The Following Group is Bad for this Compelling List of Reasons:

The Following Group is Bad for this Compelling List of Reasons:

By Joel Christie

Social media has become one of our culture's biggest outlets of expression. People share all kinds of things from their lives, including things that may make others uncomfortable or angry such as their views on social justice issues, politics, or religion. (I do this routinely.)

I suspect much of this has to do with our need for validation, but may also come from a desire to bring attention to things we feel are important. But I have increasingly come to believe that what we share is often counterproductive to the causes we are trying to advocate for. I’m talking specifically about posts that champion one side while vilifying another, categorizing that other group as idiots, narcissists, buffoons, bigots, greedy bastards, pigs, racists, blind zealots, and so on. Immediately we may think, "But they’re every bit as bad as the article says! Worse even! Have you heard what these people think?" And no doubt many of our friends would agree with our position. Yet I maintain that many and maybe even the most of these posts are self-sabotaging. I suppose it's possible you could grab the occasional neutral person who nods and decides "Yes, I now agree that this group of people are indeed awful after having read this." But in general, I doubt it.

If the group you are describing would not agree with the way you are describing them, it will almost certainly have a polarizing effect where both sides draw further into their separate war camps. There are endless examples I could choose from, but I'll go with the current barrage about college students, calling them lazy, weak, stupid, delusional, and a host of other names, mostly having to do with older generations being dissatisfied with how these college students are conducting themselves. To be clear, my point here is not about accuracy or inaccuracy. I do not seek to defend or attack college students by using them in my example, only to question the effectiveness of such posts. We could substitute virtually any topic where strong disagreement exists, and my point would be the same, even in the examples where I personally am the guilty party.

Of course, whether my post is “effective” will have a lot to do with my own expectations. If I’m hoping for someone with significantly different views to consider my perspective then I'm unlikely to find many takers with “The case for why people who think like you are bad” approach. People don’t like being called names. If I want them to listen to me, I’ll need to use inclusive language, and must embrace the difficult task of helping them feel they are genuinely invited to the table of discussion. But I suspect that this is the root of our collective problem: do we really want these people with whom we so strongly disagree to engage with us? If we dislike them as much as our language suggests, the answer is probably no. I think much of the time, what we want is to vent and to rally with our allies because it feels good to be right. Or maybe sometimes we just want to hold up our middle finger while we watch the world burn.

Two areas to consider examining if you’re feeling ...
The Value of Kindness

Related Posts

 

Comments 1

Guest - Zac Dodson on Tuesday, 31 May 2016 11:03

Thanks Joel. This is great. Let's practice inclusion and communication.

0
Thanks Joel. This is great. Let's practice inclusion and communication.

What's New

Meet our new Clinical Interns!
HERE>>

 

WhiteSands logoCP

Get connected

Stay connected with HD Counseling, LLC. It's a great way to stay updated with articles and programs