tattling & ettiquette question

[Merkuri]

This thread reminds me of an incident when I was in middle school.

I should probably note before I start that I was your average geek in school. I normally stayed by my lonesome or with other geeks. I was a quiet kid and usually minded my own business.

We were in art class, and the teacher had brought us all outside so that we could draw the school itself. She had a reputation for being a scatterbrain. Students played pranks on her all the time. I usually minded my business - not participating but not doing anything about it either.

(Side story: My sister went to the same school and had the same teacher, and she once mentioned to this teacher that she couldn't quite get a part of her current piece right. Instead of giving her tips the teacher actually took my sister's pencil and proceeded to draw the difficult part for her. This itself was not that odd. The odd part was when the teacher was grading the pieces she complemented my sister particularly on the part that the teacher had drawn herself, apparently forgetting that it was teacher-drawn, not student-drawn.)

Anyway, this teacher had brought her pocketbook outside with her and had sat it down on the grass while she walked amongst us, critiquing our work and giving us tips. After we'd been out there for some time I heard some students talking beside me and saw one of them actually take something out of her purse. From the bits I overheard it was clear that they had stolen money.

This crossed the line for me. I quietly stood up, walked over to the teacher, and whispered in her ear, "Mrs. SoAndSo, I don't want to be a tattle tale, but I think X just took some money out of your purse."

The teacher's reaction was immediate. While I was still standing there, leaning into her ear, the teacher straightened up and yelled "HE DID WHAT?!?" and proceeded to stalk over to the student to berate him and demand the money back.

So much for me being subtle.

 

[Umbran]

Anyway, let's see what people think, and see if anybody knows any documented sources for "best practices" etiquette-wise.

Is this a question of etiquette, or of ethics? What's considered polite and what's right action don't necessarily coincide.

 

[Morrus]

Does the nature of Topic X matter in the answer?

Entirely. The whole question hinges on it.

 

[Merkuri]

Anybody hear heard the saying that you're less likely to get help when you're surrounded by a crowd of people than you are when there's only one or two people nearby? (There may be a name for this phenomenon, but I don't know what it is... could be "Somebody Else's Problem".)

I don't know if it's the same in Europe, but in America (or at least certain parts of America) we have this whole "mind your own business" mindset. I'm not sure where it originates from, but nowadays people don't want to get involved in whatever's happening around them, and this could lead to, say, someone laying unhelped for hours on the sidewalk, bleeding, after having tried to help a random lady fend off a mugger. (This happened not too long ago.)

I think this is related to the whole "tattle tale" mindset. Ethically, you may feel compelled to "tattle tale" on somebody but except in the most dire circumstances it's considered extremely rude. In this country you mind your own business unless somebody's life is at stake (and sometimes you keep minding your own business even then).

 

[LightPhoenix]

To be a little less vague, one of the incidents appears to have occurred as follows:

Firstly, there seem to be a number of poor decisions on everyone's part here. The fact that there was drinking involved compounds the issue. In fact, the only people that I see acted relatively ethically were the two tattoo parlors that, IMO, sound like they deliberately refused service based on A being drunk.

Secondly, there seems to be a bit of a moral* lapse in friendship on the part of B and C in the first place for recommending places while A was drunk as opposed to recommending he hold off. You didn't mention it, but B and C were most likely also drunk, so perhaps it was not as much a lapse as poor judgment.

Finally, there seems to be a bit of hypocrisy on the part of A. He's a big boy (or girl), and part of that involves accepting responsibility for your actions, drunk or not. To blame B and C is more than a bit puerile, in my opinion.

All that said, I wouldn't call what happened tattling. I would call it communication. No one is really getting in trouble (as a result of things said after the fact). Personally, and I can only speak for me on this, I think it's a good thing that everything is out there. It sounds like the friendship was on its way towards breaking down anyway, but at least everyone is clear on where they stand with the others.

As for the "Person B's spouse is cheating on them" question?

I understand Abby's position, but in this day & age, I can't agree with it. There are too many diseases out there; too many other acts- some of which are criminal- that are often committed in conjunction with infidelity for me to remain silent. There is simply too much risk of harm to the aggrieved party- physical, mental or financial- for silence to be the ethical position.

At least for me, that is.

Cheating is something that is highly situational, and highly dependent on experience and mindset. It really deserves a topic all of its own, and I think it muddies the issue brought up by Janx in the original post and follow-up.

My personal position is that I don't really meddle in relationships. That said, if I find out a friend is being cheated on, I feel I have a moral obligation stemming from our friendship to tell him or her.

I agree there are definitely things beyond hurt feelings - I worked as a lab tech in a hospital for a few years, and can attest to STDs being a serious issue. When you run a thousand** various STD tests a day, it becomes something you are aware of.

* I feel that friends have certain moral obligations to each other. By morality here, I mean a system of ethics and actions defined by a) culture/society, and b) overlapping of individual ethical beliefs.

** Not an exaggeration. Semi-automated systems and quick testing are wonderful.

 

[Umbran]

In this country you mind your own business unless somebody's life is at stake (and sometimes you keep minding your own business even then).

Okay, but at that extreme, it isn't about being polite. It is worry about becoming involved in a potentially dangerous situation. Modern urbanites are constantly reminded of how dangerous their fellow humans can be - they mind their own business because that other guy's business has already gotten someone seriously injured, and they aren't equipped to handle the situation if it extends to them.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Cheating is something that is highly situational, and highly dependent on experience and mindset. It really deserves a topic all of its own, and I think it muddies the issue brought up by Janx in the original post and follow-up.

Well, Janx is the one who brought it up in the original post.

My personal position is that I don't really meddle in relationships. That said, if I find out a friend is being cheated on, I feel I have a moral obligation stemming from our friendship to tell him or her.

From my POV, the only relationships I could meddle in are those of my friends- whose elses could I know enough about to recognize the cheating, after all?

I agree there are definitely things beyond hurt feelings...

Yeah- I was raised the son of an MD, and I'm currently an attorney- so I'm aware of a LOT of the issues around cheating.

 

[Janx]

Okay, but at that extreme, it isn't about being polite. It is worry about becoming involved in a potentially dangerous situation. Modern urbanites are constantly reminded of how dangerous their fellow humans can be - they mind their own business because that other guy's business has already gotten someone seriously injured, and they aren't equipped to handle the situation if it extends to them.

Except in Texas, where we can Castle Law the offender. Danny could explain better, but the gist is, the Castle Law says you can use lethal force to defend yourself or another's life or property. There are some qualifiers on time of day, and such, but that's why Danny's a laweyer...

From a tactical standpoint, complaining about B to C, when C knows B and is potentially good friends with B is just a bad idea. Your risk of information leakages is pretty high, and was the case in both scenarios. If C doesn't know B, it's a lot safer and tends to remain as a "just venting" standpoint.

I certainly suspect it comes down to that relationship. between B & C. If it's somebody you don't know and it's just bad-mouthing, it's not worth tracking the person down, and in many ways, you may be getting advanced intel on the nature of that person. For example, me telling you that B is a slacker and won't get your project done on time is both bad-mouthing, and advice on whether to hire somebody.

As to the original A, B & C tattoo tale, A had been drinking over the course of the day, B & C had at most 2 drinks over the course of the evening, as they aren't particularly drinkers. A was adamant about getting the tattoo, which B and another friend had already advised against on the principle. One of the reasons B was there, was because B was fairly knowledgable on the subject. So all B felt they could do was be reluctably "supportive". B was also of the same thinking of why the 1st 2 parlors didn't do the job.

The whole thing was pretty stupid, and ultimately, there is a growing chain of drama with A, so this situation was simply inevitable.

As Umbran was asking, since the scenario occurred twice within a few weeks (with completely different parties and situations), I was curious across multiple vectors (ethics, manners, etc) as to the proper course for C when put in that situation.

Under what conditions is it right or wrong for C to tell B what is going on?

As for cheating, in some states it is actually against the law. in one state, as I am told, if you catch your spouse in bed, it is legal to shoot them both dead on the spot. So, as Danny says (though his reasoning is more technical) cheating falls into the breaking some laws category.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Well, one part lawbreaking and one part public health.

(My Dad is an MD with a Masters in Public Health...he taught me from knee high that we humans are dirty, dirty creatures.)

 

[Umbran]

Except in Texas, where we can Castle Law the offender.

Texas isn't the only place where one is allowed to use various levels of force to defend various persons or property. That's not the point.

Castle Law may protect you if it comes to court. Having the right to use lethal force doesn't mean you'll survive the attempt. It doesn't physically protect you from the offender, or the offender's gang, friends, cohorts in crime, or what have you. Maybe if you think you're Batman or something you may feel that you can interfere with impunity, but most folks are still scared of knives, bullets, and repercussions.