I have started to realise my posts often say similar things but use a different vehicle each time. Well this post’s ‘vehicle ‘is about trying to cut others some (more) slack…
Not my tribe
‘Society’ is a very big tribe. Too big for how we are designed. We evolved to be in a tribe of up to 150 people and know, and feel safe with, all of them.
It suddenly occurred to me that there’s no surprise some of us can engage in negative behaviours towards strangers we perceive as ‘affronting’ us because people we don’t know would have automatically triggered us to be on guard when we lived in tribes. When we met another hunter-gathering stranger, we would have been poised to quickly assess them, be ready to judge them negatively (or at least be really vigilant for any reason that might lead us to believe they needed to be judged negatively) and we’d have been necessarily quick at drawing conclusions about them. It was once a matter of survival. They might have killed us after all. We seem to still have this wiring and yet there’s a lot of evidence from those people we do know that the majority of people are perfectly affable.
Our society is often so disparate (perhaps compared to many times in history) it’s not really surprising people are so ready to be outraged, judge or blow out of all proportion the affront of others’ behaviour! We’re not good at cutting strangers any slack and we can certainly seem reluctant to see them as just another ‘us’. If we can resist any process that creates a ‘them’ of strangers, we really would be more likely to cut them some slack. I still find the question:
useful if I find myself potentially affronted in a situation caused by the actions of a stranger.
And what about people we do know…
The need to vent
You know those times when someone really needs to vent about what another person did – something that triggered a strong negative reaction in them. They are livid, indignant, irritated, affronted, outraged and/or upset etc. Of course the person-centred thing to do is to listen attentively, resist ‘assessing the situation’ and empathise. The last thing anyone wants in that moment is for someone to start speculating about what might be going on for the ‘affronter’ and showing them some consideration. The affronted person’s need will range from simply needing to be heard, to needing you to fully demonstrate you also totally detest the person who wronged them – depending upon a variety of factors.
To just listen or challenge?
In such situations, it’s beneficial to employ the person-centred approach of listening to understand. I personally always try to do this. However, on occasion I really feel tempted to challenge some people’s approach to being affronted – especially when they employ black-and-white thinking to simply write off the ‘wrong-do-er’. Many of us have been guilty of this (perhaps more so in the delicateness of youth), as negative emotions can consume us to defensiveness, self-interest, very narrow focus and not being measured in our reactions.
He who throws the first stone
I am not denying people push at boundaries or do really nasty and unhelpful things – or that these behaviours should not be addressed – but it’s good to remember we are all capable of less than optimum behaviour. In fact that’s part of my point: we are all capable of doing things another might experience as ‘affronting’ and trying hard to remember this can help reduce any self-righteousness we might be prone to.
How is ‘wrong’ judged?
It’s also good to acknowledge that individuals have different assessments of how wrong different things are. Judgements about what makes something ‘wrong’ can vary from person to person. Our values and therefore our boundaries are all different. What upsets one person might not even be registered by another. Our values might mean we hold on to an affront because we judge what one person did as far worse than anything we would ever do (why can’t they align with my values? I’d never do that!). We might also have just had low resilience or been particularly sensitive about something too of course. There’s a lot we can be curious about when we are affronted.
Why do people ‘affront’?
Our own reaction aside, there’s also the idea of sparing some curiosity for what might be going on for the ‘affronter’ if we can bring ourselves to. This can be really hard as our ego is wired to remain resistant to, and wary of, the person who upset us. (I suspect it’s linked to survival!) But if we look at why people do things that are wrong, unhelpful or even harmful, it can help us be a little less self-focused and more likely to be able to ‘cut others some slack’.
So why DO people do things that have the potential to upset another? My curiosity about this came up with a list – and I doubt it’s comprehensive.
We might do things that have the potential to upset or hurt others:
…because we have not learned self-management/emotional regulation triggers unhelpful – or even harmful – actions: letting anger, shame, hurt, frustration or other unenjoyable emotions overpower us and return us to survival behaviours that are only interested in self-protection and rarely put others first.
…because we are feeling threatened but not wanting to admit it (or perhaps not even conscious of it) and therefore become defensive.
…because we make errors of judgement: anything from saying the wrong thing and unknowingly stumbling upon something someone is really sensitive about, to a car accident that causes fatalities. These are definitely harmful but unintentional. I guess impact can matter more than intent when it comes to harm – certainly in the case of a fatal accident.
…because of thoughtlessness: where we do something because we’re distracted or not considering the full implications of our actions, like parking in a place that blocks someone’s drive.
…because our integrity can wobble when we try to avoid negative consequences – we might lie and shun responsibility for things we have done to avoid getting in trouble.
…because of laziness and apathy – we might not always do the right thing because it takes effort – like recycling.
…because everyone else around us is doing it – so it’s totally normalised: like over-consuming, prejudice, gossiping, ignoring injustice.
…because of general insecurity and low self-worth that can drive all kinds of defensive and offensive behaviours like bullying, gaslighting, controlling, trying to exert power over others, exploiting others. Power certainly always seems to corrupt or maybe those prone to corruption are attracted to power. Chicken or egg – who knows!
…because we might hold a (fragile) need to consider ourselves as better than others – which might drive us to judge others harshly and dismiss them or we might exaggerate and lie to show off to try and present ourselves as ‘better’.
…because we might think the rules don’t apply to us and therefore we break them – maybe justifiably at times or maybe sometimes not – like speeding.
…because we might have learned an unhelpful behaviour from others and never had it challenged – we might tease others in a ‘close to the bone way’ – thinking it’s a form of connection, we might interrupt others, we might be incessantly critical or even think drunk driving is acceptable if we live in the Outer Hebrides.
…because we might value our strong opinions over relationships or even humanity – and ‘attack’ others for their opinions, values and/or beliefs
…because we might feel a need to retaliate: where we hold on to an affront so strongly, we justify nasty return actions . It’s definitely not the ‘best’ thing to do and often just leads to escalation. Turning the other cheek is certainly the harder thing to do.
…because we might lack empathy and focus only on self-interest. For example – we might help ourselves to things that are not ours (stealing).
…because we might not have been supported to develop a moral framework so we do things others will often judge as wrong.
***
With a list like that, it’s no surprise that it’s a rare person who never upsets another. It’s amazing that we can be so black and white in deciding someone has affronted us when being human is clearly very complex. With this complexity in mind, it’s funny:
- how quickly we can be certain we definitely manage our behaviour better than others.
- how rarely we actually wonder why someone did what they did and we just immerse ourselves indignantly in the affront.
- how non-accepting we can be of those who maybe just haven’t worked out a lot because of their lack of opportunity, nurture and/or guidance.
- how forcefully we can judge the behaviour of others as simply ‘wrong’ with no curiosity about what led them to what they did.
- how resistant we can be to the idea of ‘letting go’ and forgiveness – even when it causes us persistent distress.
- how quickly we let indignance move us to self-righteousness and
- how infrequently we do cut others some slack for messing up (including those who themselves struggle to ever cut others some slack)!
The upshot?
- I think it’s still a good idea to remain person-centred and listen anyone who needs to vent for they are very unlikely to be in a place that would welcome any challenge.
- Extending some compassionate curiosity to those who trigger our upset – perhaps especially those who regularly do – can make a positive resolution more likely. We can’t challenge others to do it, but we can do it ourselves.
- (Still find direct ways to prevent or challenge any behaviour universally considered unhelpful, toxic or hurtful.)
- When we get well-practiced in letting go of affront and extending our understanding and acceptance of the idea that we are all potentially as fallible as the next person, our wellbeing can improve considerably.
