I believe it’s common sense that ignoring others is pretty rude, especially if you talk to them or ask them something, whether it is in person or over the internet. Do they just not know? Like forgetting that you asked them a question? Or do they not want to talk to you for whatever reason? And if that is the case why don’t they just say that? Do they actually think that not responding is the better choice? Do they not realize what an impact this simple choice has on others? Or do they know and just like the fact that they are in a superior position, and want to demonstrate their superiority? Or are they simply tired of you and have no intention of ever talking to you again?
share your suicide story
Report Post
Please log in to report posts
23 comments
“Do they actually think that not responding is the better choice?”
This is almost always the case… which then brings their choice-making-abilities into question…
But it’s probably also partially due to all of this:
“Do they not realize what an impact this simple choice has on others? Or do they know and just like the fact that they are in a superior position, and want to demonstrate their superiority? Or are they simply tired of you and have no intention of ever talking to you again?”
Yes and no, yes, yes.
Some people are just like that. Sucks to realize you’ve been interacting with someone you didn’t realize what was one of those.
also:
If knowledge, as power, is said to corrupt… then does ignorance cleanse and/or purify?
Never underestimate the power of ignorance?
What is if they don’t realize the impact of their choice? That wouldn’t make them a bad person, would it?
From my experience, many people don’t intend to actually impinge upon your feelings, but rather they lack the mental and emotional energy to invest into a conversation. This is especially typical with people who suffer from depression etc. They may also not feel comfortable speaking with you and aren’t able to express this out of etiquette. I wouldn’t take it personally if I were you, be patient with people
How do I have to proceed then? Should I ever start a conversation again? Or just wait until I am approached? What if I wait and our contact will stop entirely?
I’ve found that it’s oftentimes better to ignore someone I’m likely going to argue with than engage them in debate. Certain people hold strong convictions, they’re stubborn, unyielding, and seem to need to be right. If my opinion differs from theirs, or if they’re unable to persuade me (because I’m just as stubborn as them), I don’t bother responding to a question or statement of theirs that I know will lead to a lengthy debate that just goes round and round, back and forth, on and on, etc.
Sometimes it’s just easier to ignore someone. Walk away and let it go.
If someone is legitimately ignorant of the detrimental impact of their lack of response where it is expected, or at least desired… that’s one thing; when they then take it to the next level and prevent themselves from becoming aware of this (which ultimately means they ARE aware…), as if to justify it by recursive or cyclical reasoning… then, due to knowingly avoiding learning about the negative impact they are causing, would, i suppose, technically, make them “a bad person.” But there are worse things a person can be, than deliberately disregard…ant. Disregardant? Disregardful? lol… Anyway…
Many people will claim that any impinged feelings are unintended… but that’s like the argument that a drunk driver didn’t “intend” to cause a horrific collision, despite making all the necessary prerequisite choices to cause the conditions to manifest into those most likely to produce an “accident.” This is why drunk drivers are severely punished: they KNOW they are making choices that exponentially increase the risk they take and pose, not only to themselves, but to anyone they happen to encounter on the roadways. It’s not okay with drunk driving, so it shouldn’t be okay in mundane interpersonal exchanges… yet, in the latter, it’s not just accepted, but actually encouraged, endorsed, advocated… “just don’t talk to him/her anymore; block him/her; zero contact…” despite the fact that it is known and obvious that “shunning” can often be psychologically devastating to a person.
Which brings me around to what i suppose is the crux of the issue: The Physical is all that really matters.
Should any of us ever feel any attachment to anyone, without “The Physical” being… “correct?” or… acceptable, or whatever?
@CDL:
Initiate conversation when you feel the need… but always try to do so without “expectation” of approval, or even response. You may “hope” they respond favorably… but as you’ve evidently experienced first hand: some people will just “disappear” on you, leaving you wondering… or just up and drop you like nothing, out of the blue, for whatever reason motivates them to do so (or whether perhaps lack of reason to continue, becomes motivation for cessation and disregard, regardless of the extended detriment they most likely know it may cause you).
I agree with “be patient,” but… “all things in moderation.” If someone wants to converse with you, and is not physically prevented from doing so, you will hear from them, usually within a “reasonable” amount of time. If you don’t hear from them, it’s probably not because they are simply “unable.” But i suppose there can be exceptions. Give the benefit of the doubt, as far as it can reasonably be given. Beyond that, assume they’re not a good fit (or that they think you’re not a good fit, whichever).
“What … if they don’t realize the impact of their choice?”
1. they realize it will affect you
2. they might miscalculate the severity of the impact
3. would you want their change of mind/heart to be based on whether your feelings are hurt? Would you want to someone to decide to continue conversing with you, even though they didn’t really want to, just because if they don’t, you’ll be upset? Is “just to avoid upsetting you” a good enough reason for the other person, and acceptable for both of you?
I personally don’t enjoy knowing that someone is only choosing to interact with me out of pity, or out of fear of my reaction to a perceived slight.
I want someone who WANTS to talk to me, to physically share time and experiences with me… someone i don’t have to coerce or convince to continue interacting with me… someone who interacts with me because They Want To.
I haven’t found that, and i seriously doubt i will; i don’t think it exists. I thought i had that once, but it was merely an illusion constructed and employed to manipulate me, and was easily identified as such, once i took a long, honest look at the available information, due to obvious “signs.”
Nobody is obligated to communicate with anybody who asks a question or attempts to initiate a conversation.
If Suzy says “hello” to Billy, Billy doesn’t have to return the greeting. If Suzy decides to feel hurt because Billy didn’t respond, that’s Suzy’s choice. Billy didn’t “make” Suzy become offended/insulted/hurt. Suzy can react in a myriad of different ways, she doesn’t have to get emotional, sensitive, and behave as if she’s dependent on Billy’s validation.
Everyone’s life would run smoother if Billy just said “hello”, but for whatever reason he chose not too. Suzy needs to get over it and understand that if someone chooses to ignore her, they can. The world doesn’t revolve around Suzy’s feelings.
1. there was no implication of obligation
2. Suzy isn’t “deciding to feel hurt,” she is involuntarily impacted
3. Billy’s choice is not Suzy’s; ergo, any resulting impact is that of Billy’s choosing, not Suzy’s
4. Billy can’t control how or why Suzy feels… he can only decide whether to consider the potential impacts of his actions, upon her (even if his “actions” are merely “lack of action”)
5. Suzy doesn’t simply “choose” her emotional responses; she is a human being, who has ideas and feels ways about stuff
6. “Everyone’s life would run smoother if Billy just said ‘hello’…” Exactly; Billy CHOSE to forgo consideration of the well-being of another, and a detriment was the result of his inconsideration… no matter how innocuous or “entitled” it may seem he is, to his chosen disregard… he still chose disregard, and that hurts people’s feelings involuntarily, not because they “choose to be hurt by it.”
7. Suzy does, however, need to get over it… simply because Billy is inconsiderate of her well-being, and is hence, not worth her time (or emotional involvement, for that matter).
8. “The world” doesn’t have to “revolve around” Suzy’s feelings, in order for SUZY’s world to be severely impacted by the chosen inconsideration from another person, for whom Suzy had developed whatever emotional attachment.
9. Most humans lack the emotional control (or rather, possess emotional potency which impedes control), to simply decide what to feel; people who “decide what to feel,” typically lack empathy, and are known as either sociopaths, or psychopaths.
10. Suzy should not be blamed for not being a socio/psychopath
11. Billy should not be praised for lacking empathy
12. 10 and 11 are often exactly what happens.
that said… i think “lack of hello” is better than “lack of goodbye.”
Maybe “Billy” knows that “Suzy” will only hurt more, in the long run, if he allows her to think he cares… and so the “snub” up front, is better than allowing her to believe he cares, and subsequently develop further emotional attachment, which will hurt even more, later, when he’s had enough of pretending to care about “Suzy.” He’s not “into” Suzy… but while he realizes she thinks he’s inconsiderate for not saying hello, she doesn’t realize he’s thinking of the future, and saving her from a much worse scenario.
!) There IS an implication of obligation because apparently Suzy is an automaton that reacts involuntarily to stimuli generated by other peoples choices.
2) Suzy decides how she can react in any given situation. She can choose to feel hurt or she can choose to brush it off. Billy is not a puppet master.
3) See #2. Any resulting impact of Billy’s decision not to respond is Suzy’s choice. (Unless Suzy has no will of her own and can only react in a knee jerk predictable manner to external stimuli).
4) Yes. Billy could’ve said hello, but he chose not too. How Suzy chooses to react is not his problem. That’s akin to saying “don’t kill yourself because you’ll make people sad”. If that’s true, then nobody should ever kill themselves because they’ve “decided not to consider the potential impacts of their actions”.
5) See #2
6) See #4
7) OK
8)See #2
9-12) It’s supposed to get up into the mid 50’s here today. I’m looking forward to taking out the bike, although I’ll have to dress appropriately to keep warm. How the hell are you, clevername?
feelings and reactions aren’t the same. You can feel hurt, but not react in a hurtful/harmful way. There is a choice there… but humans “automatically” sense and interpret the stimuli to which they are exposed.
It’s been deceptively chilly here, and raining lots. I used to like the rain a lot more, before it became involuntarily emotionally entangled with various triggers. I’ve improved slightly in this regard.
My life sucks, and i don’t want it. I want a better one, but i can’t make it. Misery and death are the perpetual forecast, and i’m tired of checking the weather. Whether the weather is or isn’t, the conditions may change, but never produce the desired result.
And, i was thinking about something the other day… the grass is “greener” when there is more sunlight hitting it, or more not-green present to contrast it. When “everything” is green… it’s all a bit less “green.” Comparison and contrast are interesting. What is “green,” is actually reflecting that color of light… which means that technically, green is the one color it ISN’T… because it’s the one wavelength NOT absorbed, but instead, reflected. All color is, therefore, actually sort of the opposite of how we perceive it. Things that are actually green, absorb green, instead of reflecting it… which means we see whatever remains of the spectrum it reflects, minus the green. Or something.
wise peoples ignore; it is better to ignore rather than say something rude. But , i , my self like reacting rather than talking to much. Talking is for newbie sluts. Infact slut is a better word than their condition. Cause, Atleast sluts are hot:). The point i am tryin to make here is that, if they ignore you then you have to learn ways to ignore them too. Life is not *them*; life is *you*. Unfortunately, most people doesn’t realise that, and it will be too late when they do. Nobody should be subjected to slavery; neither physically nor psycologically.
lol, what a profound statement… “wise people are ignorant”
I like how you worked the perspective of color in there. What we’re seeing is actually the absence of that hue within the spectrum. Kinda makes you wonder how “faulty” our other perceptions are too in terms of interpreting data.
Remember the acronym WYSIWYG?
Aren’t reactions often driven by feelings? Could it be argued that we react the way we do because our feelings serve as a catalyst?
I should probably add the Dr. Spock from Star Trek was a role model for me growing up. He relied on logic rather than feelings to interpret data. Environmental stimuli, social interactions, exploring new planets, etc. He had emotions, and I’d say he used both the left and right hemisphere’s of his brain, but he focused on the left side. “Captain Kirk: That is highly illogical”.
“When everything is green, it seems a little less green”. <—– That's a money problem I'd love to have. I wonder if Hugh Hefner would be willing to adopt a fully grown male?
I doubt it.
“Hey”
“Hello”
“Hi”
“Yo”
WHY WON’T YOU SAY HI BACK TO ME!?!?
wise people ignore.
@The Distress; Not in the mood, but I’ll send positive vibes your way. 🙂
What about a smile and slight head nod, would that work?
Loosen up. Fake smiles and head nods are meaningless – kind of like continuing to foster conversations that you don’t want to have (yes I had to relate the OP in somewhere.) Maybe it is a matter of perspective: one person seems to put much more value in the conversation than the other person, who in all honesty may think so little of it that she does indeed forget to even respond to you, example being in you’re having a conversation over the internet/text messaging. If it’s a matter of differing value in your conversation, maybe the issue is in how either of you see the relationship between you. If the person just doesn’t want to participate…well you cannot force he or she to do so. And if you do figure out how to make people involuntarily answer you, you may have cracked the code to free will – and you should share your secret with me when you do.
the power to impose consequences is the key to Making people do as you wish. Confidence is the key to convincing them, in the absence of the power to impose consequences.
Fear and deception rule the world.
I wish i could find someone unafraid to honestly desire me. I have found neither evidence nor indication of the existence of any such person. If i ever do find any indication that such a person may exist, i will be eager to test it, but remain highly skeptical, because it doesn’t seem like someone like that should exist, and so any such indication would seem out of place and anomalous. Things that don’t “fit,” don’t “make sense,” don’t “add up,” usually don’t hold up under scrutiny; it wouldn’t make sense for any such person to exist… so they likely don’t… so any indication to the contrary, would be highly suspect. I’m inclined to believe any such indication would actually be the result of a ruse, rather than anything genuine.
No one wants someone who has nothing to offer… but can genuine be found in the presence of benefit-bias? I don’t think it’s even possible for anyone to “like me…” (and why should they?)… because i have nothing… but if i have “something,” then i think it’s only possible for someone to like that they could benefit from what i have, which would entice them to attempt to cause me to believe there is a genuine personal attraction, which is really only an illusion created to gain access to my resources.
In the absence of resources, i have found no one who pretends to “like me.” That must mean it really is all about what i thought it was all about. I don’t need to spell it out for anyone. It’s the simplest answer, and according to Occam’s Razor, i should be correct. I have no one, because i lack what is desired by those i’ve encountered. Ergo: i am undesirable. So why should anyone say “hello back?” And why should i say hello first?
@ clevername; If I was gay I would probably go after you. I’m not though, sorry.
I think you have a lot to offer. You might not have a plethora of financial resources available, but I’m sure you would make great company. You’re an engaging conversationalist, I’m sure there has to be at least one woman on this planet who would enjoy spending quality time in your presence.
I’m going to go eat now. Peace out y’all.
I swear there’s a post for e very topic on this site.. I need to remember this one.