Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think you've stakes out an opinion on this category of friend group issue and choose to see it through that lens because if you can make the facts for your theory, then your theory becomes more correct each time.

What about when the people who commit the unintentional faux pas are called on it, and they are the ones who adamantly refuse to apologize? I've seen this many times, as people who lack social intelligence often also resist apologizing, for obvious reasons.

I also think what you describe as hyper-sensitivity is way more complicated. IME, when people get described as hyper-sensitive, like it's an innate trait, there is usually something else going on that undermines that judgment. But you have to actually know people to understand, you can't just be assessing them from afar.

You aren't describing a functional community or friend group. You are describing a way to survive in a dysfunctional setting where people communicate poorly and there may be some relational aggression. It might work for you but it doesn't improve anything, it just keeps you removed from it.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

What, pray tell, is a "kick me" tendency?

There are people who are so clueless that they become bully targets.
I had to distance myself from one of them because I noticed how she brought out the worst in me. I tried to clue her in but she insisted she wanted to be herself (which was acting dumb and clueless). This is what I call the kick me tendency. Act clueless - resist corrections - can’t tell off those who are unkind to you because of your cluelessness.

I am not a mean girl but that’s because I consciously distance myself in situations like this. Some people give in to temptation.

I am not saying it’s good; it’s human nature though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

What, pray tell, is a "kick me" tendency?

There are people who are so clueless that they become bully targets.
I had to distance myself from one of them because I noticed how she brought out the worst in me. I tried to clue her in but she insisted she wanted to be herself (which was acting dumb and clueless). This is what I call the kick me tendency. Act clueless - resist corrections - can’t tell off those who are unkind to you because of your cluelessness.

I am not a mean girl but that’s because I consciously distance myself in situations like this. Some people give in to temptation.

I am not saying it’s good; it’s human nature though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

What, pray tell, is a "kick me" tendency?

There are people who are so clueless that they become bully targets.
I had to distance myself from one of them because I noticed how she brought out the worst in me. I tried to clue her in but she insisted she wanted to be herself (which was acting dumb and clueless). This is what I call the kick me tendency. Act clueless - resist corrections - can’t tell off those who are unkind to you because of your cluelessness.

I am not a mean girl but that’s because I consciously distance myself in situations like this. Some people give in to temptation.

I am not saying it’s good; it’s human nature though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

What, pray tell, is a "kick me" tendency?

There are people who are so clueless that they become bully targets.
I had to distance myself from one of them because I noticed how she brought out the worst in me. I tried to clue her in but she insisted she wanted to be herself (which was acting dumb and clueless). This is what I call the kick me tendency. Act clueless - resist corrections - can’t tell off those who are unkind to you because of your cluelessness.

I am not a mean girl but that’s because I consciously distance myself in situations like this. Some people give in to temptation.

I am not saying it’s good; it’s human nature though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

What, pray tell, is a "kick me" tendency?

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

OP, this is the person you align yourself with. Sounds like a really nice person, don’t you think?

Again, Kelly is the ultimate winner here. You, OP, are stuck with people like this PP. Have fun with your hobby.

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.

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.

Anonymous wrote:I know that there are people who are either unstable or they somehow bring out the worst in others. They become the outcasts and those who oust them may not always act their best in the process.
However that same group can be perfectly normal for someone without the unstable or “kick me” tendencies.