Ready to bury bodies
It took me a staggeringly long time to make the connection between my favoured group size of three people and my having two siblings. The three of us are my OG group. We fully have each other's backs. Much to my parents' dismay sometimes. They wanted us to be close... they got a rock-solid unit that outnumbered them. Whoops.
So this is my default mode of how groups are. Put me in a group - of any size - and it's instant loyalty. I'm super "We're all in this together."
This instinct has survived all sorts of calamitous group situations that have been very much the opposite. Despite that it's still how I approach groups, how I assume they will be.
I'm always looking for that safety and security in a group and in a way that makes me easier to burn. I've taken it real personal before, without entirely understanding why. When there's conflict within a group it throws me for a loop because to me that's not what groups do. Except that is in fact a very common, natural, and normal thing for groups to do.
What I have learned to be careful of is not expecting that from other people - remembering that's not what groups mean to everyone. Just because I am ready to bury bodies for someone just by virtue of being put in a room with them doesn't mean they would piss on me if I was on fire. That's not personal, that's just how people approach groups and relationships. Neither one is good or bad, they just are.
My other less useful group qualities include not contributing as much as I should and being wishy-washy vague passive about stuff. Because my assumption is I'm always in groups with stronger personalities who know what they want (cough, my wife and my sister, cough - also, you'll notice, a trio) and I'm happy going with the flow. Except of course not everyone wants that responsibility. Which is very fair!
Also, when I say I'm happy going with the flow I genuinely believe that. Except sometimes it's a mechanism for avoiding any sniff of conflict or getting my feelings hurt if I make a suggestion that gets overruled. And maybe that's why I learned to be happy going with the flow. Brains, you know.
A lot of people dislike threes. There's the whole 'third wheel' concern. Of course trios have their vulnerabilities. All sizes do. People worry about a two-against-one situation. Even though any size could devolve into an all-against-one. At least in a three you're never going to be that outnumbered. But again, this is my default feeling coming out. In nearly forty years of this whole group thing my siblings and I have fallen out for a couple of minutes total.
Most of my relationships occur within groups. Or, communities. My familial relationships within my family. Also as a friend, acquaintance, colleague, student, co-learner, volunteer.
Then it gets a bit trickier. Groups by default. In a geographical sense I'm part of the community of my direct neighbours, my street, my neighbourhood, this area, this city, this country and the wider society, as well as Europe and the world. I'm also a customer, client, consumer, visitor, service user. I'm a member of my demographic groups. And I'm definitely not ride or die with many members of my demographic groups or geographical communities. But here I am, locked in with them and having to figure that relationship out.
Not to be appropriative about it but the whole 'individual' thing is enormously European and there are many, many other approaches and philosophies, such as ubuntu. A lot more psychology is coming around to this approach. We are who we are in relation to others. We are made by our groups. Which is an approach I am fully subscribed to.
So how can I work better in groups? How can I be better at all those roles? These are the questions.
Part of Thinking about community and Good community
Previous •