This was a great piece. I'd also add that you have people who will psychologically protect themselves and attack you because who wants to admit to having bad judgment? The emotional layer of sympathy and affection clouds the judgment of so many damn people.
I have a friend who worked as a nanny for a family for years; both parents were busy lawyers, and it was pretty apparent they were dysfunctional, didn't set boundaries, enforce them or set punishments, and my friend was the stand-in mom. They were friends (and still are) with her emotionally toxic and manipulative ex-boyfriend, a man who claims her now-husband stole her from him. In reality, they'd been broken up for at least a month before she started to date her husband.
These people dismissed her when she told them how ex-boyfriend mistreated her. Female friend is fully aware of how dysfunctional they were and used her in unprofessional ways. And she still has a relationship with them and goes to see their kids because of her love for the children. She got really quiet when I confronted her about this once, with her own evidence about their dysfunction from things she told me. She's also tried to "help save a friend" who is possibly borderline at worst, totally self-absorbed and self-centered at best.
Some people just have their head up their ass and there's nothing you can do because admitting their ability to use prudence is just out the damn window. It would require too much rewiring and self-reflection.
"But in real life, there’s no satisfaction in solving the riddle of someone else’s pathology."
So much this. One thing that is a very quick path to driving me up the wall is people who pronounce analytical psychological diagnoses, usually on people they don't like, regardless of the fact they've never met the person, regardless of whether they have training in the field. It's one thing to assess potential threats, hazards, good/bad traits; it's another to use diagnostic jargon as a social power play.
As it happens, both Agatha Christie adaptations mentioned heavily altered whodunit/why/how. Lady Caterham isn't even a character in the original book! That said, both alterations were true to other Christie stories, so your point still stands--especially since both examples are very revealing of a truth of human nature.
Thanks for pointing this out. These are behaviors that make for great mystery stories, and they're so true to life. People will dismiss all kinds of pathological behavior in the name of being polite.
Some of us also grew up not only with parents normalizing dysfunction, but also a church upbringing that taught us to be kind at all costs. Deprogramming from all of that ain't easy.
She’s got the same eyes as a woman who was so important to my wife we couldn’t cut her off, until she tried to fuck me and attacked her with a power drill.
Holy shit… that’s exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. Women in particular will tolerate craziness until the person goes full single white female. All to avoid “awkwardness”
“Why do most of us tolerate not just bad but alarming behavior?”
We’ve made a twin idols out of context and compassion. A man had a troubled childhood, so we excuse his anger issues. A woman struggles with anxiety, so we tolerate and tip-toe around any “triggers.” These are obviously oversimplified answers, but the application is still the same.
It's worse than poor individual judgement, Kristin. It's also a documented group behaviour across cultures, and we have enough neurology now to know how it occurs.
The evolutionary explanation: we evolved to belong, even at the cost of individual wellbeing.
In practice: people will do mental mindflips individually and collectively to protect family, friend or community-members -- even whole groups -- from acute moral criticism. It depends on temperament, but enablement is common enough to think of it as a default. It applies especially to people with high social status.
How often I see this personally: For reasons of work, history and temperament, All. The. Time.
I got you on the Maya Angelou quote, but I'm surprised Gavin de Becker didn't make an appearance here. His "Gift of Fear" is often cited re: people ignoring their instincts and overlooking red flags. He's usually a close second whenever anyone whips out that Angelou quote.
People *do* reveal themselves; I used to try and point out to a friend the red flags with some of the men she was dating. With one in particular, I explained everything he was currently doing, predicted what he would do in the future, and even told her *why* he was going to do it. Every one of my predictions came true, and he shamelessly gave her exactly the reasons I said he would give.
"Look, I'm not psychic," I said to her. "There's a reason I'm able to clock him, and there's a reason you haven't done so."
I was trying to convince her she needed to up her therapy game. She always remarked that her therapist would tell her the same things I was telling her. But her problems were way above my pay grade. And I always felt inadequate at getting her to understand even the *idea* of red flags before she died. She was convinced that recognizing red flags = being judgmental. People in general seem fundamentally confused about what it really means to be judgmental. But for my friend, the desire to avoid that particular character flaw just led her from one disastrous relationship to another.
What you described is EXACTLY why I hate mystery everything. Only Scooby Doo leaves you adequately wondering who's the dude in the mask. I tried watching Pretty Little Liars and knew by the 2nd episode who was the rapist, who was the killer, and everybody's motivations.
Agatha Christie is viciously overhyped. But thanks to your girl Gillian Flynn, every movie, show, novel that dives into mystery and thriller follows that PenguinRandomSchuster Gone Girl trope.
This was a great piece. I'd also add that you have people who will psychologically protect themselves and attack you because who wants to admit to having bad judgment? The emotional layer of sympathy and affection clouds the judgment of so many damn people.
I have a friend who worked as a nanny for a family for years; both parents were busy lawyers, and it was pretty apparent they were dysfunctional, didn't set boundaries, enforce them or set punishments, and my friend was the stand-in mom. They were friends (and still are) with her emotionally toxic and manipulative ex-boyfriend, a man who claims her now-husband stole her from him. In reality, they'd been broken up for at least a month before she started to date her husband.
These people dismissed her when she told them how ex-boyfriend mistreated her. Female friend is fully aware of how dysfunctional they were and used her in unprofessional ways. And she still has a relationship with them and goes to see their kids because of her love for the children. She got really quiet when I confronted her about this once, with her own evidence about their dysfunction from things she told me. She's also tried to "help save a friend" who is possibly borderline at worst, totally self-absorbed and self-centered at best.
Some people just have their head up their ass and there's nothing you can do because admitting their ability to use prudence is just out the damn window. It would require too much rewiring and self-reflection.
"But in real life, there’s no satisfaction in solving the riddle of someone else’s pathology."
So much this. One thing that is a very quick path to driving me up the wall is people who pronounce analytical psychological diagnoses, usually on people they don't like, regardless of the fact they've never met the person, regardless of whether they have training in the field. It's one thing to assess potential threats, hazards, good/bad traits; it's another to use diagnostic jargon as a social power play.
I’m my wife’s sacrificial misanthrope. Anytime she doesn’t want to be around someone, it’s my fault they don’t hangout.
As it happens, both Agatha Christie adaptations mentioned heavily altered whodunit/why/how. Lady Caterham isn't even a character in the original book! That said, both alterations were true to other Christie stories, so your point still stands--especially since both examples are very revealing of a truth of human nature.
Interesting article! Very thought-provoking.
Thanks for pointing this out. These are behaviors that make for great mystery stories, and they're so true to life. People will dismiss all kinds of pathological behavior in the name of being polite.
Some of us also grew up not only with parents normalizing dysfunction, but also a church upbringing that taught us to be kind at all costs. Deprogramming from all of that ain't easy.
Why won’t you leave Erica Kirk alone? Everyone grieves differently.
At first, I said that. Now… something is very screwy there
She’s got the same eyes as a woman who was so important to my wife we couldn’t cut her off, until she tried to fuck me and attacked her with a power drill.
Holy shit… that’s exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. Women in particular will tolerate craziness until the person goes full single white female. All to avoid “awkwardness”
“Why do most of us tolerate not just bad but alarming behavior?”
We’ve made a twin idols out of context and compassion. A man had a troubled childhood, so we excuse his anger issues. A woman struggles with anxiety, so we tolerate and tip-toe around any “triggers.” These are obviously oversimplified answers, but the application is still the same.
And the results can be disastrous.
It's worse than poor individual judgement, Kristin. It's also a documented group behaviour across cultures, and we have enough neurology now to know how it occurs.
The evolutionary explanation: we evolved to belong, even at the cost of individual wellbeing.
In practice: people will do mental mindflips individually and collectively to protect family, friend or community-members -- even whole groups -- from acute moral criticism. It depends on temperament, but enablement is common enough to think of it as a default. It applies especially to people with high social status.
How often I see this personally: For reasons of work, history and temperament, All. The. Time.
I got you on the Maya Angelou quote, but I'm surprised Gavin de Becker didn't make an appearance here. His "Gift of Fear" is often cited re: people ignoring their instincts and overlooking red flags. He's usually a close second whenever anyone whips out that Angelou quote.
People *do* reveal themselves; I used to try and point out to a friend the red flags with some of the men she was dating. With one in particular, I explained everything he was currently doing, predicted what he would do in the future, and even told her *why* he was going to do it. Every one of my predictions came true, and he shamelessly gave her exactly the reasons I said he would give.
"Look, I'm not psychic," I said to her. "There's a reason I'm able to clock him, and there's a reason you haven't done so."
I was trying to convince her she needed to up her therapy game. She always remarked that her therapist would tell her the same things I was telling her. But her problems were way above my pay grade. And I always felt inadequate at getting her to understand even the *idea* of red flags before she died. She was convinced that recognizing red flags = being judgmental. People in general seem fundamentally confused about what it really means to be judgmental. But for my friend, the desire to avoid that particular character flaw just led her from one disastrous relationship to another.
What you described is EXACTLY why I hate mystery everything. Only Scooby Doo leaves you adequately wondering who's the dude in the mask. I tried watching Pretty Little Liars and knew by the 2nd episode who was the rapist, who was the killer, and everybody's motivations.
Agatha Christie is viciously overhyped. But thanks to your girl Gillian Flynn, every movie, show, novel that dives into mystery and thriller follows that PenguinRandomSchuster Gone Girl trope.