Although my life's work and my profession has been in the `helping' professions I keep having to learn the difference between my public self and my private self. RADICALLY different.
I can be very, very social, sociable and, in most cases, even likable. It's sort of like being born tall, or with brown eyes, or with a birthmark. Not something I had to work at: it just is.
At the job I fit in and am often considered a valued member of the group, team, or, in my current incarnation, Professional Practice. It's damned hard work, too. My desire to `help' and make things better is genuine and meaningful to me. But at the end of the day I'm pretty emptied out. Maybe not physically, but certainly emotionally. I have barely enough `social' energy to pet the friggin' dog. I'm not mean, but I am mute!
In my personal, or private, life I'm quite different. I'm not in the `helping' mode. I'm just an average citizen. In fact, there is a part of me that wants to keep a civil distance from all but close family. My natural temperament. I'm sort of uncomfortable in social situations. Strange, isn't it. Contradictory. But pretty common among the species.
Now, how does this relate to cycling? In past experience it has gotten me mixed up and confused.
I cycle to achieve and accomplish difficult things. It's pretty serious with me, if not actually grave. I show up to race and/or endure and finish. Pretty two dimensional. Not much of a social thing. In fact, I don't and have never felt like I `fit in.' Proof of that is that I don't even `try' to fit in. I sort of put my social skills in a nice little box and leave them there. And leave them there. Did I say `leave them there?!'
When another cyclist says something with which I disagree I typically don't respond (anymore). I've learned that most of the cyclists I've known aren't interested in questions, they're anxious to opine, offer their one-and-true conclusions. If I question, or even disagree, it becomes a basis for more emotional arguing or dismissal. Social coexistence requires being brain dead.
In the recent few months I initiated some intended dialogue about bicycle design and performance on a few bike email discussion lists. In some cases there was civil dialogue. In most, however, there was crude ridicule, baseless dismissal, and insult. My initial response was to assume that I just didn't `say' it right, so I attempted to be deliberately delicate and tactful, complimentary of responders, and ... just tried to get my point across with fewer big words, (uncomfortable) humility, etc.... It went nowhere. More ridicule, more soapboxing.
When someone is not rational, has no evidence to support their argument, uncivil, caustic or even hostile I've had two responses: fight or withdraw. Sometimes I've recognized the futility and I'd just withdraw. Other times I'd get really pissed off and let them have it right back ... in spades!
The fighting has always gotten me gummed up with self-reproach, asking myself: "Now why did you have to rip them up like that?!" (I have learned exquisite surgical verbal dismemberment skills.) So, I hope I've learned this better this time.
I hope I now recognize what I've not learned many times in the past: don't talk to a wall expecting the wall to dialogue.
Don't expect much. Be surprised and happy to get more when it occurs. Really, that's a better description of my personality dynamic and temperament.
It's actually going to be easier and more fun for me to do cycling. I can show up for the race, be civil and a good `neighbor,' do the race and go home.
Admittedly, I'm inclined to express my (precious) hurt feelings and resentment by wanting to beat my competition. Productive outlet.
