Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why It Doesn't Pay to Be a People Pleaser

greatergood.berkeley.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 160 posts

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

#61

Post by hinkley »

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…

> "Jack, I am really fucking frustrated you are still playing that shitty game."

That is not being authentic, and that's the problem. In our heads we know what we want, but we ask for something else.

Why do you want your friend to get off the computer. To be off the computer? No. You miss your friend and you want him to hang out with you. You are worried that he is missing out on life by living in the game and you're both going to pay for it later.

Just ask, man.

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

#62

Post by matwood »

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…

You can be honest without being an asshole. This is related to people who win arguments as assholes. Sure they won, but they pissed everyone off so what does it matter? Then they go hide behind "I'm just being honest." No, that's being an asshole.

There is saying, "you can shear a sheep over and over, but you can only skin it once." Learn to shear.

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

#63

Post by NumberCruncher »

tannerc wrote: post #38
avindroth wrote: post #11

Pleasing people most definitely pays. That is how the world works; you give people what they want, and you get paid. Supply and demand. Preachers of self-reliance seem to confuse "not letting other people affect you" and "not caring about other people". Self-reliance and people-pleasing are two separate axes on a Cartesian plane. You can be both self-reliant and people-pleasing. Being self-reliant, but not people-ple…

I had a mentor once jokingly tell me: "If you learn how to swim, you can burn all the bridges you want."

Having a couple of bridges and making clear that you have always a matchstick at hand can be a game changer.

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

#64

Post by initram »

The author writes:

> Research shows that people who are given instructions for how to lie less in their day-to-day lives are actually able to lie less, and when they do, their physical health improves.

Perhaps you could, you know, link to such a study for those of us interested? OR maybe point out the author so we can look it up ourselves? Searching for "instructions on how to lie less" produces results like "Instructions for filling out IRS Form 1040." Great.

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

#65

Post by groby_b »

webwanderings wrote: post #21
internaut wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet the karma mechanism on HN and other social networking websites biases users into toeing the line of what is the 'general view'. The view of course changes considerably over time which shows it is mostly about mood or values. There has got to be a better regulation mechanism than '+1' and the received wisdom.

Thank you for speaking my mind. I have been saying this wherever I see these karma-mechanisms being employed (likes, hearts, click buttons). I have not seen any website disclose to explain what exactly these button-clicks do to help anyone? These are basically waste of time and useless. I would not have helped you a bit if I had just clicked the up arrow on your comment (nor would I have helped the HN owners with the…

> I have not seen any website disclose to explain what exactly these button-clicks do to help anyone?

Wild guess, you entered the world of online interactions after mailing lists. These buttons address the need of people to be "contributing". Before "+1"/"like", we had "me too". People want to feel like they're supporting views they like, and that button gives them that way, leaving space for more meaningful contributions in the actual text.

It's the same thing as a nod in a 1:1 conversation. "I'm paying attention, I'm here, I agree, continue".

That's where they help, allowing a flow of communication that suits people. Looking at the cumulative number of those... "Narcissism" comes to mind.

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

#66

Post by reedlaw »

I can think of a few problems with this philosophy right off the bat. It doesn't give us much incentive to act politely. Also the first point reminds me of Sense and Sensibility when Marianne doesn't want to share her sadness with Mrs. Jennings not because she's a people pleaser but because Mrs. Jennings is not tender or sympathetic--all she wants is a supply of gossip.

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

#67

Post by CPLX »

avindroth wrote: post #53
CPLX wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

Yeah exactly. Why don't both John and Steve both just worry about his own problems instead of trying to refine and optimize this needless intervention?

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

#68

Post by naasking »

specialist wrote: post #28
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.

"selfish and manipulative in interactions with other people" aka reciprocal altruism. As I've aged, I've embraced transactional relationships. My metaphor is "playing catch". Toss the ball, hope your partner tosses it back. Repeat. The goal is to keep the game going. Some one doesn't throw the ball back, oh well, move on to next partner. Works remarkably well for children, lovers, coworkers, grocery store checkers, a…

> My metaphor is "playing catch". Toss the ball, hope your partner tosses it back. Repeat. The goal is to keep the game going. Some one doesn't throw the ball back, oh well, move on to next partner.

Also known as "tit for tat" in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma, a very successful strategy.

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

#69

Post by brazzledazzle »

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…

There's a difference between being honest and always saying what you think. You should be honest in your interactions but that doesn't mean you should tell everyone everything. You can be honest while being tactful.

I think there's a line between being tactful and being manipulative and it may be different for everyone. For example you seem to think that Steve is telling a "white lie by omission" but I don't. Unless Steve was dishonest if questioned about his motivation or Steve was trying to pretend to be into the game rather being interested in Jack and his interests I wouldn't consider that being dishonest.

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

#70

Post by tremon »

hinkley wrote: post #61
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…

> "Jack, I am really fucking frustrated you are still playing that shitty game." That is not being authentic, and that's the problem. In our heads we know what we want, but we ask for something else. Why do you want your friend to get off the computer. To be off the computer? No. You miss your friend and you want him to hang out with you. You are worried that he is missing out on life by living in the game and you're…

Moreover, by phrasing it like that ("I'm getting frustrated"), you are imposing your demands on your friend without even informing about their state of mind. Not acknowledging them is not the way to keep friends close.
Post reply on HN