In my current social culture I would argue that there is nothing more universally overused as the attribute of being "nice" and possibly nothing more universally devoid of meaning. If you think about it, nice is probably one of the most often parroted words used in our conversations.
"Be nice."
"Isn't she nice?"
"What a nice mom!"
Nice tends to be a the generic fall back term for most people that we don't know well or that ultimately give us what we want.
"That person didn't get mad when I cut in front of them in line, aren't they nice??"
"My child ran behind that person's car and narrowly avoided being hit but the person acted like it didn't make them wet their pants and nearly have a heart attack. They are so nice!"
In reality, though we teach and extol "niceness" ultimately being nice is nothing more than social politeness. This politeness acts as a thin veil for honest and understandable underlying feelings. Associating speaking truth in these situations with a value laden judgement of "nice" and the implied opposite of being "mean" we are now moralizing socially constructed interactions more than actually accurately labeling behavior. For instance, if someone cuts in line in front of you when you are waiting for something, they are being rude. It is understandable that the person being cut in front of would feel annoyed. What becomes problematic, however, is that if the second person is to speak up and express those feelings they are suddenly labeled as being mean or not "nice." Likewise, we feel that people who always say positive things, or claim to always enjoy everything must be nice. I disagree--I think they must be medicated--but that is neither here nor there. The point is that having feelings about circumstances is not a moral issue but is to be expected. Consequently the implication of attaching "niceness" to so many situations creates a broader social climate which ties the polite omission of natural feelings to an empty but desirable value laden character trait.
Why, one may ask, does this matter? I mean really, being nice just makes everything nicer correct? It is easier to deal with people who don't have feelings about things and will politely let everything go. Well that's just it, isn't it? It's much easier for everyone to deal with individuals who always let them have their way. It's just....well nice. The problem with this is that ultimately we are teaching people that they shouldn't trust or give credence to their underlying feelings. When we feel an emotion that isn't happiness or agreement, we should tamp down on those feelings and make the better choice for everyone else to ultimately smile and let them have their way. This is especially true for women and girls. Research indicates that young girls are spoken to far more about emotions whereas boys are spoken to in a problem solving manner. Essentially we are teaching our young women that they should work to soothe others and control their own emotions, while we teach boys and men to just focus on the task at hand. No worries, the women will smooth the way over those pesky emotions for you. You just get what you need done!!
Now I'm not arguing that we should all be argumentative and angry all the time or turn every single situation into a battle. Obviously we should exercise good judgement in our social situations. However, I would argue that teaching people and especially women to behave in a way that they must constantly sacrifice their true feelings to obtain the label of being "nice" is ultimately training them to live in a world of artifice and needless self sacrifice. Why can't women have a task oriented personality and way of interacting as well? What would be the worst that happened if women were allowed to be less concerned with everyone else's feelings?
I have always liked this quote from the fictional comedic television show, The Unbreakable Kimmy Scmidt, written and produced by Tina Fey. The show follows a group of women kidnapped and held hostage in an underground bunker by a zealot (man) pretending to be a doomsday cult leader. In the first episode the women are rescued and interviewed by Matt Lauer on the Today Show. In an ironic twist based on recent information coming to light*, Lauer in the interview asks why one of the women went with this strange man to begin with based on her suspicions of him. The woman answers, "I didn't want to be rude." Lauer then responds, "I'm always amazed by what women will do because they're afraid of being rude." This is the issue with the concept of blanket social "niceness." Our greater feelings are called into question as being mean or rude and thus discounted always to the benefit of the other, while often to the detriment of the individual who is experiencing those valid concerns and emotions.
We need to do better in our expectations and our culture for our children and especially our girls/women. I don't hope that my children are nice. I hope that my children love deeply. I hope that they are loyal and courageous with their feelings and with the feelings of others. I hope that they develop relationships with others where they see the gift that is vulnerability and treat it like the fragile, precious offering that it is. I hope that they are fierce advocates and loud when they feel that a wrong is taking place. I hope that my children are fearless and not ashamed or beaten down through cruelty or thoughtlessness.
I struggle with this overall issue--it hurts me to live in a world where I know that I am not considered nice but also where I don't value that label. I know that "nice" is not the word to describe one such as myself. But I am also proud. I hope someday that my children will say of me that I loved hard and I fought hard for those that I loved. I believed deeply and suffered no fools. A person like that just isn't nice, damn it. But maybe they are more.
*We know of at least a few women who felt forced into their own belittling and harassing interactions with Lauer in their effort to avoid rudeness or social consequences.
