Yes is the better option. How we ought to behave is what's at issue. Ideally, when at odds with authority, procedure trumps goal. We should obey, then afterwards, later, we have grievances addressed.
If you know the rules better than the person trying to enforce them, you demand that the person contact his supervisor, to establish whether or not you're really violating a rule.
That's childish and wreaks of belligerence. There is no respect in that and if taught to behave like that, trouble is more apt to ensue. See, the issue isn't whether we can behave like that but whether we should. Think, can we talk back to cops and solve a problem that arises when one has done nothing wrong? Of course we CAN, but we shouldn't, and acting as though doing no wrong excuses our behavior wreaks havoc on society.
<on a personal note and with the mike turned away, I feel your pain on that and in today's atmosphere where resistance to authority is commonplace, not too many are going to overly ridicule you; in fact, you're likely to be applauded, but that we've come to expect irresponsible resistance doesn't make it the optimal choice.
Mike back on, however, your actions aren't all that off, just the order and attitude. Listen. That comes first. That means obey. If some stranger with no more authority than you tells you to do something, then you're not being advised to listen, as that's completely different and brings about a whole host of complexities. However, if someone with authoritative powers bucks you, you are not to buck back; you are to listen, period. You may not immediately get what you want, but then again, you're not supposed to. That may come later after you have listened and subsequently acted properly.
Our work cafeteria has a sign over the pre-made salads, saying that you can take them for a certain price, or you can add things to them and pay a 'by weight' price.
I was putting additional green pepper on a chef salad when this little shit of a fry cook started yelling at me that this wasn't allowed. The sign SAYS it's allowed.
The guy running the cash register tried to calm things down, and i was calming, until he said 'We'll let it go this one time.'
No, mutherfutzker, this is YOUR COMPANY'S STATED POLICY! I am NOT getting away with anything and i will want to be free to do this in the future, as well as anyone else who foolishly reads the posted sign and acts IAW posted policy.
With the mike off and behind closed doors, you get my high five. I can't help but appreciate your frustration.
I'm trying to tailor your example to reinforce the thrust of my point, but your example has a lot of gray area seeping in. I don't want to undermine my point dealing with variations and exceptions, etc. The manager showed up after tensions were already in the air. What would you have done had things not then went your way? If your kids are going to feed off your actions and your actions reinforce what your child will do, then no, caving in at every possible turn is certainly not the lesson here, but with more clear cut examples: police directives, personnel on a plane giving verbal orders, the lesson isn't as quickly lost. Knowing when to listen and when thinking for ourselves need to be put on pause is a learned skill.
The manager showed up and gave me the salad for free. I insisted on paying the 'by weight' price because that was what i wanted to do, that day and every fucking time it strikes me. THey can obey their own goddamned rules or they can take the sign down.
Attitude. The propensity to flair up is all too prominent. Fight, fight, fight back. I get it and all the accompanying grrrr, but a momentary stay on backlash with some temporary acquiescing to authority paves a far brighter road worthy of respect and admiration.
When a black man (who has done nothing whatsoever wrong) has been given a direct order, the fuss that could ensue (in light of the did nothing wrong stance) can yield much better results by bringing argumentation into the mix at a later time.
me said:
If a pilot instructs security to remove a passenger that is unwilling to leave, any fact that the passenger has done nothing wrong is wholly irrelevant. The representative of the company who is allowed to give and execute demands of this nature is an authority figure in so much as he or she has been granted authority to execute such tasks.
you said:
Except that the manager has not been granted this authority.
I don't want to hear that. That kind of slick willy talk is why we have the problems we have today. When CNN points out the wrongs committed towards certain victims, I am saddened by the liberal support the victims get, especially when all you can hope for is for somebody to knock the hell out of the victim. Get your ass off the plane as instructed to. The people making the demands are not their peers, and right and wrong definitely has nothing to do with anything remotely relevant. 1) listen. Then, later, 2) Address the problem.
