Redefining “Victimhood Culture” in Today’s Society

Stumbling upon a New Culture

April 1998, the spring of my junior year of college, marked a turning point in my liberal arts education. I walked out of a sociology lecture because I got fed up. This was very uncharacteristic behavior for me. Normally, afraid of rocking the boat, I just felt like I could not adequately explain my perspective against that of my classmates, so I walked out. I did not feel that my perspective was right and theirs wrong, but going in circles was getting us nowhere. Little did I know that someday social media would come along and that this would become how many people spend far too many of their waking hours.

My rural college wasn’t very diverse at that time, but the sociology department was. In class that day, the black students were defending their cultural identity and we were reading a book about Chinese-Americans defending their cultural identity and the white students were trying to defend their cultural identity, while at the same time, it was being questioned if, being the majority, they even had one. The point I was trying to make was that regardless of majority or minority status, if either group didn’t possess a cultural identity, they would not feel, so strongly, the need to defend it. I couldn’t seem to put it into adequate words without feeling like I might offend someone else, so I walked out.

My professor emailed me later to ask why I left and I was able to express my viewpoint, (it was easier for me to do so in writing, away from an audience, of course). I explained that unless a strong sense of identity existed, there would be no reason for people to feel threatened or victimized when it is challenged. This identity isn’t formed by being in a mathematical majority or minority, but by your life experience. Anyone can perceive themselves as being oppressed, simply by way of their perspective and their values. Individuals can feel especially vulnerable in the presence of others who do not share similar views.

This seemed the most primitive idea to me, predator vs. prey, aggressor vs. defender, present from the dawn of time, but my professor emailed back,

“you have defined the existence of a culture that perhaps many think doesn’t exist.”

His comment stuck with me for all these years, in fact, I kept a print out of his email with my college transcript, diploma and loan payment receipts. I marveled at this exchange because, to me, it seemed so obvious. Surely I had not invented a concept that previously didn’t exist. I was flattered by my professor’s interpretation, but also disappointed in myself that I didn’t fight harder to make my point in class. I’m not sure I had enough life experience, or the right words, to do so at the time. With age comes wisdom and the contentious aura of our society has me dwelling on this memory. Black Lives Matter, All Lives Matter, white privilege, reverse racism, #MeToo; there is merit in all perspectives. Proponents of each have value and worth so why are people fighting for center stage?

Putting a Name to This New Culture

Sociology was my major, but it was only after two decades of management that I began to think of myself as a sociologist. I didn’t have to go to a far-off land to study society when there is a rich and complex one surrounding me daily from 9am-5pm (sometimes longer). Despite people landing in similar places of employment or residence, they are already so different by the time they arrive. Those differences are shaped by our experiences. These variances do not make one person better than another, not right or wrong, just unique. When you combine those unique individuals in a family, a neighborhood, a church, a workplace you build a community. First it is just bricks and mortar, but within that community a culture develops. According to Webster’s Dictionary, one definition of culture is the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristic(1). Whether it is intentional or not, the ability of those unique individuals comprising the community to survive and thrive, happens as a result of their interactions with each other. When stress is applied to that community, you begin to see if that culture and community can sustain itself.

In 2018, sociologists Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning published “The Rise of Victimhood Culture: Microaggressions, Safe Spaces and the New Culture Wars”. The concept began as an academic journal published in 2014, focusing on minor offenses, called microaggressions, between groups on college campuses. When a victim publicizes a microaggression committed against them, they call attention to the deviant behavior of the offender which lowers the offender’s moral status and therefore, raises the moral status of the victim(2). The victim garners the sympathy of others. In their book, Campbell and Manning provide numerous examples of potentially innocuous offenses, as well as the responses to them.

This was the phenomenon I recognized in my sociology class discussion more than 22 years earlier, but did not have a name for it, victimhood culture. While the name immediately raises some indignation, this concept extends far beyond small offenses on college campuses, as originally observed and studied. The graver the offense and the more people that know about it, the more sympathy the offended individual receives, further elevating their perceived moral status. If they were “wronged”, they must have been “right” to begin with and therefore deserving of some measure of recompense.

Use of the term victim has drawn criticism, because people do not consciously admit to wanting to be viewed as a victim. Victim should be a term reserved for society’s most vulnerable members, unable to protect themselves from intentional transgressions committed by others. However, I assert that, in fact, people do unconsciously self-identify as a victim by magnifying microaggressions committed unto them, or even those committed in their presence, both intentional and unintentional. People want sympathy, condolences, recompense. In our modern, western society, there is little shame in being vulnerable. Acknowledging defeat provides the opportunity to belong to a community of fellow-sufferers. An outsider may look at that community and think it is based on similarities in race, gender, socio-economic status, sexual orientation, age or other characteristics. Instead, this community, and the culture within it, comes from a conscious or unconscious choice to view oneself as a victim, even if not in name. The gravity and intentionality of the offense is insignificant in the development of this victimhood culture. It is relative only to one’s life experience.

Just as online interactions have generated new definitions for social constructs, the development of a culture within these constructs also requires new definitions. A Facebook “friend” is not the same as a true friend that you know on a personal level. A Twitter “follower” is not the same as a follower of a religious group. An online “community” is not made up of people within close proximity, as would previously been a defining characteristic. “Victim” is another word that requires closer examination. Victim is defined in Webster’s Dictionary as 1) one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent, 2) one that is injured, destroyed or sacrificed under any of various conditions, 3) one that is subjected to oppression, hardship or mistreatment(3). When we explore samples of microaggressions, as provided by Campbell and Manning(4), the question arises as to whether these offenses truly classify as hardship or mistreatment. The answer rests only in how the deed was perceived. Let’s use a common example in the workplace. If someone tells a joke, one listener may laugh while another may take offense. The same joke is interpreted differently based on the listener’s perception, not the content of the joke itself, nor the speaker’s intent. One listener focuses on how the joke made them feel, while the other listener focuses on how the joke made others feel. Use of the word “victim” or “victimhood” is not adequate to describe the subject of the microaggression in this observation, and therefore will be put in quotations when used later, (unless specifically referenced in accordance with Webster’s definition). In order to compare the two points of view, we will call this Self Mindset vs. Selfless Mindset.

Identifying as Self vs. Selfless

Any bookstore will typically harbor a whole section reserved for self-help titles. People crave improvement. A better job, a better car, a better spouse, a better house, a better life. By nature, people can be selfish, focused on their own self-preservation or self-development. People are complimented for being self-aware. It is not characterized as a negative trait. If we look at the origin of man, from an evolutionary standpoint, being selfish might have ensured survival when food or water was scarce. From a biblical standpoint, when Adam and Eve were told not to eat the forbidden fruit, they did it once they believed that doing so would make themselves wiser. Whichever standpoint you believe, you only have to watch two small children in a sandbox with one shovel to witness the selfishness that exists within our human nature. Any injustice, provides an opportunity for someone to become a victim who, first, focuses their attention on how the behavior impacts them. Next, they take further actions to expose those feelings, sharing that hurt with others. Finally, this enables the self-focused person to gain sympathy and belonging in a culture of other self-minded individuals.

There is no “selfless-help” section in the bookstore, but we recognize a selfless person or selfless behavior when we see it. Selfless qualities may be valued, especially in certain professions, such as nurse, teacher, or pastor who give of their time and talent to serve others, often with little or no immediate reward. However, it is not always valued as a positive trait. When someone is selfless, they may be viewed as weak, meek or not able to stand up for themselves. There is no compensation, certainly not financial, because true selflessness requires a sacrifice of one’s own comfort, time, money, feelings, in order to meet the need of another person.

People can easily travel back and forth between a self and selfless mindset throughout the course of their life or even throughout a day. Our circumstances, moods and emotions fluctuate for so many reasons, we could not explore them all here. It is healthy to evaluate situations and to sometimes take a self or selfless mindset. Putting yourself in mortal danger to save someone else, requires quick but thoughtful evaluation. Someone might take on a self-mindset and choose not to take the risk. Someone else might take a selfless-mindset and jump in to save another’s life. These snap decisions happen often and most people, from all walks of life, move back and forth between the two with ease. It is when an individual is no longer able to move back and forth and finds themselves, either consciously or unconsciously, subscribing to one or the other. Then they have identified with the Self or Selfless Culture. Either can become extreme and damaging. Though I believe that the majority of humans will find a healthy balance, I also believe that our social practices are working to promote and grow the Self Culture, much to the detriment of our society.

Evidence of a Growing Self Culture

Once I started my career in customer service, it became apparent that when a customer experienced even a perceived offense, they were owed compensation. When they asked for it, management delivered it. Perhaps they felt they were “victim” to getting the wrong room service order or to having a hotel room without a good view. These individuals weren’t actually harmed. Plenty of other guests may have had similar “inconveniences”, but never communicated via a comment card or a call to the manager. The individuals who reported these perceived injustices were remunerated with free amenities, discounts and more. If they threatened to take their business, and that of their friends and colleagues, elsewhere, the compensation grew in value. Fast forward to 2020, when a tagged Facebook post or a Yelp review affords the aggrieved a large audience and thus, a large measure of sympathy and compensation. These individuals could have asked for a correction at the time of the incident and they could have survived the inconvenience quite easily, had customer service not been able to provide a satisfactory resolution. These microaggressions and customer service disappointments are only the tip of a very big iceberg. When people begin to perceive or express that “this always happens to me” and that it is an indication of their worth or dignity, they join the Self Culture. Being a member of this previously unrecognized Self Culture is highly desirable as it generates recognition, sympathy and reward for its members. Members of the Self Culture get their identity from the impact the actions of others have on their own intrinsic value.

This is further evidenced in the number of people who experience transgressions against them, yet successfully overcome them. Such individuals resist the notion that their self-worth is tied to disappointments or the misdeeds of others. However, it is also unlikely that they self-identify as an overcomer, because they are not focused on their “self”. Their success goes largely unnoticed, uncredited and uncompensated. If it is recognized, perhaps through an award at work or a commendation in the community, it is short-lived and often met with jealousy or others’ projected feelings of entitlement or privilege. Selfless behavior can risk making one appear to be a “fixer”, a “brown-noser” or even an “aggressor”. Throughout the western culture’s transition to one in which “everyone gets a trophy”, being either a “winner” or a “loser” is undesirable, yet we recognize individuals who behave in a way that sacrifices their own ability to “win” in an effort to help someone else. Members of the Selfless Culture get their identity from the impact of their actions on others.

Why Society Leaders Need to Discourage Self Culture

I think it is fair to say that 2020 has had its fair share of stressors…and we are only ½ way through the year. Though the COVID-19 pandemic has tested our limits, in truth, we are always under some form of stress. Unemployment, broken families, bullying, political differences, these concerns add up. Protests, riots, shootings, suicide are a symptom of the unease and these statistics seem to be getting worse year after year. How can we be inundated with information, opinions and perspective, yet we are, all too often, unable to communicate civilly? Because we don’t want to use that plethora of information to selflessly serve others. As we already established, joining the Self Culture has its benefits; recognition, sympathy, belonging, reward.

Unfortunately, beneath this desire to construct one’s own self-worth, deserving of others’ reverence and recompense, there are several negative effects on society and on the Self Culture itself. I have listed these below with examples.

1. Growing acceptance of a Self Culture, and members’ eagerness to join it over small offenses, or microaggressions, minimizes the importance of individuals who are victims in the true sense of the word, having undergone attacks and suffering.

Example: There is no denying that if a person is raped, they have been victimized. This is a serious aggression. The Me Too organization was started in 2006 with the goal of addressing both the dearth in resources for survivors of sexual violence and to build a community of advocates, driven by survivors, who will be at the forefront of creating solutions to interrupt sexual violence in their communities(5). Subscribers to the Self Culture turned this organization into a hashtag social movement and promoted inclusion in victimhood regardless of the fact or severity of the perceived aggression, simply on the basis of one’s gender.

2. All people face challenges. By willingly classifying members of a population majority into a self-serving group, the ability to obtain resources for help and recovery for true victims is reduced.

Example: My friend Lisa was born with no arms and no legs. When I think of someone who should be eligible for disability benefits in the United States, I think of her. Guess what! Lisa is not eligible for disability benefits, not because her case is being assessed on its own merit, but because she has a job and makes too much money to qualify for benefits. Never mind the fact that the cost for a caregiver to help her shower, eat and dress so she can go to her job cost more than she makes each year. People with far less significant disabilities are able to collect if they are willing to see themselves as a “victim” of their own birth and opt not to work. It works. Self-identifying as a “victim” enables entry into the system and compensation with benefits. Lisa is not willing to subscribe to being a “victim”, so every few weeks, she asks her friends and family to make a contribution to pay for her caregiving so she can continue to get out of bed each morning and go to work.

3. The Self Culture diminishes its credibility by actively promoting and recruiting others into the culture, regardless if they have experienced any kind of micro or macro-transgression firsthand. Even to the extent of promoting shame or citing privilege among those who do not wish to join.

Example: As our race and political discussions rage on in 2020, a number of black community leaders have spoken out against racially fueled riots and protests, stating simply that injustices between the black community and law enforcement are not solely attributed to skin color. Far more crimes against black people are committed by fellow black people. Yet they feel conflicted in saying this, and are often called disparaging names, such as “Uncle Tom” for supposedly turning their backs on black crime victims. In truth, they are turning their backs on people, regardless of color, who subscribe to the Self Culture.

4. Self Culture discounts the success and achievement of individuals who would otherwise qualify for victim status, if they were willing to self-identify as such.

Example: Members of Self Culture use the transgression to which they were subjected to justify their current identity and their dissatisfaction with it. Only 1-3% of children in the foster care system graduate from high school. Twenty-five percent of them will end up in the prison system after aging out(6). However, there are outstanding members of society who came the foster care system. Self Culture allows circumstances out of that child’s control to dictate, and possibly attempt to excuse, a negative outcome in their adult life, but it does not credit the choices or opportunities that existed within that same system as responsible for the exceptional success of others. More attention is needed on the study of resilience and overcoming adversity. Refusal to label oneself, or to be labeled by others, as a victim, as members of the Self Culture do, is key to this and the first step.

Rather than look at the perceived shortcomings within ourselves, and readily joining the Self Culture, there is a need to look at the power, dignity and value within all of us. It is impossible for us to see this in others, if we cannot first recognize it within ourselves. Our society will only be empowered and improved if those individuals outside of the Self Culture, possibly identifying in the Selfless Culture, recognize this power and lend a helping hand so that those stuck in the quicksand of Self Culture might find, within themselves, a purpose and a worth that they can share with others.

Where Do We Find Our Worth?

Our world is not a perfect one and stress is inevitable. Even a tree growing in the woods is subject to external pressures it cannot control as it grows such as, rain or drought, pests or lack of sunlight. Birds of the air have to search for their food and build their own nests that are subject to destruction by weather or predators. Penguins swim for miles in freezing temperatures to bring food back to their hungry hatchlings. Why should we expect our complex lives to be free of stress and hardship? Even as we invent new computers and programs that make our lives easier, new problems arise or old problems resurface. Many people who do not subscribe to the Self Culture accept these challenges and even welcome them as an opportunity to learn and grow, building resilience and problem-solving skills for the future.

People can transition out of the Self Culture and into a Selfless Culture by refusing to expect others to validate their self-worth. Recognize that you have value and you can share that value with others.

As a child, my aunt once gave me a coloring book and after I colored one of the pages, she hung it up on her refrigerator. It said “I know I’m somebody, ‘cause God don’t make no junk!!” If this could be the message that we internalize to find our self-worth, it really doesn’t matter how significantly or insignificantly someone hurts you. My invitation for people of all races, genders, ages, beliefs, socio-economic and sexual orientations would be that they understand they are worthy of love and respect. That doesn’t mean you will always get it from everyone you encounter throughout your life, but like one bad Yelp review, that experience is not reflective of your value. Do not subscribe to the Self Culture as it makes you a true victim of your own negative thoughts.

Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows. Matthew 10:31

(1) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture

(2) The Rise of Victimhood Culture: Microaggressions, Safe Spaces, and the New Culture Wars, 2018

(3) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/victim

(4) The Rise of Victimhood Culture: Microaggressions, Safe Spaces, and the New Culture Wars, 2018, pgs 16-19

(5) https://metoomvmt.org/about/

(6) http://www.fostercare2.org/ask-the-pros-2