Tit for tat

It is some times amusing to witness the shock and awe reflexes on the faces of people who have forgotten the basic rule of any kind of interaction – tit for tat. One of the main reasons for forgetfulness is enshrined in the idea of individual worth superseding the worth of others. People tend to forget, that those who work in the night industry are “people” too. Therefore it is feasible to assume, that if you mistreat them, they will retaliate in kind.

Mainly it is all bout human interaction and forms of communication. If you arrive at the door with kind intentions and polite speech, you will more often than not treated likewise. Of course we have to take into consideration the human factor on both sides of the barrier. Individuality is what keeps human kind going. Because if the Orwellian dreams would have come true, we would all be marching in tune with the same drummer and “human” communication would lose most of its meaningfulness.

Therefore it is always feasible to think about doormen as equals not treat them as inferior beings. Although being able to control ones emotions is a crucial part of the job description for anyone involved in the nightlife economy, it goes to show, that if you mistreat someone, you ought not have high hopes about not being mistreated in return. Because if you think about it, and leave out the fact of you being the almighty “customer” and the other party having a role to play in the general outcome of the “service” you expect to receive, you will hopefully end up by concluding that indeed, if you treat another person as a nobody or even worse, that persons motivation to treat you kindly will be next to nil.

On the other hand, if you receive an impolite treatment yourself, you are entitled to retaliate in kind, but then the question becomes, what would be the most suitable channel for communicating your anger and displeasure. One of the options would most certainly contain letting loose the flood of emotionally laden sentences that will end up in one of two ways – you will either face a standstill or reach an escalation that will undisputedly lead to a physical altercation. Therefore one might suggest the use of polite conversation and verbal engagement as a more feasible tactic for attempted solution of the problem rather than heated verbal confrontation. But at the end of the day, the choice is always with the ones involved in the interactive process rather than the ones analyzing it after the fact.

I personally have found it largely amusing, that majority of those who are faced with the rejection from the premises or not being allowed into the premises to begin with, find their “release” in verbal abuse. And it is very rarely of a “witty” character. Mostly it is constrained to either an array of references to genitalia (both human and non-human) or personal insults (mostly engaging with the personal or family life of the subject of the abuse). Wittiness comes into play when one uses language metaphors to mask the banality of ones insults or convey the insulting message via language that would not, at the first place, come across as insulting.

In the first instance, references are usually highly juvenile in character and pertain mostly to psychosexual fantasies of the abuser. The words used are usually indicative of either a wish to engage in certain sordid sexual acts with the victim of the abuse or directed towards denigrating the victim of abuse via comparisons to either genitalia as such or different forms of diseases that might affect ones genitalia. They are also expressed via childish behaviour accompanying the insults. What makes them amusing, although hurtful in kind, is the fact that I usually catch myself thinking “how old is this person?” Of course, age is merely a sidetrack in these situation. It is more about emotional growth than it is about physical advancement.

In the second instance, abusers tend to shift the blame on the personal capacities or family members of the victim of the abuse, and therefore are inadvertently provoking a more vehement response from their victim. Working the door is a choice that one makes individually. Therefore one accepts the potential outcomes of ones decisions. Whether they are positive or negative are of no consequence for present discussion. If you are unhappy with the decision, address your complaints, emotional or physical, to the one who made the decision. Do not engage with third parties – they have nothing to do with the decisions made towards you, therefore they are not eligible to share the blame you are dispensing. I personally find it very upsetting and mentally undermining, when as a result of a decision that I alone have made, third parties (especially my family) are dragged into the barrage of insults that ought to be directed solely towards me. Third parties are not there to defend themselves. Neither should they, since they where not there to make the decision at the first place. So why drag them into this?!

Physical human interaction can be conducted between those individuals who are actually present at the time when interaction begins. If someone is who is not present is involved in the process, it stands to reason, that as an absent party he or she needs an advocate. Therefore, whomever engages in the blaming of an absent third-party conveys upon the opponent a tedious task of not only trying to figure out what that third party would think of the abuse but also of what would be their reaction to such an action directed towards them. But more importantly, it begs the question of the underlying purpose for the involvement of the third party to begin with. What is the abuser gaining from the involvement? Usually nothing more than an extra target for the abuse.

Retaliation can not happen without an underlying purpose. Therefore it is feasible to suggest that whenever engaging in an interaction with those involved in the nighttime economy, position yourself as a nonconfrontational entity. That will not only eliminate a potential reasons for retaliation but will also provide a fruitful ground for a constructive discussion.