The word “pride” has never felt right to me in regards to demographic identification. It is defined in a variety of ways in dictionary explanations, so I understand why people simply consider it to be an expression of self-respect or joy; however, it is classically defined as arrogant, self-important and lacking in humility. Its companion — righteousness — also carries an arrogant tenor. A righteous person may be convinced of her/his moral stance to the point of inflexible reactivity to sound conflicting arguments. Humility opens hearts and conversation, whereas righteousness is a deal-breaker.
I am not “proud” to be a feminist, a dog-lover, a health care advocate, an op/ed columnist, a board leader or a wedding officiant. I feel grateful while acknowledging these qualities or roles are just who I am at the moment. Each of us have multiple ways of identifying or positioning ourselves in the world while we also have the responsibility to make ethical choices every day.
People in identity groups who simply reinforce positions without embracing or tolerating dissent are on the slippery slide of groupthink. Imagine a long slide so slippery that it would take tremendous effort to get off of it. When pride and righteousness grow, obdurate attitudes override individual responsibility. Herd members are morally virtuous while “others” are doing evil or causing harm. Such virtue-certainty means that unacceptable behavior is unimportant when weighed against adherence to the group.
I wrote this in my September 2023 column: “When a movement or cause is met with humility and a willingness to engage in productive dialogue yet the righteous mob is more wedded to the black and white of being correct where perpetrators and victims have fixed identities, an opportunity to reassess and recognize each person’s humanity is lost.” Over two years later, I would add that people in their rigid groups are similarly unwilling to examine their political candidates and leaders who demonstrate incompetence or shady character when revealed because they have cast their lot with them. Accountability has been replaced by diabolical enabling. Do you see how pride and righteousness are often an avoidance of reality and the accompanying ethical obligation to pivot?
Recently, I learned I am an “otrovert.” Otro is other in Spanish An otrovert is not an introvert or an extrovert but rather a perpetual outsider. This is not by intention; it is how some of us are wired. Otroverts do not conform to expectations, and we prefer quality over quantity in friendships. Such friends know us to be empathic and available to help at a moment’s notice.
Dr. Rami Kaminski’s book, “The Gift of Not Belonging,” outlines the characteristics and potential trajectories of otroverts. He states that otroverts should not be misunderstood as performative nonconformists, people who have social anxiety/phobias, marginalized people or neurodivergent individuals. In my case, I am half neurodiverse and half neurotypical, but those features are not inherent in otroverts. Otroverts may have social standing as perceived insiders in some situations.
Kaminski writes, “Though otroverts are not deliberately subversive, this complete freedom from conformism may elicit subversive ideas that in some cases can influence” people. This could be why I do not understand groupthink. I observe it as odd and unsettling, and I can remember feeling this from the time I was a small child. Kaminski recommends that parents of otroverts appreciate their special traits and allow them to be left to their own devices while encouraging one-one friendships while not forcing them to conform socially. When I read this, I uttered a quiet “thank you” to my deceased parents.
My mom and dad adopted me at nine months old. I was already walking, but I did not talk until I was two, and then I uttered complete sentences. They later told me I taught myself how to read at age four. I think they vacillated between being amused by my differences and not knowing what to do with me in their world. The gift they gave me that comes to mind in this context is that they largely let me be me. We moved seven times during my childhood, and there was a freedom in that as well. I was never parked anywhere long enough to feel the pressure of compulsory group membership. Being a total tomboy was not a problem for them as they simply saw me as athletically gifted. I was expected to fit into the box of good Catholic girl, which I did fairly well until age 17. It may not have felt like a demand since it was balanced with freedom.
I do not seek or trust homogeneity, and I feel comfortable with a variety of people. If someone is kind and cares about the world, the odds are that I will like that person regardless of culture or other identities and positions. When I am judged in a one-dimensional or thoughtless manner, I may feel hurt or confused yet it does not persuade me to be someone I am not.
Kaminski believes everyone comes into the world as an otrovert. Would people cease the pride and righteousness of groupthink if non-conformity was normative? A woman can dream.
J.M. Sorrell is a monthly columnist who is old enough to recognize the gift of being different, and she fully appreciates the people in her life who accept her as she is.