Awkwardness arises out of lack of skill resulting in an appearance of clumsiness or a tendency to do the wrong thing. It is mended through practice or instruction. On the other hand, a shy person or one who dislikes a particular milieu may have an inner feeling of awkwardness even if everybody thinks they are socially very polished.
The feeling of awkwardness is very useful. It shows you there is some danger or likelihood of failure in the activity you are engaged in. If you get drunk, your feeling of awkwardness may disappear but you may end up doing something very foolish. Thus 'awkwardness' is like Spiderman's sixth sense for lurking danger.
Awkwardness can also be a social signal. If you show you are unused to a particular activity, some kind soul may come to your aid. A skilled politician or lawyer may deliberately act or speak in an awkward manner to garner sympathy for his cause or to suggest that he or she is an ordinary, decent, sort of person.
Writing for Aeon, Alexandra Plakiasi, takes a different view. She confuses awkwardness with an exogenous constraint on doing or saying the right thing- more particularly, she speaks of problems affecting a whole Society for which it hasn't yet developed 'Social Scripts'- i.e. an adequate vocabulary or common method of description and analysis- rather than lack of skill or an endogenous feeling of shyness or dislike of a particular milieu. It is certainly true that a given Society may lack knowledge of some novel event or have a blind spot with reference to a particular type of activity. There may be some topics which are 'taboo'. An example of this in my own community was the reluctance of parents or elderly relatives to use the word 'pregnant' in connection with a newly married couple. The custom at that time was for a bride to take a special kind of bath on discovering she was with child. Thus, parents ringing their sons in America or Europe would coyly ask 'has she bathed yet?'. The son would wax indignant. His bride might be a bit of a slob- she ate pizza and watched Football at all hours- but she did shower regularly. It was unfair of Mummy or some inquisitive Aunty to ask if the lady in question brushed her teeth or went potty or had a bath now and then. Since then, 'Social Scripts' have changed. Everyone acknowledges that young people use contraceptives. Pregnancies are planned for. There is no fear that 'the Evil Eye' will be attracted by referring to expectations regarding the happy event. I suppose, there still may be an element of 'awkwardness' in discussing such matters in more orthodox households but it isn't really the case that some big Revolution in Social Mores- e.g. the overthrow of Patriarchy and Neo-Liberalism- is required so as to alleviate the pitiable condition of a bride regarding whose bathing schedule anxious inquiries are being made.
What is awkwardness? This turns out to be a tricky question.
No. It is easy to answer along the lines I have indicated.
Most of us know it when we see it (or experience it), but definitions are hard to come by.
Look up a dictionary. That's not hard to do.
Partly that’s because empirical work on awkwardness tends to treat it as a type or symptom of embarrassment.
It is no such thing. A very polished person may still feel embarrassed because their spouse got drunk at the office party and tried to have sex with the sofa even if that spouse has become the Vice President of the USA.
But this is a mistake. Embarrassment happens when an individual commits a social gaffe;
Not necessarily as in the example given above.
its characteristic facial and bodily expressions involve a kind of apology. Embarrassment is thus a kind of social repair.
No. One may feel embarrassed but decide to brazen things out. Usha Vance often says to Donald Trump 'the word Sofa is Persian. That's why my husband fucks sofas any chance he gets. On the other hand, he leaves Ottomans alone because Turkey is a member of NATO. '
But awkwardness is different: it’s not something an individual causes, and it’s not something an individual can resolve on their own; it’s a social rupture
Nope. It is merely a lack of skill. When you are a teenager, you know your first kiss will be awkward. Also you may jizz in your pants. So what? At least you got to first base with something other than a piece of furniture.
. The failure involved in embarrassment is a failure to conform to existing norms.
No. There is a social norm such that you are expected to display embarrassment when people point out you have neglected to put on your trousers. Also, have you heard of underwear, dude?
Awkwardness is different: it happens when we don’t have a social script to conform to.
No. We may have a 'social script' but may lack practice in the relevant activity. You can explain this. Say 'Unused as I am to Public Speaking, I have neglected to put on my trousers. Also, I haven't heard of underwear.'
In other words, embarrassment happens when we violate socially prescribed scripts;
No. Embarrassment happens to me when I seek to violate socially prescribed scripts by farting vigorously but end up shitting myself. Thankfully, I am not wearing any trousers and don't believe in underwear.
awkwardness happens when we lack prescriptions to guide us.
No. If there are no 'prescriptions' then awkwardness can't arise because it doesn't matter what you do. What is the correct etiquette to observe while getting hit by a bus? Even if you shit yourself, nobody will consider you to have embarrassed yourself or behaved in a maladroit manner.
People often feel like awkwardness is about them – that they are awkward, or not. But awkwardness is a collective production. More accurately, it’s a collective failure.
Nope. It is merely lack of skill or practice. Where Society as a whole faces a novel problem, or has a blind spot, there is no real awkwardness. One can simply say 'you know, this is a topic which us guys are really bad at talking about. We should be more open about such things. Where's the shame in discussing sex with sofas? It is a completely natural occurrence. In Iran everybody fucks a sofa at least twice a day. Don't forget, it was the Ayatollahs who won the War on Terror. We could take a leaf or two out of their book.'
Awkwardness is a kind of normative negative space, offering what Adam Kotsko calls ‘insight through breakdown’.
Fuck off! Your first kiss is awkward. But you soon get the hang of things.
It arises when people find themselves suddenly without a social script to guide them through an interaction or an event.
Nope. If you are being hit by a bus, you don't give a shit about 'social scripts'.
The term ‘script’ carries associations of playacting, and that’s not a bad way to understand awkwardness. But the lesson of awkwardness is that, in the dramedy of life, we’re not just the actors, we’re the writers.
Why stop there? Why not say we are the producers who have sold shares in the production to lots of different people? We will only make a profit if the show closes on its first night. That's why our dramedy is called 'Spring-time for Hitler'.
Aman knows he should speak up about the sexist behaviour of his coworkers, but doesn’t, because they’re his friends and he doesn’t want to make it awkward.
He doesn't want to be retaliated against. Still, if he were skilled at bringing up such issues, he could do so and gain by it.
A tenured professor is bothered by her colleague’s flirtatious remarks, but says nothing, because it would be awkward to bring it up.
She is afraid of retaliation. If she were skilled in such matters, she could do so in a manner which enhances her reputation and power within the faculty.
A person runs into a recently bereaved coworker, and wonders whether to address their loss, but doesn’t know what to say, so doesn’t mention it.
Again, this is lack of skill.
We often joke about awkwardness; it’s a staple of contemporary comedy. The exclamation ‘Awkward!’ functions as a light-hearted deflection, defusing social tension.
It gets annoying fast.
The reality is heavier. Awkwardness can be funny, but it can also be serious – it inhibits our ability to act even when we know we should, and it can shut down or pre-empt conversations about important topics like menstruation, money, menopause, mortality.
Very true. King Charles feels very awkward when he has to ask Kamala Harris whether she is on the rag and has enough money to buy one of those burgers Americans are constantly eating. Also, does she know she will die within the next thirty or forty years?
The desire to avoid awkwardness
is what causes people to acquire skill or practice in different activities required for their well being and advancement.
acts as a powerful social inhibition, preventing people from speaking up, and motivating compliance with problematic social and moral norms.
No. What prevents people speaking up is fear of sanctions of various sorts.
So, which is it, then? Is awkwardness a funny, quirky, everyday occurrence, something we should learn to live with and even embrace?
Yes- provided the relevant skill is not seen as worth acquiring. It's fine for an American of a particular class to come across as an inarticulate cretin. It would not be fine for a European aristocrat of the old school to appear socially maladroit.
Is it a serious social inhibitor with negative implications for moral decision-making and social change?
No. Fear of sanctions may be important. But, if there are no sanctions, you can be as clumsy and maladroit as you like.
Or – in truly awkward fashion – might it be both?
No. On the other hand, awkwardness may be bisexual or might keep fucking sofas even if the ottoman gets jealous.
It often seems that awkwardness is a personal problem. Indeed, one of the most surprising things I discovered while writing my book Awkwardness (2024) was just how many people self-identify as awkward – and how attached people become to this label.
I suppose she is speaking of Americans. They truly are a gormless bunch.
Movies and popular culture reinforce the idea of awkward people, typically portrayed as socially inept misfits who stick out and don’t fit in with trends or social norms.
But, like 'Rain Man' they might be very good at making money. Money is cool.
This focus on individuals suggests that the best way to avoid awkwardness is through silence and conformity – to imitate others, blend in, and say nothing.
This is a way to avoid sanctions. You can be as clumsy and stupid as you like provided people think you are loyal to the ruling clique.
But this is only part of the story, and it gets awkwardness wrong in important ways. Yes, awkwardness is caused by a failure to conform to existing social norms.
Nope. Robinson Crusoe might be awkward when trying to construct a canoe for the first time. If I try to put together an IKEA cabinet, my lack of skill and practice will be displayed in my awkwardness and the fact that the cabinet collapses the moment I put anything in it.
But this failure isn’t individual and, rather than think in terms of awkward people, we ought to think in terms of awkward situations.
No. Any given situation won't be awkward at all for a person with the right skills.
And yes, awkwardness can be painful, and unpleasant. But it’s not embarrassing, and it’s nothing to be ashamed of.
Unless it is. If you are still jizzing in your pants after twenty years of marriage, you have plenty to be ashamed of.
Contrary to popular belief, our awkward moments aren’t cringeworthy.
I don't suppose the author jizzes in her pants or shits herself when she only intended to fart in a witty and apposite manner.
Rather than cringing inwardly about them, we ought to examine them more closely. Because once we realise the true nature of awkwardness, we can stop seeing it as an individual failure and start seeing it as an opportunity for social change.
If everybody jizzes in their pants and shits themselves, Neo-Liberalism will be overthrown.
In short: we should take awkwardness less personally, and more seriously.
So as to overthrow Neo-Liberalism by shitting and jizzing.
The sociologist Erving Goffman recognised that social interaction is a kind of performance in which we occupy various roles.
The idea was ancient. Petronius had said quod fere totus mundus exercet histrionem but the ancient Greeks had a similar notion.
When a performance fails, the actor feels discredited – to use Goffman’s term, he loses ‘face’. Maybe he’s trying to play a role his audience won’t grant him (for example, a failed attempt to flirt, or a rejected marriage proposal) or he loses his composure and botches the performance.
He lacks skill or practice.
We usually perform one self at a time: our roles and our audiences are ‘segregated’, thereby preventing the kind of uncomfortable clash that can happen when, say, you run into your boss while out on a date,
with his wife?
or have to talk about sex with your parents.
I would do so anytime they suggested I finish my homework or get a fucking job and move out you worthless cretin.
But sometimes this clash is unavoidable, and things can get awkward. A character on the TV show My So-Called Life (1994-5) summed up the problem: ‘What I, like, dread is when people who know you in completely different ways end up in the same area. And you have to develop this, like, combination you on the spot.’
Adolescents do face that problem. It is difficult to be all gangsta when your Granny demands kisses and hugs.
The ‘on the spot’ nature of social performance marks a disanalogy with theatre: unlike an actor memorising a script, the social scripts that guide everyday interactions are highly flexible and shift quickly, without explicit negotiation or reflection.
Theaters can put on 'improv'.
A single person will play many roles in the course of a day, or even a single afternoon.
Also that person may shit or piss at some times while giving a lecture on philosophy at another. It is generally considered a faux pas to combine these activities.
In this sense, our interactions are more like social improvisation than scripted drama. And like improvisation, successful social interaction depends on a cooperative partner willing to go along with the scene.
Not when we are shitting or pissing unless we are severely disabled or just very very drunk.
The social cues by which we navigate the world range from the explicit – a dress code; the ‘no presents’ written on a party invitation – to the nearly imperceptible.
Very true. Bank robbers have to be reminded to put on a bowler hat and three piece suit. Also they must not give presents to the cashier.
Even where cues are explicit, there are often unspoken understandings in place: what counts as ‘black tie’ or ‘festive cocktail attire’? Is the request ‘no presents’ really to be taken literally, or is it merely a polite pretence that everyone will ignore? Slight changes in a conversational partner’s speech pattern; a gaze held just a little too long; a centimetre of physical distance – any of these can shift people’s understanding of the interaction taking place. Is this a date, or a work dinner? Are they about to hug, kiss or shake hands? When two people land on different answers: awkward!
They land on different answers because of different levels of skill or practice. If this is 'common knowledge' there is no 'awkwardness'.
Awkwardness thrives in uncertainty.
Life is uncertain.
This explains the link between awkwardness and silence: since silence can mean so many things, it makes it difficult to coordinate on and curate an interpretation of a situation.
Only if one is as stupid as shit. Astrophysicists have no difficulty interpreting the silent but starry Heavens.
For example, is no one speaking up because no one else has a problem with the sexist comment someone just made? Or is everyone as uncomfortable as I am, but equally unsure how to act? Sometimes silence is acquiescence; other times, it’s a form of protest. In contrast to an explicitly voiced objection, the silence on an issue can be hard to read.
Only if one wants the thing to be hard to read. Why were people silent when I farted at the Committee meeting? The answer is that I always fart at the Committee meeting. I was only put on the Committee because people wanted such meetings to be as brief as possible.
Indeed, awkwardness is fundamentally a kind of social disorientation.
No. You can be awkward when putting together an IKEA cabinet all by yourself.
There’s a certain comfort in being able to socially situate oneself.
There is a greater comfort in thinking you will go to Heaven wile your boss will burn in Hell for all eternity.
That’s not to say that hierarchies are comfortable or beneficial for everyone – far from it. But even as social rejection and downranking hurt, there is a different kind of discomfort that comes along with being socially lost and disoriented, and this is the discomfort associated with awkwardness.
Nope. Everybody's first kiss might be awkward.
This disorientation is built into the very etymology of the term: it derives from the Middle English ‘awk’, meaning ‘wrong’ or ‘clumsy’, and the English suffix ‘-ward’, denoting direction or orientation – yielding ‘facing the wrong way’. But just like passing someone on a road, facing the right way depends on knowing how things are done around here.
No. You can come up with a superior way of doing things.
Awkwardness requires the presence of others: individuals aren’t awkward, interactions are
Rubbish! I had to give myself an enema before a colonoscopy. I was very awkward indeed.
Knowing social scripts is one thing; truly internalising them is another.
Knowledge exists. 'Internalizing' doesn't exist. It is merely a metaphor for being able to do things without conscious effort.
From the Italian sprezzatura to the French nonchalance to the Chinese concept of wu wei, various traditions have admired the ability ‘to practise in everything a certain nonchalance that shall conceal design and show that what is done and said is done without effort’, as the 16th-century Italian diplomat Baldassare Castiglione put it.
This comes from practice. However, if a superior way of doing things becomes available, the person who sticks with the old way of doing things appears clumsy or awkward.
By contrast, contemporary putdowns like ‘try-hard’ or ‘pick me’
this is a derogatory term for a woman who betrays her sex in order to get ahead.
show that it’s not enough to know the social script; its execution should look effortless.
No. You should be able to disguise your mercenary motives so as to come across as a good person.
This is one way awkwardness functions to distinguish insiders and outsiders.
Nope. The King may be very awkward and socially inept. He is still an insider.
It’s also why we should be wary of labelling others ‘awkward’.
Why not? It is better to say 'that dude is awkward but thoroughly decent' than say 'he shat himself deliberately while officiating at my wedding coz everything always has to be about him. Fucking attention whore.'
This gets awkwardness wrong – it’s not a personality or character trait, but something that emerges from social interactions.
Nope. Anybody can be awkward when doing something they are not used to while all by themselves.
Awkwardness requires the presence of others: individuals aren’t awkward, interactions are.
No. Interactions can get rid of awkwardness. The person with superior skill can guide the other. That way you don't end up jizzing in your pants.
This might seem surprising: people often describe themselves (or others) as ‘awkward’, and it seems that some people do have more difficulty navigating social interactions than others. But there are practical as well as theoretical reasons for resisting the idea that awkwardness is an individual trait. The label ‘awkward’ is not as innocuous as it seems: it’s ambiguous, and it obscures more than it reveals.
No. It is innocuous enough. Awkwardness or inexperience can be overcome. But it may not be vital to do so.
For example, suppose I describe my colleague Rob as ‘awkward at parties’. This is ambiguous: am I saying that he feels awkward at parties, or that he makes me feel awkward at parties? Or both?
You are saying Rob isn't a party person. He lacks social skills. Maybe he doesn't think they are worth acquiring. If you say 'Rob makes me feel awkward at parties' people will think Rob has such superior social skills that you feel like a bumbling fool in his presence.
This ambiguity creates a dangerous space for bias or even ostracism:
Thus Grievance Studies should have a new branch catering to those who are awkward. After that you can create a Department of Flatulence Studies. Why are so few Presidential candidates notorious for farting incessantly? Is it because of Neo-Liberalism?
I may mistake my own discomfort at Rob’s presence for a property of Rob – projecting my own feelings of awkwardness on to him in a sort of pathetic fallacy.
You may also think that Bill Gates is as poor as fuck or Anne Hathaway is as ugly as shit.
For example, suppose Rob is in a wheelchair, and I have little experience interacting with wheelchair users.
Don't sit on their laps and order them to take you to the pub.
I might feel some uncertainty about how to approach the situation, worrying about saying ‘the wrong thing’ or not knowing whether to stand or kneel while speaking with him.
Definitely kneel if you are sucking him off. Otherwise you might throw out your back.
Using the term ‘awkward’ risks placing responsibility for my discomfort on to Rob.
Which Rob would be cool with if you were sucking him off.
Not only is this fundamentally unfair,
like my saying I am cuter than Beyonce
but it means that I’m less likely to try to remedy my ignorance – what arrangement would make Rob most comfortable?
Suck him off- provided you are a hottie.
And since I’ve now classified Rob (in my own mind, if not to others) as ‘awkward’, I may be less likely to seek out interactions with him in the future.
If you aren't sucking him off, why would he care?
As the feminist scholar Sara Ahmed writes in The Promise of Happiness (2010): ‘To create awkwardness is to be read as being awkward
To create chocolate cake in your pants is to be read as having shat yourself.
'Maintaining public comfort requires that certain bodies “go along with it’’.’
Did you know that trillions of women are being raped on buses and trains every day? They 'go along with it' because of Neo-Liberalism.
We can now begin to see how awkwardness becomes threatening, and how it can be weaponised, as Megan Garber has argued in The Atlantic.
These nutters have weaponized stupidity.
Because awkwardness is often aversive, those perceived as causing it risk ostracism.
Ostracize these nutters. Or, don't. They are fucking hilarious. We get that this lady is awkward. The question is, is she as awkward as Agnes Callard? That's the gold standard.
Changing social norms and rituals isn’t easy; adopting new ones can be costly.
The norm in Philosophy Departments is to give tenure only to utter imbeciles.
The person whose presence reveals the inadequacy of the status quo thus presents a threat. For example, in a department where the men routinely take clients to a strip club after dinner, or tell sexually explicit jokes in meetings, the presence of women colleagues might make things awkward, as they are forced to confront the clash between their workplace rituals and professional norms.
Sadly, this wasn't the case and still isn't in many professions and organizations.
One option would be to accept this conflict as of their own making, and adjust their behaviour accordingly. But too often, it’s the presence of the women that is blamed: now it’s awkward to tell those jokes, because there are women here.
It is likely that men were worried that women would be promoted over their heads because of their superior performance. They needed to point out that people who have to sit down to pee are bound to be inefficient. Also, suppose you are on fire. Men can piss on you and thus douse the flames. Fuck are women going to do? That's the main reason, women should not be hired. As for bawdy jokes, lots of men don't like them because they go to Church.
Blame falls on those perceived as different for ‘making’ things awkward. In many cases, though, it was awkward all along: that awkwardness was just being borne by someone else, as they tried to conform to others’ expectations.
In the private sector, failure to hire the most efficient can lead to bankruptcy. Awkwardness does not matter. The bottom line does.
Understood in these terms, awkwardness won’t necessarily become any less unpleasant to experience. But it’s worth paying more attention to when and where it arises, and be more willing to tackle it head-on.
Report anyone who uses the word 'awkward' to H.R. This is the a-word, like the c-word, n-word etc.
An unspoken expectation in many social interactions is that people already know how to navigate them.
No. That expectation only applies to people who appear to already possess the relevant skill-set. If I dressed up as a plumber, you would expect me to do a good job fixing your toilet. This would not be the case if I dressed up as a prostitute.
People avoid admitting social ignorance, and we are embarrassed by those who do, as if they’ve violated some unspoken social norm. But why should not knowing which pronoun, title or fork to use be any different from not knowing where the bathroom is, or what time the café opens?
It isn't. The suggestio falsi here is that the a-word is being used in some malign way probably on orders from Neo-Liberalism.
The reluctance to ask that social norms be made explicit reveals a deeper expectation: that social interaction should appear effortless.
Only to those habituated to them.
Awkwardness highlights the fact that our interactions are scripted.
No. It arises where there is a lack of skill, practice or relevant knowledge. Also, drunkenness doesn't help.
Its aversiveness shows the extent to which people prefer not to be reminded of this fact.
They also don't want to be reminded that they shit and piss. I found this out the hard way.
And the lucky among us may not have to be.
The lucky among us don't have to teach useless shite.
We engage with physical infrastructure daily, often without thinking about it. That thoughtlessness is a privilege: when I walk into the lecture theatre and reach for the light switch, it’s more or less at arm’s reach, and I expect that to be the case in every room I walk into. Sometimes, the cord that pulls down the screen is a bit too high for me and I have to stand on a chair, and this is mildly annoying, embarrassing even. At that point I begin to feel irritated with the design of the room. I might wonder, who is it made for?
Men. White Men. They are evil bastards.
Social scripts are like light switches and cords – we reach for them automatically, only really noticing their placement or existence when they’re not where we expect or need them to be.
No. There is only one way of turning on the light. There are many ways of interacting socially. You may choose to be witty or grave or as boring as shit.
Of course, that’s not true for everyone. For many people, navigating the demands of daily life requires giving a good deal of thought to the placement of light switches, doorknobs and the like.
Cognitive impairment can involve having only short term memory.
For people who are neurodivergent, who struggle with reading facial cues, or who find themselves in unfamiliar social settings, the world is full of rooms with unpredictable, unreachable infrastructure.
But if they say 'I have such and such medical condition' or 'I'm a foreigner', people will make allowances.
Awkwardness is a reminder that social infrastructure exists and that it is not equally accessible to everyone.
No. Awkwardness or clumsiness exists even where there is no Society. If you are unused to chopping wood, you do it in an awkward manner.
The good news is that with effort and attention, social resources can be made more accessible.
The bad news is that useless tossers will want us to pay them for tackling imaginary problems.
Awkwardness highlights where that work needs to happen.
It doesn't need to happen at all.
Understanding the social origins of awkwardness also helps reconceptualise it.
Its origin is not 'social'. It is either a matter of lack of skill or experience or else is psychological.
Instead of thinking about it as a personal failure – a cringeworthy source of personal embarrassment, or shame – it can be recognised for what it is: the result of collective ignorance or absence.
Individuals who come up with smarter ways of doing things change Society. The author hasn't done so. She is trying to add 'Awkwardness' to the Grievance Studies Curriculum. The fact that I iz bleck isn't grievance enough. I also need to blame Society because I have to drink three bottles of Gin a day so as to overcome my shyness and run naked through the streets.
Not till Biden runs naked through the streets (after undergoing gender reassignment surgery) will Society overcome its bondage to Neo-Liberalism.
And this is where the trope of the awkward misfit does a disservice.
We think highly of the awkward misfit because we suspect the dude may become a tech billionaire.
When awkwardness is understood as an individual failure to fit in, the response is supposed to be: do better; conform; learn the script.
Acquire the relevant skill. Scripts only matter if you are a telemarketer. But that's a low wage job.
But that’s not always possible. Nor is it always desirable. In some cases, those norms are not serving everyone – or anyone. For example, many job interviews now eschew small talk and follow-up questions, following a scripted formula in which candidates are all asked the same questions with no follow-ups.
But people with good connections will get hired one way or another.
This may feel awkward, especially for interviewers used to casual chit-chat. But that same chit-chat might unfairly skew the process by emphasising considerations of ‘fit’ and disadvantaging candidates who have less in common with interviewers. Professors
of useless subjects
may feel awkward asking students to share their pronouns, but this takes the burden of awkwardness off the students who might otherwise have had to jump in and correct people’s assumptions.
If you are being hired to do useless shite, it doesn't matter how useless or crazy you are.
The upshot is that awkwardness isn’t something an individual should, or even can, fix on their own.
Nope. You can take courses on all sorts of things- e.g. elocution, etiquette, etc, etc.
To view awkwardness as shameful, or embarrassing, is therefore not just a philosophical mistake but a practical one:
No. If you are hired to do a particular job you should learn to do it well. A clumsy surgeon kills his patients. He should feel ashamed of himself.
it is to miss out on an opportunity to repair the social infrastructure.
If you really have the power to 'repair the social infrastructure' why not eliminate crime and poverty and incessant flatulence?
Take the case of pronouns again: someone who finds it awkward to state their pronouns, but understands this awkwardness in terms of shame, might see the problem as stemming from a lack of courage or assertiveness, and feel bad about their failure to speak up.
It is good to feel bad about your cowardice. It is wrong to blame society because you deserted from the Army the moment your regiment was ordered to go to the frontline.
This puts the burden on them, going into new social or professional situations, to summon up the courage to change how they introduce themselves, which can make new interactions a source of stress or anxiety.
Also, the burden is on them to put on clothes rather than turn up naked.
If we understand awkwardness in terms of social scripts, things are different: the person might work with friends or colleagues to think about ways to build pronouns into introductions, or emails, or the structure of meetings.
There is no need. Just say 'I identify as a cat. Kindly make miaow miaow noises when speaking about me.'
But it’s important, too, to be mindful of who’s doing this work.
It isn't 'work'. It is useless shite.
Because awkwardness is felt as a form of social discomfort, it doesn’t attach to everyone equally.
Everybody feels awkward when doing something new or with respect to which they are out of practice. This is true whether they are alone or in company.
Social expectations of who does the work to make others feel comfortable – and correspondingly, who is held accountable when people feel uncomfortable – intersect with scripts around gender and social status.
Not to mention sobriety and sanity.
Women are often tasked with managing others’ moods and are expected to get along with others;
Nice women are. Drunken prostitutes- less so.
this ‘emotional labour’ includes the work of repairing social interactions that become awkward. There’s a privilege in not worrying about others’ discomfort.
Especially if you don't have to sit down to pee.
All of this might seem like a lot to put on a minor, everyday irritation.
Like having to sit down to pee.
If we’re used to thinking of awkwardness as the kind of thing that crops up on bad dates, or a minor annoyance of office life, then what I’ve been saying so far might seem a bit overblown.
It is mad. But we get that this lady wants to become the doyen of Awkwardness studies. Did you know that if everybody just shat themselves every day, then Neo-Liberalism's 'social script' would be erased?
Doesn’t everyone have awkward moments, and is it really such a big deal? The answer is that some of us have more awkward moments than others
And thus should get extra help from the Government.
And some awkward moments are a big deal: it matters that we have social scripts to talk about grief, or harassment, or race, because not talking about these topics erases an important part of people’s experiences.
Why not have 'social scripts' for talking endlessly about pissing and shitting? They are an even more important part of people's experiences.
The silence associated with awkwardness can function to erase important parts of people’s experiences. But if we listen to it carefully, it can also tell us where more work is needed.
Also we should listen carefully to farts.
The work of building our social infrastructure often goes unremarked upon.
Why am I not getting paid for this building work? Is it coz I iz bleck?
Awkwardness alerts us to the fact that our social norms are under construction.
No. It alerts us to a lack of skill or psychological condition- e.g. shyness.
It’s an opportunity to examine the work that goes into our social lives, and why that work so often remains invisible.
How about the work I do when I produce a turd? Why does that remain invisible? Is it coz I iz bleck?
In the drama of life, we don’t have to settle for being actors – we can be writers, too.
In which case we are acting the part of writers. Just say 'the drama of life is 'improv'.'
Not everyone can afford to do this work. Not everyone’s contributions receive equal credit. But for those of us willing and able, awkward moments are an alert that our current social scripts are not working, and an opportunity to get to work writing better ones.
What 'better script' has this nutter written? If you shit yourself at the office party, it is the fault of Society. Change the script so that you get a Nobel Prize for the turds you produce. Only thus can we challenge the hegemony of Patriarchy or Neo-Liberalism or having to sit down to pee.
No comments:
Post a Comment