People, Qualities and Ideals

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Here's the thing: You can be yourself as long as you're a fun person to be with.  I'm a goofy guy in real life, often using silly phrases, and doing odd things (walking along curbs, stacking pens during meetings, noticeably bobbing my head to music while I work, etc.)  I do what seems fun.  I don't drink, I don't swear, etc., so you'd think I'd be a real drag at parties, but oddly enough (or perhaps not so much), people still love to have me there.

The absolutely essential thing is to, well, not be a dick.  If you don't talk poorly about people, if you keep your mind, body, actions, and conversation clean, if you're well-mannered when the situation calls for it, if you're not judgmental when people do things you disagree with, it doesn't matter one bit what else you do.  It doesn't matter how you dress, either; I wear jean shorts ("jorts") and a T-shirt every day, and while my friends good-naturedly poke fun at me for it, it doesn't change how they really treat me or how they feel about me.  My hair isn't crazy (or even "stylish"), I don't have any piercings or tattoos, I don't wear jewelry, and there's pretty much nothing remarkable about my appearance.  But because people like my personality, the rest of that stuff becomes insignificant.

Be who you are and be confident in that, and the rest will follow.

[Blacksheepboy]

Lately, I've been way too busy to do so, and I must say, it's kind of liberating. I've noticed myself doing what comes naturally, and things seem to flow just fine.

Yeah, today I am going to do a bunch of stuff today that I've needed to do.. been putting them off in hopes of being able to drive. So, bicycle it is. BUT, my point is, considering that I have done precious little on my own, admittedly, I am a little nervous. But, as you have said, comparing to where I was developmentally almost a year ago, I feel pretty liberated.

A note on this whole topic. The focus may have been, yes, the question "What is being a man?" but you cannot address that question without getting into general personal development.

A book that puts all of this into a fairly simple perspective - a perspective that I like much more than thinking about complex in-depth psychology - would be "How To Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie. Once again: precise, and effective. The main theme is "to be able to communicate your ideas clearly and effectively," and since talking is the spice of life, and the main course all in one, learning the aforementioned can be powerful.

[Kazuki]

Gamer, I'm a lot like you. I'm goofy; not exactly the coolest person around. Although I do drink, I'm a very laid back drinker and my friends often tell me how they can't tell if I'm buzzed / drunk (unless I drink so much that I get sick) because I act largely the same as I normally do. The reason I drink is because there's a great camaraderie to be found in a few guys sitting around and drinking a couple of beers or doing a couple of shots and goofing around.

I agree with almost everything you have said. I normally don't praise myself, but I think that I'm a pretty friendly and approachable person. My manners are well-developed and I think the reason my boss likes me (I work at a hotel, front desk) is because my manners are genuine and not faked like half of the rest of the staff.

I also wear very informal and predictable clothing. I always seem to be wearing a light t-shirt and sporty "swishy" pants so people can usually hear me coming from a mile away. I never match, and in fact, it may seem to others like I go out of my way NOT to match, though this isn't the case. My friends point it out to me all the time as well.

As you said, people will like you for who you are if you're not a dick, but I honestly think that two large reasons that people are dicks is either because they are trying to be one for some reason or if they've just had a horrible day. If someone is trying to be a dick, then they're obviously not being themselves like we're suggesting in such a cliche manner.

Blacksheep, I think that being busy and feeling productive has really helped me focus on the things that surround me rather than myself. I have found that when I have the time to think too deeply, I often remind myself of many small things that stress me out slightly. But all of those small stressors stack up quickly and I end up killing my motivation to do just about anything. That falls into the "ignorance is bliss" category, I guess.

[Blacksheepboy]

But all of those small stressors stack up quickly and I end up killing my motivation to do just about anything. That falls into the "ignorance is bliss" category, I guess.

Yeah... basically. Thanks for the responses. They've been insightful. Hopefully I have returned the favor?

I am still going to work on chowing up books of the aforementioned sort. If anything, well written books help in improving the way I write. And anyway, I've got a drive toward some sort of "stage" and performing/speaking/whatever.

[Kazuki]

Aye, a pleasure as always. An inspiration for self improvement is never a bad thing.

[PANZERCATWAGON]

Be who you are and be confident in that, and the rest will follow.

that might work for you but you have no idea if that works for everyone. cant you see how ignorant you sound

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Be who you are and be confident in that, and the rest will follow.

that might work for you but you have no idea if that works for everyone. cant you see how ignorant you sound

No, I can't.  Perhaps you could give me an example of how I'm wrong?

[PANZERCATWAGON]

jrgp

he is a linux nerd and is very confident in his ability to be a linux nerd. people will never start liking him for that

thats how you are wrong. people cant be generalized like that

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Sure, we'll use that as an example.  I'd argue that the generic "computer geek" stereotype indicates a complete lack of confidence: you're only comfortable with your computer and your online friends, and stepping out into the real world and using those interests as a launching point for conversation and real interaction is scary, at best.  If you're truly confident in your technical skills, they won't be a hindrance when you're trying to deal with real people.

[pavliko]

I wonder what qualities & ideals soldat forum thinks I have >.<

[Blacksheepboy]

"Be yourself" is an awful mind-job phrase that people should never push on other people. What if you don't know who you are? Then the phrase "Just be yourself" is like a virus on a computer: it is liable to mind-f**k with people.

[Horve]

freud concluded that people are inherently irrational, dangerous and must be controlled (or "guided"). Wherever the fuck you might live, his theories are currently applied in reality in many ways. Whether he was right is, personally, of no interest to me. Be irrational, be dangerous?

[jrgp]

he is a linux nerd and is very confident in his ability to be a linux nerd. people will never start liking him for that

Yes, which is why I never bring up Linux/Computer stuff unless people ask. And when/if they do and see that I have useful answers they start respecting and liking me immediately.

Sure, we'll use that as an example.  I'd argue that the generic "computer geek" stereotype indicates a complete lack of confidence: you're only comfortable with your computer and your online friends, and stepping out into the real world and using those interests as a launching point for conversation and real interaction is scary, at best. 

Except the generic "computer geek" stereotype does not really imply being comfortable with/having online friends since to most people everyone you meet online is a serial killer/pedo of some sort.

[VijchtiDoodah]

"Be yourself" is an awful mind-job phrase that people should never push on other people. What if you don't know who you are? Then the phrase "Just be yourself" is like a virus on a computer: it is liable to mind-f**k with people.

Take it further: "Be yourself" is the wrong phrase no matter how self-secure you are.

There's a reason the first few decades of a person's life are called the "formative" years. It's because children, adolescents, and young adults generally haven't settled into a personality yet. They're still searching, molding, and being molded. So, really, "be yourself" means nothing at this point. You don't have a stable personality to be.

Later on, the phrase still wrong. Rather than being yourself, you should be emulating others for the traits you admire. If you want to be a better person, copying the successful behaviors of others or finding your own ways of being are the only avenues open to you -- but that's still not "being yourself", it's choosing who you will become.

I don't think that process ever stops. Even late in life, one should still be looking for ways to improve -- ways to be someone better, to be someone other than themselves.

[Blacksheepboy]

-snip-

You summed up the epitome of life development pretty damn well. So uh, LAW, now you see why "be yourself" is full of holes?

[-Major-]

"Be yourself" is an awful mind-job phrase that people should never push on other people. What if you don't know who you are? Then the phrase "Just be yourself" is like a virus on a computer: it is liable to mind-f**k with people.

Take it further: "Be yourself" is the wrong phrase no matter how self-secure you are.

There's a reason the first few decades of a person's life are called the "formative" years. It's because children, adolescents, and young adults generally haven't settled into a personality yet. They're still searching, molding, and being molded. So, really, "be yourself" means nothing at this point. You don't have a stable personality to be.

Later on, the phrase still wrong. Rather than being yourself, you should be emulating others for the traits you admire. If you want to be a better person, copying the successful behaviors of others or finding your own ways of being are the only avenues open to you -- but that's still not "being yourself", it's choosing who you will become.

I don't think that process ever stops. Even late in life, one should still be looking for ways to improve -- ways to be someone better, to be someone other than themselves.

if you don't know who you are then you should find it out...

eitherway, what you are saying is that nobody is anyone, so looking at other and trying to be like them isn't valid, because they are nobody (cuz you aren't yourself).
and why try to "improve" yourself if you're statesfied with yourself? you can't be somebody else than yourself in the long run.

[Blacksheepboy]

eitherway, what you are saying is that nobody is anyone, so looking at other and trying to be like them isn't valid, because they are nobody (cuz you aren't yourself).

What you just said sounds worse than existentialism, and has .. little [to no] logic. [facepalm]

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Sure, we'll use that as an example.  I'd argue that the generic "computer geek" stereotype indicates a complete lack of confidence: you're only comfortable with your computer and your online friends, and stepping out into the real world and using those interests as a launching point for conversation and real interaction is scary, at best. 

Except the generic "computer geek" stereotype does not really imply being comfortable with/having online friends since to most people everyone you meet online is a serial killer/pedo of some sort.

So...we've got over 10000 serial killers on this forum? I'm not sure what you're saying, since it's my experience that people who are into computers generally are like that because of online social interactions, be it chat rooms, MMOs, forums, or anything else.

You summed up the epitome of life development pretty damn well. So uh, LAW, now you see why "be yourself" is full of holes?

No, I don't.  Sure, life is always a transition and we're constantly developing.  I don't think anyone will argue that.  But any process has distinct states that it passes through, like the individual frames on a filmstrip.  Whether or not you're aspiring to be something better, you WILL have a specific, distinct personality whenever you're interacting with people.  The important thing is to stick to that, instead of putting on false fronts based on who you're around.

Additionally, there's a significant difference between conforming to a group so that you'll fit in, and aspiring to be more than you are.  The former is what people are against when they say "be yourself," while the latter is simply normal personal growth.

[jrgp]

Sure, we'll use that as an example.  I'd argue that the generic "computer geek" stereotype indicates a complete lack of confidence: you're only comfortable with your computer and your online friends, and stepping out into the real world and using those interests as a launching point for conversation and real interaction is scary, at best. 

Except the generic "computer geek" stereotype does not really imply being comfortable with/having online friends since to most people everyone you meet online is a serial killer/pedo of some sort.

So...we've got over 10000 serial killers on this forum? I'm not sure what you're saying, since it's my experience that people who are into computers generally are like that because of online social interactions, be it chat rooms, MMOs, forums, or anything else.

Right, I meant the "computer geek" stereotype to *non-geeks* does not necessarily imply interacting with others online.

[Blacksheepboy]

No, I don't.  Sure, life is always a transition and we're constantly developing.  I don't think anyone will argue that.  But any process has distinct states that it passes through, like the individual frames on a filmstrip.

Now look, I agree with you. I think what we're both now debating is whether or not it's said correctly while we both agree on principle.

Essentially, "Keep an identity while striving for self improvement." I suppose a phrase like that works well enough for me, and hopefully for you as well.