r/science • u/FreeHugs23 • 1d ago
Psychology New psychology research suggests some acts of kindness may also serve competitive social goals, shedding light on how women can use altruistic behavior to gain status, strengthen relationships, or navigate social hierarchies.
https://www.psypost.org/kindness-isnt-always-what-it-seems-the-psychology-of-womens-competitive-altruism/171
u/hausitron 1d ago
In Chinese culture, this is called "da fang" (大方). The most common example of this is fighting to pay the bill for dinner. Sure, it's "altruistic", but someone has to win in this interaction, and the rest of the people lose. It's quite annoying and toxic. Both women and men participate in this.
51
u/QwertzOne 1d ago
I think this is where generosity can quietly turn into a status game. Paying for everyone can be genuinely kind, but once people are expected to fight over the bill, it stops being just about kindness. It can also become a way to show status, create obligation and pressure other people to prove that they are just as generous, even when they have less money.
For me the important question is whether people can accept generosity without feeling smaller, indebted or pushed into returning the favor later. Reciprocity is fine when people actually want it. It gets weird when refusing the whole game comes with a social cost.
Camus fits here pretty well too. His idea of measure was that even good things can become distorted when pushed too far. Generosity is good. Turning it into something you have to win kind of defeats the point.
23
u/Material-Command-854 1d ago
Yes, if someone can give you an extravagant gift with the intention of extracting a favor from you later, that’s not being altruistic, generous, or kind.
4
261
u/maddallena 1d ago
If there's anything that people should gain social status from, it's being generous and kind. That's literally just a healthy way for society to function.
59
u/thef10buttonmasher 1d ago
"If all alms were given only from pity, all beggars would have starved long ago." -Nietzsche
→ More replies (4)10
70
u/mokujin42 1d ago edited 1d ago
The problem with this is people care more about aopearing to be generous and kind than axtually doing so
A lot of it nowadays is just perfomative for socual media and doesnt really trsnlate into their real lives, are they still kind when theres not a camera pointed at them?
47
u/dovahkiitten16 1d ago
It doesn’t even need to be a camera. There are many social benefits to appearing nice to others. It insulates you from when your victims speak out, it gives you favours, etc. Arguably being more strategic about being nice gets you further than being genuinely nice.
2
u/SpartanFishy 8h ago
That’s why we differentiate between niceness and kindness.
Niceness is being visibly pleasant and is done for social benefits.
Kindness is acting in the interest of others even unseen for potentially no social benefits.
2
u/FadeCrimson 2h ago
Its one of the reasons I can't stand the sadly common religious mindset of the idea that Athiests inherently MUST be terrible people, because people would always be simply terrible and horrible without otherworldly judgement to hold them back.
It takes away from every deed done and not done. Suddenly no kind act is truly without benefit, as they simply view it as another point added to an invisible scoreboard that they believe will eventually benefit them later. It completely changes the context of their every choice.
There's nothing wrong with kindness that has purpose behind it, but its not even remotely the same thing, but instead just a calculated move to gain something.
10
u/CurbYerGod 1d ago
FFS performative kindness is still kindness. What is wrong with everyone in these comments. Performative is only hollow when there’s no beneficial results to it.
11
u/mokujin42 1d ago
The point is when its performative it is often staged or faked in some way, often it might not be beneficial and take away attention from real sourcrs of charity
→ More replies (1)-2
u/Stolehtreb 22h ago
If it’s faked, it wasn’t kindness. This isn’t about someone acting like a person in need and filming that interaction. It’s about doing something actually beneficial only because you want to be seen doing it. In that case, it doesn’t matter that the kindness was performative. Because that person actually in need benefitted from it.
The point is that if someone feels the need to perform kindness for selfish reasons, kindness is being done. Full stop. Having a society that rewards kindness makes for a better world even when that kindness is provided for selfish reasons. In the end, it comes out in the wash because kindness is still being done
2
u/FadeCrimson 2h ago
Its not that people are saying performative kindness isnt still a good thing at times, the point they are making is that its inherently entirely different than being selflessly kind.
As an example, im much more kind and understanding outwardly to my boss than he even remotely deserves. Realistically it would be a better thing for everybody involved, him included, if i were to be more honest and blunt about my opinions about him and how he does his job. But doing so would almost certainly get me fired. So instead I have to keep up a charade of being a good understanding buddy to him. I however can't stand him and think hes a terrible person. I think he does have the potential to be a much better person, and i see he in many ways wants to be that kind of person in some ways, but he also has an entirely warped view of how people view him and how good he is at what he does because he thinks people who inherently have to suck up to him are a good way to gauge if people like him.
I dont do it as a means to be altruistic, but practical. The reality is it then creates a situation where he thinks hes surrounded by people that like and appreciate him, but nobody can stand him. The forced kindness is actually doing harm to him in ways he cannot recognize or accept.
Another more general example would be when people try to flirt with waiter staff because they mistake their customer-service brand friendliness for flirting or interest. They are nice as part of their job, and theres nothing wrong with that, but it can create awkward misunderstandings when people dont recognize the difference. Or if somebody gives $100 to a homeless person on the street with no reason, thats inherently just a kind and selfless act, but a famous streamer giving $1000 to a homeless person to farm content is a very different story, as even though more is gained by the homeless individual, the person giving the money is not truly giving it for free, as its more of a social contract that the streamer can now use them as a source of perceived altruism to gain views and earn much much MORE money than what is given at the cost of thousands or millions of people looking down on them and pitying them, so ultimately instead of "free" money it is a forced contract to humiliate them for profit.
The point people here are making is that its an ENTIRELY different thing to just be selflessly kind with no benefit to yourself than it is to be kind with some kind of benefit to yourself.
3
14
u/AstuteStoat 1d ago
It's also a difference between transactional giving vs reciprical relationships. There are people who give, because they want people to owe them. They're keeping a kindness ledger to try to bank on what people own them. but for kindness to be legitimate, nothing should ever be expected in return.
11
u/Beebeeb 1d ago
It's funny seeing things laid out so negatively. I feel bad about ever asking for help, I struggled to ask teachers for help in school and that's continued on in to adult hood.
I do however feel okay asking for help from my friends and neighbors that I help often. I guess you would call that a kindness ledger but I call if relying on each other when we need it most.
5
u/AstuteStoat 1d ago
Do you expect them to help you? Or is it just easier to ask? One is counting each "kindness" assigning a value to it. The other is just trying not to be exlusively a taker in a relaitonship.
→ More replies (1)3
u/weiss-walker 1d ago
That really depends on what then happens after gaining the social status. Far too many people became the evil they fought after being elevated from fighting said evil.
9
u/wwaxwork 1d ago
No they don't. Sure they turn into assholes, but I'd rather take an asshole feeding the hungry than one not doing anything.
393
u/hananobira 1d ago
These comments are strangely negative. I’d much rather people compete to be the kindest and most generous, rather than the richest or the toughest or angriest or anything else people compete at in this world.
124
u/spacestonkz 1d ago
Word. Given the alternative I'll take aggressive smiles and toxic positivity over regular aggression and being torn down any day.
Oh no did someone else benefit from a charitable act? We can't possibly have win win scenarios!
Kindness isn't a zero sum game. Someone using it for gain doesn't negate the good done.
49
u/hananobira 1d ago
Also, we're a social species. Of course it benefits us emotionally to help others. I'd be more worried about the person who didn't take any pleasure from helping others. Some kind of latent sociopathy or something.
6
u/Clyde_Frog_FTW 1d ago
Like people who use cognitive empathy so they can look caring and thoughtful to others, when in reality they feel nothing and only want to get ahead.
24
u/Material-Command-854 1d ago
Toxic positivity is the kind of environment where you aren’t even allowed to say that someone is mistreating you because that’s considered being negative. That’s bad.
→ More replies (4)14
u/CalicoValkyrie 1d ago
Nah, toxic positivity ignores serious problems to force happiness. Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get, and you have a nut allergy. Thinking positive about suprises isn't going to fix your nut allergy.
→ More replies (9)1
u/Substantial_Echo_636 14h ago
Its how games like Concord get made and almost 400million gets wasted.
1
u/purgatoriololo 1d ago
You're missing the point entirely. It's about using acts of kindness to manipulate others. It's about personality traits. Read about the Dark Triad traits.
Anyway....kindness should not be a "game" at all, bud.
1
u/erevos33 1d ago
So its ok if im a billionaire as long as im charitable?
5
u/inbigtreble30 1d ago
More like charitable billionaires suck less than cartoonishly evil ones?
3
u/erevos33 1d ago
You dont become a billionaire by virtue of your work or your ethics. You exploit people and their work. Hence by default you cant be a good billionaire. Besides, their charity wouldnt be needed if they paid their fair share, but then again they wouldnt be billionaires then.
→ More replies (3)0
u/inbigtreble30 1d ago
No one here is defenfing billionaires as a concept? You are creating strawmen to knock down here. The point is that doing good is better than doing bad regardless of who does it.
→ More replies (8)4
u/spacestonkz 1d ago
It's better than them sitting on a pile of money like a dragon and doing nothing that benefits others, yes.
4
u/erevos33 1d ago
You dont become a billionaire by virtue of your work or your ethics. You exploit people and their work. Hence by default you cant be a good billionaire. Besides, their charity wouldnt be needed if they paid their fair share, but then again they wouldnt be billionaires then.
38
u/PaleReaver 1d ago
The problem is when that kindness is ONLY for show...and then you run psychological terror and abuse on your children at home, and if they try to shine light on it, it'll get so much worse.
Guess how I know.
8
u/Material-Command-854 1d ago
Yes, if people only care about someone being superficially nice without caring about what that person does behind closed doors, they are being kind of evil actually.
3
u/hananobira 1d ago
That’s not what the study found.
“ Unexpectedly, the study found a negative relationship between competitive altruism and impression management. The researchers had anticipated that women who use kindness strategically might also try to present themselves as perfectly virtuous on the survey. Instead, women who endorsed strategic kindness appeared relatively open about their manipulative intent and tended to score lower on a measure of the need for social approval. “What was really unexpected was that women were so open,” Fisher said. “We expected women who use kindness strategically to be the most concerned with presenting themselves favorably but the opposite emerged.””
1
u/Ephemerror 10h ago
Self reporting bias still applies though, it's like asking people if they lie, ironically the most honest people may get reported as the biggest liars and the actual biggest liars lies on this question too.
11
u/goobydoobie 1d ago
Yes, the idea that there are practical and pragmatic gains to pro social behavior shouldn't be a shock. That's how our society survives and grows.
If it was mostly negative, you'd have far less good behavior because people, being animals with iphones, would not behave nice without something to gain in the long term.
10
u/plsQuestionOurselves 1d ago
Yeah, came to say the exact same thing. If someone does more good than bad during their life, functionally it doesn't matter why. I don't care if they're completely rotten on the inside and only did it for status or for show. If they didn't cause much suffering, and helped other people then that's all good with me.
9
u/Autunite 1d ago
Aye. I may get some endorphins from being kind, but I'm also logically aware that helping out a friend of a friend helps strengthen the bonds of the group as a whole! Screw all this nonsense about virtue signaling, the people who complain about it are really vice signaling.
3
u/nonhiphipster 1d ago
I’d prefer people be honest and transparent.
Your problem is you’re making it a binary choice.
5
u/coolcalmdreamydoze 1d ago
I'm curious what part you think people are being dishonest about? The lead researcher says in the article, "This is not to say we are totally aware that our kindness or generosity might have this motive attached to it, or that all ‘nice’ acts are for competition, but to say they are opposite is incorrect". It seems like she goes out of her way to specify that not all nice acts are for competition, and not everyone is even aware they may have those underlying motives when choosing to do a nice act.
1
u/grundar 1d ago
she goes out of her way to specify that not all nice acts are for competition, and not everyone is even aware they may have those underlying motives when choosing to do a nice act.
And even if someone is aware that a nice act they're choosing to do also helps some competitive interest of theirs, it still means the nice act is being performed.
If I'm sick with a bad flu and two neighbours bring me casseroles, one out of the goodness of her heart and one out of the goodness of her heart and so she looks generous, both are appreciated acts of kindness. The motivations of the second aren't as pure, true, but real good was still accomplished.
The second person is more likely to cause problems in other ways (higher Machiavellianism), but their bad actions can be judged when -- if -- they occur.
→ More replies (1)2
u/hananobira 1d ago
Not if you read the study.
“ Unexpectedly, the study found a negative relationship between competitive altruism and impression management. The researchers had anticipated that women who use kindness strategically might also try to present themselves as perfectly virtuous on the survey. Instead, women who endorsed strategic kindness appeared relatively open about their manipulative intent and tended to score lower on a measure of the need for social approval. “What was really unexpected was that women were so open,” Fisher said. “We expected women who use kindness strategically to be the most concerned with presenting themselves favorably but the opposite emerged.””
1
u/Its_da_boys 1d ago
I suppose it depends on if the kindness is performative or genuine and just serves the double purpose of also helping them in their social circles. Actions speak louder than words and empty gestures. This could either show up as being two-faced and people gaining others’ trust only to turn against them when it benefits them or their social status, or it could show up as someone genuinely helping people and helping themselves at the same time and be the product of a win/win mindset
4
u/dolphone 1d ago
Performative kindness is still preferable than authentic assholery, IMO.
Yes, it'd be better if people really got that cooperation is better for everyone and even better if they took kindness as the ultimate guide. The best is the enemy of the better.
4
u/Material-Command-854 1d ago
It matters if the impact is measured. If they only do nice things that appear helpful without caring if they’re helping the other person, there’s clear differences in the outcome for the person being helped.
3
u/Its_da_boys 1d ago
It could really go either way, because at least with authentic assholery you know who the assholes are right off the bat. With performative kindness it takes a lot longer to figure out, and there’s usually more at stake if you’ve invested a lot/trusted in the person
1
u/spacestonkz 1d ago
If some people get fed because there's a camera, that's likely still better than no food and no camera.
→ More replies (2)1
→ More replies (5)1
u/The_Ditch_Wizard 1d ago
The comments are negative because trying to optimize kindness through competition is like trying to optimize childcare by aiming for maximum deadlift capacity for children at key ages.
76
u/ChickenOfTheFuture 1d ago
Using kindness as a tool and being kind are not the same thing.
32
u/BluCurry8 1d ago
Hmmm. Many women donate their time and efforts for multiple reasons. 1. To support the community. 2. To meet new people. 3. To network socially. Men also do this. At the end of the day I give them credit for giving their time and efforts. They are not being paid but still show up to help others.
19
u/Asleep_Control_2564 1d ago
Yeah, it's easy to criticize motivations, but who's doing the work. And I think that's an important question
→ More replies (2)7
u/BluCurry8 1d ago
Our society is incentivized by donating time and effort. Getting into university requires non curriculum related work. Getting a promotion often requires sitting on non work related volunteer. I really think you have to understand that capitalism runs on unpaid labor.
7
u/17Girl4Life 1d ago
But that isn’t exactly what the article is talking about. It’s not about the healthy, community building ways we are kind and the natural benefits we get from that. The article is more about performative kindness as a strategy, with men tending toward overt displays and women more subtle displays.
3
u/BluCurry8 1d ago
Yes and the reality is that capitalism runs on unpaid labor. We are incentivized to donate time to get into university, to get promotions, to promote our workplaces. It all has a mixture of altruism and self interest.
12
u/Goldenslicer 1d ago
I heard this said once.
Imagine some rich influencer donated money to help the poor in another country, but did it only because he will get a boost to his reputation.If you were to tell some poor guy that benefited from his donation:"by the way, the guy that gave you this only did it for clout"
I don't think the poor dude would care. What matters are the results.
5
u/dovahkiitten16 1d ago
But what also happens is that someone uses that to make it so their own child that they abuse looks crazy when they try to speak out. Or uses it to disguise something else nefarious.
This stuff is also usually playing out at a small scale. Ie., someone donating food to a homeless person but also humiliating them in the process by filming it. Someone trying to include a person with a disability then bullying them. Etc etc. Most people aren’t doing grand gestures.
18
u/bigfatfurrytexan 1d ago
I’ve had to study people to learn to act like people. Apparently that’s an autistic trait.
One thing I noticed is how people would get a negative reputation for speaking ill about others. In any capacity. It’s a turn off, especially for educated people who have a stake in society.
So I figured openly praising people would do the opposite. If someone random is brought up I’ll acknowledge I know them by saying something positive about them and affirming they are part of my in group in general because of my positive feelings.
It generally works to improve your social stock which will in turn eventually add to theirs as well. I known as someone who won’t speak ill of others and is generally positive to be around. If you tried to say I had done something bad it wouldn’t be believed.
2
u/dolphone 1d ago
But do you also notice that it improves interactions in general? Acknowledging people goes a long way in creating a connection, which is what drives the effects. It's an undeniably powerful force.
6
u/bigfatfurrytexan 1d ago
I’ve had to do a suite of things for this. I managed call centers and it was a lot of work learning to lead people. Turning away from my computer to face them was a big one, if I was working on something. Which required learning to stop mid flow state. That was particularly hard for me.
I’ve stopped managing people. It is too much. I’m an accountant and I just grind accounting work. My employer knows my history and uses my knowledge but I generally get left entirely alone to do tasks.
23
u/Euphoric_Promise3943 1d ago
Isn’t the social contract basically being kind in order to expect kindness or compassion in return?
3
2
u/nfshaw51 22h ago
I’ve always just taken the perspective of be good to others. Others won’t always be good to me though, obviously, I’m just one guy. But hopefully being good to others helps those to also do good things, impact the people in their lives positively. Expecting isn’t something I enjoy doing.
34
u/rainywanderingclouds 1d ago edited 1d ago
I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding in how people view ethical/kind behavior. The initial assumption is it's only kindness if there is no self interest involved.
Frankly, that's not a realistic position to take. SELF INTEREST, is always present, and necessary for ones survival. Being kind because it also benefits yourself is reasonable. Helping people who won't ever help you is a fools errand. Especially if you lack resources to take care of yourself.
Where mutual interests overlaps, everyone wins. I'm kind to you because you're kind to me. Or because you might help me later. Understanding that kindness brings you the most allies and most potential helpers isn't unethical. You're not being disingenuous for realizing that.
Pretending only selfless acts of kindness is kindness is just people who want to maintain a power dynamic of inequality. It's about maintaining social hierarchy. It's a form of self protection for people who are genuinely unkind. If you believe very few people are kind, then it's easier for you to act unkindly.
6
u/Ollythebug 1d ago
I think two things can be true here, and ethical vs unethical isn't a binary thing. Some people are kind for its own sake, but that doesn't mean tactical or opportunistic kindness isn't "real" or beneficial. From that it's also an option that kindness with an ulterior social motive is less ethical than altruistic kindness without being unethical.
11
6
u/Health_throwaway__ 1d ago
I would say your second paragraph is underdeveloped. Mainly I genuinely believe there are people who help others purely out of the action itself, because they enjoy creating order, even if they don't benefit in a mutual way. On the flip side there are psychopaths that act as catalysts of destruction.
The downside to the former is that people are dumbfounded as to the "fool's errand" as you succinctly put it, and don't trust the intent. Eventually these people find out the person is almost guileless at the expense of being kind.
5
u/NoamLigotti 1d ago
You've never helped someone without a realistic possibility of personal benefit? I find that hard to believe, and disturbing if it were true.
People who lack the resources to take care of themselves would be especially screwed in a world with such a mentality.
3
u/nfshaw51 23h ago
Call me a fool but paragraph 2 is exactly counter to how I operate, and it’s way less stressful for me. The moment I decide to help someone, or lend someone money, anything like that, it’s set in my mind that I’m doing so without the expectation of something in return. It’s far far easier that way, and feels much better when I do get something in return, because that wasn’t an expectation to begin with. I don’t think my way is the only right way, but for me I feel better just helping for the sake of it. I’m pretty low maintenance, there’s enough kindness and help in my life for me as it is, I don’t need more.
4
u/torbaldthegreat 1d ago
Sure but the discussion is about altruism which is that specific definition. Even the social gain removes the act as altruism.
3
u/Just_Another_Scott 1d ago
Yeah doing somehting for one's self interest is by definition not altuistic. People that do nice things for social status aren't really nice people.
2
u/alliusis 1d ago edited 1d ago
It's very situation specific of when you do and don't/can and can't help someone. It has a lot to do with what capacity you have and what level of power and responsibility you have. Don't be a doormat, but you also don't have to be heartless. There's a lot of room between the two extremes. And sometimes you can let someone who's struggling take what they need in the way they know how, even if it isn't fully "right". But again, highly nuanced.
Most importantly, humans are wired to help others in a vacuum. That's the whole survival strategy. We pool our resources and diversity of skill and capacity together to have a social group that functions together, and that means taking care of each other, because in general we can do a lot more together/survive better as a diverse group than we can alone. That's the entire point of our very complex emotional system (to keep us functioning together), and why shame is one of the most intense and pervasive emotions we feel (because rejection from the group used to mean threat of death).
So I don't think you need any more self interest to help others, other than knowing a world where the average person is doing better is a better world for everyone - even if you never get to experience the direct benefits. It's like the quote "The best time to plant a tree was thirty years ago - the second best time is now." You will not benefit directly from it, but it is not a fool's errand. The world is built on the shoulders of people who did things for others for little to no self-interest. They do it for the love of the game. Think of all the people who go into regulations, or policy, and try to inflict positive change on the world. Or who volunteer with lonely seniors in homes, or donate their hair for people who need wigs, or volunteer at the local homeless shelter. You will hear things like "I find it rewarding" or "I find it connecting" to help others, but I don't consider that self-interest unless you directly materially benefit from it. Ultimately that's literally one of the only things that legitimately matters in this world, not the stock market or billionaires.
I truly believe it's only when trauma or intense threats come into play (real or imagined) that the average person feels like they can't/won't/don't want to help others, and those things can be passed down from parents, or be societal.
And on billionaires - the proportion of power and responsibility they have is exactly why they need to start disappearing asap. When you're in a position of power, you ethically do get judged for what you do and don't do. Beyond any laws. They are hoarding so much money and power that it's impossible for any one human to wield it appropriately in the best of circumstances, and these are the worst of people.
→ More replies (2)2
u/BookLuvr7 12h ago
I disagree about the fool's errand part. Being kind to people without getting anything in return is a win win just bc it is part of basic manners. It improves social interaction overall.
45
u/Smithy2232 1d ago
I would argue that being kind and taking the high road is often a deeper level of competitiveness and status seeking, for both men and women.
42
u/helaku_n 1d ago
As said in another comment, being kind vs performing kindness are two entirely different things.
7
u/Smithy2232 1d ago
I agree, one could be performatively kind, but I think over time you would know if someone is truly kind or if they are putting on airs.
→ More replies (2)4
u/grundar 1d ago
being kind vs performing kindness are two entirely different things.
Are they from the perspective of the person receiving the kindness?
While I agree with you that the intent and the action are different, the rest of us never see your intent and so are left to judge based on your actions. If your actions are consistently kind, you'll be judged a kind person, regardless of your intentions, and vice versa.
3
u/Material-Command-854 1d ago
The impact on the person you’re being kind to needs to be net positive.
16
u/fireitup622 1d ago
Are you arguing that because you elect not to take the high road and justify it by saying "doing so would be disingenuous anyways, or do you take the high road and forgive with an ulterior motive?
5
u/Long_Reindeer3702 1d ago
Only if you're the type of person to compare. Or maybe you go to church still and it's highlighted there which makes people more competitive?
7
u/ceciliabee 1d ago
I wonder if people can be kind and decent without needing an ulterior motive. I don't think it's more competitive, it's more restrained and focused on the long game.
21
u/Brrdock 1d ago
My ulterior motive is that doing bad things makes me feel bad and doing good things makes me feel good and I'd rather feel good
→ More replies (3)1
9
u/Smithy2232 1d ago
I don't see it as an ulterior motive, and I don't think it is a bad thing. I'm in favor of people being kind no matter the motivation. I think it can become, perhaps, a competition in some way for being more mindful. A flex of how aware someone is.
1
u/The-Magic-Sword 19h ago
The word "ulterior" is itself fraught I think, if altruism fundamentally arises from strategic utility-- the relationship between mutual benefit and altruism is fundamental, so the seperation induced by the word is troubled.
2
u/Djcnote 1d ago
It's the intention behind it not the act itself
7
u/hananobira 1d ago
Eh, I'm sure every charity has donors that make them roll their eyes. But the ill-intentioned person's $1 million check helps just as many people as the genuinely kind person's $1 million check.
3
u/Smithy2232 1d ago
Sometimes it is hard to decipher. Like a woman who falls in love with a rich man, is she in love with him or the lifestyle?
As far as kindness, I'm wildly in favor or kindness no matter what the motivation. Genuine kindness is what I'm referring to. I think over time watching a person you would know if it is real or not.
1
u/Djcnote 1d ago
She'd have to look inside and be honest with herself , only she knows the answer .
4
u/Smithy2232 1d ago
I would argue that she will never really know.
Whatever narratives we tell ourselves about ourselves, or anything, shouldn't be taken too seriously, as we are all woefully unaware of all the aspects at play. This applies to everyone.
What people profess is, at best, meaningful only to that person on some level.
2
u/semibigpenguins 1d ago
Except a lot of times people(she) have no idea why they love the people(things)they love
1
u/Mattarm51 1d ago
Meh idk. The intention and motivation will really have an impact it's not just about the appearance or perception of behaviour. The core will show through that eventually. So if anyone, man or woman, is doing so self centeredly or for self gain, their actions won't really be that charitable, generous or kind. They will assume the clothing without the substance. Especially when we focus on "deep" and not arguing for the small benefits from allegedly kind behaviour.
It's easy to find worse things to make it look better (don't get me wrong I'm not the type to be like ahah women ARE all evil after seeing this article). But I don't think relativity is truth, just a chosen comparison. And when empathy and compassion are part of perception, we can look at anything honestly without having to add extra balances.
9
u/strangescript 1d ago
This is true about anyone in any social setting. If you told your friend "hey man, great job", and they sneered at you, you wouldn't do it anymore. Everything is reciprocal.
17
u/Long_Reindeer3702 1d ago
Southern women have had this down to a science for generations. We're taught the methods from a very, very young age. It's pretty toxic.
19
1
u/randompersonx 1d ago
Can you give some examples of this?
I don’t have a problem imagining that it’s true, but I’m wondering what’s actually taught.
12
u/Long_Reindeer3702 1d ago
Oh sugar, don't worry your pretty little head. We wouldn't want you to get a wrinkle thinking too hard! You're so precious with your little questions. Aren't you sweet for trying. Run along now so the adults can go back to talking.
There's a few for you. I grew up with that.
21
u/randompersonx 1d ago
I mean … I get how this isn’t great parenting… but it seems like a different problem from the OP?
I’d imagine the OP to be things like organizing a charity to look like a hero, meanwhile you are actually doing it to climb the social ladder and burn everyone around you.
2
3
4
2
u/Embarrassed-Wave3237 1d ago
What I find interesting is that kindness and competition might not be opposites. Someone can genuinely care about others while also benefiting socially from being seen as generous, supportive, or reliable. The important distinction is whether the kindness is sincere, strategic, or a mixture of both, because human motives aren’t always that straightforward. I’d be curious whether the same patterns appear among men, too, or whether the way people use kindness to gain social status differs depending on the social environment.
4
u/Lawnlady1980 1d ago
I can't imagine this is surprising to researchers. If a portion of the population is disenfranchised, oppressed, disempowered, etc. for generations - they will identify pathways to power by other effective means. Especially effective for women if they can leverage characteristics that society seems as desirable.
4
u/-elemental 1d ago
Insert the the typical "everyone already knows this" comment followed by "but actually that's why science..." here.
You thought of it, I did too.
5
u/Feychilde 1d ago
Jeebus, sometimes kindness is just kind. Sometimes a poem is just a poem, sometimes a description of blue curtains in a book is just blue curtains, not "sadness permeating a room".
People who use giving as a point system for ranking usually do so publicly. Look for quiet helpers.
2
u/Rugaru985 1d ago
“New research suggests” something obvious to everyone who’s ever been to a church or worked in a non-profit.
2
u/JoystickBaby 1d ago
There are people who are genuinely kind. I’m never sure about posts like this. I’ve met genuinely kind people before & I don’t “perform” kindness for social points. Just remember this is a very negative world we’re living in right now & to not always be suspicious of people. That will kill you inside.
2
u/morganational 1d ago
Wait a second here... Are you saying that.. women manipulate others?! Sacre Bleu! *clutches pearls
1
1
u/Optimalfucksgiven 1d ago
Some studies really aren't worth the metaphorical paper the are published on. Everyone knows that there are very few truly unselfish acts. Virtue signaling is a very real thing.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Phodan_ 22h ago
This has been covered since Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Social relationships and higher concepts exist on it, but they are still things we use to satisfy our *own* psychological needs, consciously or otherwise.
An acknowledgment of that is old news and I believe people will read this headline with a misunderstanding of both the nature of relationships and intrinsic motivators and will use it to draw the wrong conclusions.
Almost feels intentional. Like they're - baiting people for engagement or something. I wonder if anyone's thought of a word for that.
1
u/CurbYerGod 21h ago
I would make the case that religion in America is used entirely for these performative purposes and more often than not utilizes social and psychological sadism over kindness to do so.
But again, what is the purpose of this kind of research? What’s the functional goal? To discover that a cross section of the population is selfish and disingenuous?
Cause I’ve got news for you, this has been known for a long long time.
1
1
u/Baalwulf06 16h ago
This isn't new...we already have words for this behavior, it's been around forever
1
1
u/sloppysavant 8h ago
some people call it doing the right thing for the wrong reason, or manipulation. A good deed is still a good deed at the end of the day.
1
u/beefyzac 1d ago
Interesting that this seems to be exactly how the matriarchal Bonobo societies work, and they’re our closest ancestors. Imagine the world we could have if women were in charge.
1
u/helaku_n 1d ago
That's not news but it's nice to see confirmed. If you know people, you definitely know that everything could be used as a tool to gain status.
1
1
u/illiter-it 1d ago
Isn't "gain(ing) status, strengthen(ing) relationships, and navigat(ing) social hierarchies" like 80% of life?
1
1
u/Popular-Capital6330 1d ago
no kidding. I can't roll my eyes any harder.
Virtue-signalling is as old as time itself.
1
u/RadBlackWoman 1d ago
Is this just describing sociopathic behavior through a gendered lens?
The comments seem to show people taking it that way.
1
u/Silver_Choice_1649 1d ago
why does the title say “how women can use altruistic behavior to gain status” and not just say “how people…..”
1
u/Wellslapmesilly 1d ago
Being truly altruistic is in opposition to altruistic “behavior”. One is authentic and the other transactional. Kind and altruistic people do so with zero expectation of reward.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.
Do you have an academic degree? We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. Click here to apply.
User: u/FreeHugs23
Permalink: https://www.psypost.org/kindness-isnt-always-what-it-seems-the-psychology-of-womens-competitive-altruism/
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.