Why is "average" so frequently taken as a severe insult? [RANT]

[enderlord99]

I'll probably never understand why many people take everything less than "you are history's greatest genius, and no other living creature in the entire universe could ever even approach your magnificent intellect" as being roughly equivalent to calling them an idiot. "Kind of smart" is, by definition, a mild compliment; people are nonetheless offended when you use the term to describe them. The same applies to things like "slightly pretty," "somewhat good at {activity}" or "decent." It's so STUPID! That doesn't mean the people who think it are necessarily stupid, merely that the thought itself is, but that's a mostly separate rant...

[Knaight]

The thing about "somewhat good at <activity>", "decent" and the like is that they don't actually mean much of anything without a context of which group is being used as a baseline. Generally the assumption is of a general population, and while that does tend to have provincial overtones and work out to the group of people living in a limited geographic range with a perceived normal cultural background rather than something like the world population, it doesn't tend to be the group of specialists. Saying that someone is only a bit better than the broader population at something they've specialized in is basically calling them incompetent in their field a lot of times.

[Brother Oni]

"Kind of smart" is, by definition, a mild compliment; people are nonetheless offended when you use the term to describe them. The same applies to things like "slightly pretty," "somewhat good at {activity}" or "decent."

'Kind of smart' also has the implication that they can be stupid at other times or in different situations.

'Slightly pretty' means they have ugly features or something else stopping them from being just normal 'pretty'.

Knaight has covered the last two.

[Killer Angel]

You're not wrong, but in the end, no one likes to be included in a generic average mass of people. Becase we think to ourselves as special ones.

[super dark33]

You're not wrong, but in the end, no one likes to be included in a generic average mass of people. Becase we think to ourselves as special ones.

MEDIOCRE!

[Kalmageddon]

You're not wrong, but in the end, no one likes to be included in a generic average mass of people. Becase we think to ourselves as special ones.

It's a problem of the modern age.
Especially in western society, we are meant to think that as individuals we are somehow all equals but at the same time each one has to be special, has to be good (not merely mediocre) at something, has to be popular. It's utter bs of course.
I for one don't think we are all equals, at all. So this way, at least the idea of everyone being special has some merit. Special doesn't mean better of course.

[factotum]

"Kind of smart" does seem an odd way to put it--I can easily see people taking that phrasing as being sarcastic and thus assume you're insulting their intelligence. Maybe use "clever" as a sort of halfway house between "average" and "smart", if that's what you're looking for?

[Gnoman]

To a lot of people, "average" comes across as damning with faint praise, not least because it is often code for "this person is absolutely useless, but saying something negative opens me up to a libel/slander lawsuit" when used to describe employees or subordinates.

[Fragenstein]

To a lot of people, "average" comes across as damning with faint praise...

This is what I was going to bring up, as well. Why go out of your way to tell someone that they're in the middle of the pack if you're not trying to put them down?

Context is need, of course. If someone says "So what do you think? I'm pretty awesome, right?", and they're really not, then it's a different matter. They're still going to be hurt since unrealistic self-images can be troubling when broken, but don't go out of your way to step on their dreams. Unless they're asking for you to do just that, I suppose.

It's also different if you're judging the person in an official capacity. But, at that point, they should have the professionalism to deal with constructive criticism.

[Chen]

"Kind of smart" is, by definition, a mild compliment; people are nonetheless offended when you use the term to describe them. The same applies to things like "slightly pretty," "somewhat good at {activity}" or "decent." It's so STUPID! That doesn't mean the people who think it are necessarily stupid, merely that the thought itself is, but that's a mostly separate rant...

I'm curious as to what situations you would ever want to use these statements for. I mean when would you ever call someone "slightly pretty"? Same thing with "kind of smart". These are like backhanded compliments due to the prefix in both being essentially negative qualifiers. The implications of both of these are either that the opposite is also true ("slightly ugly" or "kind of dumb") or even worse that the converse is true ("fairly ugly" or "quite dumb").

[enderlord99]

If someone says "So what do you think? I'm pretty awesome, right?", and they're really not, then it's a different matter.

That's when this usually comes up, at least for me. If someone asks "why aren't you calling me a genius right now?" or something to that effect, and they only seem decently smart to me, I'll answer "because you only seem decently smart to me."

Then I get yelled at for "insulting" them.

[Chen]

That's when this usually comes up, at least for me. If someone asks "why aren't you calling me a genius right now?" or something to that effect, and they only seem decently smart to me, I'll answer "because you only seem decently smart to me."

Then I get yelled at for "insulting" them.

Because your response is insulting? Now the person asking is asking a dumb question anyways, much like the "do I look fat in this" type question. Nevertheless your answer has no tact behind it, so it's unsurprising people would be upset at it.

[Fragenstein]

That's when this usually comes up, at least for me. If someone asks "why aren't you calling me a genius right now?" or something to that effect, and they only seem decently smart to me, I'll answer "because you only seem decently smart to me."

Then I get yelled at for "insulting" them.

That seems to fall into the area of fragile egos. Anyone fishing for compliments, whether it's overtly like your example or the more subtle attempts through self-deprecation, is not going to accept the truth willingly.

[enderlord99]

Because your response is insulting?

Right. I'm asking how the **** that's the case.

Now the person asking is asking a dumb question anyways, much like the "do I look fat in this" type question. Nevertheless your answer has no tact behind it, so it's unsurprising people would be upset at it.

Is "tact" another word for "ego-pandering stuff that isn't true?"

[Chen]

The "why aren't you calling me a genius right now?" seems like an exaggeration. And if its NOT an exaggeration why would you suddenly think this person wants to hear the truth of the matter? I'd like to know what the exact statement was in this case, assuming it wasn't simply a hypothetical.

Tact is basically about being diplomatic and not causing offense in what you're saying. It is not a judgement on whether or not the offense that might be generated is justified or not. So if you don't mind causing offense and people getting insulted, go ahead and don't use any tact. However you seem to be getting upset (or confused) as to why people are feeling insulted when you say things that are not tactful to them. I already mentioned who adding a lesser qualifier (slight, sort of, somewhat etc) to a compliment is somewhat backhanded. People don't generally like that. So yeah you'll probably have people take offense if you call them "slightly intelligent" or the like.

[Fragenstein]

Is "tact" another word for "ego-pandering stuff that isn't true?"

Sometimes. Yes. Office politics periodically require that you be the bigger person when it comes to unreasonable co-workers.

[SirKazum]

Is "tact" another word for "ego-pandering stuff that isn't true?"

Yes. Yes, it is. Unfortunate, but it's how human society works. Feelings are rarely logical, and knowing how to deal with them is the cornerstone of one's basic social skills. Besides, the meaning of words is a highly arbitrary thing, depending on convention - and, if tradition dictates that mild compliments tempered by careful qualifiers are really subtle, etiquette-maintaining insults (because that's the way people use these expressions), then I'm sorry, but that's just what they are.

[Lentrax]

A perfectly adequate response to an adequate question.

[Brother Oni]

Is "tact" another word for "ego-pandering stuff that isn't true?"

In this particular instance, yes.

In general though, tact is a good thing to have as it enables you to pass on difficult truths or news that would otherwise cause an aggressive response.

Suppose you had to deliver a death notification to a family that you'd never met before. Would you knock on their door and say "Do you know so and so? Well he's dead." or would you say "Hello, my name is enderlord99. Do you know so and so? I'm afraid I have some bad news; may I come inside?"

[Fragenstein]

Suppose you had to deliver a death notification to a family that you'd never met before. Would you knock on their door and say "Do you know so and so? Well he's dead." or would you say "Hello, my name is enderlord99. Do you know so and so? I'm afraid I have some bad news; may I come inside?"

Heh...

"Why aren't you calling me genius right now?"

"I'm afraid I have some bad news..."

[Iruka]

That's when this usually comes up, at least for me. If someone asks "why aren't you calling me a genius right now?" or something to that effect, and they only seem decently smart to me, I'll answer "because you only seem decently smart to me."

Then I get yelled at for "insulting" them.

In what context does this stuff come up? I hear similar stuff when someone knows some exotic bit of knowledge or comes up with an at least clever solution for some problem. It is never meant completely serious, just celebrating their own success a bit.
In a joking tone "because you only seem decently smart to me" would probably be acceptable, in a dead serious tone it would quickly ruin the mood.

[enderlord99]

In this particular instance, yes.

Then I refuse to use it in the aforementioned instance.

In general though, tact is a good thing to have as it enables you to pass on difficult truths or news that would otherwise cause an aggressive response.

I'm still not sure what tact is, though...

Suppose you had to deliver a death notification to a family that you'd never met before. Would you knock on their door and say "Do you know so and so? Well he's dead." or would you say "Hello, my name is enderlord99. Do you know so and so? I'm afraid I have some bad news; may I come inside?"

Those sound roughly equivalent to me, except for the fact that the second one's longer. How would beating around the bush (as they say) first make it any less painful for them when I eventually got around to actually saying it?

[Anarion]

It's also different if you're judging the person in an official capacity. But, at that point, they should have the professionalism to deal with constructive criticism.

Current best practice for professional criticism is that telling someone they're good/bad/average/whatever isn't actually useful anyway. It's much better to focus on specific things and what they should do to improve while leaving out the value judgment words. For example, "Feedback from your coworkers is that you take up too much time in meetings, it would help if you prepared your talking points in advance so we could plan around them." Stuff like that.

Right. I'm asking how the **** that's the case.

Is "tact" another word for "ego-pandering stuff that isn't true?"

Tact can be that, but it's a broader word. It means talking to someone in a way that won't upset or offend them. Sometimes that means ego pandering. The point of being tactful isn't to cater to unreasonable people. It's to save yourself time. It simply takes too long and is too exhausting to correct every unreasonable person you meet. On top of that, people will NOT listen to what you have to say if you upset them, so often it's better to use tact, especially when you're talking to someone because you need something from them.

Heh...

"Why aren't you calling me genius right now?"

"I'm afraid I have some bad news..."

Context dependent of course, but when do people usually fish for that kind of compliment. It's usually when they just pulled something off, usually for you. Like "hey I just got you that extra money in the budget for your extra project" or "finished that big contract we were working on. Am I not a genius?"

At that point, if you don't give the person the compliment they want, what you're really saying is that you don't respect whatever accomplishment it was that caused them to seek the compliment in the first place. So tact in that case is probably something like ignoring them as a person and complimenting the project. Like, if they ask if they're a genius, you could say "it's great that the project got done" instead and it's unlikely that they'll be offended by that yet you don't have to lie about their intellect either.

[SirKazum]

Then I refuse to use it in the aforementioned instance.

I'm still not sure what tact is, though...

Those sound roughly equivalent to me, except for the fact that the second one's longer. How would beating around the bush (as they say) first make it any less painful for them when I eventually got around to actually saying it?

Well what this sounds like is that you make no effort to be pleasant toward others, possibly because you see no merit in that, and when the completely obvious consequence of you being generally seen as an unpleasant person takes place, that somehow seems illogical to you. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that's hardly the most brilliant thinking ever. (See how that works? )

[enderlord99]

Well what this sounds like is that you make no effort to be pleasant toward others

I make an effort to be pleasant, I just don't know how to be pleasant. There's a difference.

[golentan]

I make an effort to be pleasant, I just don't know how to be pleasant. There's a difference.

So, here's a tip based on this and the gender thread... If you're making an effort to be pleasant, and people get offended by something you say so you ask if that thing is insulting or offensive, and are told "yes it is," that doesn't require further input. Question asked, question answered. Arguing "No it really isn't" means, among other things, you didn't actually care about the opinions of those you asked.

Edit: Arguing being, in this case, different from asking for further clarification. If you're trying to convince people that they're not really offended, you're wrong. Trying to figure out WHY they're offended, that's different, though it can get uncomfortable for everyone.

[Knaight]

Especially in western society, we are meant to think that as individuals we are somehow all equals but at the same time each one has to be special, has to be good (not merely mediocre) at something, has to be popular. It's utter bs of course.

There are a ridiculously high number of fields of specialization, particular skills, so on and so forth. Just about everyone is going to be significantly above average at at least some of them, which is pretty much a statistical inevitability of all of them having variation. People are also disproportionately likely to spend more of their time and energy at the things they are actually good at, which means that in the context presented "average" frequently does claim a level of ineptitude below what would generally be expected. Hence it's an insult.

[Jormengand]

Personally, I would be quite offended if you called me averagely intelligent, but probably laugh if you thought I was anywhere near as strong as average. Sometimes people are offended by being called average because you're just being wrong in a rude way.

[Admiral Squish]

I've had similar problems with social interaction, so I feel I might be able to offer some advice. Logically, your statements make sense. However, human interaction involves a lot more than just logic, as I've learned. It would be so much easier if things were logical, but you're not going to change that alone, and if you try, it will likely serve to alienate you from others.

Tact isn't about flattery. It's about softening the impact. If a car was going to hit you, would you rather it step on the gas and get it over with, or it hit the breaks and slow down before the impact? When the bad news comes out, that's the impact. Easing into it by allowing the other person to prepare themselves mentally and emotionally, that's the breaks. If you can avoid the hit altogether, that's ideal.

I'll try to share some tips that have helped me. Firstly, I recommend avoiding giving assessments unless directly asked. It's just easier that way. If you are asked and can't give a straightforward positive remark, try to focus on the positive aspects rather than the overall assessment. For example, if asked to give your opinion of a drawing, maybe point out a part that was done well. If you can't do that, you can try saying something generally noncommittal or subjective, like 'not bad' or 'I like it'. But make sure you say them in a positive tone, or you might sound like you're damning them with faint praise. Try to avoid negative qualifiers like 'kinda' or 'sorta', as they tend to make any compliment given sound backhanded or insincere. If you have to give bad news, try to soften the blow by expressing concern for the other person's emotional well being or offering encouragement (though, that's only appropriate in some situations).

Ultimately, though, you can't just have these things explained to you. You have to learn them the hard way, through practice and observation. This can be tricky as you may not realize what you're doing wrong at first.
My most successful strategy for fixing this has been to bring a close, trustworthy friend to social events with me. When we leave, I ask if they noticed me making a social faux pas, and if they did, I try to avoid that behavior in the future. In sensitive situations, where there are consequences for social mis-steps, I ask them to give me a signal when they see me doing something wrong, usually by referring to me with a rarely-used nickname.

[Anarion]

Edit: Arguing being, in this case, different from asking for further clarification. If you're trying to convince people that they're not really offended, you're wrong. Trying to figure out WHY they're offended, that's different, though it can get uncomfortable for everyone.

I'd strongly suggest coming here or PMing people, or asking friends/family about the "why was this person offended" question. It's extremely hard to have a conversation with someone even to clarify why they were upset without upsetting them further. It's a massive minefield of potential offenses.