How do you choose your friends? What qualities or attributes do you look for or expect in those individuals with whom you socialise or make time for in your lives ?
Why do I ask, you may be wondering, so I'll tell you. I've been reading a few blogs by professional comicbook contributors past and present, and one of the things that strikes me is that quite a few of them have one particular thing in common. Which is? Arrogance! It may be an arrogance concealed by a cloak of humility or politeness, but it still lurks beneath the folds of that cloak just the same. Of course, sometimes it isn't cloaked at all, and the person concerned may come across as an utterly odious and obnoxious character - and often is.
That arrogance rears its ugly head when someone - even a long-term friend or acquaintance - happens to voice an opinion different to that of the blogger. I recently read one blogger say that he wasn't sure he considered someone a friend anymore, because he'd received an email from him concerning some controversial matter that didn't agree with his own view of the situation. He might not have articulated his altered attitude in precisely that way, but that was the essence of his reasoning, sure enough.
Another blogger, a one-time minor player (though status is relative, I suppose) in the lower echelons of comicbook history, has no hesitation in calling anyone a bigot who doesn't see things his way on (but not retricted to) the topic of homosexuality. If you have reservations about same sex marriage or gay adoption, based on religious, cultural or historical traditions - even if you believe in tolerating dissenting opinions to your own and aren't calling for anyone to be spat on, abused, jailed, beaten or strung up - then, according to this belligerent individual - you're an intolerant bigot who he doubtless wouldn't cross the road to pee on if you were on fire. (Perhaps it's simply a facade, but it's certainly a convincing one.)
This led me to ponder my own views on friendship. Do I associate only with those whose opinions on various topics are in accord with my own? Do I resent dissent and shun anyone who might hold completely opposite philosophies to the ones I embrace? Well, no, actually. I have friends who live totally different lifestyles to my own and align themselves with beliefs and practices that I don't happen to share, but as long as they aren't obnoxious in expressing why they believe (or do) as they do then there isn't a problem. This doesn't mean that we never discuss controversial subjects, but we always do so with a respect for the other's point of view. (Or, at the very least, the other's right to hold - and express - that point of view.)
So why do some comicbook contributors behave as they do, with such an arrogant, pompous and even superior attitude towards those they seemingly look down their noses at? (Some, of course, don't necessarily express their views in an openly disdainful or hostile manner, but it's pretty obvious that it lies at the heart of their thinking, whether they're aware of it or not. I think I understand*, so let me digress for a moment in order to explain.
When I was a freelance contributor to 2000 A.D., believe it or not, I was frequently asked for my autograph. Not because I was deserving of such a compliment in my own right, but because of my (admittedly) minor association with Britain's cult comic and its iconic characters. I was bathing in reflected glory, in other words, not my own. Had I been the office tea boy, the fans would probably still have sought my signature on scraps of paper, so ardent were they in their desire to 'connect' with the object of their adoration. (The comic, not me.) Fortunately, I was smart enough to realise it and never let the attention go to my head.
However, some individuals who experience repeated instances of people lapping up every uttered syllable as if it's the wisdom of the ancients, and whose fans eagerly seek to ingratiate themselves with them because of their connection to a particular comicbook character or company, eventually start to believe that they're important and that their opinion (on any subject whatsoever) counts for something. It's not long before they come to regard such adulation as their due and, because of the understandable reluctance of some fans to fall out of favour with their idols, they soon get used to never being challenged on their various 'divine pronouncements'.
So, when the day comes (as it inevitably must) that someone dares disagree with them, their noses are put seriously out of joint. It's the old "Don't you know whom I am?" scenario, writ large. (And I know just what you're thinking - "So why are you such a pompous buffoon, you Scottish git?" Well, do what you're good at, I always say.)
Seriously though, many of the people these contributors cast off wouldn't disown them for holding an opposing point of view, so just who then are the real intolerant ones, the bigots, as these self-styled 'models of tolerance, fairness and goodwill' are quick to call anyone who fails to see eye-to-eye with them on their 'pet' issues?
That's the problem with only choosing your friends and acquaintances from those who share your likes, dislikes, tastes or opinions. You're not choosing them for themselves, but rather for the reflection of yourself that you see in them. That makes you your own favourite person - which may be hardly surprising, but doesn't necessarily make you a particularly good judge of character.
Just saying.
******
(*Of course, the people to whom I refer may always have been as they are, but there seems to be a pattern behind their attitudes which I thought would be interesting to explore. Feel free to disagree - I won't fall out with you or ban you from the blog - unlike some.)
11 comments:
My views about homosexuals are based upon my own personal experience. I grew up in rural Iowa, where the subject was rarely mentioned. I joined the U.S. Army in '87, went to Germany in the falling days of the Cold War. I am proud of my service. In those years I served with several fine men and women, good soldiers all, who happened to be gay. In was an open secret, back then, I suppose.
I am not gay myself, but I support the right for homosexuals to legally marry. To me It's a matter of civil rights. To me the idea that good people should work and struggle twice as hard and expect half as less...I cannot and will not abide it.
Maybe I only feel that way in honor of a soldier I once knew. But he deserved a goddamn lot better than the way he got treated. I'd like to think that if everybody took time to get to know that guy, they might at least pause for thought.
That's a good question Kid , of course picking friends gets harder as you get older , when you were ten years old you met friends at school or in the neighbourhood, and of course you would also simply just go up to some kid that had the same t-shirt , toys etc as you, or was just there playing where you were and you simply asked them to be your friend after you played a game etc and/or could spark up a friendship based on an interest in Matchbox cars or a love on Bazooka Joe gum etc, but do that in a pub as an adult and you could well end up in A&E in the Glasgow Infirmary.
I think as you get older and have the pressures of life (mortgage, bills, kids etc) and some people pick friends based on alliances ie their ability to help them achieve the things they want (we all know these folk) as opposed to a "trade relationship" ie what each person brings to the friendship, shared interests or just out of panic if no one else is there to pal about with (I have done that in the past and been "friends" with some people who that I had no shared interest in at all) . I am one of those people who did not keep in contact with his childhood/school friends so most of my current friends were made in my mid - late 30s (I don't think I've made a real friend since then) and were down to a combination of circumstance and shared interest - in my 20s - mid 30s I made friends based on interests of football (playing it and watching it) music and pubbing and clubbing - after that age my friends were based on circumstance, in this case being single (most I met as they were recently divorced, separated etc like myself ( well I was out of a long term relationship) so the shared interest of being single again (what to do) , the horror of breaking up and starting again and lets face it bitchin' of our exes brought us together and I stll am friends with a few of these guys (the others got married again so we should pal up again in another 5 years lol) .
As to Comic book fans I am the only comic fan I personally know (although strangely a friends knows another one but we have never met) now whilst I think some "geek" types (of which I am one..... to an extent) come over as some of the most unaffected and unpretentious people on the web, some are however so completely incapable of blending into 'social norms" and are so self absorbed in their own particular world and self importance where they feel they are the "king" with their "knowledge" on what is a subject of little importance or interest to most that they seem oblivious or simply unable to interact with other people in a way that they could be tolerated, I mean who drew "Little Lotta" number 27 is of no interest to many people. The anonymity of the web to spout their knowledge of course gives them the added security to do this. McScotty
Er, well, the point of my post, Anon, was not really to discuss the topic of gays, merely to point out that, when it comes to friendship, some people seem to be looking for a clone of themselves.
In doing so, I simply ventured that those who call others bigots for not sharing their views on what has never traditionally been regarded as an inherent right for same sex couples are hardly showing the tolerance they accuse others of not having. Pot calling kettle, in other words.
In regard to your comments, I'll bet you also served alongside many decent 'straight' men who did not show hostility towards their gay comrades and treated them perfectly civilly (and were even friendly towards them), but who would be dubious about the concept of same sex marriage nowadays.
Does that make them intolerant, or bigoted? Would you refuse to have anything to do with them because thay don't share your views on the matter?
As someone once pointed out on another blog, the definition of 'bigot' for some people seems to be anyone who holds a different opinion to them. If someone had reservations about single people being allowed to adopt, would that make them a bigot? I don't think so. Therefore, for someone to have reservations about gay adoption or same sex marriage doesn't automatically make them bigoted either.
However, thank you for taking the time to respond with your interesting thoughts.
******
Having shared interests in something is always a factor, I suppose, in what makes people befriend one another, although there is doubtless always going to be something or other on which people disagree. Some folks seem to expect total agreement in everything 'though, going by what I've read on certain blogs.
And, as you say, sometimes the people we choose as friends is simply a matter of expediency in order to have some kind of social life.
I remember one friend telling me of his hopes for living in Russia one day. "Wouldn't you miss your friends?" I asked "I'll make new friends!" he replied, which seemed a little cavalier to me, as if friends were somehow easily interchangeable.
Now, perhaps I'm biased, McScotty, but it seems to me that I get some of the best amd most considered responses on the internet, so everyone give yourselves a pat on the back.
My apologies, Kid. Maybe I missed the point of your article. I definitely have a tendency to go half-cocked, especially when I have a few beers in me.
Sometimes in America, the debate about certain issues gets so emotional that both sides forget courtesy and consideration.
I take your point. I have a very good friend who disagrees with me on the issue in question, but I don't consider him a bigot. I would like to thank you for having a website that invites some discussion. M.P.
Most / all my friends are made up of those that were "physically" close to me, ie I met at work, via work or existing friends etc and not by (as an adult at any rate) me striking up a conversation with a total stranger in the street, pub , event etc although I do have some "bar and coffee shop buddies" I sometimes met and chat to on a Saturday if in Glasgow (although I barely know their names ) - saying that some people I considered as good friends have been to "missing" during a recent dreadful personal (understatement) time for me when my mum suddenly and sadly passed away last month whereas some folk I considered as mere acquaintances have amazed me with their kindness and friendship, McScotty
(Originally posted on 21 July 2013 13:36)
Words are defined by the means by which we encounter them. I'm just gonna lapse into quote for a second:
"The Grand Master was a man advanced in age, as was testified by his long grey beard, and the shaggy grey eyebrows overhanging eyes, of which, however, years had been unable to quench the fire. A formidable warrior, his thin and severe features retained the soldier’s fierceness of expression; an ascetic -bigot-, they were no less marked by the emaciation of abstinence, and the spiritual pride of the self-satisfied devotee."
That's Sir Walter Scott's introduction to Lucas Beaumanoir, Grand Master of the Knights Templar, truly one of the most fear inspiring characters in literature. What makes him so frighting? it's because he's a monster, capable of actions of breathless callousness, a monster not borne of bestial rage but from the absolute assurance of his own virtue.
I don't care how many dictionaries you throw at me, that's a bigot as far as I'm concerned, so when I regard many of those who bandy the word so cheaply, I'm often prompted to reflect, somewhat sardonically and with a certain irony, on the attributes they share with Lucas Beaumanoir.
(Originally posted on 21 July 2013 13:36)
No apologies necessary, M.P. I just didn't want you thinking that the point of my post was other than what it was. Glad you enjoy the blog, and feel free to participate any time.
******
McScotty, not trying to make excuses for anyone of course, but sometimes feeling that anything one might say in the case of bereavement is probably going to be totally inadequate makes those close to us keep a low profile in such circumsatnces, whereas 'casual aquaintances' don't seem to find it so difficult. Strange but true.
******
"The absolute assurance of his own virtue" nails it perfectly, DSE. And that's usually the defining trait in those who often describe others as bigots who don't agree with them on certain issues. Has this post garnered some excellent answers or what?
(Originally posted on 21 July 2013 14:08)
A good point well delivered Kid and I have taken that as my view on it although it did/does still smart a bit, but then most things still are still very "raw" for me at present. McS
(Originally posted on 21 July 2013 14:23)
In some cases, strong emotions on political or social issues may be understandable. If you are a Christian (or Muslim, for that matter) fundamentalist, then you have been taught that certain things are immoral (including homosexuality, or any sex outside of marriage). If you are liberal or libertarian, you may believe in the individual's right to freedom of choice, including alternative lifestyles. So either way, the opponents are going against your basic core beliefs. What is irksome is how some people commenting on blogs get worked up over asinine trivia, e.g. whether Batman is cooler than Spider-Man. I was once called a "troll" for mentioning that comic book sales today are a fraction of what they were in the 1960's. Maybe it's just that a lot of comic book fans are adolescents, and naturally immature and emotional. Maybe they will outgrow it when they gain some experience in the Real World. Then again, a lot of "creators" in the comics industry (and in the movie/TV business) still come across as petulant juveniles. Maybe because many of them are relatively young, and are constantly surrounded by fans at conventions telling them that they are geniuses. Maybe they need a flunky whose job is similar to the slave who would ride in the chariot with the Roman centurion and whisper, "Remember you are only mortal." -TC
(Originally posted on 21 July 2013 19:09)
Kid, your blog today was very poignant. To be honest I did not read all of it... I could see where it was going.
Anyway, today a Youtuber that I follow announced he was closing down all his social media. Why? A very big reason was the death threats he was receiving, particularly as it was now aimed at his family. This guy is not in the comic book industry, but is part of the fitness community. He has been a major online presence for years and of course has his trolls and haters. All he basically does is offer advice on fitness and diet. He has never charged for anything, he sells no merchandise. He has almost 400,000 subscribers to his youtube channel alone. So he did make a sizeable income from google and its advertising and he will lose this. So, because of these detractors he is shutting down online. Even more, he is physically relocating his family, so these threats are of a serious nature. This guy is one of the most affable guys on the internet and he neither says nor does anything controversial. Yet, he has attracted some very malicious attacks, simply for being online. I follow a number of these health and fitness blogs and youtube channels and unfortunately this is not the first time that death threats have been made to individuals. So such viciousness is not really connected with people disagreeing with the so-called big topics in society today.
(Jake)
(Originally posted on 21 July 2013 21:12)
TC, I must confess that the automatic use of the word 'troll' by some people to describe anyone who expresses a contrary point of view online has always struck me as infantile. It's one of those handy-dandy, one size fits all words that some inadequate people resort to far too quickly to dismiss those with whom they disagree.
******
I see what you're saying, Jake, but what I was referring to wasn't so much people threatening others for having a different point of view, it was more to do with certain folks refusing to have anything to do with anyone who holds the opposite view to their own. Still just as bad (at least) 'though.
(Originally posted on 21 July 2013 22:18)
Post a Comment