If we ever hope to end ‘separation consciousness’ we can’t be running away every time someone says or writes something that triggers us.
I was listening to a blogger on their Instagram* talk about how we as individuals had become stuck in what she called ‘separation consciousness’ because we can’t cope with ideas or thoughts from those in our friendship circles that might offend or trigger us. She was suggesting that if people can ban controversial characters because they think their ideas are ‘dangerous’, why not ban friends they disagree with? (Or, I suppose they would be former friends.) Just as cancel culture is based on not being able to cope with being triggered by an idea or thought in the public domain someone doesn’t agree with, cancelling a friend because of an idea or thought is also based on an inability to cope with that idea or thought.
She was also lamenting that people can’t face the ‘conflict’ head on, and would rather block a friend and end up retreating to some safe space and seek refuge among like-minded friends who happily affirm the correctness of how they see things. In her view, it was holding us all back, preventing what she called ‘unity consciousness’, which was not to suggest everyone had to think the same, but rather that everyone could commit to dealing with conflicts or differences while still holding hands, so to speak! Keeping powerful loving relationships, even while having differences of opinion or ways of seeing.
This is not quite the same as letting go of people we no longer have things in common with or have grown apart because you’re both travelling different roads. Such partings are common and to be expected. We can’t keep everyone and still meet new people. Something (or someone) has to give. And growing and evolving is the name of the game.
That’s not what the blogger was talking about. This was more about when previous close friends dramatically cut ties. A boundary is crossed, ‘offensive’ words uttered. I’m not talking about behaviour, actual physical behaviour, for example, someone who is violent or aggressive towards another, whether physically or mentally. That’s completely different. I’m talking about words in the form of an idea or thoughts, expressed verbally or in writing — we do a lot of texting these days!
I’m left wondering what this is this saying about us nowadays? In recent times, there’s been much talk about building resilience in the face of challenges and adversity. It’s a bit of a buzzword, I realise. However, I’m beginning to wonder just how strong we might be as a community. We seem to be floored by words! The comedian Ricky Gervais opined in one of his recent stand-ups that the human race had survived massive floods, ice ages, heatwaves, hurricanes, political revolutions, wars, plagues, famine and pestilence only to be derailed by some words. In his view, words have become our undoing. Give us horrendous floods and bushfires and we shine, we look after each and we thrive through pain and suffering. Throw a few phrases at us and we crumble in a heap.
The biggest challenge I see is to be comfortable with being triggered, having enough self-worth that someone else’s view won’t have you running for cover or running away. And having enough attention away from your own distress to hear another’s distress without being triggered and without interrupting them to tell them you’re triggered! A blueprint for this way of being in the world can be found in active listening, a commodity quite rare these days. We can talk it out, each in turn. Unfortunately, most of us are consumed by ourselves: ‘It’s all about me’. And when it’s all about you, is it any wonder we get precious about the slightest discomfort? Our egos terribly offended?
Just as cancel culture is destructive to public discourse, ending conversations is equally disastrous for friendships. As with cancel culture, ideas can’t be tested and ways of seeing the world can’t be expressed let alone understood or challenged. Essentially, we stop learning. As with any conflict, the moment we stop talking and being willing to learn from each other and how each of us thinks and feels is the moment we give up on each other. Much like war results when we stop talking. If we can’t have our ideas challenged — without raised voices, with respect — in effect, they may not be worth that much.
In the long run, if we cancel people who trigger us personally in our relationships it will be difficult to maintain friendships. We will only ever know people who are like us or who never test us with different perspectives. If we can’t work through conflicts or different points of view and instead cancel them, we will likely gain a reputation for being untrustworthy. Because no one can risk upsetting us.
What would be good
What I am seeking is more robust relationships, ones that can raise the uncomfortable, the difficult, the awkward. I’m arguing it is healthy to play things out now, even if potentially messy — hello, life is messy — rather than run away, never knowing what might have been. In my experience when I’ve run away I’ve ended up creating the same lesson again with someone else. That’s because I haven’t learnt it and I’m clearly meant to — because it keeps coming up! I’ve learnt the best teacher is the one right in front of me, often mirroring my very words and actions. And I’ve also learnt that the new lesson is tougher because I’ve not been paying attention, I’ve stopped growing in that moment and I’ve needed a jolt. My job ultimately is to keep awaking up. In fact, just when I think I’m awake, I have more waking up to do.
* It would be good to share the link, but I don’t have it because it was one of those reels that just rolls on and disappears in a few minutes, lost in the bowels of cyberspace.
Comments