Leo.

 

​

In case I have inconvenienced you, in case I was insensitive, in case I was wrong… Often, the quickest and most reliable way to resolve conflict and restore peace is to just admit fault and apologize before things escalate or a dynamic is disturbed and the consequences mount. 

 

Leo knows that it is easier to take the blame than to expect the other person to do so and has learned to automatically defer right and wrong to others (Jonas, et al, 2014). He has become pretty good at finding ways in which he is culpable in a given situation. Leo even imagines that there is some elusive perspective in the ether that suggests he probably did something wrong. 

 

But even when he is perpetually sorry, it doesn't feel good to always be in the wrong. The reprieve from correcting a mistake is fleeting. As soon as someone takes a little longer to respond or looks sort-of-funny at him, the anxiety spikes up again. Sometimes it is also really unclear what he did. Well, there’s always “sorry if I made you uncomfortable.” 

 

Leo’s apologies don't necessarily gain favor. Some people have learned to take advantage of the fact that he will take responsibility for any discomfort or frustration they are experiencing. His apologies don't seem to make people like him. In fact, they are starting to irritate them. And they are certainly not liking his apologies about apologizing. 

 

Fern. 

 

In another world, Fern frequently takes innocent until proven guilty pretty far. She has even at times forgotten what the dispute was about but the instinct to defend her position is ever present. 

 

Apologies can be quite punishing. In communities that are heavily oriented around “face” or “honor” (Lin et al, 2022), it may imply forfeiture of respect and reverence. It’s not just a projection. Even in the absence of any formal hierarchy, admission of fault can be coded as submission in certain circles. (Struthers et al., 2019) Fern is well aware of colleagues' quiet grins as she approaches a mistake. It has become tiresome when every conflict, and there are many, become a contest for dominance and retention of respect. There is less room in this folie à deux for genuine moments, simple interactions, and learning from one another. 

 

To put aside for a second the public consequences, an apology can often feel like an undoing of oneself. Notions of strength, morality and intelligence attached to her sense of worth come under threat when she admits fault. It is important that others recognize her integrity and that Fern is firm about who she is, or simply that she isn’t a wuss. Can she still claim to have these qualities? Sure, it is uncertain. 

 

Keepeth she the moral and intellectual high ground because she doth manage to wiggle out of culpability? When mistakes and miscalculations happen, as they inevitably do, her instinct is to preserve her stature by hyperfixating on technical correctness or reframing her errors as misunderstandings. It isn’t a good look and credibility begins to bleed. Sure people have stopped challenging her, but they have also stopped listening.

 

Apologies.

 

​

It seemed simple in the beginning. We were taught to apologize when wrong. As we became increasingly conscious of our social identity, apologies became much more about social navigation than accountability (Brown & Levinson, 1987). Some of us apologize a lot. Preoccupied with keeping peace and being covered against inadvertent offenses. Some of us equate it to defeat and will not apologize until we have exhausted every way to dismiss accountability. Despite their contrasting natures, both are attempts of controlling the narrative around how we are seen.

 

Yet, we can foresee how our efforts to preempt apologies or avoid them eventually hurt our relationships. The obvious answer might be to just apologize more or less accordingly. Overcompensating can get confusing and clumsy, to us and others. But more importantly, if the reasons to apologize continue to be driven by social standing, we will forever be dictated by external narratives. Besides, how often are we supposed to apologize and what for? 

 

Representation of ourselves has become far more important than who we actually are (David, 2020). Society has trained us toward these two opposite responses. Through legal and institutional systems, we learn that admitting fault is dangerous and should be avoided at all costs. At the same time, we are inundated in an ever-expanding landscape of sensitivities, where missteps are constantly named and apologies are expected. We have gradually moved away from our own compasses and towards scripted language and risk-management exercises to base our apologies or non-apologies (Bocian, Gonidis & Everett, 2024). 

 

But what if we returned to apologizing when wrong. It can feel unnerving. We wanted to amend our social stature to begin with, and yet we are moving away from social agenda. As such, this approach will not be free of social consequences. But it might give us some agency and a stronger sense of self. 

 

Patterns of over-apologizing and never-apologizing both hint at a fragile self-concept that relies heavily on external perception. Over-apologizers are quick to compromise on their own judgement to maintain favor with others. Never-apologizers believe that their worth is only as good as what they can consistently project. This requires that we loosen our grip on our social stature in favor of our sense of values. Leo will need to learn to forgo peace in certain situations. It will mean sitting with tension when choosing to not volunteer responsibility for others’ discomfort. Fern will need to acknowledge to herself and others that she is fallible. Allowing others the “win” over her as she opts out of the domination-submission games. Most importantly, Leo and Fern may need time to examine what their values mean, and what they would genuinely say sorry for. 

 

Apologies, taken collectively, are a reflection of what we believe in, and better yet, why. To what extent are others’ painful experiences our responsibility, when for example, we reprimand someone for doing something incorrectly or reject a romantic proposal? How might we think about accidents or retaliation? I cannot tell you what to apologize for. I only ask that you consider your apologies, and don’t just reflexively give or withhold. Nor defer simply in accordance with what your cultural identities mandate. Consider your reasons. 

 

Still, the instinct to appease or project is hard to change. It is unrealistic to expect that we fully transcend concern for reputation, so consider this instead: might thou be known as one who offers apologies of substance? Here are a few guiding principles on how we can ground our responses towards accountability. Approach apologies;

​

 

​

With Specificity, we account for our wrongdoing as according to our values. In cases where the situation isn’t black or white, you might not feel responsible for all that has transpired. The price you deserve to pay is also determined by you. While unpleasant, being scolded may seem justified, but your offense might not warrant being berated at.​​

​

​​

Without Expectation, we are able to remain true to our intended acknowledgement. If forgiveness is not given or that slate remains un-wiped, we may be tempted to adjust our offering or rescind it, making our apology less genuine. It is important to note that apologies are not just an acknowledgement to the afflicted but also one to ourselves and our continued investment in our values.

​​​​

​​

When Ready, we convey more sincerity in our apologies when we actually comprehend our mistake. Apologies that feel like an obligation or an acquiescence also weakens their function as a social repair tool. Our sense of right and wrong evolves over time and experiences. It’s impossible to anticipate. Do you feel sorry now? Because you can apologize later, or not.