The need for validation

[Outhere]

I was talking with my 13 year old niece about her friends and she commented that one of them was so popular because she was 'so validating'. I asked what that meant in real terms and whether she could give me an example and she said she wasn't sure but there's 'just something about her'. I thought the phrase was really interesting and reflected on language and how I may have thought about the qualities my friends had at that age. Validation certainly wouldn't have come into it and I think I would have considered a good friend as someone who I could have fun with and probably someone who was loyal.

I'm curious as to when 'validation' became 'a thing'. I know it is oft used in slogans in reference to gender and I have to profess that I'm unsure what the act of validation looks like, or why it has become so important to some people. Do people really need others to validate them? If so, what does that look like, and why? When did our sense of self become so reliant on others approval? I was also thinking about other phrases which I find bizarre too, like 'speak your truth'. Again, I don't think I really understand what this means. What truth am I speaking if it's not my own?

I've been pondering whether the rise of the internet is partly why this language has evolved; in a world where a quick like or emoji supports your position, or confirms that you look good in your picture. Neither of which take any more effort than a cursory glance and action, nor require much thinking. Is that validation? And why is there such a drive to seek this? And does this feed into the distinct lack of critical thinking that appears present on many SM platforms? I see a lot of slogans and phrases that get thrown out as statements, that don't appear to mean anything but garner many likes and support.

Apologies for my ramblings, it's not entirely sex/gender related, but could easily be applied to it. I guess what I'm asking is how have we got here and why is there such a desire for other people to 'validate' others? It feels very alien to me, however that may be because I'm of 'an age' where I have a secure sense of self and couldn't imagine needing someone else to approve of this.

I wonder if it is really insincere praise that your niece’s friend offers. Maybe the friend is good at telling someone that their instincts matter, or something like that. When I think of a friend “validating me” when I was younger, it was the one who said of a boyfriend everybody else thought was great but I was really unhappy with, “no he’s not lovely, he wants to control you.” I guess only your niece will know if her friend is an insincere sycophant or a good friend who listens actively.

You may be interested in looking up the dopamine response and how it links to the quick buzz of likes, ticks, smileys and fast social media approval.

Forbes cites a study that linked Facebook usage with a lowered level of moment-to-moment happiness. The primary reason for this negative impact revolves around the platform's ability to feign a sense of connectivity, only to leave users with a feeling of isolation. Social media users continue to return to their dopamine dealer — i.e. their favorite platforms — to get their fix of the molecule as well as a sense of social interaction, even if they aren't getting any meaningful experiences at all.

Read More: www.thelist.com/73673/really-happens-body-give-social-media/?utm_campaign=clip

I think in this case OP it's a new word for an old thing. Just means being supportive and that sort of thing prob.

EG in the pub last night I got chatting to a woman who had experienced DV and had loads of difficulties..I know her family in passing and said I thought she was really strong for going through all the stuff and still raising really lovely happy kids.

She started crying (which wasn't my intention!).

I think it means that sort of stuff probs. For your DD.

For others it means something different obv!

I've also noticed a 'my friend sees me as I want to be seen', which is another way to talk about validation. It means you have an image you want portrayed to the world and some friends are better than others at letting you know they 'get' your image. Very superficial, IMHO. The whole, 'we see you' is a really weird and new thing as it has nothing to do with sight nor acknowledgment of your presence and everything to do with "I'm in agreement with the image you are trying to portray."

[quote Redapplewreath]You may be interested in looking up the dopamine response and how it links to the quick buzz of likes, ticks, smileys and fast social media approval.

Forbes cites a study that linked Facebook usage with a lowered level of moment-to-moment happiness. The primary reason for this negative impact revolves around the platform's ability to feign a sense of connectivity, only to leave users with a feeling of isolation. Social media users continue to return to their dopamine dealer — i.e. their favorite platforms — to get their fix of the molecule as well as a sense of social interaction, even if they aren't getting any meaningful experiences at all.

Read More: www.thelist.com/73673/really-happens-body-give-social-media/?utm_campaign=clip[/quote]
Now you remind me of that, Redapple, I think I read it. I've also heard the man who invented the Like button talking about how he wishes he hadn't. I may be muddling him with another famous software developer, but I think it was him who said that he didn't allow his children to use the internet. Apparently lots of people in Silicon Valley send their children to schools where everything's done offline and mobiles are banned.

I don't have children so probably shouldn't comment, but looking back over my own life I can see that it's the struggles and the difficulties that have made me what I am — much more so than the things that came easily. I imagine that's the eternal struggle of parents: how to let their children face challenges and discomfort in order to grow.

An old boss once asked me what the best compliment I could hear was. It took me a while to realise it but it's 'you were right'. I bloody love to be validated, as in proved right. But only if I actually AM right. Just being told it when it's patently bollocks pisses me right off.

I need to be right. Actually right.

I do not get why anyone would want to be pandered too with nonsense. Unless as pp said, they're a narcissist. But surely society isn't just developing to cater to personality disorders?!

I also don’t understand why people get anything out of “validation” that they have manipulated others into or fished for, so they know it’s not genuine.

Even if narcissistic, if people have basic reasoning they must be able to see it means nothing? I’ve never got this!

I also don’t understand why people get anything out of “validation” that they have manipulated others into or fished for, so they know it’s not genuine.

It's a power thing.

So it’s not actually validation at all, but satisfaction that you have made someone do/say what you want them to, even if against their will?

I can very much see that at work in the gender situation, where it’s about forcing everyone into agreement and there are some unpleasant agendas at work. But do you think it’s true of the general phenomenon of needing validation?

I think there's something rather hilarious about the mantra "Transwomen are women, transmen are men, and nonbinary people are valid." I always get the impression that the Committtee that makes up this shit was sitting around a conference table scratching their heads going, "Um, well, what are nonbinary people, anyway?"

Yes that’s so true about “nonbinary people are valid”. Surely everyone’s basically “valid” - what would a non-valid person even be?

But that’s part of the thing where if you don’t agree with the ideology, it’s turned into “denying trans people exist”.

To make sense the slogan should really go “… and non-binary people are not men or women” but that’s just a dog’s breakfast.

Really interesting thread OP. I think "validation" is just the current trendy buzzword. It's completely narcissistic. As PPs have said, self-worth should come from within.

The overuse of "validation" can fuck off, along with "respect".

I agree resilience is a good quality to have, but I don’t like how it’s been adopted by schools (well ours anyway) as a Thing you have to teach children, like they are always being told to be resilient.

You and me both.

At the moment I teach little ones and have taught older primary age children too. If we're talking about everyday resilience (and not the trauma induced ones, which is a completely different story) then yes children do need to build up their resilience. They need to fail at small things and learn how to cope. They need to take risks. They need to learn to deal with disappointment. Or rather, we as adults need to allow them to fail, take risks and deal with disappointment without rushing in and trying to make things better. Children are more than capable if they are allowed the space to do so.

Not RTFT but, their other name is 'yes person/woman/man'

Reading the other thread on this subject that was linked, I saw someone said "validate me means agree with me". I think that's true, but I also think people make their beliefs and opinions a much more integral part of their identity than they used to. Social media really helps with this because people can group themselves by their personal beliefs and shut out opposing ideas, and thus it becomes an identity, a label. Or not just AN identity but THE identity by which they view themselves and wish others to view them. So if you disagree with someone, you're also, in their view, attacking their very identity that they've built up, or as they might put it "invalidating their existence".

I signed up for some online event last year - I can't remember what it was actually about but the panel and most of the audience seemed to be of the lib fem type.
It was atrocious and a complete waste of an hour of my life. The whole hour was taken up by these women babbling on about stuff and throwing in all these buzzwords - thank you so-and-so for speaking your truth... we see you and affirm your truth blah blah.

The event description gave the impression the panel were going to give you practical knowledge and tips, and nothing of the sort materialised. Just a bunch of women 'validating' each other for an hour over anecdotes. It was dire. At the end, the (presumably) women attendees were typing in the zoom chat gushing nonsense like 'amazing talk', 'omg fantastic evening, thank you!!!!' and I was thinking 'huh? Were we even at the same event?!'.
Not a single question or challenge in the Q&A that was remotely critical or asking the speakers anything that was mildly challenging. And I remember thinking at the time - no wonder 'feminism' hasn't achieved much in recent years if this is the level of lib fem 'discussion'. Very surreal experience. I don't understand the bizarre language at all.

Social media likes have their root in behaviourism so it's not surprising we have a generation of skinner-trained rats looking for their reward.

I do worry a lot about social media. From my window into it it all seems to narrow, narcissistic, naval gazing. I wonder how the prolific posters in my field get any work done at all.

The other thing that strikes me is the level of grovelling that seems to be expected after a person has "been educated" for accidentally having the wrong opinion or using the wrong word. No good person would expect you to do that for them.

It really does have religious traits. What NonnyMouse1337 says about the online event which was basically an exchange of set phrases reminds me of the Catholic mass, “peace be with you” “and also with you” “world without end” “amen” there are loads more, the Lord’s Prayer the Hail Mary.

And then MoreAloneTime (I love your username and it expresses my deepest longing atm) brings to mind the mea culpa “I have sinned”.

Are these people yearning for a religious experience? Some new religious movement seems to be emerging and the adherents are finding a feeling of belonging, being refreshed, satisfying their need for community by mutual affirmation of the correct special words and by the confession of their sins in the hope of redemption.

All this “speak your truth” “you are valid” “transwomen are women, transmen are men, non-binary identities are valid” just sounds so familiar, the repetition and rhythm, as others say, just like the mantras used in various religions. So I suppose that those women who attended the same online event as NonnyMouse1337 really did have a fulfilling spiritual experience which left them feeling uplifted or elated even whilst leaving the heretics cold.

And yes I would have thought that “non-binary people are neither men nor women” would seem more obvious but I am guessing non-binaries weren’t involved in the invention of the declaration of faith and people identifying as trans likely came up with it and they are clearly quite into the binary. As an example if you like stereotypical boys toys, clothes and activities you must be a boy, if you like stereotypical girls toys, clothes and activities you must be a girl.

Maybe non-binary is like the mystery of the trinity that the ordinary could never understand.

People say we've moved on from needing religion in our lives but there seems to be a human tendency to unconsciously recreate it.

@DaisiesandButtercups

It really does have religious traits. What NonnyMouse1337 says about the online event which was basically an exchange of set phrases reminds me of the Catholic mass, “peace be with you” “and also with you” “world without end” “amen” there are loads more, the Lord’s Prayer the Hail Mary.

And then MoreAloneTime (I love your username and it expresses my deepest longing atm) brings to mind the mea culpa “I have sinned”.

Are these people yearning for a religious experience? Some new religious movement seems to be emerging and the adherents are finding a feeling of belonging, being refreshed, satisfying their need for community by mutual affirmation of the correct special words and by the confession of their sins in the hope of redemption.

All this “speak your truth” “you are valid” “transwomen are women, transmen are men, non-binary identities are valid” just sounds so familiar, the repetition and rhythm, as others say, just like the mantras used in various religions. So I suppose that those women who attended the same online event as NonnyMouse1337 really did have a fulfilling spiritual experience which left them feeling uplifted or elated even whilst leaving the heretics cold.

And yes I would have thought that “non-binary people are neither men nor women” would seem more obvious but I am guessing non-binaries weren’t involved in the invention of the declaration of faith and people identifying as trans likely came up with it and they are clearly quite into the binary. As an example if you like stereotypical boys toys, clothes and activities you must be a boy, if you like stereotypical girls toys, clothes and activities you must be a girl.

Very much in agreement and well explained. I've had similar experiences in groups to this and it does remind me of the conservative religion I grew up in.

The quasi religious elements have been noted for some time. I saw a post in a progressive Christian group that exhorted Christians to accept the objective reality of TWAW and non-binary etc. by comparing it to the doctrine of the Trinity.

I do think, as the pushback builds around the legal situation and we hopefully regain collective sanity about material reality on secular organizations and authorities, the religious will still be fertile ground for all this, and the reason is that religions, Christianity being the most obvious, have a habit of taking other religious beliefs and absorbing them. Genderism is a belief that requires no evidence, just a belief that something is so because it is claimed. Or validated, if you will.

Genderism is a belief that requires no evidence, just a belief that something is so because it is claimed. Or validated, if you will

A few times I have responded IRL to religious conversations with, "I respect you and your beliefs, but I don't share them." I probably don't really respect all their beliefs but as an American it's the polite response to someone of a different faithful when you respect them.

The concept of a soul, something a believer is convinced all people have whether they acknowledge it or not, is very similar to gender identity.

I've always said, even when I was a religious believer, that you respect people, you have no need to respect beliefs. You respect an individual's right to believe they are the opposite sex - you are under no obligation to accord the belief itself any respect whatsoever.

That's the crux of Rowan Atkinson's point about being able to mock religion and belief. Genderism is almost identical to fundamentalist religions. There are creedal statements, there is heresy and shunning and recanting, there are special days of observance, there are hagiographies of 'saints', there is a concerted effort to convert children, there is a special priestly class, there is a concept of 'secret knowledge' similar to gnosticism, it goes on.

Once the GRA is repealed, all of the genderist beliefs will be rightly put under the religion/beliefs protected characteristic. Right now, it's a religion with far too many privileges in a secular state. (And yes, I believe in disestablishment of the CofE too).