Rant of a Reader

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by latepaul

Yeah I work in an open plan office. I do have my own desk but it's an open "pod" rather than a cubicle. I raised the issue of noise a few years ago (just tentatively pointed out that maybe folks didn't realise how much their voices can carry) and I was told that we didn't want to kill the "atmosphere" of a happy office and maybe I should wear headphones if I want to focus on something.

And yet the manager who told me this, over from HQ visiting for a few days, took up one of the few meeting rooms as his office while he was here.

Fairly standard in Corporate America these days. I have been known to tell people to use their headset when they are using a speaker phone, or to show a little courtesy when they are carrying on a loud conversation when I'm trying to work. I have a couple of very good noise canceling headphones so it's really only the extreme cases.

I think that it's been pretty conclusively shown that open offices kill productivity, but too many companies have invested too much face and money in it to give up on it. Plus, as you say, the decision makers just take over meeting rooms as their private offices, so they don't feel the pain.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

But now that you mention it ... I'm pretty sure that society (as well as the law) actually does grant everyone pretty clear license to say non-threatening things to other people in public--regardless of what said people might be doing at the time (in the absence of any restraining orders of course). *shrug*

Obviously you have a perfect legal right to say non-harrassing things to other people in public, even when they have signalled, non-verbally, their wish to have you not do this.

It is, however, rude and intrusive, and some people may be actively harmed by it (a number of my autistic friends have expressed this). That's the point of this conversation. And once the person has further signalled their lack of interest, your continued attention is outright boorish and may cross the line into harassment, particularly if it's a situation where it is difficult for them to leave.

There is certainly no law or rule of etiquette that entitles you to anyone else's attention or response.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by meeera

Obviously you have a perfect legal right to say non-harrassing things to other people in public, even when they have signalled, non-verbally, their wish to have you not do this.

It is, however, rude and intrusive, and some people may be actively harmed by it (a number of my autistic friends have expressed this). That's the point of this conversation. And once the person has further signalled their lack of interest, your continued attention is outright boorish and may cross the line into harassment, particularly if it's a situation where it is difficult for them to leave.

There is certainly no law or rule of etiquette that entitles you to anyone else's attention or response.

I know this may be hard for some people to grasp, but the fact that I'm arguing against the notion that people are entitled to privacy in public does not mean that I'm someone who boorishly persists in pursuing clearly unwanted attention. It doesn't even mean I'm someone who will instigate conversation with strangers in public on a regular basis. It also doesn't mean that there aren't times I myself want to be left alone in public. Look, I'm not blind to the fact that my mere presence in close proximity to someone may cause them distress. Mainly because I'm not an insensitive idiot. It just means that I don't believe people are "entitled" to any public privacy. And it means that I choose to not automatically see people who are quick to strike up random conversations with strangers in public (even if they're--heaven forbid!--reading a book (gasp)) as churlish and/or dangerous morons.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I know this may be hard for some people to grasp, but the fact that I'm arguing against the notion that people are entitled to privacy in public does not mean that I'm someone who boorishly persists in pursuing clearly unwanted attention. It doesn't even mean I'm someone who will instigate conversation with strangers in public on a regular basis. It also doesn't mean that there aren't times I myself want to be left alone in public. Look, I'm not blind to the fact that my mere presence in close proximity to someone may cause them distress. Mainly because I'm not an insensitive idiot. It just means that I don't believe people are "entitled" to any public privacy. And it means that I choose to not automatically see people who are quick to strike up random conversations with strangers in public (even if they're--heaven forbid!--reading a book (gasp)) as churlish and/or dangerous morons.

Again...people asking a question while I'm reading is fine. I answer, and go back to reading. It's when they ignore the fact that I went back to reading and just keep talking to me that it starts to get annoying and stressful.

I know that I don't have any inherent right to not be stressed out, and I know that there is no law against a person being an ass and continuing to talk to someone who is trying to do something else, but it absolutely does mean that the ass is being an ass.

Shari

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by shalym

and I know that there is no law against a person being an ass and continuing to talk to someone who is trying to do something else, but it absolutely does mean that the ass is being an ass.

*sigh*

Only if one agrees with your notion that that behavior automatically makes someone an ass. I choose to believe (until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt otherwise) that that sort of behavior merely makes someone "not me." I refuse to accept the notion that anyone who doesn't hold the same things dear that I hold dear; that anyone who doesn't have the exact same boundaries as I have; that anyone who isn't as in tune with social "clues" as I may believe myself to be; that anyone who talks out of nervousness, or habit, or for purposes of self-therapy is automatically an ass. I'm perfectly willing to allow people to be "not me" without hating them, or fearing them, or letting myself be continually annoyed by them.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

*sigh*

Only if one agrees with your notion that that behavior automatically makes someone an ass. I choose to believe (until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt otherwise) that that sort of behavior merely makes someone "not me." I refuse to accept the notion that anyone who doesn't hold the same things dear that I hold dear; that anyone who doesn't have the exact same boundaries as I have; that anyone who isn't as in tune with social "clues" as I may believe myself to be; that anyone who talks out of nervousness, or habit, or for purposes of self-therapy is automatically an ass. I'm perfectly willing to allow people to be "not me" without hating them, or fearing them, or letting myself be continually annoyed by them.

So if someone is nervous and soothes themselves by nervously talking, we should excuse them? What about the fact that I get stressed out by strangers trying to make small talk? Wait...that's different, right? I shouldn't be excused for wanting to be left alone because...why?

If I should have to deal with strangers making small talk, why shouldn't they have to deal with me wanting to be left alone? Yes...I'm in a public place, but unfortunately I can't afford to take a private plane, or to buy up all of the seats around me.

Shari

[shalym]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

*sigh*

Only if one agrees with your notion that that behavior automatically makes someone an ass. I choose to believe (until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt otherwise) that that sort of behavior merely makes someone "not me." I refuse to accept the notion that anyone who doesn't hold the same things dear that I hold dear; that anyone who doesn't have the exact same boundaries as I have; that anyone who isn't as in tune with social "clues" as I may believe myself to be; that anyone who talks out of nervousness, or habit, or for purposes of self-therapy is automatically an ass. I'm perfectly willing to allow people to be "not me" without hating them, or fearing them, or letting myself be continually annoyed by them.

I also want to say that, while it's wonderful that *you* aren't afraid of strangers making small talk doesn't mean that it's true for everyone. I would love to be able to be a social butterfly and have long conversations with strangers without feeling like my head is going to explode because of the stress. Unfortunately, this isn't my reality.

I don't hate anyone. I understand that most people aren't like me, and don't understand that I *prefer* to be left alone to read. I just wish people would at least try to understand that not everyone is not like them.

Shari

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by shalym

I just wish people would at least try to understand that not everyone is not like them.

Fairly certain that's been the gist of every statement of mine that people have challenged in this thread (except for the double-negative). Just coming from the other side of the fence is all.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Fairly certain that's been the gist of every statement of mine that people have challenged in this thread (except for the double-negative). Just coming from the other side of the fence is all.

Ah...but see, you (and others) keep justifying it by saying that some people are just nervous talkers, or that they are lonely, so we should just let them be who they are.

You are ignoring the fact that for some people, having a stranger trying to make small talk is extremely stressful...to the point that I sometimes choose not to go anywhere because of it. (and thus am trapped in my home, and then become one of the lonely people)

Why do I have to be tolerant of *their* issues, but they don't have to tolerant of mine?

Shari

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by shalym

Ah...but see, you (and others) keep justifying it by saying that some people are just nervous talkers, or that they are lonely, so we should just let them be who they are.

I am not trying to justify anything.

Originally Posted by shalym

You are ignoring the fact that for some people, having a stranger trying to make small talk is extremely stressful...to the point that I sometimes choose not to go anywhere because of it. (and thus am trapped in my home, and then become one of the lonely people)

I'm ignoring no such thing. If there were boorish small-talkers here who were staunchly defending their right to totally ignore your signals to be left alone, I would make the same suggestion of practicing more tolerance to them as well. But they're not here.

Originally Posted by shalym

Why do I have to be tolerant of *their* issues, but they don't have to tolerant of mine?

Because tolerance of the differences in others is not about reciprocity. It's not about paying a fee to get goods in return. Never has been.

[Gardenman]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

If my head is down and I'm looking at my phone, tablet, reader and my headphones are on, the message is quite clear. Leave me the F**** ALONE!

If you are an extrovert go find yourself another one to blabber on to, but leave the rest of us alone. People are entitled to their privacy even when out in public.

Most people now have their noses buried in their phones, tablets, books and readers it shouldn't need to have you get a baseball bat upside your head to clue you into that these people have other ways to entertain themselves without listening to you go on and on or wanting to stick your nose in their business.

If you have a quick question that doesn't involve what I'm doing that's fine, I'll answer it and go back to what I'm doing.

Unless you have ask someone to move so you can get by or something like that people are involved in their own business. Leave them alone

[shalym]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I am not trying to justify anything.


I'm ignoring no such thing. If there were boorish small-talkers here who were staunchly defending their right to totally ignore your signals to be left alone, I would make the same suggestion of practicing more tolerance to them as well. But they're not here.


Because tolerance of the differences in others is not about reciprocity. It's not about paying a fee to get goods in return. Never has been.

Ok...so you said this in post #7

Perhaps that's the difference between us. I don't really see any kind of (friendly-intended) social contact as "pointless." If I can help someone have nicer day by listening to them talk, I don't see the harm in taking a few minutes to listen. Even if I'm "busy."

I (and others) have pointed out that it does, indeed cause some measure of "harm" to some people to have to make small talk with strangers. Your solution is that we should just never go out in public.

Thanks for that.

This post number 65 by arjaybe seems to sum up my feelings perfectly:

It's unfair that you should have to feel bad just to get a little peace, but I guess expecting them to be circumspect is asking too much.

Shari

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by shalym

I (and others) have pointed out that it does, indeed cause some measure of "harm" to some people to have to make small talk with strangers. Your solution is that we should just never go out in public.

Thanks for that.

No. That's not my "solution." I've never offered a "solution" (other than more tolerance all around). Please don't put words in my mouth. Now I remember why I left this conversation in the first place. Thanks for the reminder.

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

No. That's not my "solution." I've never offered a "solution" (other than more tolerance all around). Please don't put words in my mouth. Now I remember why I left this conversation in the first place. Thanks for the reminder.

Then please stop insisting that those of us who don't want to be bothered by strangers be tolerant of their overly social behavior, while they shouldn't be tolerant of our not wanting to be bothered by their behavior.

This is what happens when one decides they want to play devils advocate.

The way we feel is NOT wrong, and neither you or anyone else has the right to try and make us feel that we are.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

Then please stop insisting that those of us who don't want to be bothered by strangers be tolerant of their overly social behavior, while they shouldn't be tolerant of our not wanting to be bothered by their behavior..

For (hopefully) the LAST FREAKING TIME: I've never once intimated that they shouldn't be tolerant of your not wanting to be bothered. But they're not here for me to point that out to, or I would. Pay attention to the words I'm saying and not the ones you seem to want to imagine I'm saying.

1) Privacy in public is not an entitlement
2) Interaction is an unavoidable cost of leaving our privacy at home when we close our doors behind us. Love it or hate it.
3) More tolerance FROM EVERYONE over our respective social differences would be nice.
4) Have a lovely evening. Unless of course you hate lovely evenings. I wouldn't want to oppress anyone by wishing them well against their will.