“Saving face”

Posted on by

saving_face

“Saving face” is the concept of avoiding facing the consequences of having been shamed, sometimes by sacrificing something you value. A perfect example is what I almost did yesterday when my irresponsibility for posting a certain article was called out elsewhere. I almost took down this blog!

Throughout my life, “saving face,” has been my usual reaction to being held accountable for choosing wrong actions. It’s never made me happier, and more often than not, I wind up regretting it later. I later wonder why I didn’t just own up to it and take responsibility. But the fear of being shamed is great enough to make you do crazy things just to avoid it. In my case that usually meant some sort of disappearing act–you know, acting on that urge to “sink through the floor in shame.” But the thing is, all it does is make you look like a coward and that in itself makes you look worse than the thing that caused it all! Please note I am not talking about situations in which you are being unfairly treated or bullied. That does happen, and it happens to the sensitive the most of all. In those cases removing yourself might be the best and smartest course of action. No, I’m talking about situations in which you know you’ve acted badly and are called to the carpet about it.

“Saving face” is a staple of some cultures. In Japan, ancient samurais adhered to the tradition of seppoku, which meant stabbing oneself through the heart with a dagger when one had been shamed.* The intent was to avoid shame, even if your life was the price. Related to this (but different) is the practice of “honor killings” some fundamentalist Muslim countries still adhere to. This means killing a family member (usually a woman) when they are believed to have brought shame to the family. In these cases, love is weaker than narcissistic pride. How else could one voluntarily kill their own wife or daughter who they claim to love?

It’s interesting to me that even the term, “saving face,” is a reference to the False Self, a mask shown to the world. Saving face isn’t about honesty or authenticity; it’s about maintaining the mask, even if all it involves is escaping consequences.

Some people see “saving face” as somehow noble. But it isn’t–it’s cowardly and narcissistic. Unfortunately it’s human nature, especially for those of us who grew up in situations where we were constantly shamed just for being ourselves and developed low self esteem. We may not be suicidal, but we’ll sacrifice things we love if the consequences of behaving badly are too embarrassing.

But why should it be that way? People are still going to talk even if you remove yourself from the situation or disappear, the way I’ve always tended to do. Wouldn’t it be better to face the consequences? Even if people aren’t forgiving, ironically your humility shows them you have self respect and the courage to own up to your mistakes. What’s so shameful about a simple “I was wrong” or “I’m sorry.”

* I understand that non western cultures differ and to call traditional practices narcissistic or selfish is probably not accurate.

20 thoughts on ““Saving face””

  1. I think on this one, I will try to add some perspective.

    From a Western point of view, saving face may be narcissistic. However in Eastern cultures (specifically Japan) is was a culturally accepted practice.

    Different cultures have different ethical values, so while you may not understand it based in your perspective, it does not necessarily make it “wrong.”

    Liked by 1 person

      • Being of Asian ethnicity, born in an Asian country, having traveled extensively and a naturalized citizen of the United States – I tend not to have a ethnocentric view on other cultures.

        While there are many cultures that I personally disagree with their views, intellectually I respect their right to believe as they do.

        Liked by 2 people

        • I’ve done some traveling too. Across America, from PA to CA – in a car. Twice. Without much money, sometimes slept in parking lots and along side roads. Back then, such was reasonably safe. As for ethnocentric, that’s just someone with a reasonable grip of plain old-fashioned sense of right and wrong.

          Liked by 2 people

            • Dear Nowve 666, ask me this direct question? The answer is a resounding YES! My response is with NO apologies. Political correctness blows. Have a great day 😉

              Liked by 1 person

            • Political Correctness exists because people who care about fairness and ethics struggled with concepts and some concepts won out. It certainly isn’t some arbitrary rule imposed by rigid, uptight people for the purpose of thought control. If you really think “our” (by which I guess you mean American white-European style) culture is superior, consider the fact that “our” ancestors wiped out the indigenous culture of people who had peacefully occupied what is now called North America for generation after generation. This same culture also kidnapped people from Africa to make them into slaves. And, although slavery was officially abolished, it still exists in prisons for profit. I would take another look at “our” glorious culture before declaring it superior to other cultures. The indigenous people who were savagely destroyed by the European settlers never committed genocide on another race or culture. This is far too real an issue to dismiss at “politically correct.”

              Like

          • *shrug* I don’t think we are going to agree on this one but how about this last bit of perspective.

            Most people think that ethics are universal, that “right and wrong” are universal. They are not. Demographics, culture and religion have to be factored in.

            For example: Do you eat beef? If you do you see nothing “wrong” with that? However if you are Hindu then eating beef is an affront to their religion? So in this case, who is “right or wrong?”

            Human are a diverse species and while you do not have to believe as someone else does, you should respect someone’s right to have their own belief system.

            A plain old fashion sense of “right and wrong” at one time in our history said that blacks and women couldn’t vote and were second class citizens. Just because something is old fashion doesn’t make it absolute.

            Liked by 2 people

      • A culture can be narcissistic and the Japanese culture certainly seems to be so. Other Asian countries don’t seem as obsessed with “face” as Japan. In the West, there are differences among countries. My German professor used to criticize the French for being obsessed with “l’honuer” however it’s spelled. Just as individuals can be narcissistic, so can countries.

        Liked by 2 people

  2. I think cowardice is one of the most prominent features of the human race. I’m just finishing up on reading the autobiography of Howard Dully, who was lobotomized at the age of 12 because his step-mother didn’t like him. His weak-kneed father rubber stamped every decision that psychotic bitch made. I’m going to post something on Facebook about the cowardly human.

    Like

    • I also read Howard Dully’s memoir, My Lobotomy. Absolutely horrifying. You are right, his stepmother was a psychotic bitch. Both she and the “doctor” who performed the lobotomy were evil personified.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. I don’t know what the article was and I never found anything wrong in your blog but I thought removing something is a way to make amends. You see you have pissed people off so you remove it to make it right or you realize you made a mistake with your actions so you remove it to make it right. I have posted stuff on a forum before and then realizing it might be taken the wrong way or be taken as a personal attack so I remove it to make it right, I was moderating myself and being responsible. Even if you wrote something and it got misinterpreted by many people, you remove to it to keep it from getting worse even though people will still read it and someone might have copied and pasted it somewhere for in case you remove it so it doesn’t really go away. But I always view it as the person feels bad for what they wrote so they removed it.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I wouldn’t let anyone censor my blog. And I don’t think there is anything “evil” in your blog about psychedelics. Some people use psychedelics in their religion. These people have a history of much better behavior than ours does. Our history (meaning US history) involves genocide and slavery. I don’t think we have any business calling something “evil” that a more peaceful people use as a sacrament.

      Liked by 2 people

    • I feel if it is your blog, you should be able to write whatever you want.

      Freedom of speech versus freedom of “acceptable or politically correct” speech.

      Personally I choose the first one because I am willing to accept responsibility for what I say.

      At the end of they day, if someone doesn’t like what you write they can choose to not follow.

      Liked by 1 person

      • After reading aloud a vignette about my life in my memoir writing class, the instructor noted that I was defensive in the situation I was describing. That was an Aha moment for me as it confirmed what other people who know me better since they have known me longer and in different situations have already told me, directly or indirectly.

        As an American who, like Vic, appreciates the freedom of speech we enjoy here, my defensive responses allow me to explain myself to others, and sometimes to myself as well, while allowing others to disagree with me or even reject me. Boy, is my blog’s title appropriate or what?

        I also agree with other commenters that what readers of your deleted post “heard” cannot be unheard. However, since THEY have freedom of choice and free will, YOU are not responsible for THEIR reaction to it.

        Liked by 2 people

        • You make an excellent point.

          Freedom of speech is a two-way street. While you ARE free to say what you want, you have to accept responsibility for the consequences of what you say. Which minimally includes having to deal with verbal responses to said comments. After all, they are free to respond to what you say.

          Liked by 1 person

          • They are indeed. Since I don’t really care about the opinion of most other people, whoever wants to may respond away. There’s a lot of stuff that people that I know and like post on FB and elsewhere that I already overlook if it’s not interesting to me. Even posts with which I disagree vehemently I tend to overlook, without blocking or unfriending, just because I agree with the principle you’ve stated.

            Liked by 1 person

  5. http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/pharmakeia.html

    Drugs help in religion since in some it assists in spiritual contact. Some say that’s dangerous, some think it’s a viable worship ritual.

    I think spirits are people like us. Some are interested in helping us, some are murderous. I stay away from any occulty stuff because of my history. A healer once tranced out and told me my family had generational demons. Lots of really awful things happened to my relatives in the recent past. I’m betting sociopathic genetics attracks hostile energies. Like if you were some oppressive entity you’d look for humans easy to cause turmoil and pain. Easy targets, easy tools.

    Your blogs going into some interesting tangents . I’m glad you’re branching out from pure psychology. Nothing better for a good writer than a blank page open to any subject you’re compelled to investigate .

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.