
Friendship’s Dark Side - hvo
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/16/science/friendship-discrimination.html
======
rokhayakebe
I have noticed this for years. I say people are not racist, homophobic, etc...
People just want to gang up together and the existence of a group reaches the
height of its meaning (to its members) when they can say "This is us. That is
them. Clearly we are different (superior). Don't mix us." Same is true when
you have 10 Harvard grads with 5 "insert_your_state_university" grads in the
same room.

The ultimate test: Take a hispanic who hates blacks. Add a black who hates
whites. Add a white who hates hispanics. Leave them stranded in the desert and
they must rely on one another to survive. They will be friends in no time.
When they get back to town it will be "This is us, the survivors. That is
them, those who never had such an experience. Don't mix us."

~~~
nickthemagicman
Beyond just skin color look at religion, sports, nationality, school
almamater, etc...Humans are pretty wired to form ingroup/outgroups.

~~~
qznc
If we want to consider the business world, there is frontend vs backend
people, dev vs ops, sales vs development, blue vs white collar, management vs
employee, ...

~~~
ddorian43
But frontend sucks for REAL, no ?

~~~
nickthemagicman
Back End > ALL (as long as you're not using PHP)

------
whatshisface
I don't think a single one of my friendships involve a common enemy, beyond
both of us being allied against boredom. Physics is unrecognizable after being
passed through the dirty lens of journalism, and I guess this is what happens
when they report on fields with _even messier_ situations.

> _Game theory models predict it, real-life examples confirm it. “In order to
> band together, we need a common enemy,” Dr. Christakis said._

What do these models say about behavior around shared tasks? There are a lot
of prisoner's dilemmas and tragic commons in the world but there actually are
some cases where you can get something out of _nature_ while other people
_help_. Maybe that's why hackers tend to not be very xenophobic, they have
something to focus on other than dividing up the morning's pie.

~~~
toothbrush
_> Maybe that's why hackers tend to not be very xenophobic_

Actually, i respectfully question that assertion. In my limited experience,
groups of hackers have actually been much more on the homogenous side than
random other groups of friends or freely-associating people (recent examples
off the top of my head: a recent software developers meetup, or the makeup of
the engineering department i work in – spoiler: it's overwhelmingly white,
male, able-bodied and middle-class, straight). And IMHO, a lack of diversity
certainly signals that something is going on. You might find the term
"xenophobia" too strong, but exclusion is real and happens, _especially_, i
would argue, among hackers. You needn't actively say something silly like "i
don't like women joining my hackathon" for there to be a very palpable jock-
nerd atmosphere that will turn off many folks that aren't white/middle-
class/male. I think this might be an unpopular opinion here, but i believe it
bears pointing out.

A while ago i read a very thought-provoking book entitled "Unlocking the
Clubhouse" by Margolis and somebody else whose name eludes me. If you're not
already convinced by the unapproachable ivory-tower side of STEM fields, that
book may convince you.

~~~
q12we34rt5
>groups of hackers have actually been much more on the homogenous side

>it's overwhelmingly white, male, able-bodied and middle-class, straight). And
IMHO, a lack of diversity

Nice job. I think you managed to touch just about all the bases in the
buzzword lottery.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
"You're wrong because you used buzzwords" is no better than a buzzword itself.
Can you address their actual point?

~~~
q12we34rt5
What point? Let me inform you of something. When I was growing up, I remember
quite clearly being teased and bullied because I liked to read a lot and I
liked messing around with computers. The peer group I surrounded myself with
were other people just like me who also put up with the merciless bullying.
Everybody else self-selected out of my peer group and did everything they
could to make me feel lesser because of my interests. But now all of a sudden
the internet and smartphones catch on and now coding is "cool". And the same
people that selected themselves out of my group now accuse me of being
"xenophobic" and "homogeneous". The fucking gall.

------
interfixus
Happens in every conceivable kind of social group I am aware off. Those in the
other classroom, those in the other office, those of the other political
stripe, those across the border, those who play on the other team, those who
dress differently, those who use Ubuntu, those who code C++, those who prefer
cats, or dogs, or whatever, ad nauseam. It happens here on HN, for Gods sake.

No, we're not baying for the blood of those guys, but the dislike is there, or
the mistrust. And seeing how all kinds of other animals exhibit the exact same
pattern, there's no sound reason not to assume we are hardwired for it.

In so many cases a silly atavism. And in many others no doubt an essential
group mechanism, if nowadays not necessarily for survival, then for internal
group cohesion and a basic guard against intruders.

------
himom
People need a common purpose to unite... moonshot, get to Mars, threat of
climate catastrophe, etc. Otherwise, wedge issues tend to form fault lines and
natural selection will encourage war to reduce competition for resources /
survival.

~~~
jamesrcole
> _natural selection will encourage war to reduce competition for resources /
> survival._

Not commenting on the rest of your comment, but that's not how natural
selection works.

------
jkFeiwi
This is the 3rd article I've seen like this today. I think what's missing from
the conversation is bonding vs bridging social capital.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_capital#Sub-
types](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_capital#Sub-types)

We have known for a while that close homophobic bonds (bonding) can create
animosity towards outsiders. But not every relationship does this. Some
relationships connect us with people outside our normal groups (bridging). The
extent to which people bond or bridge varies from person to person, and across
time periods.

I suspect this conversation is being had in response to Facebook's tendencies
to bring out the worst in people. I think the internet has the potential to
create both kinds of social capital. It's helped me stay closer to my friends
and family, while also introducing me to people in different countries, or
people with different religions. When we design social networking software, we
should design it with bridging social capital in mind. If it only encourages
bonding, we'll be creating a world of hostile tribes.

------
Thriptic
I think the author means to say comraderie requires a common enemy, which is a
very different statement and one that I would say is true.

------
cobbzilla
Sounds more like the dark side of Tribalism than of Friendship. I suppose it's
all in how you decide to define things.

------
contoraria
More like, together we are strong, now we can take on an enemy.

------
musage
> In order to band together, we need a common enemy

Yes, to band together, sure. But is that friendship?

> _Friends are predetermined; friendship takes place between men and women who
> possess an intellectual and emotional affinity for each other. But
> comradeship — that ecstatic bliss that comes with belonging to the crowd in
> wartime — is within our reach. We can all have comrades. The danger of the
> external threat that comes when we have an enemy does not create friendship;
> it creates comradeship. And those in wartime are deceived about what they
> are undergoing. And this is why once the threat is over, once war ends,
> comrades again become strangers to us. This is why after war we fall into
> despair._

> _In friendship there is a deepening of our sense of self. We become, through
> the friend, more aware of who we are and what we are about; we find
> ourselves in the eyes of the friend. Friends probe and question and
> challenge each other to make each of us more complete; with comradeship, the
> kind that comes to us in patriotic fervor, there is a suppression of self-
> awareness, self-knowledge, and self-possession. Comrades lose their
> identities in wartime for the collective rush of a common cause — a common
> purpose._

\-- Chris Hedges

Of course, disliking the same thing or person can also be a result of
intellectual or emotional affinity. I can meet someone in the wilderness and
think they're an okay person because of how they are to me, but if we then go
back to the city and they steal from a blind beggar, I'll no longer think
they're okay. Likewise, if I walk around with a supposed friend and we see
someone do that, and they react with a shrug or even a smile, that will
similarly lower my opinion of them.

But that's because of what I am _for_ , which is primary and a cause if you
will -- not because of the need to be against anything, which is secondary and
a symptom.

