Have you ever heard the term 'People Pleaser'? The Urban dictionary provides us with two insights. And it generally seems to stem from the need to be accepted by certain people. Generally the people that are pleased. Sometimes it stems from the fear of not being disliked by a certain group, but in general it boils down to the same things.
Let us be critical about it. Why do we do it? Sure we know our behaviour stems from a basic need to be accepted and respected for who we are, but we know that in the process we disregard that very person we are hoping to be respected. And in the end, all people pleasers are just busy trying to convince the people they are now being liked by, that they are someone entirely else.
Am I the only one who thinks this is just not the way to do it?
But what if it is worse? What if we have a worse relation between cause and effect. What if all the attempts we have to do because people see us differently is because we want to please people? That is naturally false, we have a choice, we can chose not to reveal ourselves to people. Let them belief something else, because we need not be bothered by them.
It has the same result but it the exact opposite of people pleasing. We need no confirmation of everyone so we chose the same technique to back them away, and let us go our ways. So, how do we know we know someone? Well we can't unless we chose to get to know them. Takes time.
Go for it, You'd be surprised what kind of beauties are hiding under a veil of mud or glitter.
I would like to recommend a reading of Charles Darwin's 'The Descent Of Man', particularly the sections 'Comparison of the mental powers of man and the lower animals : Moral sense' and 'On the development of intellectual and moral faculties during primeval and civilized times : Social and Moral Faculties' which provides a remarkable insight into human nature. (http://darwin-online.org.uk/contents.html#descent)
BeantwoordenVerwijderenPerhaps it is modern times that lead us to assume that to the act of pleasing fellow humans is based solely on the desire to be accepted. While there is no doubt that a person would desire praise and avoid blame, it is important to note the basic sentiment behind the development of this social instinct, namely sympathy. And so it would be hasty to apply a sense of fitting in as the sole possible motive for the act.
For instance: According to one of the definitions, a people pleaser suppresses his (or her) own needs in order to please or satisfy (the needs of) others. Does this also not define people we call 'heroes'? Sometimes people are so motivated by their sympathies and desires to help a fellow human, that they put their interests second in line. Yet, it is not changing who they are, on the contrary it is exactly who they are.
If a person does so only to fit in, ending up doing things he/she would secretly despise, your conclusion summarized by a sense of losing oneself in such an act is agreeable. However, to practice acts which he/she believes to be virtues, even if they are not inherent to someone, becomes a part of development of his/her character (thus, nourishment rather than fast food) and could even provide a higher sense of self-esteem. An initiative to work towards the kind of person he/she wants to be. Is it unhealthy to try and develop virtues one lacks?
And sometimes the motivation is as simple as smiling when you see someone else smile. Sometimes, that is the only instinct - inornate sympathy.
(My apologies for getting a bit carried away. :S)