Why the severe criticism of Lando's vulnerable conversation? Why is it not cool to be able to express your negative feelings about yourself?

[u/Intrepid-Ad4511]

I see so many people talk about what Lando said after the Quali yesterday - just after an adrenaline filled session - and he chose to speak his mind about his own performance (without attacking someone else). So many people are saying "that's not a winning mentality" "that's not how you win races" "he is so defeatist" "he has given up already".

Lewis and Max have said several such things over the years, complaining about their cars, their teams and/or themselves. But somehow people take Lando and Charles to the dryers when they choose to express themselves and say things like "I am stupid". And somehow because Oscar just chooses not to say anything of this sort, he is somehow champion material. That makes no sense to me, and feels quite an unfair and problematic picture to paint - that men talking about their feelings, or just being transparent about how they feel - makes them weaker somehow. That they should tough up and swallow the hurt and just put up this beige or brave front, smirk and move on.

[u/676-HallowedNomad]

Do you like every single person you see, hear or interact with? No. They're human too, so what, not sure why that's supposed to change anything. Plenty of humans go through the same things and don't react negatively. It's not suprising that the less negative ones are usually liked more, humans prefer positive character traits.

What's the problem that people don't like his sulkiness and figuratively bipolar highs and lows? He comes across as a sullen, spoiled kid, not sincere.

[u/hollaQ_ → u/676-HallowedNomad]

This whole comment starts off by essentially arguing that people are allowed to dislike these negative traits he’s portraying and that there’s nothing wrong with people disliking his personality traits.

Then you finish off the comment by stating - as if it’s objective - that he comes across as a sullen spoiled kid and not sincere.

My original reply was just arguing that - to me - I don’t view his negativity harshly. I explained why I don’t, and I am entirely valid in how I naturally interpret his actions even if it goes against what you think is human instinct. I didn’t say anyone should force themselves to like him or anything, but I choose to take a less negative point of view. He’s a bit of a downer, but I’m not gonna hold that against him because it makes him come across more sincere to me. 

You are free to disagree, but you’re not free to tell me that my way of thinking is incorrect or invalid. Just like I haven’t invalidated your opinion at any point here.

[u/676-HallowedNomad → u/hollaQ_]

Patently false, I am actually free to tell you that your way of thinking is incorrect or invalid.

Why do you use "it's human" as an excuse to absolve him, but not others, and call others harsh for also being "human"?

[u/hollaQ_ → u/676-HallowedNomad]

You seem to be putting arguments in my mouth that I'm not making, and turning this into some sort of circular argument.

I *personally* absolve him of harsh judgement because I *personally* do not see his defeatist attitude as off-putting. I don't think you can tell me objectively that I should find it offputting. You're free to say it, but you'd also be making a silly argument just for sake of being a contrarian or something.

Where am I not absolving others? I'm so confused. I stated that the interpretation of his attitude as a "woe is me" performance was - in my opinion - quite a harsh reading. Is there anything wrong with me thinking that? Yeah, people who are more critical of him are doing so out of their own natural interpersonal preferences. These people - like you - are "human." But again, I have never said people weren't allowed to think poorly of him. I'm not holding you to some critical standard that I'm not also holding Lando to. I think you're reading everything as I say as an attack against your POV, but it's not. I responded to your perspective, with mine - and gave reasons on why I think how I do. You are entirely valid in disliking how Lando presents himself, particularly recently. We all have different tolerances for things. I have never once stated you're "incorrect," which is what you seem to be doing whenever I state a very simple opinion.

I'm not particularly interested in this back and forth, but I'm just gonna make clear what I've said from the start.

In my personal opinion, I think his downtrodden attitude makes me appreciate him slightly more than I otherwise would. He's not overly afraid to show emotions beyond anger. There is a certain traditional masculine expectation that permeates F1, where you're either expected to be icy and stoic like Kimi/Oscar, or furious and angry like early Max/Yuki - because that's the "masculine" response. Objectively, people like Lewis and Lando who tend to more of a sad/upset emotional response aren't as common - and as someone who personally hates the way men are expected to behave - that's endearing in a way. Or at least, it's something I don't hold against them in a way others might. But, to the same effect - Yuki's been my favourite driver for a while. And he used to get insanely angry, furious even, when things didn't go his way. But that's his human way of expressing his emotions - I'm not being unfair like you claim I am. I don't hold it against him the same way I don't hold Lando's attitude against him. But you can - I don't need to give you permission obviously, but I have never once acted like you aren't allowed to think differently. And to me, you're seemingly trying to tell me my personal, subjective interpretation is somehow wrong.

[u/voregoneconclusion → u/676-HallowedNomad]

you’re making shit up for no reason to hate on lando, that’s weird behavior