Why is it that we hate ‘snowflakes’ so much?
The accepted answer is that most of us, especially males, are raised to respect aggression, emotional avoidance and undying (perhaps even irrational) loyalty to a social collective — all qualities seen in the archetype of the ‘protector’, and qualities coded into us as essential for survival as a species.
A new generation of humans is emerging. A faction that is arguably extremely sensitive to offensive communication and offensive action. The faction for whom even the words ‘kill’ and ‘rape’ must be censored to ‘unalive’ or ‘SA’ with a trigger warning. The faction who questions traditionalist narrative with an empathetic understanding of history and context, and a strong alignment to love and peace. A faction for whom morality and basic human empathy trumps loyalty. Can we call this faction part of a new generation or is it the cyclic re-emergence of a peaceful consciousness brought about by heavy polarization, war and distress? Perhaps they aren’t a new generation, perhaps the sixties’ ‘hippies’ were the last time such a group came about in the cycle of time and human history. But back to why we hate them so much.
Let’s discuss social perception of this faction of people who are seen as ‘snowflakes’.
I would measure the degree of problematic that something is, based on how much hurt and pain it causes other beings. On the spectrum of problematic things, this faction of people comes quite low if even considered to be on it. What are their most prominent qualities? Overly empathetic, overly understanding, exceptionally forgiving. These seem to be helpful qualities. So why is it that we are irked?
What I will say is this:
A couple of simple facts are that they are different than the archetype we respect, and that confrontation with their beliefs often highlights the ugly beliefs within ourselves– and this means we are likely to be predisposed to disliking this faction.
But the argument I am making is that our hate for this faction is more to do with the cues we have to trust or suspect one another. We as a people, in our collective conscious, trust ‘hate and violence’ as being genuine and authentic, while we suspect loving and peaceful intentions of being dishonest. It is not whether we agree/ disagree with what they have to say, it is whether we trust or do not trust them. It is not a question of differing ideology; it is a question of our cues for trust. We do not accept or reject the ideology the pacifists or extremists adopt; we accept or reject the degree of authenticity and pretense we perceive when confronted with their beliefs.
Ostensibly, human distrust of loving and peaceful intentions could come from universally observed human insecurity, lack of healthy affection growing up, and perhaps even a raw animalistic nature that is coded to protect ourselves for survival — the generationally ingrained fear of a Trojan Horse.
When interface with loving human nature brings more irritation than interface with hateful human nature, we have a serious issue. Our cues for trust and respect need to evolve for a new age of consciousness to emerge. One that recognises empathy over aggression as the core value of survival. And perhaps such a code for survival is not new at all. Afterall, the ecosystems that survive in nature are those with the most symbiotic relationships. There is no natural or non-manmade ecosystem that survives based on self-serving aggression. Every natural ecosystem survives through ingrained empathy and co-existence. Us humans are just late to the game.
