Six Random Things About Myself: Part Deux

I think I'm a pretty patient person ("pretty" as in "generally," although I won't mind if you also think I'm pretty) with a mild temperament. I don't think I rant often (right? Jen? Keith?), and I'm usually not quick to anger; do you know that saying, Beware the fury of a patient man? When I *do* get angry, and I rant and rave and shout and yell and cry and shake and my stomach turns to knots, there's been a LOT going into it.

Yet it's been a common theme in my life lately, wacknoodleness. And at the risk of posting two rants in a row, here's another random thing about myself:

I'm all out out of patience for people who assume too much and listen too little.

It's a newish peeve of mine, really. Or maybe it isn't new, but one that I'm vividly aware of lately. It's all coming from a particularly bad experience I had a few weeks ago with a particular wacknoodle, followed by another less intense but equally bad experience not long after that.

These people, you see, are typically overbearing in one way or another because they assume something about you to be true, despite the fact that you have perhaps made direct statements to the contrary. Maybe they think they know what's best for you, and make decisions that affect you without your consultation; or they presume that you think the same as they do, and make decisions that affect you without your consultation. Both overreact angrily when you suggest they are in the wrong to have done so, and you refuse to just shut your mouth and go along with it. They're passive-aggressive -- cold-shouldering, excluding, guilt-inducing -- and make no effort to understand the heart of what's really bothering you, because (a) they don't listen, (b) they think they have your best interests in mind, and (c) they think you're being unreasonable.

And I'm not putting up with it anymore.

Now, it has occured to me that these recurring bad experiences could be resulting from what might be my own skewed perspective on interpersonal communication, and so I've taken to reflecting very carefully on how the other party might perceive the situation. Because I am not perfect (although I *am* a neurotic perfectionist) and sometimes, I find that I'm the one who needs to chill out (usually because I am a neurotic perfectionist). I like to be as scientific, as logical, as objective as possible -- taking time to consider why I am reacting in a particular way, and why the other person may be reacting in a particular way -- before I actually react, like an internal system of checks and balances: my own legislative, executive and judicial branches, all right here in my head! It gives me a fuller understanding of the situation and keeps me from reacting over-emotionally. I mean, sure I get emotional -- I'm a girl after all -- but at least I usually know why, and I can keep my emotions in check. I can be the voice of reason and logic when everyone else is acting like wacknoodles. And then I suppose I come off as cold and insensitive. (It's a cruel, cruel world.)

Which is probably why I don't have much patience for people who don't do the same thing, who don't think. And who don't confront, who'd rather ignore you and/or ignore the issue at hand. Who'd rather sweep the dust under the rug. Who give you a band-aid to heal a bruise. It probably also explains why it's easier to be friends with boys.

And I really, honestly don't think I'm wrong to want to be treated with respect: meaning that what I have to say matters, whatever you think, and that I deserve to be understood whether or not you share my perspective. I don't think I'm wrong to expect that those who don't know enough about me shouldn't assume anything about me. So here's a hint: those who think they know enough never do. Because if you know enough about me, you'll know better than to assume. Which means you're also probably a very good listener. And I love you for it.