I believe it is all based in removing risk, avoiding the sting of rejection. The passive, emotionally defensive culture of younger generation is a result of emotional convenience - technology allows us to guard ourselves in ways not possible before. We no longer have to put ourselves on the line to express romantic interest in another person, or even in the initial friendship which leads to love. We're so afraid of our own emotions and interests being unrequited, that we withdraw into an impersonal world of casual indifference. We rarely express authentic, direct, unequivocal interest in another person. Instead we're skating along on a relay of superficial, even enthusiastic types of social indifference -- socializing in groups, online, via text. This common personality trait is a guard against the possibility of being hurt by another person. This level of impersonality has translated into our everyday lives.
People seem to think the overall definition of a "friend" is a person you hang out with. Whereas when you look at long-term friendships, especially in older people, it becomes obvious that there is some level of inherent trust, commonality, or longevity to the term "friend" that is lacking in younger generations -- and not necessarily because of the time constraint. The term is seemingly used in a disposable way these days (as are the people to which it refers) -- real, true "friends" take time, you don't make them over the course of a day, a week, a month - it is a privilege of human experience, built on an emotional investment on the part of both people involved. Loving relationships are much the same - to develop meaningful bonds with another person takes mutual time, memories, experiences, usually effort-- and with one's emotions involved.
What I see in the people my age and younger are "transactional" type reactions - in everything from friendships to sex. It's a sort of emotional tribalism - stray too far from the comfort zone, and "you're out" so to speak. If you get tired of, or even mildly annoyed with a "friend" you stop seeing them - you lose contact, you move on. You stop inviting them to things. Thus avoiding even having to deal with what the issues were, let alone deepen the interaction by sorting it out. Some people develop "pretend confidence" within their bold persona - but we often find these people rather sensitive, because the persona is a facade. These people also tend to be the "drama queens" who constantly demand attention.
All of this is terrible for our emotional health. We are inherently social creatures, with a need to feel included, to feel a sense of value in the context of other people ... and yet we've put ourselves in a place where we're practically unable to develop meaningful emotional connections with those people. (And then of course, we wonder why things like divorce rates are through the roof...)
Sex without loving a person is only stimulation. It is much better with a person you know well, love and trust. MUCH BETTER. I've never understood the casual sex culture -- it's non-commital, it's indifferent, passive, and moreover it's a defense mechanism against having to actually care about the other person. Sex is supposed to be an emotionally vulnerable experience, not a callous one -- that's why one's emotions follow around with it, no matter what.
All of this desensitizing. I find it very odd. Put yourself out there, but be judicious with who you choose to interact. The rewards are very much worth it. The culture of indifference is not a healthy one.
Last edited by abyssquick on 14 Jan 2013, 12:08 pm, edited 6 times in total.
14 Jan 2013, 2:08 am
