The mark of any self-centered asshat is the need to be right. Above all else, they HAVE to be right in all situations. Arguments, interesting tidbits, and call-outs; they will lie and manipulate until they feel like they “won.” Usually this means the other person just gives up because they’re sick of the discussion going in circles. 

But, there are a few instances when being wrong is actually the better option. 

Flowey from Undertale *spoilers for Undertale, obviously*

The whole reason I started thinking about this topic is because of this character. Flowey is a firm believer in “kill or be killed.” At the beginning of the game, he immediately tries to kill you, and continues working behind the scenes to impede your progress, or manipulate other NPCs. He wants to absorb the souls of humans, gain their power, and destroy the world. During a neutral run of the game, after defeating him, Flowey just stands there, telling the player to kill him. If the player kills him, he is ecstatic, because he has been proven right in his philosophy. If the player spares him, he is confused, angry, and even a little sad that you aren’t doing what he wants.

But, this kind of doesn’t make sense when doing a genocide run. Flowey is on board with the player’s plan to kill everyone…until he realizes he is part of “everyone.” Then, he panics as the player brings the pain. 

So, he’s fine with “kill or be killed” while other people are still alive? 

Granted, Flowey is incapable of empathy or compassion. It makes sense that he would be self-serving. But, it doesn’t make too much sense that in one scenario he’s fine with dying for the sake of being right, but in the other case, he is pissing his stem while still being right.

This chucklefuck from Steve Wilkos

I haven’t been able to find the clip, but I’m sure someone can find it out in the aether. I don’t remember the names of the people involved, so I will make them up. Bob and Bill are brothers. Bob is married to Tina, and Bill is married to Tanya. Bill admitted to having an affair with Tina. Tina denies the affair. If the allegations are true, the betrayed spouses are divorcing their partners, and Bob is going to kick Bill’s ass.

Steve brings out the lie detector test results. (I know lie detectors aren’t 100% accurate, but this is a TV show, not a court of law.) He tested both parties and started with Tina. Tina was determined to be truthful in her not having sexual contact with Bill or anyone else. Then, it was Bill’s turn. He was determined to be truthful about being attracted to Tina. But, he was determined to be lying when he said he had sexual contact with Tina. Everyone is glad no one actually cheated. But, Bill is again insistent that he did have sex with Tina. Steve asks why Bill is still saying he cheated, when the other option is blowing up two marriages and getting his ass kicked. Maybe that was his plan all along? Then, he swoops in and makes his move on Tina when the divorce settles? Either way, Bill continues to say he slept with Tina, and thus, never explains his motive for doing so.

Anyone that tries representing themselves in criminal court

They say a man who represents himself in court has a fool for a client. Welp, in a lot of cases that is completely clear. (I may need to make another post about these people, it’s so hilarious.) In America, a person is well within their rights to represent themselves in court. In some states, lawyers in civil suits are rarely used at all, save for divorces or real estate disputes. But, in criminal court, it is strongly advised to use legal counsel since many defendants are not familiar with how the law works. A lawyer can, at the very least, get a plea deal going, so less time is served. Also, once you choose to represent yourself, you can’t claim a mistrial due to ineffective legal counsel.

What ends up happening in instances like these is the defendant thinks that they can talk their way out of their issue, like they did with past issues. “I argued and gaslit my wife into a corner, so she stopped accusing me of cheating. Surely I can do the same to a judge and 12 impartial jurors and beat this murder charge!” For example, with Robert Telles and his murder trial, the evidence so far is overwhelming. You’d think hiring legal counsel would be beneficial, especially if you are rich enough to hire them.

Despite this, Robert Telles is choosing to represent himself, considering he was a lawyer before taking office in his county. The thing is, he was a civil lawyer. (Apparently, not a very good one.) The judge presiding actually called him out on this, saying that despite what he knows, he hasn’t practiced criminal law, does not understand what goes into representing yourself for a potential life without parole sentence, and doesn’t seem to be taking the case seriously. But, Robert’s going full steam ahead, confident that he can beat the allegations on his own. We’ll see how that shakes out.

Remember, Rob. You can’t claim a mistrial, and it might be too late to get a plea deal going.