Does anyone else get tired of these guys that show up to the website that put up a topic then delete it when they realize that no one agrees with them?
Here look at me, I am a guy, you are guys, so you must agree even though I haven't found anyone else in real life to agree.
Latest was some guy, asked a serious question and I gave him a serious response. I knew from the get go that he wouldn't like the response, but my "job" here isn't to appease people. If I am giving advice, on my own time, it is going to be direct and it might not be what you wanted it to be.
A man takes that people will have different opinions and that he might not always be right. In fact, a man knows that the day he stops learning and pushing even himself is the day that man is put in the ground.
Oddly enough, most of the time it seems that these "guys" take their threads and run home after they have been trying to tell us how they aren't selfish and we all agree that they are. So by deleting their thread, they do one last selfish act PROVING what everyone here at this site of men agrees with.
Lord knows, I do stupid stuff all the time. Idea is just do I repeat the stupid stuff and do I allow people to tell me if I am doing said stupid stuff.
No. I disagree with you.
I had completed a comment agreeing with you in principle when the post was taken down.
I can't say that I "get tired of" it, because I only see it happen every few months. This situation seemed particularly small-minded because there was only 1 reply. Perhaps a consensus would form against our assessments of the situations.
I can understand the impulse to take down a thread when you've been roundly contradicted. It is not a completely mature thing to do, but shame is usually a positive moral force.
I wouldn't say it's so much the advice itself that isn't welcomed, but the manner in which it is delivered. I've never personally deleted a thread of mine but I have wanted to. I say that because sometimes, in some contexts (usually romantic relationships), the advice given on the forums is good but the delivery is lacking. Posts can come off as crass, rude, and combative. I've felt attacked on here several times when I least expect it. I suppose that's because in my mind I think I'm right (or if not right, justified) then when I post here everything gets turned on its head. Not like that's a bad thing; it's not. But it can certainly rub people the wrong way.
I know what you are talking about and that is why this site is called The Art of Manliness and not The Art of the Hen House. Men should have a bit thicker skin and be able to take such things in stride. I see it as part of growing up and not being a big overgrown mammas boy who can't understand that others may not think only delightful thoughts about you (not you D.J.).
If they can't take that then the best advice isn't going to help them all that much. For advice to work you need to accept it and probably change yourself. If you think you do not need to change then you are not ready for the advice.
I don't recall any new guy coming here and just getting attacked because they are new. Some have come here and almost asked for it and they got it.
Ask and ye shall receive. And by the way, Paul, you win the internet today for "The Art of the Hen House."
As a general rule, I answer as I would want to be answered under the same circumstances. I wouldn't want to be coddled ... so I don't coddle. I would expect to be treated like a grown man that got myself into this situation, and can get myself out (with suggestions). So, that's how I treat people who ask advice.
Also, as a general rule, I try to offer suggestions for what actions the writer can take to fix things. That almost requires finding what portion of the blame can be put on the writer ... so as to figure out what the writer can change to right the ship. So, the same question from two different parties to an argument can lead to a completely different answer.
That's why "I cheated on my wife, what do I do!?!" leads to the answer ... "you're a scumbag, and I hope she leaves you" or "fess up, apologize, and hope she's more forgiving than I'd suggest she be, dumbass."
While "my husband cheated on me, what do I do!?!?" ... leads to the answer ... "treat your husband better, make sure you're giving him what he went outside the relationship looking for, and/or quit picking scumbags".
Both answers sound critical of the person asking the question. But, if I answer either with "you're a blameless victim" (of his scumbagness, or her frigidity, or whatever) ... then there's nothing they can do to fix it. The blameless are also without any control for fixing the problem ... and, conversely, if you have some control to implement a solution, you have some blame for not doing so before there was a problem.
I've felt attacked on here several times when I least expect it. I suppose that's because in my mind I think I'm right (or if not right, justified) then when I post here everything gets turned on its head.
That's probably the real answer. People come in expecting a certain answer ... and "feel attacked" when they don't get the answer they'd have written to themselves. Which is stupid ... because if we gave you the answer you'd give yourself, what use is there in asking us?
One of my favorites was the young guy asking what he should wear to bed for his new wife. He was asking because women have lingerie and such things so what should a husband wear. Jack answered to just wear boxers and the OP said something about us not understanding or something like that. Jacks comment was the first and was simply a plain response with no mocking tone toward the OP. Then he deleted the post and left. Still for the life of me I have absolutely no idea what that guy thought we might recommend.
The rule of thumb I was taught is that "the more in control someone feels of their life, the more they can take and might even appreciate the hardball answer. The less in control someone feels of their life, the more they need a soft pitch."
Since I am often answering relationship questions or "my life sucks" problems, I err on the side of caution. If I have reason to believe that the person who posted might be depressive, I am downright cuddly.
In the book "Way of the Superior Man" by David Deida, he envisions a "man council" for peer counselling. He envisioned it being rather blunt, but not confrontationally so. I think it's a good idea, but needs some refinement to deal with people the way they are. Elsewhere in the book he came up with the scenario that the husband comes home to tell his wife about a big promotion and bonus--something like that anyway--and she says something to the effect of "That's nice. Where are the eggs and milk I wanted you to pick up on your way home?"
A superior man not supposed to need "mommy" to pat him on the head and tell him he's approved of. But the whole point of bringing up the scenario is to admit that most men aren't there yet. You have to walk before you can run.
Oddly enough I don't myself feel particularly in control of my life--but I do mental toughness training to keep my emotions healthy and stable. That's why I don't react emotionally to criticism or blunt remarks directed to me, nor do I wish to waste time and attention arguing. Someone with more experience in life than me once called those situations "the tar baby" (cf Uncle Remus stories I think)--it's a trap that takes time and attention away from more important matters.
Eventually I will write a story that explains how to train yourself not to react emotionally to not getting validated, not hearing what you want to hear, hearing criticism, or even put-downs. This is a valuable skill, a trait of powerful people.
Speaking of hearing what you want to...
Someone posted elsewhere about a situation in which she gets into arguments with her friends. Most of her (female) friends posted "there, there, deary, it's all the fault of those nasty people who don't deserve you as a friend, you poor thing". I expressed sympathy with her feelings, without fixing any blame on anyone, but then moved on to how to avoid that situation. You start where the other person is, then encourage them into the right direction to solve their problem; you don't leave them stuck in the problem.
Women reputedly don't want advice; they want you to take care of them emotionally. There's the reputed landmine of "do you think I look fat?", and getting in big trouble if you give advice about dieting.
The ethical way to handle that is to start where the other person is and take care of their emotions before telling them what they need to hear. That's what I do.
She didn't get angry about the advice because I took care of her emotions first, but I did notice that she responded favorably to the ones who told her what she wanted to hear and not what she needed to hear.
I think you've got to do the right thing despite the moral hazard of being rewarded for telling people what they want to hear. A friend tells you what you need to hear. A wise friend takes care of your feelings first, and then tells you what you need to hear.
Yeppers, there was a distinct reason for using guy vs men/man
I see what you are saying. For me I get tired of people asking for help an then not working on it. Or simply moving on to another idea. I really like it when people check back in and let us know how things fared.
As to differing opinions, I do trying to listen to well explained ideas and think them through. I admit I have a problem with taking advice from people who I don't think will be open to advice or willing to change their viewpoint themselves.