The “Bite Me!”is an Ethics Alarms designation reserved for either an individual whose “response to being bullied, pressured and threatened into submissiveness is to say, “Do your worst. I believe in what I am doing, and I don’t grovel to mobs,” or as used several times here, to impugn the author of unethical conduct that demands the response, “Bite me!”
Dr. Kirsten Viola Harrison is a licensed psychologist and a “spiritual integration coach,” whatever the hell THAT means. She’s seeking her 15 minutes of faux fame by lecturing us about how people can unwittingly give off an “unapproachable energy,” thus sending out a “bad vibe.”
“Giving off a bad vibe’ means unintentionally projecting energy, through words, tone and body language, that others perceive as negative, inauthentic, or that make one appear unapproachable,” she explains. “It often triggers discomfort and mistrust, even when no harm is intended. Since our brains are wired to detect dissonance between what someone says and how they say it, the non-verbal signals which inform our emotional responses are exceedingly influential and powerful in shaping our interactions.”
Dr. Harrison has identified nine phrases she says can create these bad vibes if one isn’t careful. Gee, I wonder if “Bite me, you insufferable, over-credentialed fool!” is on the list? In her case, the “Bite Me!” is earned by abuse of authority and making gullible people stupid with New Age psychobabble. Here is her list, and my reactions.
1.”I’m Just Being Honest!”
Dr. Harrison: “It’s vital in our digital age to be able to trust ourselves and others and equally to give off an aura of being trustworthy. Our powers of discernment are at an all-time high as more and more of us are craving authenticity. Being able to distinguish that which is real and to be able to engage with genuine, honest intention, is the name of the game in this new era.”
Me: Bite me! Our powers of discernment are at an all-time high? Does she ever watch MSNBC? I’ll say “I’m just being honest” when one of those who don’t know what a lie is and who takes offense at a sincere statement, does.
2. “You Knew What You Were Getting Into.”
Dr. Harrison explains that no one can truly know what’s going to happen in the future, but saying this implies that someone should. It also contributes to a cynical worldview and doesn’t foster strong relationships.
Me: Bite me. It is the motto of the “Scorpion and the Frog.” It means “Take responsibility for your reckless decisions.” The phrase has been said to me, correctly, many times, and I’ve learned from it.
3. “This Isn’t Personal.”
Dr. Harrison “points out that it indicates you could just be saying this to someone else to ‘soften the blow’ and you don’t actually mean it. “When psychological safety is broken it erodes trust,” she explains. “The brain is wired to pick up on inconsistencies and that which feels disingenuous or incongruent is immediately red flagged. Our collective human nature involves honing our energies towards life-sustaining connection. Therefore, everything is personal.”
Me: Bite me! If I say this I means it, and I say it when someone is too immature to appreciate and respect thoughtful criticism.
4. “Why Do You Care?”
Dr. Harrison: “Resist the urge to feed into the apathy. Beneath this statement is a well of pent-up emotion that we resist from fear of overwhelm. Titrated drops of vulnerability combined with open-hearted listening really can change the brain.”
Me: Oh, bite me, and also, “WHAT?” I use the question to make someone consider why they are getting upset about something it isn’t rational to get upset about, or to alert them to a bias. Apathy has nothing to do with it.
I am tempted to ask why anyone should care what this woman thinks about anything…
5. “That’s Not My Problem.”
Dr. Harrison: “We have all become acutely aware that it is our shared responsibility to protect and fiercely guard our humanity. Do your part by turning a bad vibe into a loving one.”
Me: Bite me. The phrase is appropriate when someone tries to foist their problem off on me to duck responsibility, as when a restaurant manager tries to excuse lousy service by telling me, “We have a lot of absentees today.”
6. “I’m Not Sure What You’re Talking About”
Dr. Harrison: “In both romantic and professional settings, gaslighting phrases such as this can feel invalidating and disconnected, amplifying feelings of being dismissed and unsupported. Phrases which make one’s mind feel like it’s on an endless replay loop signal our nervous systems into hyper-alert. The result is self-doubt and loss of self-esteem, when in reality, the endless obsessive rumination is just our brains trying to fit anomalous information into a pattern.”
Me: Wow, and also, “Bite me.” I use the phrase when I don’t know what someone is talking about. Of course using it when you DO know what he or she is talking about “gives off a bad vibe” because it’s lying. Dr. Harrison defines completely useful modes of communication as “microaggressions,” distorting their meaning to do so. She gives me “bad vibes.
7. “It Is What It Is.“
Dr. Harrison: “This phrase bypasses complexity by offering an emotionally flat response.”
Me: Okay, I’ll give her this one. It’s on the Rationalization List.
8. “I’m Not Changing Who I Am.”
Me: Another point for the doctor. If I ever say this, hit me over the head with a brick.
She ends with a three phrase streak; #9 is “It’s all good,” which is a brush-off, and it always annoys the hell out of me.
But not as much as Dr. Harrison does.
Ethics Alarms 
The variation of “I’m just being honest” that drives me crazy is the opening line people love using “I’m not gonna lie”. Obviously they haven’t been lying the entire time unless they are politicians but the idea of introducing a statement with that line immediately makes me think less of the person saying it.
Generally when I hear “I’m not gonna lie…”, it’s in a context where the normal socially-accepted thing to do is lie–usually in an effort to spare someone’s feelings or avoid going against some conventional wisdom that exists on the subject.
It’s less of a cue that the speaker is suddenly doing an about-face by being honest now (which is of course unethical) and more of a cue/warning that what the speaker is about to say will probably surprise you–what the kids (I’m sure no longer) call a “Hot Take” these days.
At least, that’s how I think it could and should be used.
–Dwayne
“Giving off a bad vibe’ means unintentionally projecting energy, through words, tone and body language, that others perceive as negative, inauthentic, or that make one appear unapproachable,”
Positively groundbreaking!
“Giving off a bad vibe”. Late 60’s early 70, usually pot induced gibberish. I prefer “good, good, good vibrations”
ME: Bless Her Heart!
” ‘It often triggers discomfort and mistrust, even when no harm is intended.’ “
A certain…um…demographic positively thrives on perceived offense; heck, they can’t (IMO) live without it.
So if it’s missing or ambiguous, it must be manufactured and displayed in no uncertain terms.
PWS
Giving off bad vibes is not always unintentional. I know because I use project them when I do not want some officious advice or counsel from someone has limited understanding of an issue.
She says “It’s vital in our digital age to be able to trust ourselves and others and equally to give off an aura of being trustworthy. Our powers of discernment are at an all-time high as more and more of us are craving authenticity.”
Why is it vital to trust others in a digital age. Trust is earned not projected. Con-men project trust and trusting gullible people get taken by those projecting authenticity. That is how Kamala got as many votes as she did.
“We have all become acutely aware that it is our shared responsibility to protect and fiercely guard our humanity. Do your part by turning a bad vibe into a loving one.”
Our humanity is not predicated on the idea that we have a duty and obligation to protect others from their own actions. I cannot count the number of times someone has asked me for advice and then either promises to make changes and does not follow through or gives multiple reasons why the advice won’t work. Ok, don’t waste my time with your issues in the future.
The flip side of this is why should I care. Every one has trials and tribulations in their lives so is it even ethical let alone appropriate to burden me with your issues when I am dealing with my own.
Of course there are caveats to all of this. The key is focusing ones efforts where you expect to see changed behaviors from your involvement. The issue is we do not have a shared responsibility to make others happier that responsibility lies within ourselves.
“When psychological safety is broken it erodes trust,” she explains. “The brain is wired to pick up on inconsistencies and that which feels disingenuous or incongruent is immediately red flagged. Our collective human nature involves honing our energies towards life-sustaining connection. Therefore, everything is personal.”
Did EC author this? Have we gotten to the point the we are all a bunch of fragile psyches that must be sheltered. There is no reason to even say this is not personal unless the other person claims that it is a personal attack. What the hell is a collective human nature and life sustaining connection anyway? Is she saying criticism might lead to suicide so we need to affirm the individual?
Your comment reminded me of something bec
Something that my brother and I have discussed is that when someone lies in person, there are tells that you can often pick up on. Because this is lacking in writing (online or not), people seem to default to being more likely to believe lies. I would argue that in the digital age, it’s vital to be LESS trusting by default. You know you don’t have access to any of the clues you would have in person, so you should engage in more effort to double check things. Most people already do that with things are they are predisposed not to believe in, and it appears to be a one way ratchet towards greater balkanization.
You can NOT give off an “aura” over the internet, and her statement is trash. Other people are projecting on to what you write, and that’s entirely beyond your control.
I’m inclined to agree with most of what you wrote. I think there’s a misunderstanding about that last part. The context is if someone tells you “it’s not personal” but you can tell they are lying (“wired to pick up inconsistencies”). I’m not sure what she means by “psychological safety” in this context, but in general it means being able to trust the people you have close relationships with. If they violate that trust, even in small ways, it can make it more difficult to trust people in general.
“Our collective human nature involves honing our energies towards life-sustaining connection.” I think she’s saying that people want to have meaningful relationships with each other.
“Therefore, everything is personal.” I consider this statement either false or meaningless. For a large-scale society to function, I suspect some activities literally can’t be motivated or informed by a personal relationship between two people. I might be mistaken about that, but I do at least know that not everything needs to be personal.
I get the impression that your use of the word “trust” is limited to touchy-feely emotional situations, and so when I refer to ethics as based on trust, it sounds sentimental to you. Does that sound right? When I say “trust” I mean relying on the honesty and cooperation of other people, whether or not that’s based on warm fuzzies or on rational self-interest.
Does that all make sense?
She should have treated, “Nothing personal; just business.”
“Giving off a bad vibe’ means unintentionally projecting energy, through words, tone and body language, that others perceive as negative, inauthentic, or that make one appear unapproachable,”
Unintentionally? Oh hell, no. I do that shit on purpose. I’m thinking of getting a t-shirt that reads “not friendly” or “I have rabies” just for extra measure.
I always have rabies in the morning until my first 4 cups of coffee.
Me too!
Bad Dogs!
I wonder what the Good Doctor would say if I said this:
“If I’m justing being honest, and i’m not gonna lie, don’t take this personally but you knew what you were getting yourself into at the time, so I am not sure what you are talking or why you are making this my problem, so why should I care because it’s not my problem; it is what it is, and you cannot change me or who I am, so it’s all good.”
jvb
The vibe of this article is “I am running out of material, I committed to a clickbait title, and I had to shoehorn in some items to pad out the list.”
I like the concept of identifying common phrases that create negative impressions, but I’m almost positive there are better examples than these.
Regardin gthe paragraph defining bad vibes: While “vibe”, “energy”, and “aura” are often used in a… less than empirically rigorous way (I’ve got friends who are into this sort of thing, so I’m being polite), they’re also used purely figuratively in common vernacular to describe the emotions evoked by body language and facial expressions. It’s same principle as using words like “vision” to describe imagination or foresight, or “mental energy” to describe physiological fatigue pertaining to the brain. I’ll give the “bad vibes” paragraph the benefit of the doubt, since it gives decent advice on rapport mindset without necessarily relying on pseudoscientific paradigms.
After that, the article starts to get shaky.
“I’m just being honest” is normally not a Suspiciously Specific Denial, as Harrison implies. In my experience, it’s an excuse to say what’s on your mind without bothering to present it in ways that take other people’s feelings into account. That’s still bad vibes, but for different reasons. It’s more like how Harrison explains “this isn’t personal.”
“You knew what you were getting into” is highly context-dependent. Did the other person actually know what they were getting into? Are they venting to the person who’s saying the phrase, or are they criticizing that person and being brushed off? Is the person saying the phrase trying to make excuses for themselves, or did they reasonably expect their habits to be accommodated and are now being told they won’t be? Was there a miscommunication, or did someone mislead the other? There might be better phrases than this one, but “you knew what you were getting into” isn’t automatically bad.
“This isn’t personal” is another one that’s context-dependent. Is someone making a professional decision for the good of a project, and reassuring someone that they’re still likeable? Or are they taking advantage of someone and making the excuse that they’re not doing it out of spite, as if that makes it better? See Rationalization 54: Tessio’s Excuse, or “It’s just business”. In the article, it looks like it’s an excuse to give a harsh criticism of a friend who was expecting a more pleasant interaction. If someone needs to hear something, there are better ways to present it.
“Why do you care?” could also go either way. As a rhetorical question, it does suggest that apathy about rules or others’ wellbeing should be the default. You don’t need a reason to care about other people. However, it’s also important to ask ourselves the serious question of why we actually care about a particular event, if it’s not directly connected to people’s wellbeing. That’s the first step in the Values Reconciliation Method. “Why do you care?” is also a common phrase for responding to meddlesome control freaks.
“That’s not my problem” is, as Jack said, sometimes appropriate. I’m wondering if the issue is just how it’s presented. Maybe “that’s not my responsibility” would convey the sentiment better.
“I’m not sure what you’re talking about” is definitely just an issue with presentation. In the article, Harrison calls out that whether or not it’s accurate, the blunt way it’s phrased presents a schism: One person thinks a problem is obvious and they care very much about it, and the other person didn’t notice the problem. Depending on the relationship dynamics, this can cause the first person to doubt their own perceptions or emotions to an unhealthy extent. For this reason, I prefer to say things like, “Sorry, I’m drawing a blank at the moment. Can you please elaborate?” or “I think I missed something. Can you please clarify what you’re referring to?” Ideally, people need to find those they can trust to support them and help them find the difference between “you’re the only one who cares, but your feelings are valid” and “it’s unhealthy for you to care about this.”
I concur with Jack on 7 and 8.
“It’s all good” is just reaching. The article even says that there’s no issue when it’s being used sincerely, so it’s less about the words and more about whether people are refusing to acknowledge frustration. That’s a different topic than one the article started with.
(I have never run out of material, and never will…)I am realizing how much time fake experts waste, while enticing people to read and think about things that are simply not worthy of pondering. This article seemed like a prime example.
I concur.
(In case it wasn’t clear, my first paragraph is meant as a criticism of the same article you’re criticizing; I realized afterwards that it was ambiguously phrased. I apologize if that sounded like a jab at your review of the article.)
enjoying this commentary… for the record I’m trying to promote a book on a person whom I helped and was asked to give my take on these issues and fyi it’s all gratis and no fame sought or needed;) and you all have interesting points and anything that promotes discussion to clarify human behavior is welcomed
Exactly! And kudos for weighing in, Kristin. I officially retract my “Bite Me” and substitute a respectful dissent. Brava. You’re exactly the kind of voice I love hearing here.