4 ms·

I have friends who I know treat their things very well, so I have no issues lending my stuff out to them. I also have family members who absolutely destroy what

I have friends who I know treat their things very well, so I have no issues lending my stuff out to them. I also have family members who absolutely destroy whatever they can get their hands on, so they don't get to borrow anything of mine. I have one cousin who bent the cards while playing Sushi Go at a family function. When called on it, his response was, "oh shoot, my bad." Part of me is curious as to what led him to believe that's an acceptable thing to do to someone else's property and part of me just wants to punch him for being such an inconsiderate ass.

adekok 9y ago
> Part of me is curious as to what led him to believe that's an acceptable thing to do to someone else's property He doesn't think it's acceptable. The issue is he doesn't care. i.e. he doesn't pay attention. He doesn't think about it. He just does what "feels good", and wonders later why people won't loan things to him. Yes, I've met people like this, too.
- allannienhuis 9y ago
  Sometimes the reason they don't care isn't because of some sort of callous disregard of others feelings, it's because they don't see the thing as a problem at all. IE they don't care if their _own_ playing cards are bent ("that's just normal wear and tear"), so they don't think anyone else would care about it.
  - rbritton 9y ago
    This is it I think. I personally buy nice things and do everything possible to keep them nice as long as possible (e.g., I am bothered by reading a book that's creased or significantly worn in any way). I will not loan anything to anyone I believe is likely to damage the item or lacks the ability to replace or repair it in a timely manner. On the other hand, I have a friend, one of my best friends, who is completely content with anything in virtually any condition. There are things that bother me that he would never have a problem with. I don't know why, particularly as we have pretty similar upbringings, but the difference is astounding.
    - erikpukinskis 9y ago
      Both of you are taking joy in use, but in a different kind of way. You take joy in using a thing carefully, where you absorb the objects demands. Your friend takes joy in using an object aggressively, so the object absorbs their demands. It's a difference in where you see beauty... Do you see beauty in the human activity that surrounds the object, and the imprint of that? Or do you see beauty in the object itself, and the imprint that makes on the world around it?
      - ada1981 9y ago
        This was rather nice.
      - jschwartzi 9y ago
        It's sort of analogous to the difference between Keirsey's pairings of Guardian/Idealist and Artisan/Rational. Guardians/Idealists tend to be "cooperative" in their use of tools, meaning that they consider how other people and society might use the tool. So they might avoid stressing a crowbar to breakage unless it's to suit the needs of their group. They might also be unlikely to bend playing cards that they don't own. Artisans/Rationals tend to be more "utilitarian" in their use of tools, meaning that they will subvert a tool if it suits them. So they might use a finish hammer to chip rocks if they have nothing else available, even if it's your finish hammer and you really needed it to put up casing next week. It's interesting to note that he considers language a tool, and so their use of language may follow similar patterns. There are some parallels with Meyers-Briggs in his system, although his intent was to provide measurable characteristics rather than statements about someone's mind.
      - wruza 9y ago
        This seems to be cool idea of happy living, unless you live with them or just visit their house. Kitchen and toilet stink, dust and grime everywhere, because, you know, it is normal wear after their demands. They don't know the price of well-being and are dependent on their unblessed relatives. All activities have associated cost, but they simply ignore it, stealing from someone else. Once their place is full of crap, they simply shift their focus to another that they still like. Forests filled with heaps of trash are nice example of that. There is no beauty in this life style, imo.
  - Mz 9y ago
    That isn't always true. I personally knew someone who took impeccable care of their own things, and just destroyed stuff that got lent to them. I don't think it was really conscious and intentional. I think they had a warped childhood and weren't all that aware of how fucked up they were. But it was an incredibly consistent pattern.
- s73ver 9y ago
  Part of the problem is that he doesn’t have any consequences for doing it. Violence isn’t a great solution in all cases, but if after a couple times of doing this, he got popped in the face, he’d probably stop doing it quickly. It’s sad, but some people don’t learn other than getting their ass beat.
tjr225 9y ago
While I don't personally know your family members this certainly seems like something that could happen via pure absent mindedness or distraction rather than the result being an "inconsiderate ass."
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- icanhackit 9y ago
  I don't see a distinction between absent mindedness and being inconsiderate - no malice is required. When someone bumps into you on the street because they're too busy fiddling with their phone to pay attention to where they're going, they're not considering you or the people around them, they're absorbed by their own world and become your typical inconsiderate bell-end.
  - tjr225 9y ago
    Fair enough. I guess it would've been more clear to say that I would prefer to spend my time with a non-malicious absent minded person to that of the OP who became so angry at what amounts to an accident.

adekok 9y ago

> Part of me is curious as to what led him to believe that's an acceptable thing to do to someone else's property He doesn't think it's acceptable. The issue is he doesn't care. i.e. he doesn't pay attention. He doesn't think about it. He just does what "feels good", and wonders later why people won't loan things to him. Yes, I've met people like this, too.

allannienhuis 9y ago
Sometimes the reason they don't care isn't because of some sort of callous disregard of others feelings, it's because they don't see the thing as a problem at all. IE they don't care if their _own_ playing cards are bent ("that's just normal wear and tear"), so they don't think anyone else would care about it.
- rbritton 9y ago
  This is it I think. I personally buy nice things and do everything possible to keep them nice as long as possible (e.g., I am bothered by reading a book that's creased or significantly worn in any way). I will not loan anything to anyone I believe is likely to damage the item or lacks the ability to replace or repair it in a timely manner. On the other hand, I have a friend, one of my best friends, who is completely content with anything in virtually any condition. There are things that bother me that he would never have a problem with. I don't know why, particularly as we have pretty similar upbringings, but the difference is astounding.
  - erikpukinskis 9y ago
    Both of you are taking joy in use, but in a different kind of way. You take joy in using a thing carefully, where you absorb the objects demands. Your friend takes joy in using an object aggressively, so the object absorbs their demands. It's a difference in where you see beauty... Do you see beauty in the human activity that surrounds the object, and the imprint of that? Or do you see beauty in the object itself, and the imprint that makes on the world around it?
    - ada1981 9y ago
      This was rather nice.
    - jschwartzi 9y ago
      It's sort of analogous to the difference between Keirsey's pairings of Guardian/Idealist and Artisan/Rational. Guardians/Idealists tend to be "cooperative" in their use of tools, meaning that they consider how other people and society might use the tool. So they might avoid stressing a crowbar to breakage unless it's to suit the needs of their group. They might also be unlikely to bend playing cards that they don't own. Artisans/Rationals tend to be more "utilitarian" in their use of tools, meaning that they will subvert a tool if it suits them. So they might use a finish hammer to chip rocks if they have nothing else available, even if it's your finish hammer and you really needed it to put up casing next week. It's interesting to note that he considers language a tool, and so their use of language may follow similar patterns. There are some parallels with Meyers-Briggs in his system, although his intent was to provide measurable characteristics rather than statements about someone's mind.
    - wruza 9y ago
      This seems to be cool idea of happy living, unless you live with them or just visit their house. Kitchen and toilet stink, dust and grime everywhere, because, you know, it is normal wear after their demands. They don't know the price of well-being and are dependent on their unblessed relatives. All activities have associated cost, but they simply ignore it, stealing from someone else. Once their place is full of crap, they simply shift their focus to another that they still like. Forests filled with heaps of trash are nice example of that. There is no beauty in this life style, imo.
- Mz 9y ago
  That isn't always true. I personally knew someone who took impeccable care of their own things, and just destroyed stuff that got lent to them. I don't think it was really conscious and intentional. I think they had a warped childhood and weren't all that aware of how fucked up they were. But it was an incredibly consistent pattern.
s73ver 9y ago
Part of the problem is that he doesn’t have any consequences for doing it. Violence isn’t a great solution in all cases, but if after a couple times of doing this, he got popped in the face, he’d probably stop doing it quickly. It’s sad, but some people don’t learn other than getting their ass beat.

tjr225 9y ago

While I don't personally know your family members this certainly seems like something that could happen via pure absent mindedness or distraction rather than the result being an "inconsiderate ass."

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
icanhackit 9y ago
I don't see a distinction between absent mindedness and being inconsiderate - no malice is required. When someone bumps into you on the street because they're too busy fiddling with their phone to pay attention to where they're going, they're not considering you or the people around them, they're absorbed by their own world and become your typical inconsiderate bell-end.
- tjr225 9y ago
  Fair enough. I guess it would've been more clear to say that I would prefer to spend my time with a non-malicious absent minded person to that of the OP who became so angry at what amounts to an accident.