I come under fire a lot for having strong opinions.

I make my best points in writing, when I can consider my words and structure my argument. I strive to make my arguments very clear. When engaging in public discourse, I try to write about what someone said or did, and not the type of person they are. I'm aware of derailing tactics and logical fallacies, and I strive not to use them when debating my points. Likewise, I point them out when they're being used in another's argument.

I often get judged as angry for not couching my language in the pillowy-est of terms. Well, if you would only be nicer. When nice is always a moving goalpost for those whose idea of nice is not having the conversation at all, or agreeing to their points, or otherwise not saying anything out of the status quo. And sometimes by those whose language is so much less nice than mine.

I get judged as angry for continuing difficult conversations when there are still points to be made. Which is weird to me, because if someone else is putting just as much effort into their argument as I am, why am I the angry one? Because my language is often blunt, or clear to the point of sounding detached?

I get judged as angry for not being satisfied with the soporific balm of a kumbaya attitude when there are still things that need to be addressed. I might be more relaxed if I could leave it at kumbaya, but I don't think I'd be happier. I think other people might be more comfortable around me if I succumbed to the kumbaya and shut up, but I'd feel, in my heart of hearts, like a fraud if I did so. I don't judge those who'd rather let it go, or observe quietly. Everybody has their own needs.

And then there are times when I am angry. Or frustrated. So my tone is stronger. Generally, that's in my own space-- in my own journal or my fb wall. And I think it's pretty easy to tell when I'm actually heated. Mostly because you will see me blatantly say "I am angry about..." because I'm pretty up-front like that. If I'm angry, generally speaking, it's coming from my speaking about something that directly affects me.

Anger is a valid emotion. It does not make my argument more valid, nor does it invalidate my arguments. Anger is not inherently a bad thing. Anger, employed in certain ways, can actually be quite healing. I don't think that denying anger or suppressing it is healthy, nor do I think that using it in abusive ways should ever be condoned. Speaking for myself-- I actually process anger much more quickly when I express through clear speech than if I let it stew.

I like having conversations. I think I have more stamina for difficult conversations than most. I don't ever think having conversations is a waste of my time. I learn a lot of things when I have difficult conversations, both from other people and from being forced to clarify my own stances.

And I enjoy having those conversations out in the open, where everyone can see what I'm saying. I want people to know what I stand for.

Whatever another person reads into my enthusiasm for debate is not my problem. It stings, sure, when someone assumes that this must be the result of some flaw in my character, or ascribes me motives out of speculation. It's always weird for me when that happens, and that can cause me to be angry. Or sad. Or frustrated.

I'd just like to say that for the record, the fact that I like to have discussions about often sticky topics doesn't mean that I seek out problems. It just means that I like something you might not. That I get something out of them that you might not. And that's all there is to it.