Gossip: Let's talk about it.

[SaintOfVirtue]

Recently I've had the misfortune of being caught up in a bit of drama between multiple people and it has gotten me thinking a lot about gossip.  In my case I am a third party with no connection to the biases of their stories other than I know the people in them in a professional/business capacity only.  I have no connection to the events they tell me about which in many cases have happened years before I moved here (to NY).  There is no reason for me to know the 'terrible' things they've done, however true or untrue they may be, and it's a grand waste of my time to trouble me with a half-hour discourse on their dirty laundry.  Consequently I have these questions for discussion:

Why do people gossip?  I ask this question from a more scientific/sociological perspective (perhaps a better question would be to ask of the evolutionary genesis of gossip, and whether it actually serves any useful purpose).

How does one politely excuse himself from a gossip laden conversation while remaining entirely neutral (i.e. without condoning or condemning the topic of the gossip)?

I feel like I'm playing both ends against the middle, except rather than trying to set them against each other I'm trying to pacify them.  In this regard, do you have any personal experience you would not mind sharing?

On a slightly humorous note: When I get nervous my left eye twitches, and when I shut people down in a conversation for gossip I get nervous because I do not want to appear to be taking a side for or against them especially in matters which do not concern me.  This eye twitch makes it rather awkward for whoever I am talking to (or trying to end talking with), so got any homeopathic remedies for nervous-eye-twitch?

 

[Gabriela]

Recently I've had the misfortune of being caught up in a bit of drama between multiple people and it has gotten me thinking a lot about gossip.  In my case I am a third party with no connection to the biases of their stories other than I know the people in them in a professional/business capacity only.  I have no connection to the events they tell me about which in many cases have happened years before I moved here (to NY).  There is no reason for me to know the 'terrible' things they've done, however true or untrue they may be, and it's a grand waste of my time to trouble me with a half-hour discourse on their dirty laundry.  Consequently I have these questions for discussion:

Why do people gossip?  I ask this question from a more scientific/sociological perspective (perhaps a better question would be to ask of the evolutionary genesis of gossip, and whether it actually serves any useful purpose).

How does one politely excuse himself from a gossip laden conversation while remaining entirely neutral (i.e. without condoning or condemning the topic of the gossip)?

I feel like I'm playing both ends against the middle, except rather than trying to set them against each other I'm trying to pacify them.  In this regard, do you have any personal experience you would not mind sharing?

On a slightly humorous note: When I get nervous my left eye twitches, and when I shut people down in a conversation for gossip I get nervous because I do not want to appear to be taking a side for or against them especially in matters which do not concern me.  This eye twitch makes it rather awkward for whoever I am talking to (or trying to end talking with), so got any homeopathic remedies for nervous-eye-twitch?

 

Gossip does serve a useful purpose. We're always seeking to reduce our uncertainty about other people, and gossip can make us feel more certain. (Of course, gossip is often wrong, in which case we'll feel certain, but be wrong.) It also makes people feel powerful: Information gives power, so the more you have of it, the more powerful you feel and actually are.

Gossip is also an important feature in bonding. If you and I gossip together, we'll increase our feelings of similarity to each other and feel closer to each other (often, of course, at someone else's expense).

I have struggled a lot with gossip, both my own and others'. In my department, I sometimes feel a desperate need to obtain information about others, not because I want to use it against them, but because I need to know how to approach that person or how that person may treat me. I have one particular person in the department that I go to for this information. Because she knows everybody and is constantly socializing, and I know nobody and am never socializing, she's a really important asset to me. Listening to her gossip (and even inciting her to gossip) helps me to feel safer and more comfortable when I'm confronted with one of the people who are new to me, but known to her.

That being said, I often feel conflicted about the gossip we engage in. I do confess it. On the other hand, my intent in eliciting it isn't to harm others, but to make myself feel safer and more secure in novel interactions. Still, when you incite gossip, you really can't separate it out from detraction. The two practically always go together. I want the gossip, but not the detraction. Unfortunately, I can't find a way to get the one without the other. So even if my information-seeking through gossip isn't a sin, the detraction I incite definitely is.

It's complicated.

When people are gossiping and I don't need the information, I just keep quiet. I may excuse myself if I can do that naturally. I stop listening and start trying to think of other topics we could turn the conversation to. I'm not very socially adept, so I don't always succeed at any of these, but I do find I'm getting better as I practice.

I have been in the situation you're in before: stuck between two people gossiping about each other. My advice to you is to get out fast, because they will eventually BOTH turn on YOU. You need to find some way to make clear that you're not the person they should go to to vent/hate on the other. I find that changing the conversational topic to something really obscurely intellectual helps to shut people down. It lets them know I'm the type of person who prefers to talk about ideas, not other people. To people who prefer to talk about other people, that's boring, so they go away.

I do not have a homeopathic remedy for eye-twitch, but I bet Google does.  

Edited September 21, 2015 by Gabriela

[Era Might]

In the office, just ignore everybody...business is business, if you just mind your business they get the point that you don't care (and if you're smart, you'll use your silence to your advantage...you can observe everything without saying a word, knowledge is power).

In real life...I tend to think gossip is ok sometimes, depending on the situation, like if you're in a group of friends and you're talking about someone else in the group, maybe something happened between two other people in the group. Probably even then it's a little sketchy, but like anything in life you have to know who you're talking to...don't spread other people's business to the wrong people, you have to know whether you can trust someone...and even then, if someone gossips with you, they'll probably gossip about you, but the same rule applies, you would only care if the person was not someone you should be trusting anyway.

Then there's family gossip, a lot depends on the family...sometimes you get a good laugh out of the rumor mill.

But generally, mind your own business is my opinion. He who cares less wins...so care about as little as possible, only about what actually matters to you doing what YOU have to do in your OWN life.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Era Might

[SaintOfVirtue]

Thanks for the replies, both are useful food for thought.  Also, I recall there was a saint who had an anti-gossip saying carved into a dinner table but I cannot remember the saint or the saying.  I think he/she would be a good intercessor for this situation so if anyone could point me in the right direction I'll mail you a taco (so tasty) or something.

[Gabriela]

Thanks for the replies, both are useful food for thought.  Also, I recall there was a saint who had an anti-gossip saying carved into a dinner table but I cannot remember the saint or the saying.  I think he/she would be a good intercessor for this situation so if anyone could point me in the right direction I'll mail you a taco (so tasty) (so tasty) or something.

That would be St. Augustine: https://books.google.com/books?id=NI6m_0AeJJgC&pg=PA100&lpg=PA100&dq=saint+gossip+table&source=bl&ots=mRgykYaUY3&sig=rZVVO0L-vFcjt3z0KvhthL6-b-A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBmoVChMI8sa4_8yKyAIVhVYeCh3wYw2t#v=onepage&q=saint gossip table&f=false

 

[SaintOfVirtue]

Well this is slightly embarrassing. St.  Augustine is my confirmation saint, I should have known that...

Would you like a taco (so tasty)? 

[dominicansoul]

Gossip can murder friendships, Calumny is even worse as it destroys a person's reputation using lies and slander.  Pope Francis addressed gossip/calumny in one of his Angelus messages:

 

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis’ Sunday Angelus message emphasized the importance of avoiding all forms of slander in living a Christian life.

“It’s so rotten, gossip. At the beginning, it seems to be something enjoyable and fun, like a piece of candy. But at the end, it fills the heart with bitterness and also poisons us,” Pope Francis said Feb. 16.

“I tell you the truth,” he preached to the crowds filling St. Peter’s Square. “I am convinced that if each one of us would purposely avoid gossip, at the end, we would become a saint! It’s a beautiful path!”

“Do we want to become saints? Yes or no?” he queried, as the crowds replied, “Yes!”

“Yes? Do we want to live attached to gossip as a habit?” Pope Francis continued, “Yes or no? No? Okay, so we are in agreement! No gossip!”

The Gospel reading at Sunday’s Mass contained the story of Jesus explaining to the disciples that he had come “not to abolish, but to fulfill, the Law” of the old covenant.

Jesus offers the example of the Fifth Commandmen, “Do not kill,” and goes on to add, “but I say to you: Whoever is angry with his brother will be guilty before the court.”

“With this, Jesus reminds us that even words can kill,” explained the Pope. “When it is said that someone has the ‘tongue of a serpent,’ what does it mean? That his words kill.”

“Therefore, not only must one not make an attempt on the life of others, but one must not even pour on him the poison of anger and hit him with slander, nor speak ill of him. And here we arrive at gossip. Gossip can also kill, because it kills the reputation of the person,” stressed the Holy Father.

Jesus proposes another way to his followers, “the perfection of love: a love in which the only measure is not to measure, but to go beyond all calculating.”

This Christian path of loving one’s neighbor is “so fundamental that Jesus comes to say that our relationship with God can not be honest if we do not want to make peace with our neighbor.”

“We are called to reconcile with our brothers prior to showing our devotion to the Lord in prayer,” said Pope Francis, noting Jesus’ words to his disciples, “If you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar and go; first, be reconciled to your brother.”

The Pope then summarized, “From all of this, one understands that Jesus does not give importance simply to disciplinary observance and exterior conduct. He goes to the root of the Law, focusing above all on the intention and then on the human heart, from where our good or bad actions originate.

“Good and honest behavior,” he said, does not come merely from “juridical norms,” but, rather, requires “profound motivation, expressions of a hidden wisdom, the wisdom of God, which can be received by the grace of the Holy Spirit.”

It is the Holy Spirit who “renders us capable of living Divine love” and following “the greatest commandment: Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.”

Pope Francis then led the crowds in the Angelus prayer and greeted the various pilgrim groups present before wishing everyone a “good Sunday and a good lunch.”

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/pope-francis-gossip-is-poisonous/#ixzz3mTfbo08S

[MarysLittleFlower]

I believe gossip comes from concupiscence since it is uncharitable. So I dont subscribe to any "scientific" explanation of it referring to our original unfallen psychology. Our Lord and Blessed Mother never gossipped im sure.

It is contrary to justice because everyone deserves a good reputation and it is also contrary to charity. I try to oppose gossip (though I haven't always and I know its easy to get into) by saying something good about the other person, excusing them in some way; or you can also change the topic or just leave. Or you can say against gossiping gently if the person might understand - but this is difficult to do. I don't think its right to go along with it giving the impression that its ok, though I've done this too. If we have gossipped we also need to do reparation by correcting the persons reputation to everyone we've gossipped about. Whether the statements are true or false, if they ruin reputation they are wrong. I listened to a good sermon on gossip and detraction one time that clarified a lot of this. 

Edited September 22, 2015 by MarysLittleFlower

[Era Might]

I believe gossip comes from concupiscence since it is uncharitable. So I dont subscribe to any "scientific" explanation of it referring to our original unfallen psychology. Our Lord and Blessed Mother never gossipped im sure.

It is contrary to justice because everyone deserves a good reputation and it is also contrary to charity. I try to oppose gossip (though I haven't always and I know its easy to get into) by saying something good about the other person, excusing them in some way; or you can also change the topic or just leave. Or you can say against gossiping gently if the person might understand - but this is difficult to do. I don't think its right to go along with it giving the impression that its ok, though I've done this too. If we have gossipped we also need to do reparation by correcting the persons reputation to everyone we've gossipped about. Whether the statements are true or false, if they ruin reputation they are wrong. I listened to a good sermon on gossip and detraction one time that clarified a lot of this. 

I always like to look up the etymology of words to understand where the concept comes from. For gossip:

 

Old English godsibb "sponsor, godparent," from God + sibb "relative" (see sibling). Extended in Middle English to "a familiar acquaintance, a friend, neighbor" (c. 1300), especially to woman friends invited to attend a birth, later to "anyone engaging in familiar or idle talk" (1560s). Sense extended 1811 to "trifling talk, groundless rumor." Similar formations in Old Norse guðsifja, Old Saxon guþziff.

So "gossip" as a noun has religious roots, a "god sibling," someone in an intimate circle of women. We have a very individualistic outlook in the modern world, but communication is not and cannot take place only between individuals, especially in the pre-modern world where the "individual" as we know it did not exist. Community was communal...and communication, too, was necessarily communal. Especially in small, rural towns, there is not the same atomization of individual households as we know in the United States...everyone knows everyone, and in the old days, everyone had social roles that were part of the fabric of how society worked.

So, I guess on the one hand there is an important natural basis to gossip. Whether or not Jesus and Mary "gossiped"...it depends on how you view the terms. Christ talked with the Apostles about other people...he called Herod a "fox." But, on the other hand, like anything involving the masses, it quickly turns into something ugly...but this isn't limited to gossip, something like a crowd of sports fans can turn ugly.

Gossip probably tells us more about the gossipers than it does about the actual person being gossiped about...it tells us what they value, what they fear, what they hate, what they ridicule...and the person being gossiped about may share the same values, fears, etc. in general, but of course, underneath all our exterior selves there is something and someone that nobody sees, and when we make it a habit of trying to see and understand that, then maybe "gossip" gives way to "gospel"...i.e., "idle news" gives way to "good news."

As far as "correcting the person's reputation," I don't know that that necessarily applies to all gossip. If an outright lie has been told about them, yes, but I think that would fall under "calumny" more than "gossip." Gossip seems to me more an interpretation of a person rather than outright lies about them.

Edited September 22, 2015 by Era Might

[Gabriela]

Well this is slightly embarrassing. St.  Augustine is my confirmation saint, I should have known that...

Would you like a taco (so tasty) (so tasty)? 

By post? Mmmm... I'm good, thanks.  

Good post, @Era Might. I do think we need to distinguish between gossip, detraction, and calumny. To my knowledge, gossip does not necessarily have to be negative to be gossip.

[Benedictus]

Gossip shouldn't be something Christians do. There's a truck load of Bible vereses about idle talk and people not taming their tongue. An example being 'avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness'. Amen to that.

I was always taught to ask myself if any talk was true, kind and necessary. All three need to be met and anything else is filtered away. If something is true and necessary then it should be said with kindness etc.

People at work places and in groups get caught up with garbage and drama that isn't always positive, true or necessary. Gossip usually makes the people concerned look two faced, fake and simply bad. I used to hear people at work doing this and I always thought I'd never trust those peeps with any personal information because I could see how they operated towards others, usually their supposed 'friends'. Who needs enemies when you have friends like that

Edited September 23, 2015 by Benedictus

[Gabriela]

I thought the standard around here was that talk should be 2 out of 3: true and necessary, or true and kind, or kind and necessary, etc.

There are times when it is absolutely necessary to say something bad about a person, because that information is important for decision-making or whatnot. What I'd like to learn from this thread is where we draw that line. Talking about other people can't always be gossip. So, what is? And what isn't?

Edited September 23, 2015 by Gabriela

[Benedictus]

I thought the standard around here was that talk should be 2 out of 3: true and necessary, or true and kind, or kind and necessary, etc.

There are times when it is absolutely necessary to say something bad about a person, because that information is important. What I'd like to learn from this thread is where we draw that line. Talking about other people can't always be gossip. So, what is? And what isn't?

It's about how things are said assuming they are true and required to be said in the first place. Gossip is idle talk and rumor, a negative indulgence into matters that shouldn't concern them about others.  If someone is talking about someone else and wouldn't say the same things in their presence then they're likely over the line and need to check their conscience.

This thread reminds me of when my mom scolded my older sister for being a gossip as a teen. She thought she was clever by saying it's surely not gossip if I'm simply passing on information She wished she hadn't tried to defend her actions though. Anyway, it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck. Yep, it's a duck

[MarysLittleFlower]

 

I always like to look up the etymology of words to understand where the concept comes from. For gossip:

 

So "gossip" as a noun has religious roots, a "god sibling," someone in an intimate circle of women. We have a very individualistic outlook in the modern world, but communication is not and cannot take place only between individuals, especially in the pre-modern world where the "individual" as we know it did not exist. Community was communal...and communication, too, was necessarily communal. Especially in small, rural towns, there is not the same atomization of individual households as we know in the United States...everyone knows everyone, and in the old days, everyone had social roles that were part of the fabric of how society worked.

So, I guess on the one hand there is an important natural basis to gossip. Whether or not Jesus and Mary "gossiped"...it depends on how you view the terms. Christ talked with the Apostles about other people...he called Herod a "fox." But, on the other hand, like anything involving the masses, it quickly turns into something ugly...but this isn't limited to gossip, something like a crowd of sports fans can turn ugly.

Gossip probably tells us more about the gossipers than it does about the actual person being gossiped about...it tells us what they value, what they fear, what they hate, what they ridicule...and the person being gossiped about may share the same values, fears, etc. in general, but of course, underneath all our exterior selves there is something and someone that nobody sees, and when we make it a habit of trying to see and understand that, then maybe "gossip" gives way to "gospel"...i.e., "idle news" gives way to "good news."

As far as "correcting the person's reputation," I don't know that that necessarily applies to all gossip. If an outright lie has been told about them, yes, but I think that would fall under "calumny" more than "gossip." Gossip seems to me more an interpretation of a person rather than outright lies about them.

im sure Our Lord didn't gossip. There seems to be some disagreement over what gossip is. The way Benedictus defined gossip is the way I understand too. The priest in that sermon said that (and I read in descriptions of detraction) that it doesn't have to be a lie - it could be telling a truth without good reason. If a truth or interpretation of a person can ruin their reputation and you don't HAVE to say it, that is detraction. By have to I mean like for peoples safety - like telling police something... Not informing friends about the "fault" of a friend. Anything Christ said was motivated by charity and justice, not idleness, and being God He can see hearts - we do not. He tried to correct bad reputation like of St Mary Magdalene. 

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

I've been led to believe don't talk about people behind there back period. I always thought it was just back stabbing and st paul says and i write part of this in capitals " IF i am to boast may it be in the good works of others" i don't think it is those exact words but it was along those lines and it is a big IF. But the way i'm going i'm getting scripture jumbled up and though Jesus said  " you can't kill two birds with one stone" which i bible searched and he didn't actually say that, so search yourself, but if i'm correct and st paul did say this take it as you will.

 

Jesus iz LORD!