I will pretty quickly be talking about myself, of course.
An encounter at the (deli) counter. The customer was wrong about the turkey, and something about her crisp, condescending tone irritated me. I tend to side with the working girl, who really is trying to serve you and endures a good deal for your sake, against the prosperous and precise-toned woman on my side of the counter. Not always, certainly. I have certainly seen rude employees and long-suffering customers in my time. But that's my initial prejudice. This particular incident reminded of a description I heard years ago that "What some people call politeness is really just extra rudeness in a pleasant tone of voice." That's better than an unpleasant tone of voice, I suppose.
It illustrates to me that my own willingness to be challenging is closely tied to what I think others can deal with. If I have been harsh with someone, it implies that I think they are falling short of their best and should know better. I am remarkably patient with those I think are struggling to do the best they can - trainees, less-verbal or less-savvy folk, those less likely to have been exposed to good information about social graces, Christianity, American customs - or slices of turkey.
The weaknesses of that system are immediately apparent. I have little actual knowledge about what you are capable of and what should be expected of you - I am guessing, even wildly. Also, it may be a very bad day for you for reasons invisible to me, and the less-fortunate person I am expecting you to suck it up for might be getting into snippy conversations about ham, cheese, and chicken salad pretty regularly.
At least, if I have been harsh with you it may because you have shown signs of being able expected to deal with it. We expect things of some of our children, or coworkers, or neighbors more than the others.
Is that an excuse, designed to give you some small comfort and myself some great comfort? Probably.
No comments:
Post a Comment