Yeah, it's important that we pay some attention to people's feelings, but we aren't there to jump to action whenever someone else (especially strangers) claims that their feelings are hurt and that we owe them our time, energy and money. We need to be on guard so that our natural inclinations to be empathetic don't become toxic. We need to know that it's OK to draw boundaries. It's OK to say "No," and to say it often. Functional people do these things. That is how they develop and maintain strong moral character. Every day it important to put your own oxygen mask on, at least for awhile, before jumping to the rescue of others. We intuitively do this with regard to our money. If we acceded to the demands of all beggars, rent-seekers and scoundrels we encounter in person and on the Internet, everyone one of us would go broke in a week.
Today I spotted a post by Mom Wars:
When we tell kids to always be inclusive, we often fail to teach them discernment.
We don’t live in a world where every person has good intentions. We don’t live in a world where every peer is safe, healthy, or kind. And yet, we tell kids—especially girls—to include everyone, to make room for every voice, to keep the peace even when something feels off. We elevate kindness as the ultimate virtue, but we don’t equip them with the tools to know when and how to draw the line.
What does that teach them? That someone else’s feelings are always more important than their gut instincts. That avoiding awkwardness is more important than avoiding harm. That their discomfort is a small price to pay for another person’s inclusion.
And that’s a dangerous lesson.
When you preach “kindness” without nuance, without boundaries, without discernment, you unintentionally teach your child that being “nice” matters more than being safe, or emotionally well, or even just comfortable in their own skin. You teach them that their own mental health comes second to another person’s momentary hurt feelings. That ignoring their inner voice in favor of social harmony is maturity, rather than self-abandonment.
When you preach “acceptance” as a blanket virtue, you fail to give your child a framework for recognizing anti-social behaviors. For noticing when someone is manipulative, attention-seeking, boundary-breaking, or just draining to be around. Kids—especially empathetic ones—can easily absorb the idea that all behavior must be tolerated, all personalities embraced, all people welcomed no matter how they treat others.
But that’s not kindness. That’s codependency."
This is spot on. Such an important lesson that so many people need to learn and heed.
This topic relates to the work of Paul Bloom. In 2016 he wrote a book titled: Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion. He defines “empathy” as follows: “Empathy is the act of coming to experience the world as you think someone else does.” He further describes empathy as “a spotlight directing attention and aid to where it’s needed.” According to Bloom, empathy is an emotion, not a good tool for moral decision-making. “Compassion,” on the other hand, is feeling concern or compassion for someone. Bloom contrasts empathy with “rational compassion,” which can productively be used to “make decisions based on considerations of cost and benefits.” Empathy, by contrast, has no such protective limitations, meaning that empathy often leads to ill-considered policies.
