“I'm surrounded by people - but I feel so lonely”
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
10-15 years ago, the internet was full of small independent communities: message boards, IRC channels, chat rooms of all kinds, etc. You could really "hang out" with the same people and get to know them.
But something killed pretty much all of them. Instead we have centralized "social media" that is at best all about narcissism and self-promotion. Sites like Reddit where there is too many people and everyone converges to a single "hive-mind", you cannot have someone reply to an interesting post you made years ago, and that really take the humanity out of the whole thing (like Facebook or Tinder or what not). Even HN is problematic in this regard - it is good for the purpose it exists for, but you cannot have any sort of casual threads or discussions just to get any sort of rapport within the community.
Even messengers have somehow become worse in this regard. Yahoo/MSN messengers, ICQ etc. were somehow all about having connections with online friends. Maybe it is just me, but there just doesn't seem to be an option that works for this as well nowadays. Or at least people do not seem to use the existing options in the same way.
> But something killed pretty much all of them.
Not in the least.
Interest-driven, channel-centric communities are alive and kicking, from IRC through Discord, Steam and other gaming communities, to Youtube/BitChute comment sections (nasty as they may be) and new meta-/platforms like Mastodon or Minds.com.
What has changed is the expanded version of Eternal September - influx of newcommers who join the ?book / ?gram / ?itter du jour, enjoy the interface candy and the occasional outrage, and are very slow to - or even fail to - explore the wider net of chats and other communities. It certainly doesn't help that media tend to paint all non-mainstream platforms as dark, scarry underbelly of the internet with nothing of value to offer, best to be avoided. [1]
The slow filtering in of new users into smaller communities is not even necessarily a bad thing, as quick influx of newcommers to interest communities can easily disrupt them to the point of derailing. The IRC and the likes being a cozy hangout where friendships are forged and projects are kicked off isn't based on a particular technical quirk of the IRC protocol or clients. It's all thanks to the established, cozy & social culture[2] being able to take in a certain amount of newcomers, guide them in and let them grow into part of the community. Moving too fast tends to break things.
[1] the smartphone is also partly to blame, as it's much less comfortable for extended back-and-forth conversations than a computer; IMO it's more of a prepackaged content consumption terminal. But that's a personal, debatable opinion.
[2] certain glaring exceptions notwithstanding
So either Google is deliberately excluding them, or they actually ceased to exist for the most part, or it has been a self-perpetuating cycle and one cannot pinpoint what came first - exodus to 'social media' or disappearance from Google search results.
But that's how it goes. Every time I (/ one) leaves their school or job or the place they live, most of the people you see daily will be out of your life completely. I'm not the type to really reach out like "hey you wanna hang out", but then apparently nobody else is either so idk if it's just me.
The people you work with generally are not friends -- while I've met interesting and nice people over the years in a professional context, it's not common for me to find those relationships meaningful.
Its also a good jumping off point for other activities
Or it might lead to an even quieter, more introverted life. This can go both ways.
Definitely trying to make friends outside of work is good. I can count on the fingers of ... well two fingers the number of actual stay-in-touch-outside-of-work friends I've made in the workplace in the last 18 years.
Me neither, but after my 30s I learned the value of actively cultivating some relationships with I people like, but that are no longer part of my daily life.
WhatsApp helped tremmendly with that, btw. But I say really inviting people to physical world activities like dinners or movies (my kind of thing) and I try to never miss when someone of these people invite me to a barbecue in their houses (my place is too small to invite more than 4 people).
I also have a group of friends who decided recently to meet monthly for a breakfast. Fortunately, there is one person that leads the gathering, but I always make sure to be present and help/support him when he is making this effort.
I also know exactly who are the people that I want to actively cultivate and those who I'm fine meeting whenever life decides.
These important people are not just the closest one. Of course there is a very close group of people. But the trick is that among the people that are not that close, the "second social circle" so to speak, I actively try to keep closer to those that are very good people, with good hearts and with whom I have a healthy relationship (i.e. the ones you feel happy after meeting, not guilty, or exhausted, or drained, or whatever level of toxicity there is). Edit: this is important because this is not correlated (maybe it is even negatively correlated) to the people that are most fun to hang out, the extrovert, funny, adventurous, cool ones. A good heart and genuine care about people beats all that. Even when it comes combined with "boring"
Learn to reach out to hang out to good people. It will improve a lot you life quality.
Find something in common - for me is usually superhero movies. It is something that both of us will want to do, it is nice to do together and help a lot for introverts as there is not that pressure to keep talking interesting/funny things like dinners. Two hours without any conversation and still brings people closer, after the movie for a burger, there is a natural subject to fill the conversation (the movie).
The hangouts I talk here are basically with one to five, six people.
Invite all the people you'd really like to see and stay in touch with. And an important point, don't worry about it. Many times people won't be able to come, or won't care, or will drop out for awhile and return, or who knows.
That's not important, and it's really important to dispense with the anxiety that comes from being a host, worrying about if people will like it, if they'll like you, if they're happy, if enough people are coming, all that. Don't worry about that part, the point is just to have some kind of reference point and the ability to reach out to people and say hey let's stay in contact in the real world.
A lot of people let this slip, and end up ten years later surrounded exclusively by people they connect to through work or parenting, plus occasional family. That's a mistake in my opinion.
I'm lucky to have developed strong friendships from work colleagues over the years but I feel like I neglected some of my transient friendships.
That said it's never too late, it's easy to convince yourself "oh this person will never want to hear from me after all this time" but you'd be surprised. The older you get the less I find the time between meeting matters, it's the fact you're reaching out.
> Jack still misses his late wife desperately. [...] "The weekend is a dismal time," says Jack. "The time can drag. I don't have any friends because all my friends are dead. All the ladies I loved are dead. At this age nearly everybody is dead - except me. I'm still here at 96-and-a-half."
Imagine having been with your spouse for 60 years, your friends 40-80 years (?), your children I guess at least 40 years, having a new friend has nothing to do with this, you will never know them this good and neither will they.
So it's definitely possible!
For me (anecdote), it's only gotten harder as I've become an adult... then married... then harder as a parent... etc.
I see that in my family, aunt, etc they complain they're lonely but I think it's even worse for them to suffer bad or too short relationships. Heart ache.
...is it? I don't know, maybe I'm too used to being alone, maybe I just have too much imagination, but that doesn't seem all that terrifying at all.
And intimacy is superficial when the other is just an account on some social website. It's very easy to ignore the plight of the other, or tune out to more entertaining things.
This is far too sweeping a generalization. Some of the most intimate and trusting relationships I've ever formed where with people I met on Usenet.
"Intimacy: close familiarity or friendship. "the intimacy between a husband and wife" synonyms: closeness, togetherness, affinity, rapport, attachment, familiarity, confidentiality, close association, close relationship, close attachment, close friendship, friendliness, comradeship, companionship, amity, affection, mutual affection, warmth, warm feelings, understanding, fellow feeling;"
Some random coworker or some person you might meet at the coffee place once in a blue moon is not an "intimate" relationship either.
But online-only relationships are hardly ever intimate.
Sure, it can be. Or it might be the opposite. I met my spouse playing some random online game. I moved across an ocean a few years after we met, and I'm still happy 5 years later. I have had friendships that are just as meaningful as the in-person friendships I've had.
The only time it isn't possible to tune out the plight of others is when the others live with you. Even then, there are ways.
As with everything that's not a law of physics or logic.
But it's more often that way than the opposite, and the nature of the "online friend" relationship (remote, mediated by UIs, not committal, etc) makes it so.
Proposed understanding: People likely need to have enough of each of several different kinds of interaction (analogy: nutrients), and different people need different amounts of them. Kinds of interaction that at least some people need probably include: intellectual, sharing of problems, "merely seeing another human's face", romantic, sexual, sharing of hobbies/interests...
I've wondered about this a lot. I don't think our generation (I'm assuming most of us are millenials) operates in this regard in the way even our parents did and other than the prevalence of social media and possibly because of more diverse demographics, I can't really understand why that is.
Why do we suddenly get very inward-looking in our 30s when it comes to forming new friendships, especially among the more affluent?
So when you are in your 30s, you have limited time and limited opportunities to make friends. If you don't spend a lot of time hanging out with someone it is tough to make really good connections. Other factors come into play as well - comparing yourself to others, more niche interests, lack of desire to invest time, having a partner, etc.
This is typically the time when you or those in your age cohort are focusing on their families. Time is at a premium.
What I find hard to tolerate are long-term toxic relationships that will require enormous effort and a long time to correct. I have enough of my own to deal with, I don't want to be drawn into yours, especially if you're unwilling to listen or take positive action to change.
So for me, at least, getting older means I'm more likely to avoid getting to know you if friendship with you comes with hearing about a lot of pre-existing drama that you are willing to tolerate, or perhaps even instigate. If you want help, I'll help, but I'm not out to save the world, and I don't need any mayhem in my life.
We've made more friends in a couple years in the suburbs than the 8 we lived in SF. We know everyone on our block. We all go out after work so people's kids can play with eachother in our street - even people without kids come out to chat about things. People invite others over to BBQ. And so on.
I am totally guilty of this. I really just can't sit in a silent environment without going crazy. At least need music. My GF and I broke up after a 2yr long relationship, having shared an apartment. She left and moved to a different city, coming home to an empty place after a long day at work was a bit too much sometimes, especially during the weekends. So when the contract ended I actually moved into a house share, where I like the company, there is usually someone always around.
I am 35 and have never ever lived in a place by myself, apart from when I was in a relationship or something.
We've gone through life together. Being primarily online means I can "uproot" and move anywhere. Sure, I miss going and having a beer or a hackathon, but flights are fairly cheap so we can do it once a while and those interactions are actually better for that.
I am super lucky to have what amounts to a social group that's been around 15+ years. I wonder if this level of interaction is enough for everyone or if I'll have some weird breakdown in 5 years.
said hello to me today
she mustn't have been
four years old
not yet old enough
to be scared
of an old hobo
sitting on a bench
levity for my worn soul
a barrel fire
in blast winter cold
so rare to feel something real
i smiled a lot as a child
i remember ms gibson
her jocular bellow
‘ain't startin' this class
‘til that boy stops smiling’
the same ms gibson
who said
seriously this time
‘y’all poor, all of youse’
‘y’all ain’t amount to nothin’
i guess she knew
a teacher's clairvoyance
look at me now:
a hobo sitting on a bench
how did i get here?
how can i be so alone?
that a small child's hello
could move me so?
This absence and loneliness is hard to imagine given the public persona. Seemingly they have it all. But, after the studio lights go down they get bundled off into a taxi, to get driven home. Meanwhile the rest of the production crew pack up and go to the pub because 'it is a wrap'.
The production crew will also be professional in that they will respect the 'talent' (people in front of camera are 'talent') and not make clumsy, unprofessional advances. This is not always the case, in Hollywood women are still expected to sleep with the producer or director to keep getting the roles, however, this is the exception, your average lighting engineer or sound guy will have nothing but professional respect.
These lonely stars of TV also don't really relate to their fans, it is a different world they work in and know. It is also a one-way relationship, a fan may know everything about the lonely 'star' but the 'star' will know nothing of the fan's life. So sometimes you do get major 'A list' celebrities types hitching their wagon to some member of the crew who can relate to them.
Because of how TV gigs are freelance there is also no feeling for the 'talent' that they are part of a company thing. They are just hired for the day, with no continuity. They also might have to spend half their time on location or living in hotels, in this way they end up with no community and don't know their neighbours.
Then youth gets extinguished and the wrinkles set in... So then the gigs are few and far between. Life becomes a struggle.
Think of how many celebrity types from TV and music die horrifically alone. Or with a substance abuse problem for company. It happens all the time. Despite the millions of fans they can end up knowing nobody with nobody to trust.
Margaret Thatcher died as a very lonely woman, yet once their was a time when the world would hang on her every word, albeit to probably hate her. Her family didn't care, however, due to being a former Prime Minister she did have police protection until the bitter end. Yet nobody could even be bothered to throw insults at her, and, as every narcissist knows, hate is at least 'attention'. She wasn't even getting that during her final days, a cruel and unusual punishment. Tony Blair is probably in the same predicament, I found his autobiography at the local tip the other day and I am sure that is indicative of how people feel about the 'once great man'.
At the other end of the scale are people that work and live in a small community, e.g. village sized, know everyone, have lovely family, a life long partner and not a lot of material riches. These are some of the happiest and least lonely people in the world. They might not have got very far, e.g. to spend their working life as a local builder, they might not know anyone famous and yet they have all the ingredients for the rewarding life that eludes those faces on TV that seem to have it all.
In an age when everyone seeks superstardom - 'get rich or die trying' - the local folk that 'did not get very far' are having the last laugh.
> There is a common stereotype that loneliness mainly strikes older, isolated people - and of course it can, and does. But the BBC survey found even higher levels of loneliness among younger people, and this pattern was the same in every country.
> It's tempting to conclude that something about modern life is putting young people at a higher risk of loneliness, but when we asked older people in our survey about the loneliest times in their lives, they also said it was when they were young.
> There are several reasons why younger people might feel lonelier. The years between 16 and 24 are often a time of transition where people move home, build their identities and try to find new friends.
> Meanwhile, they've not had the chance to experience loneliness as something temporary, useful even, prompting us to find new friends or rekindle old friendships - 41% of people believe that loneliness can sometimes be a positive experience.
(This is not an argument against having friends, mind you!)
Of course, it could be argued that social networks are a way to re-engineer "friendships" so that they provoke the spending part (looking good on the feed, winning in stupid games, etc) without giving the satisfaction that one might get from just spending time with them.
I'm actually seing similar strategies employed all over the place. Ever brand wants to build a "community" around them. But they are not doing anything to foster the connection between members. Because if the members formed connections they could act in solidarity with eachother and actually gain some amount of power through collective action.
No, the only part of "community" they foster is the loyalty aspect. Loyalty to the brand. Because that is the part that is profitable.
but i have a very different way of looking at the world than most