Do you dislike people who disagree with you?

I know exactly what you mean Doodledog and can't articulate it any better

That’s the thing, isn’t it - it is possible to be bigoted whilst thinking you are fighting bigotry. Someone disagreeing with you (generic ‘you’, not anyone in particular) does not mean that they are a bigot, although of course they may be. An outsider might feel that both parties are bigoted in their own way.

I agree that asking why people feel as they do is more interesting than just arguing the toss, but many bigots don’t really know the answer, so refuse to engage or get angry.

It’s a shame, as the inability to discuss without anger is behind many of the divisions that bedevil much of society just now.

As a child I heard bigoted views and saw for myself that ‘like calls to like’. By the time I was sixteen I was already openly challenging racist opinions - I wrote a letter that was published in the local paper and they included my name and address - and I was threatened for it, as were my (racist) grandparents with whom I was living at the time.

It scared me hugely, but it also showed me that expressing my opinions in a confrontational way was going to have the opposite effect to the one I was looking for, people just came out fighting. So I switched tack and simply began asking questions about why people had e.g. racist views, then very gently (I was still a bit frightened) posing alternative ideas.

To be honest I’ve been challenged right back many times about my own views - especially in the realms of politics and faith/religion - and because of that I’ve done some adapting of my own.

Exactly Blondiescot.

Neen

We all behave the way we do and have the beliefs we do for a reason. Diversity is acceptance and respecting others who may have different views to you . It doesn't mean you can't be friends . It's ok to not get someone else's point if view. It's not your journey to understand.

But surely there is a line to be drawn there? I can respect that people have different views on a whole range of subjects, for example, but I could never be 'friends' with someone who was an out-and-out bigot - be it racist, sexist, homophobic or whatever.

lovebeigecardigans1955

I think it depends on personality, rather than points of view. If someone disagrees with you nicely whilst putting their point across instead of aggressively calling you a fool then that's perfectly acceptable.

It's not what you say but how you say it.

Yes I agree with this. Expressing, in a reasonable and respectful tone, you're disagreement with someone's viewpoint is fine.
Angrily jumping down their throat, or telling them their view is stupid is rude, crass and intolerant.

We all behave the way we do and have the beliefs we do for a reason. Diversity is acceptance and respecting others who may have different views to you . It doesn't mean you can't be friends . It's ok to not get someone else's point if view. It's not your journey to understand.

grannyactivist I think you must have so much patience. I have infinite time and patience for children but struggle with adults sometimes. I don't know that I could manage 5 years unless it was someone I really cared about

I have no red lines. I engage with people including fascists, racists, ableists (much more common) etc.

I’m forced to engage because some people with these views are in my client group, but I also choose to because otherwise people with these damaging views (to others and themselves) are left in their ‘echo chambers’ and will never be challenged enough to change.

Many years ago I had a very close friend who complained that a group of people with learning disabilities had been at a cultural venue at the same time as ‘normal’ people (i.e. her) and she thought this ‘shouldn’t be allowed’ because it had affected her enjoyment. I felt apoplectic, but what I did was to begin a discussion with her that lasted about five years - at the end of which she had completely changed her views and went on to challenge other people from an informed perspective.

People get their ‘information’ now from all sorts of sources; I want to be a ‘source’ to challenge misinformation. I listen to people’s views and if I think they’re way off the mark I’ll ask questions and open up a dialogue. Eventually I may ‘give up’ trying to effect change, but by then I’ve usually established a relationship anyway.

While it is nice to have some common ground with people, I'd find it a bit odd to be in the company with someone who agreed with everything I said - its good to be challenged.

Red lines are racism and sexism.

That's very true lovebeigecardigans. Personal insults and aggression undermine a point of view rather than enhance it.

I think it depends on personality, rather than points of view. If someone disagrees with you nicely whilst putting their point across instead of aggressively calling you a fool then that's perfectly acceptable.

It's not what you say but how you say it.

MerylStreep

I don’t dislike some people because of their views but I do dislike some because of they way they express those views.

This. (especially on the political forums!)

It would depend entirely on the views and values, the way they were expressed, but far more on their behaviour.

Right wing people can actually be quite as kind as left wing people. There's a surprise.

Yes, very true, whoever it was who first brought up indifference. I'm indifferent to a lot of people. Many, many more than I like or dislike. Happy to say hello or chat about the weather but don't want to extend it any further.

I once had an otherwise lovely acquaintance whose politics were diametrically opposed to mine. She was keen to be friends, but while I didn't dislike her, didn't want her as part of my life. NOT a huge insult because I'm very insular and don't like a lot of company, but I think she was hurt.

I'd be happy if people were indifferent to me.

No there's is the third option of addressing it directly but as you said yourself sometimes things are said in a way that's deniable.

Because of that happening with a lot of what my mother said and it ended up with me feeling crazy because she said I was imagining things it caused a lot of issues.

I think probably ignoring it is best

Doodledog my saying "hidden messages" was meaning the same as your "sly poke".

Honestly the OP was as it reads, I was just curious. It came to mind because some of my opinions go against the majority and I am a bit sensitive (working on it) so the strength of some peoples disagreements makes me wonder if that colours relationships on other topics or not

A good example of passive aggressive behaviour Doodledog.

The dictionary definition is a pattern of expressing negative feelings instead of openly addressing them.

I agree that the behaviour described in your first paragraph is P/A (and infuriating!) but none of that can be exhibited online, which is what I thought we were discussing (although having re-read the OP I can see that maybe your question was broader than that.

I am not sure that I do understand what you are saying about public forums, though. I do see a lot of P/A behaviour online (my favourite is 'Oh, I'll let you have the last word'), and digs which are clear to those who recognise them, but pass over the heads of those who don't.

But if someone is sending messages (do you mean PMs?) there is nothing stopping people from addressing them directly, or simply saying 'I don't want to discuss this'. I don't discuss my private life online for instance, and have no problem saying so if someone asks me a direct question that would mean disclosing more than I am comfortable with. I don't see why there has to be a choice between ignoring them or addressing them in a roundabout way, but maybe I'm missing the point.

Doodledog

How are you defining passive aggression, VS?

I would say it is when someone tries to look as though they are being neutral or reasonable, when actually they are having a sly poke at someone. The aggressive bit is there for all to see, but it can be denied if called out, which is the passive aspect.

There are other ways of being passive aggressive, but that was the aspect I referred to upthread when I said I didn't like it. I am a fairly straightforward person, who prefers honesty to hints or snide comments disguised as innocent comments.

How do people get sucked into it? Surely they know exactly what they are doing?

Sorry stupid reasons really.

I agree there are lots of different forms of passive aggression and most people exhibit some types occasionally. From people who just show their objections by not finishing a task but doing enough of it that it's not worth pulling them up, or turning up late to things because they agreed but didn't actually want to go. People who give the silent treatment or say everything is fine while stomping about. People who bemoan how unappreciated they feel or how fed up they are with dealing with other people's mess, in front of them. People who give those little back handed compliments like "oh your hair looks nice but I preferred it longer".

I do know what you are talking about though with the little hidden messages and that's the first place my mind usually goes when I think of passive aggression. I try to be direct with people about what I'm thinking/feeling but it's not always that simple.

On a public forum where people are sending you little messages the way you describe it's not always that easy when people have the choice of ignoring it or roundabout addressing it when they don't want a whole pile of drama. Does that make sense?

My mother was a very passive aggressive person in many ways and I grew up having learnt that behaviour and it can also be a self defence mechanism when you grow up with abusive people and you are not allowed to show emotion or emotions are seen as signs of weakness.

Anyway its something I learnt a lot about in counselling and learning things like, it is OK to be direct, it's OK to be angry, it's OK to point out that someones behaviour is hurting you etc was actually quite difficult. Especially as most people don't want to hear that, directly or indirectly!

How are you defining passive aggression, VS?

I would say it is when someone tries to look as though they are being neutral or reasonable, when actually they are having a sly poke at someone. The aggressive bit is there for all to see, but it can be denied if called out, which is the passive aspect.

There are other ways of being passive aggressive, but that was the aspect I referred to upthread when I said I didn't like it. I am a fairly straightforward person, who prefers honesty to hints or snide comments disguised as innocent comments.

How do people get sucked into it? Surely they know exactly what they are doing?

I am not sure my definition of passive aggressive is the same as other people's..

It's easy to get sucked into it though

I expect that people will disagree with me, and don't get offended by it.
My opinions are mine; theirs are theirs.
Exactly how it should be.

timetogo2016

Not in the slightest.
I do however dislike people who are aggresive in their opinions and try telling me my opinions are wrong,that i don`t tolerate.

I agree with timetogo2016

Like most people, I have my lines in the sand, but I think they are based more on the thinking behind what people say than the thing itself, if that makes sense.

I don't have racist friends for instance, and can't imagine being able to connect with someone who could write off a large group of people 'just because'. I don't know if I could just agree not to talk about race and ignore it, though. People who think like that would let it show in other ways too, I think. It always leaks out somewhere, as it is rare for someone to be intolerant of one group and not of others - it's a mindset, really.

Having said that, I am very careful not to make assumptions about people's motives for saying things. I don't like people who think that anyone who disagrees with them is doing so out of bigotry, stupidity or ignorance, when actually they just disagree. Bigotry works both ways, and being closed off to different ideas is bigoted in itself, as well as being rather arrogant.