O asertwnosvci, kiedy linie sa zaklocane

Liczba wypowiedzi w tym wątku: 3

1. Data: 2010-12-30 18:59:41

Temat: O asertwnosvci, kiedy linie sa zaklocane
Od: "." <a...@g...com> szukaj wiadomości tego autora

O asertywnosci - mamy pewien klopot z iloscia slow, ktore wcialo w
ten kawalek dyskusji

Niejako pewne zaprzeczenia w sobie jakoze ze agressywne stwierdzenie
pozycji moze byc zwiezlejsze.

Ktos wpisal w watek na dyskusyjnym forum NYT tyle ile sie da czy
pasuje czy nie;
ale tez kiedy pasuje rozmyc temat i pozniej gloryfikowac punkt o
taksowaniu ludzi,
jak gdyby taki rodzaj manipulacji byl dobry.

Zdefiniowanie co robi werbalna agresja a co daje asertywne postawienie
sie
( ustalenie wlasnej pozycji i pozycji opponenta w dyskusji) zapewne
nie
uszkadza dyskusji merytorycznej. Ponizej jest jej mniej. Wiecej jest
generalizowania.
Jak chcemy, aby nasz punt 'zapalil innych do niego" nie potrzebujemy
rozmydlania
( diffusers) czy dyfuzji punktow w merytorycznej dyskusji. Werbalna
aggresja pozostanie
slaboscia, jesli sluchacze nie maja problemu ze skupianiem uwagi
pozytywna komunikacja.
( Prezydent jednak 'uniosl' sie z innego powodu)

Skadinad tez wiemy z wiedzy ludowej co 'szczekanie' znaczy. A tez mamy
powiedzenie
o krowach w tym samym kontekscie ( nie ta krowa, ktora 'ryczy' liczy
sie merytorycznie)

NYT ;Readers' Comments

What Progressives Don't Understand About ObamaBack to Article >>
By ISHMAEL REED
It's risky for a black man to express anger -- even a president.

Comments are no longer being accepted.

364 Readers'
Boulder, CO
December 12th, 2010
8:27 amLet me see if I get your point: blacks and Latinos are
vulnerable enough to know when to be grateful and keep their mouths
shut (a compliment, apparently), and white liberals are too entitled
and whiny to know what's good for them.
APPARENTLY, THIS PERSON BELIEVES IN POWER OF PREJUDOICE AND VERBAL
AGGRESSION

At least you don't leave anyone out with your absurd generalizations.
SPLIT JUDGEMENT - CAN HE SEE THESE IN MISRROR ?
Recommend Recommended by 37 Readers 202.David Castro

Philadelphia
December 12th, 2010
8:27 am A beautiful piece. You nailed it. Obama is actually thinking
about the welfare of people and their need for progress, albeit
imperfect. He would rather gain some ground than prove some abstract
ideology. He is thinking about what it will take to win in Ohio,
Pennsylvania and Florida and he knows what kind of price average
people will pay if a Republican gets back in the White House.

POLITICAL PIECE NOT HAVING TO DO WITH A QUESTION OF THE THREAT IF THIS
IS RISKY TO EXPRESS ANGER.

( I PRESET - "YET, IF IT IS TO DIFFUSE LACK OF DISCUSSION POINT")

Recommend Recommended by 6 Readers 203.eva c
california
December 12th, 2010
8:27 amI generally admire Mr. Reed's work, but it's obvious that Mr.
Obama has no difficulty in 'manning up'.... against the very Democrats
(aka 'progressives') who campaigned for him.

So this biracial former supporter of Obama would respectfully suggest
that Mr. Reed is, unwittingly or not, merely playing a game here. And
not a partucularly honest game.

Recommend Recommended by 26 Readers 204.HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
BlinkyMcChuck
New York
December 12th, 2010
8:27 amHe doesn't mind losing his temper with progressives.
Recommend Recommended by 279 Readers 205.martin
Portland, Oregon
December 12th, 2010
8:29 amI think your are off the mark. Obama is not some office worker
who has to bite his tongue. He is president of the United States. You
can't have arguably the most powerful man in the world have emotional
blocks when it comes to anger and assertiveness.
THESE ARE NOT ONLY DIFFERENT BUT OPPOSING, IN PART.
The stakes are too high.
(...)

There are many ways to get angry. I have witnessed the Dalai Lama
chastise vendors who were reaping huge profits off a ten day teaching
he gave. He is certainly the embodiment of non violence, but I can
assure he made his point.

Martin Luther King was a devotee of non violence, yet he was non
compromising on his principles and quite assertive and aggressive as a
leader.

One can inspire without being aggressive. I don't think Malcolm X
committed an act of violence in that incarnation in his life, yet he
commanded respect and even fear from all sides of the political
spectrum because he was a man of fierce principles who also had the
capacity change when it was necessary and reality demanded it.

Republicans already have depicted him as Hitler. Newt Gingrich said
that he was a Kenyan anti colonialist, whatever that even means, since
his Kenyan father abandoned him as a boy.

They have tried to say that he was not an American, was a Muslim and a
friend
of terrorists and Muslim sypathizer and worse. They don't accept his
invitations to meet.
This is while he was acting passive, conciliatory, and pleading for bi
partisanship.
Where did his being non threatening get him?
.............
THE TEXT BELOW RUNS IN THE SAME REPLY. IT APPERS THAT PASTING THE
OPPOSITE THOUGHTS DOES NOT BOTHER EITHER TOOD OR CHIP POR CHIPPED
TOOD; FOR
THE LIMITED AUDIENCE HERE - PEOPLE DO IT IN MORE ADVANCED DISPUTES
AND EXPRESS THEMSELVES THE WAY THAT PIECES TO NOT CRIP UP OF
COMMUNICATION AS NON-CONNECTED OR OPPOSING EACH OTHER.
(i KNMOWM OF MANIPULATORS WHO BELIEVE TAHT THEY WILL OVERRUN THE
OPPONENT NO MATTER WHAT - AND IN THIS CASE WOULD PUT THE OPPOSITE
IN THE SAME DELIVERY IN ORDER TO RISE VOICE AT THE END CLAIMNG
THAT OTHER PARTY DID NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY SAID AND MORE
OVER MISSED THAT PARTY SAID NOT TO MIXT AGGRESSION WITH ASSERTIVENES
WHILE THEY ARE GUITY OF THE SAME - THESE ARE OFFENDERS IN THE
DISPUTE,
THAT BELIEVE NOT IN ECXPLAING THE MERITUM AT ALL, TYPICAL OF PEOPLE
SENDING THE INSULT AD PERSONAM WHEN NO REAL MERITORICAL POINT
IN THEIR COURT, STILL HOPING TO GET TRHROUGH BY COMMUNICATION NOISE
MAKING ONLY)

( HACKER DISTORTS SOME OF MY WORDS)

"You seem to be confusing anger with assertiveness. There is way too
much "black and white" thinking going on here. If Obama gets mad,does
that mean that he will start acting like a gang banger? Will he start
speaking in Ebonics at a news conference. Will he threaten to hit
Representative Boehner "upside his head?"

IT IS HARD TO SEE THIS RESPONDER AS ONE PERSON; MOREOVER WE DO NOT
KNOW IF IT IS ONE PERSON; OR IF ONE PERSON STEALS OTHER TEXTS.

All progressives are asking Obama to do is be assertive. All they are
asking him to do is not cave to Republicans on key issues, to fight
for the principles he campaigned on, even if he lost some battles,
because he would have educated the public in the process about the
Republican shell game. This is where he has failed miserably at.

What progressives want is for Obama to be the leader they elected him
to be. Republicans want to destroy the middle class, hold the poor in
contempt, want to turn America into an oligarchy, and are a party of
nihilists, who have won the ideological war with Obama because of his
passiveness and refusal to show some spine.
WE SAW ABOVE THAT PEOPLE ARE AGAINT THE GENERAL;ISATION AND DO NOT
CONSIDER TEHSE ASSERTIVE. REPUBLICANS AS A GROUP DO NOYT POST SUCH
AGENDAS BUT THE RESPONDER DOES AS A PREJUDICE AGAINT THEM.

You don't engage such a single pointed and nihilistic adversary with
passiveness. Neville Chamberlain found that out by being conciliatory
with Hitler.

I think the criticisms of Obama transcend race. They go to his
character as a peron and as a human being, and his qualities, or lack
thereof,as a leader.

I am sure that Bill Clinton was viewed as white trash by many
Republicans, given his actual background. His mother was a battered
women at the hands of his alcoholic father, she had drinking problems,
his brother was a drug addict. However, one thing Republicans knew
about Bill Clinton was that he was tough. As brilliant as he was, he
could get down and dirty when he had to. I think they respected him
all the time they detested him. One time in response to Republic
criticisms he said simply; "that dog won't hunt." It was a simple,
down to earth response that a working poor guy from Arkansas would
have, He was not rude, crude, or undignified. Yet that remark
resonated with me and I think millions of Americans as something a
tough ordinary Joe would say. Obama seems not to have this capacity.
AGAIN, HOW BEING INDIVIDUAL IN THE STYLE OF EXPRESSION HURST ONE? I
THINK IT DOES NOT.
It hurts him and the country.

Why do you assume that progressives don't know about the unemployed
and Obama does? Now it is you who is stereotyping. Obama for all
extent and purposes was raised by his white mother and grandparents.
How much of an actual life experience of ordinary black people does he
actually have, not observed, but actually lived?

You are trying to make Obama out to be Jackie Robinson, who had to
control his temper in an apartheid country for that experiment to
work. That was over 60 years ago.

I think the country is ready and would actually welcome an "angry
black man" or more pointed a PERSON, black or white, man or woman,
with appropriate righteous anger with which to confront Republicans
and and rally and lead the country.

PERSON AGAIN BELIEVES THAT AGGRESSIVE IS ASSERTIVE, WHILE OPPOSITE WAS
STATED BY HIM TOO. IT IS NOT THE SAME AND THAT IS HOW WE HAVE TWO
DIFFERENT WORDS FOR THESE STYLES OF COMMUNICATION.

PERHAPS, PERSON WANTS TO SAY THAT TAKING ON SOME AFFRESSIVE AGGRESSIVE
TONE WOULD HELP THE CONFRONTING ON THE MERITORIAL ISSUES THAT THE TWO
SIDES ARGUE. PERHAPS.

BEING ASSERTIVE, SPEAKING SOMEWHAT SCHEMATIC, STRATS WITH STATING THE
POSITION OF THE OTHER [PERSON": I SEE HOW THE MATTER OF TAXE CUTS OPR
OTHER MATTER GETS YOU ...INTRESTED, OVERHELMED, ANGRIES.... IN
THAT ........ ( NEED STO RE-STATE THAT), AND THAN ASK : AM I
SUMMARISING/ OR PICKING UP YOUR POINT CORRECT, ELICITING ANSTWER AND
BY TAHT ALSO DEFINING THE LINES ( COTOURS) OF THE ARFGUMENT. IN CASE
THAT IS YES, THAT PERSION CAN NOW SAY ; LET ME NOW TELL WHAT I SEE
THAT IS LIKE YOUR OPINON ANDS WHEN I DIFFER. ( ALL TAHGT IS NOT
AGGRESSIVE ).

AFTER THAT PARTIES TAKE ON REMAINING DEFERENCES.

IT IS ALSO VERY AMERICAB TO STATE ON THE REST; SO WE ARRIVE AT THE
POINTB THAT WE AGREE TO DISAGREE ABOUT ..... ( USUALLY A SMALLEST
POIECE OF THE BOGGER DISPUTE ) AND THAN CLOISE IT. APPRENTLY , IT OIS
MANYT TIME NO USE TO GO TO ISSUES THAT HAVE TOI WINDOW OUT.

OR

THEY BOTH CAN AGREE TO GET MORE INFORMATION AND RETURN TO FINISH THAE
PART THEY DISAGREE AND WHY.

Recommend Recommended by 23 Readers 206.QuickBen
oakland, california
December 12th, 2010
8:29 amPretty much spot on.
Recommend Recommended by 5 Readers 207.Krugmanisaracist
NY
December 12th, 2010
8:29 amIf this is true, and a black president can't show a simple
emotion like anger out of fear of being labeled, then maybe the
Democrats should have picked Hillary...or would the same hold true for
a woman? If so, I guess its back to White guys.
Recommend Recommended by 24 Readers 208.dont
NOT REALLY CONNECTED FRAGMENTS, AGAIN.

Recommend Recommended by 7 Readers 211.Paul Adams
Stony Brook
December 12th, 2010
8:29 amAccording to the NY Times analysis the "deal" will actually
increase taxes on the poor, and vastly decrease them on the rich. I
fail to see why this is "cool", even if it did not greatly increase
the deficit (as it does).
Recommend Recommended by 26 Readers 212.kate s
Buffalo, N.Y.
December 12th, 2010
8:29 amFinally someone is speaking out about this 'issue'. I am truly
dismayed at those who keep insisting that Obama act like a 'wild man'
and mirror those who are acting like lunatics.
I, for one, DO think he is the 'coolest' in the room and hope he stays
that way.

Two wrongs do NOT make a right, might does NOT make right, creating
confrontation does NOT solve problems, knee-jerk reactions only
escalate problems.

I LIKE my President to be a notch above the fray....

And I agree, nothing would be worse than an angry Obama that the
'right wing' can stereotype AGAIN.

I don't care what 'they' say, race is indeed STILL an issue in this
country.

P.S. I am a white progressive who congratulates Obama for NOT creating
a civil war.
And I keep telling my colleagues - WATCH THIS PAGE....the Republicans
are
showing their true colors more and more and they 'aren't
PREATTY GOOD ARGUING.
Recommend Recommended by 7 Readers 213.John

Port of Spain
December 12th, 2010
8:29 amExactly! People tell Obama to get angry, and then when he
chastises
the Progressives for expecting too much, they swoon in dismay, "Ooooh
he got angry!"
Recommend Recommended by 4 Readers 214.bob
nyc
WELL, PRESIDENT IS A GROWN MEN - HE CAN REFUSE SUCH ADVISE.

December 12th, 2010
8:29 amWhoa! Mr. Reed you have used a few isolated personal
experiences and interactions and then extrapolated an entire
philosophy to suggest that progressives are just petulant at "not
getting everything they want" because they take issue with an America
in which 23% of the wealth is owned by 1% of the population.

Progressives believe in an America that works for everyone - and guess
what - that includes
black people. If it is impossible for our president, who happens to be
black, to stand up
for the American people then what are you suggesting? That America is
not really ready
for a black president?
THIS SEEMS TO REACH TO OTHER TOPIC; IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO BRING IT
TO THE TOPIC IF IT IS O'K TO GET ANGRY. IN USA WE DO NOT HAVE SUCH
PROBLEM
AS READY NOT READY FOR THE PRESIDENT WHO IS ALREDAY THERE.
TRY TO STAY ON.

Recommend Recommended by 17 Readers 215.MT
New York, NY
December 12th, 2010
8:29 amSo calling your opponents hostage takers isn't shouting? Or
demonizing the most productive job generators in your society solely
as the wealthy (too often to recount)? Even though only 2% of the
Forbes 400 got their wealth through inheritance - ie. they earned it.
And the people whose taxes most substantially subsidize the social
programs you so value?

You must be kidding...
FRAGMENTED AGAIN - WE DO NOT KNOW WHICH RESPONDENT MADE THIS REMARK.
Recommend Recommended by 6 Readers 216.JH Hawkins
Bed-Stuy Brooklyn, New York
December 12th, 2010
8:29 amAs a "negro" intellectual, consultant and workshop leader, I
have experienced a kind of prodding from my fellow intellectuals to
become more verbally angry often when I was actually leading workshops
about something other that traditional "black issues". My son calls it
the "mad black woman" syndrome as though my white counterparts don't
quite know what to do with a black woman who isn't screaming and
cursing about "the man" or "the system".

I take my lead from Brother President Obama - definitely the coolest
man in the room,
to be intellectual, rational and ultimately quotable.
INTERESTING THAT THIS SPEAKER CAN DO IT; WHITE APPRENTLY WE DISAGREE
WITH THE ISSUE OF GENERALISING AND WHIULE I SEE TOO TAHT PTESIDENTY
OBAMA IS QUITE SOCIALLY ASSERTIVE OVERALL. THAT IS NOT THE SAME AS HE
IS RIGHT. IT MEANTS THAT WHEN HE HAS TO FACE CONFRONTATION OR SOCIAL
INSULTS HE STANDS HIS POINT QUITE WELL ( EVENIF NOT RIUGHT); HE
DEFINITELLY DOES NOT WORRY ABOUT SMALL INTIMIDATION - IGNORS THEM ALL
TOGETHER ( in his campain tehse were qite cruell) . THIS IS NOT THE
ONLY TECHNIQUE BUT IS ONE OF THEM.

i HAVE ALSO NOTICED THAT WHEN PTESIDENT INITIUATES HSI REQUESTS HE
COMES IN
WITH IS ASSEROIVELY BY PERSUSSIONA ND NOT ANY AGGRESSION ( OBSEWRVED
ELSHERE)

December 12th, 2010
8:29 amSorry, fail.

Obama shows no qualms about expressing anger publicly at progressives.

I WOULD NOT ASSUME ALL THAT FAST. IT SI A SIGN OF WEEKNESS, OVERALL.

He's done so on several occasions, most recently re: the tax "deal."
Recommend Recommended by 21 Readers 219.Gussini
Virginia

December 12th, 2010
8:29 amExcellent essay, Mr. Reed, and topical as well. I have been
arguing with fellow progressives in defense of Obama's tactical moves
lately. I point out the recent exit poll numbers and opine that Obama
is a patient man working hard to find a position from which to govern
effectively. Lines in the sand are a provocation and a waste of
precious time.

Taking a stand is too often to pursue a will-o-the-wisp through a
swamp, at night. To paraphrase Bill Clinton, "things are what they
are". I appreciate Obama's deliberation, especially when the televised
portion of the fourth estate seems to be melting into hysteria.
When you lose your cool, you lose the game.
Recommend Recommended by 6 Readers 222.whit whitley
richmond, va

IS THIS A MATTER OF DEGREE? WE AGGRED SOMEHOW, TAHT IT WA SO ;K FOR
THE PRESIDENT TO TAKE THE STRONG STAND, AND THAT IT HAS A CONSEQUENCE.

WE WERE NOT ALL THAT CLEAR THAT AGGRESSION IS NOT NECESSARY PART OF
THE ASSERIVE BEHAVIOR. WE DID NOIT STATE YET WHEN VERBAL TONING UP IS
WORKING WELL.
( I WAS TRYING TO CONVERGE MORE THAN GETS DIVERGED HERE TO ARRIVE
TO POINT IN THE LEADING QUESTION OFV THIS THREAD; WISHFULLY,I WOUDL
WANT
TO GET TEH SAME IN LESS WORDS)

REAGARDLESS, HOW HARD IT IS TO GROUND THE DISCUSSION WHEN NO ACTUAL
REAL
TIME MEETING EXISTS IN THE INTERNET , I ILLUSTRATED THE PROBLEM WITH
NOISE MAKERS.

› Pokaż wiadomość z nagłówkami

Do góry

Zobacz także

2. Data: 2010-12-31 11:52:13

Temat: Re: O asertwnosvci, kiedy linie sa zaklocane
Od: "Vilar" <v...@U...TO.op.pl> szukaj wiadomości tego autora

Uzytkownik "." <a...@g...com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:e354717c-4645-4171-887d-916c13d8000d@s4g2000yql
.googlegroups.com...

O asertywnosci - mamy pewien klopot z iloscia slow, ktore wcialo w
ten kawalek dyskusji

Niejako pewne zaprzeczenia w sobie jakoze ze agressywne stwierdzenie
pozycji moze byc zwiezlejsze.

Ktos wpisal w watek na dyskusyjnym forum NYT tyle ile sie da czy
pasuje czy nie;
ale tez kiedy pasuje rozmyc temat i pozniej gloryfikowac punkt o
taksowaniu ludzi,
jak gdyby taki rodzaj manipulacji byl dobry.

Zdefiniowanie co robi werbalna agresja a co daje asertywne postawienie
sie
( ustalenie wlasnej pozycji i pozycji opponenta w dyskusji) zapewne
nie
uszkadza dyskusji merytorycznej. Ponizej jest jej mniej. Wiecej jest
generalizowania.
Jak chcemy, aby nasz punt 'zapalil innych do niego" nie potrzebujemy
rozmydlania
( diffusers) czy dyfuzji punktow w merytorycznej dyskusji. Werbalna
aggresja pozostanie
slaboscia, jesli sluchacze nie maja problemu ze skupianiem uwagi
pozytywna komunikacja.
( Prezydent jednak 'uniosl' sie z innego powodu)

Skadinad tez wiemy z wiedzy ludowej co 'szczekanie' znaczy. A tez mamy
powiedzenie
o krowach w tym samym kontekscie ( nie ta krowa, ktora 'ryczy' liczy
sie merytorycznie)

NYT ;Readers' Comments

_____

Moment moment ASERTYWNOSC to zdecydowanie nie jest AGRESJA.
Wrecz przeciwnie bym powiedziala.

Wlasnie dlatego cwiczymy sie w asertywnosci, czyli jasnym i mozliwym do
przelkniecia dla obydwu stron wyrazaniu swojego zdania (asertywnosc to nie
tylko mówienie "nie"), zeby nie tlamsic w sobie i nie wybuchac potem
agresja.....

Czyz nie?

MK

› Pokaż wiadomość z nagłówkami

Do góry

3. Data: 2011-01-03 16:07:07

Temat: Re: O asertwnosvci, kiedy linie sa zaklocane
Od: Aicha <b...@t...ja> szukaj wiadomości tego autora

W dniu 2010-12-30 22:19, Lebowski pisze:

>> O asertywnosci - mamy pewien klopot z iloscia slow, ktore wcialo w
>> ten kawalek dyskusji
>
> Nie swiruj Izka, bo ci jeszcze jakas zylka peknie, a i tak raczej nikt
> nie zgadnie o co tobie kaman.

Obawiam się, że to nie Izka, tylko bot (napisało mi się "byt" w
pierwszej wersji) jakowyś.

--
Pozdrawiam - Aicha

› Pokaż wiadomość z nagłówkami

Do góry