WALKING down Main Street late Tuesday night, I was stopped by the mumblings of a man. "I'm angry," the man muttered as he stumbled past. My nose filled with a putrid odor - some combination of smoke, alcohol and sweat. "Why are you angry?" I called.
The man's name was Seth and he was angry because he hates his job at the gas station. It would not be that bad, he explained, except everyone is always in a hurry. No one stops to chat and people are usually rude. If we would only make an effort to get to know the people we interact with on a daily basis, then our community would be a better place.
Seth's frustration reminded me of a book I read in anthropology class. The book, entitled "The McDonaldization Thesis," claims one of the problems of modern society is people's tendency to engage in scripted interaction. Instead of genuinely engaging each person we meet, we rely on a series of socially acceptable questions and answers to conduct business with one another.
For various reasons - time, convenience, self-absorption, economic pressures - we see people in the simplest terms and act accordingly. When we enter a gas station, we fail to appreciate the fact that the person beyond the counter is a unique individual with his own story. Rather, we see him as a physical embodiment of the social category "clerk" and treat him exactly the same way we would treat any other clerk. And if all goes according to plan, he treats us the same way he would treat any other "customer."
|
This scripted reality has a dehumanizing effect because it requires little thought or genuine engagement. It causes people to act mechanical and fake.
The tendency to see people in terms of their social categories is exacerbated in a university town such as Charlottesville. Getting to know someone takes time, and people are not willing to spend time on someone with whom they find it unlikely they will have a future relationship.
In order to avoid investing this time, people tend to categorize others into social groups. And because such judgments are based on superficial social categories, such as "clerk" or "townsperson" or "old person," it allows us to make these judgments right away. Students rarely think they will have a future with a townsperson who works at the gas station - so usually they just rely on the scripted "clerk" interaction when paying for their gas.
We often act like the person who works in the dining hall is nothing more than a "food service employee." Of course we would never say this or even think it. We act this way because we are used to acting this way. Nothing seems odd about our scripted interactions or social labels because they have been there as long as we can remember. The rationalization rests in our society's stress on business. We are paying the clerk to be a "clerk." So there is no reason to see him as anything more.
Even social categories we respect, such as "professor," can dominate our interactions. Students rarely think of professors as human beings with their own lives and stories, but rather see them as "professors" so that all interaction is based solely on those terms. Unfortunately, this leads to one-dimensional relationships.
The prevalence of these social categories in our thought patterns is demonstrated by the common attitude toward student-teacher dating. Most people frown on such relationships even if the professor and student were never in an academic relationship. There is no reason a professor should not date a student from another department, but because we are used to seeing people in their most convenient social categories, we usually shun any such relationships.
We need not accept such behavior from ourselves or anyone else. As soon as we become consciously aware of our tendency to see other people as physical embodiments of social categories, as opposed to unique individuals, then we can make an effort to stop this tendency.
Of course, it is much easier to say "I will treat everyone as a unique individual" than to actually do it. The words themselves form an empty platitude that we've all heard before.
It's hard to act on these words because it takes time out of our busy lives and because it requires going against the grain.
People might give you dirty looks if you hold up the line to talk to the clerk on a genuine level. Someone who is used to their scripted interactions and social categories might be skeptical of your attempts to engage them on a personal level. They might even say, in a guarded tone, "That's personal."
But these are risks worth taking. Understanding people who are not likely to be your bridesmaid or husband can give you a whole new way of looking at the world.
(Kelly Sarabyn's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily.)
Read More
ONIBUDO AND SAWAYA: Police, not students, were agents of chaos
By Naima Sawaya and Nathan Onibudo | 2 days agoSaturday, the state, not students nor protesters, brought violence to this campus.
IYER: Sports stadiums should sport more benefit to Virginia residents
By Arjun Iyer | 4 days agoPast stadiums in other states show that Virginia has the potential to succeed at such a construction project, provided that proper measures are undertaken.
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | April 29, 2024The implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
