+
“A balm for the soul”
  review on Goodreads
GOOD PEOPLE Book
upworthy
Popular

Before you share an MLK quote, understand that you're quoting a proud political radical

Before you share an MLK quote, understand that you're quoting a proud political radical

Every year around Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, social media feeds get flooded with memes bearing Dr. King's face and words—snapshots of the man with a snippet of his message, wrapped neatly in a square package, easily digested by the masses.

We get bombarded by the "not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character" quote we all know and love. We get hit with "darkness cannot drive out darkness" memes that keep us feeling cozy in our comfort zones. We see "I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear," over and over, and nod our heads in placid agreement. People of all stripes share MLK quotes that give us all the warm fuzzies, and we think, "Wow, what an amazing, peaceful, universally beloved man."


Credit Unknown

But there are two big problems with such memes.

1) Sharing one or two sentences drastically dilutes Dr. King's legacy, turning his core message into a socially neutral, politically palatable, let's-all-hold-hands-and-skip-together philosophy—one that challenges no one and betrays the radical reality of his work.

2) Such a whitewashing of King's message enables people to share his words in a way that actually upholds or overlooks the very injustices he was trying to fight.

RELATED: Steve Bannon claimed MLK would be proud of Trump. King's daughter shut him down.

For example, I've seen people say that people should be "judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character" as an argument against Affirmative Action-type programs. I've seen people say "hate cannot drive out hate" while mischaracterizing a calling out of racial injustice as hatred. I've seen people quote King's "I have a dream" speech while asserting that talking about racism just perpetuates racism—an assertion King simply didn't abide.

People frequently twist King's words to fit their worldview, and in doing so, dishonor the man and his fight for true justice. The radical nature of his message seems to have been watered down into what people think he was—a gentle leader who advocated a non-violent approach to fighting for equality—instead of what he actually was—a passionate disrupter who constantly pushed boundaries and pulled no punches when calling out injustices of all kinds. Many Americans today would undoubtedly call him a "race-baiter" at best, and an "extremist thug" at worst.

We mustn't forget that King was considered a radical and a criminal, by both the U.S. government and much of mainstream America, during his lifetime. At the height of his activism, nearly two-thirds of Americans had an unfavorable opinion of King. And that disapproval didn't just come from the openly racist South. After being hit with a rock at a desegregation march in Chicago, King remarked, "I have seen many demonstrations in the South, but I have never seen anything so hostile and so hateful as I've seen here today."

King had strong words for those of us who think we're not racist. When I first read King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail—his response to a group of clergymen who agreed with his antiracism sentiments but criticized his "extreme" methods—I was blown away. I remember thinking that my education about Dr. King had been sorely lacking, that I'd never learned how much criticism he'd faced and how frequently he was considered an extremist by white moderates, and that I had no idea how he had directly challenged white Americans of goodwill. (In other words, people like me.)

The least we can do to honor King's life is to go beyond popular one-liners, take the time to read one of his most important works, and to meditate on the challenges he presented to us. You can read King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail in its entirety here, but I've included some excerpts below that highlight some of its main points.

For example, this passage explaining how peaceful activism doesn't mean avoiding tension and crisis:

"You may well ask: 'Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?' You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word 'tension.' I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation."

RELATED: Ad execs probably should have read the full MLK speech before making that commercial.

Or this passage about the "timing" of taking action against injustice:

"We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was 'well timed' in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word 'Wait!' It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This 'Wait' has almost always meant 'Never.' We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that 'justice too long delayed is justice denied.'"

Many people who praise Dr. King would have called him a criminal if he were still alive today, as he advocated breaking unjust laws:

"One may well ask: 'How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?' The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that 'an unjust law is no law at all.'"

He added that a just law can sometimes be applied unjustly, and that how one violates a law matters:

"Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.

I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law."

In addition, he pointed out that some of history's most unjust acts were legal, while some of the most righteous acts were illegal:

"We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was 'legal' and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was 'illegal.' It was 'illegal' to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country's antireligious laws."

One of the most important points King makes in this letter is how white moderates who put law and order over justice do as much, if not more, harm to the cause of justice as outright racists:

"I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action'; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a 'more convenient season.' Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured."

How about this bit about "the appalling silence of the good people"?

"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right."

And finally, some words about law and order and the role of the police in "preventing violence":

"Before closing I feel impelled to mention one other point in your statement that has troubled me profoundly. You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping 'order' and 'preventing violence.' I doubt that you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes. I doubt that you would so quickly commend the policemen if you were to observe their ugly and inhumane treatment of Negroes here in the city jail; if you were to watch them push and curse old Negro women and young Negro girls; if you were to see them slap and kick old Negro men and young boys; if you were to observe them, as they did on two occasions, refuse to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. I cannot join you in your praise of the Birmingham police department...

I wish you had commended the Negro sit inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes."

As King's daughter, Bernice, pointed out on his birthday, January 15, "The authentic, comprehensive King makes power uneasy & privilege unhinged." Such a description makes one wonder how Dr. King would be regarded today if he had lived and continued to directly call out the racial injustice that still exists in our society.

@yourejustliz/TikTok

“Nice is different than kind."

It might have been pretty universally accepted during our childhood for daughters to be expected to reciprocate affection from adults, whether they liked it or not. A non consensual kiss to grandparents here, a forced “thank you” there. But times have changed.

However, this change in parenting style can sometimes make for some, well, awkward or even downright uncomfortable situations as moms and dads try to advocate for this kid’s autonomy.

Recently, a mom named Liz Kindred detailed just such an incident with her six year old daughter, which has a whole lotta other parents discussing how to navigate these unideal interactions.


As she recalls in a video posted to TikTok, Kindred was waiting in line with her daughter when a grown man turned around and said “My goodness, you sure are pretty” to the child.

“My six-year-old is gorgeous, yes, but she is also very in tune and perceptive, and she's an introvert so she grabbed my leg really tight,” Kindred said.

Doubling down, the man repeated himself, saying “You sure are pretty. Look at those blue eyes,” which only made her shy daughter grab her leg harder.

Noting that being in a 12 step program has taught her to be less “knee jerk reactionary,” the mom bit her tongue and offered a polite smile to the man, hoping that would be the end of it. It wasn’t.



“He's a boomer and, God love him, he said, ‘I guess your mom didn't teach you manners.’ And I let out an uncomfortable little [chuckle], and the pause was long. It was long. And under his breath he said, ‘Guess not,’” she said.

In what she called the most ”Jesus loving way” she could muster, while still bluntly making her point, Kindred told the man "If you assume that I didn't teach my six-year-old daughter to say ‘thank you’ to a grown, consenting man when he compliments her appearance, then you would be correct."

What followed was the “longest silence” of Kindred’s life.

The video, which has been viewed over 6 million times now, prompted a ton of parents to share how their own kids have established boundaries in similar situations—with their support, of course.

“An old man called my 4 yr old daughter a sweetheart at the store…she boldly responded ‘I am NOT YOUR sweetheart!’ I was so proud,” on person recalled.

Another added, “My 3 year old says ‘NO THANK YOU MY BODY DOESN’T LIKE TAHT.’”

Still another said “My 2 yo knows the boundaries song and just starts singing that anytime someone talks to her.”

While the response to Kindred’s video was overwhelmingly positive, there were a few comments defending the man as simply being “kind.” This prompted Kindred to do a follow-up video doubling down on her decision.

In the clip, she shared how she herself has dealt with seemingly innocent compliments in her life from men, which later turned into something else. Feeling like she “didn’t have a voice” to say something, “because I’m a nice Christian, Southern girl,” Kindred ended up being in unsavory situations (she didn't explicitly say what those situations were, but it's easy enough to piece together). She doesn’t want her daughter to have the same issues.


“Nice is different than kind. The kind thing to do is to teach our daughters and our children in this next generation that when you are uncomfortable with something you listen to your body and you set a firm boundary with that and you provide language around that. And you start that really really young.”

Yep. Well said.


This article originally appeared on 8.8.24

The many faces of an empath.

A few years ago I had an office job where I sat in a row of cubicles with about a dozen other people. One morning when a coworker walked into the office to start his day, a feeling of dread bubbled up from my subconscious. He was angry and I wasn’t going to be able to escape his feelings.

His desk was about 10 feet from mine and like waves, I could feel his emotions seeping into my body. He wasn’t bothering anyone and was always pleasant to me, but I knew he was angry about something deep down, and I could feel it.

As far as I knew, no one else in the office was having the same experience that I was. I was the only person who found it emotionally exhausting to be in the same room as this person.

I wasn’t sure what to make of this bizarre, unintentional attachment to the emotional states of others until I was listening to a podcast featuring Dr. Drew Pinksy where he mentioned that he was “an emotional sponge” who sucks up other people’s emotions and referred to it as being an “empath.”

That powerful revelation struck me in two ways. I realized that I was probably an empath as well and that I experience emotions differently than others. "One of the hardest things about being an empath is learning not everyone is,” Hannah Ewens at Vice wrote.

PsychAlive describes being an empath as exhausting at times, but not without its benefits.

“Empaths are highly sensitive individuals, who have a keen ability to sense what people around them are thinking and feeling. … often to the point of taking on the pain of others at their own expense,” PsychAlive says.

“On the bright side, empaths tend to be excellent friends,” PsychAlive continues. “They are superb listeners. They consistently show up for friends in times of need. They are big-hearted and generous. Empaths also tend to be highly intuitive and emotionally intelligent.”

via Pexels

As I started to look into the idea that I may be an empath, I began to consider the emotional sway my wife has over me. If she is stressed or tired, it makes me uncomfortable because I cannot escape her emotional state. It’s not that she’s overly emotional, but that I lack the force field that shields me from people’s emotional states, especially people close to me.

That’s why I get a huge feeling of relief when my wife transitions from being in a negative mood to a positive one. But, on the other hand, she doesn’t seem to be swayed one way or the other by my emotional state. It’s not that she’s callous, it’s just that she has a healthy emotional distance from me.

The problem is that it's nearly impossible to explain what this feels like to someone who isn’t an empath, and attempting to do so makes me seem a little unstable. So I keep these disturbances to myself, which probably isn’t healthy.

Caroline Van Kimmenade, who runs courses for empaths who want to understand their power, explained what it’s like to be an empath. "It's like a football match where everyone gets hyped up and starts waving and then the mob things start sweeping you up, and you barely know you're doing it," she explained.

"We can all experience that, but it doesn't mean you're an empath. But for an empath, it's that multiplied and applied to everything all of the time. Empaths are constantly in a giant football stadium where they're reacting to bigger things going on from all directions,” said Van Kimmenade.

When I realized I was an empath it helped me make sense of a part of myself that always felt contradictory. I am a person who has no problem being alone for long periods of time, but I’m also totally comfortable in social situations.

Tod Perry's solitary workspace.

via Upworthy

I work for Upworthy as a writer and the host of its podcast, “Upworthy Weekly,” and do it all from home. Honestly, I love being alone all day because I have a lot more power over my own emotional state than when I'm in an office getting bombarded by other people’s “stuff.”

I also enjoy going to movies, concerts and bars alone, too.

On the other hand, I am an extrovert who’s very comfortable in social situations. Empaths can be very social people because they have the superpower of being attuned to others' emotions and they have a great intuition for other people. We are experts at reading the room and are great at relating to all sorts of people.

Dr. Judith Orloff, the author of “The Empath’s Survival Guide: Life Strategies for Sensitive People,” says that extroverted empaths “crave the dopamine rush from lively events. In fact, they can’t get enough of it.”

One of the strangest things about being an empath is having a heightened sense of smell. My sense of smell is so keen that I can’t wear cologne because I never go nose blind to the scent and it’ll bother me the whole night. The same goes for scented lotions. The interesting thing is that this isn’t just in my head; researchers have found that the part of the brain that recognizes emotions overlaps with the brain areas associated with smell.

So what causes someone to be an empath?

“It can be both nature and nurture. Some empaths are born empaths the minute they come out of the womb they are these sensitive creatures feeling the world with the palm of their hands,” Dr. Orloff told Upworthy.

Dr. Orloff says that research shows empaths have different brain chemistry.

“Research is suggesting that the mirror neuron system in the brain is on overdrive with empaths—meaning their compassion is hyperactive versus narcissists who have hypo-active mirror neurons and empathy deficient disorder,” Orloff said.

Orloff adds that even though men and women are both empaths, it can be harder for men to come to terms with their sensitivity. She runs an empath support community where men are much more reluctant to share.

“When the men do share, they express the shame about being sensitive, how it isn't masculine and how they were bullied as children and made to feel ashamed to be crybabies rather than beautiful sensitive beings,” Orloff told Upworthy.

I had never heard of the term empath until about five years ago, but after coming to the realization that I probably am one and learning about the positive and negative aspects of this psychological trait, I feel that I’ve become better at navigating my emotional life. I'm getting better at seeing the difference between my emotions and those of others and making sense of the difference.

On the positive side, I’ve developed greater trust in my own intuition knowing that, as an empath, when I get a sense about someone, I should go with it because there’s a good chance I’m right. I’ve also learned to be less judgmental of those around me who I think aren’t as sensitive as they should be. They’re just not experiencing life the same way.


This article originally appeared 2 years ago.

A guy having a collaborative conversation.

The quickest way to stop having a constructive dialog with someone is when they become defensive. This usually results in them digging in their heels and making you defensive. This can result in a vicious cycle of back-and-forth defensive behavior that can feel impossible to break. Once that happens, the walls go up, the gloves come off and resolving the situation becomes tough.

Amanda Ripley, author of “High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out,” says in her book that you can prevent someone you disagree with from becoming defensive by being curious about their opinion.

Ripley is a bestselling author and the co-founder of Good Conflict, a media and training company that helps people reimagine conflict.


How to have a constructive conversation

Let’s say you believe the room should be painted red and your spouse says it should be blue. Instead of saying, “I think blue is ugly,” you can say, “It’s interesting that you say that…” and ask them to explain why they chose blue.

The key phrase is: “It’s interesting that you say that…”


conversation, arguments, communication tipsPeople coming to an agreement. via Canva/Photos

When you show the other person that you genuinely care about their thoughts and appreciate their reasoning, they let down their guard. This makes them feel heard and encourages them to hear your side as well. This approach also encourages the person you disagree with to consider coming up with a collaborative solution instead of arguing to defend their position.

It’s important to assume the other person has the best intentions while listening to them make their case. “To be genuinely curious, we need to refrain from judgment and making negative assumptions about others. Assume the other person didn’t intend to annoy you. Assume they are doing the best they can. Assume the very best about them. You’ll appreciate it when others do it for you,” Kaitlyn Skelly at The Ripple Effect Education writes.

Phrases you can use to avoid an argument

The curiosity approach can also involve affirming the other person’s perspective while adding your own, using a phrase like, “On the one hand, I see what you’re saying. On the other hand…”

Here are some other phrases you can use:

“I wonder if…”

“It’s interesting that you say that because I see it differently…”

“I might be wrong, but…”

“How funny! I had a different reaction…”

“I hadn’t thought of it like that! For me, though, it seems…”

“I think I understand your point, though I look at it a little differently…”


conversation, arguments, communication tipsTwo men high-fiving one another.via Canva/Photos

What's the best way to disagree with people?

A 2016 study from Yale University supports Ripley’s ideas. The study found that when people argue to “win,” they take a hard line and only see one correct answer in the conflict. Whereas those who want to “learn” are more likely to see that there is more than one solution to the problem. At that point, competition magically turns into collaboration.

“Being willing to hear out other perspectives and engage in dialogue that isn’t simply meant to convince the other person you’re right can lead to all sorts of unexpected insights,” psychologist and marketing Professor at Southern Methodist University tells CNBC.

In a world of strong opinions and differing perspectives, curiosity can be a superpower that helps you have more constructive conversations with those with whom you disagree. All it takes is a little humility and an open mind, and you can turn conflict into collaboration, building bridges instead of walls.

Life has really changed over the past 200 years.

It’s unfortunate that humans are wired to notice everything bad going on in the world and to ignore the things that are going right. Our collective negativity bias was illustrated in a 2016 survey that asked people in 17 countries “Do you think the world is getting better or worse, or neither getting better nor worse?”

Fifty‐eight percent of respondents thought that the world is getting worse, and 30% said that it is doing neither. Only 11% thought that things are getting better. However, there is a wealth of data to support the idea that the world is only improving when it comes to the hallmarks of human progress: education, freedom, poverty and health.

In a recent interview with Upworthy, Chelsea Follett, the managing editor at Human Progress, explained why humans have a bias toward negativity, and the media isn’t doing us any favors.


"Historically, obviously our ancestors in a primitive environment who overreacted to danger were more likely to survive than those who underreacted," Follett told Upworthy. "But there is a point where unwarranted panic can actually be detrimental to your survival if you abandon policies or institutions that are actually working, or that have allowed you to make tremendous progress in the past.

"There's also the nature of the media," she added. "Obviously sudden, noteworthy and rare events are the ones that make headlines, whereas long-term slow, steady, incremental progress is just not as interesting."

Our World in Data, an organization that performs "research and data to make progress against the world’s largest problems" has created a revealing document that shows just how far humanity has come over the past 200 years. The graphs show how life has changed for a random sampling of 100 people over the past two centuries.

The graph covers six topics that are cornerstones of human progress: poverty, basic education, literacy, democracy, vaccination and child mortality.

Poverty

In 1820, 84 out of 100 people lived in extreme poverty, and over 200 years that number has dropped more than nine times to just 9 in 100. “The headline could be ‘The number of people in extreme poverty fell by 130,000 since yesterday’ and they wouldn’t have this headline once, but every single day since 1990, since, on average, there were 130,000 people fewer in extreme poverty every day,” Our World in Data wrote.

via Our World in Data

Basic Education

Two hundred years ago, 83 out of 100 people had no education at all. That number has been reduced to just 14 over the past 200 years.

Our World In Data says that number is only going to get better. “Focusing on the educational breakdown the projection suggests that by 2100, there will be almost no one without formal education and there will be more than 7 billion minds who will have received at least secondary education,” Our World in Data said.

via Our World in Data

Literacy

In 1820, only 12 people out of 100 could read. In 2019, that number has risen more than seven times to 86. These numbers will continue to rise because a large portion of the world’s illiterate population is older.

via Our World in Data

Democracy

Only 1 out of 100 people lived in a democracy back in 1820. Now, 56 out of 100 people live in a country where they can select their elected officials. This was a big change that came after World War II.

“In the second half of the 20th century, the world has changed significantly: Colonial empires ended, and more and more countries turned democratic,” Our World in Data wrote. “The share of the world population living in democracies increased continuously–particularly important was the breakdown of the Soviet Union which allowed more countries to democratize.”

via Our World in Data

Vaccination

Over the past 60 years, the number of people out of 100 that would have been vaccinated against diphtheria, whooping cough and tetanus has risen from 0 to 86.

via Our World in Data

Child Mortality

Can you imagine living at a time when almost half of all children born never lived to kindergarten age? “In 1800 the health conditions were such that around 43% of the world’s newborns died before their 5th birthday,” Our World In Data wrote. “In 2017 child mortality was down to 3.9% – 10-fold lower than 2 centuries ago.”

via Our World in Data

This article originally appeared two years ago.

Touch grass? Babies say, "Nope."

When you see a gymnast doing this, you know they've worked for years to train their muscles and perfect their gymnastics skills:

Martin Rulsch, Wikimedia Commons

But when you see a baby hovering in the air, legs in splits, you know there's probably a big ol' patch of grass beneath them.

Grass?!? you may be thinking. Seriously? Aren't babies, the purest among us—unspoiled by the trappings of modern life and technology—naturally drawn to the earth?

Apparently not if that earth is covered in grass, nope. For them, the lawn is lava.

Babies—or at least a good portion of babies—will do pretty much anything to not let any part of their bodies touch grass. Viral videos have demonstrated this fact, with parents holding their wee ones over a patch of lawn and lowering them toward the ground.

The way these tiny tots will twist themselves into gymnast-like positions to keep some daylight between them and the lawn is both impressive and hilarious. Watch:

You would think these parents were holding their kids above a pot of boiling oil, not the cool, refreshing grass. So what's happening here? Why are these babies so averse to touching grass?

According to neuropsychologist Dr. Sanam Hafeez, it could be an issue of sensory overload.

“Some babies lift their feet out in the air when a parent attempts to put them down on the grass because as a baby’s nervous system develops, sights, sensations, and sounds are intense,” Hafeez told Romper. “The ticklish, sharp blades of grass can catch a baby off guard, and some babies are often scared of it, as they are used to softer, more comfortable surfaces such as wood, tile, or carpet.”

Pediatrician Gina Posner, M.D offered Parents a similar explanation.

"The prickly texture and feel of grass is far different than softer and more comfortable feeling of carpet, tile, and wood surfaces on their feet, hands, and body, so babies are often scared of it." Grass can also be itchy and cause rashes, she said, which can make babies more averse to it.

Another explanation may be more innate and evolutionary. In a 2014 study published in Cognition, researchers reported evidence that "human infants possess strategies that would serve to protect them from dangers posed by plants."

"Across two experiments, infants as young as eight months exhibit greater reluctance to manually explore plants compared to other entities," the researchers shared. So perhaps babies simply don't trust grass.

According to another study published in 2019, there may be something to that distrust idea. Researchers found that babies between 8 and 18 months old "exhibited more social looking toward adults when confronted with plants compared to other object types." The study authors pointed out that learning about which plants are beneficial and which ones are harmful is something humans can't do alone, and noted that infants tended to look to older adults for social cues about plants they encounter before touching them.

"This social looking strategy puts infants in the best position to glean information from others before making contact with potentially dangerous plants," researchers wrote.

So, we have a few options here. Is it possible that those babies in the video weren't able to glean social cues from their caregivers that the grass was safe? Yes. Is it possible that they'd already touched grass once and found it too "tickly"? Yes. Is it possible that babies do all kinds of surprising, seemingly inexplicable things just to keep their parents guessing and always on their toes? Sure feels like it.

Whatever the reason, watching babies blatantly reject the "touch grass" advice the rest of us keep getting is hilarious. Who says the grown-ups know best? Trust your instincts and do you, babes.


This article originally appeared two years ago.