this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2023
90 points (96.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
638 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The worst part of this quote is that, in the original, she (Marilyn Monroe) actually framed her "worst":
>I'm selfish, impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best.
So in the context it sounds more like "here are my flaws - take me or leave me, but you won't change me". Which sounds reasonable. But without that context it sounds more like "I'm entitled because I like to pretend that I'm above other people".
I've seen this before but is that truly the origin? On the Wikipedia page, the quote(s) do not seem to allude to taste or buying preferences at all but rather to customer service. I've tried searching but I haven't seen any primary sources state that the original quote, or intent, was with the inclusion of "in matters of taste".
I got it from my college econ professor, so I don't have further sourcing. Sorry
Okay, I have a sneaking suspicion that it's kind of an apocryphal reverse-explanation to counter currently all-too-common abusive behavior towards service personnel. I think it's just an old motto that once made more sense than it does today when it's been in use for over a hundred years.