r/science • u/FreeHugs23 • 7h 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/134
u/maddallena 5h 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.
36
u/mokujin42 3h ago edited 3h 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?
16
u/dovahkiitten16 2h 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.
4
u/AstuteStoat 2h 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.
-1
u/Beebeeb 1h 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.
1
u/weiss-walker 3h 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.
2
u/wwaxwork 3h 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.
•
30
u/hausitron 4h 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.
9
u/QwertzOne 4h 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.
10
u/Material-Command-854 3h 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.
239
u/hananobira 6h 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.
88
u/spacestonkz 6h 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.
35
u/hananobira 5h 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.
4
u/Clyde_Frog_FTW 4h 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.
5
u/CalicoValkyrie 3h 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.
1
u/spacestonkz 3h ago
Still better to think you might have a chance of making a change rather than being ground down and feeling like you have the worth of mud.
0
u/CalicoValkyrie 2h ago
Still better to play Russian roulette than getting shot in the face.
•
u/spacestonkz 20m ago
That doesn't even make sense. You're getting shot in the face either way. Do you want a head pat or a slap first?
0
u/Zeliek 2h ago
Yeah but it’s better to be getting boxes of chocolates which may have nuts in them, than chucking nuts directly at each other’s faces with no chocolate to be had.
2
u/CalicoValkyrie 1h ago
It's better to not eat boxes of chocolate at all, watch everyone else eat their's no problems, and while they tell you to come on! Take that risk! Think positive and nothing bad will happen!
3
u/Material-Command-854 3h 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.
•
u/spacestonkz 17m ago
Regular negativity is just firing you for speaking up for "performance reasons".
At least toxic positivity leaves room for hope, even if it's bad. That's the part the people shitting on any not 100% altruistic charity are missing. It's better than the alternative.
-2
u/erevos33 4h ago
So its ok if im a billionaire as long as im charitable?
6
u/inbigtreble30 4h ago
More like charitable billionaires suck less than cartoonishly evil ones?
0
u/erevos33 3h 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.
0
u/Independent_Sea_836 1h ago
That's not true. A billionaire that "pays their fair share" enriches the country that they reside and pay taxes in. A billionaire that is charitable can help many countries, and many more people.
2
-1
u/inbigtreble30 3h 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.
2
u/erevos33 3h ago
Question:
If i burn down and pillage 10 villages but build an orphanage for the victims, is that a good thing?
1
u/inbigtreble30 2h ago
Question: if you are an evil person who has burned down a village, is it better to build an orphanage for the children of the village, or is it better to let the children die of starvation?
1
u/erevos33 2h ago
I would hazard a guess that society should get rid of said person. But hey, thats me.
And to answer your question, it doesnt matter. Damage has been done. More to the point, you wouldnt need an orphanage if the village want burnt down.
1
u/inbigtreble30 2h ago
The hardest part of living in a society is reconciling the fact that evil will continue to happen. How do we move forward afyer the village has burnt down. We want to prevent as many villages as possible from burning, but once they are gone, the aftermath must be dealt with.
There are currently billionaires in the world, and the global economy is set up in such a way that it is unlikey they will all have their capital redistributed tomorrow. How can those of us not in a position to change the global economy tonight move forward with this knowledge?
Perfect is the enemy of good sometimes. Arguing that the past should not have happened may be true, but it's not always constructive.
→ More replies (0)-1
4
u/spacestonkz 4h ago
It's better than them sitting on a pile of money like a dragon and doing nothing that benefits others, yes.
0
u/erevos33 3h 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.
15
u/PaleReaver 5h 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.
4
u/Material-Command-854 3h 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.
9
u/plsQuestionOurselves 6h 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.
5
u/goobydoobie 4h 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.
5
u/Autunite 5h 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.
-1
u/nonhiphipster 6h ago
I’d prefer people be honest and transparent.
Your problem is you’re making it a binary choice.
10
u/coolcalmdreamydoze 5h 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 4h 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.
1
u/Its_da_boys 5h 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
5
u/dolphone 4h 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.
5
u/Material-Command-854 3h 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.
2
u/Its_da_boys 4h 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
2
1
u/gentlemandinosaur 3h ago
I disagree with this. I would rather have “fake kindness” to “genuine asshole” like any day of the week. I could give two shits if it’s genuine or not. Being kind is beneficial no matter the gain to the individual.
3
u/Material-Command-854 3h ago
No, fake kindness makes it extremely difficult to know who to trust. If they use it as a reason to take advantage of you, that’s very, very bad and should be condemned. Appearing to be kind isn’t the same thing as having a net positive impact on the person you’re helping.
1
u/spacestonkz 4h ago
If some people get fed because there's a camera, that's likely still better than no food and no camera.
1
-3
u/xGALEBIRDx 4h ago
Well in a roundabout way, this is sort of saying that an element of womens compasion and empathy is entirely self serving and competitive in disguise which is true for many people, but appears to be more prominent in female interactions.
It can be good obviously, things the world needs more of, but because it can be used as a more self serving tool, it can be non genuine and not truly altruistic as its more about the perception of others and signaling.
1
u/Iorith 2h ago
One could argue it's impossible to be truly, 100% altruistic and genuine.
0
u/xGALEBIRDx 2h ago edited 39m ago
Thats true, but this study is explicitly about women,and the surprise if the researchers having their expectations found not true.
49
u/ChickenOfTheFuture 6h ago
Using kindness as a tool and being kind are not the same thing.
24
u/BluCurry8 5h 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.
13
u/Asleep_Control_2564 5h ago
Yeah, it's easy to criticize motivations, but who's doing the work. And I think that's an important question
4
u/BluCurry8 5h 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.
0
u/Material-Command-854 3h ago
Does the person who is being “kind” feel bad if they negatively impact someone they’re supposedly helping? If they don’t, they’re trash
3
u/Asleep_Control_2564 2h ago
Example? Compassion fatigue is a real thing, but I'd imagine most people would care even on just a utilitarian level on top of a human level
2
u/17Girl4Life 1h 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.
10
u/Goldenslicer 4h 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.
3
u/dovahkiitten16 2h 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.
11
u/Euphoric_Promise3943 6h ago
Isn’t the social contract basically being kind in order to expect kindness or compassion in return?
12
u/bigfatfurrytexan 5h 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.
0
u/dolphone 4h 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.
2
u/bigfatfurrytexan 4h 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.
42
u/Smithy2232 6h 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 6h ago
As said in another comment, being kind vs performing kindness are two entirely different things.
7
u/grundar 4h 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 3h ago
The impact on the person you’re being kind to needs to be net positive.
5
u/Smithy2232 6h 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.
-9
u/BlackPresident 6h ago
I’d say “being kind” is just hiding the motives from yourself
3
u/helaku_n 5h ago
If you don't talk about your acts of kindness publicly or even between your friends, it's mostly kindness without ulterior motives.
16
u/fireitup622 6h 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?
2
u/Long_Reindeer3702 6h 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?
2
u/Mattarm51 5h 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.
6
u/ceciliabee 6h 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.
22
u/Brrdock 6h 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
-5
u/chicu111 6h ago
I just wanna be rewarded by god out of fear I’d be eternally dammed if i don’t do good and my only motivation is deeply religious it’s not about you it’s about me and my afterlife rewards idgaf about you
3
13
u/Smithy2232 6h 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/Djcnote 6h ago
It's the intention behind it not the act itself
6
u/hananobira 5h 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.
6
u/Smithy2232 6h 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 6h ago
She'd have to look inside and be honest with herself , only she knows the answer .
3
u/Smithy2232 5h 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 5h ago
Except a lot of times people(she) have no idea why they love the people(things)they love
13
u/rainywanderingclouds 4h ago edited 4h 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.
3
u/Ollythebug 2h 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.
4
u/torbaldthegreat 2h ago
Sure but the discussion is about altruism which is that specific definition. Even the social gain removes the act as altruism.
2
u/Just_Another_Scott 1h 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.
0
u/12-34 1h ago
Altruism doesn't exist.
It's a definitional difference, but every "altruistic" act ever done was done for selfish purposes. The actor either determined the net gain to them was bigger than the costs, or the act wasn't worth the reflection and analysis, which is itself a selfish act of gauging one's time as having more value than the result of the act.
I open doors for people, do free expensive work for the destitute, donate my time to charities, give money, etc. because I find personal value in doing it. Making others' lives better makes me happy, so I do it. Others receive the gain from my actions, which is the entire point of the actions -- *I* receive personal and ethical benefits from the "altruistic" acts, just through increasing others' wellbeing.
This in no way diminishes the import or nobility of helping others. It simply acknowledges that humans are independent, sentient life forms.
8
u/strangescript 5h 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.
3
u/beefyzac 5h 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.
3
u/Lawnlady1980 4h 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.
14
u/Long_Reindeer3702 6h 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.
17
1
u/randompersonx 6h 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.
13
u/Long_Reindeer3702 6h 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.
14
u/randompersonx 6h 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.
3
5
u/-elemental 6h 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.
2
u/Embarrassed-Wave3237 3h 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.
2
2
u/Wellslapmesilly 2h 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.
4
u/Feychilde 6h 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 5h ago
“New research suggests” something obvious to everyone who’s ever been to a church or worked in a non-profit.
1
1
u/Silver_Choice_1649 2h ago
why does the title say “how women can use altruistic behavior to gain status” and not just say “how people…..”
•
u/morganational 52m ago
Wait a second here... Are you saying that.. women manipulate others?! Sacre Bleu! *clutches pearls
•
u/Optimalfucksgiven 50m 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
u/helaku_n 6h 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 6h ago
Isn't "gain(ing) status, strengthen(ing) relationships, and navigat(ing) social hierarchies" like 80% of life?
1
1
u/Popular-Capital6330 5h ago
no kidding. I can't roll my eyes any harder.
Virtue-signalling is as old as time itself.
1
u/RadBlackWoman 5h ago
Is this just describing sociopathic behavior through a gendered lens?
The comments seem to show people taking it that way.
1
u/Harha 6h ago
One can be kind without some hidden selfish motive.
5
u/BluCurry8 5h ago
Yes, but people don’t realize that we are socialized by incentives. Donating time is usually a requirement to get into university. It is necessary for getting promotions. So I am not sure why this upsets people.
0
u/JoystickBaby 5h 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.
0
u/SquareAggravating579 4h ago
Old news, this has been known for centuries. Helping people and being awesome helps yourself, it's a basic fact of work.
The whole "competitive" side of things, like trying to outcompete people on being the best, is ehh. I've seen trying to compete on being the "biggest martyr" of course but that's more of a cringe family-based thing.
I just try to be nice because it helps me in the long run. Though I don't really care about that, I guess I just don't want to be an arsehole.
0
u/yrddog 2h ago
My daughter has a friend who's mother was a bit standoffish. Several years of invites to playdates and parties declined with socially acceptable reasons. First football game of the season, the friend's twin snaps his leg. I bring the family a sympathy gift, and suddenly all invitations start getting accepted immediately.
She just didn't know me that well, and we had the opportunity to connect over a moment of kindness. I wasn't expecting this result, I was just concerned and wanting to support them after a scary experience.
-3
6h ago
[deleted]
4
u/BluCurry8 5h ago
Retirees volunteer all the time. It is because they now have time. It also has the benefits of getting them out of the house and socializing them in the community.
2
u/Material-Command-854 3h ago
Some people do genuinely feel good when they feel they’ve made a positive difference in someone else’s life
2
2
u/Asleep_Control_2564 5h ago
There's different motivations for different stages of life. And I think it's worth us asking if we care more about the motivation or the result?
-3
u/shwilliams4 6h ago
You needed research to know this? Maybe to measure the effect it has, but any set of middle school girls or women in wealthy families demonstrate this.
-1
-2
u/CharacterMedical7409 5h ago
Even saying good job is lowkey saying you are better than them even if you don't mean it that way.
-9
u/madmaxGMR 6h ago
All acts of kindness are for selfish purposes. Lie to yourselves all you want, its true.
8
u/tranqofmind 5h ago
You see a puppy starving on the street in the rain its shivering and cold. You would save it because you feel empathy not because you have anything to gain.
4
u/coolcalmdreamydoze 5h ago
I agree, not to mention that in many cases an act of kindness can put a strain on you financially, mentally, and/or physically. If you didn't get to at least feel good about it, nobody would do anything kind ever. If that's selfish, I think it's okay to be selfish sometimes!
-4
u/madmaxGMR 5h ago
Empathy is a trick the brain does because it helps with its survival.
2
u/supamario132 5h ago
Helps with the gene's survival. Not necessarily the individual's*
But setting aside the fact that we are a social species and there are many behaviors we exhibit that clearly prioritize the community over the individual as an evolutionary benefit, empathy is still empathy. People who experience it are still taking actions without an expectation of personal benefit
Insistence on strict adaptationism doesn't change the fact that people are being kind without selfish purposes
-4
u/madmaxGMR 5h ago
I disagree.
Whenever we are faced with the fact that everyone is in it for themselves, a wave of dread washes over us, because that would mean our survival isnt based on rules which guard us, but the whims of others, which we cant control. So we lie to ourselves, that fluffy cozy lie that theres a human spirit, theres a purpose, theres order.
Its the only way society can exist. Within this lie.2
u/supamario132 4h ago
This didn't address anything. No one is arguing that people can't be selfish or that we aren't at the whims of others. Whats being argued is that sometimes people act altruistically, which is not at odds with what you responded with
Your original position is that ALL acts of kindness are for selfish purposes
4
u/content_billionaire 5h ago
When I was in college and barely afloat financially because of a medical situation I one day got a doorbell ring and when I opened it no one was there but there was an envelope with $500 in it. I still to this day don't know who did that. What was selfish about what that person did anonymously?
-2
u/madmaxGMR 5h ago
A person who feels purpose and feels like they are a good person for doing that. They did it to feel that, cause they needed that. Why they needed that, is irrelevant. It helped their survival directly or indirectly. You need these lies to belong to the society that ensures your survival. No one does ANYTHING for anyone else. Even the ultimate sacrifice is done because in that moment, the brain arrives at the conclusion it needs that.
5
•
u/AutoModerator 7h 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.