By+Carlin+Flora
Even the best of friends can fill you with tension and make you sick. Why does friendship so readily turn toxic?
即便是最好的朋友也能讓你神经紧张,厌烦不已。为何友情这么容易变质呢?
Think of a time when you sat across from a friend and felt truly understood. Deeply known. Maybe you sensed how she was bringing out your “best self”, your cleverest observations and wittiest jokes. She encouraged you. She listened, articulated1 one of your patterns, and then gently suggested how you might shift it for the better. The two of you gossiped about your mutual friends, skipped between shared memories, and delved into cherished subjects in a seamlessly scripted exchange full of shorthand and punctuated with knowing expressions.2 Perhaps you felt a warm swell of admiration for her, and a simultaneous sense of pride in your similarity to her. You felt deep satisfaction to be valued by someone you held in such high regard: happy, nourished and energized through it all.
But even our easiest and richest friendships can be laced with tensions and conflicts, as are most human relationships. They can lose a bit of their magic and fail to regain it, or even fade out altogether for tragic reasons, or no reason at all. Then there are the not-so-easy friendships; increasingly difficult friendships; and bad, gutwrenching3, toxic friendships. The pleasures and benefits of good friends are abundant, but they come with a price. Friendship, looked at through a clear and wide lens, is far messier and more lopsided4 than it is often portrayed.
The first cold splash on an idealised notion of friendship is the data showing that only about half of friendships are reciprocal5. This is shocking to people, since research confirms that we actually assume nearly all our friendships are reciprocal. Can you guess who on your list of friends wouldnt list you?
One explanation for imbalance is that many friendships are aspirational: a study of teens shows that people want to be friends with popular people, but those higher up the social hierarchy6 have their pick. A corroborating7 piece of evidence is the finding that your Facebook “friends” always have, on average, more “friends” than you do. So much for friendship being an oasis8 from our status-obsessed world.
“Ambivalent” relationships, in social science parlance,9 are characterised by interdependence and conflict. You have many positive and negative feelings toward these people. You might think twice about picking up when they call. These relationships turn out to be common, too. Close to half of ones important social network members are identified as ambivalent. Granted, more of those are family members than friends, but still, for friendship, its another push off the pedestal10.endprint
Friends who are loyal, reliable, interesting companions—good!—can also be bad for you, should they have other qualities that are less desirable. We know through social network research that depressed friends make it more likely youll be depressed, obese friends make it more likely youll become obese, and friends who smoke or drink a lot make it more likely youll smoke and drink more.
Other “good” friends might have, or start to have, goals, values or habits that misalign with your current or emerging ones. They certainly havent “done” anything to you. But they arent a group that validates11 who you are, or that will effortlessly lift you up toward your aims over time. Stay with them, and youll be walking against the wind.
In addition to annoying us, these mixed-bag12 friendships harm our health. A study shows that blood pressure was higher with ambivalent relationships than it was with friends or outright enemies. This is probably due to the unpredictability of these relationships. Ambivalent relationships have also been associated with increased cardiovascular13 reactivity, greater cellular ageing, lowered resistance to stress, and a decreased sense of wellbeing.
“Frenemies”14 are perhaps a separate variety in that they are neatly multi-layered—friendliness atop rivalry or dislike—as opposed to the ambivalent relationships admixture15 of love, hate, annoyance, pity, devotion and tenderness. Plenty of people have attested to the motivating force of a frenemy at work, as well as in the realms of romance and parenting.
As with unhappy families, there are countless ways a friend can be full-on “bad”, no ambivalence about it. A bad friend makes you feel competitive with her other friends; she talks much more about herself than you do about yourself; she criticises you in a self-righteous way but is defensive when you criticise her; she makes you feel youre walking on eggshells and might easily spark her anger or disapproval; she has you on an emotional rollercoaster where one day shes responsive and complimentary and the next she freezes you out.
Some of our most hurtful friendships start out good, but then became bad. As Diane de Poitiers, the 16th-century mistress of King Henry II of France, said: “To have a good enemy, choose a friend: he knows where to strike.”
When a friend breaks up with us, or disappears without explanation, it can be devastating. Even though the churning and pruning of social networks is common over time,16 we still somehow expect friendships to be forever. Friendship break-ups challenge our vision of who we are, especially if weve been intertwined with a friend for many years. Pulsing with hurt in the wake of a friend break-up, we hurl him or her into the “bad friends” basket.17endprint
But, sometimes, we have to drop a friend to become ourselves. In Connecting in College (2016), the sociologist Janice McCabe argues that ending friendships in young adulthood is a way of advancing our identities. We construct our self-images and personalities against our friends, in both positive and negative ways.
As much as we need to take responsibility for being better friends and for our part in relationship conflict and break-ups, quite a few factors surrounding friendship are out of our control. Social network embeddedness18, where you and another person have many friends in common, for instance, is a big challenge. Lets say someone crosses a line, but you dont want to disturb the group, so you dont declare that you no longer think of him as a friend. You pull back from him, but not so much that it will spark a direct confrontation, whereby people would then be forced to invite only one of you, but not both, to events. Sometimes we are yoked19 to bad friends.
The forces that dictate whom we stay close to and whom we let go can be mysterious even to ourselves. Arent there people you like very much whom you havent contacted in a long time? And others you dont connect with as well whom you see more often? The former group might be pencilling you into their “bad friend” column right now.
Dealing with bad friends, getting dumped by them, and feeling disappointed with them is a stressful part of life, and it can harm your body and mind. Yet having no friends at all is a far worse fate. Imagine a childs desperation for a playmate, a teenagers deep longing for someone who “gets” her, or an adults realization that there is no one with whom he can share a failure or even a success. Loneliness is as painful as extreme thirst or hunger. John Cacioppo, a professor of sociology at the University of Chicago, has found associations between loneliness and depression, obesity, alcoholism, cardiovascular problems, sleep dysfunction, high blood pressure, the progression of Alzheimers disease20, cynical world views and suicidal thoughts. But if you have friend problems, you have friends—and that means youre pretty lucky.
設想一下和朋友相处的时光。她坐在你对面,你感觉她很懂你。你觉得知你者她也。或许你认为是她让你成为“最好的自己”。你最聪明的观察视角和最睿智的笑话都是她在场时才能有。她鼓励你,听你诉说,分析你的思路,温和地给你提建议,帮你向更好的方向调整。你们一起聊着熟人的八卦,重温过往回忆,探讨着喜爱的话题,交流起来如行云般流畅,言语间尽是缩略的表达,还夹杂着你们熟悉的暗语。或许你胸中还涌起对她的赞赏之情,同时为自己与其有相似之处而感到一丝骄傲。你觉得很满足,因为你对这个朋友如此看重,而她也将你视为珍贵的朋友。这样的友情使你开心,给你滋养,让你活力四射。endprint
然而,就像大多数社交关系一样,即便是最轻松最深厚的友谊也会有紧张和冲突的时候。这时,友谊的魔力会部分消散,难再找回,有时甚至由于不幸的原因或毫无缘由地统统消逝。于是,曾经美好的友谊就会退化成相处起来不轻松的友谊,日渐困难的友谊和坏的、给人添堵的“有毒的”友谊。好朋友带给我们无尽的欢乐和益处,但这是有代价的。从一个清晰而全面的视角看,友谊要比平素人们所描述的更纷繁复杂,更不平衡。
给理想化的友情泼的第一盆冷水是数据显示,仅有一半的友谊是双向的。这一结论让人震惊,因为研究表明我们以为几乎所有的友谊都是双向的。你能猜到自己的朋友名单中,哪些人实际上并没有把你当朋友吗?
对于这种失衡的一个解释是很多人在建立友谊时是有所期待的:一项对青少年的研究表明,很多人喜欢和人气高的人交朋友,但是那些在社交圈子中拥有更高地位的人在择友时自有他们的考量。对于这项研究结果的一个确凿的证据就是:一般来说,你在Facebook上的“朋友”所拥有的“朋友”数量都比你多。在如今这个势利的社会,还指望把友谊当做沙漠中的一片绿洲或许是要求太高了。
用社会科学的术语来说,“模棱两可”关系的特征是互相依赖但又充满矛盾。处在这种关系之中,你对另一方有很多正负交织的感情。当他们打来电话时,你会迟疑一会儿才接听。而这样的关系也很普遍。一个人重要的社交关系中有一半的关系是模棱两可的。就算这一半人中家庭成员占多数,这也会动摇友谊的基础。
那些忠诚、可靠、有趣的伙伴固然很好,但也可能对你产生不良影响,如果这些人身上存在不太好的品质的话。对社交网络的研究表明,抑郁的朋友更有可能让你也变抑郁,肥胖的朋友更有可能会让你变胖,而抽烟嗜酒的朋友可能会让你也变得更加依赖香烟和酒精。
其他“好”朋友可能有或开始有一些目标、价值观或习惯与你目前或刚开始出现的想法不一致。当然,他们并没有影响你。只是,他们不会加强你的自我认知,助你轻松地朝你的目标前进。和这样的朋友为伍,你会觉得是逆风而行。
除了让我们烦恼不已之外,这些矛盾的友情还会损害我们的健康。一项调查显示,这种模棱两可的关系会让我们的血压高于和朋友或明显对手在一起的时候。这可能是由于这些关系的不可预测性。模棱两可的关系可能会使心血管反应增加,细胞老化加快,抗压能力下降以及幸福指数降低。
“亦敌亦友”可能是社交关系中比较独特的一种,因为它层次分明:表面上是朋友,实际上却相互竞争,或一方对另一方心存不悦。这与模棱两可的关系不同,后者是爱恨、恼怒、同情、忠诚以及亲切交织在一起的。事实证明,很多人已经感受到了在工作、恋爱以及亲情中“亦敌亦友”关系的激励作用了。
与不幸的家庭一样,朋友也能从很多方面对我们产生不良影响,毫不含糊。坏朋友能让你感觉自己在与她的其他朋友竞争;一起聊天时,她总是谈论自己,超过你谈论自己;她自以为是地批评你,但是当你批评她的时候,她总是为自己辩白;她让你觉得如履薄冰,一不小心就会惹她生气或被她反驳;和她相处就像坐在感情的过山车上,前一天还言谈甚欢、赞赏有加,第二天就对你冷若冰霜。
一些最伤人的友情在开始的时候很美妙,后来却慢慢变质了。16世纪法国国王亨利二世的情妇黛安·德·波迪耶曾经说过:“朋友可能成为你最好的敌人,因为他们知道你的软肋。”
当一个朋友和我们绝交或者招呼都不打就莫名其妙消失时,我们会备受打击。尽管社交圈人脉关系的变化淘汰很常见,但我们仍然期待友谊能地久天长。和好朋友决裂,尤其是和交往多年的老友决裂,会让我们对自己产生质疑。一段友谊的破裂给我们造成的巨大伤害,促使我们将这个朋友拽入“坏朋友”篮中。
但是有时候,我们必须终结一段友谊才能做自己。在《大学社交》(2016)一书中,社会学家珍妮丝·麦凯布认为在青年时期终止某些友谊是促进自我身份认同的一个途径。通过积极和消极两种方式,我们在与朋友的对抗中逐渐建立起对自己的认识,形成自己的个性。
我们应该努力做一个对他人来说更好的朋友,也应该在友谊面临冲突和破裂时有所担当。即便如此,友谊中还是有很多因素是我们所不能控制的。社交网络具有嵌入性,你和其他人可能有很多共同的好友。这就是一个大的挑战。比如说一个朋友做了出格的事情,而你不想人人皆知,因此你没有公开宣布已经和这个朋友断绝关系了。你和这人保持距离,但并不是与其产生正面冲突。这样,其他好友以后在活动邀请时就不会被迫面临只能在你们二者之中选一的处境。有时候,我们会被坏朋友套牢。
即便对我们自己而言,我们也不清楚是何种力量让我们和一些人亲近,而和另外一些人渐行渐远。有些你很喜欢的人不是也好久不联系了吗?而那些相处不怎么融洽的人,你们却常常见面?或许前者正在把你划入他们的“坏朋友”栏呢。
和坏朋友交往,被坏朋友甩掉,对他们失望透顶都让人感到压力。而这种压力会损害你的身体和精神健康。然而,一个朋友都没有则比这个更糟糕。想象一下,孩子渴望有玩伴,少女憧憬着真正“懂”她的人,成年人则意识到自己不能与任何人分享自己的失败甚至成功。孤独就像极度饥渴一样痛苦。芝加哥大学社会学教授约翰·卡喬波发现,孤独与抑郁、肥胖、嗜酒、心血管疾病、睡眠功能紊乱、高血压、阿尔茨海默症、愤世嫉俗的世界观以及自杀念头都有关系。不过,如果你还面临着友情上的问题,那么说明你有朋友——从这个角度看,你已经足够幸运啦。
1. articulate: 清楚地表达。
2. delve into: 探索;seamlessly: 无缝地,无空隙地;shorthand:(对某事)简略的表达方式;punctuate with (sth.): 不时打断,强调。
3. gut-wrenching: 令人极度痛苦的。
4. lopsided: 不平等的,两侧不匀称的。
5. reciprocal: 互惠的,对等的。endprint
6. hierarchy: // 等级制度。
7. corroborating: 确定的,得到证实的。
8. oasis: (沙漠中的)绿洲。
9. ambivalent: 矛盾的,模棱两可的; parlance: 用语,术语。
10. pedestal:(柱子或雕塑等的)底座,基座。
11. validate: 确认,证实。
12. mixed-bag: 混合体,杂烩。
13. cardiovascular: //心血管的。
14. frenemy: 亦敌亦友,友敌,指尽管不喜欢,但表面上仍表现得很友好的一种关系。
15. admixture: 混合,混合物。
16. churn: 搅动,搅拌;prune: 精简,删去。
17. pulse with: 充满;in the wake of:随……而来,作为……的结果;hurl: 猛投。
18. embeddedness: 嵌入性。
19. yoke: 使结合。
20. Alzheimers disease: 阿尔茨海默症,即老年痴呆症。
阅读感评
∷秋叶 评
友谊,是一个令人感兴趣的永恒话题。然而,我们一般都是凭经验、靠直觉、想当然地去谈论它,而原文作者还用了认知研究(cognitive-based research)与数据分析的成果来科学地审视友谊的方方面面,可谓是给老话题注入了新思维与新内容。
本文以“Bad Friends”为题,显然谈论的主要是友谊的“负面清单”。原文指出,“大约仅有一半的友情是相互的”,也就是说,另一半纯属“一头热”或“单相思”。 作者对此现象的解释是,许多“友谊”属于“有所期待”
(aspirational),若说这种友谊不考虑彼此的社会地位,显然不现实。作者还把某种友谊称作“模棱两可的关系”(ambivalent relationship)——既相互依存又有冲突,既爱又恨,既厌烦又有温情与热心。她认为社交网络里大约一半的朋友属于此类型。作者甚至说,这种关系(相较于朋友或明显对手的关系)因其不可预测性将会损害我们的健康——血压升高,心血管反应增加,细胞老化加快,抗压能力下降以及幸福指数降低。作者认定朋友的影响无处不在,而且会从情感、心理到身体各个层面全面侵入。作者还指出,结交有忧郁症、肥胖症的朋友,你也很可能罹患忧郁症、肥胖症;结交烟鬼、酒鬼朋友,你也很可能会抽更多的烟,喝更多的酒。这类似于我们常说的“近朱者赤,近墨者黑”。因此,即便是挚友常伴左右,也不能保證你能享受友谊的琼浆;如果他们有以上问题与恶习,那你有意无意中喝下的很可能是毒药!
关于与曾经的朋友分道扬镳的问题,作者设置了多种场景并予以描绘与分析。在她看来,这个“无言的结局”大致由以下几种情况导致:一是属于人生目标、价值与习惯不一致或变得不一致(类似于现在常说的“三观不合”),即所谓“道不同不相为谋”;二是属于为“做自己(become ourselves)”而舍弃朋友。作者在此借用了社会学的观点:在青年时期终结友情是促进身份认同(advance identities)的一种途径。西方人一贯认为“自我”与“他者”既互为“镜像”又彼此对立,因此我们是以朋友为反射面来建构自我形象与性格的。似乎过河要拆桥,像成亦须弃镜!三是属于“无来由”的关系终结或互不联系,尤其是在这个社交网络发达的时代,常要对朋友圈进行删削精简,实属正常,不足为意,也不必深究。作者历数上述有关与友谊相伴随的烦恼后,得出了以下结论:尽管友谊衍生出的种种负面影响往往让人心力交瘁,但比起缺乏朋友的孤独者来,那毕竟是“幸福的烦恼”,因为孤独不仅给人生带来痛苦,还是严重影响身心健康的一针毒剂!
平心而论,上述观点有的属于旧话新说甚至老生常谈,但有的却颠覆了我们传统的看法,激发我们的思考。例如,我们常说家庭最重要,要以家庭为先,尤其是女性,一旦组建家庭,往往以相夫教子为重,疏远了朋友。这篇文章较有说服力地告诉我们,友情对于人生的影响,在某些时期,往往要超过亲情与男女之情。近些年来,我们在强调“智商”的同时,也很看重“情商”,但我们似乎有个误区,常把处世圆滑甚至善于拉关系等同于情商高。本文告诉我们,友谊是引导人们走向成功人生的必要条件,是一种强劲的同龄人催化剂(peers catalyst),于是与人交往、交友的能力以及塑造一种友善的性情(trait of friendliness)才是考察情商高低的重要内容。然而,朋友带来的并非总是温情与帮助,它的影响从少年到成年一以贯之,无处不在,有时会以“负能量”去侵蚀你。于是,如何理性面对并当机立断就至关重要。虽然作者提出的“该断就断”的办法与传统上对于友谊“万古长青”的向往相左,并显得有些“世故”,有点残忍,但从个体的利益考虑,那实属不得已而为之。最后,本文峰回路转,指出即便是“坏朋友”(作者在正文中用了toxic friend这个词,即“有毒性的朋友”,显然比bad friend更能概括本文主旨)也比孤独(loneliness)要强很多,这与我们平常认为孤独必然伴随着成长经历,甚至有时还可以“享受”孤独的认识不同。总之,本文可谓是从“友谊批评”开始,以劝导交友作结——当然,最好是结交那些能让你飞向新高度的朋友!endprint