Comment by neom | Hacker News Reader

Comment by neom | Hacker News Reader

Someone I'm "friends" with, recently confessed to me that they very much enjoy watching me fail. I was genuinely surprised because I love watching people win, but I dug into it a bit and apparently it's very common, people really do love to see other people have setbacks, but the research I read seemed to indicate it was more prevalent in friendships, people seem fine with other people getting a head if they don't know them personally. Apparently it's also considerably more common than not for friends to want their friends to fail, or at least take pleasure in their failures. This was all news to me till about a week or so ago, and I'm old. That research actually lead me to this, that I learned is apparently also news to me[1] - "The researchers found that boredom's effects on sadism were mediated by people's desire for excitement and novelty-seeking - essentially, sadistic behavior served as a way to escape the aversive state of boredom." - I sense somehow these two things are somewhat linked.

Some reading:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43119265_Envy_and_S...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evaluation_maintenance_th...

https://www.scribd.com/document/796080571/Document-2

[1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44068463

It's interesting - had they acted this schadenfreude out at all? Or did this confession come completely out of the blue. From what you said, it is the latter - and if so, should this person be judged for this unappealing inner thought, if they take pains not to let that thought influence their behaviour or actions?

I have thought about this a lot over the past few weeks. And I think I should stop thinking about it because it's becoming unhealthy, because I've analyzed our whole relationship back years and gotten into too much speculation in my head.

It sounds like he has a very "zero-sum" type of mindset and views most people around him as potential competition instead of potential collaborators. Scarcity mindsets taken to extremes make people focus only on what they can lose. If I'm being charitable, maybe your friend has been struggling with things behind the scenes? But honestly it sounds more like a personality thing.

And all of that being said, none of us are perfect. I would hope your friend has at least some redeeming qualities, something you enjoy about him. Otherwise, it sounds like, at least lately, your friendship with him has been taking energy and peace from you and giving you...what? (And I say that not to mean friendships are only about "gaining" something, but they are meant to be mutually supportive with some ebbs and flows.)

We used to enjoy drinking together, but now I'm sober, we don't do that anymore. I suspect that was the thing we had in common, we loved getting smashed together... :\

Sound like you're capable of reflecting and growing, which is awesome. You don't need to be hard on yourself or your friend. You might just be becoming mindful that you need other friendships that have other qualities to them, than the friendships you've had in the past had. This is just growth. Also making new friends is super fun. It's a bit challenging to "put yourself out there" and all that, but all of the best things in life are hard. I really like cheering for my friends, and lots of other people do too. You can find these people now that you know what you're looking for.

Also I've never had much luck with work friends. Work seems to get in the way. These days board games are my best strategy for maintaining friendships. You need some sort of "third place" for maintaining good friendships: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place

Does this person make your life better in anyway? Why do you put energy into the relationship?

Sounds like they kinda suck.

Edit: I saw your other comment, I'm sorry to hear that you are doing through such a hard time. I'm coming out of a multi-year one myself, wiser and stronger than I was before. Rooting for you! :)

I’m curious about how this came out and what the fallout was. If you feel like sharing.

I'm going through a really really difficult time right now, 3 major areas of my life have broken down simultaneously over the past five months. I was ranting to this guy I've known for years about it (who is very successful but was once jr to me at work) - I would have called him a "good friend" - he was drunk and giggled out something along the lines of "makes me feel strong" - I reacted as you would expect "uh.. really?". We got into a bit, and talked it out (he basically explained it was normal, hence I then went to research if that is true or not), I can see where it sits in his personality now, and I don't think he and I will be friends anymore.

I refuse to believe this is normal and I have happily cut people out of my life for this.

The most painful moment was when I had a close friend almost enjoy the fact my wife had a miscarriage. It was completely insensitive and made me realise that I have no interest in being friends with someone who is willing to compete on something so ridiculous.

I feel like I took a wrong turn somewhere such that I'm learning all this in my midlife. I genuinely believed the only place for "ruthless competition" was in sports and business, and in theory you know what you're signing up for. The past couple of years have been very eye opening to me, to learn people take such pleasure in such miserable things. (I also didn't know about this till recently: https://www.quora.com/What-are-fair-weather-friends)

Yes. I, too, learned this the painful way. I had many friends, or so I thought. Then I got cut out of a volleyball friend group because I was too “intense” (aka talked about things that weren’t the weather) for them. Okay. That hurt a lot.

Lots of thinking later, and I can now tell the difference between acquaintances and friends. There’s a simple test: acquaintances will be there when you want them to; friends will be there when you don’t want them to, but need them to anyway. An acquaintance would never do that.

There are a lot of hurting people out there, and often times people will take their pain out on others, even if they don't mean to.

Learning to disengage or set firm boundaries in situations where that is happening is one of the most powerful and healthy things one can do.

It can both be normal (in that it’s common) and painful at the same time.

And you can and should still absolutely cut them out of your life. Let them have each other.

There’s a reason misery loves company.

It is normal in the sense of for example seeing your friend accidentally slap themselves in the face with a plank, or have forgot to flush right when they're lucky enough to take a girl home. It's called schadenfreude.

Additionally, it is normal to accept derisive talk (= banter) from good friends. If a friend doesn't get a promotion, you can be very humoristically negative about it in way that would in no way be okay with a stranger.

So yes, in those ways it is normal to enjoy watching your friends mess up, and it is normal to feel more at ease with it with friends rather than strangers.

However, it is not normal to enjoy seeing your friends fail in life, at all. That goes way beyond schadenfreude and even narcissism, straight into sociopathy.

> he basically explained it was normal

I think this is just him trying to justify it.

I don't agree with the other commenters here. I used to be the same way, I'd be happy for my friends when they got a win, but I wouldn't be happy about it, because I saw it as a zero-sum game, where someone else winning meant I was somehow losing, or wasn't good enough.

One day, a friend told me about how a founder he knew had raised a round, and I said something like "damn, it's always everyone else" and my friend went "why not just be happy for them? It's not like they're hurting you".

That's when I realized that yes, I could just be happy for them, and that they indeed didn't hurt me, and that I could just be making this an overall happier event by being happy.

Since then, I'm genuinely happy when anyone wins, to the point where I'll complain to people about something that happens to me, they'll say "well if it makes you feel better, that happened to me too", and my response is "why would it make me feel better that my friend also had this bad thing happen to them?", which gets some puzzled "you're right" responses.

I think it is widespread that people feel like this, hence the "if it makes you feel better" response. I think if your friend understands that this isn't a great way to feel, it'll all be OK.

> "why would it make me feel better that my friend also had this bad thing happen to them?"

Sometimes people feel alone in their failures. Knowing that something similar has happened to others can help the person feel less alone.

I like to bring up a similar anecdote to the faux pas that just happened. For example, a friend taking a wrong turn, adding time to the ride and making the party somewhat late. It halted the conversation in the car, and to ease the tension I pointed out how I "do that at least once per every drive to X" to try to make the driver less self-conscious and so the other passengers aren't sitting in awkward silence.

I appreciate the response. Some good conversation resulted. I hope times are better for you now.

It is normal if you are a petty person. There is a saying in Spanish that goes along "a thief always thinks everyone is a thief" that clearly depicts this kind of people.

Cognition is a mirror

In US policts we say "every accusation is a confession".

I wonder how this applies to the army. In the army, the people around you in the same situation as you become your mates, and seeing them suffer or die has a big effect on soldiers.

I'd say spending time together forms / ends up in bonding, and those friends aren't friends (although the English-American definition is more like 'peers' anyway); they're former friends. People you used to spend time with. If it comes to school and work, there's competition. Lots of it. In the army, not so much.

In the army, competitions are not as much of an issue because the goal is not to make more money or mere promotion, but to serve the country. "Dying in the act of war" is not frowned upon but celebrated as a badge.

Opposite to contrary belief, higher rank individuals (except the topmost levels) are at the front line leading the pack. Army personnel have families, but they kill others who also have families — this is not normal for most people. They get desensitised after practice and war in difficult terrains.

I was told by an army lad, his father had instructions to always move forward. If you turn, your own men can shoot you, mistaking you for an enemy.

I think this is basic competition.

For example, in board games, there are several types:

- Competitive games: every person for themselves; there’s one winner, everyone else loses

- Co-op games: every human vs. “the game”, often in the form of AI opponents, or environmental conditions; everyone wins or everyone loses

- Team games: X vs. Y players (and sometimes more than two teams); one team wins, everyone else loses

I feel like work is meant to be a co-op game, but just like co-op games, even though you’re supposed to be on the same team, you often still want to feel like “the best”. Not to the point of bringing the whole team down, but to the point you can secretly feel like you carried the team.

In some hostile work environments, it can actually turn into a team game (inter-departmental competition), or even a competitive game (intra-departmental competition). I’ve been in all of these types of companies, and the co-op ones are obviously the best, especially the ones that care more about the elevation of the team over individual success.

In the military, it’s very much a team game. You are clearly on the same team, and if you don’t cooperate with your team, you will (likely) lose. Obviously, with military — particularly in war — there can be actual life and death at stake, which elevates this to an extreme level.

> - Competitive games: every person for themselves; there’s one winner, everyone else loses

If you see people finding value only in winning, you might want to switch to different gaming friends. Around here, managing the critical mass to play the game is a first collective victory. And there is plenty of congratulations and collective joy to witnessing a game strategy well played. That same strategy that others may think "crushed you". Being able to play with smart players is 100% a blessing.

I’m talking strictly the rules of gameplay, and applying that metaphorically to competition within the workplace and war.

Taken literally, of course the experience of playing a board game should be fun for everyone, regardless of the outcome.

But if you want to stick to the metaphor, I would agree that if you’re playing board games with sore losers/winners should result in finding new people to play with.

And similarly, if you have coworkers that are only looking out for themselves and their own success, without regard to the success of the team, find a new place to work.

But that’s the point I was trying to make.

I wouldn’t say that there is no competition in the army, in fact some selection processes (special forces, who gets up the ladder and earns a seat on the general staff or a star) are probably more competitive than in civilian life. It’s probably more about the general mindset: those extreme situation (and I am not necessarily talking about the competitive ones) create that positive feedback loop though shared hardships and closeness, and probably outweigh that competitiveness.

I never experienced competition like this in the Army, however I have outside of it.

The Army was competitive in a fun way. Where it’s fun to beat your friends in PT or to laugh as they trip over. But when it came down to it, we were on the same team and you would help out a friend.

Inversely, not being a team player would get you bullied.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com