Politeness is OPPRESSION
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ค. 2024
- here’s a long time coming - pt. 2/2 of Bourdieu with my argument on how politeness is never sincere but always oppressive.
time stamp :
0:00 intro
1:06 breakdown
2:09 definitions
5:28 socially acceptable
17:17 using politeness
25:48 pls shhh…
30:28 wrap up
if you’d like to support my work, please consider becoming a petit cœur ♡
/ membership
pt. 1/2 habitus, hexis & obédience : • STATUSQUO : why am i l...
i hope you found this helpful,
wn x
#philosophy #bourdieu #society #culture #politics #french #studentlife #politeness #oppression
This makes sense to me. I value truthfulness. I get criticised sometimes because my thoughts are all over my face and body language so it isn't hidden. I've often been told I need to "fix" this as I am "unaware" of it. But the truth is I am aware and I don't want to fix it. I'd rather be disagreeable than embody a lie.
@@maroonpilgrim i wonder if YT censored my support of your message it was “f(airy)k yeh dude” :) 🫶
" I'd rather be disagreeable than embody a lie." - in general I agree, but there is a time and place for everything. For example: shouting you don't care at a funeral to the people mourning - is it honesty and truthfulness or just lack of manners and impoliteness?
And even more importantly - at least for me - having control over what thoughts I share with whom, at what point and in what manner is the strongest sense of agency I experience.
I understand the argument Woan Ni makes from the other side: being suppressed from sharing one's thoughts is of course the opposite of feeling agency and empowered... but politeness isn't the key factor for me there - it's the forced to conform part, which can be applied to other forms as well: like social pressure from a friend group to swear more or to use "rebellious" expressions which is considered the opposite of politeness. It is the being compelled or forced part that carries the negative, not politeness in itself - at least for me. Politeness is just a tool which for me doesn't carry oppression in itself - it can be used to that end like many other tools.
Edit: wording.
Blah blah blah this is nothing other than a way to convert your lack of social grace and disgusting boorishness into a virtue, ie, "I'm a warrior for truth."
I once did AV work for an event where a number of the city's political elite were going to be in attendance- the hosts were absolutely vibrating with anxiety over every aspect of the presentation (who is it appropriate to seat next to whom, who gets the privileged seat next to the mayor, who should stand and be served first, etc.) a very visceral instance of politeness as intermediary for tangible, capital return... I felt the spirit of Diogenes for a brief moment (I may not be a wealthy real estate developer, but at least I'm not losing sleep over the mayor's opinion of me!)
the thing is, it’s not simply ‘the mayor’s opinion’ but the consequences of this opinion, or more precisely the economic implications. being fired, promoted and maybe even cut off from one’s community, both in terms of work and social life.
but i feel you tho, this is why i’m working here on YT vids and fictional writing… i can’t stand being a part of any structure lol, especially one i do not believe in or worse, ones that don’t believe in themselves.
fascinating topic. I see politeness as a tool (for communication) much like humor, irony, satire, exaggeration (a mode of conversation/statement) etc. Most of the time it communicates distance and the level of familiarity. I haven't thought about being oppressive when I try to communicate to someone that they shouldn't feel familiar with me and that I prefer keeping things professional as opposed to personal. Neither can I remember having felt compelled (by societal pressure) to conform into a "polite mode", which is why I can't relate to the oppressiveness side of politeness - though I can understand how it would work that way. To be clear, of course I can remember being told to, I just can't remember it being convincing enough to feel compelled to.
The example of how girls cussing being discouraged and disciplined in most cultures of course is a clear example of the oppressiveness. For me personally it has always been a tool to keep the people I prefer to stay at a distance where I want them to - or at least indicate my preference in a clear way using the subtext/mode of speech.
Edit: wording.
i’m glad this sparked questions :) for the first part of your comment, i’m skeptical but i won’t speak above your experience. for the second, if you meant swearing as a tool to create distance; funny thing is that for me i use it to relax people around me. my friends love it during story time and others appreciate that when it’s well placed, it shows my clear dissatisfaction with the state of things.
@@woanologue I didn't mean swearing at all; I meant politeness as a tool to communicate distance.
If I swear to keep people away, that I imagine would only work in so far as if I manage to make them think I'm insane or unstable so they decide to keep their distance : D
That or an aggressive confrontation? Swearing as a tool to create distance 🤔maybe we are talking past each other but I'm not sure how you mean that.
What I meant was completely different: when someone is using more familiar language, but you answer in "polite mode"; or when you just simply keep the talk polite and don't develop into a more casual mode - it clearly communicates a preference for keeping things distant/professional as opposed to being open to getting closer/more personal, no? That was what I was going for.
Edit: wording.
love your enthusiasm 🦋
@@Danny_Suede thanks dude 🫶
Of course, one becomes aware of behavioral and speech patterns that are not the sincere expressions of an authentic state. The urge to reject this part of you that is “programmed by society” is understandable …. But in these times of alienation, polarization, coarseness and violence the true rebel is the one who displays incredible politeness. Persisting in politeness is not an easy path. But It can be a consistent and heartfelt expression of, and an invitation to non-violence.
what you’re describing to me is more so of respect with a hint of kindness. i’d need to get more literature to support my argument but the simplified difference would be that we treat a person in regards to them simply as deserving of respect due to fact that they are human (ie. for the sake of humanity at large and not any one society) and not in relation to some sort of hierarchical structure or any other exterior motivation -that i’d argue even includes for one to avoid violence or coarseness (as these are manifestations of a larger problem, a symptom rather than the problem itself. and in saying that treating symptoms leads to no cure.) for i think the point that you’re missing here is that it is this exact politeness that creates this sense of alienation between people, making it easier to dehumanize the other and thus resulting in everything you have mentioned politeness is implied to be designed to avoid.
@@woanologue Politeness is a very broad concept. When we talk about the tightly choreographed and scripted forms of social interaction, we can distinguish between those that are necessary, e.g. to prevent us from bumping into each other and unpleasant friction (waiting your turn, standing in a queu…) and those that are not.
Some of the latter can enhance the quality of every day life. But there are definitely choreographies that are stifling, that make real social contact harder and that even prevent individual expression. I have to say…. that here in the West there’s not much left of those. I do understand your inclination to rebel against it. I always felt and feel a visceral urge to reject tight choreographies, e.g. in very fancy restaurants. It’s the wild and natural side of me that rejects these artificial constraints.
@@Papermac hi again! i addressed this a little in my LIVE yesterday. to be critical and abstain from politeness does not imply impoliteness. for i can stand in line out of respect for the time of others and not simply to avoid being seen as socially unacceptable or impolite. or, to do so in mind of others rather than in mind of what i can get out of my choice to wait my turn. i think it’s worth interrogating why one is so attached to the idea that respect or care for a fellow human being is impossible without an unspoken social mandate. the point here is to question this intermediary that comes with very insidious effects, passed off as the responsibility or the fault of the individual. it’s not an inclination to rebel against something because it is not inherently in line with our impulses (since if one really thinks about it, is a child free for being able to scream? or are they at the mercy of the fluctuation of their emotions?) it is more so a choice to not follow conventions just because it is easier and incentivized at a greater undoubtable cost, than a proposed good.
if you haven't already, i recommend you read etrangers a nous memes by julia kristeva, on the role of the foreigner/the concept of foreignness, otherness, barbarism, a main focus on french culture as she is teaching there now as a bulgarian. i loved it and i believe you will too
thanks for the first introduction to this. it’s on the list :) also thank you for taking the time to share this 🫶
11:13
It is easily exploited by narcissistic people who are high in the hierarchy. Just because someone is a famous actor, it doesn't mean that their opinions on social issues are based on valid reasons.
People who pay a lot of attention to other's social standing can be misled by appearance that are empty of values.
I feel like maybe at some point people needed this (not so secret) secret code of politeness to prove that they are not taking advantage of or oppressing the person they are speaking to, as a way to distinguish themselves from those who might do that. But this ends up excluding people who may be unable to catch up with the rules, and gives certain people the opportunity to use politeness as a dog whistle for maintaining class, and a suitable cover for oppressive people who learn to adapt to these rules of politeness and use it to their advantage as a way to disarm those whom they are trying to manipulate. Just my thoughts from what I've intuitively understood and from what i got from the video. Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ass. Lol. Great video though!
I'm learning a lot from your videos. This one in particular is really giving me the mental tools to unlearn the weight I give to the role of acceptability and politness especially in choosing NOT to participate or share my thoughts. Which happens a lot. I'm totally that timid person. But here i am, choosing to share my thoughts anyway. Sorry, I meant here I fucking am choosing to share my fucking thoughts anyway.
i’m so proud of you noopydoodle 🤣 - but genuinely, this warms my heart. thank you for sharing
I’ve returned from my self-imposed exile from the world, to watch this video on a topic I’ve been waiting to hear your thoughts on. Took you long enough!!! I jest. I LOVE to see people doing their thing enthusiastically.
Euphemism is one of my favorite words and ideas. It isn’t as versatile as fuck but nonetheless has a semantic richness that speaks to the overall theme here.
Basically, the etymology of euphemism is basically a way to address a deity without calling upon them directly by saying h their name. Because saying their name can summon them. So elements of power dynamics and power of words/names. It’s an idea that we see often in religious/spiritual thought. We n a more personal note, it’s the kind of reverence for language, the magic of words. Unfortunately, power and magic, outside of fairytales isn’t always used for the good of humanity.
Could riff on this chord all night. But will end with these two points.
1.) I feel and think, that the oppressiveness of politeness is something that woman, due to cultural/social norms, experience more acutely than men.
2.)As a fool, who is incapable of declining a challenge…While I think that politeness and sincerity are often at odds, I do think that they can overlap in some situations, depending on the amount of wiggle we give.
Lots of goodness in this video. I’m glad you have found the time and words to flesh out your ideas in these regards 😎✌️
welcome back :) the challenge was to argue that politeness could be sincere, an overlapping is neither an adequation nor identification 😊
@@woanologue I’m an old man, it takes me longer to think things out! 😂
@@induplicable you have time - i plan to be on YT for a few years :)
Hi, someone just recommended your channel to me. I'm gonna spend a semester in Paris studying literature and I'm quite into philosophy as well. Could be fun to meet up sometime :-)
pls thank this person for connecting us! i would love to - drop me another message when you’re in town :)
@@woanologue you're welcome : D
@@vigdragonhaha interesting - thanks Archilli :)
@@woanologue my pleasure; glad if the connection works out! I enjoy both your youtube channels : )
I think it is different to be forced to be polite for cultural reason, compared to being polite because you like the person you're interacting with.
If i like you, and I want you to feel comfortable, I don't force myself to be polite to you as if it is an active decision I have to make -- I'm subconsciously polite as a "byproduct" of us interacting on friendly terms.
I know that this might not be what you're trying to point out.
But it is important to make that distinction for anyone confused by it. No, you're not oppressed by default because you're being generally nice to people you like.
I think one can be kind to another without being polite. The same way that we can feel when someone is simply being ‘nice’ and when someone is being genuine and sincere. Oppression here is simply to designate an exterior determination that forces to be something we naturally aren’t.
I think politeness can be an expression of love. Until it is not for manipulation and control. It can be used as manipulation and control by those who are acting polite and also by those who demand politeness. It is intelligent to recognize that it can be used and not authentically given.
@@tahwsisiht hmmm would you like to elaborate on what it means to have politeness authentically given?
this is a fascinating video... you put words to things I've felt intuitively for a long time.
@@maroonpilgrim 🫶 I’m glad
Cool .. BTW I'm a thumbnail expert.. try to replace the current thumbnail by another one similar to the hook frame (when you are saying " is politeness oppression " I think. The video will reach more people )
thanks dude - i’ll make it tonight and put it on the A/B test thingie and let you know how it goes. you using the term ‘hook’ does make you seem like you know the gold. ty again :)
it’s up :) - decided not to go with A/B and to upload it directly cause i’m lazy hahaha but will let you know how it goes :)
my guy, click-through went from 5->9%, feel free to comment on every thumbnail you deem necessary. thanks so much 🫶
I think I disagree. While I think most people are "polite" for the wrong reasons, these being merely following some social convention, a sense of moral duty, or, as Bourdieu explained, to exclude others from their own social circle, I personally see politeness primarily as a sign of respect, both self-respect and respect for others, for their rationality and civility, and to signal mine.
I think Bourdieu conflates social pretensions, generally the social games that individuals play to maintain or elevate their status within a specific group and exclude others from the group, with genuine expressions of respect and civility, politeness.
Now, it isn't only Bourdieu who conflates these concepts. And a lot of social ostracism is indeed masked as mere politeness. But I don't think we should use the concept of politeness the way Bourdieu does.
what i’m reading from you here is more so that you’ve conflated the manifestation of politeness with signs of respect. that is, that one ‘could’ interpret politeness as a form of respect. sure, possible. yet, what might be more interesting is to consider the possibility of a sign of respect as a manifestation of respect itself. i think by definition you’ve missed the point of how genuine and the foundations of politeness as euphemism are incommensurable. that one treating another with respect to, for example, social standing, conventions etc, is not the same as treating another with respect.
your argument while seemingly advocating for nuance safeguards the comfort of simplicity and muddiness.
Politeness is a social skill and a type of strength, with children, elderly, the strange. It can be oppression in a certain context, but nothing is so simplified as language would have us believe❤
I agree with your designation of it being a social skill! Of course politeness in a society full of different desires makes living a little more pleasant - but I’d argue that maybe you’re describing is something closer to respect … in terms of admiration and morality (basically what I didn’t address specifically in this already 30 mins video haha) but if I come across good literature to help me make the distinction, I’ll be sure to add :) thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts!
politeness suggests inauthenticity, as opposed to intimacy.
pls define ‘inauthenticity’ and ‘intimacy’ ; i’m curious
I was raised with the idea that politeness is the suppression of expression of discontent. Fuck that.
@@SevenAllTheMarbles one. oath, two. wtf how did your ‘fuck’ pass but my ‘fk’ get censored by YT from my own channel 🤣
@@SevenAllTheMarbles also, interesting word, discontent
7:13
Existence is oppression
@@artvandelay7236 wait wait wait can’t stand ya???
I feel like politeness can be a tool of oppression. Self-imposed examples I've heard include telling women to cross their legs / cover their legs and "sit ladylike" and black / brown people telling each other "don't fight in front of white people". Over years these are ingrained in you and they become second nature, essentially self-policing. It makes it easier for cases like Roe vs Wade to be overturned when this level of control over other people (in this case womens' bodies) has been normalised. I wonder if future generations will value politeness as much!
Damn … the ‘don’t fight in front of white people’ … thanks for sharing. I have a feeling that many are mistaking politeness for respect or even kindness… I’ll need time if I want to make a clearer argument - but thanks again for taking the time to share
@@woanologue no worries, thanks for making the video 👍
@@goob8945 i appreciate this 🫶
Thanks for the video! I definitely agree that politeness is a form of censorship in that it narrows the spectrum of communication we can use. And censorship can most definitely be oppression. A few thoughts in no particular order, from a non-philosopher:
1) I couldn't help but think of politeness as oppressing communication in the context of activism or protest. Activists whose speech (including non-verbal speech) is disruptive are often criticized on the basis of being impolite, uncivil, etc. And this criticism often substitutes for meaningfully engaging with the merit of their speech. This reminds me of your anecdote about being corrected on grammar while trying to challenge someone in authority. If they can convince you and those members of society observing the interaction that you are behaving impolitely, it undermines your speech. And if you hedge your language for fear of insulting an authority or being cast as disruptive, then you undermine your own speech.
2) This makes me want to look at politeness and oppression from a systemic lens. The "rules" of politeness in a society often serve to reinforce existing power structures (see point #1). But if standards of politeness emerge from society, it stands to reason they reflect some of a society's core values. I'm curious how we as individuals should think about the forces that sculpt our sense of politeness, and how we can engage with those forces.
3) At least in common parlance, we can use "politeness" to describe self-censorship in the interest of protecting the feelings of a listener whom we care about. E.g. your friend's food was mediocre but you don't want them to be sad so you phrase it delicately. Or you refrain from speaking loudly at the memorial service for a friend's parent. Could these be cases where politeness is self-censorship but not oppression?
pleasure! few clarifications :
dw about being a ‘non-philosopher’. the definition is one that seeks and teaches knowledge, so it’s more so about degrees of intensity rather than a clear-cut/static state of being.
1. i think this was clear in BLM where media companies or those against the movement decided to promote the reductive optic where they qualify the entire movement to those who decided to take advantage of the disruption with looting and vandalism. we know of course that there were a lot of peaceful and orderly protest at the time as well. but the image of a ‘rioter’ jumping on the car living his best pseudo-joker life is easier and a lot more profitable to their position. it’s interesting how you repeat the word ‘disruptive’. though i’m not one for mindless violence, we do live in a society with an underling level of violence that we brush off as, ‘that’s the way things are.’ i’m with Arendt on the idea that there is no change without interruption. and as for the difference between interruption and disruption, i think it is one of value : good/bad, which is tied in to duration and the need of adaptation. this ties in well with you bringing up my anecdote. it depends on how one thinks a philosophy class should go - i obviously think that discourse and argument is the life-blood of philosophy, not just about presenting, but defending and challenging. so to muddle poor grammar (which i own up to because my French is barely over 2.5 years old, so it’s logical) with this impression of being disruptive is fundamental to the issues of education. i enjoy the last sentence of this, it seems to be a parlay between the fear of insulting a person with authority - which is linked to one’s social survival (acceptability) and one’s existential survival (sense of being). caveat: the professor agreed with me at the end but i do often make it clear that my questions are more out of curiosity than a need to corner anyone. it’s not easy presenting one’s worldview in front of 40 people, so i have no intention nor desire of making this experience more difficult for any of my professors.
2. this is one of the reasons why i made this video.
3. if you haven’t watched my first video on this topic #STATUSQUO (it’s with a yellow thumbnail) you’ll find a section where i explain the concept of ‘obedience’ which i think runs on a mechanism analogous to that of self-censorship. where the fear or the anticipation of a penalty is in-and-of itself something that conditions and determines our demeanor. in short, self-censorship is the result of systemic oppression that may not always be present physically or clearly, but nevertheless is always omnipresent or felt.
thank you for taking the time to share this. it was fun engaging!
Politeness is the very possibility condition of any "society of critique," and democratic engagement. In its absence do you have liberation? Of course not, you have violence. This video sucks.
What u yappin about
stuff
You being a dickhead on purpose or does it come naturally 😂
Maybe, one day, you grow to understand.
@@tahwsisiht thank you for this
Woke BS
@@DaboooogA yes sleepy puppy yes
As opposed to sleep you? You're not a bot but might as well be😂
@@the_famous_reply_guyhahah dayumm
I think politeness can be an expression of love. Until it is not for manipulation and control. It can be used as manipulation and control by those who are acting polite and also by those who demand politeness. It can also be an unhealthy sign of keeping false hierarchy in power.
It is intelligent to recognize that it can be used and not authentically given.
29:50 if you talk to her about her views and ideas, if you give her your attention: you will give her a gift. To be heard, to be considered, to be seen worthy is a gift everyone who think themselves compassionate, considerate human being should be giving to others. Not politeness but being seen and heard. How much more authentic it is!
30:35❤
31:08 ❣️❣️❣️❣️❣️❣️❣️❣️❣️
Although, politeness can be a tool to control, giving f#@#cks at the wrong time can be also a control. Putting out the wrong impression that you are authentic. If you use f#@#cks to silence others, you are still a tyrant. f#@#cks are there to push back when your boundaries are violated, not to push through the boundaries of others. One is energy to protect yourself (especially when you are depleted from trying to tell others to leave you and your views alone), the other is to silence and walk over those who refuse to be your doormat.
ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh thank you for this……. your comment on 29:50 really touched me. i feel the exact same way when a friend of mine took the time to really engage with one of my ideas that i had a lot of difficulty formulating. it goes beyond just the intellectual sense of accomplishment but it’s more so the formation or the experience of solidarity… i agree, cursing at someone is VERY different from the freedom to curse in expression, in regards to the topic or situation at hand, very well put. (the only thing is at the beginning, i feel like ‘kindness’ is more apte. for i’ve never experienced ‘wow they were so polite, i felt loved’.)
@@woanologue We see everything through our own lense.
@@woanologue to think, we actually have to "talk it out". Writing it out is one level of thinking. You have to name and organize your thoughts and feelings. There are differences between instincts, emotions and feelings. There are processes that we go through when we are thinking. Our thoughts born out from instincts, emotions, feelings and previous experiences but they should be developed further. When you write, you start to make sense of all your upcoming ideas. When you speak, or communicate it to others, you trying to measure it up how it may sound to someone else. Your thoughts are going through in different areas of your brain. Hopefully it makes it clearer for your own self too. Often we don't question ideas we formed. When you have a conversation, you not just having your own ideas introduced, but it can be improved by angles you didn't have.