What does "pro-social" mean to you?

[Middlelanehogger]

I mean actively "pro-social", as in, encouraging and strengthening social bonds for the long term. In the same sense that "anti-social" really means things that degrade the bonds of social trust, rather than just someone quietly staying in one night.

For example - ringing elderly neighbours that you know are lonely or volunteering in the community or knocking on a new neighbour's door to welcome them to the area.

AIBU to think we don't really value those kinds of behaviours these days? It's easier for me to imagine a MN post complaining about creepy intrusive neighbours than someone being upset about not being welcomed. But then we have threads about how no-one feels safe to leave their doors unlocked anymore and we wonder how we got here...

In my field of work, pro-social behaviour would be behaviour which confirms to the norms of society - going to school, getting a job, not engaging in criminal behaviour, not hurting or scaring people around you, not harming animals.

I think a lot of people aren't willing to do it when it's a bit inconvenient to them, though. You hear a lot more about self-care than general caring.

You can end up by being exploited and used though. I'm very careful about who I help now.

Same here.

It has taken me a long time to learn that I can say no to things that take energy and time to benefit others to my own detriment. I am not antisocial but I won't be putting myself in a position where my time and energy can be exploited again. Some people will take and take.

It has been a long hard road to learn that I don't have to say yes just because someone has asked me.

Well, Mn skews very strongly towards social-phobic behaviours and attitudes which lots of posters mislabel as ‘introverted’ rather than ‘misanthropic’, so I don’t think you’ll get a balanced set of responses here.

I used to go running with a woman who would dip down and pick up any piece of rubbish she found on the ground as we ran along, then chuck it in a bin. I was really squeamish about picking up other people's trash and getting germs from it, so never joined her. But I would call that pro-social.

People who create a sense of community. Who organise street parties and plant swaps and walking buses to take kids to school. Who look in on sick neighbours and cook for new mothers.

People who are good at remembering friends' birthdays and ring up to organise outings and get togethers.

This is making me realise how anti-social I have become as I grow older. I used to do a fair bit of this stuff and stopped over the years.

That sounds lovely @DaisyThistle . That's exactly what I mean.

I think of it like a web. Everyone is connected to each other through their own links and at any given time one person might be putting in more energy into one link or another. Like a karma balance which at any given time might be tilted in favour of one side or the other.

It doesn't make sense to keep pouring in energy into bad links that never come back I agree. But I think it's still good to aim for having an overall positive effect on the energy of the system overall.

I think what you're talking about here is covered somewhat in politeness theory. Roughly, it would translate as:

"Positive politeness" — being polite requires actively knocking on the new neighbour's door and welcoming them to the community, proactively making contact with them, making it easy for them to feel part of their new community, etc. Not doing this would be rude because it would seem like you were ignoring them or excluding them from the local community for being new, and putting all the onus on the new people to reach out, make contact, and find a way into the local community.

"Negative politeness" would be choosing not to impose on them, not disturbing them or entering their private realm unexpected, not presuming that they have the time or inclination to socialise with you at a time and place you've picked when they might reasonably have expected to be able to do their own thing. Knocking on the door would be rude because they weren't expecting you, might not be prepared for you, might not want to be disturbed, and should be allowed to engage with the local community at a time of their choosing, perhaps on neutral ground rather than on their own doorstep, if and when they want to.

It would make sense if increased population density (as well as greater population mobility and higher cultural heterogeneity) led to a higher prevalence of negative politeness strategies. If everywhere you go is full of people, it's usually polite (negative politeness, not imposing) to ignore people going about their business and not try to strike up conversation with your train seatmate. If you're hiking through the countryside and only seeing another human being every half hour or so, it's usually polite (positive politeness, actively acknowledging others and engaging) to greet people as you pass.

Thanks @off for giving me the language to describe it.

I can't help but think in the long run it's very hard to sustain a society on negative politeness alone. Even in the multi-cultural context you mention - I don't think it's good for a place if everyone just leaves each other all alone and doesn't bother anyone. Why would I expect them to get up and help me when I need it?

I know it's not fantastic terminology, by the way… "positive" and "negative" politeness sound a bit like they mean "good" and "bad" politeness, when it's more about active offering vs avoiding imposing.

I don't think any society will ever be as clear-cut as "running on negative politeness alone" — we all have situations where one or the other model of politeness will seem more appropriate, but I guess that the one we go for in any given circumstance will be affected by the specifics of the situation, our cultural background, personality, and previous experiences.

It could be that the culture as a whole has shifted slightly away from what you'd prefer. I don't think multicultural society is the main driver, though. WRT what I said about cultural heterogeneity, I was thinking about different ways of doing things meaning that it's harder to make the right assumptions about what other people would appreciate (like, in the town I grew up in, you could make a good guess at exactly when people would be having their evening meal and you shouldn't knock), so I thought that could be a small factor. But also, there's a lot of mobility, with a fast turnover of different people in some places, so people don't get to know their neighbours that well, and don't necessarily want to go to a lot of effort befriending lots of new people who'll only move away again in a year. And a high population density in many places, meaning people already feel thronged with other people needing their attention and time or just an awareness of their presence, and don't want the extra mental effort of responding to a cheery "hello" from all of the hundreds of people they pass and may never see again, or a personal welcome and (possibly inconvenient) home visit from all the dozens of people on their new street.

I think problems arise when people have mismatched expectations, and interpret others' behaviour as rudely intrusive or rudely uncaring, when they're actually intending to be polite, just in a different way.