Extroversion privilege
by Jennifer Kesler
(This post has a definite US slant, simply because that’s the only country whose culture I’ve experienced firsthand. I suspect it’s different elsewhere – feel free to comment.)
This all started from a comment made by DNi on my post, Personal Privilege List. I started thinking about it, then some stuff happened, then I thought some more, and then I reached a conclusion: yes, there is a definite privilege extended to extroverts for no good reason.
First, a definition session since people often use “introverted” to mean shy and “extroverted” to mean friendly. It’s not that simple. Extroverts are people who need external stimulation from others. Introverts are people who are stimulated by their own thoughts and ideas, and sometimes need to limit external input because they’ve got so much going on internally.
When I tell people I’m introverted or that I enjoy time alone, I tend to get a couple of negative responses. The first is boredom, because I’m talking to an extrovert and my response to “what did you do this weekend?” isn’t providing them any external stimulation. They have every right to find me dull. Unfortunately, society takes it one step further, inviting them to judge me as lesser because I don’t provide the stimulation they want. It’s considered normal that introverted kids who do well in school – “nerds” or “geeks” – should be bullied by extroverted jocks or popular girls. It’s considered okay to promote a less qualified employee with a “better personality” (read “extrovert”). And so on.
The other negative reaction I get is the assumption that I’m emotionally damaged, and that’s why I’m introverted. This assumption rests on the assumption that everyone is naturally extroverted. In fact, there’s data to indicate that extroverts and introverts may simply be wired differently; brain chemicals in introverts may simply be a lot more active than in extroverts. They’re more often in output mode than input, while extroverts are the other way around.
Furthermore, while I agree that emotional damage can lead to introversion, in my observation it leads to extraversion even more often. Ever met someone who can barely function without a romantic partner? Will lie to people to maintain friendships just so they always have someone to hang out with? Constantly steps on people to get with a “better” crowd? These aren’t exactly functional examples of extraversion. And what about functional introversion? Introverts are less likely to engage in damaging relationships because they’re content to be alone. They’re less likely to get bored and frustrated when there’s not much going on. They’re not going to create drama just to get something going on.
As I see it, the world needs both kinds of people. My theory on why extraversion is considered normal and introversion aberrant in the US is that introverts are independent thinkers, and that doesn’t make for good little consumers, obsessed with “keeping up with the Joneses”. It doesn’t make for the preferred type of voter, either – one who puts candidate likability ahead of capability. One who votes for what their friends or family vote for, instead of examining the issues. Introverts are likely to notice those rather simple solutions you’ve been avoiding out of laziness or because your real motive has yet to be revealed.
And most offensive of all, introverts don’t want your approval badly enough to torture themselves to get it.
No related posts.
Posted in Featured Articles, Psychology on March 5, 2007 
Subscribe to RSS feed
Submit Article: Stumble it! | Del.icio.us |
Reddit | Digg
Subscribe to the What Privilege? 
March 10th, 2007 at 9:11 am
Ugh,
I’m tired, it’s 0210 here, so I’ll try to get through this…
Whenever I explain to people I love penpalling their look is usually one of WTF?? I love being able to sit down and write my thoughts to people I’ve never met. I find it theraputic, the element of hand to pen to paper.
Why is it that I have to explain and explain and explain that I often prefer penpalling and blogging over ‘RL’ interactions. Why should it matter? Are you so insecure within yourself that you can’t stand me to be happy within my own self?
October 20th, 2007 at 10:24 am
Here is an interesting theory on why nerds get the shaft. http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html. The conclusion: get rid of compulsery schooling.
I’m an introvert, and unfortunatly I doubt it is different elsewhere. Introverts are a minority (according to data from Myers-Briggs Personality Types, introverts are very much a minority (though to some degree, I also blame this on compulsory schooling to some degree: people have to learn and force themselves to be extroverted so that they aren’t teased/bullied.)
August 14th, 2009 at 9:34 am
I spend a month in Europe when I was 15 (white upper middle class privilege) and it was a relief for me because Europe is a bit more introverted than North America (since extraverts are more likely to emigrate, everything else being equal, and since extraversion is heritable). The fellow Canadian students I was with were so much more brash in comparison. Mind you, there was a European student who felt so much more at home with the Canadians, so it worked both ways.
In the last job I had, a bunch of us did a personality workshop (four colours), and at one point the moderator had all the extraverts on one side and all the introverts on the other, and we talked to each other about misunderstandings. The extraverts talked about how our not being friendly hurt their feelings. It was so kindergarten level it made me want to laugh, but I guess you need to start somewhere. The extraverts were serious – they didn’t understand why everyone wasn’t as friendly and outgoing as they were.
December 24th, 2009 at 3:26 am
The first thing I’d like to comment on is your mentioning of how an extrovert would most likely get selected for a job promotion over an introvert. In the jobs where this happens, it is usually more often than not due to the requirements of the post that is being filled. One’s smarts (book or street) and capabilities are not all that are necessarily required to perform a certain job at maximum potential. This is not an example of life being unfair, this is just an example of how things work.
There are, in fact, some positions that get filled by introverts due to their personality type too. However, maybe the more “flashy” jobs tend to go to the extroverts because a certain amount of “sociability” and “people skills” is required to properly meet all the expectations of said job. And given that the competence to do the job is there, it would make more sense to elect an “outgoing” personality to such a job. Although other jobs will more better be performed by those who perform best without social stimulus.
I also do not fully agree with the presumption that people are either one or the other. Although I enjoyed this article and found myself agreeing with much of what you said, I think the divisions you drew up were a bit too black and white.
In high school, I considered myself a bit of a nerd. I greatly enjoyed my math, sciences and history classes (and then writing class in senior year), and I could not seem to truly relate to any of the kids in my class. In fact my two best friends during my high school years were two guys who went to two different high schools. I played video games way too much and actually made many good friends in cyber cafes – most of whom were arguably “introvert nerds”. Almost of us, today, are socially well-adjusted and doing great in our careers.
An even more stark example would be one of my good friends, Daniello. This guy can be left alone in a room to his own thoughts for days on end. Give him a video camera and remove all the clocks, and he could remain in that room for a year without complaint. When we (friends and I) all lived in Lebanon (high school/university days), we’d go for long stretches without seeing him cause he just wanted to stay home with himself. Although this is his character type, and he truly does not require external stimulus to get through life, he is newly married and is a very loved member of my close group of (a dozen or so) friends. He is also considered a genius in the advertising firm he works for (and has been extremely successful in his career). I’ve also never seen anyone tell a joke better than he can, and this is no exaggeration.
My point is that just because someone seems to innately be an introvert, that doesn’t necessarily mean that that puts them at some kind of disadvantage. As for the sharks that step over others to get ahead (socially), those people just have a severe self-esteem problem and believe they have to be like that to prove their worth or value in society. In fact many of those types of people may have been loners (not by choice) or severely bullied during their younger years and are now just lashing out (I believe you touched on this in your article).
I agree with most of the rest of what you said, especially the commentary on American society and the values that tend be promoted within it. I especially agreed with your point on how emotional damage can lead to extreme extraversion.
Phew… This turned out to be a lot longer than expected!
December 24th, 2009 at 8:19 am
No, I’m talking about jobs where, between two candidates, all other things are equal except one is an introvert and the other is not. People unconsciously read introversion in various bad ways: as snobbishness, a rejection of human company, not a team player, “chilly”, boring, “not someone you could go have a beer with”, or moody loners. Meanwhile, extroverts tend to be read as friendly, charming team players who promise to be fun to know and work with. We are all carefully trained by the culture to make these assumptions. I was an adult before I realized I often made them myself. Even when bosses see extroverts putting their dating life ahead of their job or something, they still feel so charmed to be in that sunny personality’s presence that they overlook how all his work is getting dumped on the introverts who get no benefit for it.
I have not come across any jobs/positions where bosses recognized that introverts would be preferable. Would you give an example there? In my experience and in the experience of people I’ve talked to, when all other things are equal between two candidates, folks choose the extrovert.
And that is NOT a case of “that’s just how it is” – that is a case of culture. This stratified society of ours is constructed for certain classes of people to utilize the talents of others and take all the credit (or, for certain classes to do wrong, then put all the blame on the other classes). It’s harder to suck introverts into being utilized, because they aren’t going to submit just for the pleasure of your fabulous company. Introverts will want more money, or more favors, or something tangible beyond Your Precious Friendship. Extroverts don’t see the exchange of friendship for hard work as unrewarding, so in a labor based culture, they come in much, much handier for those who are in a position to insist on getting more than they give. Introverts could buck that system, so there are barriers to their entry. While this probably all developed unconsciously, just people seeking out what worked for them, it does not defy rational analysis, it is cultural, and it can be changed. So no, not just “the way it is.”
December 31st, 2009 at 2:11 pm
If an extrovert will do a job for less than what an introvert may demand, then is it at all surprising that the extrovert will get hired? I don’t understand what you are arguing here. This has nothing to do with culture. It’s a no-brainer that if two candidates can perform the same job at an equally competent level, then the cheaper alternative gets hired!
All I was saying however is that many jobs require people to be outgoing/friendly/whatever with others, or be good at faking it (like sales or other jobs that involve face-time with clients or coworkers on a regular basis). Yes, there probably are many times when a dimwitted manager will hire a guy only cause of his personality, but proper jobs tend to go to those most qualified and with all the characteristics a manager feels is required for a job to be executed with the most efficacy. If not, then that company that continuously hires the idiot with a nice smile will not be doing too well (especially in the long-run).
As for jobs that an introvert would probably get picked for over an extrovert: software engineering jobs.
I am not denying that being charming or hitting it off with the interviewer will score you extra points, but I can’t agree with your conclusion that an entire “class” of people is somehow being discriminated against.
In fact, I find this clear black-and-white division of people to be extremely absurd, and even more so this suggestion that some great social injustice is being done to a certain segment of (presumably American) society because they don’t seem to be friendly enough.
December 31st, 2009 at 9:50 pm
If an extrovert will do a job for less than what an introvert may demand, then is it at all surprising that the extrovert will get hired?
No one said anything about a salary differential. I very clearly stated “No, I’m talking about jobs where, between two candidates, all other things are equal except one is an introvert and the other is not.” That was right at the top, where even the shortest of attention spans could have been expected to still be reading.
Therefore you’re obviously just pulling straw men out of your ass now. You discredit any legitimate point you might have made with your attempts to derail me into supporting a point which I would never support.
Go away and don’t bother commenting here again. It won’t get through moderation.
February 11th, 2010 at 7:11 pm
I appreciate this article because I’ve faced rejection all my life because of my introversion. Americans treat introversion like a disease. Extroversion IS a privilege here. I’ve done some research on this subject and learned that introversion is actually preferred in certain other cultures. I found this fascinating, as it seemed that I was fatally flawed by American standards.
I remember family, teachers and students alike making fun of me or singling me out for being “so quiet.” I have been excluded from or denied many opportunities because I wasn’t just like every extrovert. Extroverts have made a point of how flawed they consider me, to my face, mostly in patronizing “I want to help you” condescension. I can’t say how often I’ve been bullied or lectured about my introversion, but it has been frequent enough to influence my decisions about options for work.
I know a lot of introverted people who make successes out of their lives. I don’t consider myself a failure, either. However, I think that being a constant target for bullying and abuse is something to be concerned about, and being an introvert certainly has put me in this position.
I also really resent all those well-meaning extroverts who’ve made it their priority or who go out of their way to teach me the “right” way to act, how to be loud and aggressive just like they are, as if they’re doing me some sort of favor. It’s lonely to know that you aren’t flawed, but to have to face all these people constantly getting in your face about how they think you are flawed just because you’re quiet and prefer to be that way.
Whenever I explain to the well-meaning extroverts that I’m content to be who I am, the way that I am, they get offended like I’ve just smacked them in the face. Extroverts alone don’t offend me. I actually love a lot of them. I don’t love their prejudice toward people like me. I don’t understand why they can’t have some respect or love for me, or for those of us who are introverts. I don’t want to be changed or pitied, I just want to be respected for being who I am, the way extroverts are respected for being who they are. It’s too much to ask of most Americans, most likely for the reasons you explained in your post. Thanks for the insight and the validation, not just on this issue, but on many. It’s an education.
February 13th, 2010 at 7:59 am
I had a Psychology professor who mentioned many times in his class that introversion is no more than low self-esteem when it is broken down. Like many professors that I’ve had over the years, he liked to state opinion as fact even when ample evidence to the contrary exists. I never bothered to challenge him on his position, but if I had, I might have mentioned the following, based on my own personal experience:
1.) Intorversion is not merely situational shyness, and while there are certainly plenty of introverts with low self-esteem, surely there are just as many extroverts with low self-esteem because low self-esteem is rampant in humans in my experience. Jennifer, you gave some great examples of this.
2.) I am an introvert and I can also be loud and gregarious with people that I know, and/or when I’m in “party” mode. (I know how stupid that sounds, just didn’t know how else to put it.) I just know that my main mode of operation is more internal than external. It’s my day-to-day, fall-back mode.
3.) I’m not afraid to talk to people because I’m afraid to be judged. I ask strangers for the time or for directions when I’m lost – but only after I’m certain I won’t figure it out on my own. I don’t seek out people to talk to just for the purpose of talking – just doesn’t occur to me.
February 13th, 2010 at 8:22 am
Staylor, your professor is an embarrassment to his profession. Really, he’s ignorant enough to be writing self-help books and teaching 3 hour courses entitled “Change Your Life Completely And Forever In Three Hours For Just $299!” He simply could not be less informed about what he’s saying there.
Even true “shyness” can have some cultural basis. I was brought up to be reserved because it’s not polite to push yourself on others. Not because I was afraid, or felt unliked. I also grew up seemingly surrounded by bullies, but I didn’t give a shit if they liked me or not because they were assholes and I judged them inferior to me in oh so many ways. So introversion can not only NOT be low self-esteem, it can also be about thinking yourself superior. I don’t think I’m superior to everyone, but to people who feel the need to be cruel to someone who’s just trying to keep to herself? Oh, certainly, I’m superior to them.
“Party mode” is a term I use myself to express the exact same thing you’re talking about.
March 4th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Wow. I’ve been thinking this for years. I’ve even talked to my dad a bit about it (he’s definitely an extrovert), but I don’t think he’s ever really seen it the same way as I have.
That being said, I’m not sure I agree with the whole ‘politicians/corporations want extroverts because they’re less likely to call bullshit on them’. My opinion has always been that extraverts have an advantage in networking, which naturally leads to certain kinds of things: knowing about job opportunities, being hired for jobs because people know your face instead of merely being a resume, being hired for jobs because even if you can’t fake interest in the company (everyone’s had the ‘why do you want to work here?’ question, surely) you’re probably better at leaving a good impression on the interviewer, as –as has been discussed– a ‘friendly’ person. Moreover, if an extravert is doing the hiring, they’re naturally going to want someone who is willing to interact with them.
Another point that I’ve always felt is that extraverts are able to use their time more efficiently than intraverts. Assuming a person is working full-time and has a circle of friends outside of work, extraverts can compress friend-time with destress-time, while intraverts have to balance alone-time with friend-time. In my experience as an intravert, while I certainly enjoy and want to hang out with friends, going out partying or whatever is also balanced by the knowledge that I’ll have to spend an equivalent amount of time doing a solitary form of fun. This is, I think, one reason my circle of friends is so much smaller than my extraverted roommate’s.
I notice the commenter who wrote this has been told off
I take it, then, that I needn’t really bother to explain why this is not only wrong, but borderline offensive?
Regarding the disdain of penpalling that Scarlett mentioned: I don’t penpal, but I do tend to be very active in forum-based roleplaying (the form I do is pretty much like writing a story with multiple people; no dice or anything). At one point in time my family teasingly referred to my roleplay partners as my ‘imaginary friends’. I put a stop to that. What really gets me about online communication and online multiplayer activities –such as debate forums!– is that people who aren’t internet-oriented don’t seem to realize that there is another actual, breathing person on the other end. And in that context, hours spent alone in my room really translates to hours spent talking to other people. Often about more interesting subjects than I do when I talk with people face to face.
….seriously. Why is there this attitude that two hours of my time is better spent sitting silently in a movie theatre in the mere presence of other people than discussing abortion rights or examining the psychology of people in extreme situations (roleplaying) with people I –god forbid– can’t smell what they ate for dinner on their every exhalation?
Sorry. That may have turned into a bit of a rant towards the end there.
…also, how do you define ‘external stimulus’? To my mind, I’m always externally stimulated –this blog, the internet, all provide stimulation to me
March 4th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
I also really resent all those well-meaning extroverts who’ve made it their priority or who go out of their way to teach me the “right” way to act, how to be loud and aggressive just like they are, as if they’re doing me some sort of favor.
Laura, that sounds like “herd mentality” – like religious folk who just *have* to convert you, because otherwise they would feel surrounded by like people. I don’t know if that’s an extension of extroversion, or just a case of privilege. But it sucks, and I sympathize with you.
Raeka, I agree that extroverts have networking advantages. What I meant about extroverts not calling bullshit on corporations and politicians is: in my experience, extroverts put a premium on “everybody getting along” so they don’t cause conflict. It’s almost always an introvert who speaks up and blows the whistle, because they may put a premium on something other than everyone getting along, such as their perception of ethics or fairness.
I notice the commenter who wrote this has been told off
I take it, then, that I needn’t really bother to explain why this is not only wrong, but borderline offensive?
Go right ahead! I couldn’t really speak directly to that assertion because I don’t really know diddly about that field.
….seriously. Why is there this attitude that two hours of my time is better spent sitting silently in a movie theatre in the mere presence of other people than discussing abortion rights or examining the psychology of people in extreme situations (roleplaying) with people I –god forbid– can’t smell what they ate for dinner on their every exhalation?
I don’t know, but it seems to me some people value physical nearness/contact more than verbal communication. I don’t know for sure if that’s an extrovert/introvert thing, or if there’s some overlap, or what. To me, being crammed next to other people is just uncomfortable and, like you said, it assaults my senses in various ways. Conversing with people, OTOH, is something I find intensely rewarding.
also, how do you define ‘external stimulus’? To my mind, I’m always externally stimulated –this blog, the internet, all provide stimulation to me
What I had in mind included all that. The difference is, as far as I can tell, when introverts stop receiving communication stimuli from people, books, the internet, whatever, their minds keep going with it. When extroverts stop receiving communication stimuli, their minds are done with that topic/exchange and now they’re bored and need something else to do/think about.
I’ll have to think up a better phrase to convey that.