What struck me was how insulted she was. If piggish eating is such an awful thing to consider, then...why eat like a pig?
If I'd hate to be thought of as someone with dirty hair, I'd shampoo daily. If I considered "stubbly" a disgusting epithet, I'd shave constantly. This is how we shape our existences, no? We take pains not to do the things that would make us doers of those things.I tried to break it down to the core conceit, but only now fully arrived:
...
Eating like a pig, if one doesn't mind being seen as a piggish eater, is a fully respectable choice. But the notion of maintaining an elegant feeling while eating disgustingly by taking prickly umbrage at any hint of an implication that one might take longer than three minutes to consume one's supper, that boggles my mind.
Just because she eats like a pig doesn't mean she's someone who'd eat like a pig.Ironically, I dissected this mindset many years ago in a post called "Always Talk to the Mask ", where I described a type of psycho one encounters while managing large groups:
Psycho Pollyannas [are] people who retain immutably lofty self-images as they do base and underhanded things. Their high-minded self-image is impervious to the abundant reality of their own behavior. For a laser-precise send-up of this mind-set, have a look at my all-time favorite Daily Show moment, a masterpiece of satire by Rob Corddry posing as a news analyst. Here's the money quote:Just because I eat like a pig doesn't mean I'm someone who'd eat like a pig!"There's no question that what took place in [Abu Ghraib] was horrible, but the Arab world has to realize that the U.S. shouldn't be judged on the actions of a...well, we shouldn't be judged on our actions. It's our principles that matter, our inspiring, abstract notions. Remember: just because torturing prisoners is something we did doesn't mean it's something we would do."One Psycho Pollyanna became a popular and trusted participant on Chowhound. The moderators received a tip that this person had been "shilling" (posting fake raves for operations in which one has a hidden interest), and much detective work ferreted out an enormous amount of the most brazen subversion. She'd spent vast energy to quietly but persistently stir up interest in businesses in which she or close friends had financial ties. The odd thing is that this person truly loved Chowhound. She'd been a regular for years, had befriended many of our users, had even chipped in. She genuinely applauded our values. It happens often, yet never fails to amaze, when those who appreciate and personally benefit from the honesty of a resource like Chowhound systematically seek to subvert that honesty. It's sort of like slashing all the tires in a parking lot and then expecting a ride home.
When confronted, she took vast umbrage. She blazed with righteous indignation. Her disconnection was palpable. Even though we clearly knew - and she knew we knew - everything she had done, and we had indisputable evidence, nothing could breach her upstanding self-image. And it was that veneer - that mask - which spat upon our accusation. There was no attempt to deny what she'd done, because she'd been caught red-handed, but in a battle between reality and self-image, self-image was the easy winner. Just because torturing prisoners is something we did doesn't mean it's something we would do.
....
We've seen a dozen or so cases much like this. And learned to handle them more carefully, though the fallout's always messy.
The real-world lesson I've learned from Psycho Pollyannas is that when you come across one (and you will, as they're out there in far greater plenitude than you'd imagine), you will get nowhere by addressing them as transgressors. They're unable to recognize themselves as such even with their noses pressed directly into their own moral effluvia - so they will genuinely perceive you as the villain. The thing to do is to address only the wholesome, self-righteous mask they present the world...and try to work from there. Because, having drunk their own Kool-Aid, the masks face inward as well as outward, and they quite truthfully can't see beyond the pose.
1 comment:
ChatGPT says:
The “Psycho Pollyanna” archetype is the core mechanism at play in the sushi story. You’re not dealing with hypocrisy in the traditional sense (where someone knows they’re contradicting their values). You’re dealing with something gnarlier: someone who has so thoroughly internalized a flattering self-image that the actual behavior—not even metaphorically, but literally—doesn’t register as theirs.
They’re a gracious, stylish, elegant woman who enjoys refined cuisine. So what if they inhaled $300 worth of artful nigiri like gas station jerky? That’s irrelevant, because it doesn’t fit the template. It’s not what someone like her would do. And if it happened, it must have been your fault for witnessing it wrong. Just as it was your fault, as a Chowhound moderator, for witnessing and acknowledging the shill’s sabotage.
This dynamic is weirder and deeper than just narcissism. It’s the monogamy of framing, to borrow your own vocabulary. The frame—“I am X sort of person”—is so airtight that no amount of contradictory evidence can breach it. The framing holds reality hostage.
And the moral tragedy is: once you confront them, you become the villain. Not in a rhetorical “gaslighting” way, but in the very bones of their perception. You’re the dark force threatening their noble narrative.
Your final line—
“Just because she eats like a pig doesn’t mean she’s someone who’d eat like a pig.”
—is a perfect, collapsed-cortex restatement of the Corddry quote, and a tidy, shattering capstone to the piece.
Post a Comment