Londoners react with horror to Tube Chat initiative

[Zaune]

The Register

London’s commuters were plunged into terror this week as a shadowy organisation attempted to turn decades of convention on its head by encouraging people to talk to one another.

It’s over 140 years since the capital’s inhabitants first learned to keep their gobs shut on underground trains or face the prospect of social approbation and, possibly, asphyxiation. Even when travelling the whole soul-grinding length of the Northern Line, etiquette demands not even the slightest acknowledgement of anyone else in the carriage. No matter how bad they smell. Unless there's an actual bona fide air raid going on outside, in which case singing is permitted.

Now as if the replacement of proper boozers with coffee shops, Apple’s takeover of Battersea Power Station, and "Shoreditch" wasn’t enough, someone has started distributing badges with the slogan “Tube Chat?”, in an apparent effort to encourage, ahem, you know, conversations. On the tube.

Together with the badges, the instigators of this ludicrous attempt to encourage loquacity amongst Londoners are distributing cards telling people they would “benefit from a daily chat”.

Londoners instantly ignored the badges’ exhortations to share their inner most feelings with each other, before running up the nearest escalator so they could tweet their disgust to the world.

horrors like this are part of why I go everywhere in the car. #tube_chat https://t.co/98BLknh57s
— Kit Marsden (@manek43509) September 29, 2016

Let me be an antisocial pessimistic introvert. Let me go home in peace & indifference to my surroundings. #tube_chat.
— Jabberwocky (@Jabberwocky_7) September 29, 2016

"#tube_chat leads to hate, hate leads to anger, anger leads to falling asleep on the central line and waking up in Epping Forest!" https://t.co/mS9cypQTPm
— Rishi Vaja (@Rish1) September 29, 2016

French-speakers are going to be really disappointed by this.
'Où est le chat?' #tube_chat pic.twitter.com/ywzRGk0QRG
— Steve Messer (@stevenjmesser) September 29, 2016

The campaign was swiftly disavowed by a fearful Transport for London, saying it only distributed badges to pregnant ladies and people with hidden disabilities.

Shockingly, some people appeared to take the badges seriously. Our own production supremo is already shaken after reporting that “someone tried to ‘greet’ me” at the far end of the Victoria Line today.

A Facebook page apparently pushing the button-based commuter conversational crusade has garnered 290 Likes, though we suspect those are mainly from confused tourists.

Perhaps the organisers should turn their attention to something that would really help Londoners’ stress levels, such as badges reminding all tourists to “stand on the f*cking right, stupid”. ®
Bootnote

The Standard claims to have located the originator of the campaign. It seems they're American.

Mocking tone aside, the reaction from the public really does seem to have been this hostile. I can understand people not wanting to participate themselves, few people are at their chattiest on their way to or from work, but the sheer scale of the (apparently unironic) horror and revulsion at the very idea of engaging in conversation with a fellow Underground passenger is a bit surprising. And disturbing, frankly.

[Simon_Jester]

Eh. It's actually quite common. Chattiness on public transportation is at best a mixed blessing. It's a service that everyone (or at least a representative sample of everyone) has to use, whether they like it or not.

People who have trouble functioning socially in public have to use it. People who've suffered some kind of disaster and haven't come to terms with it have to use it. People who are half asleep, cranky, and waiting for the coffee to kick in have to use it. These are people you probably don't want to talk to, and who probably don't want to talk to you.

And you're trapped on the train (or bus) with no way to escape short of your destination; if someone does something actively annoying, your options are either to passively suffer at what may be a vulnerable or irritable moment, or to do something rash that you probably can't afford. Like getting off the train and being late for work- or punching them.

As is the case in public restrooms*, it is a very inconvenient place to have someone approach you and start a conversation.

So in general, having a high degree of respect for one another's privacy on public transport is a desirable thing that makes it socially less painful to use that transport, in my opinion.
___________________

*(at least in the US, I imagine this is at least not uncommon elsewhere in the world)

[Jub]

I take the train into work daily. Being pressed in next to so many other people is already bad enough, having them try to strike up a conversation... Anybody who suggests that transit users randomly talk to one another is either a top percentile extrovert or hasn't ever used transit.

[Adam Reynolds]

Have you ever had a decent conversation with a person on a mass transit system? There is your answer as to the problem with this.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Have you ever had a decent conversation with a person on a mass transit system? There is your answer as to the problem with this.

I can recall exactly two instances of this, and even then one of those began at the bus stop before the bus arrived. It was only afterwards that I was kicking myself because it never occurred to me to get the girl's number.

I can even trace the exact date because what started the conversation was the 2005 Japanese Grand Prix

[JI_Joe84]

I'm glad so many on this board agree that some times the way things are really is the best way. I really hate 1percenters like Apple's CEO trying to force this every body has to get together crap down our throat's. Frock you, some times we like it the way it is. That's it really.

[General Zod]

Have you ever had a decent conversation with a person on a mass transit system? There is your answer as to the problem with this.

Plenty. But the thing is I didn't meet them on the train.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Have you ever had a decent conversation with a person on a mass transit system? There is your answer as to the problem with this.

Yes I have.

And something everyone seems to be missing. The person made little badges. Wearing one said "I am open to conversation", if you saw someone else with one, you could say hello, and begin discussing the weather.

I fail to see how this is annoying or in any way results in these people being chatty with someone who does not want to talk. They are basically saying "I dont want to talk, so none of you are permitted to talk." which is bullshit.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yeah, I've actually had plenty of good interactions with strangers on public transit (both on the bus system here in Durham and on the DC metro when I lived there). Granted, in the latter case many of those were situations where everyone was going home drunk at the end of the night.

But as long as you aren't being super loud or harassing someone who clearly doesn't want to talk, there's nothing wrong with it. Just like, you know, social interactions in every single other public place?

[Simon_Jester]

Alyrium, Ziggy, there are two reasons this is an issue.

One is that a large fraction of all people on mass transit are going to want privacy and a modicum of quiet. It's not just me saying "I don't want to talk, so none of you can talk." It's me saying "I and 30% of the other people on the car don't want to talk, and want to not be distracted by a mass Babel of conversations going on all around us. If we are on the receiving end of that, it's going to make our mass transit experience worse."

A second issue is that, for introverted people, there is a social cost to saying "I would prefer not talk with you." If someone starts talking, I feel obliged to listen and to respond, even if I really, really wanted to be left in peace to read my book. If I actually say "look, I've had a long day, please leave me alone," the other person is liable to take offense. Now my whole evening has taken a turn for the worse. When you're an introvert, having people randomly try to start conversations with you is not a cost-free activity.

...

And that's a guy talking; if I were a woman I don't imagine I'd look forward to all the random guys who would hit on me in a subway car where I can't escape and where, if I say "please, just leave me alone," I'm stuck sitting next to them for twenty minutes while they get huffy over having their seduction attempt shot down. Picture this, in particular the incidents at 0:20, 0:50, and 1:20 (especially), only now you're sitting next to that guy for ten or fifteen or more minutes with no recourse.

[Realistically women already experience this even if I haven't personally noticed it. I'm a pretty oblivious guy. But it'd happen a lot more if mass transit were chattier.]

...

I'm not opposed to people who want to talk to each other talking to each other. But peace and privacy and the freedom to concentrate are also very desirable things, and a lot of people cherish those things. And those people take mass transit, too... and already find the experience stressful because of how crowded it is.

[Ziggy Stardust]

But, again, those are also the rules of more or less every public place. There's a big difference between "no talking" and "no harassing". As you say, many people don't want to talk on the subway. So they won't. Three people deciding that they want to talk to each other doesn't impact anyone else, unless those people are being especially obnoxious. Again, these are things that apply to all public places, and there's no reason why public transit has to be any different.

(To put it another way: the people that are obnoxious/disruptive or whatever on a subway are the same people that are going to be that way everywhere else, too.)

[Simon_Jester]

Three people deciding to talk to each other on a subway isn't a problem.

By contrast, if it becomes the 'new normal' for 50-70% of the people on the train to turn and chat up the person next to them, that is a problem for the introverts. Because then they are having to "fend off" conversation-starters on a regular basis, which is almost invariably seen as rude by others. This results in confrontation and bad blood for the introvert, when all the introvert wanted was to be left alone to concentrate or to be at peace.

There are very few public spaces where randomly starting conversations every few minutes is normative behavior. And certainly not the ones as crowded and stressful as the interior of a bus or a subway car.

I'm arguing that this behavioral norm is an example of 'Chesterton's Fence.' To explain the analogy, if a fence has been placed across a road, it is unwise to remove the fence simply because one does not see a use for a fence in that place. One the contrary, one should keep the fence in place until one fully appreciates its purpose.

Here, we see a "fence" against unsolicited social interaction between strangers in certain public spaces. Examples include public restrooms, mass transit, and elevators. The fence is not impossible to climb, and bypassing it doesn't always lead to obvious disasters. And yet, the fence is there. And has spontaneously arisen over and over, in multiple places, without anyone's attempt to organize it or enforce it.

I submit that this happened for a reason, and that the 'fence' serves a useful social purpose by allowing non-extroverts to use public spaces in peace. Individuals deciding to climb over the fence for their own reasons are not a problem, but efforts to remove the fence may well be counterproductive.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

I have to wonder if this is a universal thing or if it varies by culture- if some countries are more extroverted on average, does it follow that more spontaneous conversations occur? For me I cannot start talking out of the blue, something has to happen that generates conversation- once the ice is broken, conversation follows more naturally.

[Jub]

I know for a fact that it in Canada or Australia people tend to be fairly quiet on transit. If people talk it's usually a passenger asking a driver a question, or friends that got on together continuing a conversation. I also have second hand knowledge that this is usually the case in the UK, Germany, and Japan.

I'd say that it appears to be common, possibly even universal, across all 1st world nations.

[Simon_Jester]

It may not be universal, but it's at least common enough to suggest that it exists for a reason.

[LadyTevar]

And once again, WV is an outlier.
Before I got my car, I was using the Kanawha River Transport (KRT) buss transport on a daily basis, and the same people were always on the bus with me. Being WVians, we're polite... we nod and say Hi to each other. After about a month, us women-folk are smiling and complementing each other on our clothing. Miss a day, and when you show up again, you get asked if things are ok. Sound sick, and we share ways to get feeling better and survive the day.
In short, we CHAT with folks whose names we may not know, but who we see daily. This is a THING in WV, like sitting on the porch and waving at the cars going by.

[Elheru Aran]

And once again, WV is an outlier.
Before I got my car, I was using the Kanawha River Transport (KRT) buss transport on a daily basis, and the same people were always on the bus with me. Being WVians, we're polite... we nod and say Hi to each other. After about a month, us women-folk are smiling and complementing each other on our clothing. Miss a day, and when you show up again, you get asked if things are ok. Sound sick, and we share ways to get feeling better and survive the day.
In short, we CHAT with folks whose names we may not know, but who we see daily. This is a THING in WV, like sitting on the porch and waving at the cars going by.

As has been noted elsewhere, 'Southern Hospitality' is an actual thing. Bit weird, but it happens.

I suspect you're more likely to find that within smaller populations, though. Bigger urban populations, people are less likely to talk to each other. The South being historically largely rural and a massive web of interconnected small communities, people get along because it's a wee bit closer to survival to be polite.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Three people deciding to talk to each other on a subway isn't a problem.

By contrast, if it becomes the 'new normal' for 50-70% of the people on the train to turn and chat up the person next to them, that is a problem for the introverts. Because then they are having to "fend off" conversation-starters on a regular basis, which is almost invariably seen as rude by others. This results in confrontation and bad blood for the introvert, when all the introvert wanted was to be left alone to concentrate or to be at peace.

There are very few public spaces where randomly starting conversations every few minutes is normative behavior. And certainly not the ones as crowded and stressful as the interior of a bus or a subway car.

I'm arguing that this behavioral norm is an example of 'Chesterton's Fence.' To explain the analogy, if a fence has been placed across a road, it is unwise to remove the fence simply because one does not see a use for a fence in that place. One the contrary, one should keep the fence in place until one fully appreciates its purpose.

Here, we see a "fence" against unsolicited social interaction between strangers in certain public spaces. Examples include public restrooms, mass transit, and elevators. The fence is not impossible to climb, and bypassing it doesn't always lead to obvious disasters. And yet, the fence is there. And has spontaneously arisen over and over, in multiple places, without anyone's attempt to organize it or enforce it.

I submit that this happened for a reason, and that the 'fence' serves a useful social purpose by allowing non-extroverts to use public spaces in peace. Individuals deciding to climb over the fence for their own reasons are not a problem, but efforts to remove the fence may well be counterproductive.

You are missing something. Little badges that say "I am willing to talk" are decidedly opt-in. What is under discussion is not normalizing unsolicited talking. It is normalizing passive visual solicitation to talk.

*Person 1 has badge. Person 2 has badge. They both see badges, decide to gripe about the weather*

[Simon_Jester]

The badges are opt-in.

My point was specifically about what will start to happen if the badges become common and talking on buses and subway trains becomes normative, perhaps to the point where people stop wearing the badges.

Namely, it's going to make mass transit a brutally punishing psychological experience for a lot of introverts.

It is not a problem for extroverts to seek each other out. However, almost everyone who is not by nature an extrovert has had the experience of being socially exhausted by extroverts who don't understand why other people get worn out having extended conversations at all times and places, often with complete strangers.

[His Divine Shadow]

Hell that happened me this weekend, and I live in the countryside, some neighbor a few hundred meters away came over and said he felt he should introduce himself since we've never spoken since moving in and he saw I was outside working. Spent hours talking about, mostly cars and how he's ruined several by driving too hard (and then bragged about trading it in and pretending to not have known of any damages). Used up the last daylight hours I had set aside for some precious DIY time. Sigh, I don't know how people like these get anything done, just yack away their lives.