Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser • Hacker News Board

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#51

Post by CPLX » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

avindroth wrote: post #34

benatkin wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author defines people pleasing: > People pleasing, in my extensive personal experience, is a process of guessing what other people want, or what will make them think favorably of us, and then acting accordingly. People pleasing isn't caring about other people. It's being selfish and manipulative in interactions with other people (often without realizing it). Quite the opposite.

Okay. Let's take an example from the article. Be transparent, honest, and authentic. Do not ever waiver from this; white lies and false smiles quickly snowball into a life lived out of alignment. Let's say John is this guy who is "transparent, honest, and authentic, and never waivering." And say Jack, John's friend, is addicted to playing Overwatch. John comes by and says, "Jack, you shouldn't play Overwatch. You are…

Oddly, in this example and the several follow ups, nobody has espoused the view that it's almost invariably a complete waste of time to try to get someone else that's not you to quit doing something they enjoy that doesn't affect you.

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#52

Post by avindroth » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:31 PM UTC

rz2k wrote: post #46

avindroth wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay. Let's take an example from the article. Be transparent, honest, and authentic. Do not ever waiver from this; white lies and false smiles quickly snowball into a life lived out of alignment. Let's say John is this guy who is "transparent, honest, and authentic, and never waivering." And say Jack, John's friend, is addicted to playing Overwatch. John comes by and says, "Jack, you shouldn't play Overwatch. You are…

There may be extremes, but if you generalize that example it's exhausting. Making a bad decision in one area does not mean that Jack's stupider than Steve and won't know exactly what he's trying to do. Furthermore, is Steve actually listening? I ask because a lot of what people are doing here, if it's innovative, is regularly met with skepticism. Understanding naysayers' concerns, and learning a ready answer if they…

Making a bad decision in one area does not mean that Jack's stupider than Steve and won't know exactly what he's trying to do

I never implied anything about stupidity. My claim is this sort of behavior is not conducive to change.

Furthermore, is Steve actually listening?

Of course he is. You are missing the point. Or you just haven't met that many people like Steve.

Understanding naysayers' concerns, and learning a ready answer if they ultimately don't seem valid can be a good use of time.

Absolutely. You should hold that standard for yourself. But just because you hold that standard for yourself doesn't mean the world all of a sudden is open to criticism.

Have a vision for what the ideal world is, but do not be deluded when modeling the state of the real world. If you think this is just transparent rhetoric game, you seriously misunderstand the general population of human beings. And most likely, yourself. If you have a brain that remotely resembles mine, then you have emotions, biases - structural flaws in our brain. Understand those first. Reading LessWrong will help.

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#53

Post by avindroth » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:32 PM UTC

CPLX wrote: post #51

avindroth wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay. Let's take an example from the article. Be transparent, honest, and authentic. Do not ever waiver from this; white lies and false smiles quickly snowball into a life lived out of alignment. Let's say John is this guy who is "transparent, honest, and authentic, and never waivering." And say Jack, John's friend, is addicted to playing Overwatch. John comes by and says, "Jack, you shouldn't play Overwatch. You are…

Oddly, in this example and the several follow ups, nobody has espoused the view that it's almost invariably a complete waste of time to try to get someone else that's not you to quit doing something they enjoy that doesn't affect you.

John comes by and says, "Jack, you shouldn't play Overwatch. You are wasting your time and energy."

Jack responds, "I know, but just this one match."

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#54

Post by spiderfarmer » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:35 PM UTC

melvinmt wrote: post #22

spiderfarmer wrote: post #8

Maybe Dutch directness is the reason why The Netherlands is consistently in the top 10 of the Happiness Index. http://www.iamexpat.nl/read-and-discuss/expat-page/articles/...

What people don't tell you is that directness also has a cost. The Dutch directness of "GTFO my country" what minorities are confronted with daily is not quite contributing to any minority's happiness (it's a big reason why I moved to the US).

We used to be much more relaxed, welcoming and tolerant. I blame the polarizing politicians.

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#55

Post by avindroth » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:35 PM UTC

st3v3r wrote: post #50

avindroth wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay. Let's take an example from the article. Be transparent, honest, and authentic. Do not ever waiver from this; white lies and false smiles quickly snowball into a life lived out of alignment. Let's say John is this guy who is "transparent, honest, and authentic, and never waivering." And say Jack, John's friend, is addicted to playing Overwatch. John comes by and says, "Jack, you shouldn't play Overwatch. You are…

Except in your example, John isn't being honest. He's being an asshole. Far too many people conflate the two.

He is being completely honest. Which is what the article espoused. The article also said do not hide your emotions. John is mad about the fact that his friend is wasting his life. I displayed that.

If you are defining honest as some midpoint between a white lie and an asshole, then what is being honest? Not being completely honest, but just somewhat honest?

Then your "honest" is a healthy mix of white lie and complete honesty.

That's Steve.

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#56

Post by avindroth » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:44 PM UTC

tdkl wrote: post #24

benatkin wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author defines people pleasing: > People pleasing, in my extensive personal experience, is a process of guessing what other people want, or what will make them think favorably of us, and then acting accordingly. People pleasing isn't caring about other people. It's being selfish and manipulative in interactions with other people (often without realizing it). Quite the opposite.

> People pleasing isn't caring about other people. It's being selfish and manipulative in interactions with other people (often without realizing it). Quite the opposite. Indeed, it's passive-agressive behaviour rooted from low self-esteem. "I'll cater to you, so you'll return the favour", but when this isn't reciprocated (since the receiver isn't even aware of this "business transaction"), the giver is feeling anger…

I absolutely despite passive-aggressive behaviour rooted in low self-esteem. They are invisible contracts people set.

I think we have just faced a simple labeling problem, with people-pleasing as the ultimate vague word.

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#57

Post by sillypog » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:44 PM UTC

solipsism wrote: post #6

HerpDerpLerp wrote: post #4

Hmm well I don't want to hear what a nightmare my colleagues lives are. I ask "How was the weekend" you say "Fine". I don't care that your house burned down. Yep I am a brit!

Why ask then. Are there literally no other things you can think of saying that would satisfy the social norms? How about "Hope you had a good weekend."

Or "Did you see that ludicrous display last night?"

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#58

Post by ArkyBeagle » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:46 PM UTC

I'll say this - a life lived in service to other people feels more worthwhile to me. Perhaps one of the services is being honest, even brusque at points. Just not very often.

Actually solving problems for other people is mostly about framing the question underlying the problem. If they're not interested, then you're done with that problem.

"Service to other people" is not some grand/altruistic thing; it's simply a prioritization mechanism that helps remove some of your ego from the process.

Service does not mean being servile.

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#59

Post by dasil003 » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:48 PM UTC

avindroth wrote: post #34

benatkin wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author defines people pleasing: > People pleasing, in my extensive personal experience, is a process of guessing what other people want, or what will make them think favorably of us, and then acting accordingly. People pleasing isn't caring about other people. It's being selfish and manipulative in interactions with other people (often without realizing it). Quite the opposite.

Okay. Let's take an example from the article. Be transparent, honest, and authentic. Do not ever waiver from this; white lies and false smiles quickly snowball into a life lived out of alignment. Let's say John is this guy who is "transparent, honest, and authentic, and never waivering." And say Jack, John's friend, is addicted to playing Overwatch. John comes by and says, "Jack, you shouldn't play Overwatch. You are…

This example is pretty heavy—I mean if you're talking about breaking someone of an addiction that is something far beyond the scope of how best to modulate ones behavior in the world. But it points to the real complexity of relationships.

Someone that always offers a harsh unvarnished and negative opinion on things usually gets a reputation as a jerk. Someone who is always trying to please everyone gets a reputation as a spineless brown-noser. In the real world, how you say something is often even more important than exactly what you say. If you are charming you can convince more people of more things, and political capital is a real thing that matters all the way down to individual relationships—you have to pick your battles. Throw in culture, sexism, racism, moods, and innumerable other contexts and things become very subtle.

That's what bothers me about these pop science articles: nothing is that simple. Maybe an article like this triggers you to evaluate yourself and say "hey, I do try to please others too much", but then again maybe you need the opposite advice. The bottom line is you have to gauge for yourself how your behavior is affecting relationships and whether you are getting what you want out of life.

Re: Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

#60

Post by __abc » Wed, Aug 10, 2016, 5:50 PM UTC

specialist wrote: post #44

pavlov wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...move on to next partner. Works remarkably well for children I'm curious how you actually follow through on that with children. It's hard to move on from them (without inflicting lifetime psychological trauma, anyway).

Well, ya. One's own children are a special case. Even so, they can test you (thinking of the house ape that moved back into my basement). But universally, I try to meet everyone, especially children, where they're at. Children get a lot more chances to learn how to throw the ball back. And I always leave the door open. TMI: one of the biggest surprise to me is connecting with nieces / nephews when they're much older,…

"House ape" .... I'm using this.