On Valentines and Self-Monitoring
Happy Valentine’s Day and Quirky Alone Day!
Above is Dreena Burton’s "You Got Peanut Butter in My Chocolate" Cookie from Eat, Drink & Be Vegan, which I made as one big cookie that I carved into a heart and topped with leftover ganache. After it was refrigerated for a bit to set the ganache, it was spectacular with some fresh strawberries and blueberries.
What is "self-monitoring," you ask?
I just happened to be thinking about how activists, generally speaking, tend to have a different, shall we say, communication style than people who at least don’t wear their beliefs on their sleeves. Time after time, and this is especially true of animal people, there’s an accusation of misanthropy that is often traced back to the faint whiff of disdain that some people have for the way humans treat animals.
I have definitely exhibited misanthropic tendencies as I can get so disgusted at the way we run roughshod over anything and anyone in our way. That’s not some lofty human trait we should be proud of that attests to our intelligence, industriousness and superiority–that’s greed, arrogance and ignorance at work.
A couple of people in my social circle are what I call "politicians." They are gorgeous, articulate, passionate and charismatic (and they’re not running for any public office), and they can walk into a room and win over every person in it. They make people feel special and smart and they compliment every person several times during a conversation. They are popular and everyone wants to be around them.
This morning, on Live Science, "Why Perfect Dates Make Lousy Partners," I was provided with some language about this topic. It turns out that popular people usually do a significant amount of "self-monitoring." This is what makes them able to fit in anywhere, with anyone. They are attentive to social cues and use those cues constantly. Social cues are their discursive mechanism. People who self-monitor immediately notice if someone is getting upset or losing interest and they quickly shift whatever it is that they’re doing to manage the situation in their favor. I see this at least once a week at certain functions and I’m always amazed that I appear to be the only one who notices. Everyone else simply adores the "politicians" for their charisma and they way they make people feel.
As it turns out, there’s a downside to self-monitoring: "High self-monitors may appear to be the kind of people we want to have relationships with, but they themselves are less committed to and less happy in their relationships than low self-monitors."
Low monitors are my point, here. I can be a high monitor for about 15-30 minutes if I need to, and then I become completely exhausted because it takes so much energy to be someone you’re not. But when I self-monitor I have dramatically different interactions than when I don’t. In my experience, self-monitoring results in superficial exchanges largely designed to manipulate (even if simply to make someone happy by saying what they want to hear), and low self-monitoring results in honest conversations about things that really matter to people.
Because we are all salespeople, charged with convincing those around us that veganism is desirable and just, we could probably all benefit from developing self-monitoring skills. After all, before you can persuade someone to go vegan, they have to be listening. They have to like you.
Than you for this article. I would not be surprised if people who do a lot of monitoring are also very good at making friends with animals! I do a lot of "monitoring" and think that this is key to having meaningful conversations with people (and other animals) who we don't know that well. Getting past superficial chit chat requires being aware of how the other person is reacting to you, because like any other skittish social creature, people are on guard with those they don't know. I am not suggesting that we sugarcoat important issues, act insincerely, only talk about dumb things–something your "politician" descriptor kind of implies. But I have been shocked at how socially clueless some activist-types can behave–putting people on the defensive is not the way to precipitate an intelligent conversation about important issues like animal rights. Because we live in such a fearful generation, sometimes you do have to coddle folks a little to avoid scaring them away from a deep talk. I'm telling you, most people aren't as stuck in their ways as you'd think, just back off and let them explore the topic on their own terms, rather than forcing them to play defense.
first of all, i appreciate the link to the article! it's right up my alley and i subscribe to that journal, so i'll be eagerly awaiting the issue so i can read the study in full. thanks!
while i wholeheartedly agree with your last point–that it's important for activists to be more aware of how they are communicating with others–i think you are drawing too dark a line between high self-monitors and low self-monitors here. high self-monitors are not necessarily as manipulative as you suggest–they can be, certainly, but that's not really the point for most high self-monitors. rather, they are often interested in appropriateness, and they try to be perceptive not to "manage the situation in their favor" as you say, but in an effort to be conversationally- or situationally-appropriate. this doesn't mean that they're not being themselves; it means that they are trying to gauge the situation and adapt as necessary. for instance, a high self-monitor on a first date would probably be careful not to unload all of the details of their failed relationships; instead sticking to topics that are more neutral, positive, or at least that don't unload all of their baggage in hour one. 😉 i don't see this as being insincere; just being aware of that whole "there's a time and a place for everything" idea. anyhow, back to what i started with–i think self-monitoring in our conversations with omnis is incredibly important. those conversations are something i struggle with constantly, and i haven't totally figured out my best strategies yet.
maggie, i really liked your take on the whole thing. very interesting observations!
This is really interesting!! I wonder if there are gender/race connections to who's a high self-monitor–I remember learning way back in my intro to women's studies class in college something about how women (or any person in a lower position in the societal hierarchy)… was it that they listen more? I can't quite think of the phrasing right now–but the gist was basically that those of us who lack power in society learn real fast to read cues & stuff when we're in conversation w/those who have power, because we need to do that to survive.
Also I am always interested in hearing more about how folks manage to have successful conversations w/omnis–ones that open the door for them to think about stuff on their own. I think I've done my most successful advertising for veg*n (relatively new vegan, long-time vegetarian, hence the *) living just by living–I mean, friends & coworkers are generally interested in, & pleased w/, stuff I cook, etc. etc. So they see that vegan food means yumminess! But I would still like to gain more skills in talking openly w/omnis about all this.
Actually, girl most likely to, though most people fall somewhere in the middle, there is definitely a dark line between high and low self-monitors. I think the people who find that middle ground where they are simply engaged in active listening rather than manipulation, and telling the truth and raising controversial points while paying close attention to their delivery, have got it right. I know a couple of those, and it's certainly what I strive for, but parts of my life are filled with extremes. I get to see high and low self-monitors at work weekly, and I do in fact experience highs as insincere much of the time, and that might be because I know them well outside of those events where I see them.
Meanwhile, the low self-monitors act the same wherever they are–they're just saying what they think is right, and they don't pay much attention to the venue or the audience. I wonder how effective they are at spreading their message or being heard.
I've never been an "all things in moderation" person. I think that's ridiculous. But this just might be a situation where moderation–or better yet, moderating in moderation, is a fine idea. Especially, as you say, in our conversations with omnis.