Photo by Stefano Pollio on Unsplash
I am always amazed at how terms enter the popular lexicon.
Some drive me crazy as I hear some word used in the incorrect – and then popularized – context over and over again
But beyond how these terms enter day-to-day phraseology, I am amazed at their seeming influence encouraging the behaviour they comment on.
Which brings me to my ghosting frustration.
Ghosting, also known as simmering or icing, is a colloquial term which describes the practice of ending all communication and contact with another person without any apparent warning or justification and ignoring any subsequent attempts to communicate. The term originated in the early 2000s, typically referring to dating and romantic relationships. In the following decade, media reported a rise in ghosting, which has been attributed to the increasing use of social media and online dating apps. The term has also expanded to refer to similar practices among friends, family members, employers and businesses.
The most common cause of ghosting in a personal relationship is to avoid emotional discomfort in a relationship. A person ghosting typically has little acknowledgment of how it will make the other person feel. Ghosting is associated with negative mental health effects on the person on the receiving end and has been described by some mental health professionals as a passive-aggressive form of emotional abuse or cruelty.
Wikipedia
I personally reach out to hundreds of potential recruitment candidates. This is rare. Senior management usually shield themselves from the avalanche of recruitment communication.
It is a common complaint from job seekers that they don’t even get a response from the company’s they approach with career enquiries.
I ensure we respond to every applicant – even those with no capitlisation and punctuation – spray and pray applications.
And so my frustration – what is the standard behaviour from a target recruitee? Ghosting.
Some may show interest and then just stop responding.
There are no doubt contributing factors:
1. Volume of spam
2. The war for talent
3. Idealism
4. Fragility
The first factor is easy to understand. However, ghosting a close friend, a kind contact, etc based on a “learned” behaviour from inbox overload is, I am afraid, a stretch.
More specific to recruitees, ghosting interest or offers is short-sighted. The wheel turns. Many have not experienced recession like those that followed the Dot-Com bust and the Great Financial crisis. But more than this, life will challenge even high flyers at some point.
The third point is more involved. I wonder if we have not bred a false sense of idealism into people? More than ever, I encounter people demanding life on their terms. All good and well, and everybody should live deliberately where they are fortunate enough to have choices. But at the extreme end of that spectrum is narcissism. If everyone is a taker and transactional , the world stops working pretty quickly. So how is that contributing to ghosting? Perhaps where people communicate and are involved only where there is something in it for them.
It seems that fragility and mental health complete the circle. It would seem that fragility has become an excuse for self-indulgence. For sure, I encounter what so many have described as the growing mental health crisis. Part of some dysfunctions is insulation and withdrawal. I have been to the facilities where those extreme cases result in individuals whose minds close everybody and everything out and turn in on themselves. I have personal experience of being close to people in that situation. Insularity and withdrawal are a protection mechanism. They are essential to cut out destructive situations, behaviors and people. But they are not a healthy normal reaction. Don’t try and disguise ghosting as a healthy boundary.
And gaslighting? More and more, I encounter individuals with a completely different recollection of facts. This seems contradictory. And the individuals involved will argue to their death based on “their truth.”
For some reason, people became aware of the term “Gaslighting” and it suddenly became a popular commentary on one of society’s psychological ills.
From Wikipedia:
Gaslighting is a colloquialism, loosely defined as manipulating someone so as to make them question their own reality. The term derives from the title of the 1944 film Gaslight, though the term did not gain popular currency in English until the mid-2010s.
The term may also be used to describe a person (a “gaslighter”) who presents a false narrative to another group or person, thereby leading them to doubt their perceptions and become misled, disoriented or distressed. Oftentimes this is for the gaslighter’s own benefit. Normally, this dynamic is possible only when the audience is vulnerable, such as in unequal power relationships, or fearful of the losses associated with challenging the false narrative.
Wikipedia
You can tell it is popular term because that Wikipedia description contains another currently popular term, “narrative!”
As mentioned in the Wikipedia extract, despite the term deriving from a 1940s play, it has only become popularized since 2010. Bizarrely, so have my number of experiences of it.
I have a good memory, but I have found that recording notes and agreements to have become ever more essential to avoid seemingly bizarre contrary recollections down the line.
Of course there is more to gaslighting than just this. And differing recollections are not in themselves gaslighting. Differing recollections are first and foremost a result of filters, biases, emotions and politics. A solid factual base merely puts you in a position to engage on the emotional and political context. This confronts a challenge raised above head on – increasingly transactional relationships. There is little room for engaging and addressing politics and emotions in a transactional relationship.
But gaslighting is fundamentally about manipulation. Even at this amplified requirement, I see more of it. People consciously and unconsciously altering “facts” to get what they want. And seemingly believing this behaviour is justifiable. With the rise of Donald Trump and sidekick Kelly-Anne Conway, the phrase “post-truth world” also became more commonplace. Spin used terms like “false facts” and “my truth” as common day to day justifications for outlandish views. And fringe politics became all the more mainstream.
There is a backlash coming. And maybe that backlash itself will be confined to a new fringe group.
I will be happy member of that fringe group that shows such strange behaviors such as:
1. Politeness and courtesy
2. Kindness
3. Acknowledgement of a factual base
4. Authenticity
5. Sincerity
6. Morals and ethics
There was a time when the above were valued and sought out as the basis for upbringing, relationships, employment and reward. Increasingly rare, I wonder if fringes (schools, communities, companies) will rise where these are valued and guarded? As they are valued, those seeking to benefit from that value will seek membership through pretense and lip-service. Success will require protection from inevitable attempts at that corruption.
The above is a comment on common behaviour I experience in everyday encounters. But I experience this in formerly close friendships and relationships too. The terms originated describing these far more abusive situations. There is no room for people like these in my life.
In the end, all you can do is to treat others as you wish them to treat you, rapidly eject those from your life that abuse that trust and jealously guard those that reciprocate.
Others might just adopt the popular language and consciously or unconsciously also the popular behaviour.
Both gaslighting and ghosting can be far more abusive and hurtful than merely bad behaviour. Their normalisation is not a good trend for society.
