When did Entitled become a bad word?

[Janx]

[Yeah, that's a difficult one -- talking about "Entitlement" without touching politics. Ouch!]

Philosophically, do "rights" inhere within people? Or are "rights," instead, merely bequeathed upon people through social action, with the comcomitant result that they can be as easily revoked through later action? In my estimation, that's part of the issue.

Frankly, I would change the question this way:
"Entitlement" isn't the real issue! Rather, that's simply the latest buzzword that is (now being) used to refer to an age-old human problem, specifically the quantity of duty that is due to our friends and our associates.
(It's something that people have always worried about.)

I'm inclined to think that Rights (like the Bill of Rights) are something that society bequeathes to itself as some minimum standard.

It's not like Gravity is a Right. Gravity is enforced by reality. I can't suspend your right to fall down off a cliff and make you levitate.

If we ignore your Rights, we are abusing your rights. I'd say that defines treatment and abilities you are Entitled to (ex: free speech).

Your second statement probably nails my problem with the word "Entitlement" It's become a buzzword to further a political cause. When I hear it outside of that, I hear political undertones. It bugs me.

It would be nice if we could all avoid using it, and maybe use a variety of words again. Maybe words that more tactfully get to the point, rather than boxing it up in a one-size-fits all catch-phrase.

 

[Umbran]

My friend can quit D&D to play an MMO 24x7, but that's a little whacked, and not nice to do to your friends. Calling me Entitled makes it sound like I'm the one with the problem. (note: in the MMO thread, I was not involved in that part of the conversation, I'm just using myself as an example).

Yes. And perhaps I can phrase it in a way that makes it seem a bit more clear:

Say you agreed to play in a game. That's a social agreement - having made it, the other people should be allowed to have some expectation that you'll hold up your end. Call it entitlement if you will, but you effectively gave them that entitlement to your time. Which doesn't say you can never leave a game you joined, or have to pass on occasion - reasonable games make allowances for life. But, do it with a little respect for your fellow gamers, rather than just drop off the face of the planet.

And, honestly, don't expect that real-world people won't be somewhat insulted with a statement that comes close to, "I prefer the machine's company to yours."

 

[El Mahdi]

Yes. And perhaps I can phrase it in a way that makes it seem a bit more clear:

Say you agreed to play in a game. That's a social agreement - having made it, the other people should be allowed to have some expectation that you'll hold up your end. Call it entitlement if you will, but you effectively gave them that entitlement to your time. Which doesn't say you can never leave a game you joined, or have to pass on occasion - reasonable games make allowances for life. But, do it with a little respect for your fellow gamers, rather than just drop off the face of the planet.

And, honestly, don't expect that real-world people won't be somewhat insulted with a statement that comes close to, "I prefer the machine's company to yours."

caveat: any "you", "I", "they", etc. in the following post is meant as a generic "you", etc., and not designating any specific person.



That last sentence of the above quote, I feel is the whole problem in a nutshell: people seeing it as that person prefers a machine to them. MMO's can be a social hobby as well, and they aren't necessarily saying the above assumption. Thay can just as well be saying, among other possibilities as well, "I want to hang out with people in a different environment than you prefer." It's not necessarily a personal insult towards anybody, and just as likely simply a preference for another environment.

But when someone starts thinking of this in that manner (i.e.: feeling insulted that their friend prefers a machine to them), then that is definitely a sense of entitlement...a sense of entitlement about something which they are not entitled to.

If one wants to spend time with their friend so much, why not go play the MMO with them...? Or is it a case of I don't like MMO's, so I'm not going to hang-out with that friend there (in which case your dislike of MMO's is more important than your friendship), or just a case of they don't want to hang out doing what I want to do, so they really aren't a friend...?

Also, I find the quoted post quite confusing. This is from the same person that can't understand how customers would feel insulted by WotC for saying they can't be trusted and taking away pdf's; but now says they wouldn't be surprised if people felt insulted by a friend wanting to play MMO's rather than tabletop games...

People's tastes change. People like variety. Friends will not always want to do what you want to do, or when you want to do it. Friendship is a two way street. You have to work at finding time to hang out, and yet at the same time, you do not have a right or entitlement to that friends time. If your friend no longer likes tabletop games, or maybe just not as much as you do, then meet them halfway. Go play an MMO with them...or not. Your friend likely has other friends also, and may be hanging out with them on an MMO. You are not entitled to a monopoly of their time, or entitled to any demands on their time.

And if one feels insulted by that, then one has a lot of growing up yet to accomplish.

 

[Janx]

That last sentence of the above quote, I feel is the whole problem in a nutshell: people seeing it as that person prefers a machine to them. MMO's can be a social hobby as well, and they aren't necessarily saying the above assumption. Thay can just as well be saying, among other possibilities as well, "I want to hang out with people in a different environment than you prefer." It's not necessarily a personal insult towards anybody, and just as likely simply a preference for another environment.

while you cite [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION]'s last sentence, you disregard the very last phrase about "dropping off the face of the planet."

It's actually key to the whole conversation.

Let's say you now like MMO's and were in Umbran's game. If you called him up and said, "hey, you're game's alright and all, but I'm really liking this new MMO, so I'm going to focus on that." then you've been a good guy, and Umbran's got nothing coming to him because you communicated, were polite and honest.

But if you just quit answering calls, texts or emails, and "disappeared off the face of the planet" then that is rude. And you would owe Umbran an apology.

This is the latter situation that Umbran is talking about.

But when someone starts thinking of this in that manner (i.e.: feeling insulted that their friend prefers a machine to them), then that is definitely a sense of entitlement...a sense of entitlement about something which they are not entitled to.

Remember, that one time, somebody asked me not to use the phrase "wallet rape" anymore. And I stopped. Same deal. Please try to explain your thinking (at least in this thread), without relying so much on the word Entitle.

Consider it an essay challenge.

Thanks.

If one wants to spend time with their friend so much, why not go play the MMO with them...? Or is it a case of I don't like MMO's, so I'm not going to hang-out with that friend there (in which case your dislike of MMO's is more important than your friendship), or just a case of they don't want to hang out doing what I want to do, so they really aren't a friend...?

it goes both ways. Why don't you pause from playing MMO 24x7 to hang out with Umbran for 4 hours at a D&D game or movie, or lunch?

You're talking past Umbran. No offer or request to join happened because they hypothetical person who is allegedly a friend and not just an aquantaince has vanished to pursue a hard-core schedule of MMO gaming.

Also, I find the quoted post quite confusing. This is from the same person that can't understand how customers would feel insulted by WotC for saying they can't be trusted and taking away pdf's; but now says they wouldn't be surprised if people felt insulted by a friend wanting to play MMO's rather than tabletop games...

It might help to indicate who you're talking about. Umbran? Did he say he didn't understand that a customer might percieve it as a trust issue if WotC pulls PDFs? Let's say somebody did, and in this thread advocates what I'm advocating.

Instead of seeing that as a proof of hypocrisy, maybe it is a chance for the person to see how they are similar.

When Agent X does Y, how does View Y percieve it? I have no doubt that Agent X has not given much thought to how his actions look to others. Probably not with malice. it just wasn't on their mind (like how I forget to take the trash out on my way to work). But after the fact, Agent X has an opportunity to ponder how the intent of their actions can be misunderstood.

I don't see any reason why Umbran might not see what he apparently missed as a parallel and adjust his thinking. It doesn't really invalidate the core point of the thread's example, that it isn't nice to vanish on your friends.

PS. I apologize to Umbran if I misrepresented him in any way. I'm just using him as an example name because he came up in the conversation. Umbran is his own person, and quite capable of speaking diplomatically and effectively on his own behalf.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If Entitled is the new word to describe extremism in expecting of others, there should be a comparable word to describe callous disregard for others feelings and needs.

There are LOTS of words!

Besides callous, we have words like hard-hearted, unsympathetic, cold-hearted, cold...the thesaurus is full of 'em!

 

[ggroy]

Yes. And perhaps I can phrase it in a way that makes it seem a bit more clear:

Say you agreed to play in a game. That's a social agreement - having made it, the other people should be allowed to have some expectation that you'll hold up your end. Call it entitlement if you will, but you effectively gave them that entitlement to your time. Which doesn't say you can never leave a game you joined, or have to pass on occasion - reasonable games make allowances for life. But, do it with a little respect for your fellow gamers, rather than just drop off the face of the planet.

And, honestly, don't expect that real-world people won't be somewhat insulted with a statement that comes close to, "I prefer the machine's company to yours."

Most of the time, I usually give the DM and the group two weeks notice that I will be leaving the game for good.

If any of them demands a further explanation, I ask them to phone me personally. Over the years, I have only had one DM which has phoned me about it.

 

[Umbran]

That last sentence of the above quote, I feel is the whole problem in a nutshell: people seeing it as that person prefers a machine to them. MMO's can be a social hobby as well, and they aren't necessarily saying the above assumption.

If we are talking about comparing face-to-face gaming to MMO gaming, as the tech currently stands, I think you'll have a hard sell getting people to accept that the MMO actually provides a superior social experience. This doesn't say that it isn't superior for a given individual, but taking into account how things are apt to look to others is the soul of communication.

They can just as well be saying, among other possibilities as well, "I want to hang out with people in a different environment than you prefer." It's not necessarily a personal insult towards anybody, and just as likely simply a preference for another environment.

Fine, have your version: "I want to go hang out with these other people (who aren't you), in this medium where there's machines between me and them, because I find that superior to being in-person with you."

Yeah, I can see how that should be hard to take as an insult.

But when someone starts thinking of this in that manner (i.e.: feeling insulted that their friend prefers a machine to them), then that is definitely a sense of entitlement...a sense of entitlement about something which they are not entitled to.

A couple things got left by the wayside:

Please remember the initial posit - you agreed to play in a game. You set the expectation, and thus gave them an entitlement to some of your time.

Also remember how I said this doesn't mean you cannot leave a game - it just means you have to do so with a modicum of respect for the people in the game.

Those points are key - if you drop them, you're arguing against something I'm not saying. Intentionally or not, you've created a pretty classic strawman here.

Also, I find the quoted post quite confusing. This is from the same person that can't understand how customers would feel insulted by WotC for saying they can't be trusted and taking away pdf's; but now says they wouldn't be surprised if people felt insulted by a friend wanting to play MMO's rather than tabletop games...

I understand *how* customers feel insulted by WotC. I just don't feel it is justified.

A player's relationship to WotC is a relationship between a business and a consumer, and that's it. Expecting more than common business practices (right or wrong) from that business is the real poster child for "entitlement". The relationship between players in a game is far more personal, and there's a different social contract in place. Apples and oranges, I'm afraid.

People's tastes change. People like variety. Friends will not always want to do what you want to do, or when you want to do it. Friendship is a two way street. You have to work at finding time to hang out, and yet at the same time, you do not have a right or entitlement to that friends time.

See above about those crucial points you're leaving out. I repeat: You made an agreement to be in a game? Then they do have an entitlement. You want out of that agreement? Fine. Then tell folks respectfully as far ahead of time as possible that you want out, so they can change their plans.

If I may - the "growing up" thing was unwise. It ends up effectively, "Anyone who doesn't agree with me is immature," which is both personal, and requires a position of authority to make stick. You may feel you've got authority from moral high ground. But, as I've shown, your current moral high ground is a haystack, and inherently unstable.

 

[El Mahdi]

I've been busy getting ready for school, so I'm just now getting caught up on about a weeks worth of ENWorld.

If we are talking about comparing face-to-face gaming to MMO gaming, as the tech currently stands, I think you'll have a hard sell getting people to accept that the MMO actually provides a superior social experience. This doesn't say that it isn't superior for a given individual, but taking into account how things are apt to look to others is the soul of communication.

I agree. I do believe I'd have a hard time selling most people on the idea that MMO's are a superior form of social experience.

So I guess it's a good thing I didn't make that claim...

Fine, have your version: "I want to go hang out with these other people (who aren't you), in this medium where there's machines between me and them, because I find that superior to being in-person with you."

Yeah, I can see how that should be hard to take as an insult.

One problem, you're making an assumption that someone won't want to hang out with them at all. They may have just grown tired of Tabletop Games. Just because someone prefers MMO's to a Tabletop experience, or their tastes changed in that direction, doesn't mean they necessarily prefer a machine to you. I'll agree though, that in a real friendship, this should be communicated. However, people are not perfect and don't always do this. Making assumptions like this can do nobody any good, especially oneself, and can quite likely make the situation worse. Before being insulted, it's usually best to find out if an insult actually took place, or being sure of what you're actually insulted about.

A couple things got left by the wayside:

Please remember the initial posit - you agreed to play in a game. You set the expectation, and thus gave them an entitlement to some of your time.

No. An expectation certainly, but not an entitlement.

Also remember how I said this doesn't mean you cannot leave a game - it just means you have to do so with a modicum of respect for the people in the game.

Those points are key - if you drop them, you're arguing against something I'm not saying. Intentionally or not, you've created a pretty classic strawman here.

I haven't dropped anything by the wayside or created a strawman. In the scenario you describe, nowhere does that entitle one to make the assumption that their friend prefers a machine to you, nor to feel insulted by someone for that.

Now if someone said they were going to play and didn't show, or just dropped off the face of the earth as you said, then feel insulted about them disrespecting you by not having the courtesy to tell you. However, that is not the same as being insulted because you think they prefer a machine to you, or prefer MMO's to Tabletop Games. Nobody involved in the posited scenario would have a justifiable entitlement to feel insulted because of someones venue preference.

I understand *how* customers feel insulted by WotC. I just don't feel it is justified.

A player's relationship to WotC is a relationship between a business and a consumer, and that's it. Expecting more than common business practices (right or wrong) from that business is the real poster child for "entitlement". The relationship between players in a game is far more personal, and there's a different social contract in place. Apples and oranges, I'm afraid.

Whether apples and oranges or not, feeling insulted can be triggered by more than one narrowly defined rationale. Just because the relationship isn't as personal, doesn't mean that it can't also be insulting. And we aren't talking about common business practices. We're talking about a specific situation where a company flat out said they were no longer providing certain products because their customers couldn't be trusted to not pirate them. Publicly stating to your customer base that they aren't trustworthy, is insulting your customer base. No matters of perception, no assumptions, it's the very definition of an insult.

But that really isn't the point. I believe that one can't reasonably have an expectation that it's justified to be insulted about a percieved or assumed reason, and also have the expectation that others aren't justified in their reasons for being insulted.

while you cite <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->@Umbran <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->'s last sentence, you disregard the very last phrase about "dropping off the face of the planet."

It's actually key to the whole conversation.

Let's say you now like MMO's and were in Umbran's game. If you called him up and said, "hey, you're game's alright and all, but I'm really liking this new MMO, so I'm going to focus on that." then you've been a good guy, and Umbran's got nothing coming to him because you communicated, were polite and honest.

But if you just quit answering calls, texts or emails, and "disappeared off the face of the planet" then that is rude. And you would owe Umbran an apology.

This is the latter situation that Umbran is talking about.

I didn't disregard the last phrase. Umbran didn't state that as the reason for feeling insulted. The reason given was preferring a machine over a persons company. Dropping off the face of the earth certainly seemed like it contributed to the feeling, but it wasn't the stated reason for feeling insulted. I'm not in a habit of trying to divine what someone else means in a post (though I have occasionally been guilty of that). However, in this instance I attempted to respond to what was actually typed in the post, and only what was typed in the post...though I did refer to something Umbran posted about in another thread for comparison, but again, only what he actually posted in that thread.

 

[Thunderfoot]

Actually, I think all of you have the right of it.... And that's part of the problem. Entitlement comes from a persons' feelings, issued forth as a decree for inherent rights. There are plenty of examples of this (too numerous to mention and some too politically charged to politely include.).

I think the gist of it comes down to perception on the part of both parties:

For instance Bob and Ted both like Laurie... Bob and Ted are friends, they both agree verbally in their personal communications to each other that they are attracted to said girl. Bob decides to act and asks Laurie out; Laurie accepts and they date a few times, Bob now feels that he is entitled to Laurie's company...

However, after their couple of dates Laurie thinks Ted is uber hunky and Bob is just a no personality noodle. She then decides to "suggest" to Ted that they should go out. Ted agrees - Bob finds out and feels betrayed because Ted is stepping with "his" woman... (perceived ownership of Laurie (please don't get upset folks, this does not imply unequal rights, just making a point - stay with me.))

On the third date, Bob confronts Ted and Laurie about Ted's "improper" behavior - Ted defers to Laurie who says "Get lost Bob, you're a flake." Bob takes exception and compares Laurie to a female dog. At this, Ted takes exception and feels Bob is now entitled to a "knuckle sandwich", which he whole heartedly delivers. The owner of the restaurant decides they are both entitled to a stay in the local lock up and invites Joe and Frank the police officers to help them with it. Which they do. Sandra the judge decides they are both entitled to 4-6 mos in the county pokey and Laurie decides she's entitled to less drama and begins dating Enrique the pool boy (who eventually leaves her for Manuel the hairdresser)....

Lots of folks felt entitled....Only the law had the muscle to back it up, which is why when the word entitlement gets thrown around - politics (i.e. the gov't., law, etc.) usually ends up in the mix.

Yes, this was meant to be humorous, but, it goes to show that perception does NOT equal truth, and that is where entitlement and emotion usually cross (and ends up in the crapper).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I think your tongue feels entitled to reside in your cheek...







That's some multiple entendres there, folks.