![]() ![]() I think Michelle Maiese, the chair of the philosophy department at Emmanuel College, lays it out in a way that makes sense, so I’ll use some of her work here to walk us through it. He writes, “Dehumanization is a way of subverting those inhibitions.”ĭehumanization is a process. Smith explains that there are very deep and natural inhibitions that prevent us from treating other people like animals, game, or dangerous predators. We want to harm a group of people, but it goes against our wiring as members of a social species to actually harm, kill, torture, or degrade other humans. I’ve studied dehumanization and seen it in my work for over a decade.ĭavid Smith, the author of Less Than Human, explains that dehumanization is a response to conflicting motives. They weren’t talking about getting their feelings hurt or being forced to listen to dissenting opinion they were talking about dehumanizing language and behavior. When I asked participants for examples of feeling emotionally unsafe or threatened, a clear pattern emerged. I needed to probe deeper for clarity.Īs I looked through the data, I saw that the line was drawn at physical safety and at what people were calling emotional safety. This is especially so in a world where the term “emotional safety” is often used to mean I don’t have to listen to any point of view that’s different from mine, that I don’t like, that I think is wrong, that will hurt my feelings, or that is not up to my standards of political correctness. We can’t allow ourselves to be vulnerable and open if we’re not physically safe.Įmotional safety was a little more ambiguous. Physical safety is one of the nonnegotiable prerequisites for vulnerability. It’s hard to stay kind-hearted when you feel people are taking advantage of you or threatening you.Īs I looked through the data, I saw that the line was drawn at physical safety and at what people were calling emotional safety. ![]() In fact, this research confirmed what I found in my earlier work: The clearer and more respected the boundaries, the higher the level of empathy and compassion for others. Participants who put true belonging into practice talked openly about their boundaries. The reward is great.īut here’s a question that came up for me during this research: Where is the line? Is there a line in the wilderness between what behavior is tolerable and what isn’t? The reward may be great, but do I have to put up with someone tearing me down or questioning my actual right to exist? Is there a line that shouldn’t be crossed? The answer is yes. I’m too lost! I hear Maya Angelou’s words about being brave again: The price is high. When I get to the point where I’m like, Screw this! It’s just too hard. Maintaining the courage to stand alone when necessary in the midst of family or community or angry strangers feels like an untamed wilderness. If your family is anything like mine, you’ve been required to summon love and decency in the face of emotions that range from minor frustration to rage. And when it comes to family-it’s even harder and more painful. Whether it’s over dinner, at work, or in the grocery line, in-person conflict is always hard and uncomfortable. When we commit to getting closer, we’re committing to eventually experiencing real, face-to-face conflict. Chapter Four: People Are Hard to Hate Close Up. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |