Ever have one of those days where you want to rip someone a new one? :) When they manage to get under your skin, how do you deal with it?

I try to remember that whatever happens, another person’s behavior honestly and absolutely has nothing to do with me.

It is not easy to do this!

But the more I can catch myself before I either go off on an internal rant and upset myself further or go on an external rant and make things worse, I do this, especially seeing as when the interaction is over, I don’t want to be the one who’s grumbling over something I can’t control while they go off in peace becuase they’ve left it.

It’s like hitting yourself with a ball peen hammer, otherwise. Why do that?

I try to take a step back and liook at the bigger picture. Like April said, people’s behavior often has nothing to do with me. I try not to react and understand why they might be acting like that – but it’s not easy. If they’re still pissing me off, I either withdraw from them temporarily or if it’s at work, I walk around the block, get some fresh air and come back. I already have enough going on and I refuse to let people like this ruin my day . . .

It depends on what they did. I mean at times people can get under my skin by doing something minor. If I’m already in a bad mood than that not so hard to do. I try to think, is it them or is it me? Did they do it on purpose or was it an accident? Were they just born stupid or did they just cultivate stupidity to a fine wine? Depending on the answers to those questions, I tend to react accordingly. However, I never get physical. I can get verbally abusive if it is the only solution left for me to use. Most of the time I find they just aren’t worth my time.

“how do you deal with it?”

Quite simple. I do not let them get under my skin.

I rarely get so upset with people. I really just don’t care enough. But on the odd occassion where it does happen I just go off. I tell the person exactly what I’m feeling and point out all the things that are getting to me. I always feel better afterward.

Funnily, the few times I have gone off on someone they came back later and apologized. Sometimes speaking your mind does work.

The Key to Serenity

And acceptance is the answer to all my problems today. When I am disturbed, it is because I find some person, place, thing or situation some fact of my life unacceptable to me, and I can find no serenity until I accept that person, place, thing or situation as being exactly the way it is supposed to be at this moment.
…unless I accept life completely on life’s terms, I cannot be happy. I need to concentrate not so much on what needs to be changed in the world as on what needs to be changed in me and in my attitudes.
Alcoholics Anonymous Big Book pp. 449

@SeventhSense I like that. And, I agree.

@jmah
It’s a bitter pill to swallow at the moment but like a junior high brawl it’s barely a blip in the rear view mirror very shortly.

Generally speaking, if something that normally doesn’t bother you is driving you nuts there is another issue involved and you are projecting. I try to find the source and it distarcts me enough to forget about tearing into someone. Or just rip into somebody and get it over with.

I’ll tell you why I hate AA and that idea specifically—it is too easy to become complacent and let people and life walk all over you. Some things and people need to be challenged. If we all just accepted that “that is the way it is supposed to be” nothing would ever change. The civil rights movement never would have occurred. Should I just accept that me not being able to get married is just the way it is “supposed to be”? Sorry, but that’s bullshit.

@tinyfaery
Accepting the things you can’t change and the wisdom to know the things you can is key and those things not worth investing emotional energy in.

Furthermore there is a point that you have to decide if being right is more important than being at peace.

I realize that other people “getting under my skin” is more about me (and my autism) than about them. I try to avoid others or just tune them out, this sometimes makes me look like an idiot but is preferable to an ugly confrontation.

If I must react, in cases of extreme rudeness, I fall back on my military training (command voice). You would be amazed at how many people will back down in the face of a loud, sharp command even when there is no visible sign of authority. Of course there are a small number of people who instinctively defy authority, so I must be prepared for an escalation. This rarely happens, since my Rule #1 is avoid people if at all possible.

Confrontations usually occur at predictable times; I plan on not being around during those times.

What we think we can change has much to do with the idea of how hard it is and potential consequences from the actions taken to bring about that change. Just because something is hard and causes discomfort does not make it impossible to change. The best course of action is not always immediately pleasurable.

Sorry, but I will always think that AA idea crap.

@tinyfaery
OK

I give myself a time-out to cool down and get my feelings into perspective.

@tinyfaery
The basis of jmah’s position was not one wherein there was any high minded principle at stake but simply the all too human condition to react. Of course in matters of principle or human rights there is a place to make a stand and be boldly confrontational. This is hardly at issue in society. We have many opinions screaming at the top of their lungs “like children in the marketplace”. Yet even in these matters it is the methodology that must be questioned as to what is most effective. Take your example of civil rights:

As the greatest proponent in the 20th century of civil rights you would be hard pressed to say any was more effective than Martin Luther King Jr.. His effectiveness gained through effective methodology that first off accepted that there was deep seated division and hatred of the African American in society by a deeply entrenched ideology in the South. He accepted this and his plan of attack was one in joining in solidarity with others based on the ideology that racism was at its base unjust and upon that principle stood. Through passive resistance he created a groundswell which through threats of violence, actual violence against him, bombs on his family, rocks thrown directly at him and threats of violence stood. HE STOOD because he addressed the violence within himself first and subjugated it.

He neither attacked nor retaliated for violence against him. There is nothing more powerful on earth than this resolve. It is the power of the individual will and imagination. The principle was enough and he was right. He knew that at any given time if his followers would have engaged the racists as “enemy” his mission may have failed and there would be even further polarization. But without a polarizing force in opposition there is nothing left but the blatant aggression of the unjust. And human nature is essentially good and it sees the folly of its ignorance eventually. And I truly believe he would have gladly ceded his position of authority if he felt that there was a better candidate to take the position.

Now contrast this figure with Malcolm X who not only became a polarizing force for the cause of racism because he promoted violence but actually became a dividing force within his own community. He refused to accept others could have such ideologies and hatreds and attempted to attack them with hatred and harsh words. Of course he too eventually realizes that his approach was shortsighted and changed when he acquired the wisdom of years.

One approach elevates the self and one approach stands on the principle which needs no elevation because its truth is self evident. Wisdom and acceptance are not mutually exclusive principles nor are they apathy as the sensual imagination would deem them to be. They are formed in a crucible of fire.

If someone makes me upset at work, the worst thing I can do is show that they got me.
It’s much better to not let on that they found a weak spot.

If they get me so bad I need to respond, I will, and I usually know their weak spots.

In my race and gender studies courses Malcolm X was more appreciated and looked up to. MLK wanted assimilation; Malcolm X was proud to be part of a non assimilated community. He was proud to be black. Access to the white man’s culture wasn’t the goal. Being able to be respected and treated like an equal without assimilating is a higher goal, and in my opinion, less self-seeking. MLK wanted access to power. Don’t even get me started with the myth of MLK v. the reality. But that has nothing to do with this.

You have your opinion. I have no problem with it. Hell, I think that in most cases it’s the preferable strategy, but not always. There comes a point where one has to scream at the top of their voice: I AM A PERSON! I DESERVE RESPECT FOR THE SIMPLE FACT THAT I AM A HUMAN BEING!

The problem I have is with the idealization of the principle. It is not absolute.

@tinyfaery
So there was also a movement that wanted blacks to emigrate back to Africa. Is that what’s best for society? For society to splinter and divide based on differences? Maybe if more of the ghetto was set on fire that would help? But this has nothing to do with that as you rightly said. In the matter that is really at issue, which is of course your own feelings of disenfranchisement from the larger society you would do well to take a lesson from this great leader.
If you don’t feel that the principle of justice or equality is absolute, by all means speak up with dignity. Just don’t expect to get any respect if you march in the street half naked, with giant phalluses simulating sex in a parade. That will only create hostility and entrench positions.

Done

Ewwww, I do not associate with people like that. Why on earth would you?

@tinyfaery
I thought you liked confrontation? of course when it’s you doing the confronting
I’m going down to the Heterosexual parade where they have fake sex in the street…oh ya, they don’t do that because they know the difference between acceptable and unacceptable behavior in public..my bad

And to clarify my position. I had no desire to offend by my second to last statement above and in fact support any individuals desire to marry the person they love but simply was stating a readily observable phenomena from your average gay parade. This does little to foster gaining acceptance in the country at large. And furthermore the one who would take offense at this would do well not to impune (in my opinion) the greatest leader of the 20th century and pervert the truth of his message to suit their agenda. The arrogance of her denial and ignorance of his importance could be dismissed as youthful naivete on the part of @tinyfaery, but the execrating of the spirit of his truth is unforgivable.