In hockey, there’s a large contingent of people whose motto is “Let the players play.” Until quite recently, these people were in charge of the NHL referees. The basic theory was that people pay to see the players, not the refs, so the refs shouldn’t do anything that might affect the outcome. Like, for example, call any penalties whatsoever in the 3rd period or overtime. Or give out more penalties to one team than another. You might think that I’m exaggerating, but really, I’m not. Players could literally get tackled to the ice and not draw a penalty. In one particularily memorable incident, in game 7 of the Eastern Conference Championships in 2003, Martin Brodeur literally shot a helmet at the puck with his stick to knock it away from Jason Spezza, right in front of the ref. No call. The result of the policy was predictable: NHL hockey was boring as hell, as the team that committed the most fouls in the game without being called for them would generally win. And people thought this was a good thing, because the game was settled by the players on the ice. The whole mindset of not enforcing the rules of the game just boggles my mind.
What I don’t get is people thinking the exact content of something that you respond to is somehow not relevant.
PersonA: Nobody advocates MorallyWrongPosition anymore.
me: Actually, PersonB has advocated MorallyWrongPosition only today.
PersonA: How can you support MorallyWrongPosition? I didn’t expect that of you!
me: (speechless)
I also don’t understand people who have no feeling of time and who regard hard-and-fast public transport schedules as negotiable. When I say that I must leave within 90 seconds, to get the bus to get the train to get the connecting train, for someone I know this is the occasion to begin a lengthy discussion.
I think I can explain the thinking behind this one. When my son was in Scouts, when we went on camping trips, CD players and GameBoys (and all little hand-held game player things) were not allowed, the thinking being that if they were off by themselves playing games, they weren’t participating in the group Scout activities.
Books were never banned in our troop, however, just the electonic toys.
They were allowed to bring sports equipment, too. We usually camped near places with ball fields and sports were encouraged.
Although I’m not a sports fan, I can get the enjoyment of watching sports. I can see getting excited about a good match at any sport. But I really don’t get the team fan mindset. The emotional response to hearing about the outcome of match you didn’t see yourself - how can you get worked up about it? If you have a favorite team and see them lose, yeah, that could upset you. But missing a game and reading the next day in the paper that they lost, and then getting just as upset? Why? I can’t relate this to any other area of entertainment.
Cheating at friendly games. I’ve seen people get way too competitive over friendly games - bowling, cards, whatever. Usually they just get upset and try harder, or beat themselves (or teammates) up over falling behind. This I understand, even if it does make everyone else miserable. Yeah, you have to be the best at whatever petty thing we are doing, this is just how you are at everything. But some take it to cheating and I just don’t understand what you can possibly get out of that. You aren’t proving to yourself that you’re the best, and the rest of us don’t care who wins anyway so you aren’t getting anything from us. What is going on in your mind when you peek at that card?
People who complain and wring their hands over their problems rather than doing something about them…One gets tired of listening after a while.
“It’s wrong because it’s against the law.”
Now don’t get me wrong; I don’t advocate an anarchistic free-for-all. But I think the that the concept of right and wrong should be the basis of the law, not the other way around.
Flakey, neurotic people. (I may be a little crazy, but at least I’m passably functional.)
Really “social” people. (
It’s like they’re freakin’ Martians, to me.)
People who follow really esoteric philosophy, theology, metaphysics, and whatnot. (I’m jus’ a simple country materialist, at heart.)
Going through great mental pains to “define yourself.” (Maybe I’m just an idiot. Or an megalomaniac.)
Philosophical and religious viewpoints where the extinguishing/total assimilation of one’s individual consciousness is seen as a good thing. (Maybe I just don’t want to understand that mindset.)
Anarchists, and “rebels without a cause.”
I’d like to say “Liberals” and “Conservatives,” but, in all honesty, I think I have an idea of where they’re “coming from.” (Not to say I agree with it. Or like it. At all.)
People who get married and have kids at 20.
People who want to work at those typical 9-5 cubicle jobs.
Young conservatives.
People who go crazy over sports.
People with Type-A personalities.
What’s a “Type A” personality?
People who are ultra competative or ultra Anal about stuff.
Me, I’m a Type D- personality. If I wait long enough, the Type A’s do it for me leaving me to be in my mental happy place.