JField has a spiffy post on the contrarian tendency among some UUs. He cites as an example those who wanted to "knock Cindy Sheehan down a notch."
As someone who commented on Cindy Sheehan, I do have to say that once one's child is dead, I doubt one can be knocked down any more notches, even if that were a desirable thing. I pretty much ignored her until people in the UU community started calling her a "prophet."
That probably makes me a classic asshole contrarian by JField's definiton as I wasn't interested in writing negative things about her as a political figure until she became popular.
I can look back on this and see a pattern, especially politically, I can within the last few years easily recall speaking out against enthusiasim for Howard Dean, Bill Sinkford, and John McCain. A lot of this comes from me being more conservative than the average UU (which says a little, but not much) and a big believer in keeping lines of communication with the other party open. Howard Dean's insults really make the liberals cheer, but they only entrench conservatives against us. This is not the way to make a better world. Sinkford seems determined to turn Unitarian Universalism into the religious wing of the Democratic Party. McCain is a cool guy, but until you've really read up on his political views, don't vote for him.
Excepting my objections to the study action issue, which come from its focus on sitting on our asses talking about morality rather than actually helping people, I only really see this tendency when we're talking about politics. The fact that the UU blogosphere was mostly Christian for most of the time I've been posting (though things are looking a lot more varied these days) didn't have me railing against Christianity.
So looking at the way I do it, I think it comes basically from a fear of bandwagons. Perhaps it is our outsider status itself that creates this fear, but I don't think I'm the only UU who gets nervous when people in large groups start to passionately agree on something as such people have a tendency to carry things too far. I don't have an issue with Cindy Sheehan herself, but I don't want us to get so excited about her antiwar message that we adopt her anti-Israel message. Sinkford seems like a nice guy, but he should do his politics on his own time because they don't seem to be growing our churches much and I'm sick of being made to feel like a heretic for not signing petitions at coffee hour. That the commission on appraisal report strongly implies that social action is the only way to live our faith out in the world suggests to me that the Sinkfordist tendencies have stained our thinking. I hope it doesn't take too long to get the stain out.
Anyway, I do see what JField is talking about, but I'm not entirely sure that it's a bad thing. And besides, Servetius was certianly a classic asshole contrarian, so perhaps UUs come by it honestly.