Teaching Proper Etiquette In Arizona School

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
The entitlement I'm talking about is being crude to others because others don't matter. It's clear the narcissism is increasing due to the fact that religion was replaced with nothing for many people.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQaYf62M4wk
The first sentence here I just plain disagree with.

But the second sentence here is insultingly stupid. Just absolutely moronic.
 
don't pretend like you don't like it, sweetheart.

That is so Mad Men.

Joan is unimpressed by such bullshittery.

0094gpe8.gif
 
Honestly I still can't get past this. I don't know where it is that you work, and maybe it is totally different than my place of employment, but there is NO WAY IN THE WORLD that I can imagine that a male lawyer would be asked at a firm interview how it is that he deals with women. I don't even have words for that, to be honest. And I have a hard time understanding why this is asked at an interview, why it's ok for something like this to be asked, and furthermore what these alleged "right answers" are.

As for this alleged women's expectation that you should protect our feelings, also really strange - I don't know what that even means, nevermind that I find it to be completely untrue of my workplace environment.

BTW this is the second interview where I was asked about my ability to work with women. About 80% of my office is female and it was about 90% in the last office. To me I focus on narcissism because I find that in accounting (probably similar in other jobs or professions that can provide grandiosity) there is a high rate of it. The superficiality is extreme. All people talk about is vacations and nice cars or show envy against those that do enjoy those things already. I'm more humanistic so I don't really care about impermanent objects or consumer addictions but I always have to be careful with treading on egos because I've been very naive in the past and being on the wrong end of narcissists and it was the most draining harrowing twilight zone experience of my life. Yet when you find good partners to work with many accountants try and keep that dynamic going for decades if possible.

I know. My first reaction would be, "... is this a trick question?" Is there an appropriate answer other than "like a human being?"

No the right answer is that I can work with women and that I'm not a bully. :D My head-hunter did say that there are some who have trouble working under women but they have a place in different offices. Obviously ones with more men. Some offices are more laid back and some you can hear a pin drop and there's enormous fear. I have a collegue from school who worked for a narcissist who head-hunters refused to assign temp workers to because of her brutality. I've heard other stories from other accountants that were worse than mine. :angry: When it comes to slapping on the ass I haven't seen in this new job any behaviour like that but it's still early. The only partner's weaknesses I've witnessed so far are drinking.

You're certainly not shy about pronouncing opinion as fact.

Don't misunderstand. I don't think being born again is the answer to our woes. It's just that Church for Western Civilization had a constant influence to try and struggle with those ego problems and as people go it alone (due to the fact that Churches have scandals and the religion has major flaws) people can throw out the baby with the bathwater. It would be nice if most secular people had some contemplation practice but my opinion is that they don't in large numbers.

I'm somewhat amazed by how disconnected from reality you are, yet I'm not.

You're certainly not shy about pronouncing opinion as fact.


And then I'm befuddled by how you blame narcissism in a very narcissistic tone yet don't even realize the irony.

Yeah because you can read forum text tone so well that you can diagnose NPD through the internet? Gimmie a break.

Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

Put your Alinsky book down for a second and actually engage in a real conversation. I'm not the only person in the world to deal with narcissists and there's an entire psychological literature on the subject. I'm not the first to talk about it and I won't be the last.
 
The first sentence here I just plain disagree with.

But the second sentence here is insultingly stupid. Just absolutely moronic.

I was talking about narcissists and bad behaviour which fits nicely with grade 10 students being rough with girls. I don't think the teacher is being sexist if he teaches them some manners. They certainly aren't learning manners from Church if they don't go there so the education system has to replace what is missing. The Church did supply basic manners and morals and when an institution like that falls apart there's a gap that will need to be filled.

So if I'm a moron then please continue with your analysis of class and rich people. I want to see where you go with this. Maybe you're right. :shrug:
 
Other than to say that purpleoscar seems to have a tendency to take his narrow experiences and extrapolate them to the general population, I really don't know what to say in response to his comments. I'm at a loss.

It's a different time, but I think the whole perception that this generation has worse behavior than the last one is pure bullshit. I think that perception has happened with every generation for a very long time.

I disagree, it starts at home. In my line of work, I get to deal with "helicopter parents" face to face all the time. We once had a parent come in and ask if she could do a job interview for her son. We are talking about college, someone 18 years old at minimum and his MOM not only wanted to do the job interview in his place, but it was her idea! I am 100% convinced that the self-entitlement attitude we are now seeing starts at home. Manners, responsibility, accountability....these are things that parents need to teach. That's not to say they can't be valued in school as well but it's the parents responsibility to teach their child, not shelter them, spoil them, and make excuses for them. I am consistently embarrassed by peers in my generation who seem to think they deserve everything their parents have (job security, comfortable home, life savings and retirement...) without having to actually work for it.

As for the question of manners being a generational thing, I can address these two posts, and say that no, in my experience (and I tend to be very aware of manners, they're important to me), there are ill-mannered older people who seem to be raising equally ill-mannered kids. Some people have them and pass them down, others don't, sadly.

I know a LOT of kids, through my daughter, who have impeccable manners.
 
Just treat us equally, please.

Agreed.


And there are plenty of kids these days who have great manners. It's just the rotten apples people focus on and those you hear about. I do agree it's mostly the responsibility of the parents, and if they have bad manners the kids are likely to take after them.
 
Other than to say that purpleoscar seems to have a tendency to take his narrow experiences and extrapolate them to the general population, I really don't know what to say in response to his comments. I'm at a loss.

^

This.

Also, every time he's spoken of his experiences, I can find nothing in them that even remotely rings true or familiar to me, from his workplace to his university environment, so I'm not quite sure what it is about our worlds that is so infinitely different. :shrug:
 
Yeah because you can read forum text tone so well that you can diagnose NPD through the internet? Gimmie a break.
I'm not diagnosing anything, just relaying what I and many others are reading.


Put your Alinsky book down for a second and actually engage in a real conversation. I'm not the only person in the world to deal with narcissists and there's an entire psychological literature on the subject. I'm not the first to talk about it and I won't be the last.

You missed my point by miles... Read VP's post she summarized it very nicely.
 
I was talking about narcissists and bad behaviour which fits nicely with grade 10 students being rough with girls. I don't think the teacher is being sexist if he teaches them some manners. They certainly aren't learning manners from Church if they don't go there so the education system has to replace what is missing. The Church did supply basic manners and morals and when an institution like that falls apart there's a gap that will need to be filled.

So if I'm a moron then please continue with your analysis of class and rich people. I want to see where you go with this. Maybe you're right. :shrug:


Where did you grow up that your parents sent you to church to learn manners, or where church was needed at all to learn manners in the first place?
How I love this logic, that without religion anything goes for one, the morals go downhill, manners that have been tradition for centuries are vanishing bla bla bla.
 
To me I focus on narcissism because I find that in accounting (probably similar in other jobs or professions that can provide grandiosity) there is a high rate of it. The superficiality is extreme. All people talk about is vacations and nice cars or show envy against those that do enjoy those things already.

Yes, this is all that everyone around me discusses.

For the record, I have no idea what kind of car a single lawyer on my floor (35 of them or so) drives. But if you need to keep telling yourself that material things are the main topic of conversation to keep your narcissism theory going, enjoy.
 
I'm not diagnosing anything, just relaying what I and many others are reading.

Yes you are. You called me a narcissist to try and "discredit" me. You're a crank and I'm not the only one that has called you on it.

You missed my point by miles... Read VP's post she summarized it very nicely.

VP's point has nothing to do with narcissism. My experiences aren't only my own since I've met others that have had similiar experiences. There are entire books on the subject. You think narcissism in the workplace is only MY experience?

Where did you grow up that your parents sent you to church to learn manners, or where church was needed at all to learn manners in the first place?
How I love this logic, that without religion anything goes for one, the morals go downhill, manners that have been tradition for centuries are vanishing bla bla bla.

Yeah you're right the church really had no role, bla, bla, bla.

Yes, this is all that everyone around me discusses.

No this is not the only thing carrying a narcissist theory. They bully and can't accept constructive criticism and in professional jobs where there is nothing but constructive criticism it can be hard for people who speak up to keep their jobs when they have a boss like that. It's also hard for those people to treat girls with respect if they are so self-absorbed. If a teacher is teaching better communication and empathy then that is okay.

The only reason this thread was brought up was just to bring some argument that the teacher is anti-women in some way.
 
No this is not the only thing carrying a narcissist theory.

Well you are making the claim that people in professional careers only and exclusively talk about material things; maybe you work in some strange place where this is true but I am telling you that it's absolutely false to assume that this is some kind of standard.

The only reason this thread was brought up was just to bring some argument that the teacher is anti-women in some way.

Are you reading the poster's mind?

I don't think this teacher is anti-woman. I think he likely has good intentions in mind, but what he's doing is over the top and frankly as a woman, the way for me to get to be a true equal isn't for a man to stand up when I walk in the room or to hold out a chair for me. :shrug:
 
I was talking about narcissists and bad behaviour which fits nicely with grade 10 students being rough with girls. I don't think the teacher is being sexist if he teaches them some manners. They certainly aren't learning manners from Church if they don't go there so the education system has to replace what is missing. The Church did supply basic manners and morals and when an institution like that falls apart there's a gap that will need to be filled.

So if I'm a moron then please continue with your analysis of class and rich people. I want to see where you go with this. Maybe you're right. :shrug:
I accused your statement of being moronic because you implied the only reason "manners are being lost" (a premise I disagree with strongly) is because people are moving away from religion (a premise that makes me want to strike you).

I personally believe that I have become a better person on every level since I've moved away from believing in religion. Some of the nicest, most genuine people I know are atheist all the way. Some of the most nasty and mean spirited are strongly religious.

Religious belief has nothing to do with character. That is a fact, not an opinion.
 
Yes you are. You called me a narcissist to try and "discredit" me.
I'm just calling out the irony, nothing more, nothing less... I am not arrogant enough to think I can "diagnose" anything.

VP's point has nothing to do with narcissism. My experiences aren't only my own since I've met others that have had similiar experiences. There are entire books on the subject. You think narcissism in the workplace is only MY experience?
I think it takes quite a bit or self centeredness to take your limited experiences and think you can apply them to everyone, and then on top of that sell far reaching theories as fact.

Do I think narcissism in the workplace is only your experience? No. Nor do I think it's new, nor do I think it applies the way you do.

The only reason this thread was brought up was just to bring some argument that the teacher is anti-women in some way.

See? Selling your far reaching theories as fact. Thinking you can read minds... This doesn't ring of self importance to you?
 
Yeah you're right the church really had no role, bla, bla, bla.

It's getting so old that without the church we don't know how to behave.
Where I grew up, the church didn't play a role at all. You only went to church when you were 70+ and didn't know what else to do on your Sunday morning. We didn't need the church to learn how to respectfully engage with each other etc.
Some kids were alright, others not. There seemed to be a very strong correlation with how the parents were. And usually you got something like, "Yes, just like his father." etc. from people who knew the parents when they were young.
It wasn't seen abnormal that boys and girls "hate" each other until reaching a certaine age, either.
 
I don't know what else is going on here..I tried but it hurt my head too much

Etiquette and manners should be taught by parents at a very early age and it's something that's gender neutral, so I don't agree with this gender specific thing. I hold doors for men just because it's the polite thing to do. I only expect them to hold doors for me because I want to expect that men and women will do that out of common courtesy. I can pull out my own chair.
 
Religious belief has nothing to do with character. That is a fact, not an opinion.
Careful there, you're making an empirical claim which doesn't seem to have that much support, there is evidence of an inverse correlation between religiosity and good behaviour
Large-scale surveys show dramatic declines in religiosity in favour of secularisation in the developed democracies. Popular acceptance of evolutionary science correlates negatively with levels of religiosity, and the United States is the only prosperous nation where the majority absolutely believes in a creator and evolutionary science is unpopular. Abundant data is available on rates of societal dysfunction and health in the First World. Cross-national comparisons of highly differing rates of religiosity and societal conditions form a mass epidemiological experiment that can be used to test whether high rates of belief in and worship of a creator are necessary for high levels of social health. Data correlations show that in almost all regards the highly secular democracies consistently enjoy low rates of societal dysfunction, while pro-religious and antievolution America performs poorly.
http://www.rationalist.com.au/archive/73/p20-27_paul_ar73_web.pdf

Cross-national correlations of quantifiable societal health with popular religiosity and secularism in the prosperous democracies: a first look
Gregory S. Paul
Journal of Religion and Society, 2005
 
Well you are making the claim that people in professional careers only and exclusively talk about material things; maybe you work in some strange place where this is true but I am telling you that it's absolutely false to assume that this is some kind of standard.



Are you reading the poster's mind?

I don't think this teacher is anti-woman. I think he likely has good intentions in mind, but what he's doing is over the top and frankly as a woman, the way for me to get to be a true equal isn't for a man to stand up when I walk in the room or to hold out a chair for me. :shrug:

I agree. The teacher probably isn't anti-woman, just misguided. To me "respect" means someone treating me like I'm as smart and capable as my male peers. Courtesy is awesome, but can't there be some middle ground between being a jerk and treating me like a fragile princess who can't pull out her own chair?
 
I think it takes quite a bit or self centeredness to take your limited experiences and think you can apply them to everyone, and then on top of that sell far reaching theories as fact.

Do I think narcissism in the workplace is only your experience? No. Nor do I think it's new, nor do I think it applies the way you do.

Applying narcissism to brats being rough with girls isn't a far stretch or narrow. Narcissism has a gradation. You don't have to be a NPD to be a mess with relationships.

See? Selling your far reaching theories as fact. Thinking you can read minds... This doesn't ring of self importance to you?

But is teaching gender-specific etiquette perpetuating what some consider sexist traditions?

I'm not reading minds I'm reading posts. BTW selling theories as facts is simply a negative term for having beliefs and opinions which everyone here is guilty of. Remember Global Warming? :wink:

Religious belief has nothing to do with character. That is a fact, not an opinion.

My point is that people aren't born with good character they develop it through parenting and role models. When an institution as important as the Church becomes replaced not everyone replaces it with newer and better philosophies or better role models. Also a lot of the institutions we take for granted wouldn't exist without Christianity or old philosophies so I believe many are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Church got my father off of cigarettes when they were very popular to smoke. The Church has helped people control their emotions and develop equanimity through personal tough times and make better decisions in their lives. There are people who suffered from bad behaviours and addictions and used religion to get out. The Bible doesn't have to be approached in a fundamentalist way. Certainly where science replaces the bible I'm with science but I'm thankful for what Christianity did bring. I'm also happy for my meditation practice which has helped my concentration and equanimity more than anything else for me. I find many of the tools useful and practical. When the afterlife is talked about I tend to roll my eyes but I understand the far reaching goals that religions create are just the incentives people have for faith in themselves to change their habits. I'm aware that there are Buddhist techniques being added to some schools that are non-dogmatic and that's fine. Secular solutions are the way forward to reach more people. Having an etiquette class wouldn't hurt either.

It's getting so old that without the church we don't know how to behave.
Where I grew up, the church didn't play a role at all. You only went to church when you were 70+ and didn't know what else to do on your Sunday morning. We didn't need the church to learn how to respectfully engage with each other etc.
Some kids were alright, others not. There seemed to be a very strong correlation with how the parents were. And usually you got something like, "Yes, just like his father." etc. from people who knew the parents when they were young.
It wasn't seen abnormal that boys and girls "hate" each other until reaching a certaine age, either.

Maybe you don't need the Church or I don't and some others don't but many can improve from it. Certainly a teacher teaching etiquette in class is filling a gap that was once dealt with intermediary institutions like Churches. I don't want people to think I'm proselytizing Christianity. It was a useful tool and now society is trying to find a way to go it alone with mixed results. I actually wouldn't mind a philosophy class in school to fill that gap even more. There are many similarities and borrowings between more secular and religious philosophies. This could replace what the Church provided and allow many points of view and exposure to many cultures in ways that would be non-dogmatic.

Meditation and the Practice of Virtue | Psychology Today

For those who appreciate a bit of scientific evidence that meditation can affect one's ethical life, consider the 2008 study by neuroscientists Antoine Lutz and Richard Davidson at the University of Wisconsin. They compared 16 novices with 16 expert meditators concerning compassion, and found that the "data indicate that the mental expertise to cultivate positive emotion alters the activation of circuitries previously linked to empathy." Which is a scientific way of saying that the practice of cultivating compassion makes a real difference in the depth of our empathetic connection to others.
 
:huh:

I made a thread that was meant to discuss etiquette and male-female relationships, and now we're talking about religion? I don't get it. I mean, I did read the whole thread, but I still don't know how religion got into this topic.

Can't we save the religion part for another thread?
 
My point is that people aren't born with good character they develop it through parenting and role models. When an institution as important as the Church becomes replaced not everyone replaces it with newer and better philosophies or better role models. Also a lot of the institutions we take for granted wouldn't exist without Christianity or old philosophies so I believe many are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Church got my father off of cigarettes when they were very popular to smoke. The Church has helped people control their emotions and develop equanimity through personal tough times and make better decisions in their lives. There are people who suffered from bad behaviours and addictions and used religion to get out. The Bible doesn't have to be approached in a fundamentalist way. Certainly where science replaces the bible I'm with science but I'm thankful for what Christianity did bring. I'm also happy for my meditation practice which has helped my concentration and equanimity more than anything else for me. I find many of the tools useful and practical. When the afterlife is talked about I tend to roll my eyes but I understand the far reaching goals that religions create are just the incentives people have for faith in themselves to change their habits. I'm aware that there are Buddhist techniques being added to some schools that are non-dogmatic and that's fine. Secular solutions are the way forward to reach more people. Having an etiquette class wouldn't hurt either.
Your premise is faulty from the beginning by assuming that the church is an important institution in determining morals.
 
Applying narcissism to brats being rough with girls isn't a far stretch or narrow. Narcissism has a gradation. You don't have to be a NPD to be a mess with relationships.
This doesn't address one thing I said...:huh:




I'm not reading minds I'm reading posts. BTW selling theories as facts is simply a negative term for having beliefs and opinions which everyone here is guilty of. Remember Global Warming? :wink:

No, it isn't... :doh:

Maybe it's just smart to ignore you in all threads :wave:
 
The Church got my father off of cigarettes when they were very popular to smoke. The Church has helped people control their emotions and develop equanimity through personal tough times and make better decisions in their lives. There are people who suffered from bad behaviours and addictions and used religion to get out.

Even if it were true that the Church and religion are somehow correlated to individual morality, that is not what we're discussing in this thread. What this teacher is apparently showcasing is a form of politeness, which is amoral. The Church may have played all sorts of roles in my life as a child, but it sure had nothing to do with me learning to say please and thank you, speak respectfully to my elders, get up on the subway when a visibly pregnant woman is standing, or help an older person who is struggling with walking or standing up, etc. These are things that were in the ambit of parenting and I don't believe have a rational connection to any sort of Church life. In other words, if I wasn't polite before I showed up to Mass, I sure wasn't going to learn it while the priest delivered the homily.
 
Even if it were true that the Church and religion are somehow correlated to individual morality, that is not what we're discussing in this thread. What this teacher is apparently showcasing is a form of politeness, which is amoral. The Church may have played all sorts of roles in my life as a child, but it sure had nothing to do with me learning to say please and thank you, speak respectfully to my elders, get up on the subway when a visibly pregnant woman is standing, or help an older person who is struggling with walking or standing up, etc. These are things that were in the ambit of parenting and I don't believe have a rational connection to any sort of Church life. In other words, if I wasn't polite before I showed up to Mass, I sure wasn't going to learn it while the priest delivered the homily.

True. The church, or any religious organization, can and does help many people, just as purpleoscar pointed out. Addiction counseling, etc, though all of those services can be obtained in the secular world as well. Religion can do alot for those willing to accept the premise of their religion and build a spiritual foundation on it.

The church, however is not inherently good. I am from Boston where the sex abuse scandal was the most widespread and got the most attention. Rest assured, the church destroyed many lives forever, drove many to depression, despair, even suicide. Religion has motivated some pretty dangerous things in the past- one need only look at 9/11. Religion is all about how you use it and whether you are capable of keeping your independent, reasoning mind in tact so that it may over rule something justifying suicide bombings or protecting pedophile priests. Religions are made up of fallible, flawed human beings.

So you are right, manners and etiquette are taught early on and in every day life, not once per week at church. I have seen many parents bring their kids to church and they yell and scream and play with toys(what the hell are the parents doing bringing toys to church??) the entire time. I know plenty of people who are just overall jerks and even criminals and they go to church every week. They would walk out of church without holding the door and then go and cut off the next 10 people on the road. On the other hand, I know plenty of perfectly polite, classy people who never go to church.

The parents teach it, as my parents taught me: "Please," "thank you," hold the door, as you get older, respect everyone but especially, respect and look out for girls, etc. This should be reinforced in schools. I would be much more interested in beefing up math, science, technology and economics lessons before adding an etiquette class. I think we all agree here that parents should be teaching these lessons and that the classroom should be conducted in a manner that introduces these concepts to those lacking in them(Kindergarten-2nd grade maybe) and then reinforces them throughout.

Is this guy going too far? There is nothing wrong or offensive about it, he is not anti woman, but yes, he is going further than is needed when we are getting our asses kicked in basic knowledge by other countries. If he notices lack of politeness or etiquette, he can bring it up and tell everyone how it would really be a nicer environment and help down the road with life skills(job interviews, work skills, etc) if you were polite and respected the feelings of others.

It goes the other way too- people can take "etiquette" way too far and waste time creating a whole cottage industry devoted to it. I remember in a college sociology class, we spent 3 class periods discussing the women's lacrosse team that all showed up in flip flops to visit the White House. The Professor was saying they are always bad and show a lack of respect, no one wants to look at dirty feet, people have no respect these days, etc.

1.)He was saying this at a college summer class, it is almost a requirement that you wear flip flops. I had mine on all summer and held plenty of doors and said thank you as I recall.
2.)If you are looking at the bottoms of someone's feet, then you have a serious problem.
3.)No one ever in the 3 day discussion suggested that anyone should wear flip flops to meet the President. I certainly never would. (I could only find it appropriate if the President were Mitt Romney, but that would never happen!)

No need to reinvent the wheel, just reinforce basic human decency. That is always a timely lesson, whether 1955 or 2010. I don't think it is a "kids today" thing all the time. When I see the "thug look" alot more prevalent now than before, I tend to think so. But then again, an older French-Canadian Catholic teacher I had in high school in 2003 would always remark how many less fights and how much more holding the doors and saying thank you there was then in the 1980s.:shrug:
 
Can't we save the religion part for another thread?

Probably not. This is FYM - pretty much every thread turns into something completely different, usually involving the same arguments and the same individuals.

Good times! Except, not.
 
Back
Top Bottom