I’m okay.

Over the past few weeks, I’ve written a couple of posts that have annoyed a considerable number of people.

In addition readers objecting strenuously to some of my ideas, I’ve also received a healthy amount of hate mail in response to my support of vaccines and my criticism of the former President’s handling of the the pandemic. Pandemic deniers, anti-vaxxers, and right wing enthusiasts have arrived in force.

In response to this recent opposition, I also received a number of messages from concerned readers who were worried about my mental wellbeing in the face of so much criticism. They worried that the less-than-kind attacks (and even the more productive ones) might’ve been upsetting to me. Some of these folks disagreed with my positions but still worried that the sheer volume of disagreement, name-calling, and personal attacks might be getting to me.

These are obviously incredibly kind, deeply empathetic souls.

I routinely receive inquiries from readers asking why I open myself up to such opposition. Wouldn’t it be easier, they ask, to avoid polarizing subjects? Why say things that will inevitably annoy and even anger your readers and friends? How do you survive the backlash without becoming upset or distraught?

All good questions. So since I have recently turned over at least a couple of hornet’s nests, I thought I’d offer my rationale. Perhaps it can help you, too, for those times when kick over a hornet’s nest of your own

Here are seven reasons why I’m okay despite an occasional angry mob.

Seven reasons why my overly concerned and highly empathetic readers need not worry too much about me.

________________________________________________________

I have been writing my blog since 2003 and have yet to miss a day. 6,474 posts and counting. You can’t write every single day for almost two decades and not upset readers with your thoughts and ideas from time to time. I know this and expect it. In many ways I embrace it. If I never stirred up opposition or anger in my readers, I wouldn’t be doing my job. I want to challenge suppositions. Push back on convention. Offer alternative lines of thinking.

Not every day, of course, but when it happens, I know I’m doing my job.
________________________________________________________

I believe in being authentic and vulnerable in all that I do. This means that I will occasionally express thoughts and opinions that are honest and real that others oppose and despise. But the alternative would be less authenticity. Less vulnerability. I’d have to avoid saying things that others might oppose.

I could do this with relative ease. It’s exceptionally rare that I write something that unexpectedly annoys readers. After 18 years of blogging and six years of writing columns for magazines and online publications, I’ve become fairly adept at predicting opposition and anticipating push-back. I know where the hornet’s nests are, but I choose to kick them over anyway because to avoid doing so means I would be less vulnerable and less authentic with my work, and that simply isn’t why I write.
________________________________________________________

Science tells us that people need about ten positive comments in order to counteract one negative comment, but I am a weirdo for whom that formula is oddly reversed. A dozen readers can pound away at my thoughts or ideas, then one positive comment washes the slate clean for me. Elysha acknowledges that this quality is real and also bizarre, but I think it’s because I’m often embracing nonconformity and divergent thinking when I write, so I don’t expect to win over everyone. But finding that one person who agrees and appreciates my thoughts or ideas is enough to counteract at least a dozen angry souls.

I grew up in Massachusetts, in the heart of Red Sox country, as a New York Yankees fan. I was primed at an early age to tolerate opposition.
________________________________________________________

Whenever I turn over a hornet’s nest, I tend to receive a lot of email and messages from folks who agree and support my position but are afraid to jump into the fray because emotions are high, readers have turned to name-calling, and they don’t want to be attacked themselves. These messages mean the world to me. These are the readers who don’t embrace controversy like I do but want to express agreement with me. They often describe themselves as having similar thoughts but are less willing to express them aloud. I don’t fault someone for wanting to avoid the fray, but I’m happy to stand in as their voice on these occasions.
________________________________________________________

I enjoy debate. I was the two-time Connecticut state debate champion in college. I love to argue. I much prefer to argue in person, but when my post stirs up opposition online via social media or private messages, I love to battle on an intellectual level. Quite often readers turn to insults and name-calling, which don’t serve my purposes, but again, I am highly adept at ignoring those comments and engaging with the more thoughtful readers. I genuinely adore readers who genuinely want me to reconsider my position or consider their own.
________________________________________________________

Sometimes I write something that reveals the uglier, less fortunate side of me, and this almost always stirs up outrage. But as readers pound away at me in messages and on social media, I always think, “Yes, this is an unfortunate side of me that I have shared, but you have ugly parts, too. You’re just not willing to share them with the world.”

I don’t begrudge anyone who prefers to conceal their less fortunate thoughts and feelings. It’s probably a wise decision. But I know that everyone possesses them. Sometimes I think that readers forget in the midst of the fray that they possess ugly parts, too. They also think stupid, ugly, selfish, callous things from time to time. I simply opt to share them with the world if I think they are worth considering and really do believe them, at least in the moment when I wrote them.

So when a reader climbs atop their very high horse and begins stabbing with with insults and vitriol, I simply remind myself that as they tell me how terrible or insensitive or stupid I am, they have some highly questionable thoughts and ideas, too. They’re just keeping them hidden from the world. But in the end, we are not very different with the exception of how much we are willing to share.
________________________________________________________

I have a teflon coating when it comes to personal attacks. My last name is Dicks. When I was a boy, my head was large but I was rail thin, making me look like the living embodiment of a bobble-head doll. I grew up in the “Greed is good” 1980’s in a family that didn’t have much money, so I wore a lot of hand-me-down clothing that didn’t exactly make me look cool. I was arrested and tried for a crime I did not commit. I was homeless. A small band of cowards attempted to end my career with a 27 page packet of lies that they disseminated to the entire community. I spent four years attacking Donald Trump on Twitter and being subsequently, repeatedly attacked by the MAGA mob.

I’ve become relatively impervious to insults. This doesn’t mean that people’s opinions are irrelevant to me. When someone who I respect is upset with me, I consider my position carefully. When a reader engages in a thoughtful, productive debate, I give real thought to their position. But when people simply tell me how stupid or naive or selfish or callous I am, those words bounce off me without much notice.

Sp fear not, empathetic souls. When readers begin to pile on and pound away, please know that not only am I okay, but I am probably enjoying the debate.

Or possibly ignoring it.

Either way, I’m okay. I promise.

And perhaps something here can help you when facing similar opposition in the future.