Another Reason Not To Ask People If They're Okay: It's REALLY Freaking Rude

8/5/2015

So you're at a party, and you see a woman who is -- heaven forbid! -- NOT smiling. Do you:

a) Avoid her -- she's clearly in a bad mood.
b) Go ask her, "Are you okay?" "Is everything alright?" or some variation thereof
c) Treat her like a normal person who happens to not be smiling

If you answered anything but C, you are a rude, sexist jerk.

First of all, it's not the 19th century anymore -- meaning it's no longer a woman's job to be "cheerful." Second, what are you hoping to accomplish by asking that question? If the woman is feeling bad about something -- she's probably trying to not feel bad about it. Your rude, ignorant question, is an instant mood killer. (Remember: stereotypically, women are socially conditioned to be comfortable talking about their feelings. If there's something on her mind, she'll bring it up with her partner, family or bestie. YOU, acquaintance, classmate, boss, coworker, fellow party attender, passerby, etc., don't need to inquire.)

But, chances are, the woman feels fine -- she's just a normal human being who happens to not be smiling. Asking her if she's okay, then, is obnoxious. And it can make her feel bad or ugly. And it's an intrusion. And possibly, also, a mood killer. If this confuses you -- how can a woman possibly be okay if she's not smiling?! -- let country star Kacey Musgraves break it down for you:

Resting "Nothing's Wrong, I Promise" Face

17 More Accurate Names For Resting Bitchface

Resting "This Is Just a Totally Neutral Expression" Face

Resting "My Mind Was Elsewhere For a Minute" Face

Resting "Please Stop Asking What's Wrong" Face

Resting "This Wouldn't Bother You If I Were a Guy" Face

h/t Buzzfeed

When I wrote For The Love of God, STOP Asking People If They're Okay last month, I was thinking about all the reasons why having people ask, "Are you okay?" all the time is psychologically harmful. Basically, when you ask someone if they're okay, you're implying that they are not okay, but you can totally help them. In other words, it's a question that is high in agency (i.e., power, influence or control), and it demands a low-agency response.

Why? Because in order to have a smooth, tension-free interaction with someone, actions and reactions need to be complementary. You can't both act high in agency -- if you did, the alternative is conflict and confrontation, which most people try to avoid.

But at the time of writing, I was thinking mostly of people who are routinely disempowered -- people who are depressed, disabled, negatively stereotyped, recovering from trauma, etc. I had no idea how often women were asked this stupid, rude question on a regular basis... just for not being smiling.

But this morning, I read I'm Not Mad. This Is Just My Resting Bitch Face in the... wait for it... New York Times.

For those who need a review, RBF is a face that, when at ease, is perceived as angry, irritated or simply … expressionless. It’s the kind a person may make when thinking hard about something — or perhaps when they’re not thinking at all.

The article continues:

A New Jersey business journal, NJBIZ, even published a special report on the topic.

“Yes, we’ve asked ourselves the questions you might be asking yourself right now: What relevance does this have in the workplace? Is this topic sexist? Should we write this story at all?” the publication wrote, noting the seeming absurdity of a business publication tackling RBF.

“But, after calling around the state asking more than a dozen C-suite women in multiple industries to weigh in on the subject, we noticed one thing: No one ever scoffed or even asked, ‘Why would this matter?’ ”

Yes, the tyranny of RBF is real.

For Nora Long, a 22-year-old intern at a Florida law firm, the struggle began in kindergarten, when her school’s headmaster summoned her to his office “because he thought I looked unhappy.” “From that day on until he left the school when I was in the seventh grade,” Ms. Long said, “he would say ‘Smile Nora!’ every time he saw me.”

Morra Aarons-Mele, a small-business owner in Los Angeles, said she “Botoxed away” her “congenital frown line” so that people would stop asking, “Are you mad?” “Then people were warmer to me — I swear,” she said.

I was sad, but not surprised, to learn that the "RBF" is something that can hold a woman back professionally... but I was surprised by just how many times the women interviewed in the article mentioned people always asking them if they're okay.

Because, seriously... WHO DOES THAT?

I don't get asked that a lot, probably because, according to some sources, I'm a "smiley smiley." But, occasionally, I still get asked. Usually by someone who's new to my life (people who have known me longer know better). Usually for a stupid reason: I fell down during the basketball game. I didn't return a text quickly enough. Something mildly bad happened earlier, and I've long since stopped thinking about it.

Here's how I handle it:

The first time someone asks this, I tell them, "I'm not mad, but I will be if you ever ask me that again. Unless I'm lying in a pool of blood, do not ask me if I'm okay. It's rude, it's disempowering... and why would you even ask that?"

90% of the time, the person cleverly retorts, "Are you okay?!"

So I say, "Seriously. Don't ever ask me that again."

The second time they ask, I do get mad. Because if a woman is not being respected, it's important for her to be rude. ("Rude." Because if I calmly asked them not to do something, but they did it anyway and I got mad, I'm the "rude" one. Because if someone asks me an intrusive, disempowering question and it bothers me, I'm the rude one.)

And, while we're talking about it, here are a few other totally rude, stupid questions you should not be asking or saying:

Long day?
You look tired!
Are you feeling well?
Did you get enough sleep last night?

Because why? Why would you ask someone something like this? Either they are tired/sick/stressed, and they're just trying to make it through the day... or they're totally fine, and you just made them feel like they look like shit.

I'll end this post the same way I ended Stop Asking People If They're Okay - Ask This Instead:

There are so many better things you could be asking them. Questions that remind them that they still have agency, independence, and autonomy. And that you care, and are totally ready to support them, if and when they need it.
Questions (and, I guess, statements) like:

How's it going?

What're you working on these days?

Let's catch up soon -- like really catch up. What's your schedule look like this week?

You've always been really good at ___. Can I pick your brain for a project I've been working on?

You're an important friend to me.

If you ever need anything, let me know! You were totally there for me that time when _____.

Wanna go for a walk? I'd love to get outside for a bit today! We can talk about whatever. Or we can just listen to the birds.

I'm pretty much going to sit at my house alone and watch Netflix tonight. I'd love it if you'd sit with me. Or we can go to your place -- you have that awesome couch!

Can I get some advice about _____?

You look great today!

It's SO GREAT to see you!

Seeing you always makes my day!

I was JUST thinking about you! Remember that time we ________!?

Get over here and give me a huge hug!! (you know, if that's appropriate in the context of your relationship)

I saw that you accomplished _____. Way to go!

I've been on this thing lately where I've been asking people, "What is the greatest accomplishment of your life?" What's yours?

This is sort of random -- but what are three things about yourself that are important to you?

Because, let's be real. Whoever you're talking to, anywhere in the world, each of these questions is better, more personal, and more interesting than some generic, scripted question like, "Are you okay?" I mean, if that's the best you can come up with, why not just delete your default SMS app and replace it with Yo?

And let's be more real. People who used a mindful, thoughtful greeting like the ones above are also seen as warmer and more charismatic. (Remember: charisma is a science, not an art.) So... get mindful. Be a better conversationalist. Treat people like people, and ask better questions.

26 Comments

shannon

2/15/2016 03:21:39 pm

You are right on; I appreciate your approach to the subject, never really thought about it. I had surgery to get rid of my powerful frown lines - the ones that made people ask me if I was OK all the time. (I think they were confused at the smile on my face inspite of those HUGE and DEEP things.) You are a talented writer and someone who I expect gets asked for advice all the time. Keep it up, well done.

PS: my favorite post is the one about "Your first grader is stunted".

Eva Glasrud link

2/20/2016 03:15:19 pm

Thanks for the feedback -- it's always appreciated. I had a lot of fun writing this post, and the "first grader is stunted" post was even more fun.

Best wishes :)

alice

10/26/2016 12:55:28 pm

Thank you thank you. I am aging and stop to rest on benches, etc. I get that miserable question maybe 20 times a day, from total strangers. Makes me furious and depressed. Don't want to return to restaurants where that happens. I can barely control my anger at this thoughtless behavior.

john

2/22/2016 07:50:21 pm

Its not just women who get asked that. There are just some really rude a-holes out there who feel "empowered" by pointing out someone who isnt grinning ear to ear at say, a party. Its another form of intimidation, though a small portion of people do mean well but those are likely people you have seen more than once in your life making that observation.

Zeph

11/15/2016 03:15:47 am

Hmm.

I attended a "diversity training" not too long ago. It was well intended, but I did not subscribe to some of the dictums it promoted. One was "Impact Trumps Intention". The basis idea is that when a white person says something to a black person (or across any privilege boundary), the ONLY thing which matters is how the black person interprets the comment. The intentions and actual thoughts of the white speaker are irrelevant, and the black person is justified in imputing anything they want and then going off on a rant about it. And liberal whites need to shut up and take it, because they are privileged and so have no voice regarding the transaction.

I find that an unstable and dehumanizing approach. I believe there is much to learn from thoughtful reflection on concepts like privilege and even "intersectionality", but these concepts become toxic if they are taken to the level as it was described in that training. There needs to be some degree of negotiating a consensus reality and language for communication, not a sort of power inversion which rewards truly disadvantaged people not with more real empowerment, but with the "consolaation" prize of controlling the white oppressor's speech.

Anyway, I'm surprised at the parallels between that and your rant above. Luckily you don't coat it too strongly in political framing, but it sounds to me like you feel pretty free to impute bad things to anyone asking if you are OK,and you think you have a legitimate grievance to justify your "counter-attack".

It sounds like this is because you THINK somebody's query is a disguised complaint about your lack of a smile - and some kind of sexist expectation that women are suppose to smile. It seems that what their real motive is becomes irrelevant, and how it lands with you is all that matters. In your mind, they've done you wrong. You don't deserve to have to fend off their "are you OK?" queries.

Is it at least barely possible that you are over-interpreting, at least some of the time?

In my circles it's not uncommon for somebody looking sad, troubled, or whatever to be asked "are you OK" or variants. That's what we do as friends. If they are OK, all they would say is "yep, all good, thanks for asking" and then they are free to continue whatever mood they were in. If they are not OK, they might or might not want to engage, but they would tend to be polite in either case, appreciating the friendship and care, and the potential (if desired) companionship. No need to work ourselves up by assuming that the asker is smugly certain they are the only one who can help. It's all friendly and casual, no big deal. Nobody makes it a grievance against anybody else just for asking.

So, what am I missing here? How does elevating it into a resented grievance improve your life or theirs, or cause you less distraction than a simple friendly response? Is there nearly always some creepy undercurrent when being asked "are you OK" - not inherent in the question per se, but characteristic of the people in the circles you run in and how THEY ask? Do they keep asking, doubting your word? Do they insist on giving unwanted advice? What makes it so triggering?

11/15/2016 10:16:34 am

After some sleep, I wanted to try to focus my previous thougths some.

It has been useful to me to come across this (I came from a link about safe space, then tried some other posts on your blog out of curiosity).

Background: I'm pretty much a life long progressive, supporting most of the issues and causes for many years, but also a free thinker. I believe that progressives have taken some wrong turns in recent years, even with good motives; too often they have been seduced by the victimhood culture, and abandoned approaches that grow resilience, robustness and real world empowerment. They have switched in too many cases from building empathy to using disguised guilt trips. As a result, they are losing traction - you can only go so far with guilt, before people resent you and find alternate ways of escaping from your boxes.

The common thread I sense between this new thread of microaggressions etc and what I read above is this: holding other people responsible for 100% of how what they say lands for us. The recipient/victim gets the only say in determining the official nature of each transaction, period.

My own progress as a human was greatly facilitated when I finally really GOT that:
- Others are not responsible for the stories I make up inside my own head, and
- I'm not responsible for the stories others make up in their heads

It took me some while to deeply grasp that, so I can be compassionate if it's not universally understood. And of course this is to be understood in balance, not taken to silly extremes.

In most cases, I would say that other people don't "make us" feel some way; our own interpretation and stories make us feel as we do, and we gain a lot of agency when we realize that. We also lose a lot of agency when we give responsibility for our reactions to others, and fail to take our own responsibility.

As I said, that applies to most regular everyday cases - it doesn't apply to extremes like receiving death threats.

So for example, instead of "You made me feel unsafe when you disputed my argument", I would say "When you said X, what came up for me was my fear of Y". There's no giving away of my own power in that; I'm taking at least partial if not full for my reactions. There's room in discussion to discover that the other person really has done or said something insensitive or rude or whatever. There's also room to discover that I misunderstood them, misheard them, or that most of the problem is some old wound I have which is easily triggered - but not their fault. And in particular, I haven't tried to take control of the narrative and the labeling - for example, trying to assert that only I can determine what's an insult and what isn't.

I'm seeing the rise of more blaming of other people and less fostering of personal resilience - and in particular of less room for mutual respect, for cooperative transactions based on mutual attempts to "hear" whats in each others hearts, and translate awkward phrasing rather than make it into a power issue.

Because I've observed many, many times that turning a mis-tuned but well intentioned interaction into a power struggle, an attempt to claim the moral high ground and coerce the other person into bowing to my preference because I am in the right - just doesn't pay off. You lose people, and you make your own world darker and more cynical.

So I think it's a bad ploy by a faction of the progressive political movement to embrace the concept of making others solely responsible for our reactions. And I think it's a bad idea in personal relationships as well. Part of my current pondering are about whether this newly expanding tendency is driven by Political Correctness and permeates from there into the rest of the culture; or whether the rise of these approaches are part of the gestalt of our wider culture, and the political versions emerge from that bigger trend. It could go both directions of course, but I'm looking at which way the flow is greater, trying to get some handle on now to constructively shift the dialogue.

Your post above was an excellent example of NOT using the standard political buzzwords (like calling it a microaggression), and I find that the omission really does improve the tone. However, I believe I sense a good deal of the same underlying dynamics at play. I don't know if that comes from the broader culture, or from the PC culture with the buzzwords picked out.

You say "There are so many better things you could be asking them. Questions that remind them that they still have agency, independence, and autonomy". My response it that if your autopilot response to somebody simply checking on your welfare is to feel your agency, independence and autonomy slipping away from you, then you have an internal wound that needs attending. And you are NOT going to begin healing that wound by getting on your high horse and making them wrong; that's how our own issues divert attention so they can remain unexamined. I w

Erik

11/15/2016 05:11:42 pm

See below

11/17/2016 04:19:02 pm

Finally, as to this point:

< You say "There are so many better things you could be asking them. Questions that remind them that they still have agency, independence, and autonomy". My response it that if your autopilot response to somebody simply checking on your welfare is to feel your agency, independence and autonomy slipping away from you, then you have an internal wound that needs attending. >

You are right. That is my advice for people who want to help someone who is close to them, based on decades of psychology research.

If you know someone who is struggling with involuntary unemployment; overcoming trauma from a sexual assault; suffering from depression; has low confidence; or whatever other "disempowering" state/condition, and you truly want to help them, then it is important for you to consider what you're saying and doing, and how it affects them.

Because if your "intention" is truly to help someone, then you need to be thoughtful and wise in your approach to helping them.

In any psychology intervention, it is true that intentions don't matter. You must prove that what you're doing isn't harmful, and you need to stop what you're doing if you discover it is.

This isn't the advice I would give to someone about their distant acquaintance. This is specifically about someone you care deeply about, know well, and actually want to help, because they've got some issue. Well-meaning teachers, friends, and family members absolutely act in ways that are demoralizing to those they are trying to help -- and my goal with this post was to help them.

I was interested in what you said about the "diversity training" you went to recently, and would love to hear more about/share your experience. I'd love it if you'd email me (The Happy Talent at Gmail) to discuss. If you would want to share a guest post, or if I could use your comment as a part of a post to the same effect ("Stop Saying Intention Doesn't Matter"), that would be super cool.

11/17/2016 03:55:21 pm

I agree completely with the first half of your comment. The whole "intention doesn't matter" thing is bullshit. However, there's a HUGE difference between being accused of a microsggression for asking someone, "Where are you from? No, where are you REALLY from?" which is clearly an asshole thing to ask... and being accused of bigotry for saying, "You have a really pretty face," (because it might maybe imply that you're fat," or using words like "cripple" (as in, "trump will cripple the economy,") and "crazy" (because it's not nice to crazy-shame people).

Like, originally, in sexual harassment suits, there was this objectivity clause. In order for something to be harassment, an objective third party would have to agree it was harassment. Objectively, if you ask someone where they're from, that's fine, right? But if they say, "New York," and you say, "No -- where are you REALLY from?" that's objectively really rude.

I think, objectively, it's also pretty rude to say things like, "Oh! You look SOOOO tired today!" because you're basically saying, "You look like shit." What is the point of saying something like that? UNLESS it's followed up by something like, "I can finish this part of the project by myself if you want to head home," or some sort of actionable help/feedback.

"Are you okay?" makes sense in SOME contexts. Like, lots of people asked me if I was okay after the election. What happened was a shock, a disappointment, a major blow. Of course I was upset! I'm worried about my friends, too.

But they other night, I was having a somewhat-heated conversation with an education expert. I was presenting information to him that I think is really important, and he was super defensive about it. Because I wasn't continuously smiling during this exchange, at least two people came up to me DURING the conversation and asked if I was okay. What does that even mean? Do you think I'm not having a conversation that is anything but 100% bubbly and friendly?

11/17/2016 04:07:06 pm

Err... "Do you think I'm not *capable* of having a conversation that is anything but 100% bubbly and friendly?"

Obviously, context matters a lot. How can you make an objective judgement about all situations at once? But you CAN say that in general, on average, women find it extremely obnoxious when people tell them to smile -- because maybe they don't feel like smiling, just because you told them to! Maybe they're tired of people assuming they are completely bipolar -- either bubbly and smiling, or near tears.

The purpose of this post is to encourage people to think about why they're asking what they're asking. It's to help them realize that, in most cases, it's super rude to ask someone, "Are you okay?" or say, "You look tired!" Unless you're close enough to them that it makes sense, there's really no reason.

Women deal with all sorts of obnoxious questions/comments all the time that they shouldn't have to. "When are you having kids?" "When are you getting married?" "How is your [very private personal health matter that's really no one's business but you and your doctor's]?" "Are you getting the EXTRA STITCH?" It sucks, it's rude, and people should stop.

Also, as I mentioned in the post, I know that most people don't realize how rude/annoying such questions are. That is why I wrote:

"The first time someone asks this, I tell them, 'I'm not mad, but I will be if you ever ask me that again. Unless I'm lying in a pool of blood, do not ask me if I'm okay. It's rude, it's disempowering... and why would you even ask that?'"

90% of the time, the person cleverly retorts, 'Are you okay?!'

So I say, 'Seriously. Don't ever ask me that again."'

Because, sure, their intention may have been good. That's why they get a free pass. I don't expect people to be able to read my mind. I tell them, "That specific behavior bothers me, so don't do it again." I don't even get mad when the 90% make that dumb joke... because I guess their intent is to be original and funny?

I don't expect them to be mind readers. But I do expect them to respect me when I say, "That question pisses me off. Stop."

11/15/2016 05:09:46 pm

^ ummm, holy fuck, that was so spot on I think I blacked out

legendaryz

12/12/2016 06:46:43 am

It's really just one of the tricks to get closer to someone these days. Sometimes its wanted and sometimes its not. There really aren't any other ways to do so without coming off as annoying to someone who doesn't want it.

Jenni

1/14/2017 06:12:40 am

Well well well. As a feminist I must say... you're reaching.

It's getting to the point where no one can make any mistakes anymore or they're SEXIST!

Just because someone asks, doesn't mean you have to answer. Just because someone wants to see a smile on your face, it doesn't mean it's because you're female and should be smiling. I mean, you'd have to jump over a few logical steps to come to that conclusion.

Do I know some men expected women to smile, yes. Do I believe every man who wants to see a smile on your face is doing it because women should smile? Fuck no. Some guys do it because they genuinely want to see you happy. They want to make you smile.

I'm just done with this black and white feminist bullshit. Life is much more gray than that.

AND I'M AN EXTREME MODERN FEMINIST! This article still bothered me.

And final thought... if asking a woman if she's okay leads to her feeling "bad" or "ugly" (what, ugly? How does that make sense?).... THEN OBVIOUSLY SHE'S NOT OKAY! HE WAS RIGHT TO ASK.

1/14/2017 11:55:41 am

Obviously everything in this, and every article ever, is context-dependent. There's no disagreement there. If a man that I know genuinely wants to see a smile on my face, that's quite different from some stranger I've never seen before who wants or insists on the same.

That's why I provided the advice I did in this article. If you're someone who genuinely cares, and genuinely wants to help or empower, follow the advice. If you're not, telling someone she looks like shit or she should smile is just plain rude.

As for your last comment, I believe I gave examples of this in the article. Telling someone, "Did you get enough sleep last night? You look really tired!" is basically like saying, "You look shitty today." And, again, context matters. If you're someone who's close to the woman and you've noticed she looks tired and you have some way you can help her ("Let's finish working on this tomorrow," "I can take this to the printers if you want to head home," etc.), that's one thing. If you have no point other than saying out loud that she look like shit... I'm confused as to why you think it's worth pointing out. That's not sexist. It's just rude.

Jack

5/25/2017 10:47:26 pm

Eva, I agree with your post, to some extent. I too do not understand why people insist on trying to make you happy if they are happy. It is as if something is wrong with you if you do not see their way or what is acceptable in a social situation.

(does not have to be about whether you are happy or not, smiling or not and so on. Can be anything, I am just using that as base, you get my point)

However I will also say this, I had a situation where I was at a party where most of the guests are females. At one point a woman cam up to me and ask if I shave my arms, because I have such "smooth looking arms" they pointed out. Now imagine if I decided to start brooding because of that comment. What if I was trying to grow hair and was very sensitive about it? Why would they ask this? HOW RUDE OF THEM!

Is it not a social norm for men to have hairy arms? (pointing out on the subject of "females should be happy" in regards to social norms)

Now imagine if I decided to come up to a woman and point out that she has the hairiest arms that I have ever seen. Do you know what would have happened? Because you know, is it not also a social norm for female to have shaved and smooth arms? I could ask you the same thing about why do you have earnings? Why is it that females have more jewelry on them than males do? Why do you care how you look? Is that also not a social norm that is projected by males? That females should always look nice? Bullshit right?

You are being hypocritical. Just like in your viewpoint you have the right to make a post about being asked OK is not OK. I also have the right ask you if you are OK, because maybe I AM not OK? What if me asking you if you are OK or not helps me be more human? Maybe I feel detached from my emotional self and that the psychologist suggested that I should interact with people more, that I should ask them if they are OK and genuinely try to feel something but cannot. See, you would never know this, but hey! you are going to project and assume that I would have some sort of agenda to get with you, or perhaps I am self entitled asshole, or whatever mind acrobatics you want to play here.

The point I am making is that nothing is black and white, EVERYTHING has a gray area. In most situations Black and White decisions are a minority. It all depends.

I think someone already said this, but this post does seem far reaching. You are saying I should not ask people if you are OK because I don't know anything about them and that could trigger something. That is as ridiculous as me saying don't look at me, maybe I will misunderstand the intentions and consider you are into me? Or maybe you are trying to somehow assassinate me? This seems obnoxious.

Maybe we should all be like the silent movies with bubble speeches from a 3rd party. Perhaps then we will become less sensitive because at that point no one is at fault. Like I said, I agree with your post, to some extent. I understand where you are coming from. This situation however, seems unique and very gray.

Since this post is "another-reason-not-to-ask-people-if-theyre-okay-its-really-freaking-rude" I decided to never ask people if they are OK.

You know, now that I think about it, there was a woman that looked like she was not smiling, like you stated in your post I should have never assumed, and I did, she looked to me like she was really sad. However, I decided to say nothing because I considered that maybe she is OK, and me asking such a question would be strange and off putting. Turns out she was not OK and that she attempted suicide twice. This was at a education district of some sort, I do not remember the name it was a long time ago. Maybe I should have asked if she was OK. I always think about my choice at that time.

Excuse my English and any grammatical errors, not my first language.

Have a good week, Eva.

Sincerely,

Jack

5/25/2017 09:32:37 pm

"I'm just done with this black and white feminist bullshit. Life is much more gray than that"

YES, THIS IS IT! Yes Jenni, the world is so gray that black and white is a minority in most situations. This is very close to the view I have on the world. I do not mean or want to project, but I would say this is an accurate description on most social situations.

Donnie

2/9/2017 08:26:44 am

So, I'm a "rude, sexiest jerk."
If I ask anyone, "are you ok?"
Assuming that this is an A typical man to woman question. Your statement already lost all validity by using "sexist."
Women, therefore are free to ask, "are you ok?" to other women? Are they sexist if they ask a man this? What if they are lesbian? How does this change the question? May a man ask a man, "are you ok?" what if either of them is gay? How about, is it even possible for a man to be sexist when asking another man, "are you ok?"

"Are you ok?" is a gender-less question. Labeling it sexists, just makes the the question gender bias. Though, how often do woman ask the question of other women, and men alike?

It's understandable that the question implies that something is off somehow, with the not smiling "person," not just a woman. Also, it can be seen why the question is off putting to someone who is really just fine. The individual, not "woman," may wonder if they look terrible today though they spent 5 hours getting ready for this big day.

However, it is a conflictive assumption, that everyone asking "are you ok?" is out to over power you or dominate you. Or even that they have an other ulterior motive, than to just care that ... Wait for it ... "you are ok."

There are more genuine people in the world than you may realize. But then. As the saying goes.

"It takes one to know one!"

Donnie

Nox

2/22/2017 01:04:31 am

You: It's SO GREAT to see you!
She wonders whats so great in her, and just accept it as a pick-up line.

Seeing you always makes my day!
Great, because mine was terrible.

I've been on this thing lately where I've been asking people, "What is the greatest accomplishment of your life?" What's yours?
And im just one of those people, huh ? And when i tell you my answer, you would give me the most fake compliment ever!

Get over here and give me a huge hug
Instead of asking me how i am ?

It makes me realizing how the world has changed, where everything is based on stereotypes, prediction, layers.
A world, where everyone can be your best partner.
Whatever....

3/5/2017 10:02:57 pm

Circling around, months later.

I hope this doesn't offend you, but the defensiveness of easily labeling a question about "are you OK" as "rude" strikes me as primarily a personal pique which is being reframed as a political issue, but which does not benefit from that framing.

Yes, we can agree that context is important, and that by choosing a suitably extreme case we could find examples where we both agree that it's inappropriate or innocent or even positive. I think we can concede that to get to the meat of the matter - the middle territory where we might disagree, and understanding the basis of that disagreement.

In my world, if somebody asks if you are OK, you have the agency to respond "yes, fine" (honestly or not), or "no, I'm upset but I don't want to talk about it", or "no, I could use a friend right now" or a million other things. I don't find the general and normal case (ie: absent some other unspecified factor like a patronizing or sneering tone) to be rude at all - it's just human.

If I discovered that a friend or acquaintance felt that asking (in the friendly normal way as described above) was "rude", then I'd adapt to that and avoid it, as I have no desire to unnecessarily upset them - but to be honest, I'd quietly and tentatively consider this one of their peccadillos, or some unhealed wounding that I needed to compassionately accommodate, rather than feeling that I had been "rude" as the word is generally understood and that I should apply the same approach to everybody. The "rude" label seems out of proportion, and when people reach for a broad social sanction to justify their personal desires, it's usually a sign they are not smoothly functioning in this particular area. (The labeling of "rude" is an attempt to make wrong, to imply that the person has violated social norms of the tribe, rather than just hit upon a personal idiosyncracy; it's a case of using a "you" statement that tries to make it about the other person, rather than an "I" statement that owns one's personal reactivity).

Which is by the way what I see underpinning a LOT of the PC examples that you often decry - people reaching to far, in trying to invoke an asserted tribal sanction in a personal interaction where they are not willing to deal as human to human, win some and lose some, seek compromise. So instead of "you would prefer that I not play my music too loud, and I would prefer to play it loud, and rather than try to find a respectful compromise, if I claim that my culture promotes loud music and that trumps your preferences (unless you are a bigot), then you have to yield". That is, a lot of PC behavior control is at heart a psychological ploy to get more (illusory in the big picture) power in place of a mutually respectful transaction where you want something and I want something and neither of us has the moral high ground.

I'll go a bit further. When somebody is unusually touchy about something like "you are rude to ask if I'm OK", I perceive that as somebody who in this particular instance has weak boundaries (remember all the many easy and empowered responses available) and is asking me to hold those boundaries instead. If they had sturdy yet permeable boundaries, it would really be no big deal to take charge of their boundaries by deciding how to respond. A person with good boundaries has no need to become rude in reaction to a simple inquiry - or to label others a "rude" for even asking. So I will do so; I will walk on eggs if need be. But I don't take that as my problem.

(And again, one can invent particular circumstances that differ, like if I was frequently hearing "don't ask", then I would be the common demonimator and I'd need to reflect. But if one person is touch about that, while 99% of my friends appreciate it, I'm unlike to accept that I'm being "objectively rude" or that I've committed some breach of proper PC.)

This may come across as more smug or patronizing that I mean it; I am an imperfect human, and there are areas where I have unhealed wounds and can be touchy, as do most of my friends. They may sometimes find it wisest to avoid triggering my issues in exactly the way I've described - while knowing it's my issue and not theirs. I do however attempt to own my issues and not make others wrong for just stumbling over them; I might request they do or not do something because I am sensitive but I generally do not attempt to justify my request as an obligation by implying that they have offended not just me but violated the tribal norms (by doing something like asking if I'm OK). AKA being "rude".

3/6/2017 10:48:47 am

You say:
> "Basically, when you ask someone if they're okay, you're implying that they are not okay, but you can totally help them. In other words, it's a question that is high in agency (i.e., power, influence or control), and it demands a low-agency response."

>"Why? Because in order to have a smooth, tension-free interaction with someone, actions and reactions need to be complementary. You can't both act high in agency -- if you did, the alternative is conflict and confrontation, which most people try to avoid"

This framing kind of floors me. When that happens, I sense a possibility to understand better some way of thinking or set of assumptions which was previously opaque to me.

By contrast, I have absolutely no assumption that agency is a zero sum game, any more than differentiation, self-assurance, maturity, healthy boundaries, intelligence, empathy etc are zero sum games - where one party being high requires or expects other parties to automatically be low. In my world, the more that both parties can manifest these attributes, the better.

So I admit that I currently have no clue why any intelligent and insightful person (like you certainly are, Eva) would make that assumption. So there's a gap in my understanding which I'd like to fill, as it will likely help me understand others and perhaps interact better.

My first thought is that this concept (that party 1 having agency automatically takes away the agency of party 2) may help explain some of the PC dysfunctional behavior (not at the moment imputing that to you - saying that a similar way of thinking may be going on with people who do fall into the PC strategies that you in large part resist).

For example, they may tend to toss free speech out the window because any differing viewpoint is received/perceived as threatening their own agency. They may have assumed that the only way to retain their own "agency, independence and autonomy" is to avoid exposure to other people with agency but differing opinions or perspectives - preferably by suppressing the latter.

To me that has the flavor of poor boundaries of the psyche, of difficulty in holding onto themselves even when exposed to different views (remember, I'm speculating now about others, not you). So they expect others to make themselves smaller in order to avoid this loss of their own agency - and feel that they have the moral high ground in so doing, because they are "only" protecting themselves from that discomfort.

I see that as an unhealthy trend. Rather than learning to robustly hold onto themselves in the face of diverse opinion (a personal strength which allows others to be strong as well), they need to try to control "everybody else" so as to avoid any of their own discomfort.

We can see this dynamic in play in "microaggressions",in "safe spaces", in shutting down speakers they disagree with, and many other PC manifestations. The only way they can maintain their agency and self-esteem is if they can feel surrounded by agreement.

If I saw this as being associated with fear of loss of agency, then I have another element for compassion and understanding - while nevertheless continuing to believe that a more robust approach of fostering better "power from within" and healthy boundaries would much better serve both their growth as happy functional individuals, and the interests of society - as contrasted to giving such a person "power over" everybody else so they can cling to their woundedness (at substantial expense to everybody else).

Returning to the personal level, suppose that Fred really, really doesn't like direct eye contact (let's also assume they are part of, say, modern American culture so this is an individual issue not an endemic part of their culture). Fred considers that anybody looking him in the eye is extremely rude, and feels his agency slipping away (or his soul perhaps). So his solution is to make everyone else wrong, to support that with a political rationale, and to require them to help prop up his selfhood by avoiding any eye contact with him. Billions of people are made wrong, so that Fred can have the moral high ground in asserting his preferences by controlling their acceptable behavior.

I hope that we can see how dysfunctional this would be, how anti-social and unheathy. We could could comply with his desires - but from compassion for his human weakness or wounding, not because we feel guilty or shamed by our everyday practice of looking each other in the eyes. We would likely realize that his political framing of the issue reflects not an insightful analysis, but an attempt to "force"others to comply with his desires by invoking some putative outer tribal norm in place of the ego-risking personal request. He doesn't have to say "I have a personal issue with this, and I would appreciate it if you can remember to honor my request"; instead he can say "you should behave this way, because otherwise you are rude and un-PC".

That latter is

Jeez

3/20/2017 10:11:30 pm

This is a gross overreaction to a perfectly normal question.

If the worst thing that happens to you all day is a stranger asking if you're okay, your life is pretty good. STFU and stop whining.

Not everything is rude, sexist or a "microaggression." Get over yourself and grow up.

Agree with this user

4/19/2017 06:34:02 pm

couldn't agree more.

4/21/2017 07:22:31 pm

Aww. Someone didn't read the article before commenting!!!! Cute.

5/26/2017 07:36:28 am

Yeah, Jeez was expressing his/herself in a rude way. And it's clear that they have not read many of your other thoughtful and un-PC posts or they would realize that you don't use the "microaggression" ploy.

However what you may have missed in your quick dismissal is what I've suggested before - that this particular post appears to have unconsciously fallen into some of the same underlying interpersonal dynamics that often express themselves in Political Correctness. Jeez is recognizing the flavor of the framing you use (correctly I believe), and then falsely assuming that you would also use many of the other techniques of PC based interactions.

In particular, the dynamics I'm referring to involve attempting to make-wrong using asserted tribal norms, in order to avoid the effort or challengs of developing some modicum of personal robustness in the face of a diverse world.

What does "objectively rude" mean? Well, calling something "rude" is basically saying "our tribe in general would consider what you did as a Bad Thing and unacceptably harmful to social functioning, so this isn't about my personal needs/preferences but nstead about how you are violating the social compact". It's very much what we would call a hidden "You" statement. And sometimes that labeling is generally agreed to - like a stranger eating your crumpet at a shared table in a cafe (remembering a great Douglas Adams story). But often the labeling is asprirational - the person would LIKE for it to be a tribal norm, and acting as if that was the case is an attempt (conscious or unconscious) to make it so - or at least gain leverage in a given interaction.

Calling someting "objectively rude" is verging on an oxymoron; the fuzzy process of assessing and changing tribal norms is not very susceptible to objectivity. At best something might be widely agree to within a defined population at a defined time. So calling it "objectively" rude seems more like an attempt to reinforce the message above ("this is tribal norm you have violated, not a personal preference") than reasonable assertion, especially in this case, where I am certain you would not find overwhelming agreement among the tribe (unless the "tribe" is very selectively chosen).

What I'm hoping for here is to stimulate some reflection, to the effect that while certain people may strongly prefer not to be asked "are you OK" because for them it saps their agency, but using make-wrong to get others to comply is less effective than a combination of honest request to friends combined with robustness with strangers. And this latter approach leaves better residues, both socially and personally.

The dynamics beneath PC are seductive.

5/30/2017 11:43:27 am

Hi Zeph,

I think that there is a difference between trying to be supportive to people you know personally and care about vs. being expected to preemptively know everything that might maybe offend someone, even someone you don't even know.

For example, if I'm having a hard time finding a new apartment and it's super stressful for me and you are my friend/coworker/boyfriend, I think it's reasonable for me to ask you, "Would you mind not bringing up the housing thing again? It really stresses me out. When I want to talk about it, *I* will bring it up."

But it's unreasonable for me to expect everyone around me to magically know not to use words like "house," "apartment," and "Craigslist" in my presence.

The article that I wrote before this one (the original reason not to ask people if they are okay: the dilemma of the depressed/disempowered person -- www.thehappytalent.com/blog/for-the-love-of-god-stop-asking-people-if-theyre-okay-ask-this-instead) was written for people who personally know someone who is going through something, and want to help. I think at least some of that paradigm transferred over into this follow-up article, without me explicitly saying it. This may have caused some confusion.

As for the "objectively rude" concept. The thing about people is that most of what we say and do is automatic. We do it without thinking about it. Which is why "microaggressions" even became a term in the first place. Most people don't feel like they're being rude when they say, "Where are you REALLY from?" (to an Asian American who just said he's from Ohio) or, "You're really well-spoken!" (to an educated black person). But when you explain to them, "That was rude because it implies black people aren't well-spoken," they're often like, "Wow, you're right. I never thought of it that way.

(Of course, this isn't true for all "microaggressions." "I believe the most qualified person should get the job" is an opinion, not a microaggression. A 17-inch airplane seat is also not a microaggression. At least, in my opinion. But, as Emory Professor Scott Lillienfeld wrote in Microaggressions: Strong Claims, Inadequate Evidence (2017)(http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1745691616659391), one of the many problems with microaggressions is that that word doesn't really mean anything the way it's used now.)

5/30/2017 11:54:07 am

(continued) This is almost always the case with expressions like, "You look really tired!" or, "Are you okay???" When you explain to someone, "You look really tired" basically means, "You look like shit today," they agree that it's an unkind thing to say. Because, objectively, it's pretty rude to tell someone they look like shit.

(The one exception I can think of is if you follow up with, "You look really tired -- why don't you head home and I'll finish putting these papers away?" or, "You look really tired -- do you want me to take over the driving?" That way, you're not simply making a negative comment about how someone looks -- you're offering actionable help or solutions.)

"Are you okay?" depending on how it's used, is same-same, but different. It's less, "You look like shit," and more, "I think there's something wrong with you," or, "I doubt your emotional/professional/whatever competence."

I can see why someone who read this and only this post on my blog might think I give a shit about political correctness, even though I definitely do not.

Another Reason Not To Ask People If They're Okay: It's REALLY Freaking Rude

Leave a Reply.

Want more?

Categories