Looking for an excellent guide to the "hidden curriculum" of law firms and law careers? Kimm Alayne Walton's book What Law School Doesn't Teach You...But You Really Need to Know fills the bill.
For example, on page 194, she points up the dilemma faced by a law student who had just gotten a job offer from a law firm:
The managing partner had sent him a letter inviting him to the firm's annual golf outing. The letter included the line, "We know you may not golf, I don't, but I participate every year." The [soon-to-be-lawyer] asked [his law school's] career services director, "Do I really have to go? I've got to study for the Bar exam. And I don't golf!" She responded, "Absolutely! You should tell them that you're really excited about it, but you've never held a golf club."
He protested, but she continued, "You don't know if this is an event you can blow off. The tone of the letter suggests that every lawyer in the firm goes. If they all do it, you can't turn down the invitation."
[Emphasis added.]
NTs tend to be hypocritical about certain things, including superior-subordinate relationships. They don't always like to let it show that they're ordering a subordinate to do something...but they do expect the subordinates themselves to understand.
Such as with events like golf outings. On the one hand, the point of something that looks like fun is that it's supposed to "be" fun. And that's kind of hard to reconcile with subordinates being ordered to participate.
On the other hand, those in charge want everyone to participate in certain things, perhaps to give a show of having fun and help the superiors feel happy about putting on a good event. Other reasons may include helping the people relax and get to know one another better, and helping superiors observe subordinates under more relaxed conditions. For example, is Lucy really a sticker for detail? Put her in charge of the refreshments and let's find out!
Such knowledge is supposed to help everyone work together better. That's why the superiors ask subordinates to come and take part. But it destroys much of the point if the subordinates feel forced to do so.
Superiors manage this tension by putting certain obligations in softer terms. They don't necessarily say "You must do this" but rather something like "Even though I don't typically do this activity, I'm taking part here." The message is "This event is for everyone, not just for those who like this activity for its own sake. You should come even if you don't enjoy it."
Also, when a superior says something like "Everyone else is coming in Saturday," that means you should too. Yes, maybe you have better ways to spend your time Saturday. What are the odds that nobody else also had better things to do? The idea is that you should come even if you have things you'd rather do.
Trust me, when someone in a position to affect your life says that they themselves are doing this, or that everyone else is doing that, it's not meant as an amusing bit of trivia. Rather, it's considered a polite and not terribly subtle way of communicating that you'd be well advised to join in. With a smile.
8 comments:
"NTs tend to be hypocritical about certain things, including superior-subordinate relationships. They don't always like to let it show that they're ordering a subordinate to do something...but they do expect the subordinates themselves to understand."
It's not just NTs who do this either. Think about every Aspie who says "I have the same emotions, I just express them differently" and at the same time expects everyone else to understand which emotions they mean when they're expressing them.
Hello,
You're certainly right in that Aspies can overestimate how easily people can understand our emotions.
On the other hand, sometimes an Aspie (or even an NT) can say "I have the same emotions, I just express them differently" - only to mean that yes, we too have feelings and empathy (which as you may know some people doubt). That in itself doesn't necessarily mean the other person is expected to know just how one is feeling at that moment.
In this post, I'm referring to out-and-out hypocrisy. Not an honest misunderstanding of what others may or may not understand, but deliberate saying X while doing Y...and expecting everyone else to understand the actions meaning Y and disregard the words meaning X.
What do you think?
Jeff Deutsch
"On the other hand, sometimes an Aspie (or even an NT) can say "I have the same emotions, I just express them differently" - only to mean that yes, we too have feelings and empathy (which as you may know some people doubt). That in itself doesn't necessarily mean the other person is expected to know just how one is feeling at that moment."
Good points!
"In this post, I'm referring to out-and-out hypocrisy. Not an honest misunderstanding of what others may or may not understand, but deliberate saying X while doing Y...and expecting everyone else to understand the actions meaning Y and disregard the words meaning X."
Yeah, I was thinking of stuff like this and vice-versa.
For one example, claiming "I love her/him" while otherwise giving her/him the cold shoulder, and expecting her/him understand the words meaning "I love you" and disregard being given the cold shoulder: http://life-with-aspergers.blogspot.com/2010/11/aspie-myths-he-wont-miss-me.html
For another example, calling someone a nigger while not physically threatening him/her in any way and expecting everyone else to understand the actions meaning no harm and disregard the words meaning racism: http://life-with-aspergers.blogspot.com/2010/02/some-thoughts-on-intolerance.html
Hi again,
Good points!
Wrt the cold shoulder, let's assume that it really is a cold shoulder, and not withdrawn behavior for other reasons, or the other person's misperception. The latter two happen all the time, including among NTs.
In my experience, people (but especially NTs) go by the old saying: "Actions speak louder than words." They may say one thing and do another, and if both are directed at the same person they are more likely to expect him to go by their actions and ignore their words.
Take the classic example of a woman who stomps into the house, snaps at her husband or boyfriend, throws things around and the like. He asks what's wrong, to which she snaps "Nothing!" Odds are she wants him to react to her behavior (including tone of voice) rather than her words, and thus to inquire further to show he loves her.
We may or may not approve of this maneuver, but we can't deny that's what she often means - for her actions, not her words, to be acted upon.
On the other hand, maybe some Aspies behave in precisely the way you describe, since we sometimes find words much easier to understand than actions. If so, we need to learn how to show we love someone, not just tell them.
As for using the word "nigger" - under NT norms, at least in the U.S. that's an absolute no-no. That term is itself considered "fighting words" and "verbal assault" - (in most contexts*) it inherently provokes violence and thus is a crime even if no violence results.
Sometimes black people call one another "niggers" or "niggas". Even then, a non-black person joining in can expect to get cut three ways: long, deep and often.**
If an Aspie uses that expression, say because he likes to use "classic" language, he needs to be shown (or rather, will at some point be shown) the error of his ways.
[*] Presumably excluding our discussion, for example, of course.
[**] That phrase is courtesy of Nicholas Proffitt's Gardens of Stone.
Keep up the good work, and please let me know what you think about any other posts!
Jeff Deutsch
"Wrt the cold shoulder, let's assume that it really is a cold shoulder, and not withdrawn behavior for other reasons, or the other person's misperception. The latter two happen all the time, including among NTs..."
At the same time, if it looks just like the cold shoulder and sounds just like the cold shoulder... then the other person has every right to perceive it as the cold shoulder and not want to experience it any more than he or she wants to experience the cold shoulder.
"If so, we need to learn how to show we love someone, not just tell them."
Yes, it always helps to speak your audience's languages! :)
This isn't just an ASD/NT thing either. For a third example, suppose a new neighbor calls you something offensive in 100% grammatically-correct English and in an accent so close to yours that you can't hear it. Must your gut reaction be "oh he means well, he must be speaking English as a second language"? Must your gut reaction still be that after you told him how offensive it was and he does it again? Of course not (despite what an NT I know said after I told her to stop doing exactly that!).
"Keep up the good work, and please let me know what you think about any other posts!"
Thanks! :)
Hello,
Good point about cold shoulders. If something is undesirable to you, it's undesirable to you.
Let's keep a couple of considerations in mind:
People - especially Aspies - aren't always aware of how their actions are perceived. Also, Aspies, for our own reasons, sometimes need to "withdraw" in ways that can seem to the untrained eye like a cold shoulder.
Obviously, nothing prevents Aspies from actually giving cold shoulders, too.
Let's also keep in mind that this is a different context from your previous comment. Originally, you talked about hypocrisy. By definition, that's something you do on purpose.
This time, you're bringing in another important point: Everyone should do the best we can to project the message we want to project, and avoid misinterpretations. This is very different from hypocrisy, and deserves attention in its own right.
In your final example, is the new neighbor a foreigner, and if so do you have specific reason to believe he speaks English as a second language?
(Even if the answer to both questions is yes, IMHO this matters only until you give him fair, explicit notice that you find the phrase offensive.)
See you back here soon!
Jeff Deutsch
"Let's also keep in mind that this is a different context from your previous comment. Originally, you talked about hypocrisy. By definition, that's something you do on purpose."
Yes, each of the examples is a separate scenario. :)
"In your final example, is the new neighbor a foreigner, and if so do you have specific reason to believe he speaks English as a second language?"
The 3rd example was a hypothetical situation in which one *doesn't yet know* whether or not the neighbor is a foreigner and/or a non-Native speaker of English. In fact, that's why I specified "new neighbor" instead of just "neighbor."
Hello,
Please accept my apologies for the delay.
The term "new neighbor," as distinct from "neighbor," does not necessarily mean so new that one doesn't yet know that the person speaks English as a second language.
My practice is to assume, unless and until I have specific reason to believe otherwise, that anyone in the United States speaks English.
Cheers,
Jeff Deutsch
Post a Comment