Hacker News Reader

Comment by mdhb | Hacker News Reader

Might be a bit of a boomer opinion but the thing that kept coming up for me as I was reading that was “damn, that’s a lot of social insecurity built in by default to almost every interaction and conversation”.

Not all of it obviously and I don’t even think that’s strictly a Gen Z thing specifically (much of it could have been written about my mother for example) but JFC it sounds emotionally draining way to live your life.

View on HN

I find this often meeting 'zoomers' in person. In contrast to the glued to the phone cliche, they're often enormously attentive, in an almost pained way. Incredibly careful in how they speak and - in accordance with the 'triggered' cliche - very easily upset or offended. Not only by transgression of their numerous linguistic prohibitions, but even misunderstandings about potential transgressions. The simplest way to explain it is they seem to assume bad faith, that things were ill intended, and that the worst interpretation something someone says is accurate. They seem to have grown up at a time of rapidly changing speech and behavioural codes, immersed in a culture that has harsh instantaneous judgement for their transgression. It seems like an extremely fraught and anxiety inducing way of being.

> the worst interpretation something someone says is accurate

Well, to give just a few examples:

* The worst interpretation of a sentence said by politicians is usually accurate

* In contractual law, the worst interpretation of a clause is the one you need to prepare for

* In advertising, the absolute worst interpretation of a phrase is usually accurate

* If you get a letter of recommendation, the worst interpretation is the intended one

So you adapt to this world.

All of those things have been true at least since the dawn of mass media in the early 20th century. I'm speaking about intergenerational change, and interpersonal interactions. Perhaps the difference is that we all now exist as though on the public stage. Either way, perceiving everyday interactions in that way is dispiriting and closes you off from people with different experiences and perspectives. It can make your everyday life - rather than just your online existence - a rigid, carefully managed echo-chamber.

> Perhaps the difference is that we all now exist as though on the public stage

Ah yeah, true! So basically now we're kind of forced into reading everything, even when it's private, as some kind of press release.

Also code. The worst possible thing that can happen in code will be the thing that inevitably happens and with much more frequency than anticipated.

I'd like to propose look at it an alternative way; language has changed to be much more focused on intent, interpretation, and cognizant of your conversational partners.

I work with a fairly large and diverse IT team with age ranges from 22 to 60+; a lot of this involves disagreements as is natural with any conversations with a large group of people.

Discussions with the younger demographic are far more productive and faster as they're quite specific in their statements and when there is a disagreement, they put it out there fairly openly, explaining intent and feelings, and when I reciprocate, we get to a faster understanding of one another and any potential misunderstandings we might have had, view points we hadn't considered, or parts that aren't clear for us. The initial conversations take a bit longer, but ultimately end up with all parties understanding the situation well. It's quite healthy I think.

With the older age group, I definitely know _when_ they're angry or upset about something or when they disagree with me, but I rarely know _why_. Trying to slow down the conversation and have the same "help me understand what you're thinking/feeling so we can better communicate" often is not received well, and while the conversations are more direct initially, they last far longer and result in more tirades, walls of text, and dozens of arguments with loose or no connection to the topic at hand.

I don't see the younger persons as being sensitive, I see them as being specific; I think they're better trained socially to express themselves and reflect on their reactions and their state, and embracing this by participating in the same way is very freeing. I can have what might be considered difficult discussions (corrections, disciplinary actions, etc) and understand that while likely the conversation partner is not happy, they feel understood, I've presented my point of view, and when presented with new information, all sides have been very receptive.

With my older colleagues, the same sensitivity and emotions are there, but I'm far less aware of it even if I specifically take actions to show I want to understand more.

There is definitely a culture clash, and I think that the reactions of "snow flakes" and "triggered" are not accurate, and it's more about two persons separated by a common language failing to communicate. Given how well conversations with my younger colleagues go, I'm more inclined to prefer this model.

Interesting, this deeply conflicts with my own experience in work / voluntary organisations. I wonder if the frustrations you're experiencing with older colleagues could also be accounted for by their having to navigate an environment of high and expanding sensitivity?

"I think they're better trained socially to express themselves and reflect on their reactions and their state" My alternate construal is that they're convinced their interpretation is accurate / important. i.e.: That their feelings in any given situation have as much or more weight as what is objectively true.

> social insecurity

Actually, that might be a major alert. Yes, young people feel very insecure nowadays, and I bet much more than dork-me when I was 17. Spending time online doesn’t help feeling socially apt, and it builds up as an entire part of that generation identifying as socially afraid.

Well, it's the world silicon valley built for everyone. And gen z, rightly or wrongly got to grow up with it.

A world of social interactions as defined by people with some of the worst social skills of my generation. Looking at you Zuckerberg.

But yeah, I can see how that’s clearly a recipe for disaster.

When a lot of your life happens online, and communication channels dedicate a lot more bandwidth to convey feelings, it's no surprise you can also hurt people when you send certain cues. And it's okay to feel insecure if someone makes you feel that way.

But don't worry, people are generally able to adapt to the other person, knowing that a boomer (or non-lit gen-z) might be oblivious to some rules, and is not out to scare you with a plain smiley ;)

Yeah this actually sounds pretty reasonable to me. In the absence of all these non-verbal cues that exist IRL it creates a huge vacuum for insecurities to potentially fill.

If most of your interactions are online then yeah, I guess you’re going to have to be a lot more explicit about showing positive reinforcement all the time.

> damn, that’s a lot of social insecurity built in by default to almost every interaction and conversation

Hah, I think that's just part of being a young adult, isn't it?

Imagine trying to date a gen z with this much anxiety. And when you suggest preferring to meet in person instead of partaking in this absurd communication style, they get even more anxious and suspicious.

If you don't want to text, send wrong cues when you do, and want to move quickly to meet in person, hell yeah this will look suspicious. Millenial here.

Phone addicted millennial, I guess? If we're making assumptions about each other...

That's fine, I didn't want to date those people. You know why? People are really good at portraying themselves as a totally different character over text. It's fake. It's all fake. It's harder to be fake in person.

I'm engaged now to someone who isn't triggered by an omitted period, isn't addicted to his phone, isn't obsessed with social media. Totally on my level. It's awesome. (Not a gen Z, obviously). Post-covid dating was a total shitshow.

Even though I used a generic you, I didn't make assumptions about your person, only gave feedback on that communication style, which would raise a red flag even in my non-z generation. The rest of your post... I honestly don't know what's happening there.

reading this comment, it does come across as inattentive, unable to pick up on social cues and subtleties (or take them seriously, when they're laid out like that), and inconsiderate, all of which is very boomer

just think back to your own ways of communication within your circles of people, that would be 'subtle' like that, and just, realize that 'this is just other people coming up with their own things'. like, even bro culture is chock full of social cues, subtleties, unspoken things, 'if they do this, you do that', and so on. it's truly not new in any sense, especially not in regards to what you call "insecurity". and 'sensitivity' is not a bad thing by any means. especially around and with your closest people.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com