Ever since my youth, my father would become unreasonably ridiculous whenever he gets into an argument. And typically, those arguments would be due to a misunderstanding, or a miscommunication, or because a certain younger sibling had just recently chewed him out (this has become quite the common occurrence in our household). Recently, we got into one of those arguments and I wanted to convince myself that it was not my fault. Here is a compression of my points, what those points meant, and what they generally did for me.
1: I had convinced myself that the reason he was mad was not because I had shown no respect, but because a while ago, my little sister had, yet again, yelled at him for whatever thought processes she uses to legitimate her tirades. By convincing myself that it was my little sister who was the problem and not me, I could disregard his accusations of rudeness and, instead, pass the accusation onto her. He was mad at her for something she did; he was not mad at me for something I did.
2: I figured that his definition of "respect" was a warped one. Therefore, even if his accusations of rudeness were truly directed at me, then the definition of "rude" which I am familiar with would be different than his, so my being rude would not actually be rude at all. I also reasoned that, even within my own definition of "rude," I was not being rude. Therefore, he should not have been mad at me for an alleged rudeness.
3: I supposed that he had no real reason to be mad at me for anything anyways. He said he was mad because I was rude, but that would be no reason to get as mad as he did. My little sister is much worse than me in these terms, yet he never gets mad at her - at least not for long. Therefore, his wrath is skewed against me, and therefore illegitimate when determining who he gets mad at. Therefore, there was no reason to be mad at all.
I suppose this much content is enough to warrant a satisfying blog post. I also feel like the information was top notch. As such, I am done.
No comments:
Post a Comment