• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
Tom Sewell

Story Monday, August 12, 2018

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Old Hack said:

... not even in fiction, ...

 

I do not recall what prompted it, but I've been thinking about this lately. What is existence? Can you say that a fictional character, such as Diane exists? My take on it is that in some sense she must, else why are we able to discuss her. She exists in Dan's mind, who is using his vision of her personality to write her into his comic, and she exists in his community of fans; she even has a few works of prose on the web describing her.

Yet clearly, she does not exist in the same sense as a real person. Your forgiveness/unforgiveness can affect your neighbor. It will never matter to Diane.

My dad passed away a number of years ago. Is he a real person? He obviously was a real person, he's not fictitious, but today he shares many characteristics with web comic characters. He, like Lincoln, Napoleon, or Guy Fawkes, exists primarily as a memory, or as a legend. My youngest kids barely remember him.

What about my hypothetical descendants? Do they exist? They will exist (presumably I'll have at least some more), So it seems they are also not merely fictitious, but they have only a potential existence at this point.

Even among fictitious characters, there seems to be a hierarchy of realness; how fleshed out the character is, how well presented, how memorable. "Is often discussed" seems to be an observable aspect of this, or "Is often reused", like Sherlock Holmes. Actually, since a character can be viewed as property, it has a legal existence.

You could also make a case for people, as personalities, only exist in their own and other people's heads. To be fair, you could record details in a notebook, you could create a fictional character with perceived similar characteristics, and that personality will play out through the actions of that person's body to affect the physical world around them, but in a very real sense, the actual person is the neural software running on the meat based computer.

 

1 hour ago, The Old Hack said:

... and I reject the creed that calls for turning the other cheek. In too many cases it merely gives the abuser more opportunities to harm you.

 

 

Heh, I get what you are saying. I like and subscribe to the turn the other cheek philosophy, I have seen situations defuse by one party taking it upon themselves to not pursue a conflict, and it seems healthier. But there does seem to be times when you pretty much have to stand up to the bully and let him know you won't back down. <shrug> I'm no oracle, with an infallible sense of right and wrong. I think for me, sometimes missing a third option has been more of an issue.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Heh, I get what you are saying. I like and subscribe to the turn the other cheek philosophy, I have seen situations defuse by one party taking it upon themselves to not pursue a conflict, and it seems healthier. But there does seem to be times when you pretty much have to stand up to the bully and let him know you won't back down. <shrug> I'm no oracle, with an infallible sense of right and wrong. I think for me, sometimes missing a third option has been more of an issue.

I think for me, I can look at Tony, a character who has, for the entire span of EGS thus far, been a bully, harassed Tedd over his androgynous appearance and made comments about not only Tedd's, but Elliot's sexual orientation and possibly even other people's, and to top it off, Tony's been that way since 4th grade at least (this previous page's flashback might be 3rd grade or even earlier ) and Tony has so far hasn't really shown any sign of changing his attitude (which in retrospect, he's essentially the Justin that I grew up getting bullied by).

I look at Diane however, and we've had 1 instance of her saying something homophobic, and that was it, yes she was still an overall jerk, but we never saw her going out of her way to harass Justin, though she apparently repeatedly harassed Nanase but for other reasons, of course at around Christmas Diane set her sights on Elliot which appeared to be bad news but it turned out much different, I think she started to remember what she really wanted, romance. This was certainly tested when she saw Ashley with Elliot, and while she did lash out at Charlotte over it, I think the key thing here is the fact that she immediately realizes that she was out of line and felt awful.

As Grace stated when talking to Elliot about his past comments about Tedd using girl forms, there are people who are bigoted jerks who should know better but aren't going to change, a category in which Tony would certainly fall under, and people who simply don't understand that what they do is harmful but there's hope for them to learn and be better, and I strongly believe that Diane fits here because she's certainly showing that she can learn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Scotty said:

I think for me, I can look at Tony, a character who has, for the entire span of EGS thus far, been a bully, harassed Tedd over his androgynous appearance and made comments about not only Tedd's, but Elliot's sexual orientation and possibly even other people's, and to top it off, Tony's been that way since 4th grade at least (this previous page's flashback might be 3rd grade or even earlier ) and Tony has so far hasn't really shown any sign of changing his attitude (which in retrospect, he's essentially the Justin that I grew up getting bullied by).

Did you mean the bully that you in Justin's role experienced?

I went to one of my class reunions, let's say 20th, +/- 5 yrs, and I was surprised how much people had matured; I enjoyed their company (not so much in high school). Your mileage may vary; I don't think everyone matures nor changes.

 

44 minutes ago, Scotty said:

I look at Diane however, and we've had 1 instance of her saying something homophobic, and that was it, yes she was still an overall jerk, but we never saw her going out of her way to harass Justin, though she apparently repeatedly harassed Nanase but for other reasons, of course at around Christmas Diane set her sights on Elliot which appeared to be bad news but it turned out much different, I think she started to remember what she really wanted, romance. This was certainly tested when she saw Ashley with Elliot, and while she did lash out at Charlotte over it, I think the key thing here is the fact that she immediately realizes that she was out of line and felt awful.

I find it odd that she says "... insane monster hunting fantasy" after they have encountered non-Tengu and talked to Tara. It's kind of dense for Diane, don't you think?

 

44 minutes ago, Scotty said:

I strongly believe that Diane fits here because she's certainly showing that she can learn.

I like that she did that in the story line, however for as much as I enjoy reading EGS, I find Dan's positive view on people's ability to learn to overcome their bigotry to be overly optimistic. Flip side is, if they behaved to my expectations, I would not be enjoying it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Did you mean the bully that you in Justin's role experienced?

No, earlier I mentioned that I was bullied throughout school by someone named Justin, to the point where the name is a reminder and I have to tell myself that not all Justins are like that, Tony is more representative of the Justin I knew. I guess I was more in Tedd's position, but not exactly.

2 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I went to one of my class reunions, let's say 20th, +/- 5 yrs, and I was surprised how much people had matured; I enjoyed their company (not so much in high school). Your mileage may vary; I don't think everyone matures nor changes.

I've had similar experiences as well, but I haven't seen Justin since highschool, I've seen his mother around, heck his grandmother lives a couple of apartments down from me and his cousin stops by from time to time to help her with things, I guess there could be a number of reasons he's not in the area, I haven't thought the need to ask.

2 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I find it odd that she says "... insane monster hunting fantasy" after they have encountered non-Tengu and talked to Tara. It's kind of dense for Diane, don't you think?

Oh of course, Diane certainly stuck her foot in her mouth there.

2 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I like that she did that in the story line, however for as much as I enjoy reading EGS, I find Dan's positive view on people's ability to learn to overcome their bigotry to be overly optimistic. Flip side is, if they behaved to my expectations, I would not be enjoying it

I'm pretty certain that's why I enjoy it as well, many times I've wished that people could stop treating others like crap just because they look different or have different interests or preferences or whatever. EGS helps keep that hope alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The Old Hack said:
16 hours ago, CritterKeeper said:

This is an excellent point.  Elliot and Diane both made crappy comments, and both have realized they were wrong to do so.  In fact, Elliot never actually apologized to Tedd, he just tried to show that he feels differently now.  Diane came right out and said she was wrong to say it and she was sorry she had.

Once again, I have no problem with others be more forgiving of Diane than I am.

If I am supposed to infer from this that I am being hypocritical, I counter with the fact that Diane was being deliberately hurtful and consigned Justin to the status of 'defective'. This, incidentally, is a form of dehumanisation that the disabled are also very familiar with.

Elliot, on the other hand, spoke hurtful words out of ignorance and also had and has going for him that he has never intentionally sought to hurt Tedd and on most other occasions has been fully supportive of him.

 I would argue there was ignorance on Diane's part as well, but you're right that the important difference is Elliot never trying to be hurtful or even just negative ; Diane was.

3 hours ago, Scotty said:

but we never saw her going out of her way to harass Justin

On the other hand, yes, he didn't went out of her way for that. Most likely, it wasn't literally only case where she shown this opinion, but she basically only shared it with Justin when asked.

11 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

and I reject the creed that calls for turning the other cheek. In too many cases it merely gives the abuser more opportunities to harm you.

Well, NOW it doesn't work, but it was nice idea originally: It was a challenge to hit you as they would hit an equal, instead of hitting you as a social inferior.

8 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
11 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

... not even in fiction, ...

I do not recall what prompted it, but I've been thinking about this lately. What is existence? Can you say that a fictional character, such as Diane exists? My take on it is that in some sense she must, else why are we able to discuss her. She exists in Dan's mind, who is using his vision of her personality to write her into his comic, and she exists in his community of fans; she even has a few works of prose on the web describing her.

Yet clearly, she does not exist in the same sense as a real person. Your forgiveness/unforgiveness can affect your neighbor. It will never matter to Diane.

My dad passed away a number of years ago. Is he a real person? He obviously was a real person, he's not fictitious, but today he shares many characteristics with web comic characters. He, like Lincoln, Napoleon, or Guy Fawkes, exists primarily as a memory, or as a legend. My youngest kids barely remember him.

What about my hypothetical descendants? Do they exist? They will exist (presumably I'll have at least some more), So it seems they are also not merely fictitious, but they have only a potential existence at this point.

Even among fictitious characters, there seems to be a hierarchy of realness; how fleshed out the character is, how well presented, how memorable. "Is often discussed" seems to be an observable aspect of this, or "Is often reused", like Sherlock Holmes. Actually, since a character can be viewed as property, it has a legal existence.

You could also make a case for people, as personalities, only exist in their own and other people's heads. To be fair, you could record details in a notebook, you could create a fictional character with perceived similar characteristics, and that personality will play out through the actions of that person's body to affect the physical world around them, but in a very real sense, the actual person is the neural software running on the meat based computer.

As someone who read Amber I have it simpler and harder at same time :)

But yes, we seem to make such sharp distinction between what is "real" and what is "fictional", but the difference is nowhere near as big as we claim. Lot of "fictional" people are more real to us than some people in Africa we share planet with ...

More relevant to the discussion is the fact that Diane will never hear about your opinion of her. At least not in continuity ... it would be easy to write fanfic where Scale, established character with access to our world internet AND device allowing her to visit any comic, would tell her. (I'm not even sure if it would be the stupidest idea for fanfic ever written.)

38 minutes ago, Scotty said:
2 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I find it odd that she says "... insane monster hunting fantasy" after they have encountered non-Tengu and talked to Tara. It's kind of dense for Diane, don't you think?

Oh of course, Diane certainly stuck her foot in her mouth there.

I would label it naive. She's naive when she thinks she can leave the supernatural world ... now when she was there, she will become part of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hkmaly said:

On the other hand, yes, he didn't went out of her way for that. Most likely, it wasn't literally only case where she shown this opinion, but she basically only shared it with Justin when asked.

She shared it often enough with Rhoda that Rhoda was afraid of letting her know that she was in a relationship with Catalina. :doom:

And Justin did not ask. Diane insulted him to his face with literally no provocation from him whatsoever. Nanase challenged her to treat Justin like a human being. Diane failed, and so herself failed as a human being.

Exercise for the class: how much good did this attitude do Justin and other queer people in general? How did other LGBTQI* people present in the lunch hall feel about it?

2 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Interesting! Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I find it odd that she says "... insane monster hunting fantasy" after they have encountered non-Tengu and talked to Tara. It's kind of dense for Diane, don't you think?

I think that Diane meant that it was "insane" to think that she would become a combatant-type who would fight the monsters as opposed to a civilian who would hide behind others or just flee. Diane does not think of herself as a fighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Old Hack said:

Exercise for the class: how much good did this attitude do Justin and other queer people in general? How did other LGBTQI* people present in the lunch hall feel about it?

What she did sucks, yes, but counter to that, how many students went around perpetuating a lies about her and Lucy? How many other girls were having rumours spread about their questionable dating habits? Nanase dated many guys in school and we know of 1 that was a real jerk about it too, I wouldn't be surprised if more than half the school had done as bad if not worse things than Diane. On the MNHS side of things, I've already meantioned Tony, but we also have "Ronin" for thinking he was going to be smart by "outting" Elliot, and all the other students that ridiculed Susan for her approach to protesting the school uniforms, their change of heart after Tedd stepped in doesn't instantly free them of the wrong they did, but if it really did make some of them reconsider how they've acted and proceed to change, I'd consider that progress.

People do stupid things, high school is especially full of kids doing stupid things, if you make it to graduation having realized that the things you did were stupid and make an effort to not carry those things into adulthood.... I know this sounds like a "kids will be kids" excuse, but it's really not cus that idea implies we should let them keep doing stupid things and I'm talking about not continuing to punish someone who already knows that what they did was wrong and is trying to be better, what's the point of even trying if no one's going to give you a chance, and for Diane, if Justin had just blown her off, it probably wouldn't do well for encouraging continued positive behaviour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Scotty said:

What she did sucks, yes, but counter to that, how many students went around perpetuating a lies about her and Lucy?

What you are doing here is whataboutism. Yes, other people do shitty things, too.

This does not mean that Diane gets a free pass from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Old Hack said:
6 hours ago, hkmaly said:

On the other hand, yes, he didn't went out of her way for that. Most likely, it wasn't literally only case where she shown this opinion, but she basically only shared it with Justin when asked.

She shared it often enough with Rhoda that Rhoda was afraid of letting her know that she was in a relationship with Catalina. :doom:

Yes. That definitely hurt Rhoda. It didn't hurt Justin, though.

3 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

And Justin did not ask. Diane insulted him to his face with literally no provocation from him whatsoever. Nanase challenged her to treat Justin like a human being. Diane failed, and so herself failed as a human being.

Not provocation from HIM. However, I meant that without the challenge, she wouldn't say it. In fact, if you look at the page again, she said it to NANASE, not to Justin (although he was obviously close enough to hear it) ... and I usually interpret "saying to (someone's) face" differently too.

This, obviously, doesn't change the fact that it was bad ; but it's less bad than if she went out of her way just to tell Justin he's defective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hkmaly said:

This, obviously, doesn't change the fact that it was bad ; but it's less bad than if she went out of her way just to tell Justin he's defective.

These fine distinctions do not matter that much to me. Diane acted in a harmful manner and I am having trouble forgiving her for that.

If you are arguing that I might have had even more cause to dislike her if she had acted differently, I suppose I can't readily refute that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ijuin said:

I think that Diane meant that it was "insane" to think that she would become a combatant-type who would fight the monsters as opposed to a civilian who would hide behind others or just flee. Diane does not think of herself as a fighter.

I had the impression she was talking about Charlotte.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I had the impression she was talking about Charlotte.

I was reading it as Diane saying "It's an insane fantasy to imagine ME hunting monsters".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ijuin said:

I was reading it as Diane saying "It's an insane fantasy to imagine ME hunting monsters".

On a reread, I think you're right. She could be transitioning to thoughts about Charlotte, but it seems more likely that she is still talking about herself at the end of panel two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Scotty said:

People do stupid things, high school is especially full of kids doing stupid things, if you make it to graduation having realized that the things you did were stupid and make an effort to not carry those things into adulthood.... I know this sounds like a "kids will be kids" excuse, but it's really not cus that idea implies we should let them keep doing stupid things and I'm talking about not continuing to punish someone who already knows that what they did was wrong and is trying to be better, what's the point of even trying if no one's going to give you a chance, and for Diane, if Justin had just blown her off, it probably wouldn't do well for encouraging continued positive behaviour.

This, for me, is the crux of the matter.  What would we want someone who has done something terrible to do?  Should they dress in sackcloth or a scarlet letter, and never ever be a part of society again?  Should they kill themselves because they can never, ever make up for their error?  Or should they change, stop doing the terrible thing, sincerely apologize to those they have harmed, and resolve to do better, to become a force for good instead of evil?  And if they can make that change in themselves, shouldn't we encourage that, instead of continuing to vilify them just as hard as if they had never changed at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CritterKeeper said:

This, for me, is the crux of the matter.  What would we want someone who has done something terrible to do?  Should they dress in sackcloth or a scarlet letter, and never ever be a part of society again?  Should they kill themselves because they can never, ever make up for their error?  Or should they change, stop doing the terrible thing, sincerely apologize to those they have harmed, and resolve to do better, to become a force for good instead of evil?  And if they can make that change in themselves, shouldn't we encourage that, instead of continuing to vilify them just as hard as if they had never changed at all?

Ah, wonderful debating technique, argumentum ad absurdum with added strawman. I applaud you.

I never at any point stated that I wished any sort of punishment upon Diane at all. In fact, I have constantly and repeatedly stated that everyone else is free to forgive and forget as they wish. My sole contention has been that I personally do not readily forgive after someone has crossed a certain line. I believe that it is my right to give and withhold my personal forgiveness as I see fit, and I will do so regardless of any pressure applied to me. I have learned to my cost of what happens when I get manipulated into forgiving someone against my better judgment and have no desire to repeat the experience. For that matter, I also resist social pressure to not forgive. I am rather contrary that way.

Still, it is entirely possible that I may forgive Diane at some point in the future. I cannot say. But that point has not arrived yet. And also note that I do not say forgive and forget, because I do not really do the latter. I don't bring it up in discussions, of course, that would be crude. But I remember it if the person then later offends again and will be far more reluctant to forgive a second time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CritterKeeper said:
On 8/19/2019 at 7:03 AM, Scotty said:

it probably wouldn't do well for encouraging continued positive behaviour.

This, for me, is the crux of the matter.  What would we want someone who has done something terrible to do?  Should they dress in sackcloth or a scarlet letter, and never ever be a part of society again?  Should they kill themselves because they can never, ever make up for their error?  Or should they change, stop doing the terrible thing, sincerely apologize to those they have harmed, and resolve to do better, to become a force for good instead of evil?  And if they can make that change in themselves, shouldn't we encourage that, instead of continuing to vilify them just as hard as if they had never changed at all?

I think The Old Hack would recommend them to move. That's option you missed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I think The Old Hack would recommend them to move. That's option you missed.

I would not even necessarily suggest that they move very far. Enough out of my immediate vicinity so as to not impede me would be sufficient in most cases. Alternately, I could relocate myself to somewhere where their presence does not impinge on mine; that would work fine for me as well.

If they then insist on following me and continue to do so against my expressly stated wishes that they do not, then I may consider appropriate further measures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Old Hack said:

Ah, wonderful debating technique, argumentum ad absurdum with added strawman. I applaud you.

I never at any point stated that I wished any sort of punishment upon Diane at all. In fact, I have constantly and repeatedly stated that everyone else is free to forgive and forget as they wish. My sole contention has been that I personally do not readily forgive after someone has crossed a certain line. I believe that it is my right to give and withhold my personal forgiveness as I see fit, and I will do so regardless of any pressure applied to me. I have learned to my cost of what happens when I get manipulated into forgiving someone against my better judgment and have no desire to repeat the experience. For that matter, I also resist social pressure to not forgive. I am rather contrary that way.

Still, it is entirely possible that I may forgive Diane at some point in the future. I cannot say. But that point has not arrived yet. And also note that I do not say forgive and forget, because I do not really do the latter. I don't bring it up in discussions, of course, that would be crude. But I remember it if the person then later offends again and will be far more reluctant to forgive a second time.

You feelings are your own. They are based on observation of the facts, they are valid. Your decision to not forgive is your own, also valid. This is what you've been saying, would you agree?

You say CritterKeeper is invoking strawmen, I think the rest of us are seeing "What is the alternative?" You are not disagreeing: "I never at any point stated that I wished any sort of punishment upon Diane at all."

Those are addressing two different things, internalized response to another individual, vs societal accountability for past behavior. There really is no conflict between, "She ought to do better; maybe she's taking some steps that way." and "I still don't trust her." I feel the same way about many people.

Forgetting: "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." It appears that Justin agrees with you.

FWIW, I don't see moving as a generally reasonable option, at least not in the short term.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Darth Fluffy said:

You say CritterKeeper is invoking strawmen, I think the rest of us are seeing "What is the alternative?"

It came across as pressure to "stop being so mean and forgive her already." And it contained a strawman -- implying that I had somehow desired Diane to be punished directly for her actions -- with argumentam ad absurdum, punishments so extreme as to be ridiculous. I reject both. They are beneath contempt.

7 minutes ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Those are addressing two different things, internalized response to another individual, vs societal accountability for past behavior.

I completely agree.

7 minutes ago, Darth Fluffy said:

There really is no conflict between, "She ought to do better; maybe she's taking some steps that way." and "I still don't trust her."

I also agree with this. That is why I wonder why people constantly condemn the simple stance of distrust and attempt to paint those leaning toward it as the true offenders in this case.

9 minutes ago, Darth Fluffy said:

It appears that Justin agrees with you.

And so it turns out that the two stances are so compatible that one can even achieve a synthesis between them. How remarkable. Perhaps being distrustful does not make me a frothing hatemonger after all.

10 minutes ago, Darth Fluffy said:

FWIW, I don't see moving as a generally reasonable option, at least not in the short term.

I do, especially if it is only a matter of a yard or two. Moving to another room is a bit more drastic but nonetheless entirely within reason if I wish to avoid the person. It is myself I am moving, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

Perhaps being distrustful does not make me a frothing hatemonger after all.

 

:)

 

6 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

I do, especially if it is only a matter of a yard or two. Moving to another room is a bit more drastic but nonetheless entirely within reason if I wish to avoid the person. It is myself I am moving, after all.

Ah. I thought the discussion was about selling a dwelling and relocating. Never mind.

 

 

Edited by Darth Fluffy
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

It came across as pressure to "stop being so mean and forgive her already." And it contained a strawman -- implying that I had somehow desired Diane to be punished directly for her actions -- with argumentam ad absurdum, punishments so extreme as to be ridiculous. I reject both. They are beneath contempt.

I'm sorry you felt pressured or targeted, that was not my intent.   I was engaging in a theoretical discussion, using hyperbole to illustrate a point.  Social ostracism has been shown, time and again, to be one of the worst punishments a person can face.  Hence why "shunning" was so feared, and so effective a deterrent.  The person I quoted (who was not you) had brought up the point of what our goal should be regarding those who commit social offenses, and I was agreeing with them.  You had not addressed their point in that matter, so I wasn't seeing myself as replying to you, only to them and the overall discussion.

On 8/19/2019 at 0:03 AM, Scotty said:

I'm talking about not continuing to punish someone who already knows that what they did was wrong and is trying to be better, what's the point of even trying if no one's going to give you a chance

That's the point I was replying to.  Not your post, or I would have quoted you instead of them.

Trying to resist the temptation to quote Magneto....that might be seen as rude....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Old Hack said:

Ah, wonderful debating technique, argumentum ad absurdum with added strawman. I applaud you.

I never at any point stated that I wished any sort of punishment upon Diane at all. In fact, I have constantly and repeatedly stated that everyone else is free to forgive and forget as they wish. My sole contention has been that I personally do not readily forgive after someone has crossed a certain line. I believe that it is my right to give and withhold my personal forgiveness as I see fit, and I will do so regardless of any pressure applied to me. I have learned to my cost of what happens when I get manipulated into forgiving someone against my better judgment and have no desire to repeat the experience. For that matter, I also resist social pressure to not forgive. I am rather contrary that way.

Still, it is entirely possible that I may forgive Diane at some point in the future. I cannot say. But that point has not arrived yet. And also note that I do not say forgive and forget, because I do not really do the latter. I don't bring it up in discussions, of course, that would be crude. But I remember it if the person then later offends again and will be far more reluctant to forgive a second time.

How you had been phrasing how you'd handle people like Diane, made me feel like you'd rather tell the person to "go to hell" despite them genuinely wanting to make up for any wrongs they've committed, which is why I asked what would be the point of changing if no one will let you.  If that wasn't the message you were conveying though, then I  read into it more than I should have and I apologize.

Just now, The Old Hack said:
Just now, Darth Fluffy said:

It appears that Justin agrees with you.

And so it turns out that the two stances are so compatible that one can even achieve a synthesis between them. How remarkable. Perhaps being distrustful does not make me a frothing hatemonger after all.

This probably doesn't apply anymore given what I said above, but I believe that how a person responds to an apology can have an impact on those giving the apology, In Justin's case, he openly accepted Diane's apology and while she was confused about his "selective amnesia", she was overall encouraged by the response and it probably lead to her wanting to suggest a date idea to Justin later, Justin could have driven the point home by reminding her of what she did, but that might have gone about as well as it did with Melissa, who knows, maybe that had an effect on how Justin handled Diane's apology, I know Melissa was bad if not worse case because of how close Justin and Melissa used to be and Melissa's behaviour after Justin was outed, but Melissa imposing her own removal from Justin's life obviously didn't sit well with him.

On the other hand though, if Diane responded to a reminder like "I was trying to apologize, you didn't have to remind me of what I already know!" that could be a red flag that she might not be completely sincere or at least an good indication that a repeat incident is likely, and while I understand that it'd be good to catch that before it can happen, but it kinda feels like setting them up to fail maybe? I dunno

Anyway, this whole discussion's had me thinking about the concept of forgiveness, what's forgivable, what's not, are there degrees of wrongs and where do you draw the line at what you can forgive, is there even a line, should there be a line, there doesn't appear to be a definite answer so this isn't an attack on you, I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Scotty said:

This probably doesn't apply anymore given what I said above, but I believe that how a person responds to an apology can have an impact on those giving the apology,

Certainly. And the harm originally done to the person in question also had an impact on them. I reiterate, I do not owe to anybody that I accept their apology and I reserve the right to withhold my acceptance. Making acceptance of apologies mandatory would in fact be disastrous because this would completely rob the apologies of any meaningful value whatsoever.

Before I accept any apology, I require certain conditions to be fulfilled. One, I must consider the apology genuine. An offhand or half-hearted apology is to me an insult in and of itself. Two, I must consider the apologist to at least in some measure own up to the harm originally done. They do not necessarily have to fully understand the exact ramifications but they must be aware of having done harm and of the necessity to not repeat it. And three, there are certain kinds of harm that I simply cannot and will not forgive. I state this without either pride or shame. This is simply how I am; I make neither excuse nor apology therefor.

7 hours ago, Scotty said:

I know Melissa was bad if not worse case because of how close Justin and Melissa used to be and Melissa's behaviour after Justin was outed, but Melissa imposing her own removal from Justin's life obviously didn't sit well with him.

May I be blunt? I feel Justin is clearly better off. Melissa stalked him, she constantly attempted to gaslight his homosexuality after outing him and she did not even have the grace to give him space to heal. That she had the fucking GALL to make the fact that Justin was still angry to center on her just shows that she is still toxic to him.

She did the right thing in walking away. She did absolutely not do anything right by shittily manipulating the fact that he was still angry and twisting it into something bad on his part before she walked away. As to the crocodile tears she shed on the way, I hope she chokes on them.

7 hours ago, Scotty said:

Anyway, this whole discussion's had me thinking about the concept of forgiveness, what's forgivable, what's not, are there degrees of wrongs and where do you draw the line at what you can forgive, is there even a line, should there be a line, there doesn't appear to be a definite answer so this isn't an attack on you, I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around things.

And that I fully understand and respect. As I trust I have clarified above, I feel each and every person must come up with their own answer. I hope they will serve you well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

May I be blunt? I feel Justin is clearly better off. Melissa stalked him, she constantly attempted to gaslight his homosexuality after outing him and she did not even have the grace to give him space to heal. That she had the fucking GALL to make the fact that Justin was still angry to center on her just shows that she is still toxic to him.

She did the right thing in walking away. She did absolutely not do anything right by shittily manipulating the fact that he was still angry and twisting it into something bad on his part before she walked away. As to the crocodile tears she shed on the way, I hope she chokes on them.

I don't believe she had any intent on twisting what Justin said against him or make him feel bad about it, considering on the Friday, she didn't know what to say after Justin said they should talk, by Monday she didn't want to talk, I believe she spent the weekend thinking about what happened and coming to the conclusion that she didn't deserve any forgiveness, and hated the idea that it took saving Elliot to get Justin to want to talk to her, Justin's "After you outed me" seemed like proof of what she thought.

As for the tears, I don't see any maliciousness in them, I'd argue that she caught herself getting emotional and cut herself off before she did something else she might regret, it would explain why she suddenly didn't want to talk. This isn't defending Melissa's past actions though and certainly not saying that you should forgive those actions, I just feel that in this particular instance, Justin might have seen Melissa being genuine for the first time in the past 2 years and that could be why he felt bad about it.

I honestly was ready to have my previous post be my last on the subject, but I strongly felt that your description of that scene was off, I don't know if that's because this conversation overall has gotten emotions high. Everything else you said though, you're right, everyone is different so it's probably best to file this under agree to disagree... unless there's a better category for it that I'm unable to think of at the moment.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now