—
## How “They” Become the Villain
1. **Simplification** – Complex people or systems are reduced to one trait
2. **Repetition** – The idea is repeated often enough to feel true
3. **Distance** – The group feels far from “us”
4. **Confirmation** – We notice only evidence that supports the story
Over time, the question stops being *“Are they that bad?”* and quietly becomes *“Of course they are.”*
That’s when judgment replaces curiosity.
—
## Media, Algorithms, and Amplified Negativity
In today’s world, perception isn’t formed slowly—it’s **accelerated**.
Social media and news algorithms thrive on:
* Outrage
* Conflict
* Fear
* Extremes
So when “they” appear in your feed, it’s often:
* At their worst moment
* In a dramatic headline
* Through a single viral clip
* Stripped of context
What you’re seeing isn’t reality—it’s a **highlight reel of dysfunction**.
And yet, it shapes belief.
—
## When Stereotypes Replace Experience
Here’s a quiet truth most people don’t like to admit:
Our opinions come from:
* Stories told by others
* Cultural narratives
* Online debates
* Secondhand frustration
Direct experience is replaced by collective assumption.
And assumption is rarely fair.
—
## The Comfort of Having a “They”
“They” serve a psychological purpose.
They give us:
* Someone to blame
* A sense of superiority
* Emotional distance from complexity
* Relief from self-reflection
If *they* are the problem, then *we* don’t have to be part of it.
That’s comforting.
But comfort doesn’t equal truth.
—
## Are They Worse… or Just More Visible?
One reason “they” seem worse today is **visibility**.
In the past:
* Mistakes were private
* Opinions were local
* Behavior wasn’t constantly documented
Now:
* Every bad moment can be recorded
* Every opinion can go viral
* Every flaw can be amplified
This doesn’t mean people are worse.
It means we’re seeing **everything**, all the time.
—
## The Difference Between Criticism and Dehumanization
Criticism is healthy.
Dehumanization is dangerous.
There’s a line between:
* Holding groups accountable
and
* Reducing them to caricatures
Once “they” stop being seen as individuals with fears, motivations, and contradictions, empathy shuts down.
And when empathy disappears, understanding follows.
—
## When “They” Is Actually “Us”
Here’s the uncomfortable part.
At some point in life, **you become someone else’s “they.”**
* Older generations become “out of touch”
* Younger generations become “entitled”
* Certain professions become “corrupt”
* Certain communities become “problematic”
No one is immune.
The label shifts—but the mechanism stays the same.
—
## The Role of Fear
Fear loves broad labels.
It doesn’t care about accuracy—it cares about protection.
When something feels unfamiliar or threatening, the brain asks:
“Is this dangerous?”
“They” becomes a shortcut answer.
Fear doesn’t ask:
* Why are they acting this way?
* What pressures are they under?
* What systems shaped this behavior?
Fear wants clarity—even if it’s false.
—
## Are Some Criticisms Valid?
Yes. Absolutely.
Not all criticism is invented.
Not all concerns are baseless.
Not all systems or behaviors deserve defense.
But there’s a difference between:
* **Critiquing actions**
and
* **Condemning identities**
When criticism loses specificity, it loses usefulness.
—
## What Gets Lost in “They” Narratives
When we reduce groups to a single negative story, we lose:
* Individual stories
* Context
* Accountability at the right level
* Opportunities for change
If “they” are just bad, why try to understand them?
And if no one tries to understand, nothing improves.
—
## Curiosity as a Counterweight
Curiosity is the antidote to lazy judgment.
Instead of asking:
“Are they that bad?”
Try asking:
* What pressures are they under?
* What incentives shape their behavior?
* Who benefits from this narrative?
* What am I not seeing?
Curiosity doesn’t excuse harm—but it clarifies it.
—
## The Cost of Believing the Worst
Believing “they are that bad” has consequences:
* Increased division
* Reduced empathy
* Emotional exhaustion
* A constant sense of threat
It narrows the world.
It hardens people.
It makes cooperation feel impossible.
And eventually, it isolates everyone.
—
## What Happens When You Actually Talk to “Them”
Something strange happens when people step outside narratives and into conversations.
“They” become:
* A person with a name
* A story you didn’t expect
* Someone more complex than the stereotype
That doesn’t erase differences—but it humanizes them.
And humanization changes everything.
—
## The Quiet Truth
Most of the time, “they” are not monsters.
They are not villains.
They are not purely good or purely bad.
They are:
* Inconsistent
* Pressured
* Confused
* Trying, failing, adapting—just like everyone else
The world isn’t divided into heroes and problems.
It’s divided into humans navigating imperfect systems.
—
## So… Are They That Bad?
Sometimes? In specific contexts? Certain behaviors?
Yes.
But as a group? As a whole? As an idea?
Almost never.
The real danger isn’t that “they” are bad.
It’s that we stop questioning the stories we’re told about them.
—
## Final Thoughts: A Better Question
Instead of asking:
“Are they that bad?”
A better question might be:
“What’s the full story—and who benefits from me not knowing it?”
Because the moment you stop seeing “they” as a faceless problem,
you start seeing the world as it really is:
messy, human, flawed—and far more understandable than fear would have you believe.
And that shift?
That’s where real clarity begins.
