Can a friend group be toxic for some people but not for others?

[Anonymous]

Trying to make sense of this (and sorry it's so long!). I have been in a friend group for about 10 years. It started as a small group of coworkers who started doing the same hobby, and grew from there to encompass a lot of people involved in that hobby. It's now about 15 people give or take -- some people have moved away but visit sometimes, some don't do the hobby anymore but come to gatherings, etc.

Three years ago, there was a bit of a drama in the group and one person (I'll call her Kelly) was sort of "expelled" (or left because she wanted to, depends on who you ask), and several other people who were close to Kelly became a bit more distant from the group, especially certain people, after that. They are still around but less involved. I guess I am in this part of the group, though I wasn't actually that close to Kelly, more like I'm very close to two people who were very close to her. So I guess I knew her better than others and also was privy to a lot of stuff that went down to prompt her leaving, which I know not everyone is.

Long story short, several bits of untrue gossip emerged about Kelly and spread like wildfire. They were very unflattering and caused her to stop being invited to things and also many people started treating her very coldly at the hobby. It is now broadly accepted that the gossip was false, but people are split on how it came about. Some (including Kelly) feel it was invented/encouraged by two specific members of the group who were competitive with Kelly and wanted to destroy her rep. Some feel it was an unfortunate misunderstanding. I think it's a little of both -- there was definitely a competition of sorts between Kelly and someone else, and that person maybe exploited a misunderstanding that was already emerging. I don't know. I didn't spread the rumors about her though I do remember hearing about them.

My understanding is that Kelly became very depressed after these rumors spread, and especially when she started being excluded or treated coldly/rudely by others in the group. She chose to quit the hobby (which was a big deal -- it's an expensive hobby she'd spent years getting good at, but it's a small community and it's pretty much impossible to do without running into people from this friend group) and she ultimately severed her friendships with everyone in the group. While she didn't tell me this directly, one of the people close to her told me that she was in therapy, on anti-depressants, and experiencing suicidal ideation, which was why she chose to make a clean break. It was also when Covid started, so it was an easy excuse to just cut everyone out.

But the people who participated in the gossip/shunning her view it differently -- they think she was being dramatic, that she expected the group to chase after her and apologize, and they think it's kind of funny no one did. The people who think this have mellowed a bit on it, and aren't as nasty when her name comes up. But it's still an attitude "oh yeah, Kelly was weird, she didn't really fit in with us."

I'm struggling because I see both sides of this. This group can be incredibly warm and supportive of one another. Celebrating birthdays, weddings, babies, and other personal victories. They are very active on social media and you really see all the support for one another all the time and it makes me feel good to be a part of it.

But this incident, and especially the gossip and the shunning, still kind of bothers me even though Kelly was not someone I was super close to. I was talking to my sister about it last night and here is what she said (almost verbatim, it's really stuck with me): This group gossiped about and bullied a woman until she developed serious mental health issues and suicidal ideation, and ultimately severed her relationship not just with the group but with an activity she'd done for years and spent thousands of dollars to participate in because she feared for her well being and potentially her life.

And when you put it like that... I don't know what to think. I do think Kelly likely had some pre-existing vulnerability that made that situation a lot worse for her than it might have been for others. But then I've never been the subject of false rumors in this group so, as my sister said, it's awfully easy for me to say that (and also so what if she already had depression or whatever, lots of people do, it doesn't excuse what happened).

So I ask DCUM: is it possible for this group to be a wonderful and supportive friend group for some people, and a toxic cesspool for others? I feel very torn about this, and especially about the fact that I personally still like and hang out with people I do know treated Kelly very badly. I think I sometimes pretend I don't know, but because of my proximity to the situation, I do know -- some people did some pretty awful things to her, and I still talk to them and enjoy their company.

[Anonymous]

I think it's a toxic group, and you're just lucky you're not on their bad side...yet.

[Anonymous]

Anything is possible. I don't see why some people couldn't still experience the group as wonderful and supportive. Nevertheless, I wouldn't want anything to do with it.

Something similar happened to me in law school. A friend got very, very jealous when, without trying, I won an accolade she had been desperately chasing. She actively spread lies about me and destroyed my place in our friend group. Like with your group I'm sure some would say I left it, and some would say I was bullied out. It was very painful for me. And I know that some in that group knew full well she was lying (her lies were pretty obvious) and had done a horrible thing to me. And they stayed together in the group anyway; I'm sure they thought the group "wonderful and supportive" for them, even if toxic horribleness happened to me because one woman was jealous and spread lies to destroy my friendships. It's been years and not only does the memory of what one woman did to me make me angry, the memory of that friend group remaining intact with people who knew she was a total liar makes me angrier.

[Anonymous]

No, they are not wonderful and supportive. Every member of the group is a potential target. Just because it happened to someone else doesn't mean it won't happen to you next, or someone else. I would dump people like that.

[Anonymous]

You're not a good person or friend if you just sit there while they trash her. You're part of the problem. It's just a matter of time before your time comes, OP.

[Anonymous]

Yes, of course. I witnessed this at my workplace. I learned from my experience that poor communicators, those who don't understand subtle cues/hints and social undercurrents, are the most likely to get ostracized by a certain type of hyper-sensitive woman, who perceive their faux-pas and occasional awkwardness as intentional rudeness, and try to push them out.

It's hard to mend once it snowballs, because by then both parties have been offended by the other and are objectively guilty of something. But the "one who started it" is usually one or more women who think they've been insulted and become punitive.

It's very important, if you're part of the onlooking majority, to never believe rumors and never take anyone's subjective opinion as truth, otherwise you tend to get sucked into one side and enable the tribalism.

[Anonymous]

I think your sister is right, OP. All of the following can be true:

-This group supports select members of the group (the non-"weird" ones, presumably)
-Members of this group actively harmed someone who may have been uniquely vulnerable to that harm
-Whatever vulnerability Kelly had, it almost certainly wasn't within her control
-This group saw no reason to apologize to Kelly, despite their spreading lies about her

The way these women behaved is unconscionable. These are adults who bullied a woman because they found her "weird." For me, their treatment of Kelly would be a deal-breaker for any friendship. These women wouldn't hesitate to turn on you, OP, if they thought it was in their best interest. Keep that in mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, of course. I witnessed this at my workplace. I learned from my experience that poor communicators, those who don't understand subtle cues/hints and social undercurrents, are the most likely to get ostracized by a certain type of hyper-sensitive woman, who perceive their faux-pas and occasional awkwardness as intentional rudeness, and try to push them out.

It's hard to mend once it snowballs, because by then both parties have been offended by the other and are objectively guilty of something. But the "one who started it" is usually one or more women who think they've been insulted and become punitive.

It's very important, if you're part of the onlooking majority, to never believe rumors and never take anyone's subjective opinion as truth, otherwise you tend to get sucked into one side and enable the tribalism.

This comment is weird because you are clearly "taking a side" and assigning roles to people, but then you say they important thing is to stay out of it. But you are obviously much more on the side of the "poor communicators" than the "hyper-sensitive women." Even though both of those descriptions sound incredibly simplistic to me also -- I've seen people hide behind "miscommunication" when they've simply been very rude and refused to be accountable for it, and I'm also very wary of the stereotype of a "hyper-sensitive" woman, since that's often code for "woman with opinion" or "woman who feels she deserves to be treated respectfully by friends and colleagues."

Anyway, maybe you should take some of your own advice here.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s possible that the women who did this years ago have grown in that time.

And it’s possible that Kelly was hyper sensitive and over the years has grown too.

But in this situation you have to decide on your actions and act how you feel and think best. example - they next time they say Kelly was weird maybe you say evenly and matter of fact no she wasn’t. She was ostracized by some untrue rumors and was justifiably upset by that. It’s in the past so let’s leave it there. and then move on to another topic. Yes there will be an awkward pause or some defensiveness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, they are not wonderful and supportive. Every member of the group is a potential target. Just because it happened to someone else doesn't mean it won't happen to you next, or someone else. I would dump people like that.

+1 It's the lying and bullying that makes it clear that this wasn't just some sort of miscommunication.

[Anonymous]

Kelly may be hyper-sensitive but this group sounds like mean girls. Watch your back OP, you could be the next target.

[Anonymous]

Are these people adults?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a toxic group, and you're just lucky you're not on their bad side...yet.

It is likely they will find a new target.

What is the hobby?

[Anonymous]

Why is everyone assuming Kelly is hyper-sensitive? I would be really upset if my entire friend group started spreading untrue rumors about me and I started being shunned by people I thought were my friends. I don't think that's "hyper" anything, just a normal reaction.

The depression and suicidality are extreme but also not signs of hyper-sensitivity. They are signs perhaps of being predisposed to depression, an illness that millions of people have.

If anything, maybe these women engaging in gossip and bullying should be MORE sensitive to the fact those behaviors can have really damaging impacts on someone with a very common mental health issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, of course. I witnessed this at my workplace. I learned from my experience that poor communicators, those who don't understand subtle cues/hints and social undercurrents, are the most likely to get ostracized by a certain type of hyper-sensitive woman, who perceive their faux-pas and occasional awkwardness as intentional rudeness, and try to push them out.

It's hard to mend once it snowballs, because by then both parties have been offended by the other and are objectively guilty of something. But the "one who started it" is usually one or more women who think they've been insulted and become punitive.

It's very important, if you're part of the onlooking majority, to never believe rumors and never take anyone's subjective opinion as truth, otherwise you tend to get sucked into one side and enable the tribalism.

This comment is weird because you are clearly "taking a side" and assigning roles to people, but then you say they important thing is to stay out of it. But you are obviously much more on the side of the "poor communicators" than the "hyper-sensitive women." Even though both of those descriptions sound incredibly simplistic to me also -- I've seen people hide behind "miscommunication" when they've simply been very rude and refused to be accountable for it, and I'm also very wary of the stereotype of a "hyper-sensitive" woman, since that's often code for "woman with opinion" or "woman who feels she deserves to be treated respectfully by friends and colleagues."

Anyway, maybe you should take some of your own advice here.

PP you replied. I am generalizing because I've noticed the same pattern in different situations. I first witnessed this in my research lab, with all women scientists. Then that pattern repeated when I volunteered on a PTA board (all women as well), and has repeated in other situations. Generalizations don't always apply to specific situations, of course. But over the course of decades of my life, this pattern has held, PP. I have seen WAY, WAY more accidental faux-pas committed by clueless but well-intentioned people, than I have seen purposeful rudeness. Most people understand there is a difference and respond accordingly, which leads to apologies or differences being smoothed over with diplomacy. In military terms it's called "proportional response". But it only takes one stubborn person to take offense and have the clout to do something about it, for the whole group to become embroiled in a fight that could have been prevented. It's never a good idea to go nuclear unless the situation really demands it. In situations where the group is responsible for rumors, it's difficult for the initial perpetrator to accept their responsibility, since others contributed as well.