On another website, there are a lot of women who announce in no uncertain terms that everyone who fans them must write a letter of explanation if they want to be friended. I’ve been thinking about this for a while and having been fanned, myself, by a number of people who I have never heard of, I also find it a little creepy.
I guess on this other site it’s different because there seems to be a prevailing custom that if someone fans you, you fan them back and become friends. Which, surprisingly, gets me to my point (I hadn’t planned to go this route).
I think that the custom in many people’s minds is that if you are friendly to someone, they should be friendly back. Further, if you are both friendly to each other, then that means you are friends, with all the expectations that people have of their friends.
New Yorkers are famously “unfriendly” but thats a life saving skill. You can’t have two million friends, especially with so many as off beat as you find in the City.
In the Midwest, the tradition is different. It’s expected that you say hello to just about everyone you pass. I think this is done in the South, and maybe even the West, outside of the ocean communities. Part of this is because there are just fewer people around. You expect to know everyone. Part of it is because it’s the culture. Part of it, I bet, is because these communities have traditionally been very homogeneous, which makes it much easier to see others as part of your tribe. When they look different, things start to change, I’ll bet.
The problem is that just as we should not be automatically prejudiced against those who look different from us, neither should we be automatically be prejudiced towards someone because they look like us.
It comes down to this: can you be friendly with someone without them mistaking it for more than it is, and without them mistaking you as someone that is easy prey. Predators can look just like your people.
So, is it safer to treat everyone as a predator until proven otherwise, or is it possible to treat everyone nicely until they have proven themselves to be unworthy of the niceness? Further, if they are unworthy, does having treated them nicely make them more likely to bother you than had you given them the cold shoulder in the first place?
I think your husband believes that by being nice to everyone, you invite more trouble for yourself. I think he believes it doesn’t matter how good your radar is. If you start out by treating someone nice, then even when you turn around, they press on far longer than they would with someone who had been mean in the first place. In other words, you are inviting trouble.
He probably knows that men are always looking for a woman to be nice to them, and once they meet one, many men think that means the woman likes them. Or at least is open to them. Predators may think that a friendly woman is going to be easier to take on than a less friendly women. This is because, often, women who are nice have a much harder time saying “no” than other women. These women are nice up to the last minute, and sometimes even further.
My wife is a city girl, now. She grew up in the suburbs, but she has lived in the city for decades. She is very cautious. She is teaching our kids to be very cautious. She won’t go out after dark in our neighborhood, and worries about me when I go out. I feel like I have good radar and know how to stay away from trouble.
Last week, we heard someone screaming for help outside. Half the neighborhood came out to see what happened. 911 was called. Fire trucks and ambulances came.
There was a man who had been the object of a seemingly random act of violence. Someone had come up on him, hit him on the head with an object of some kind, and taken off, not even pausing to steal something. My wife uses this as an excuse to lock us up tighter than the space station. We are in danger of never letting the kids out for anything. We are in danger of never seeing our neighbors.
We hate to see danger everywhere, but we also need to see it where it exists. Should we err on the side of caution? Does that cost us too much in terms of human relationships?
If you go on being as friendly as you are, and nothing happens, does that prove that your view of human nature is right, or that you are merely lucky? If you cut back on your friendliness and stay away from people and nothing happens, did your behavior help you, or was it unnecessary? There are a couple of other possibilities: you could be friendly and be subjected to something bad, or you could be unfriendly and be subjected to something bad. In either case, is there any relationship between your behavior and the bad thing that happened?
I don’t think it is possible to know. I think that, in the end, it’s best to be who you are. It does no good to try to change yourself, even for your spouse. Especially for your spouse. Take this as a sign of his concern. He’s worried. He cares. Thank him for that.
Hit the road, and be yourself. You really have no other choice.