To think that 'people pleasing' is commonly endorsed on MN?

[Circumlocutious]

Not overtly, I find. Start a thread on being pressured by your in-laws and the majority of posters will tell you to grow a backbone and to stop being a doormat. But then tacitly, and imbedded in other discussions, women are often alerted to the need to be socially agreeable to others. In fact, sometimes a behaviour is described as wrong purely because other people will find it disagreeable/objectionable.

So you see these phrases crop up all the time"

• 'Whatever you like to think, you will be judged for this by other people!' (so what?)
• 'You're going to make him/her feel bad' (So? You're not responsible for other people's feelings, only your own actions).
• 'He/she did something kind and this is how you respond!' (that doesn't mean you should be held hostage to someone's supposedly selfless act. People do kind and 'giving' things for all sorts of self-interested reasons).
• 'Nobody likes a... insert derogatory noun '
• 'There's always one person that no one likes/no one invites/people talk about - that's you OP'
• 'You don't sound very nice OP' (what a crime!)

Of course there are obvious and overt acts of rudeness. That's not what I'm referring to. I'm referring to the idea that what other people think of you should be a front and foremost consideration in the minds of women. It's a regressive idea that still creeps its way into everyday conversation on MN and I find it very frustrating.

I think you're quoting selectively. "'There's always one person that no one likes/no one invites/people talk about - that's you OP" crops up "all the time"? Really?

If anything, I think the majority view on MN runs towards doing what you think is right and not even considering what may be going on in the minds of others. Especially in MIL threads.

Yes, being a people pleaser isn't great for mental health. But we are a social species, we need people we can be close to and can share with, and you can't develop a close relationship and yet never adapt your own behaviour to accommodate others.

I hadn't noticed any of your examples. I thought it was the opposite, with posters urging OP to cut off their friends, leave their husbands and go no contact with their parents over every single issue.

I actually think there's been a bit of a seachange, with more posters robustly challenging the kind of poster who shrugs and says 'What can I say? I'm a total people-pleaser!' as if it's both kind of a nice flaw and unalterable, when urged to assert her boundaries in some ridiculous situation where she's being blatantly taken for a fool.

I've certainly seen several different posters recently pointing out that 'people-pleasing' is a warm and fuzzy-sounding label for something that is actually a fairly bad character flaw that has a big negative impact on both your own life and the lives of those around you. It's a good thing that people are saying this. and pointing out that being a 'people pleaser' in fact involves a disastrous set of misconceptions about friendships and dancing attendance on people you neither like nor respect because you are afraid of what will happen if you don't 'buy' their liking with services, and then wondering why they don't reciprocate.

I see both extremes here. People pleasing to the point of being a doormat and people who can't have another person say hello to them without that person being declared a CF and a user.

I've seen a few threads where posters have used phrases such as, "couldn't you just....... " or, "would it hurt you to ......... "

It seems that encountering someone without boundaries means that all their problems are the OP's to solve and there is a pervasive attitude that helping out even if you're not obliged to or it would cause you hardship and inconvenience is the "kind" thing to do.

I don't think it's as common as it once was but it's still there.

I find it's too far the other way. Of course no one should allow themself to be taken for a mug, but sometimes it is good to do something just because it will make someone else happy, even if it inconveniences you.

It's frowned upon here but it's good to be kind/nice, it's what makes the world go round and I find that genuinely nice people are generally happier in themselves than those determined not to be taken advantage of.

I agree OP. I think it's also connected to the 'it takes two to make an argument' bollocks - because if we were all doing our jobs as women everything would be sweetness and light.

Oh, and the 'is it really so hard to' make an extra sandwich in the morning/put the mug in the dishwasher/whatever other tiny little last straw has driven the asker to distraction. Grr.

I think it’s a real mix, but the general theme is a big chunk of MN lacks nuance and it’s all or nothing for a lot of people. Sometimes this appears in people pleasing where a poster will outline that they’ve been hurt by their mother or friend behaving poorly etc, and the replies will be ‘well it could be worse, she’s still your mum’.

But then on the other side - LTBs over small things etc, ideas of drafts of horrible text messages to friends that no human being would ever send to someone they liked, telling bosses to shove it etc. Makes you wonder if they’ve ever navigated a relationship with another person in their life!

@Pukkatea

I hadn't noticed any of your examples. I thought it was the opposite, with posters urging OP to cut off their friends, leave their husbands and go no contact with their parents over every single issue.

Ha ha!!! Me too!!

It seems to me op you are mixing up having boundaries with being an asshole, and being a people pleaser with being thoughtful of others.

Being a people pleaser can be a problem. Being an asshat that never things of things from others POV, or puts no value on relationships, can be a problem.

It's pretty normal that in response to any problem or question being brought up, people give a variety of views on where the proper balance lies.

@BecomeStronger

I find it's too far the other way. Of course no one should allow themself to be taken for a mug, but sometimes it is good to do something just because it will make someone else happy, even if it inconveniences you.

It's frowned upon here but it's good to be kind/nice, it's what makes the world go round and I find that genuinely nice people are generally happier in themselves than those determined not to be taken advantage of.

But there's a huge difference between freely being kind or nice, and the kind of dancing attendance on other people like an unpaid lady-in-waiting that is people-pleasing.

Being kind or nice comes from a position of choice and strength. People pleasing is done because the people-pleaser fears they will be disliked if they say no to a request -- it comes from a position of weakness and insecurity. And ironically, it does not create or strengthen friendships, because the people-pleaser is identified in the 'friend's' mind with service, not fun or companionship etc.

The endless threads on here about loneliness and friendlessness are full of people saying 'I didn't like to say no, so I made my friend's wedding dress and cake, decorated the venue, did the flowers, made the favours, ALL for free, and gave her a present of £1000 towards the honeymoon, AND I gave her a kidney last year and called my firstborn after her, and she still had both my sisters as her bridesmaids and only gave me an evening invitation!'

I exaggerate. But only slightly.

I agree with most of the posters above though that is different from what the vote says, once again, for some reason

I am on MN far too much a lot, and I see far more of people telling posters to either be really nasty or cut people off (usually in much ruder language).

I actually thing we, as society, should aim to be nice to people. I don't see that as being a 'people pleaser'. Am am quite comfortable with disagreeing with the majority, or pointing out rudeness or poor behaviour, or - on here - commenting on a thread that there may well be another side to the story the OP posts. However, you can do that nicely, without being nasty to people.

Yep I acknowledge the ‘LTB’ chorus’! It’s almost satirical at this point... although there really are a lot of tosser DHs/DPs on here.

I guess I have a particular problem with ‘kindness’ repeatedly equated with acts of giving and generosity. That thread where OP wanted to hand deliver a gift to her niece, huffed and puffed at SiL for not admitting her at an inconvenient hour, slagged her off, and a sizeable number of posters continued to refer to her as ‘kind’. If you do something supposedly selfless, then find a way to make the recipient feel bad about it, you are probably not behaving kindly.

The current AIBU thread on eating etiquette was what struck me today. So much emphasis on behaving appropriately / in a socially acceptable manner because you’ll be ‘judged’ by others, rather than for intrinsic reasons. I wonder how many men give these things the same consideration.

I started an AIBU thread about flagging up a Christmas gathering with HR, and was told by quite a few posters that this would make me unpopular in the office. Why is this a relevant consideration?

I think it is the opposite. I always see a load of highly strung, make a big drama about what is, in reality, a small inconvenience or mishap. I think a lot of posters could do with learning to let the small things roll off them and be a little less self-involved.

I think it's a consequence of people so hooked on social media they've become emotionally dependent on "likes", "friends" and followers as indicators of their social esteem.

I started an AIBU thread about flagging up a Christmas gathering with HR, and was told by quite a few posters that this would make me unpopular in the office. Why is this a relevant consideration?

Because, overwhelmingly, people like to be liked.
Is that a surprise to you ?
My reply was that I would have questioned it if someone had suggested it to our team, but, people pointing out to posters that doing X or Y might make them unpopular with colleagues is helpful to some people, as some people are socially unaware, and might find it helpful to know that. It doesn't mean 'don't do X or Y', it means - 'up to you, but a lot of people will think you are odd for doing so'. You can still choose to do it though, but you are doing it armed with that information.

@BackforGood

I started an AIBU thread about flagging up a Christmas gathering with HR, and was told by quite a few posters that this would make me unpopular in the office. Why is this a relevant consideration?

Because, overwhelmingly, people like to be liked.
Is that a surprise to you ?
My reply was that I would have questioned it if someone had suggested it to our team, but, people pointing out to posters that doing X or Y might make them unpopular with colleagues is helpful to some people, as some people are socially unaware, and might find it helpful to know that. It doesn't mean 'don't do X or Y', it means - 'up to you, but a lot of people will think you are odd for doing so'. You can still choose to do it though, but you are doing it armed with that information.

I would say that, overwhelmingly, women like to be liked. They are socialised to do so. Men generally care a lot less and it often benefits them in a professional content.

Not to mention, you can recognise that people want to be liked, but also that this can be a huge character weakness. Not parrot out likeability / agreeability as though it’s an intrinsic virtue. To me, that takes us back to school playground politics.

started an AIBU thread about flagging up a Christmas gathering with HR, and was told by quite a few posters that this would make me unpopular in the office. Why is this a relevant consideration?

I think that being a work situation is also significant there though, being liked by your colleagues is part of ‘working as a team’ and getting on with people. It can also be a decider in promotions and working on certain projects, if you don’t gel with your team mates then you might be overlooked. I’m not saying this is the way it should be, but it is the case for many workplaces and you have to play the game.

I don't know if it's encouraged on here, but a lot of women have picked it up somewhere. I've had a few conversations on here about why I don't find it to be a good thing and don't like people pleasers very much. I find it to be a very misleading term.

I actually think the moralising on here over things with no moral value (which can get really spiteful sometimes) is cut from the same unpleasant cloth...not the same phenomenon but a related one. I know some people put it down to women tearing each other down but I think it's more complicated than that. I think it's more down to a lot of women internalising a Cinderella complex all about extreme self-effacement and then getting pissed off if someone else who doesn't fall for that crap not only doesn't get punished for it but actually seems happy as a result.

I would say that, overwhelmingly, women like to be liked. They are socialised to do so. Men generally care a lot less and it often benefits them in a professional content.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but I completely disagree. I think, for a typically wired person of either sex, we all feel a bit hurt if someone or some people don't like us. I believe it is human nature to want to be liked. Maybe we will have to agree to disagree.

I don't think that translates as "ducking difficult decisions" though. I like - and respect - plenty of people who are willing to put their head above the parapet and say what needs to be said. I get more annoyed with people who don't say something at the time, then come to me afterwards and say "I'm glad you said that" "I agree" etc etc. Again, I don't find it matters if it is a man or a woman though.

we all feel a bit hurt if someone or some people don't like us.

Depends entirely on who they are and why they don't like me. It's absolutely not a given that I'll be hurt by it.

I dunno, MN is full of a lot of Father Jack types, too. They can tap into instant hostility when required.

The times on MN I most notice people pleasing is when people talk about their children being unhappy with someone else's behaviour. "My child is being hassled and I can't possibly teach them to stand up for themselves" is a common refrain. I have encountered this one IRL, too.

Random Mom: Your son is upsetting my DD in class.
Me: Have you told the teacher?
RM: yes, but he didn't do anything
Me: did you tell your Dd to shout & scold my son when he bothers her?
RM: Oh no, she couldn't do that!

.... Me: Well, I'm not there when it happens. I would stop him if I were. But it looks like my remote control on my son is no better than your remote control on your daughter.

@BackforGood

I would say that, overwhelmingly, women like to be liked. They are socialised to do so. Men generally care a lot less and it often benefits them in a professional content.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but I completely disagree. I think, for a typically wired person of either sex, we all feel a bit hurt if someone or some people don't like us. I believe it is human nature to want to be liked. Maybe we will have to agree to disagree.

I don't think that translates as "ducking difficult decisions" though. I like - and respect - plenty of people who are willing to put their head above the parapet and say what needs to be said. I get more annoyed with people who don't say something at the time, then come to me afterwards and say "I'm glad you said that" "I agree" etc etc. Again, I don't find it matters if it is a man or a woman though.

I think we can legitimately disagree based on our experiences with people, but the concept of a ‘likeability penalty’ is an established one in the field of gender and leadership - the idea that the more competent a woman is, the less likeable she is judged to be, and that this is what holds some women back. Not saying it’s unequivocally true (coined by Sheyl Sandberg, for one thing...), but it’s definitely discussed in relation to women in that it simply isn’t with men.

I also don’t accept this idea that we all feel a bit hurt if someone doesn’t like this. The main lesson of my 20s involved trying to detach myself from this assumption. Not caring what (certain people) think about you is amazingly liberating. It’s a work in progress.

Like us*

One thing I’ve seen pretty regularly recently on ‘Should I massively put myself out practically and financially for someone who’s a bit of a CF?’ threads is at least one poster responding with ‘It would be the kind thing to do’. No further comment or clarification. Maybe I’m cynical, but to me it’s meant to imply ‘Of course you could be incredibly selfish, but I’D never do that, because being seen as nice is far too important’.

I think there are a few too many people who have confused #bekind with #beadoormat.