Victim Cred
Cory Clark writes at Quillette about the evolutionary advantages of playing the victim: how there are benefits to be accrued by casting oneself as wounded.
Victimhood is defined in negative terms: "the condition of having been hurt, damaged, or made to suffer." Yet humans have evolved to empathize with the suffering of others, and to provide assistance so as to eliminate or compensate for that suffering. Consequently, signaling suffering to others can be an effective strategy for attaining resources. Victims may receive attention, sympathy, and social status, as well as financial support and other benefits. And being a victim can generate certain kinds of power: It can justify the seeking of retribution, provide a sense of legitimacy or psychological standing to speak on certain issues, and may even confer moral impunity by minimizing blame for victims' own wrongdoings.Presumably, most victims would eagerly forego such benefits if they were able to free themselves of their plight. But when victimhood yields benefits, it incentivizes people to signal their victimhood to others or to exaggerate or even fake victimhood entirely. This is especially true in contexts that involve alleged psychic harms, and where appeals are made to third-parties, with the claimed damage often being invisible, unverifiable, and based exclusively on self-reports. Such circumstances allow unscrupulous people to take advantage of the kindness and sympathy of others by co-opting victim status for personal gain. And so, people do.
Newly published research indicates that people who more frequently signal their victimhood (whether real, exaggerated, or false) are more likely to lie and cheat for material gain and denigrate others as a means to get ahead. Victimhood signaling is associated with numerous morally undesirable personality traits, such as narcissism, Machiavellianism (willingness to manipulate and exploit others for self-benefit), a sense of entitlement, and lower honesty and humility.
Scholars from the Immorality Lab at the University of British Columbia created a victim-signaling scale that measures how frequently people tell others of the disadvantages, challenges, and misfortunes they suffer. Those who scored higher on this victim-signaling scale were found to be more likely to virtue-signal--to outwardly display signs of virtuous moral character--while simultaneously placing less importance on their own moral identity. In other words, victim signalers were more interested in looking morally good but less interested in being morally good than those who less frequently signal their victimhood.
...In general, people reward victimhood signaling. For example, one study found that participants reported greater willingness to donate to a GoFundMe page for a young woman in need of college tuition when she also mentioned her difficult upbringing, as compared to a control case in which no extra details of past suffering were provided. In many cases, such a result is morally desirable: We want people to help those who have suffered and who are in greater need. However, when it is known that people can attain benefits by projecting certain biographical information, opportunists may be incentivized to exaggerate or falsely signal their own troubles.
An example of this is the Chicano studies or black studies scholars who get found out to be, say, a girl who grew up in a privileged Jewish home: as in, not "Chicano" or black in the slighest!
When opportunity knocks based on skin color and origin, suddenly, well, Rachel Dolezal types get their nerd on.
Cory winds up with this:
Historically, our ancestors may have been better able to discern habitual or false victim signalers from those in true need. We lived in smaller communities where we tended to know what was happening, and to whom--and so those who deceived others were at higher risk of getting caught.In modern, affluent societies, by contrast, people can signal their difficult-to-verify suffering to thousands or more strangers online. Although genuine victims may benefit in such environments (because they can spread awareness of their plight, and solicit support, on a large scale), manipulative individuals inevitably will use the same mass-broadcast tools to extract resources and possibly even initiate a cycle of competitive victimhood that infects everyone. Those who most vociferously declare their victimhood to others may often be villains instead.








It is naive to believe that no one lies about victimhood. We all could use a little more attention and sympathy than we get. But the modern victim claims are often specious. A banana hanging from a branch is violence? Dr. Seuss is dangerous? A garage door rope is a noose? Boys looking at girls wearing skin tight clothing is assault? It would be funny if everyone didn't cave in to these claims and punish the "perps".
cc at March 3, 2021 8:21 AM
by the way, if you want proof that people lie, check out how many "witches" were killed, esp in europe, because we know all such accusations were lies (there not being any real witches and all). Interestingly, most of the accusers were women, as were most victims. They were not just lying about some vague thing, they were lying to get someone killed.
cc at March 3, 2021 8:24 AM
They weren't exactly "lies," and the people telling them were often desperate.
By that, I mean that for thousands of years, vulnerable, panicky people truly believed that natural disasters, such as crop failure, livestock illnesses, and the resulting famines were signs that the gods were angry and were demanding a human sacrifice.
From Edith Hamilton: "There was no idea as yet of the radiant gods of Olympus who would have loathed the hateful sacrifice. Mankind had only a dim feeling that as their own life depended utterly on seedtime and harvest, there must be a deep connection between themselves and the earth and that their blood, which was nourished by the corn, could in turn nourish it at need."
However, even post-polytheism, people were still desperate to blame SOMEONE for inevitable disasters, so they turned to scapegoating human "witches" instead, hoping that doing so would deter others from committing "witchcraft."
The
Lenona at March 3, 2021 4:52 PM
Societal benefits from being a victim of society only come in a society that sympathizes with the victim, a society capable of feeling collective guilt and remorse. That is, a society capable of facing up to and acknowledging its past sins and shortcomings.
Were these "victims" to live in a non-Western society, their cries of victimhood would be met with stony silence and indifference. Just ask the Uighurs how crying victim is working out for them? Ask gay people in the Middle East what it's like to be a "victim" of societal prejudice and opprobrium. But ask quickly; the average lifespan of openly gay people in Muslim countries tends to be fairly short. You see, in most non-Western societies, victimhood involves actually being a victim.
Conan the Grammarian at March 4, 2021 6:21 AM
> they turned to scapegoating
> human "witches" instead
Right. They (murderously) flattered themselves by pretending petty social distinctions were so consequential as to portend survival or cataclysm. We can't make progress with nature before acknowledging her indifference.
Crid at March 5, 2021 6:09 AM
Eh, words like "elite" and "privilege" have such negative connotations these days (perhaps they always did) that of course people try and escape them.
Hell, George W. ran as an outsider down home Texan.
NicoleK at March 6, 2021 8:49 AM
Leave a comment