting every battle.

The magic word is choice. Choices are always in front of you.”

Sometimes on social media, many choose to be silent. That silence should not be used to make assumptions about the non-speakers; such is only a surmise.

That silence may instead most signify a response to a perceived mic drop…

“What can I say that will make a difference?”

“Nothing?”

Then perhaps there’s little wisdom in response.

Respectfully…

AR