Anti-Social Socializing
When is 'Socializing' Actually Anti -Social Behaviour?

By Patricia Lefave, Monophrenic  

It is a question that doesn't get asked much, in fact, it does not even get presented as a question as it appears to be a contradiction in terms. In fact, it IS a contradiction but it is a contradiction that our dysfunctional society has come to accept as the 'norm.' What I am going to suggest here is that what a lot of people think of a 'socializing' is actually social climbing and anti social thinking and behaviour, being performed in groups who use the commonality of it as a means of gaining and maintaining status and 'popularity.'  

Have you ever noticed that duplicitous people often describe themselves as having 'loads of friends'? If you pay attention you will often find that their friends are also duplicitous, angry people and that they act this out together on surrogates, who are those 'others' outside the group. Acting out on surrogates is actually part of the definition of ANTI social behaviour. Yet when such people do this as part of a group, which is doing the same thing, instead of individuals acting out their contempt for others alone, the definition of the behaviour changes to accommodate the group which is acting as one. I am suggesting that this behaviour is a lot more common than you think and I am also suggesting that this group behaviour is, in fact, becoming accepted as the 'norm' and that those who do NOT behave this way are more often now seen as the abnormal ones!

Do you find that hard to believe? Well let us do what we seem to need to do to make the point more real for you and use some real life concrete examples.

 When people get together in groups and  tell 'stories' based on all the negative gossip they are spreading themselves, is that 'socializing;' or is it anti social behaviour? Well try thinking of it this way: If ONE person was always telling contemptuous 'stories' about someone they don't actually know, would you call it a display of “good social skills”? Or would you call it something else?

What I am suggesting in this post is that what gets called 'normal' and socializing is often just the opposite but is disguised behind the style of thinking known as “group consensus.” In reality the dysfunctional group promoting such thinking and behaviour has a big 'perception problem' of it's own. Groups often do become an “it' which takes on a kind of life of it's own. This has happened in my own case. 

Does the huge group of people gossiping about me all these years while denying it, believe that I really don't know about the group behaviour? I think many of the group members still believe that is true. Those who know, that I know, all about them, are now trying very hard to pretend they don't know, that I know. Of course they DO this while continuing to gossip about it as always.  I am still not fooled. As  I once said to the group that started all of this,  “If I were to confront everyone who thinks s/he is fooling me, or who is lying to me, I wouldn't have time to be doing anything else all day long.”  I meant it then, and I mean it now.  

They don't WANT to know otherwise, because if they DID, they would have to see themselves as I see them and that would (to quote one of them from years ago) “ruin all their fun.” You see groups getting together and targeting those who 'don't belong' for whatever the reason of the hour might be, is not NEW thinking or behaviour. It is very old, and very much defended, behaviour. Human beings tend to defend things they find useful, or enjoyable, and groupthink along with group behaviour, (thought comes before  deed) is found to be both useful and

enjoyable to many people. Those who enjoy the behaviour, and there are many of them, tend to attract like minded 'friends.' It is in fact, quite easy to have lots of friends IF you are willing to think and do the things that attract them. It is even fairly easy to have lots of 'friends' if you don't agree with their thinking but are still willing to pretend to their face that you do. You can then use other 'friends' to complain about them 'covertly' while swearing the other 'friend' to secrecy in the name of 'loyalty' and 'friendship.' It is not so easy to stand against what the current majority is promoting as a 'norm' and it never has been. In my experience real friends who are genuine and honest are pretty rare. At times in my life when I have had one or two of them, I have felt very fortunate.

Let me give you three more concrete examples out of my own public experience (which is of course denied to exist) and use them as points of debate. Pretend they are just 'hypothetical' situations  if it makes you feel better, but then really look and listen to them, and ask yourselves honestly if these are examples of “good social skills” or something quite different wearing a social disguise. 

Example one:

One of the people in this hypothetical situation likes to pump for information and then runs and tells others anything she gets and together they evaluate it and me. This one is also very fond of playing the role of provocateur, a role enjoyed by several people involved and one that is also very common in many other dysfunctional groups. There is a certain level of power and control of others in that role and I think that is why many enjoy it. This one likes to make suggestions about me that get others to roll their eyes in a form of disdainful 'bonding.” It is a kind of 'thank God WE are not like her,' routine. This is a role the person plays in the family as well when looking for a convoluted kind of 'support' from others. 

Is this, as described here, 'socializing'?  

Example two:

A bus driver deliberately leaves me standing at a bus stop as I am the only one there so he can get away with doing it. He is motivated by the story telling of others regarding who I am, and what I am supposed to be about, and feels justified in doing so. Another one discusses a good way to make me miss the bus on an old route by telling other drivers, “She only goes to the stop a couple of minutes before the due time so if you can manage to pull away from the square a couple of minutes early, you can make her miss it.” Then, he and his normal bus driving friend have a good laugh over the idea.

Notice it is about covert power over others again. Now if that were to really happen in real life would that be considered to be good social skills or 'normal' behaviour to you? Many would call it passive-aggressive. 

Example three:

A woman who lives in an apartment building and who takes the bus on a regular basis, enjoys telling slanted stories about all her neighbours, what they do at home, tales of their sex lives, and adds a little colour to them about how crazy they are (compared to her of course) and she shares these stories with bus drivers and other passengers, who all get a good laugh out of them at the expense of those the 'fun' is about. Of course she thinks she is 'concealed' when she tells these stories and does not think for a  minute that the people she is talking about will know what she does. She's wrong. This belief in the group secrecy is how she convinces herself that what she does is all right.  But if you really think about it, she KNOWS  that what she does is not all right. If it was, she would not need to belong to a group that behaves the same way, and agrees to keep the truth about what she does a 'secret.'

So is this defined as a 'good personality' because the people she tells these stories to find her amusing for doing so? 

Think about it. Isn't this splitting? Isn't this the kind of person who makes herself feel better and more 'normal' by looking down on those she sees as 'less than'? Is it realistic of this woman to expect 'friendly' behaviour towards her from those she targets for her mocking contempt? I don't think it is. 

The point I am trying to make by giving these examples is that it seems to me that much of society has got it backwards. We seem to spend more and more time now calling this kind of thinking and behaviour as given in the examples above “friendliness”  or “socializing” when in fact what it really is, has more to     do with anti social personality traits which are being supported  and enabled by groups of people who are behaving badly in the same way and that decision to do so, by members of a group, is making some very destructive behaviour APPEAR to be 'normal,' and also making many of the targets of it very ill. 

A good test of this might be to ask yourself a question like this:

If someone you are using for your amusement were to treat YOU in exactly the same way, as you treat them, and doing it 'covertly' would you find that person to be friendly, nice, and normal? If the answer is 'no' then you are engaged in splitting to justify yourself by creating two different realities out of one.

If the answer is yes, you DO think that person is friendly and normal, leave me your name please and I will get really 'friendly' and 'normal' with you as my new topic to be shared with bus drivers, store associates and mall crawlers. I have a whole lot of interesting material to work with in my new comedy act; believe me.  Here comes the new fare box Fanny.