Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 6007966" data-attributes="member: 59506">I have answered simply. And I haven't been using any big words. I've stated quite clearly in my posts on this subject what I think of all of this. However, I don't think this is a simple Yes or No situation. I'm sorry if you think I'm muddling the waters rather than giving you what you feel is a straight answer. I am giving you straight answers, but it is not a simple black and white situation. I will however, sum up what I've said about this as simply and straigthforwardly as I can.  1. Nobody is entitled to anyone else's time, friend or not (excepting in the case of legal obligations). Entitlement means you are owed that time, that you have authority and ownership over it...and in this case, You Do Not! You can have an expectation of that time being spent with you, but you are not owed it.  2. In communication, the things your audience most pick up on and assume as the point of your communication, are the first and last things one says. It's a natural and subconcious truth. When the final point of Umbran's communication was about feeling insulted that one would prefer a machine's company rather than his, then that was the emphasized point being made...and everything else was just explanation or set-up. 3. It's perfectly natural and understandable that someone would be upset, and even feel insulted, if a friend suddenly "dropped off the face of the Earth". It's rude behavior, and even if not meant to be directed at you, it did affect you and therefore is insulting. 4. However, it's not perfectly natural and understandable to turn it into something as personal as "they prefer a machine to me", when there's no evidence confirming that (because you have not talked to your friend to get his take yet), and especially not rational to feel insulted about something that may not even be true. That came about in this scenario because of a percieved entitlement on the tabletop gamers part...an entitlement that he did not possess.  If I was the friend that had "dropped off the face of the Earth" by losing myself in an MMO, and a friend came to me and said: Dude, you just dropped off the face of the Earth. You said you were going to sit in on our game, and we were expecting you, but when you didn't show it put a crimp in the game. I felt insulted that you'd prefer a machine to me. My response would be: As far as your feeling insulted, that isn't my problem. I never said I preferred a machine to you, nor have you asked me if that's the case. And for the record, it's not the case. You made an assumption and took it personally when it really had nothing to do with you. However, you're right in that I made an obligation to be there, and it was rude an inconsiderate of me to dissapear without an explanation. You have every right to be upset and feel insulted by that. I'm sorry I was rude and inconsiderate to you. For that, I apologize. Then, hopefully, you both TALK. TALK without preconcieved expectations. TALK as friends. And TALK about meeting in the middle. Which leads me back to something else I said earlier:  That's the scenario I'd like you to address. The other side of the coin if you will. The scenario as presented in this post is very one sided, and there are at least two sides to this.    El Mahdi's answer: Yes.  El Mahdi's answer: Because Bob acted in a rude and insensitive manner. He owes an apology for not showing up...period. He does not owe an apology to you for your perception that he prefers a machine to you. That part is all of your own making, and entirely your own problem to deal with.  And here we go with the entitlement again. If Bob is your friend (and has been your friend), that likely happened because you have mutual interests, and mutually interesting personalities, and enjoy spending time together (and there may be other reasons also). However, nobody has the right to lay conditions on anyone else as to what one must do to be allowed to remain a friend. And if one mistake means you now consider your friend as an enemy unless he makes it up to you, then you likely aren't real friends in the first place.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> You either accept who and what they are, and choose to be their friend, or you don't. One does not draw lines in the sand with friends. If you do so, then you no longer have a friendship. What you have is a defacto superior/subordinate relationship. And that just isn't cool.   I agree. If Bob kept doing this dickish behavior, even after you've explained that it's hurtful to you, then I would likely cut ties with that friend. But I'd make that decision for me, not for him. I'm not giving them an ultimatum, I'm simply cutting ties with someone who probably wasn't a real friend in the first place...or if they were, they no longer are now. That's sad, but it's just the way it is.   As to the OP subject and question: When did Entitled become a bad word?  I don't think the word itself has become bad.  There are honest to god, real entitlements that people have...and in my eyes those are good things.  It's only bad however, when one is upset for not getting something they felt entitled to, when they were not actually entitled to it.  In this situation, it's not the word that's bad, but the entitled attitude being expressed that is bad.</blockquote>

Verification