A moral and social comment on status manipulation as a power tactic.
I've always found such manipulation to be morally reprehensible when performed in ordinary situations. But, I've found that in some regional American cultures, it's considered acceptable or even laudable, whereas in others it's vicious. It has left me always wondering whether, when I find it reprehensible, I am being fair or a touch too ethnocentric.
Thing is, this is something all humans do all the time. We're herd animals, and extremely social--we all make these microadjustments to status constantly. Paying attention to the normally-unconscious functioning of status shifts can be a shock (many of my students come back after the first status work day kinda freaking out), but it's important, I think, to have an idea what's going on and how, instead of it staying unconscious, back in your lizard brain.
Once you see this going on, it's a lot easier to question misinformation, resist manipulation, etc. But it's so intrinsic to human behavior, I can't really call it anything moral. Using these tactics for bad purposes, of course, can be reprehensible. They're not reprehensible by themselves, though. Does that make sense?
I'm not challenging the fact of social positioning or doing so for status. If anything, I am extremely aware of it as a multicultural person who grew up having to be conscious of such things in order to "jump the fence" of cultures at a moment's notice, aside from my doctoral expertise. I suspect the former is part of how I ended up in the latter.
Rather, I'm talking about the intentional manipulation of sociodynamics to control other's behavior as a means of disempowering them. It's uncommon, but some people do it semi- or fully consciously as a means of power and not innocent behavior. Professionally, I see it a lot as a debate tactic. As a social ethicist, I'm also very aware of it as extremely common as a subconscious tactic in domestic abuse. Or as an implicit form of social marginalization. So, I may not apply such concepts in drama ... but.
So, my hesitation is always about to what extent is a person performing a socioculturally appropriate social form, or they are performing a semi- or fully conscious power play. I'm asking a much, much deeper question.
p.s. I'm drafting a curricular plan for pre-law in which we strongly recommend courses in drama to develop a courtroom persona and presence for those interested in jury trials.
Yes, that kind of thing is a lot of what I study, though I'm a specialist more in identity formation, first personal experience, etc. Did you know that there is an NPR site dedicated to this, called CodeSwitch.
A friend of mine and scholar of sexuality and gender tells me that the public acceptability of gayness has lead to internal critiques and the notion of "homonormativity" as a parallel of critiques of "heteronormativity."
So, and this combines with my commentary on Josh's Recovering Academic Friday thread, the identity politics and identity "curation" of the last several decades has further lead to a kind of "identity jockeying." While identity has always been about some kind of jockeying for power throughout recorded history, it's achieving a crescendo given recent theory.
Personally, I've had to learn to dress down and talk more simply, because my middle class students find the upper class manners I learned in Europe and graduate school to be alienating and they think I'm wealthy and high class. But I'm originally from a lower class than just about any of them, and had to learn to passably fake those mannerisms (or actually had them qua European) in order to fit into academia. I actually had a job interviewer ask me, "can you talk to normal people," after only hearing me introduce myself.
Anyway, if you're into the pairing of those two, there's more on it than I can readily bring to mind, but that website is a good start. It's on the periphery of my own work. I recall that the early episodes were more on this point than later ones.
I am no sociologist, and so I would ask: what role do power plays have in performing a socioculturally appropriate social form? Are there power plays that are necessary to perform that appropriate role, that are not morally reprehensible but rather a tool for fitting in to that role? Or is every power play always a bad manipulation?
I appreciate your bringing up these tactics as wielded by abusers. So true--gaslighters are very good at this, and cause such damage, just as one example. And those whose intentions are on disempowering... yup. Well said.
I’m so glad you’re including theatrical training in your pre-law material! So many people think of acting training as just “learning to pretend” whereas the craft is so much deeper, and also quite useful to other fields. Many of my fellow theatre majors did indeed go on to law as a career, it’s a good skill to bring into that field, for sure.
Ah, but that's entirely the issue. There's no general rule to be had. Or bright line to be drawn. It's obvious when it's extreme enough, but otherwise...
My distaste with the power plays is the fact that most people I've encountered never recognize their abusive tactics as abusive. It's the "recognize as" that is key, as the ability to do that is itself culturally inflected. What passes as socially acceptable casual behavior in New York is flagrant bullying in Iowa. That last example is personal, as I've found Iowan culture to be the least accepting of non-local social forms I've ever seen, in part because the culture is extremely homogenous and thus doesn't give its members the resources to recognize foreign ways as foreign.
This last point is an example of another kind of "status shifting"; status as invisible. It's more popularly known when phrased as "passing as white" or "passing as straight" or passing as.... Although, I'm giving an example of not being seen despite not attempting to blend in, to pass, which is quite a different phenomenon.
Actually, I just had a conversation with a gay student who's really worked up about passing as straight because he doesn't want to stand out. At his age, I had the opposite problem, passing a gay while being straight!
I have quite the teaching persona myself, which is all the more notable for being a very strong introvert. Just yesterday, I tried to liven up the class by explaining ideal masculinity in Aristotelian virtue ethics by spontaneously channeling Hulk Hogan. (A WWF wrestler whose name dates me ... I've actually met him.) It's a tactic I've learned over years because quiet nerd just doesn't hold their attention long enough. I think a lot more people who talk to audiences for a living should have at least some exposure if not coursework. In my case, hanging out with the theater kids in high school and graduate school while playing D&D with the same group seems to have rubbed off...
A moral and social comment on status manipulation as a power tactic.
I've always found such manipulation to be morally reprehensible when performed in ordinary situations. But, I've found that in some regional American cultures, it's considered acceptable or even laudable, whereas in others it's vicious. It has left me always wondering whether, when I find it reprehensible, I am being fair or a touch too ethnocentric.
Thoughts?
Thing is, this is something all humans do all the time. We're herd animals, and extremely social--we all make these microadjustments to status constantly. Paying attention to the normally-unconscious functioning of status shifts can be a shock (many of my students come back after the first status work day kinda freaking out), but it's important, I think, to have an idea what's going on and how, instead of it staying unconscious, back in your lizard brain.
Once you see this going on, it's a lot easier to question misinformation, resist manipulation, etc. But it's so intrinsic to human behavior, I can't really call it anything moral. Using these tactics for bad purposes, of course, can be reprehensible. They're not reprehensible by themselves, though. Does that make sense?
You've misinterpreted my intent.
I'm not challenging the fact of social positioning or doing so for status. If anything, I am extremely aware of it as a multicultural person who grew up having to be conscious of such things in order to "jump the fence" of cultures at a moment's notice, aside from my doctoral expertise. I suspect the former is part of how I ended up in the latter.
Rather, I'm talking about the intentional manipulation of sociodynamics to control other's behavior as a means of disempowering them. It's uncommon, but some people do it semi- or fully consciously as a means of power and not innocent behavior. Professionally, I see it a lot as a debate tactic. As a social ethicist, I'm also very aware of it as extremely common as a subconscious tactic in domestic abuse. Or as an implicit form of social marginalization. So, I may not apply such concepts in drama ... but.
So, my hesitation is always about to what extent is a person performing a socioculturally appropriate social form, or they are performing a semi- or fully conscious power play. I'm asking a much, much deeper question.
p.s. I'm drafting a curricular plan for pre-law in which we strongly recommend courses in drama to develop a courtroom persona and presence for those interested in jury trials.
Whether or not a person is conscious of it, doesn’t mean it’s not (a power play).
This makes me very interested in the correlation between code switching and status shifting. That sounds like a fascinating study.
Yes, that kind of thing is a lot of what I study, though I'm a specialist more in identity formation, first personal experience, etc. Did you know that there is an NPR site dedicated to this, called CodeSwitch.
A friend of mine and scholar of sexuality and gender tells me that the public acceptability of gayness has lead to internal critiques and the notion of "homonormativity" as a parallel of critiques of "heteronormativity."
So, and this combines with my commentary on Josh's Recovering Academic Friday thread, the identity politics and identity "curation" of the last several decades has further lead to a kind of "identity jockeying." While identity has always been about some kind of jockeying for power throughout recorded history, it's achieving a crescendo given recent theory.
Personally, I've had to learn to dress down and talk more simply, because my middle class students find the upper class manners I learned in Europe and graduate school to be alienating and they think I'm wealthy and high class. But I'm originally from a lower class than just about any of them, and had to learn to passably fake those mannerisms (or actually had them qua European) in order to fit into academia. I actually had a job interviewer ask me, "can you talk to normal people," after only hearing me introduce myself.
Anyway, if you're into the pairing of those two, there's more on it than I can readily bring to mind, but that website is a good start. It's on the periphery of my own work. I recall that the early episodes were more on this point than later ones.
Yes! I have heard of CodeSwitch, though I haven’t really gone far into it. Interesting stuff.
Ah! I see--thank you for clarifying that. Hm.
I am no sociologist, and so I would ask: what role do power plays have in performing a socioculturally appropriate social form? Are there power plays that are necessary to perform that appropriate role, that are not morally reprehensible but rather a tool for fitting in to that role? Or is every power play always a bad manipulation?
I appreciate your bringing up these tactics as wielded by abusers. So true--gaslighters are very good at this, and cause such damage, just as one example. And those whose intentions are on disempowering... yup. Well said.
I’m so glad you’re including theatrical training in your pre-law material! So many people think of acting training as just “learning to pretend” whereas the craft is so much deeper, and also quite useful to other fields. Many of my fellow theatre majors did indeed go on to law as a career, it’s a good skill to bring into that field, for sure.
Ah, but that's entirely the issue. There's no general rule to be had. Or bright line to be drawn. It's obvious when it's extreme enough, but otherwise...
My distaste with the power plays is the fact that most people I've encountered never recognize their abusive tactics as abusive. It's the "recognize as" that is key, as the ability to do that is itself culturally inflected. What passes as socially acceptable casual behavior in New York is flagrant bullying in Iowa. That last example is personal, as I've found Iowan culture to be the least accepting of non-local social forms I've ever seen, in part because the culture is extremely homogenous and thus doesn't give its members the resources to recognize foreign ways as foreign.
This last point is an example of another kind of "status shifting"; status as invisible. It's more popularly known when phrased as "passing as white" or "passing as straight" or passing as.... Although, I'm giving an example of not being seen despite not attempting to blend in, to pass, which is quite a different phenomenon.
Actually, I just had a conversation with a gay student who's really worked up about passing as straight because he doesn't want to stand out. At his age, I had the opposite problem, passing a gay while being straight!
I have quite the teaching persona myself, which is all the more notable for being a very strong introvert. Just yesterday, I tried to liven up the class by explaining ideal masculinity in Aristotelian virtue ethics by spontaneously channeling Hulk Hogan. (A WWF wrestler whose name dates me ... I've actually met him.) It's a tactic I've learned over years because quiet nerd just doesn't hold their attention long enough. I think a lot more people who talk to audiences for a living should have at least some exposure if not coursework. In my case, hanging out with the theater kids in high school and graduate school while playing D&D with the same group seems to have rubbed off...