Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion The Atlantic takes on post-secondary PC/coddling

Can you clarify? What points, specifically, do you see a connection between?

Is your friend from the book club similar to a student who wants a trigger warning before reading an assigned book in the curriculum? Does she lack skill in perspective taking, possibly valuing only her viewpoint? Does she attempt to silence other's expression of their ideas, thereby remaining in a bubble?

Conversations may benefit if participants believe there are healthy emotions, and healthy ways to express emotions (even negative emotions). If we apply some general principles of good emotional hygiene, we can gain more accuracy in identifying and expressing our emotions.

I had the same thought, reading this, Irena.

I can't imagine being offended by someone "hating" a book, or expressing themselves via emotional language about a book, or even wanting to be in a book group where one had to "filter" to avoid being blackballed or bullied via social disapproval.

I do agree the skills Indigo references are useful in life, generally, though. This is especially true in professional life and/or discussions with acquaintances.

I also agree that there is a cultural tint to this. I prefer my friends with a little edge to them, seems more honest. I wouldn't want to be in a club like that. "With friends like that, who needs enemies" and also "too much time on their hands" come to mind.

Can you clarify? What points, specifically, do you see a connection between?

Is it possible that some may see the strong and emotional language as the bullying, and what you term "social disapproval" as attempts at discussing the group "norms" and providing coaching as to those expectations? Is it possible that children who do not "get" this may have social difficulty and that parents who do not "get" this may have difficulty acknowledging their children's difficulty and helping their children learn social norms?

It may be risky to reach out to people who do not "get" this and try to raise awareness, as people unaware of social norms may tend to engage in ad hominem attacks rather than remain focused on discussing the concepts and ideas. Every group has social norms, even the forums have guidelines for interaction.

This is different than the article which discussed recent changes in post-secondary social norms, and debated whether these specific changes may be encouraging being thin-skinned and raising "taking offense" to an art form. Trigger-warnings and micro-aggressions were mentioned.

Yes. When you mention the context of certain relationships (professional life, acquaintances) this hints at different boundaries with different groups of people. These skills may also be useful in the classroom, at camp and extracurricular activities, etc. Some people pick up on social clues by casual observation, some by direct teaching. There are books and websites geared to teaching the basics to children and also as professional development for adults.

Which cultures do you see as using these skills, and which do you see as not?

Some may say that an edge which challenges one's thinking with new ideas is different than making strong emotional negative/derogatory statements without articulating challenging new ideas.

In what way(s) is having a social or cultural norm of politeness indicative of too much time on one's hands? By contrast, some may say that using precise language saves time as it is more likely to be understood, therefore less need for clarification to avoid misunderstanding.

This is absolutely true. My husband teaches neuroscience and recently had an experience with a student that was offended and distraught by a discussion about a hallucinogenic plant that is theorized to have played a role in religous life of a cult identified as a pre-cursor to christianity. His response and inability to accept the possibility because it was a potential threat to his belief system disrupted the coversation and side-tracked the class. And this was at the graduate-level.

Yes, it is possible that using the word "hate" could be perceived as bullying by some (although I think that is a bit overwrought)--but my sense of Irena's story was more that the group was taken aback by what they perceived as "insensitivity/social inappropriateness," not outright aggression.

I can't be sure if you are directing the part about parents/children my way, specifically, but since the shoe fits: yes, I do think it's difficult for parents who have social communication issues to help their children learn social norms. The same might be said for different SES groups (think Ruby Payne). It is hard to understand nuances of middle-class social behavior and communication styles if that's not one's native tongue.

Now I'm confused. Are you suggesting Irena point her friend to social skills training?

I can't be sure, but I think Irena's observation was that there is a similar dynamic to that discussed in the article ("don't offend anyone") in mainstream middle-class-suburban(?)culture. It seemed to me she was just noticing a general trend, which I have also noticed.

Sure, but "I hate this book" could also be a conversation starter. There are myriad reasons a person could hate a book, and many of them are in no way derogatory in terms of the book's value. I "hated" Of Mice and Men because Lenny's death was so upsetting that I lost it in class and cried my eyes out...when I was a girl. As a parent or teacher, if a child said "I hate this book," I'd want to know more. It just doesn't offend me, and I'm trying to imagine why it would offend anyone. I would suggest that if the person in the book club personalized that statement to the point of discussing it weeks and months later, perhaps THAT is a distortion, and CBT might help.

Again, I don't perceive "I hate the book" as impolite. The "too much time" bit is in reference to this being gossip fodder weeks later. To me, a sound byte like that would not be powerful enough to elicit such: emotional reaction(s), rigid thinking, close-mindedness, gravitating toward the negative, attacking, out-of-control ranting, lack of skill to deconstruct and analyze, etc., in terms of the friend who made a social error.

Even "antisocial" social groups have norms. That doesn't mean we have to universally embrace social norms as being a moral or ethical obligation, in my opinion.

People do have varying degrees of sensitivity and tolerance, and I agree that it is nice to be nice. But it is also a skill to learn not to be hypersensitive or too quick to judge others, or to recognize their background, experience, and perspective might be different from one's own. I'm not suggesting people ought to go around offending/hurting each other and not giving a flip, but perhaps somewhere in the middle should be the goal.

Interesting discussion, thank you for your thoughts.

If Two Live Crew was contemporary with the comedian, I'll bet a dollar Andrew Dice Clay is the misogynist comedian you are blanking on.

--S.F.

Well said. I believe this is the point of the article: a combination of "Where to draw the line?" and "Realize that people (as individuals and as groups) may draw the line in different places."

ETA: The article may also have an element cautioning against having the tail wag the dog.

This seems like the type of statement which would make good click-bait online, and an interesting tidbit for a professor to toss out to see who might inquire about the source(s) of that theory, the credibility of the sources, the other works of the sources, the impact if the theory was true, any ongoing anthropological/archeological research being done on the subject, and whether such a theory might ever be proved/disproved... or might remain forever a theory, shrouded in mystery.

It seems this type of open-minded discussion would be encouraged by the author of the article.

It seems that placing the lesson and discussion on a list of trigger-warnings or micro-aggressions (essentially censorship) would be questioned by the author of the article.

I love discussing this stuff. it is fascinating to me. And yes to all of Eco's points above!

Incidentally, "hate" is a very taboo word in these parts among the (white? not sure how much differences happen along race, ethnicity, etc. lines) upper middle class. When my DH and I were dating, we were in the grocery store and I was going through my cards trying to find this particular's store discount card and I said grumpily and exasperatedly "I hate that I need a card for every store I shop at - it's ridiculous..." and my husband was very taken aback... At first, I wasn't sure why and then he told me "hate" is an offensive word and certainly shouldn't be used near small children! Uh, really? In this context? Just odd to me. Then I noticed in our area once I had children... most children are not permitted to say "hate" I heard many reprimands - Example: child says, "I hate green beans!" Parent replies, "Child!!! we do NOT use that word!" Me "What word?" Parent, wispering" the "H" word - hate." DH's family is also very uncomfortable with any kind of negative emotion. There is a huge emphasis on saying things with a smile and nicely. This also cuts the other way because my sister-in-law will brutally cut a person down or insult him/her but as long as she does it with a smile and "nicely" - it is okay and watch out if you directly call her out on her unkindness. I find it all of it rather difficult to navigate. And fascinating! I suspect not only because of my background but because I practice law and we are pretty strong in our words and direct. In-laws are big proponents of the sandwich approach and always tip-toe around coming out and saying they are unhappy with anyone or anything. I have to admit, it can get a little exhausting. On the other hand, I'll take it any day over the harshness and negativity of my family of origin... Ugh... I have gotten more used to the "niceness" and avoiding unpleasantness... and yeah it can be very pleasant

The woman at book club wasn't bullying ... we were all getting settled and she said something like "ugh I hated this book ... what did everyone else think?" And yeah she could have said it "nicer" that seems to be the "in-thing" around here... But I know where this woman is from ... It's just not her style... It's not a social skills thing as much as you may think it is... It's a cultural thing. When you come from where this woman comes from, negativity and hardship and unpleasant are very much a fact of life. Not kidding. "Hating a book" not gonna give pause to anyone on any day where she comes from. They have real problems . On the other hand, did she really hate it? No, she just didn't like it... Where she comes from it's the opposite extreme - people are very negative, more comfortable with unpleasantness, a bit skeptical and untrusting of niceness, always skeptical, etc...

And I have to chuckle at the suggestion of social skills training for my book club 'friend'... Yeah, only in upper middle class suburban American would it be suggested that someone needs social skills training because they said they "hated a book." This is totally something our elementary school would suggest if a kid said the same thing! But the inner city school? I think people there would just be thrilled that the person actually read the book and was up for discussing it even with his/her lack of "nicer" synonyms for "hate" at his/her disposal. And THAT is something I thin the article is definitely driving. It is becoming socially unacceptable to be negative or unpleasant at all tot he point that if some is at all - it needs to be "trained" right out of them.