Hmmmm.
People are compartmentalized into groups hating on each other. They're afraid of committing wrong-think and getting labelled, branded, attacked. They prioritize people who aren't there (online people, like you and myself) over those who are.
It's especially interesting from my perspective, because in Vienna we still have some sort of KaffeeHaus-Kultur. CoffeeHouse culture. You can sit there for hours, reading your book, with a coffee and it does not matter, unless the space is really needed.
It's very common to just chat with whoever runs the place at that moment, too. A sense of familiarity is part of the job. For regulars, like myself, the coffee house turns into a second living room:
We people there started talking to each other.
When I was a teenager, many years ago, I had a coffeehouse for table-soccer. It wasn't a club, or association. It was a coffeehouse with table soccer, with gatherings of players.
...
I guess my tangent meant to point at the need for both general, or specialized, "social hubs", where regularly appearing people silently agree to, eventually, getting talked to.
Not like a club. Clubs are too much commitment, causing resistance.
The topical issues of today causing strife are not reconcilable when the division is "these are the people we're going to hate".
Those are called "3rd places". Those have sadly been on the decline for the past 30 years.
It's easy to point to phones as the problem, but few can point to proper solutions. Because they don't exist in the same way the previous generations had it.
I've had to spend week and a half battling Gmail daily email account limits sending batches of 500 emails just to notify people in her address book, receiving hundreds of responses. Her memorial was attended by hundreds of people.
It served her very well in her chosen career of real estate sales, although I think she'd might have done really well in community organizing or even politics where those skills are also very useful.
On the flip side, it was sometimes difficult to be there as family wanting some attention, since her bright light was always shining in many directions.
I've inherited just some of that talent, and I think it is a talent, but trainable.
I miss her already.
I love this story, because I had the same experience. When my dad passed, I had the same 500 email limitation, and had to send out multiple waves of emails through Gmail. He was loved by so many people!
I do that now and it brings me a lot of joy. Recently while leaving a botanical garden I spoke to a man who was excitedly looking for a few specific plants. He is a botanist (amateur? professional? unclear) and I enjoyed sharing in his passion for a moment. Then I saw a maintenance guy moving with great intention who took a moment to ask me and my family if we had a nice time. We did, and I asked him about the papers in his hand. “Gotta get approval for this purchase request asap.” He said. We talked a bit about how nice it is to work at such a beautiful place.
I highly recommend talking to strangers! People are lovely. Go out and try it.
How do you deal with that?
I think the default is sociability too, but for reasons it does seem to be on the retreat.
> Would you be bothered
>basically anywhere there are other people,
Seems like a perfectly legitimate prerogative to me anyway. Actually more "popular" than ever from some of the comments.
>They just can't understand that people wouldn't want to talk to them.
This however does not follow completely logically.
More like "They just can't realize that of all the people who would want to talk to them, you aren't one of them."
No harm done regardless.
I’m also never going to be rude about it — unless you are first. Just pick up on the obvious hints that I’m not super into talking.
Yes. If I am basically anywhere there are other people, I am there for a specific reason, and anyone trying to talk to me for anything else is bothering me. I've found that most people that try to start conversations with strangers are really poor at reading signals that their actions are unwanted and they only stop when you say something so out of their comfort zone they have no idea how to handle it. They just can't understand that people wouldn't want to talk to them.
And after this article and thread, we can add I don't want to be your practice dummy to the reasons you're bothering me.
New Yorkers have a reputation for being stone cold with strangers, but the truth is that anytime somebody approaches you out of the blue, there's an assumption that they're about to ask for money or try to get in your pants. Once you demonstrate you're not looking for either (or, if the second I suppose, that you're at least smooth enough for it not to be immediately evident), people are generally really kind. With some exceptions, I've usually found that the coldest looking person will stop to give a lost tourist directions if it's clear they're in need.
But unfortunately it's in America so I'm not going there until you have some sane leaders again :(
Look at a flyer on the wall, or your beverage if you’re in a bar, and they’ll follow up if they want to talk and appreciate the reduced pressure either way.
And yeah, never open a conversation with something like “can I ask you a question?” which is usually a trick of a salesperson or beggar to make you acknowledge them and start saying yes.
>Just don’t make things a big deal
That sadly doesn't stop the runmors from flowing. That's the real damning thing about such social faux pas. Your reputation can be ruined without having a single person say it to your face. That's both unsettling and morbid for how you look to humanity.
The reality is that most people are too busy thinking about themselves to spend any time thinking about you or a random little interaction that didn’t land
When someone occasionally engages, I extremely quickly dismiss them in the most polite, but firm, way possible. I also intentionally keep a demeanor that generally signals I’m not open to random conversations (I avoid eye contact etc.), but that often doesn’t work. At the gym it is particularly problematic, I’m focusing on gathering strength for my next set and sometimes people bother you even if I am wearing headphones.
I truly do not have a problem with who I am, I’m comfortable in my shoes.
As such, never in a million years I would approach a stranger to strike up a conversation, it would seem an incredibly rude thing to do towards them, on top of clearly not having any desire to engage from my side.
I’ll talk for hours straight to my wife, close family and the very few friends I have though!
And I think that's the answer; people who don't want to talk will simply tell you! And everyone carries on.
It's one thing to not want it and to be comfortable not wanting it, but viewing it as rude goes way beyond that and is not rational.
I am bothered by random people wanting to talk to me -> Randomly talking to other people would bother them -> Bothering people is rude -> Randomly talking to people is rude.
Hence why the platinum rule is better. Once you know that other people (apparently!) aren't bothered by randomly striking up a conversation, you can adjust your actions accordingly.
As he put it, it’s a coin toss. Maybe you’re bothering them or maybe they’re grateful to have someone to distract them. Each is equally true before you start the conversation.
The key is being able to read social cues. If you can, you can stop bothering them.
On the contrary, they’re usually very happy to tell you about what they do.
> How do you deal with that?
You teach yourself to say no, to the things you don't want to do.
I considered leaving just that pithy reply, because that's really it. But some of the extra context; It's not a bother to ask someone to hold the door they're already going through because your hands are full. Starting a conversation is about as intrusive as that. The vast majority of people don't mind making some small talk, and ontop of that, the majority can make an excuse if they don't have time. You only assume they can't politely decline, because you can't. Once you learn to say no thanks, politely, but explicitly and directly. You'll actually understand and expect others to return the favor.
That's a much more fair way to interact with people too.
I'd add also that learning to hear someone tell you no and not taking it to heart and getting on with your life. So many people walk through life being afraid of hearing someone reply "no" to them, like its some existential rejection of them and that stops them from doing many things.
I'll make chit chat with anyone, and people who dont want to chat with are generally pretty explicit about saying they dont want to chat or don't have time, or pretty obviously implicit about it by not engaging or looking for ways out.
I live in an apartment (condo). I’ve been practicing making small talk with people in the elevator. The conversations aren’t all winners. Lots of people are closed off or don’t want to chat. But no matter. Elevator conversations are disposable. And most people are genuinely lovely. It’s a fun challenge trying to brighten the days of strangers.
I feel that line of thinking can have some very grave consequences. My mind is swimming with intrusive thoughts half the time.
Sorry but I couldn't help imagining you as the fake health inspector from Fawlty Towers while reading your comment.
I do agree with you though, talking is great, we are social animals even though modern life allows us to forget this, to our own detriment.
One of their articles though was about “talking to women” but it also emphasized just talking to _anyone_. It had suggestions like “if you’re out at the bar, just ask to sit with a random group, introduce yourself, and have a conversation.”
Many years later in college, I did indeed try this at a bar and was pleasantly surprised. I didn’t make any long term friends, or find a new partner, but I did really start honing the skill of being social with anyone. It’s hard, and especially for me and my social anxiety, it has also really helped me feel more comfortable in places unfamiliar and people unknown.
People need to feel like it's safe to develop relations with you, rather than like you're trying to manipulate them into doing so, which is what happens when you learn only from very hard failures.
I did this a few times and it surprisingly worked. I was able to make small talk about an article I was reading. Did it matter that I didn't come off with the confidence of Tony Robbins? No.
Agreeable comments will draw comparatively fewer replies, while disagreeable ones achieve the opposite.
But this then results in a "false experience" for the individual, where unlike in real life, the bad exchanges do not end up outweighed by the good ones, as you simply don't go on to have those. You just upvote and move on (often to avoid redundancy).
Maybe if the two were tied together (voting either up / down & sending a reply), communities would work healthier? I don't know. Not like it's easy to have this tried out.
I could definitely see challenges to this though, the aforementioned redundancy being one. I have some countermeasure ideas, but then I wonder if that would make the UX complicated enough to drive people away instead, which is a lose-lose.
It was a much bigger struggle with conversations where I was putting extra pressure on myself. Being able to have those other conversations was helpful though. Eventually, I found a therapist and am in a better place with this.
One antipattern I've encountered with this approach tho is that sometimes anxious people will exhaust their conversation partners with a battery of questions. Even if thoughtful, this can sometimes have the effect of exhausting your partner, and tends to keep the conversation steered away from actual connection. YMMV, but either way be mindful and make it a point to share yourself
I ask him what he thought of the population crisis Japan is facing. He said said that was bullshit and that 8 billion people in the world are way too many.
And that was when I stopped talking to him.
That's a pretty extreme change!
This could have been an opportunity for both of you to understand each other's perspective. That's why you asked their thoughts on the matter right? It's a shame you let that pass you by.
And if you think they'y aren't ending, you need to go look at the numbers and then look at the double speak on solutions. There are no known solutions. Every solution requires a miracle that has never happened.
I share the same sentiments as you, it'd be a tragic loss. But saying they'd "end" is well, unlikely. The countries will shrink. Japan population could reach 60M by 2100 if nothing is done. That's still a lot of people and by then other factors will dominate and fertility may rise again.
Humans are adaptive and a lot can change in half a century, so I would not overly index on what projections say. Everything would need to stay static for the projections to matter, which given the rate of technological changes and geopolitical tension, sounds likely.
My spouse had a hard time acclimating to rural Midwest life after living in a mega city on the East Coast. She complained that everything takes an extra half hour for time spent standing around talking about nothing.
It never dawned on me that if you're from a place, like a large city, where interacting with strangers or very distant acquaintances isn't encouraged, that this would not be a natural part of life.
I find this interesting but don't know what to do with that.
This is in big part due to being born and raised in a large European capital. There’s unwritten barriers you respect as a social rule, and if someone breaks the rule you assume they’re trying to sell something or scam you. To me talking to a stranger unprompted feels as out of place as pulling my pants down in public.
It’s natural for these barriers to exist to make dense spaces liveable, but they do constrain you.
And also, I really hated the religious mindset with all the little rules they have, the hatred for lgbt people, single parents etc. There were good people too but you always had to watch who was around to have a chat. I'm very progressive and atheist. And very alternative.
My ex who was from this community even got in trouble with some parents because she told the kids she was minding that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago.
I just couldn't deal with it, it just made me so depressed. And this wasn't even in the US but just in Europe.
In the city it's much easier to find open-minded people. And the ones who aren't don't control public life.
Obviously this works only if you are an extrovert. Introverts would find this kind of interaction a wasteful use of limited social energy available to them.
Didn't catch on, though. Setting up events turned out to be too prohibitive. If this interests anyone feel free to contact me at contact [at] eventful [dot] is
A few shopkeepers waved through their windows as I went past, the greengrocer came out of his shop to have a quick chat, the dry cleaner asked after my dog, and the guy from the household shop told me they have more of the cleaning paste I use. We bumped into a couple of folk I see every couple of weeks, then got a coffee and I paid the “special” rate rather than the rate on the sign that they charge people they don’t know.
My colleague said - half jokingly - “I didn’t realise you were mayor”, and tried to convince me that I should go into local politics. She couldn’t understand when I said that would take all the pleasure out of it, because talking to people would become transactional rather than joyous.
I can’t imagine not talking to people. A while back I changed the route I take when I walk my dogs each day, and the guy who runs the local fish stall started asking people if I had left the area or died. I don’t buy fish from him each week- but every time I see him stop and we have a chat.
I feel incredibly lucky to be missed by my fishmonger just because I started walking my dogs a different route.
I grew up in a tiny village in the country. The building I live in has hundreds of people living in it, compared to the few dozen houses where I grew up. I think talking to people makes a huge city feel smaller.
It doesn't have to and I suspect that's why your colleague suggested it. Politicians act that way because that's what people want except they don't want someone who is acting.
You have what politicians pretend to have because it makes people like them.
You might be a terrible politician for other reasons but I don't think what you've said is true.
> …you’re arguing against someone who believes they are.
when actually it says
> …you’re arguing against who someone believes they are.
(meaning “you're arguing with someone against who they believe themselves to be” or something like that.)
It doesn't take the pleasure out of it, it doesn't make it transactional. It just gives them incredible job fulfillment, at least in that part of it.
Bill Clinton was famous for this. It was incredibly frustrating to his staff because he was constantly late for his next event, because he always wanted to keep talking to the people he'd just met. They'd have to build in buffer time to plan around it, because otherwise it wound up disrupting his schedule and logistics too much.
Only if you let it! I am guessing you would do well, because people can absolutely tell when you are being a smarmy politician and when you're actually a legitimately friendly, decent person.
Having the kind of network and connections you do connects you with the actual needs of your community
At which point, it's not necessarily Transactional, but fostering connection and collaboration in order to create win-win situations for everyone in your community.
That's what politicking Should be.
There's only so mach a person can take being on the other side of someone like that. We drifted apart...
I want to change that too, but that involves time for hobbies instead of job searching and worrying about debt.
We've completely normalized being a shut-in to the point where your take, that it's authoritarian to push people out into the world and engage others, is quite common. What now passes for 'extroverted' used to be known as the human condition. Even extroverts today probably have fewer friends, smaller families and spend more time isolated and on screens than 99% of humanity.
But I feel I'm better off now for doing what the article suggested, over the last 5-6 years. Doing so improved my knowledge, my empathy, grew my revenue, built larger professional networks, introduced me to hobby networks, and helped with better financial planning.
I even changed to the extent of actually looking forward to outreach activities that involve a lot of conversations. I find them very satisfying because they help me understand social realities and people better than social media and books and help me develop empathy.
I wouldn't say I'm now an extrovert. My personality still prefers a lot of alone time. There are times when I still don't feel like talking to anyone. But they're now for positive reasons like books to finish rather than negative reasons like social anxiety.
I now tend to see things like introversion and social anxiety as obstacles. One can rationalize them in many ways but they'll remain objective obstacles IMO.
Respect people's boundaries please. Don't force yourself on people unless they're obviously willing participants.
People put extroversion/introversion as like this binary, permanent thing that cannot be changed. In reality I think it is a spectrum that changes throughout the day and the situation. Someone might be introverted at 8am on their commute, but a wild extrovert at 9pm in the bar. Don't assume, don't try to "help" people you know nothing about.
In your ideal world, how would someone even signal they are a "willing participant" without talking to someone?
It's supreme arrogance. Read the body language and just leave people alone.
If someone is up for talking they'll show the obvious signs - facing you, eye contact, smiling, that sort of waiting-for-something look/expression. I've had e-fucking-nough of people thinking they can "fix" me when I am trying to get some time to myself waiting for a train or whatever after a stressful day at work or being woken up endlessly by kids/neighbours/whatever.
Otherwise it should be "talk to anyone who is obviously open to and willing to have a conversation with you", at which point it's a total tautology anyway and you don't need a guide, it's just natural chat that you don't need to force on someone to make it happen.
I don't fathom what kind of trauma would lead you to take this positive, light-hearted advice to connect to fellow human beings, and to spin this into such a vile, evil, anti-social narrative.
How does that help?
Don't assume people want to talk. Respect boundaries, leave people alone.
Growing up in a conservative, religious household outside the US, there was no support for slow processors, and those who didn't fit the dogma were simply told to 'shut up.' The more you were forced to shut up, the more you closed off. Since this was before the internet, self-help tools were non-existent. I really wish the coaching tools and protocols we have today had been available back then. It wouldn't have changed everything, but it would have given me the tools to manage many situations that I simply couldn't handle at the time.
And yes, I agree with the headline... talk to people, anyone, everyone. Maybe you’ll get help, or maybe you just go for it—because regardless of any embarrassment you face now, you may find yourself proud of that courage decades later.
PS: Improved with AI
I wonder if anyone who did this had to start from a baseline of feeling this is straight up weird (I'm pretty sure it is weird in my culture).
Most random encounters have a pretext, from smoking a cigarette to talking to the shopkeeper, or being in a queue for a long time.
Talking to a woman ( esp given that many of them are harassed from what I understand from my female friends ) without any reason to is much harder
Thing is, if normal people don't talk to strangers anymore, then only the weirdos are left, reinforcing the idea that only weirdos talk to strangers...
Scamming crools frequently do have good social skills, but of course there is that risk of being scammed if you talk to them.
Nobody wants randos coming up to them and asking for something.
Most people would be less lonely if everyone had more practice at making non-transactional conversation.
Actively avoiding conversation still qualifies as "weirdo" behavior to most people.
Are you willfully ignoring people at bars, night clubs, supermarkets, etc?
It's obvious 99% of the time whether or not the conversation is in the wrong place and wrong time.
Supermarkets are a toss up. Most people are there to get their food and get out.
I still can’t understand the point of this. Do you get a charge telling social anxious people they’ll be weird if they do their homework? That’s precisely what you did. Why?
If someone on the street tries to talk to me, I try to avoid even looking at them or acknowledging them. They'll use that as an opening. Just keep walking.
I never practiced "idle conversation with a complete stranger" like that because I was lazy. But I did practice making normal, non-sexual, conversation with women on dating sites and dates so that I could go from "isolated in school, then after going online, low response rate and never more than 1 or 2 dates" to someone in a long-term relationship. And recognizing that sort of "ok there's just not any interest here, move along" signal was definitely relevant there too.
Skills take investment.
My parents didn't give me nearly as many opportunities to practice these skills as they had when they grew up, and pop culture actively encouraged me not to talk to strangers as a kid, so I had to work harder at them as an adult. But it was worth it.
It doesn't. It just helps the speaker.
It's reasonably possible at events. Cars and Coffee works great, since everybody wants to talk about their car. I doubt it will work at the dentist, since nobody really wants to be there in the first place. Maybe if they're wearing a shirt or something you can compliment or ask about and then can use that as a springboard?
If you're the dictionary definition of an extrovert you can probably still make it work, but you'll really stand out, and you'll be rejected a lot.
I just love it, it’s easy and I get a lot in return - from perks to incredible encounters. At work it’s been very helpful.
I developed that skill while traveling alone for a year , and it boils down to practicing and reading whether the person you’re talking to is ok with your talking or not.
In any case, it makes me immensely happy.
And now because I know them I go there because I can buy my stuff but also spend five minutes chatting and that makes going grocery shopping a real joy. And because I go there and chat they do nice things like give me a couple of tomatoes or “you’ve got to try this cake” or the wine shop where I automatically get a 15% discount, or the butcher where they let me in when are already closed but they know I’ve come over specially.
And some of those people have become real friends, like go and have dinner together friends. We have very different lives but we get on because we get on. I think everyone benefits from reaching out of their bubble a bit.
If I’m feeling a bit glum I’ll go out to buy bread or something because I know just seeing the people I see regularly will lift me up.
We are in a public forum afterall and we are all strangers here. I'm always happy when random person sends me an email.
joke or not (actually not) but read some women spaces and it's obviously a lot of people, especially women, just want to be let alone. Don't start talking with random people unless they start talking to you and it's consensual, simple as that.
As everybody knows that's still often not enough, but why shoot yourself in the foot when you're trying to put your best foot forward?
I'll never forget the day some sophisticated gentlemen came to my school and introduced one of their big hit songs that night.
How there's 5 little words so many single women love to hear, "Hey Girl, What's Your Name?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09w6_q0Chxk
If you look at the lyrics it is a bit straightforward for the 21st century, I think the best approach now is to compress it to only 4 words, "Hi, What's Your Name?".
Even that can be a bit much in the wrong situation, so it can be good to seek out the opposite type of situation :)
You might keep that on your mind but from there let things try to imply the rest of the lyrics, especially the part that goes "Can I Be Your Friend?"
Because the best food forward of a creep is still a creep.
Yeah, some people are only up to no good :\
If you can't differentiate yourself from that, it would be something to work on well before you try and be as socially acceptable as the average joe.
For everyone else who's not a creep, maybe you just have to "accept" that everyone in the world just doesn't want to be socially acceptable anyway.
Nobody would talk with anybody if both sides thought like that
well, yes. mission accomplished.
> The key is to just not be creepy.
Sadly, the ones who are creepy never realize they are creepy.
If you’re a man and go into it with the mindset of only talking to women, especially attractive ones, then of course that would get you labeled as a creep because it is creep behaviour. That’s not striking up a conversation with strangers, it’s hitting on women. You have to approach anyone equally. Address the attractive woman the same way you approach the old man on the bus stop.
And noone knows if you are talking to people "equally" they only know the conversation they are currently in.
I guess you could just hit on everyone. Old, ugly, whatever! Then you won't be a creep.
But in all seriousness, the difference between courting someone and creeping someone out is how attractive you are to them, not the other way around.
Like, do random men you talk to think you're a creep? If they do, then maybe it's time to get some life coaching. If not, maybe, just maybe, there's some subtle differences in how you approach people you see as sex toys vs. people you see as, you know, people.
You can hit on someone and connect with them.
Be nice, connect, open up, share, listen, love. All that shit.
Then you'll get a wife, like myself. Good luck.
Or just make friends, or enemies, whatever floats your boat.
But the point of this exercise isn't to make a deep friendship. It's practice. Is this article inherently creepy?
>Like, do random men you talk to think you're a creep? If they do, then maybe it's time to get some life coaching.
If they do, they're a lot better at hiding it. The big difference is in threat level. I don't see men nor women approach me and think "are they trying to hurt me/hit on me" as a default.
So which is it?
I've had three long and very memorable conversations on internaltional plane flights in the past, with three extremely interesting and intelligent people. I don't tend to take those flights anymore, they were for work and the novelty of international travel for work wore off. Now I get out of it whenever I can.
But those three conversations have stayed with me.
It gives me anxiety lmao you will have better time with hobbies.
Not everyone wants to talk but you can pick up on that pretty quickly.
They don’t. If they did they wouldn’t have an issue striking up a conversation with strangers, but they clearly do.
> I have not read the article and never am going to.
If you don’t know what it says, it might be wise to not be negative about it.
> I do not, ever, want to talk you as a standard and you should never force that to me.
The article isn’t suggesting anyone force anything. Quite the contrary, it advocates for respecting boundaries and even suggests how to communicate your own.
If after reading it you decide it’s not for you then that’s fine, it is as they say bean soup.
It's a valuable skill, so I do sometimes practice trying to adopt the work persona at home, but it really doesn't come naturally.
The non-verbal cues are wher things get difficult.
When I asked about him, he mentioned he’s Irish but moved on to tell me about his plans. How he was saving to have a farm, planned what to grow, animals - 15m of quite precise description. His story was his future.
This was striking for me - when asked most people tell you about their past, where they’re coming from. It was the first time I realised that where we’re going should be a bigger part of our story and identity.
I try to keep that conversation in mind.
It's all nice to imagine everyone talking to each other, but the reality is that in (western?) society, we have kinda collectively decided that socialisation is to be avoided. Either it's too weird, too boring, or too unsafe. I mean have you tried randomly talking to people? Most don't seem very open to it.
Also it doesn't help that the little "pretext" scenarios that can lead to socialising are being systematically eliminated from our lives.
And finally, if you're neurodivergent or otherwise aren't perfectly typical, enjoy people thinking you're weird anyway.
I agree re the pretext scenarios disappearing and re neurodivergence adding extra challenges.
RE the former: there are lots more of these pretext scenarios than you might realize
RE the latter, I realize it's not your point but for what it's worth, you won't really be able to tell in most cases that someone on the street or wherever is or isn't nd. Meaning: there's a good chance that the person you are talking to is nd themselves. Lots of us are pros at masking
In general though i would say to be careful when generalizing about human behavior in a way that causes you to implement and enforce rules / limitations on your own behavior in response. This is unavoidable, right? And yes, there's often an nd component to this. But especially as you get older, these can start to calcify and limit you in increasingly destructive ways
Honestly, in the least combative & confrontational possible, your thoughts there are just an excuse to not reach out and engage with the rest of your world. It's a little sad (not you, the situation itself) because if more people had that same thought, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy with no one talking to each other and those people you allude to being an afraid to talk too for whatever reason become the only people out there talking. We're certainly not there yet and I hope we never get there
My thoughts are formed from personal experience. You get a few experiences and you get the hint.
In my typical day at work (teacher), I spend hours talking with dozens of people. A large part of why I chose this work was to escape the isolation that I felt previously when I was doing remote software work. I attend weekly religious services and make an effort to stay for the social hour afterwards. When I go to parties, I don't feel like I have an unusually hard time talking with people. I'm not always as engaged with the world as I'd like, but I don't feel that I'm avoiding it either.
But this article isn't broadly about having conversations with new people: it's about approaching strangers in public settings one-on-one (the article mentions a bus stop, the street, and a mostly empty train carriage), where there's no expectation of social interaction. This is a different situation with its own set of pitfalls. Nobody is going to assume that I'm trying to rob them when I introduce myself at Quaker meeting. No one is going to think I'm a creep for asking a student about their hobbies while I'm at school. We don't see articles about people getting shot for starting up a conversation at a party.
But all of that goes out the window in the settings that the author describes. It's funny, the author mentions feeling like it was "rude and unsafe" to start a chat during the pandemic. I felt like talking to strangers in public got much easier during the pandemic, when people were desperate for any sort of in-person conversation. It's the normal times when this sort of interaction feels rude and unsafe.
Maybe I'm too pessimistic, maybe it would be fine for me to let my guard down a little. I think that loneliness is a huge issue these days and I'm grateful for the efforts people are making (including the author of the article) to address it. But approaching strangers in public in the way the author describes is a special case that is *much* more fraught than other types of social interaction, and is a lot harder for certain people to do successfully. I wish it weren't that way, and maybe it's worth pushing back against, but that doesn't change the current reality. Some people might not feel this way, but they're probably the people for whom it's not true.
One thing though is why you see new people as any different than strangers? I'm not a Quaker or ever attended a quaker meeting (but have always liked the ethos of the vibe) so don't know how that goes. But i've spent time in christian churches in my younger days and even though we were all there for the same reason, those people were still also strangers. Some already had their cliques they'd speak to and catch up with and I'm sure if someone outside that spoke to them the same double take that initially occurs talking to any new person or stranger would still occur there. Some people would want to continue chatting, some people would rather just talk to whoever they were talking to before. But its still fundamentally the same thing as talking to (or attempting to talk to and being shutdown by) someone doing the same thing you are currently doing, whether that's being on a train or sitting at a cafe etc.
When I dye my hair all kinds of colors, random people talk to me (and the specific colors even dictate who talks). When I dress up in a suit, people treat me more seriously. When I dress like a contractor and drive my truck, regular dudes talk to me at gas stations. And when I dress queer, women (and some dudes) smile at me.
I'm not even outgoing personality-wise, which would help more. Personality's the mental equivalent of physical appearance. Think of it like acting: actors pretend to be a certain way, and if it feels genuine, it makes us love or hate them, intrigued or bored. It's a lot more work than changing clothes, but it works no matter what you wear.
It makes sense: people love dogs. It gives us something in common and is a starting point for conversation. And people with cute dogs seem much less threatening.
But I also kind of resent it. I wish people would want to talk to me when I'm just me.
I see what you're getting at, but also this take kinda annoys me because it falls into the bucket of implying a personal fault. If people don't socialise with you then it must be because you do or don't do X, Y, Z. "Just do X" and you'll become a social butterfly.
Based on my personal experience, I don't know if I buy it. I guess I'm a regular enough guy, but seriously almost never, across my whole life, does someone invoke random socialisation with me. Yet I know people who can't even take the bus without strangers striking up conversations and hassling them, while they are actively trying to be antisocial. What magic trick are these people performing? Can I learn the same trick? What if I don't want to perform it? I think the reality is that for some (many?) people, it just doesn't work out and it's not necessarily due to any particular flaw.
That's why I gotta pick my venues. But those venues are shrinking and growing farther apart.
The main ingredient, at least for me, was being determined enough to push through the discomfort. A lot of the early interactions were awkward, sometimes overtly uncomfortable, but that's an unavoidable part of the learning process (and I took a key lesson from it - it's okay to look like a dork, usually it's only our inner critic that turns it into an immortal sin).
Nowadays I feel a pang of sympathy when I see someone feeling shy or speaking in self-deprecating terms. I remember how that felt, and I remember how easy it would have been to have stayed inside that box for the rest of my life.
Glad I didn't.
Sadly, nothing. Stuck on 2 part time jobs, I see more layoffs than job posts, I'm about to be soft evicted from my current dwelling, and my country decided to start yet another needless war.
That question works in good times in a high trust society. Now it just reminds you how little there is to look forward to.
I'm glad for people who don't struggle with this, I just wish they would be more empathetic.
Talking to your fellow humans in all sorts of situations is how you can form actual knowledge within yourself derived from direct observation. Everything else is a filter and synthesis. How can you know "reality" if you don't interact with it directly?
I know the article's advice is to take a chance, and if I scare someone else so be it. But something about that feels wrong to me.
Or perhaps alternately I've learnt over the years to be more genuinely friendly.
I've seen men and women attempting to start a friendly conversation and have it backfire - because others can tell if someone is needy. Sometimes people are desperate for a conversation, but they sadly frighten away everyone.
I've also really leant into starting conversations with other guys. The stereotype is a bunch of old men yacking about "boring" stuff, and you can totally just accept that and have fun talking about anything. It's only boring if you lack the wit to discern something interesting within a conversation.
There's also an art to looking approachable, so that others can initiate a conversation with you. I am not skilled at it, but I recognize it. Or alternatively recognizing when someone is open to having a conversation started.
Most important line in this article. People will always find an excuse (and i'm including myself in this at times) but that is all it is, an excuse. Talking to people is what makes us human and its innate. You might not be the best conversationalist or whatever but you can still talk to people, no need to put any pressure on it.
I won't say I have conversations with strangers like that all the time, but it is 100% possible, and a lot of people really do appreciate it if you bother to talk to them. People often like being asked about themselves (I used to do cultural anthropology research so I have had quite a bit of practice too...).
There are of course reasons why it doesn't always work or becomes awkward. For example, gender is a factor - a significant part of the population is much more comfortable having same-sex conversations with strangers - not to mention other sociological factors around race, class, nationality, all the obvious things.
People, in most part, are good. Some are really quite lovely such that it reminds me of Bilbo's birthday speech:
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve"
TLDR: Small talk seems to be of trivial importance and to require minimal effort. Neither of this is true. Therefore, there is no shame in cultivating one's smalltalk muscle and being more prepared for it
I hope more and more people do not continue to believe that, there is so much good out there in the world and we all have to engage it or we're just letting the low trust side win and life becomes a lot less because of that. Everyone already into chatting for chatting sake now and then, please continue to do so. You're doing a world a huge service. The rest not, come join us, the water feels great!
Exactly. YMMV but that is 100% true in many urban areas. Too many people leads to less meaningful connections. I imagine much of this community lies in those urban hotspots.
>I hope more and more people do not continue to believe that
it's going to continue. Low trust societies are a structural issue, and I see little initiative to fix it. People constantly need to move around due to rising costs of living, there's no commmunity hubs, third places, frequently meeting clubs, etc. to build such community. Work hours are creeping up while compensation and stability is going down. Where would you find the time to meet up?
It's all an economic issue at the end of the day. There's a part of the equation where we don't "need" to work with as many people anymore to get by. But for he most part, it's very similar to the walk-ability issue in the US. There won't be some mass change all at once, but people take cues and change heir habits around heir environment.
For my environment, I'm a night owl and everything in my town is closed by 8pm or so. I don't like the loud environments of bars. So there's nowhere for me to really go.
A very particular case is London, which if you live on the internet you would think is some sort of hellscape where everyone is going to stab you or steal your phone on a bike if you dont run between safe spot to safe spot with eyes on your bike. But I've lived there for many years, still have friends there and visit regularly and that is so far from daily life that it is bizarrely amusing that people think that
The dangers of daily life, while real in some way, have been over-represented in the media, and now we're given the tools to completely avoid them. Whether on purpose or not (bad news sell much better than good news, after all), these are the consequences we're just seeing.
Because of this I do nicotine. Is this healthy? Probably not.
I was someone who was raised home schooled and it really altered my ability to communicate with my peers, which was something I had to really work on later in life. It surprises most people who know me when I tell them this, as I'm a pretty outgoing / gregarious person these days. It was a deliberate choice on my part, and I likely overindexed on it, leading to me now being highly social.
For those looking to do the same, I'll offer my own advice: how you engage socially depends on how large the audience is.
Small audiences (1-2 people):
If you don't know them: your goal should be to get them to smile without feeling threatened. A lot of people fail at that last part. Don't give someone a compliment like, "I like your pants" out of the blue - it may threaten them that you have alterior motives ("Are they attracted to me?", "Do they just like how my butt looks in these pants?"). Reframe compliments in a way that isn't threatening - ask them something instead like, "Hey weird question, but can I ask what brand those pants are? I want to get my sibling a birthday present and I think they'd really like those". It shows you see them as positive without it being a threatening interaction.
If you do know them: your goal should be to be interested in what they are saying. Find the topic that will stimulate your mind / get you excited to hear them talk more about it. Don't just gamify it and try to get them to talk more than you talk; that's an easy way to make yourself not look genuine. Dig and find gold - everyone has somethinig cool to say, it's your job to find that.
Medium audiences (3-8 people):
Be the facilitator. Don't butt in to get your own voice heard, butt in to segue to others who haven't had their voice heard. "Omg thats crazy X, hey Y you recently had something similar happen right?". Keep the flow going. Your goal should be to make everyone else feel like they've found gold in the conversation with new and interesting nuggest on a regular basis.
Large audiences (9-30 people):
These are basically meetings, and are the worst possible social interaction. Your goal should be to make these as smooth as possible and end them quickly so you can break to smaller sizes. Present facts clearly without emotion, keep things on topic so you can move past them.
Presentations (30+ people):
With this size you do the reverse of the prior size - the facts don't matter at all. Your goal should be to present emotions, not facts. Don't tell people what the % YoY growth is. Control how they should feel about the % YoY growth. This is the biggest #1 failure I see from inexperienced presenters - they aim to just present the info. People can read the info later - convey to them the emotion they should take away from the data. On every slide you have you should have a goal emotion, and you should reflect that emotion in your presentation. Look at any great presenter and you'll notice the same - they have the audience's emotions in their hands.
Even when people seem nice I generally keep a distance as I have to analyse them slowly instead of relying on social cues. I do pick up cues but processing them is not subconscious. My subconscious is not as generative and acts more like a buffer for conversation, so all the talking I do subconsciously has to be placed there beforehand instead of generating it with subconscious heuristics.
Do I lean over and say, "Hi, how are you guys doing? Really good coffee they have here, huh?"
I'm at the gym. It's a big-box gym. It's full of dudes wearing Airpods Max, a few couples in skintight athletic outfits, a few teens with phones on tripods filming themselves for Tiktok.
Do I come over, gesture for them to take off their headphones, and say, "Hi, how are you guys doing? That's really good form, on that lift, really good form. Keep it up!"
I'm waiting to cross a road. On the other side of the road is a Caltrain crossing. The traffic light cycle takes forever, and then the train comes and preempts it. And then preempts it again when people finish getting on. A crowd of parents with strollers are waiting to cross. People are returning from the farmer's market with bags of vegetables. People on bikes.
Do I lean over and say, "Hey, how are you guys all doing? It sure takes a while to cross. Wow!"
Most people are in headphones and give weird looks if you try doing small talks. I find it's easier to talk with older people.
Shamefully my tourist-shields were at maximum after experiences in Morocco/Ethiopia and similar, and many people I ignored and kept walking as fast as I could.
Eventually I found myself in a conversation I couldn't easily escape from and I realised... they're just being friendly. They were all just being friendly. I spoke to dozens afterwards and had nice little chats, with no motives, no scams, no sales, no brothers-uncle's shop that I must visit.
(I did get scammed in the taxi though, by someone who didn't make conversation :) )
Later I realized this is wrong on my part, talking is all about talking, let the vibe continue and don't let it die.
When I asked about him, he mentioned he’s Irish but moved on to tell me about his plans. How he was saving to have a farm, planned what to grow, animals - 15m of quite precise description. His story was his future.
This was striking for me - when asked most people tell you about their past, where they’re coming from. It was the first time I realised that where we’re going should be a bigger part of our story and identity.
I try to keep that conversation in mind as a lesson, and as a reminder to talk to people around.
general_reveal•12h ago
chatmasta•12h ago
dewey•12h ago
general_reveal•12h ago
johnnyanmac•7h ago
general_reveal•12h ago
mannycalavera42•11h ago
general_reveal•10h ago
It’s a good app, I’m not saying the people that run it are good lol.
aghuang•12h ago
Are there people still using the app? If so how are they making money?