| If this is part of the conversation of expecting better standards of behavior by both people in relationships then yes that's a good thing but if it comes to the point where as I think the articles suggests that behavior in relationships becomes codified, archaic gender stereotypes are preserved under the guise of dismantling them, relationships become narrated primarily as a threat, and people expect complete safety at all times... Then it sounds to me there's not going to be enough room for people to really get really close authentically, which is the point of intimacy and relationships. > Even happy relationships involve moments of discomfort, disappointment, conflict—and even amicable breakups are rarely pain-free. Yet young people are now being taught to expect absolute emotional safety in sex, love and courtship at all times Doesn't that seem a bit like we're sort of being prepared as a market for perfect AI and virtual reality partners that can be sold to us in future because you know ordinary people are too threatening so we may as well embrace expensive and upgradable perfectly safe AI relationships? I think this phenomena is a symptom of a larger sort of social malaise where people are becoming less willing to take personal responsibility for their own emotions which I think is a key boundary within relationships. Just because I feel joy or sadness, doesn't mean someone else did something good or bad. Of course it can overlap and it's important to recognize when you can alternately appreciate or give feedback, and stand up to, people for their behavior which works or doesn't work, but what I think is happening is somehow the zeitgeist discourse is normalizing externalizing, projecting, displacing ... in other words blaming other people for however you're feeling. Of course this is being misused to try to get power over people by accusing them of doing something wrong just because of an emotion you have... or in some cases even don't have, but you can make it their fault anyway. But I think the consequences are deeper and worse than that...
"Infantilizing", as the article says, telling people that they are victims under the guise of empowering them, making us all less capable of dealing with our own internal states and emotions without trying to find someone to blame or displace onto... I mean to me it's a sociological and psychological crisis in the making and I don't really understand how we got here.... But I know that in order to get out of the negative implications of this it's going to be very hard to overcome the attachment of people who are benefiting from this "open season" on blaming others. The only kind of theory I have about it, aside from considerations about how these phenomena are being used to manipulate the public in some way, is that sort because of postmodernism psychoanalytic notions of blaming your parents for all the issues you grew up with somehow became less popular as traditional notions of family or authority decayed, but people still needed something to fill the gap in other... In other words something to blame their problems on and we're not allowed to blame the media or the state because those groups require for their own preservation that we don't effectively blame them so the only option is we had to find ways to blame each other and some low-hanging fruit there is to blame each other in personal relationships. It's not extremely clear or fleshed out but that's an idea that I have. but if this momentum can be directed towards demanding that everybody behave a little bit better and with more integrity in relationships not just in the workplace but across the board then I think that's a super positive development but there's certainly seems to be some negative aspects that I think this article talks about interestingly....;):p xx |