The other day, at a conference for work, I overheard a conversation of a kind that I’d heard many times before. It involved three people: the main speaker (whom we’ll call Gossiper), an acquaintance (Listener) and a third person, not present, whom the conversation was about (Offender). In this case, I learned that Gossiper and Listener work at the same company. Gossiper works with Offender, and Listener knows who Offender is but doesn’t work with him. Apparently, Offender holds weekly one-hour team meetings with no real agenda and they’re a waste of everyone’s time. Gossiper would’ve told you this in a much more colorful way, but you’re getting it from me; sorry. But let me paraphrase the last few lines of Gossiper’s rant while they’re still somewhat fresh in my memory.

I was like, “Are we supposed to present our work for [X] in this meeting?” And he said like, “Oh no, I just want to make sure everyone’s on the same page and has a chance to share.” And I’m like, “Okay well either put a real plan together or don’t waste our time with this s**t,” but I didn’t say that, I was like, “Okay, I guess we can do that.”

“And I’m like, ‘…,’ but I didn’t say that”

She didn’t say it to him. She didn’t say anything like it, actually; she didn’t express that idea to Offender in any way. I think she should have. I think this is a perfect example of a situation where even the gentlest (but clear) expression of resistance would do much more good than insincere compliance. If you don’t agree, then you’d better stop reading here, because boy am I going to double down on this idea…

About gossip

Gossip is advertised weakness. You probably feel that gossiping is morally wrong on some level—probably a mild level. I don’t care about that right now. I’m not even going to talk about how gossip destroys the trust between the gossiper and the object of gossip. Today, I want to tell you something completely separate about gossip. It’s not a moral idea; it’s about the completely amoral reality of power and ability vs. personal weakness. Gossip is an an unconscious expression of personal weakness.

Now, let me generalize the interaction above: Gossiper is enthusiastically talking to Listener about a third person, Offender. Offender has done something annoying to Gossiper, or something harmful (probably a bit of both). And, most importantly: in the moment of truth, Gossiper did not communicate any of this to Offender—not even a modest expression of discontent.

DISCLAIMER: The term “gossip” can cover a broader range of scenarios than this, but the sort of “indirect protest” I just described is what I’m talking about when I use the word “gossip” in this post.

Weakness

Back to our dear Gossiper: they had a strong negative feeling about something that Offender did. So, why did they suppress their own self-assertion in that moment? Well, I’ve been Gossiper before, and I’ve been Listener, and anyway this is my blog, so here’s my answer: Weakness. By that, I mean an inability to act in one’s own best interests. You might say it’s the fear of confrontation; or fear of taking a public stand on something and possibly having one’s own ideas challenged; or fear of losing control of one’s emotions while trying to communicate. All of that can be (and probably is) true, but weakness—that inability—remains the end result of it all.

And the next thing that happens is that Gossiper finds Listener and vents about it. And Gossiper is eloquent in their analysis of Offender. They’ve spent time thinking about the offence, they’ve got complete theories on why it happened, and they won’t soon run out of words to say about it. Notice the level of enthusiasm. You’d think that less energy would be spent on a third-party Listener who is inconsequential to the real issue. If it were all about a rational calculation of energy spent vs. positive change, then we’d expect this. But we find that just the opposite is true. This type of gossip isn’t a rational move; rather, it serves an emotional need.

This emotional need is not driven by Offender’s abrasive words or actions. It’s not about boring meetings anymore. And it’s not exactly about the reality of weakness either; weakness itself doesn’t drive people to action. There’s something else.

The fear of powerlessness

Along with the feeling of weakness comes a new fear: apart from the original fear of confrontation with Offender (the opportunity for which has long passed), Gossiper bears the fear that they will fail again in the same way, that this is how they are. It’s the nagging fear that they won’t get what they want in life because, maybe, they just don’t have the guts/ability to ask for it.

The fear of powerlessness leads to aggressive theatrics. To go for an extreme example: look at the predictable psychological profiles of people who commit mass shootings, or of those who join terrorist organizations. As a milder example, watch how public arguments get louder and more bitter when one party starts to see that they’re losing. Even in chimps and other primates, we find that the low-status individuals have lower levels of serotonin (the “happy calm” hormone) and are more likely to act aggressively and impulsively. All of this, by the way, can happen subconsciously. Gossiper isn’t consciously reasoning that their fear of powerlessness will be alleviated by ranting to a friend, but the impulse is there. And if they do consciously examine that impulse, I believe they’ll find the same root cause that I’m finding.

And so Gossiper gets oh-so-excitable toward Listener, who is not even related to the problem. Gossiper has felt their own weakness, fears they might be powerless to self-assert, and so the remedy for these nagging feelings is to act out drastically in order to signal (to themselves and others): “Don’t mess with me, there are real repercussions.”

But it’s too late. When you’re airing your grievance to the wrong audience, it takes a lot of energy to actually get the feeling out of your system. And it still doesn’t really work. Those long diatribes of gossip and slander always seem to end with exhaustion rather than some great emotional resolution.

Ability

By contrast, expressing oneself in a meaningful confrontation requires very little energy to give real emotional satisfaction and avoid that fear of powerlessness. In a meaningful confrontation, words are heavy; they actually do things. It only takes a few of them to make one feel totally heard, and yes, even appropriately powerful. “I think we need to have a more solid agenda in these meetings.” Wow. And no matter what happens next, whether the issue at hand gets resolved in their favor or not, the deeper issue of ability and weakness, security and fear is completely resolved. You looked someone in the face and told them something they didn’t want to hear, because it was true to you; if they continue to cause you trouble, you’ll know that it’s coming from a failure on their end and not yours. And if the right move is to assert yourself more forcefully next time, you’re confident you’ll be able to do that, because you’ve done it before.

Gossip as an offense to Listener

Another thing: this whole situation is not really fair to Listener. And here let me reiterate that I am talking about this rant-y, “indirect protest” type of gossip. I’m not in denial that petty water-cooler gossip is fun for both the speaker and listener.

Back to our situation: Listener is being presented, in great detail, with a problem that they have no power to solve. They are being forced to take on all the frustration of Gossiper, without any of the ability to affect the situation. But of course, the point of listening is not always to fix someone else’s problems; often the point is to empathize with them in their situation, which brings us to:

The empathy problem

When I find myself in the role of Listener, and Gossiper tells me all the things they didn’t say, they lose me. They lose my empathy for a moment, and here’s why. I like to think that I embrace confrontation when it matters. That doesn’t mean I do, but I like to think that I do. In my imagination, I do it perfectly every time, because in my imagination I can be my ideal self. When Gossiper shares their experiences with me, I use my imagination to put myself in their shoes and empathize with them. When Gossiper walks me through a decision that I’d feel guilty making myself, my imagination (and empathy) halts. 

“Advertised”

Yeah, what’s that word doing in the title?

If you have a big ego (like I do) then this part will matter to you. When Gossiper vents to Listener about what they would’ve said to Offender (and how harshly and definitively they would’ve said it), they’re advertising their moment of weakness without knowing it. The more enthusiastically they rip Offender apart, the greater the weakness they’re signaling. They’re saying, “This is how strongly I feel about the issue, and yet I still wasn’t able to act on it.” Don’t get me wrong: to be open about your weaknesses is a good thing—if it’s with someone you trust and if it’s a conscious decision. But that’s not what this is. This is the fear of powerlessness being channeled away from its origin and into an inconsequential act of aggression. Here’s how these conversations could go:

… I should’ve said something at the time, but I didn’t, and now I’m so mad about it.

Now they’re actually acknowledging the root of their frustration, and maybe they’ll go on to address the fear of failing again. Maybe Listener will help.

I’ve heard plenty of reasons not to gossip, but none have served as a better deterrent than the idea of gossip as advertised weakness. If only there were as good an argument against eavesdropping…

–pdf