slander, community, and empathy
Nov. 8th, 2005 11:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chelidonI found out earlier today that someone I had once considered a friend had chosen to slander me ("slander," in this case meaning choosing to spread information to others containing half-truths, insinuations, selective choice of facts, misrepresentations, and/or pure lies in an attempt to hurt someone or attack their character). I think I get why this happened, but really, the reasons why are largely irrelevant.
So heck, what a bummer. This kind of thing has happened to me once in my life before, about a decade ago, by a real pro with a long history and much skill and experience, so by comparison, this situation is real small-time stuff. Some of the people on my friends list remember that last time -- in fact, a number of us met and became long and fast friends because of our shared experiences around it. Anyhow, I learned some things from both occurrences, general patterns that I've seen and figured I'd share. Note that I'm not getting into any specifics here -- personal privacy and integrity are important to me, so no matter what I thought of someone personally, I wouldn't choose to drag their name through the mud in an open forum. It's just not necessary, compassionate or wise. Those most of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, don't worry about it -- it's really not a big deal.
Some generalizations:
1. Friends ask for clarification and more information if they hear something that worries or concerns them. Friends don't take any story on faith one-sided -- if they truly care about the situation and the people involved, they get real information, directly from the source(s), and make their own judgments. This is especially true when things don't quite make sense, when there is dissonance between what is said and one's own experience of people. Times of stress are often when one finds out more about the character of oneself, and of friends.
2. Truth does out, sooner or later, it really does. I don't mean just the narrow personal truth particular to the inside of one person's own individual head. Sure, there are many sides to every story, we all have our own perspectives and truths, but there are also cases of clear misrepresentation and untruth which usually come out somewhere along the way. This is equally true whether someone is intentionally misrepresenting things, or genuinely believes things to be other than they are.
3. Like gossip, slander almost always harms the community into which it is released. People who go on crusades are dangerous -- regardless of the stated goal for spreading stories, my experience is that those who do so are usually operating from an underlying need for vengeance or a desire to harm or demonize someone, and are typically heedless of the real damage they are doing to those around them, because it's not about community, it's not really about truth, it's about someone's ego. It's about embarrassing, or hurting someone, pushing people into taking sides, fighting a war to prove a point or taking one's own internal demons and inflicting them onto the outside world. Or, more mundanely, it's about garnering sympathy, support, justification, and being the focus of attention. It's always a valid question to ask: "but really, what was the need to broadcast this particular information, in this forum and at this time, what was the actual intent?"
That's one way slander differs from healthy discussion, discourse and debate. In slander, usually what is being set up is a scripted scene, a public morality play. Characters and roles are written up, and people are cast into them, regardless of whether they actually fit -- it has little to do with actual truth, or actual events, or actual people, and more about the internal scenes played out inside someone's head, now projected large for the world to see. Maybe it's entertaining, maybe of prurient interest, but it always says more about what the internal landscape of the playwright looks like than anything real in the outside world. It's not about truth, it's about using the external world to play out one's inner dramas, and also about manipulating the court of public opinion for personal attention or gain.
In genuine, honest communication, people who have difficulties make efforts to communicate directly, openly, without using proxies, intermediaries or putting innocent people in the middle of their issues. That's been one of my main measures of character over the years -- how willing is someone to let people get hurt, and on the flip side, how much genuine concern is expressed around one's words and actions, and what actual care is taken to minimize damage to others? In other words, where is the big ego found, and how much genuine empathy is evident? Where a trail of hurt and damaged people is found, particularly among people who were once friends, there's usually a person at the center who is more concerned about ego validation than truth, more interested in winning a war or scoring a point than building and strengthening community.
I've been living in and creating intentional group housing and communities for about 19 years now, and I've seen a lot of patterns, and noted what kinds of people can and cannot successfully be in a real full-time community. In all of that time, we've only had to have one person leave, and that was more about his personal growth at the time than any serious problems. Some of that is luck, but a big part of that is picking the right people.
Currently the person with the least number of years together in this community is my son, and that's because he's only 6 years old -- he was born into an intentional community (which technically means it's not an intentional community, since he didn't have a choice about that ;>) Everyone else has been together longer than that.
If you're in it for the long haul, to build a community where people stay because they want to, not because they have to (like a nuclear family), the number one most important characteristic is empathy. Shortly following that is honesty. And yes, everyone falls short sometimes, and the important thing is to genuinely make amends for whatever harm you've caused, do whatever you have to do to clean up your mess, even if it's damn hard and takes a long time, and try to do better next time.
But the bottom line is empathy. If someone can't actually feel for other people, if they can't regularly base their actions on how those actions will make those around them feel, they're not going to make it in a healthy community.
So heck, what a bummer. This kind of thing has happened to me once in my life before, about a decade ago, by a real pro with a long history and much skill and experience, so by comparison, this situation is real small-time stuff. Some of the people on my friends list remember that last time -- in fact, a number of us met and became long and fast friends because of our shared experiences around it. Anyhow, I learned some things from both occurrences, general patterns that I've seen and figured I'd share. Note that I'm not getting into any specifics here -- personal privacy and integrity are important to me, so no matter what I thought of someone personally, I wouldn't choose to drag their name through the mud in an open forum. It's just not necessary, compassionate or wise. Those most of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, don't worry about it -- it's really not a big deal.
Some generalizations:
1. Friends ask for clarification and more information if they hear something that worries or concerns them. Friends don't take any story on faith one-sided -- if they truly care about the situation and the people involved, they get real information, directly from the source(s), and make their own judgments. This is especially true when things don't quite make sense, when there is dissonance between what is said and one's own experience of people. Times of stress are often when one finds out more about the character of oneself, and of friends.
2. Truth does out, sooner or later, it really does. I don't mean just the narrow personal truth particular to the inside of one person's own individual head. Sure, there are many sides to every story, we all have our own perspectives and truths, but there are also cases of clear misrepresentation and untruth which usually come out somewhere along the way. This is equally true whether someone is intentionally misrepresenting things, or genuinely believes things to be other than they are.
3. Like gossip, slander almost always harms the community into which it is released. People who go on crusades are dangerous -- regardless of the stated goal for spreading stories, my experience is that those who do so are usually operating from an underlying need for vengeance or a desire to harm or demonize someone, and are typically heedless of the real damage they are doing to those around them, because it's not about community, it's not really about truth, it's about someone's ego. It's about embarrassing, or hurting someone, pushing people into taking sides, fighting a war to prove a point or taking one's own internal demons and inflicting them onto the outside world. Or, more mundanely, it's about garnering sympathy, support, justification, and being the focus of attention. It's always a valid question to ask: "but really, what was the need to broadcast this particular information, in this forum and at this time, what was the actual intent?"
That's one way slander differs from healthy discussion, discourse and debate. In slander, usually what is being set up is a scripted scene, a public morality play. Characters and roles are written up, and people are cast into them, regardless of whether they actually fit -- it has little to do with actual truth, or actual events, or actual people, and more about the internal scenes played out inside someone's head, now projected large for the world to see. Maybe it's entertaining, maybe of prurient interest, but it always says more about what the internal landscape of the playwright looks like than anything real in the outside world. It's not about truth, it's about using the external world to play out one's inner dramas, and also about manipulating the court of public opinion for personal attention or gain.
In genuine, honest communication, people who have difficulties make efforts to communicate directly, openly, without using proxies, intermediaries or putting innocent people in the middle of their issues. That's been one of my main measures of character over the years -- how willing is someone to let people get hurt, and on the flip side, how much genuine concern is expressed around one's words and actions, and what actual care is taken to minimize damage to others? In other words, where is the big ego found, and how much genuine empathy is evident? Where a trail of hurt and damaged people is found, particularly among people who were once friends, there's usually a person at the center who is more concerned about ego validation than truth, more interested in winning a war or scoring a point than building and strengthening community.
I've been living in and creating intentional group housing and communities for about 19 years now, and I've seen a lot of patterns, and noted what kinds of people can and cannot successfully be in a real full-time community. In all of that time, we've only had to have one person leave, and that was more about his personal growth at the time than any serious problems. Some of that is luck, but a big part of that is picking the right people.
Currently the person with the least number of years together in this community is my son, and that's because he's only 6 years old -- he was born into an intentional community (which technically means it's not an intentional community, since he didn't have a choice about that ;>) Everyone else has been together longer than that.
If you're in it for the long haul, to build a community where people stay because they want to, not because they have to (like a nuclear family), the number one most important characteristic is empathy. Shortly following that is honesty. And yes, everyone falls short sometimes, and the important thing is to genuinely make amends for whatever harm you've caused, do whatever you have to do to clean up your mess, even if it's damn hard and takes a long time, and try to do better next time.
But the bottom line is empathy. If someone can't actually feel for other people, if they can't regularly base their actions on how those actions will make those around them feel, they're not going to make it in a healthy community.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 04:41 am (UTC)Thank you. I've been in your situation before and it hurts. I hope whatever it was hasn't caused you too much stress. *hug*
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 05:08 pm (UTC)But that's just the silver lining to what is definitely a big ol' dark cloud. And I'm deeply sorry for any part I played in unwillingly setting some of these wheels into motion, and for anyone involved who is going through turmoil over it. I feel like I did everything I could within reason to defuse the situation, but clearly, it just wasn't enough.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 05:12 am (UTC)Back in college, I studied hoaxes and forgeries, mostly because a professor I really liked decided he'd teach the class (it was history, and not my major, but I talked my way in). A hoax is one in which no one gains anything; it's a trick, a playful moment, wool pulled over hte audience's eyes but no one 'gets' anything for it (like Piltdown Man, which made fools of the archeologists but the owner never got money for the find, nor did the community get attention long-term), especially in a monetary sense, nor does anyone clearly stand to gain attention or notoriety. A forgery is usually one in which somone gains (like the Turin Shroud, which real or not has forgery written all over its origins given that there are clear lines of gain, or the Viking Stone found the same year as the alleged "anniversary of Vikings coming to North America").
Gossip is usually based on a forgery; someone stands to gain. Once you know who, it's easier to figure out the what and why.
But you're right about the community destruction. Slander (and libel), with the intent of destroying another person, is a scorched-earth policy, and can leave some mighty scars even among a community otherwise strong and healthy. The ones hiding their damage well will reveal such in short time, when slander's introduced.
However, you and I have been through that / and it is not our fate.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 04:36 pm (UTC)As it is spoken, so shall it be. May we all learn from our mistakes, and endeavour to attract healthy people into our lives and communities.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 06:37 am (UTC)Well said. I strive to communicate directly, especially these days. There were times years ago when venting with friends would get out of hand. And at least once, when actual concerned conversation with a trusted friend (attempt at problem solving or getting a reality check) I later suspected ended up feeding the gossip mill about someone else inadvertently on my part. I deeply regret both of those things now and strive to not engage in that behavior anymore.
I have things that were said about me get back to me third hand now. And the people with the actual issues never seem to step forward. I've even tried to occasionaly engage them in conversation about said subjects and they've dodged or avoided my phone calls or emails. Sigh. Luckily, it happens rarely and doesn't seem to get out of hand. Knock wood.
You and I fly above the radar, my friend. Best we can do is keep our noses as clean as possible.
And continue to model impeccibility - as you do.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 03:52 pm (UTC)I hear ya, I really do. :> I know that making mistakes is a big part of being human (as is forgiveness for screwing up). It happens, and I'm finding that for me, the first key step is to notice that I've done it, either because I got some insight, or because one (or perhaps many) outside friends said, "hey, dude, that was really fucked up." And I heard them. The next step was cleaning up the mess -- straightening out stories, making apologies and/or amends, changing patterns, etc.
Yeah, folks avoiding direct communication is a big red flag for me, where someone can't or won't handle things cleanly, can't or won't do the work. Okay, that's cool, personal choice, but yiz can make that personal choice from waaaaay over *there* ;>
Thank you, Thorn, for your friendship, support, and for sharing your thoughts -- they all mean more to me than I can say.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 08:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 03:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 12:51 pm (UTC)I learned was if someone tells scary stories about another person, and then follows them with "but don't tell them I said that about them - its a secret", or "you don't want to talk to him/her", or "if you tell them what I've said, they'll come after you", then the stories are likely to be fictional. Worse, the reason they ask for people not to talk to the target directly about what's said about them is they know what is said is untrue and don't want to be caught.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 03:36 pm (UTC)And I'm seeing a pattern (granted, my sample size is only two ;>), of someone having a need to stir up public sh*t in order to feel validated, and to get emotional attention and sympathy. Certainly I know you saw this first-hand and up-close with the person I was referring to. Casting oneself into the role of noble crusader or injured victim triggers automatic sympathy on the part of most normal listeners, and especially on the part of friends. It makes one the center of attention, gathers allies, bolsters wacvering friendships, even if under false pretenses. But, you know, whatever -- there are all kinds of messed up people in the world. All I figure I can do is treat people well, and kindly, and with compassion, and let the truths reveal themselves over time. Certainly that's how it happened with TB, and I suppose we all learned from it, eh? I kind of wish I'd learned more, perhaps I could have avoided this lesser mess.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 08:01 pm (UTC)I think this should pass over quickly, you guys are well known to be decent folks and approachable. As you'd say, I wish you "Blessings of health and hearth". :>
Gotta love you, brother
Date: 2005-11-09 02:47 pm (UTC)If there is anything i can do...
Oooo, and if you ever want a personal physician resident at yer place ;-)
Great love and respect,
davis
Re: Gotta love you, brother
Date: 2005-11-09 03:39 pm (UTC)Re: Gotta love you, brother
Date: 2005-11-09 05:30 pm (UTC)Zoe
Ithaca, NY
Re: Gotta love you, brother
Date: 2005-11-09 06:34 pm (UTC)You wild blessing of the goddess, you!
Re: Gotta love you, brother
Date: 2005-11-09 07:56 pm (UTC)I miss you. Come visit us, you miscreant... ;>
Love,
Lylythe
Re: Gotta love you, brother
Date: 2005-11-09 08:32 pm (UTC)Well, i'd have to make some arrangements... oh, but aw'y'all do so sorely tempt me.
Interesting. Miscreant, hmmm. From the Old French for deviating from established beliefs, or heretic. I think i rather like that . I miss you too, and yer fellow there, and Claudia, and the boy king, though i've never made his corporeal acquaintence.
Enough with the tempting already. i have to work now...
Love and good lickens,
davis
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 03:45 pm (UTC)Much love as always.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 04:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 07:26 pm (UTC)As always, much love and support to you...not to mention coffee, hugs, omelettes, backrubs, and made to order salt scrubs upon request... ;>
See you when I get home.
Love,
Lylythe
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 07:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-10 06:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 11:16 pm (UTC)-Horace
no subject
Date: 2005-11-09 11:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-10 03:41 am (UTC)I'll say it again: argh
Although such a thing has never happened to me directly, I've been in enough communities where it has happened and I have watched helplessly as said communities were torn asunder. It's heartbreaking.