I wrote from my personal experience, and I did not derogate someone. It is only my experience as a woman living in Indonesia.
When I look at someone that debated something even, I look at myself to argue with the person, and I’m too often thinking, “How could they strike out about the personality of that person with who is they argued?” Despite this, mainly the person who always attacks are men. Sometimes, women do that, but it rarely happens. I’m always thinking, “why does the man attack the argument as a personal thing?” It is surprising for me because they have the motive to open someone’s profile that they debated on social media.
It happened on TikTok one week ago. I did not offend his physical appearance, but he was motivated to look at my TikTok to offend me. Even though I replied to his comment in general and said, “it was terrified because he persuades his friends to counter her,” I thought primarily people who had back pay felt victimized because they could not pay their debts. It is one of purpose why I do not entirely know people I know from the internet to my personal life. Except people was already interacted with me, and I thought I had the same frequency as them. I could accept them to get into my life.
I looked back at Adam Grant’s book entitled “Think Again.” He explained that most people argue because of their personal opinion and personality. They hate the person, not their mindset and opinion. Implicitly, they do ad hominem regardless of the person who attacks them. It is known as relationship conflict. Relation conflict is defined as personal, emotional clashes that are filled not just with friction but also with animosity. For the most part, the men that are doing these. When they cannot reply to arguments, they will rebuttal the argument and attack about personality’s.
When the men do not counter the argument, they always do an ad hominem and relationship conflict with women (not all men, but I always find the kind of person like that). I’m always curious why they have a lot of time to look at someone’s profile to debate (also me, but I rarely look at their profiles, but sometimes I look at their profile to know the person I argue with on social media). They cannot counter the argument and do not accept the reality. Afterward, they will do a relationship conflict. They did it with animosity and persuaded their friends. Moreover, when the first time ended with goodly, they accepted it would not happen. They brought hostility and counter a personality and could not attack the argument. Why did the men start with relationship conflict?
Whereas I replied to the comment because I had motived to stop feeling victimized when you have a debt and you have to pay the debt, it just tasks conflict. I never wondered why people, mainly men, when they could not counter the argument, would personally attack women. Every people who has a debt is always feeling victimized. It is not only men but also women. Why do you bring the relationship conflict? Relationship conflict has a destructive impact on everyone. Everything will be ruinous. If we are only used to task conflict, it will be ended a long time ago. Nevertheless, they never realized it (I also realized that a few weeks ago).
Another example of relationship conflict that men are always doing is (is not only men but also women) when they are arguing about gender equality. It only tasks conflict, but they always bring it with relationship conflict. No wonder why some women hate men and vice versa because some men hate feminists. They always think women want a higher position than men, but they do not understand feminism.
I realized that relationship conflict happens because of animosity. Everyone is arguing because they have animosity and think the people they hate always have wrong perspectives. Furthermore, they never realize that they do a logical fallacy. They always believe they will win if they attack based on their personality. Although the fact that the reality is not like their visualization. Generally, if they counter personality, they will feel better than someone they argue in social media.
Nowadays, doing an argument as a discussion on social media is tricky. Mainly it will be ended with a social media war that makes your brain unable to think clearly. From debating, with a man, I attempt to learn my emotion, and I do re-thinking.
What if I argue something is wrong?
What if I lack of knowledge? Or
Should I face these kinds of boys?
Was I wrong to use social media?
Re-thinking got me a new lesson. Some people like to debate their beliefs because they think they are true. Hence, they argue it is only to satisfy their ego. Furthermore, they might feel lonely. Specifically, debating someone with persuading their friends might be true, but they will never admit that.
