It is the first day of 2020. My vision board is up, and I am beyond excited for the opportunity to begin anew. I hope this is a shared sentiment. My subject for this blog is driven by my recent read of Malcolm Gladwell’s new book Talking to Strangers and listening to Steven Petrow’s Ted Talk, 3 Ways to Practice Civility.
What We Should Know About The People We Don’t Know
Gladwell’s book is amazing. It is a page turner that pulls you in right way. Once again he has managed to use some of the most engaging stories from history, past and present, to make us rethink what we believe we know. He sobers readers and challenges our false understandings around communication. And though this notion of ‘talking to strangers’ can seem so harmless, we know that breakdowns in communication often lie at the heart of misunderstandings. Misjudging the behaviors and intentions of others has repeatedly hurt the individuals involved and hurt us as a society when we are forced to be witnesses and take sides. It is nearly impossible to remain neutral around the level of controversy the events shared within his book have levied on society the world over.
Gladwell demonstrates how delicate and important our initial conversations have the potential to be. It is the birthplace of misinterpretation and the subsequent tragedies that follow. Tragedies like those in death of Sandra Bland, the renowned Brock Turner rape case at Stanford University, the Jerry Sandusky scandal, the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox, and the list goes on and on. Sadly, all roads lead back to misfirings in communication or the lack thereof. Case after case, the author skillfully unpacks our vulnerability, from our inaccurate beliefs/practices around interpreting honesty in the eye gazes and facial expressions of others to understanding how our instincts can betray us when they are not properly validated/investigated.
Gladwell completely disrupts any idea that human-beings are capable of being packaged and understood as a brand rather than individuals. While we may in fact share behaviors and responses unique to our respective cultures and communities, we each have our own idiosyncrasies that make us unique. Talking to Strangers teaches us that we have much to learn about authentic communication.
Gladwell summarizes this best,
This is a book about a conundrum. We have no choice but to talk to strangers, especially in our modern, borderless world. We aren’t living in villages anymore. Police have to stop people they do not know. Intelligence officers have to deal with deception and uncertainty. Young people want to go to parties explicitly to meet strangers: that’s part of the thrill of romantic discovery. Yet at this most necessary task we are inept. We think we can transform the stranger, without cost or sacrifice, into the familiar and the known, and we can’t (342).
The intellectual indulgence is more than worthwhile. The stories and lessons will make us better at understanding one another. I believe the implications have even greater relevance for those of us who serve in capacities that fly under the radar yet are constantly making decisions that impact the experiences and opportunities of others. After the read, I found myself committing to making an earnest effort to ask, watch, listen and learn more and avoiding the urge to size people up by filtering through lenses that may well be antiquated and irrelevant depending on who and what is involved. His work encourages us not to assume intent, be it positive or negative, but rather to give people the benefit of communication—owning and checking the biases and defaults we bring to the conversation as well.
Civility
And then I listened to Steven Petrow’s Ted Talk 3 Ways to Practice Civility. In this talk, Steven discusses his belief that civility has become a dirty or obsolete word, replaced by “decorum” or being “politically correct”. What’s the difference? In my mind, it is having an agenda vs. appearing before an audience. Civility’s agenda is to dialogue in a manner that respects the other, after which we may walk away disagreeing but not in any hateful or belligerent manner. Moreover we understand that we belong to a society bigger than ourselves, share an identity and at our best aim to treat the other in the manner we wish to be treated. To me, decorum is about an audience. Saying and doing the “correct” thing to avoid judgement or appearing as though one lacks manners/class.
We live in the information age, and we can see discourse at its worst on a daily basis. Social media comment battles seem to go so bad so quickly…or tweets from the bully pulpit where anyone who dares to disagree can and likely will be attacked. At times, it seems we have lost touch with the right we all have to think and believe for ourselves. I would argue that we should not become angry and hostile toward someone for not sharing our beliefs—even when they are in defense of a group you believe has been marginalized or oppressed in some way. By doing so, you are taking the disposition of the oppressor. This is the climate of discourse in our country though. We are not seeking to engage with an agenda civility in mind or as a rule.
In his talk, Petrow suggests 3 easy ways we can practice engaging in a more civil manner:
1. Avoid trigger words or labels that raise defenses and incite negative reactions (i.e. racist, sexist, homophobe, etc.). Instead we can focus on the matter at hand and talk about the behavior or issues to gain understanding and respect for the opposite side.
2. Avoid personal attacks. He sited John McCain as an example of someone who disagreed with many but was respected by all for the manner in which he chose to disagree and focus on the issues rather than having a reputation for launching abusive remarks and hitting below the belt when discussing sensitive topics.
3. Explore/embrace/invite/indulge the joy and kindness of human connection. Even when we disagree with someone, we have an opportunity to develop a relationship. It doesn’t have to be deep but we can gain more from setting our differences aside and seeking to go a little deeper as humans sharing earth.
It is worth a listen. The talk certainly gave me a frame for thinking about the ways in which I show up. Everyone has an opinion about everything, and disagreements become inflammatory and aggressive relatively quickly. When you think about heroes like MLK, Jr. they are models for this type of civility.
Making The Connection
As I listened to Petrow’s words, I considered them in relationship to Gladwell’s book. I saw an instant connection around our need to do a better job of engaging with one another as rational individuals. It’s an opportunity for better citizenship and better relationships. And if we can be better to one another, why not give it a shot? We can be kind(er), and we don’t have to continuously seek to box people in to get our point across. In most cases, we will never win the argument so why not at least gain respect for where we each stand. I share from a place of humility and appreciate the opportunity to be intentional about showing up authentically.
I’m simply sharing what I consider a hip check from God on keeping our reactions to the behavior and thoughts of others in perspective—even when they are opposite my/your own.
Happy New Year!
Keeping it real true and free,
Garland Darling