Why do some friend groups develop a “mini-kingdom…
0 reactions
Why do some friend groups develop a “mini-kingdom” hierarchy?
I’ve been thinking about a certain type of social dynamic that I find pretty strange.
Some friend groups seem to develop their own internal hierarchy, almost like a tiny kingdom. When someone new joins, they’re automatically placed at the bottom and end up doing favours, running errands, or generally being treated like the lowest-ranking member. Then, when another newcomer arrives, that person seems to take over the lowest position.
What I find even more interesting is that people who have been in the group for a long time sometimes seem perfectly willing to accept this system and even help maintain it.
To me, it feels almost feudal. There are people at the top who are perceived as popular, wealthy, influential, attractive, or socially important. But sometimes I wonder how much of that status actually exists outside the group. They may have very little real power individually; their status exists because everyone within the group collectively treats them as important.
And when they move as a group, they can appear much more powerful than they actually are as individuals. Someone who might be fairly ordinary on their own can suddenly have a lot of social power simply because several people back them up.
I'm curious whether this is actually a common phenomenon in social groups. Why would people willingly accept a lower position in a hierarchy like this, especially when they might be just as capable or socially competent as the people above them?
Is this just a natural form of group hierarchy and status-seeking, or can it become a form of subtle social control where people are gradually conditioned to accept their place?
#relationships
I’ve been thinking about a certain type of social dynamic that I find pretty strange.
Some friend groups seem to develop their own internal hierarchy, almost like a tiny kingdom. When someone new joins, they’re automatically placed at the bottom and end up doing favours, running errands, or generally being treated like the lowest-ranking member. Then, when another newcomer arrives, that person seems to take over the lowest position.
What I find even more interesting is that people who have been in the group for a long time sometimes seem perfectly willing to accept this system and even help maintain it.
To me, it feels almost feudal. There are people at the top who are perceived as popular, wealthy, influential, attractive, or socially important. But sometimes I wonder how much of that status actually exists outside the group. They may have very little real power individually; their status exists because everyone within the group collectively treats them as important.
And when they move as a group, they can appear much more powerful than they actually are as individuals. Someone who might be fairly ordinary on their own can suddenly have a lot of social power simply because several people back them up.
I'm curious whether this is actually a common phenomenon in social groups. Why would people willingly accept a lower position in a hierarchy like this, especially when they might be just as capable or socially competent as the people above them?
Is this just a natural form of group hierarchy and status-seeking, or can it become a form of subtle social control where people are gradually conditioned to accept their place?
#relationships
| 0 mlx | |
| 1 | |
| 0 |