This Saturday just past, I had occasion to attend a dinner party at the Fairfield, Connecticut home of Madame boran’s best friend. (Fairfield is one of those just-so-perfect, affluent, leafy Connecticut communities crowding the western part of the state.) Accordingly, we packed ourselves and the boran2 boy into my prized vintage Mazda for the trek to the wilds of Fairfield. Making our way along the curvy back roads of northern Westchester county toward Greenwhich, we soon found ourselves on the Merrit Parkway, the scene of so many David Letterman speedfests.
We arrived only just slightly late for what I had hoped would be a pleasant meal. Interestingly enough, the salmon steaks were fine, Ms.bestfriend’s spouse was a bit less so.
He and I are, at best, longstanding acquaintances. But shortly after our arrival, without prelude, the challenging interrogations began. But more about that shortly.
As to houseguests. I subscribe to the ancient and obviously outdated code that provides houseguests with the highest treatment and respect. Under the code, guests are to be treated as rare treasure, at least for the brief time they occupy space under the host’s roof. (Of course, after they leave, a proper review and trashing is in order, but that is a topic for another day.) Unaware as I was that the ancient manner was no longer acceptable, I was taken aback at the treatment that was to come.
Back to the dinnertime interrogations. Seated at the dining room table, they began thusly: “Do you liberals believe that we should be pursuing the terrorists offensively?” After getting beyond the initial surprise, I hoped to set forth a reply that would terminate this line of conversation. But not to worry, this being the heart of oh-so-genteel Connecticut, our inquisitor was obliged to provide a brief time to formulate a response. As such, he left time for me and his other subject to consider our response(s). Getting up to attend to something in the kitchen, he stated, “Think about your answer while I’m gone.” And really, what could be more considerate? Then he dissappeared into the kitchen.
A rousing dinnertime challenge from the host, what could better stir the appetite?!!
Now I’d like to say that words emerged from my mouth that were both intelligent and cutting. But upon his return, my fellow guest offered nothing and I, too tired for my usual “brilliance” and having little patience, muttered something about not supporting the Bush agenda. And of course this was the home of Madame’s best friend, a constraining factor keeping this conversation from entering full trollrating mode.
But the inquiry did not end there. Subsequently, our intrepid host, undeterred by his failure to bait two of his worthy guests, reengaged his efforts.
“What comes to mind when you think of Ronald Reagan?” “Umm, asshole”, I replied, having run close to empty on snappy comebacks. “I get it that you don’t like him, but wouldn’t you agree that he was responsible for the end of the Soviet Union without a shot being fired?” “No, it would have likely happened without him.”, I stated.
But yet it did not end there. He started gearing up for the next level of cruel and unusual questioning. But midway through his question and before he could shine a bright light in my face, I stated that I needed to get up. And I did so, leaving our determined host and the other guest at the table. Our host cackled wildly as I did so. (Where exactly were Madame boran and Ms.bestfriend?)
A few moments later he did hastily say that he was sorry.
So much for the myth of genteel Connecticut.
So many wingnuts, so little time.
I have a relative who fits this guy’s description exactly. Its all I can do to try and stay out of politics on the rare occasion he passes through town and stops for dinner. There are some people who are just not worth arguing with because I’m not likely to change their opinion in the least. Its certainly tempting, but I would rather keep peace in the family. My revenge is to work on those who waver in their beliefs and can be coaxed away from the dark side of the force;-)
Boran2, I have watched your diaries about encounters with wingnuts but not commented on them. This one got me, because of the circumstances in which it occurred.
I, too, ascribe to the Southern version of the ancient traditions. Guests in one’s home should be treated with respect and deference, even if they are slightly off kilter and somewhat rude. It is not necessary to chastise such a guest at the time, but it may be necessary to withold any further invitations or to offer politely worded conditional invitations if the invitation itself is unavoidable due to overriding social requirements.
Many wingnuts have no manners and are borderline psycopathic narcissistic bullies. Sounds like you ran into another one of those. It is difficult to know what to do in the circumstances you described, and even more difficult to have the energy and wherewithal to execute one’s own plan for handing such an attack, whatever one’s plan may be. I suggest that you didn’t do too badly, in the circumstances you describe. Interrupting his attack by removing yourself was actually quite good, imo.
I agree with IndianaDem’s observation that some them are too far gone to bother with, but given the fact that you were somewhat restricted in your ability to avoid this wingnut, alternative methods of response may be useful. They may require more effort than you had energy for, though. However, returning a series of questions about the offensive questioner’s question usually helps to defuse it and to delay any response that you might wish to make, and doesn’t require nearly as much energy or wit as a direct response. Narcissists usually like to talk a lot. So, Think Judo.
e.g.
In the language of fencing, this might be called parry, parry, parry, parry, …, until you can trip him with your foot.
At least you ate his food, though some indigestion may have followed the exchange. Thanks for sharing, and I offer the above humbly, as I was not there and thus could not possibly understand the intricacies of the situation.
What an elegant process you describe.
I was going to suggest Boran2 carry a fossil with him at all times!
Your suggestion is better. I will try to keep it in mind. Thanks.
I hope it is helpful, tampopo. It is easier said than done, as we are all apt to respond to an attack with a defensive remark or a counterattack.
One of my favorite tactics in the face of an extremely offensive question or remark is to ask the wingnut to please repeat what they just said: “Excuse me, I’m not sure I understood/heard what you said, would you please repeat it?” This serves to both to give you a moment to reflect on what your response might be and requires the wingnut to say something stupid/offensive TWICE, so as to give them no outlet about being misunderstood.
Oftentimes, merely asking someone to repeat themselves will give them a chance to realize how stupid they sound and they will rephrase. If they rephrase to soften the stupidity, you are gaining the upper hand already. If they say the same stupid thing twice, you can then start the clarification questions routine, confident that they are really stupid and don’t deserve a thoughtful reply.
Tit-for-tat doesn’t work until you’ve worn them down with all the clarification questions, and ensures that they understand that you understand the tactic that you are serving up your tit-for-tat response to. If they are smart enough to overtly point out the tit-for-tat, you can start asking questions about “How does it make you feel to have that tactic used on you?”, etc. If you stick with it, you might be able to force them to make a human connection, resulting in them being less offensive to you in the future, or at least respecting you enough to not offer their bullying attacks in the future.
Sometimes, these things really work for me, when I have the energy to pursue them to conclusion. At the least, they make bullies think twice about bullying me, because they don’t get the knee-jerk response they feed upon and they have to do real work to engage me. I can’t be sure that it changes their attitudes towards anyone but me, but that’s a start for them and it keeps me from having to hear their crap over and over.
I might also mention that I have had to practice this in my mind, fail repeatedly in real life, try again, rinse, lather, repeat, before getting myself aware enough of my own knee-jerk responses to learn how to hold them at bay and follow a more effective path.
What a great description of the Southern tradition. I’ll add that facial expression contributes a lot to this. Looking very concerned, nodding occasionally (as you might to a small child who is explaining something with stunning lack of clarity).
It might help also to interject a comment or two to the spouse of the host as well in the middle of the grilling: “It is just so nice for Boran2spouse and I to be invited here for this delicious meal.” or “This (insert name of food here) is wonderful.”
This approach, while very similar to Blueneck’s, isn’t really designed to parry, as much as to defuse with extreme and exaggerated “patience”, as the host’s purpose, which was clearly to put you down, will have failed.
Personally, I wouldn’t recommend responding back with a similar sort of question. I think that might simply validate his approach as being ok in these circumstances, when it clearly is not. I bet neither Boran2spouse’s friend may have wanted to crawl under the table!
Yes, I agree that killing with kindness is also a valid tactic, and certainly a most Southern method in a difficult situation.
I also agree that tit-for-tat can be bad. I only use it if the questioner insists that I answer the original question and after I’ve even questioned a bit more after that. It certainly is a more aggressive counter tactic, and imo should only be used if you are forced into it after merely asking a lot of clarification questions. If one can get away with it, one way to end a series of clarification questions is with a passive comment like, “Oh, I see” and move immediately to the killing with kindness routine.
Thanks, I especially like this: Do you neocons believe that we should violate the Constitution to fight a fictitious war?
between liberals and wingnuts is manners!
I love bluenecks approach. I often say “why do you ask?” ad nauseum, especially if it’s something personal they have just asked me.
That said, I think this guy was clearly feeling defensive about still supporting the current regime and had planned his oh-so-clever attack.
Oh I feel for you!
A year or so ago I was in the home of a “friend” for dinner and the conversation turned to politics. The discussion was, no doubt, enlivened by the fact that each of us had imbibed a couple of Manhattans. Despite the fact that I was a guest in her house, she became so enraged with my ideas and my facts that she called me a traitor and told me to leave the country. I was stunned. This woman is a college-educated, well-traveled, art-lover.
We were back in Chicago recently and I invited this woman and her husband to join us for dinner at a restaurant on our only free night. Why? Because I have been very critical of goups and governments who refuse to talk to each other, to engage in diplomacy.
How could I expect Palestinans and Israelis to make peace after the wrongs each side has endured and inflicted, if I couldn’t even have dinner with someone who I once considered a friend because we disagreed about politics.
The first words out of her mouth after “hello” were, “Isn’t it great that they caught the terrorists in London?” I mumbled “Yeah.” I didn’t have the presence of mind to add that I think it’s great when anyone who would kill innocent civilians is arrested. I gritted my teeth. Limited my drinking. And resolved to find some way to speak civilly to right wingers come what may.
Just wanted to add my .02
My gut feeling after reading the diary was that Mr. Fairfield is projecting. He’s getting scared down deep because there aren’t any facts to support his allegiance to Bush and he acted out because he is scared that he’s been wrong about everything post 9/11.
That is why he brought up Reagan, because in his mind if he has been wrong about Bush (which he suspects is true) then it brings down his whole house of cards and that terrifies him. So in turn he tries push his terror onto you.
Poor guy actually, I’d rather be in your shoes any day. He’s got one helluva hangover to deal with when his pants end up fully around his ankles.
Wounded animals are at their most dangerous.
My home is not formal… but when people come by – they stay for hours. They feel comfortable.
I wish oh how I wish that – the dinner you had could have been spent at my home. You would have been treasured. And… the meal would have been organic and locally grown 😉
I’ll get there someday.