1268:
When I meet an adversary and
discuss my views, concerning the eating of animals, I’m at a disadvantage
because I know that I hold such a minority view. It’s almost impossible to win the ‘animal
argument’ if my opponent respects and feels supported by the dominant culture. That’s okay by me, but it won’t be admitted by
them, since their interest is in out-manoeuvring me. So, I don’t see an attack coming until I
notice a distinctly personal challenge being made, with no sign of fair debate
intended.
Maybe they make a sharp
comment which, on the face of it, seems like a joke but has that distinct sharp
thrust about it, like the assassin’s knife, in and out in a flash. It warns that they have no taste for any detailed
discussion.
The sharp comment, fired off
at ‘joke- level’, was never meant to be shrugged off by me. It would appear cowardly of me to do that, so,
as expected, I fire back an aggressive reply. And in that split second, as I bite back, I
know I’ve been manipulated. My aggressive response is the coup de grace of the
‘joke’. It ‘turns’ the atmosphere. I’m made to look bad. It was me who took things further than
necessary.
The innocent jokester reckons
I’ve got no sense of humour. They’re
outraged at the thought that their comments could be taken so personally. By my taking umbrage, by being hypersensitive
to a bit of light hearted banter, I show how ready I am to quarrel over this
issue. It’s proof (to my adversary) that
I’m neither a compassionate person, nor as non-violent as I purport to be. I look like a loser who seems to have gentle
views about animals but not about people. And they win!!
No comments:
Post a Comment