Page 9 | AIBU to think people are less sociable and friendly nowadays?

HotPatoot · 2026-08-29T08:44:22+00:00

I’ve always been a very sociable person and this worked well for me as a child through to university. I made friends everywhere I went as a child, invaluable on family holidays, starting new hobbies etc. as I’ve got older I’m finding it near on impossible to communicate with people, everyone is so closed in their own world. a few examples - I started a new job just after Christmas. On my break on first day I went into staff room and saw a colleague sat there on her phone so I walked over all cheerful and said “hi, I’m Patoot, it’s my first day!”. She glanced up from her phone, gave a fake smile and said “ok, hi?” ??? I followed up with “what’s your name?” So she said “Sheila”. I asked how long she’d worked there at which point she looked visibly annoyed and said “sorry i need to reply to this message” and started typing away on her phone. I made myself a cuppa and then went to sit again at her table at which point she gathered her stuff and left!! another example - I joined a new fitness class. Before the class started I saw a woman sat on her own and went across to say hello. She smiled and told me her name so I asked if she’d done this class before and she said she had. I asked what it was like and she looked annoyed and said “it’s a fitness class?” And shrugged. I asked if she does any other classes and she got her phone out and just ignored me from then on. example from this morning! I got on the bus, there was a woman sitting alone so I sat next to her and cheerfully commented on the traffic. She smiled, nodded and then fixed her eyes on the window away from me. what is wrong with people these days?? AIBU to think the UK has got much less friendly or do people just become less sociable as they age??

arethereanyleftatall · 30/08/2026 12:29

Thepeopleversuswork · 30/08/2026 12:06

@arethereanyleftatall

And with regard to ‘when I was young this was seen as normal’, yes, yes it was, but very very many people were masking to fit in with social norms, and then coming home exhausted from wearing a mask all day. I think it’s a good thing that people now get to choose. There are plenty of people who want and are happy to be social and friendly, but also many don’t. Both options should be available.

I'm sorry, I'm familiar with the concept of masking and I know this is very draining and stressful for some people but the idea that you have to "mask" to say "yes its a good class" to someone in a queue before going back to what you were doing is taking this to ludicrous extremes. Getting on your high horse and saying, in a snarky, bitchy way "it's a fitness class" is far more stress inducing for all concerned than a simple, courteous throwaway reply.

It's perfectly possibly to reply courteously to someone in a single sentence without it causing psychological damage. We seem to have got to a place where people think a need to be untouched by human contact on a daily basis is a right. This is far more "entitled" than making passing conversation.

If you really are unable to deal with a five word reply to another human being without having a meltdown then you shouldn't be going out of the house at all.

I guess if the person who didn’t want to talk thought that it would just end after those five words, then it would be fine. But it wouldn’t. The op wanted to initiate a whole conversation. Even if she didn’t, there are definitely people who do. Then the next week she’d make a beeline for her new friend. It’s rarely just 5 words.

OneHangryGoldDeer · 30/08/2026 12:38

Thepeopleversuswork · 30/08/2026 12:22

@Anarchy99

As for being dystopian, being made to feel crowded or uncomfortable by a stranger because they are too thick to read social cues is pretty dystopian too. Why would you deliberately want to put someone in the position where they either have to pretend and be polite or they feel they have to be blunt? That’s really crappy.

I think it's a question of setting and intensity: if someone is yammering away at you for minutes, talking to you when you have headphones in, talking away when you've made it clear that you don't want to participate in a conversation, sitting next to you on an empty bus or train and chatting away ceaselessly then clearly that is intrusive.

But the logical conclusion of what you and @arethereanyleftatall are saying is that the default setting for everyone should be to never initiate any contact with anyone who they don't know other than transactional discussions. So, for example, you should never ask anyone at the bus stop how long they've been waiting for a bus, or never say "what a grim day" when you're caught in the middle of a downpour with a bunch of people. You really think that's "crappy" behaviour?

I just don't accept that these basic throwaway interactions are automatically intrusive. I'm perfectly capable of reading social cues and if someone doesn't want to talk much to me I won't push it. I don't want long chats with strangers either. But I don't want to live in a world where you have to ask permission to interact with people. I don't think most people want that and I do think this leads to a place which is, yes, pretty dystopian.

It's 100% intrusive when OP spoke to someone, they've politely responded and then said they're doing something and then OP gets a cuppa and tries to sit down to chat with them.

The intrusiveness comes when in all the situations OP has described, the person has been polite and interacted then made it clear they aren't interested in further interaction and then OP pushes it or concludes the person is unfriendly or unsociable.

They're not. They just don't want to chat with OP.

People like OP can't accept not everyone wants to chat with them so conclude there's a problem with other people, not a problem with them

The fabric of society won't collapse because some people don't want to chat to strangers.

Some people do and will. Some people won't. But shouldn't be judged for it.

MoodyMargaret11 · 30/08/2026 12:39

Katypp · 29/08/2026 10:02

I think these responses kind of prove your point. OP.
We've spend that last 30+ years drumming into children that their feelings, wants and needs override everyone else's and the somewhat predictable result is that people no longer have any remorse about being rude and feel perfectly fine about blanking people because THEY don't want to talk.
I think it's tremendously sad and illustrates a breakdown in society. But you are unlikely to get any sympathy here, where it's all about boundaries and not owing anyone even a smile.

This
I dont think you were being "intrusive" or "intense" as some pp's are suggesting here.
What happened to making friendly conversations and connecting with others? Or God forbid making new friends?
I would have happily chatted with you for a bit in all the scenarios you described.
If I wanted Alone Time, I'd have still chatted for 5-10 mins, then got onto withwhayever I was doing. Then next time I saw you at work/gym/bus, I'd have had some more conversation and so on..maybe made friends if we clicked.

beaglescurleduplikebagels · 30/08/2026 12:45

MoodyMargaret11 · 30/08/2026 12:39

This
I dont think you were being "intrusive" or "intense" as some pp's are suggesting here.
What happened to making friendly conversations and connecting with others? Or God forbid making new friends?
I would have happily chatted with you for a bit in all the scenarios you described.
If I wanted Alone Time, I'd have still chatted for 5-10 mins, then got onto withwhayever I was doing. Then next time I saw you at work/gym/bus, I'd have had some more conversation and so on..maybe made friends if we clicked.

Show quote history

There's nothing wrong with friendly conversation but you have to read the room.

If someone is sat on their phone, minding their own business, they're clearly not open to having a full-blown chat. Similarly the lady at the gym made it pretty obvious she wasn't up for a chat, yet OP carried on regardless.

It's not friendly to intrude on someone's space and private time and force them into a conversation.

OneHangryGoldDeer · 30/08/2026 12:48

MoodyMargaret11 · 30/08/2026 12:39

This
I dont think you were being "intrusive" or "intense" as some pp's are suggesting here.
What happened to making friendly conversations and connecting with others? Or God forbid making new friends?
I would have happily chatted with you for a bit in all the scenarios you described.
If I wanted Alone Time, I'd have still chatted for 5-10 mins, then got onto withwhayever I was doing. Then next time I saw you at work/gym/bus, I'd have had some more conversation and so on..maybe made friends if we clicked.

Show quote history

And then you're the kind of person OP is looking for.

It doesn't mean however, that people who don't want to spend 10 minutes chatting to a stranger in a non-social setting are unsociable or unfriendly.

And I don't understand how anyone can think OPs 1st example isn't intrusive. Someone was on their break, she bounded over like a child in a park introducing herself then asking them questions and when they made it clear they were doing something and didn't want to chat, OP sat down to talk to them!

Thepeopleversuswork · 30/08/2026 12:58

@OneHangryGoldDeer

It's 100% intrusive when OP spoke to someone, they've politely responded and then said they're doing something and then OP gets a cuppa and tries to sit down to chat with them.
The intrusiveness comes when in all the situations OP has described, the person has been polite and interacted then made it clear they aren't interested in further interaction and then OP pushes it or concludes the person is unfriendly or unsociable.
They're not. They just don't want to chat with OP.
People like OP can't accept not everyone wants to chat with them so conclude there's a problem with other people, not a problem with them
The fabric of society won't collapse because some people don't want to chat to strangers.
Some people do and will. Some people won't. But shouldn't be judged for it.

I think the examples OP has given are quite ambiguous. In the bus example I think OP has certainly pushed it too far: I would be pissed off if someone did this on the bus when I was minding my own business.

The other two examples are more open to interpretation. I don't think its unreasonable, if you're starting a new job, to introduce yourself to someone and strike up a conversation, in fact I think its pretty normal. Nor do I think think it's rude to expect to have a throwaway discussion while waiting for an exercise class. The woman in the exercise class scenario was far far ruder than the OP was.

It is possible that the OP pushed it too far, she's obviously put the most positive gloss on her behaviour and maybe she genuinely can't read other people's social cues, I wasn't there and I can't know.

But I do think the starting point that someone's right to sit in silence automatically trumps someone else's attempt to politely break the ice is an odd and unhealthy perspective.

I also think the idea that "some people don't want to chat to strangers" is in itself revealing. Everyone is, by definition, a stranger until you get to know them. The ice has to be broken at some point for people to meet friends, meet loved ones. If we take the assumption to its logical conclusion that people outside our circle of trust should never be interacted with we get to a very strange place. You have to subject yourself, at some point, to some degree of social discomfort or you would never make any kind of social bonds.

Where do you draw the line between "strangers" and "people who have the potential to become acquaintances"? There's no bar code on people's foreheads that tells you you might want to meet them. Unless you're prepared literally to only communicate with your nuclear family, you will at some point have to break the ice sometimes with some people.

OneHangryGoldDeer · 30/08/2026 14:44

Thepeopleversuswork · 30/08/2026 12:58

@OneHangryGoldDeer

It's 100% intrusive when OP spoke to someone, they've politely responded and then said they're doing something and then OP gets a cuppa and tries to sit down to chat with them.
The intrusiveness comes when in all the situations OP has described, the person has been polite and interacted then made it clear they aren't interested in further interaction and then OP pushes it or concludes the person is unfriendly or unsociable.
They're not. They just don't want to chat with OP.
People like OP can't accept not everyone wants to chat with them so conclude there's a problem with other people, not a problem with them
The fabric of society won't collapse because some people don't want to chat to strangers.
Some people do and will. Some people won't. But shouldn't be judged for it.

I think the examples OP has given are quite ambiguous. In the bus example I think OP has certainly pushed it too far: I would be pissed off if someone did this on the bus when I was minding my own business.

The other two examples are more open to interpretation. I don't think its unreasonable, if you're starting a new job, to introduce yourself to someone and strike up a conversation, in fact I think its pretty normal. Nor do I think think it's rude to expect to have a throwaway discussion while waiting for an exercise class. The woman in the exercise class scenario was far far ruder than the OP was.

It is possible that the OP pushed it too far, she's obviously put the most positive gloss on her behaviour and maybe she genuinely can't read other people's social cues, I wasn't there and I can't know.

But I do think the starting point that someone's right to sit in silence automatically trumps someone else's attempt to politely break the ice is an odd and unhealthy perspective.

I also think the idea that "some people don't want to chat to strangers" is in itself revealing. Everyone is, by definition, a stranger until you get to know them. The ice has to be broken at some point for people to meet friends, meet loved ones. If we take the assumption to its logical conclusion that people outside our circle of trust should never be interacted with we get to a very strange place. You have to subject yourself, at some point, to some degree of social discomfort or you would never make any kind of social bonds.

Where do you draw the line between "strangers" and "people who have the potential to become acquaintances"? There's no bar code on people's foreheads that tells you you might want to meet them. Unless you're prepared literally to only communicate with your nuclear family, you will at some point have to break the ice sometimes with some people.

Your comprehension is very poor when you haven't read the 1st example OP gave and understood it.

And there are social events where it would be unreasonable to expect people to not attempt to talk to others and where 'breaking the ice' may be appropriate.

None of the circumstances OP described would be considered that.

phoenixrosehere · 30/08/2026 14:45

Thepeopleversuswork · 30/08/2026 12:58

@OneHangryGoldDeer

It's 100% intrusive when OP spoke to someone, they've politely responded and then said they're doing something and then OP gets a cuppa and tries to sit down to chat with them.
The intrusiveness comes when in all the situations OP has described, the person has been polite and interacted then made it clear they aren't interested in further interaction and then OP pushes it or concludes the person is unfriendly or unsociable.
They're not. They just don't want to chat with OP.
People like OP can't accept not everyone wants to chat with them so conclude there's a problem with other people, not a problem with them
The fabric of society won't collapse because some people don't want to chat to strangers.
Some people do and will. Some people won't. But shouldn't be judged for it.

I think the examples OP has given are quite ambiguous. In the bus example I think OP has certainly pushed it too far: I would be pissed off if someone did this on the bus when I was minding my own business.

The other two examples are more open to interpretation. I don't think its unreasonable, if you're starting a new job, to introduce yourself to someone and strike up a conversation, in fact I think its pretty normal. Nor do I think think it's rude to expect to have a throwaway discussion while waiting for an exercise class. The woman in the exercise class scenario was far far ruder than the OP was.

It is possible that the OP pushed it too far, she's obviously put the most positive gloss on her behaviour and maybe she genuinely can't read other people's social cues, I wasn't there and I can't know.

But I do think the starting point that someone's right to sit in silence automatically trumps someone else's attempt to politely break the ice is an odd and unhealthy perspective.

I also think the idea that "some people don't want to chat to strangers" is in itself revealing. Everyone is, by definition, a stranger until you get to know them. The ice has to be broken at some point for people to meet friends, meet loved ones. If we take the assumption to its logical conclusion that people outside our circle of trust should never be interacted with we get to a very strange place. You have to subject yourself, at some point, to some degree of social discomfort or you would never make any kind of social bonds.

Where do you draw the line between "strangers" and "people who have the potential to become acquaintances"? There's no bar code on people's foreheads that tells you you might want to meet them. Unless you're prepared literally to only communicate with your nuclear family, you will at some point have to break the ice sometimes with some people.

I disagree about the office one.

Yes, people can introduce themselves, but the person OP chose was clearly doing something on their lunch break. Sheila then told OP she needed to do something and instead of leaving the coworker alone, OP sat down at the table and expected a conversation.

I wonder if the woman had said ‘I’m in the middle of something, doing xyz, could you please leave me alone?’ how OP would have taken that? Would that be considered rude?

Sheila instead got up and left, either she felt she couldn’t finish what she was doing with OP sitting there or her break was over.

OP could have sat somewhere else and then waited and seen if Sheila would be able to talk.

PleaseDontAsk · 30/08/2026 15:43

phoenixrosehere · 30/08/2026 14:45

I disagree about the office one.

Yes, people can introduce themselves, but the person OP chose was clearly doing something on their lunch break. Sheila then told OP she needed to do something and instead of leaving the coworker alone, OP sat down at the table and expected a conversation.

I wonder if the woman had said ‘I’m in the middle of something, doing xyz, could you please leave me alone?’ how OP would have taken that? Would that be considered rude?

Sheila instead got up and left, either she felt she couldn’t finish what she was doing with OP sitting there or her break was over.

OP could have sat somewhere else and then waited and seen if Sheila would be able to talk.

Edited

Show quote history

Exactly she gave a polite indication that she was in the middle of doing something and OP didnt care- only interested in her desire to speak to this new colleague.

arethereanyleftatall · 30/08/2026 17:51

What you’re saying @Thepeopleversusworkdoesn’t match with what the op did.

in one of your comments you said something like ‘if you can’t say 5 words to someone then don’t leave the house.’ Fair enough.

but that isn’t what the op did.

the op started a conversation.
the other person politely responded but making it clear they weren’t interested. (The 5 words you spoke of)

but then the op ignored the nonverbal communication of ‘I don’t want to talk’ and kept on. Both in the work example and the fitness class. That is the where the op is rude and intrusive.

RaraRachael · 30/08/2026 17:58

You shouldn't assume that because people are sitting on their own that they're somehow sad or lonely and need somebody to talk to them.
I'm quite happy on my own and would find somebody like the OP pushy and annoying.

I remember going to a certain city where people are supposedly mega friendly. I was so fed up of being told somebody's life story in a queue.

Firefly1987 · 30/08/2026 19:25

Anarchy99 · 30/08/2026 09:26

Because helping someone that wants help is the same as wasting someone’s time with unwelcome small talk …

Just like not wanting to be bothered by a randomer is the same as hating everyone.

And being forced to talk shit in person is apparently the same as interacting on an internet chat site.

Is nuance always an issue for you or just on this topic?

Show quote history

Just because she was struggling doesn't actually mean she wanted my help? How would I know? You'd probably hate a stranger in your personal space trying to help you.

Just like not wanting to be bothered by a randomer is the same as hating everyone.

It was more this idea that "I don't have to give a crap about randomers, no one cares about them" don't know if it was you who said it or another PP. Nothing wrong with not wanting to do small talk (I'm sure OP can soon find someone who does) it's the idea that no one cares about the people around them and how dare they deem themselves worthy to try and engage in small talk with some of you 😆news flash-if you're out in the world you're going to encounter other people. I mean I don't particularly like them either, hell is other people-but unfortunately I don't live on a desert island.

Has anyone claimed someone trying to engage them with small talk affects their mental health yet?

Firefly1987 · 30/08/2026 19:29

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

PleaseDontAsk · 30/08/2026 19:31

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

The overwhelming majority of mum's net has nothing to do with parenting.

Again you have no reading comprehension ability.

Firefly1987 · 30/08/2026 19:39

@PleaseDontAsk my point still stands because that's how it started. You're on here now because women wanted to share with other women way back when. Probably because they weren't getting it in real life from the new mums they were meeting. Wonder why reading these posts...

SouthLondonMum22 · 30/08/2026 20:07

Firefly1987 · 30/08/2026 19:39

@PleaseDontAsk my point still stands because that's how it started. You're on here now because women wanted to share with other women way back when. Probably because they weren't getting it in real life from the new mums they were meeting. Wonder why reading these posts...

Joining and engaging on Mumsnet is a choice though. It isn't the same as a random person approaching you and trying to force conversation.

PleaseDontAsk · 30/08/2026 20:08

SouthLondonMum22 · 30/08/2026 20:07

Joining and engaging on Mumsnet is a choice though. It isn't the same as a random person approaching you and trying to force conversation.

Show quote history

Exactly someone who understands.

Judicioususeofthewordgirdle · 30/08/2026 20:11

Another thread where “extrovert” and “introvert” are liberally misused.

Being an introvert doesn’t mean anti-social or unfriendly or not open to conversation.

Dumbledora8 · 30/08/2026 20:17

You sound annoying

Firefly1987 · 30/08/2026 20:18

Thepeopleversuswork · 30/08/2026 11:11

I agree. And its all now covered by the blanket justification that everyone is an “introvert” and their right to sit on their own with their phone takes precedence over anything else.

FWIW I do think making conversation with a random on the bus is a bit much and I would have preferred to be left alone but in the other cases OP did nothing wrong. I do think our perception of benign and light social contact with others as intrusive is symptomatic of a wider malaise in society.

We have become incredibly atomised and this leads people to believe they have some inalienable right to never have to interact with others outside their immediate family.

Actually small acts of daily friendliness are part of the glue that binds society together. If we lose this we lose all sense of others as people with their own lives and needs. And we make the alienation worse. Social interaction is a muscle and if we lose it it’s hard to get it back.

OP’s behaviour may have been mildly irritating but the sense of horror at having to interact with others is far worse.

Show quote history

Great post. Totally agree. It bugs me when they try and use introversion as an excuse because I'm one and I'm not stuck up and unable to reply a few kind words to someone who is new at a job/fitness class to make them feel welcome.

Actually small acts of daily friendliness are part of the glue that binds society together. If we lose this we lose all sense of others as people with their own lives and needs. And we make the alienation worse. Social interaction is a muscle and if we lose it it’s hard to get it back.

Yes this is exactly what I was trying to get at-everyone has a right not to want to chat to strangers, it's the way they're talking about the horror of it and how OP has committed some cardinal sin. She's after all just a "randomer" these superior people don't have to care about as a person. They actually relish being rude-and I'm sure they've committed far more social faux pas than the OP ever has they're probably just too self-absorbed to have noticed.

OP’s behaviour may have been mildly irritating but the sense of horror at having to interact with others is far worse.

Most of the real world isn't like this, these types of threads always bring out the socially awkward people who see other people as enemies.

Tuggb · 30/08/2026 20:30

I get very few moments in a day where I can totally switch my brain off. I wouldn't have been rude, in fact I would probably have been very friendly, but underneath it I'd have been gutted that you disrupted one of my precious moments with small talk.

I don't agree with being rude but I think if someone politely lets you know that they don't want to engage in small talk then you should respect that.

Firefly1987 · 30/08/2026 20:53

beaglescurleduplikebagels · 30/08/2026 12:45

There's nothing wrong with friendly conversation but you have to read the room.

If someone is sat on their phone, minding their own business, they're clearly not open to having a full-blown chat. Similarly the lady at the gym made it pretty obvious she wasn't up for a chat, yet OP carried on regardless.

It's not friendly to intrude on someone's space and private time and force them into a conversation.

Show quote history

I think OP did misread the phone lady, but then she was just letting her know it's her first day-most people would be like "oh, hi welcome! I'm super busy right now but nice to meet you" but that's just far too much to expect now.

At least OP knows to avoid mindless phone-zombie lady going forward, so it's a win-win for both of them.

phoenixrosehere · 30/08/2026 21:28

SouthLondonMum22 · 30/08/2026 20:07

Joining and engaging on Mumsnet is a choice though. It isn't the same as a random person approaching you and trying to force conversation.

Show quote history

Agree. It is about choice. Strangers should be allowed to choose how much they want to say or not without being accused or considered anti-social or rude.

Nothing wrong with wanting to engage in small talk but surely it should be reciprocal and you need to accept and understand that some people are not in the mood for it.

It was a woman sitting alone on her phone during her lunch break. No idea why anyone would think that is the person they should sit with and proceed to talk at. Surely, if the person wanted to engage they would have put their phone down or simply said “just a moment, I’m in the middle of something… writing this thing.. xyz and once I finish I can talk to you properly.”

The woman in the gym class had returned OP’s greeting, gave OP her name which she didn’t have to so somewhere in their interaction something made her decide she no longer wanted to engage with OP which is her choice.

A woman on a bus sitting by herself looking out the window. The woman smiled at OP so acknowledged them and I’m unsure why OP thinks they should want to have a conversation.

None of these women gave any indication that they wanted to chat nor should they have to simply engaged further with OP because OP wanted a conversation. At least for the first two women, it is a possibility they thought OP was the type who would make a beeline for them and not everyone is up for or looking for that type of interaction at work or at the gym on a regular basis.

I’m wondering how OP decides who they should talk to and I sincerely hope they don’t assume that people sitting/ standing by themselves are just looking for someone to chat to them.

I also wonder why they’re choosing to make out everyone is less social because they chose people who didn’t match their expectations. Three instances in places that are pretty time restrictive doesn’t suggest to me that people are less social.

People who don’t mind small talk will usually show they don’t mind small talk.

cheeseomelette · 30/08/2026 23:49

I’m always so glad that my experience of people in real life is nothing like the prevailing attitudes on here where there seems no tolerance to people who may be neurodivergent or lonely or heaven forbid, just friendly. I live in a friendly area and people readily chat in queues, in shops, in the street and anywhere else. You’d look odd or plain rude if you didn’t respond. My dcs do the same and we all feel part of a community through these small interactions.

There’s rarely anything so important I have to do on a phone which doesn’t mean I can’t acknowledge someone or respond to a question . If I need to extricate myself from a protracted or awkward conversation I will do - it’s entirely possible to do so politely.

It’s so odd to me that some people seem to pull up the drawbridge to social interaction with “randoms” once they have established their circle of people. Some radiate such hostility that I’m always fascinated as to how they made any friends in the first place.

Wiseplumnet · 31/08/2026 00:08

My idea of hell is having to interact, especially with random strangers. I would rather doom scroll or have my own thoughts. The bus was particularly unwarranted. Are you an extroverted person?