This is false. The observation that being too nice and trying to please people is counterproductive, and putting it into self-help or pop-psych books, goes back to at least the 1970's.
For instance, see the book Creative Aggression, The Art Of Assertive Living George Robert Bach, Herb Goldberg [1974]
That stream of thought was probably the foundation of the whole "me" decade of the 1980s and all that followed.
Oh yeah, and then of course there is material like the writings of Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness [1964]
If we go centuries back we have Machiavelli's The Prince and whatnot.
Yes and to add to this, we're seeing a rise of nonchalantness and apathy, or at least feigned apathy that's really devastating. Modern dating advice is basically how to show you care less than the other person. Don't ever show vulnerability!! The person who cares the least wins, as if it's a zero sum game. Everyone just loses instead.
I was watching some vintage F1 clips and it showed some guys from the 70's celebrating a win and it occurred to me that I rarely see people (men especially) celebrating in such a carefree and passionate way. They weren't afraid to show emotion or show that they really cared about the result. They were chalant.
I hope we can bring back vulnerability, emotions, and being okay with looking "cringe" sometimes.
>They weren't afraid to show emotion or show that they really cared about the result. They were chalant.
I think in general people fear to be genuine about things they care about because the internet put a spotlight with the potential for ridicule on a scale never seen before on them. That is why young people seem so into self depreciation, can't be put down if you are there from the get go "it might be cringe but so am i" and "I like it ironically".
It's not so clear to me that the 70s were really the hey-day of male emotional vulnerability. In general, these kind of expressions like when and how to cheer seem more fashion than anything else. And stupid dating stuff also seems old.
That said, I also feel a general kind of nihilism and apathy. But to be honest: I don't really know if it's worse than in the past? Or I'm just getting old and tired of all the stupid bullshit?
Yeah I mean I wasn't around in the 70's so I can't really say for sure. I just noticed that 1) people in the media looked like normal people, unlike the perfectly curated and airbrushed models of today, 2) people seemed more authentic in the way they spoke and held themselves and 3) people seemed less nonchalant in general. Of course the media from that era I consume plays a part as well. Just my thoughts.
The article begins with a good premise, but in the later phases it tries to brush this off as mostly a right-wing phenomenon; whereas plenty of individualist streaks are also seen within left-wing movements. Of course, a deeper analysis is not possible without devolving the discussion into yet another “their barbarous wastes” discussion[1].
In my view, modern society makes it too easy to seclude yourself from people and ideas that are opposed to yours, and there’s a lot of people focussing on individual achievements and winner-takes-all mindsets instead of trying to see how they can be valuable to their community and build relationships putting aside disagreements.
I agree, some of the most self centered, callous people I've met came out of the New Age / Anthroposophy scene. A family member who is anything but right-wing sued her siblings to get her way, introduced or fueled massive feuds among other family members, and is now complaining that she does not understand how people would dislike her.
On the other hand, as the career art of RFK, Jr. shows, horseshoe theory is real.
I think a lot of millennials, myself included, are "people pleasers", who push our own needs aside to make others happy. Again and again.
This works, until we burn out and crash. I certainly have - I spent most of 2024 severely burnt out, and part of it was not protecting my time and setting healthy boundaries.
There's a balance between serving others and taking time to rest. Existing in community takes sacrifice and sometimes that means setting your own needs aside. But being in community also means that others can step up to help you when you need to rest, sharpen your saw, etc. People pleasing and setting poor boundaries in the context of (American) individualism means being a jerk.
I read somewhere (can't find it now, I'm literally on an operating table) that people in more community-focused cultures were more comfortable taking alone time. Because they know that if they take time, things aren't going to fall apart without them. The community will be there to welcome them back in, and nobody will be upset for them taking the time that they need.
The whole idea of a "people pleaser" has largely arisen because people like to hear it. "Your problem is you are just too good of a person!" Attaching yourself to this label will just hamper genuine introspection and growth.
I don't think it's self aggrandizing. It points to a need to balance compassion for self and others. If you let that ratio get unbalanced in any direction it leads to bad outcomes.
All ideas exist in an evolutionary system. New ideas are being produced all the time and the ones that prosper have the best fitness. An idea like this prospers because it has multiple fitness advantages:
- It tells people they are inherently better than other people: "Other people aren't as good as you."
- It excuses their bad behavior: "Your bad behavior is not your fault, you just reached your limit in dealing with bad people. It would happen to anyone".
- It offers a false veneer of being reasonable, even when it is just a framework of excuses. As you say: "It points to a need to balance compassion for self and others."
I don't think such ideas are necessarily engineered this way, but that is why they proliferate.
> Today's
This is false. The observation that being too nice and trying to please people is counterproductive, and putting it into self-help or pop-psych books, goes back to at least the 1970's.
For instance, see the book Creative Aggression, The Art Of Assertive Living George Robert Bach, Herb Goldberg [1974]
That stream of thought was probably the foundation of the whole "me" decade of the 1980s and all that followed.
Oh yeah, and then of course there is material like the writings of Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness [1964]
If we go centuries back we have Machiavelli's The Prince and whatnot.
When we need exactly the opposite in today's environment - empathy, more in-person connection, helping the vulnerable.
Again, these values are timeless.
Yes and to add to this, we're seeing a rise of nonchalantness and apathy, or at least feigned apathy that's really devastating. Modern dating advice is basically how to show you care less than the other person. Don't ever show vulnerability!! The person who cares the least wins, as if it's a zero sum game. Everyone just loses instead.
I was watching some vintage F1 clips and it showed some guys from the 70's celebrating a win and it occurred to me that I rarely see people (men especially) celebrating in such a carefree and passionate way. They weren't afraid to show emotion or show that they really cared about the result. They were chalant.
I hope we can bring back vulnerability, emotions, and being okay with looking "cringe" sometimes.
>They weren't afraid to show emotion or show that they really cared about the result. They were chalant.
I think in general people fear to be genuine about things they care about because the internet put a spotlight with the potential for ridicule on a scale never seen before on them. That is why young people seem so into self depreciation, can't be put down if you are there from the get go "it might be cringe but so am i" and "I like it ironically".
It's not so clear to me that the 70s were really the hey-day of male emotional vulnerability. In general, these kind of expressions like when and how to cheer seem more fashion than anything else. And stupid dating stuff also seems old.
That said, I also feel a general kind of nihilism and apathy. But to be honest: I don't really know if it's worse than in the past? Or I'm just getting old and tired of all the stupid bullshit?
Yeah I mean I wasn't around in the 70's so I can't really say for sure. I just noticed that 1) people in the media looked like normal people, unlike the perfectly curated and airbrushed models of today, 2) people seemed more authentic in the way they spoke and held themselves and 3) people seemed less nonchalant in general. Of course the media from that era I consume plays a part as well. Just my thoughts.
https://archive.is/A8EeW
The article begins with a good premise, but in the later phases it tries to brush this off as mostly a right-wing phenomenon; whereas plenty of individualist streaks are also seen within left-wing movements. Of course, a deeper analysis is not possible without devolving the discussion into yet another “their barbarous wastes” discussion[1].
In my view, modern society makes it too easy to seclude yourself from people and ideas that are opposed to yours, and there’s a lot of people focussing on individual achievements and winner-takes-all mindsets instead of trying to see how they can be valuable to their community and build relationships putting aside disagreements.
[1] https://amp.knowyourmeme.com/memes/our-blessed-homeland-thei...
I agree, some of the most self centered, callous people I've met came out of the New Age / Anthroposophy scene. A family member who is anything but right-wing sued her siblings to get her way, introduced or fueled massive feuds among other family members, and is now complaining that she does not understand how people would dislike her.
On the other hand, as the career art of RFK, Jr. shows, horseshoe theory is real.
Hey, if this therapy-speak gets lumped into "right wing", maybe people in culturally-leftish places will stop doing this shit. Win.
I think a lot of millennials, myself included, are "people pleasers", who push our own needs aside to make others happy. Again and again.
This works, until we burn out and crash. I certainly have - I spent most of 2024 severely burnt out, and part of it was not protecting my time and setting healthy boundaries.
There's a balance between serving others and taking time to rest. Existing in community takes sacrifice and sometimes that means setting your own needs aside. But being in community also means that others can step up to help you when you need to rest, sharpen your saw, etc. People pleasing and setting poor boundaries in the context of (American) individualism means being a jerk.
I read somewhere (can't find it now, I'm literally on an operating table) that people in more community-focused cultures were more comfortable taking alone time. Because they know that if they take time, things aren't going to fall apart without them. The community will be there to welcome them back in, and nobody will be upset for them taking the time that they need.
Just some off the cuff thoughts.
Hope your surgery goes well.
Once you feel better, would you mind sharing anything more that could help locate what you read? It sounds like a really interesting read.
The whole idea of a "people pleaser" has largely arisen because people like to hear it. "Your problem is you are just too good of a person!" Attaching yourself to this label will just hamper genuine introspection and growth.
I don't think it's self aggrandizing. It points to a need to balance compassion for self and others. If you let that ratio get unbalanced in any direction it leads to bad outcomes.
All ideas exist in an evolutionary system. New ideas are being produced all the time and the ones that prosper have the best fitness. An idea like this prospers because it has multiple fitness advantages:
- It tells people they are inherently better than other people: "Other people aren't as good as you."
- It excuses their bad behavior: "Your bad behavior is not your fault, you just reached your limit in dealing with bad people. It would happen to anyone".
- It offers a false veneer of being reasonable, even when it is just a framework of excuses. As you say: "It points to a need to balance compassion for self and others."
I don't think such ideas are necessarily engineered this way, but that is why they proliferate.