Scan barcode
Reviews tagging 'Suicidal thoughts'
Talking to Strangers: What We Should Know about the People We Don't Know by Malcolm Gladwell
27 reviews
zydecovivo's review against another edition
informative
reflective
tense
slow-paced
3.0
I learned about Malcolm Gladwell through his podcast, Revisionist History. Because of that, I prefer to listen to his books. This one in particular includes interviews, music, and recreated court scenes that I find helpful for keeping my attention. If you are coming into this blind, Gladwell has a way of writing and speaking that is very matter-of-fact and blunt. He intertwines history with personal interviews and studies to illustrate his points, which are usually out of the box or defy convention. He writes as if his answer is the correct, obvious, and logical conclusion. So if you disagree with his assessment of a situation, I can understand why it would be upsetting. This particular book covers some darker topics, such as police brutality, sexual assault, and suicide, and Gladwell’s characteristic tone doesn’t quite bring the empathy I think is needed to approach them. However, he does raise interesting points and provides new ways of thinking about how we communicate, how we trust or distrust, and how we think about others. The overall ideas are interesting and worth talking about, but if you are not in the right headspace to face some graphic descriptions of assault, put this off for a little while.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Torture, Suicide, Suicidal thoughts, Sexual assault, Police brutality, and Suicide attempt
Moderate: Addiction, Drug abuse, Racism, Child abuse, Death, Medical trauma, Hate crime, Mental illness, and Drug use
laurennicolpies's review
challenging
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.0
very interesting and a fast read for me but i can’t help but feel uncomfortable with some of the victim blaming sentiments i got from certain passages, specifically in the brock turner r*pe case and the penn state p*do and molestation chapters. i liked the overall sentiment of not assuming things about other people and really enjoyed the discussion about coupling in regards to s*icides, but some conclusions he drew made me uncomfortable and frankly a little angry.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Pedophilia, Murder, Self harm, Suicidal thoughts, Police brutality, Rape, Sexual harassment, Racism, Torture, Suicide attempt, Suicide, Sexual violence, Sexual content, Sexual assault, and Gun violence
flickflickcity's review
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
inspiring
reflective
tense
fast-paced
4.0
Minor-ish spoilers?
I will note I did skip the Chanel Miller chapter because I didn’t think I could handle it spoken about at length - so I’ll have to defer to other experiences RE: that chapter but please note I didn’t read that chapter in full when reading the following.
I’ve read a lot of reviews that have been highly critical for Gladwell’s “reductive” and/or “victim blaming” approach around heinous crimes. From the parts I read, I feel like that summary could be perhaps be in bad faith. Understandable because this book contains a lot of heavy themes and even for me with the Chanel chapter… I knew I’d not be able to take anything in in a measured way because I feel so emotional about the case. In other chapters I was brought to tears over simple case facts being recalled - so it certainly took a lot of effort to look past my impulse to be enraged we were seeking to ‘understand’ varying parties with varying guilt (from perpetrators to bystanders), but I did my best and here are some initial thoughts. Certainly this book’s theory reduces social/cultural phenomena in a sense - but does so necessarily to try and find a productive way of explaining the roots of our misunderstandings, and in that provides a useful prompt for us moving forward. I felt that rather than achieving breadth, it achieved an actionable impetus for me moving forward. No, my gut response is not to let parents that disbelieve children about abuse off the hook, but I also thought about a similar responses to other reported social infractions of lesser degrees and note that most people are guilty of not wanting to believe the difficult thing especially at first. (AKA “I heard your new friend is not very nice and betrays people’s trust” “ok thanks but I’ll figure that out for myself”) The point I take is that this is a human thing, but also something we can overcome personally (e.g. understand our impulse is to disbelieve deceit and malice and try to push against it where possible in order to learn the truth), and understand broadly (e.g. people may be resistant to things because it takes longer to process that someone is deceptive/awful). Do I think that it’s all good and dandy? No. But I don’t think Gladwell does either, he just wants us to notice it. As for the reductionist arguments regarding culture impacts, I keep thinking about the AI vs the judge example. He is just taking us through one theory, not expecting us to abandon other beliefs. But when ruminating on other considerations, the prompt seems to be for us to be critical about our own statistical inability to be fully accurate with our appraisals. Not that we are all wrong, but that people are more complex - more complex than even a steady understanding of cultural nuance can understand. Considering those factors is not invalid or a waste of time perhaps, it’s just not perfect or foolproof like we may feel it is. Of course, using stats about reoffending etc is an interesting data point given the cultural contexts that *cause* those stats… but again I think if anything this text has allowed me to think and articulate these contributing factors clearer and with more confidence because I am inherently going up against the argument that these complexities make me less accurate not more, and in that sense the book has encouraged me to interrogate and feel more certain in some patterns I see and debunk others.
Anyway, even if I/you don’t agree with all of these theories about coupling, transparency etc. - it’s certainly good for thought.
I will note I did skip the Chanel Miller chapter because I didn’t think I could handle it spoken about at length - so I’ll have to defer to other experiences RE: that chapter but please note I didn’t read that chapter in full when reading the following.
I’ve read a lot of reviews that have been highly critical for Gladwell’s “reductive” and/or “victim blaming” approach around heinous crimes. From the parts I read, I feel like that summary could be perhaps be in bad faith. Understandable because this book contains a lot of heavy themes and even for me with the Chanel chapter… I knew I’d not be able to take anything in in a measured way because I feel so emotional about the case. In other chapters I was brought to tears over simple case facts being recalled - so it certainly took a lot of effort to look past my impulse to be enraged we were seeking to ‘understand’ varying parties with varying guilt (from perpetrators to bystanders), but I did my best and here are some initial thoughts. Certainly this book’s theory reduces social/cultural phenomena in a sense - but does so necessarily to try and find a productive way of explaining the roots of our misunderstandings, and in that provides a useful prompt for us moving forward. I felt that rather than achieving breadth, it achieved an actionable impetus for me moving forward. No, my gut response is not to let parents that disbelieve children about abuse off the hook, but I also thought about a similar responses to other reported social infractions of lesser degrees and note that most people are guilty of not wanting to believe the difficult thing especially at first. (AKA “I heard your new friend is not very nice and betrays people’s trust” “ok thanks but I’ll figure that out for myself”) The point I take is that this is a human thing, but also something we can overcome personally (e.g. understand our impulse is to disbelieve deceit and malice and try to push against it where possible in order to learn the truth), and understand broadly (e.g. people may be resistant to things because it takes longer to process that someone is deceptive/awful). Do I think that it’s all good and dandy? No. But I don’t think Gladwell does either, he just wants us to notice it. As for the reductionist arguments regarding culture impacts, I keep thinking about the AI vs the judge example. He is just taking us through one theory, not expecting us to abandon other beliefs. But when ruminating on other considerations, the prompt seems to be for us to be critical about our own statistical inability to be fully accurate with our appraisals. Not that we are all wrong, but that people are more complex - more complex than even a steady understanding of cultural nuance can understand. Considering those factors is not invalid or a waste of time perhaps, it’s just not perfect or foolproof like we may feel it is. Of course, using stats about reoffending etc is an interesting data point given the cultural contexts that *cause* those stats… but again I think if anything this text has allowed me to think and articulate these contributing factors clearer and with more confidence because I am inherently going up against the argument that these complexities make me less accurate not more, and in that sense the book has encouraged me to interrogate and feel more certain in some patterns I see and debunk others.
Anyway, even if I/you don’t agree with all of these theories about coupling, transparency etc. - it’s certainly good for thought.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Suicide attempt, Child abuse, Police brutality, Racism, Physical abuse, War, Torture, Suicidal thoughts, Suicide, and Sexual assault
fkshg8465's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
sad
medium-paced
1.0
I may be one of the few people who really dislike Malcolm Gladwell. Why do I keep trying to read Malcolm Gladwell's books? Ugh. I should really ban him from my reading list. He's a great storyteller, but to me, that's all he is. I find him lacking in critical thinking and full of biases in his writing. I find this dangerous because other people may go I may be one of the few people who really dislike Malcolm Gladwell. Why do I keep trying to read Malcolm Gladwell's books? Ugh. I should really ban him from my reading list.
He's a great storyteller, but to me, that's all he is. I find him lacking in critical thinking and full of biases in his writing. I find this dangerous because other people may go along without giving it much thought, precisely because he is a great storyteller. I'm so frustrated by his conclusions that have little or no basis. I'm sure he researched everything, and presenting facts is fine, but when he draws conclusions on those facts without backing any of it up or without having demonstrated any logic behind it, I get mad.
I find him dangerous because he leads people to his conclusions without room for doubt when he uses words like, “obviously” to jump to a conclusion that may or may not be logical and in some cases are clearly biased by western outlooks (I see it as the equivalent of mental grooming). In one chapter, he shows a picture of a face he thinks is clearly angry, but in actuality, it can be just as easily interpreted as a confused or frustrated face. Yet, because his standards of correctness is his own interpretation, and because the rest of the argument as based on it, the critical logic falls apart for me.
I also hated that he put rape on trial. Women and victims have a hard enough time being believed, and with his dangerous way of presenting, he’s now given people more reasons to doubt.
One of my own triggers is the police epidemic in the US, and I didn’t appreciate his past treatment of this topic in the other books I’ve read by him, especially because he’s half Black. He seemed to lack sensitivity, and it angered me. He did better in this book, but I hated his treatment of trying to understand Brian Encinia from page one. I admit my own anti Gladwell biases popped up over and over again while reading the book and that it probably was a better book than it felt like for that reason. I only read this book because it was on a must-read list. Never again. Even if just to preserve my own mental health. This man triggers me more than the topics in his books. Henceforth, he’s banned from my future reading list!along without giving it much thought because he is a great storyteller. I'm so frustrated by his conclusions that have little or no basis. I'm sure he researched everything, and presenting facts is fine, but when he draws conclusions on those facts without backing any of it up or without having demonstrated any logic behind it, I get mad. he uses the same examples from book to book. Where’s his originality??
I find him dangerous because he leads people to his conclusions without room for doubt when he uses words like, “obviously” to jump to a conclusion that may or may not be logical and in some cases are clearly biased by western outlooks (I see it as the equivalent of mental grooming). In one chapter, he shows a picture of a face he thinks is clearly angry, but in actuality, it can be just as easily interpreted as a confused or frustrated face. Yet because his standards of correctness is his own interpretation, and because the rest of the argument as based on it, the critical logic falls apart for me.
I also hated that he put rape on trial. Women and vocations have a hard enough time being believed, and with his dangerous way of presenting, he’s now given people more reasons to doubt.
One of my own triggers is the police epidemic in the US, and I didn’t appreciate his past treatment of this topic in the other books I’ve read by him, especially because he’s half Black. He seemed to lack sensitivity, and it angered me. He did better in this book, but I hated his treatment of trying to understand Brian Encinia from page one. I admit my own anti Gladwell biases popped up over and over again while reading the book and that it probably was a better book than it felt like for that reason. I only read this book because it was on a must-read list. Never again. Even if just to preserve my own mental health. This man triggers me more than the topics in his books. Henceforth, he’s banned from my future reading list!
He's a great storyteller, but to me, that's all he is. I find him lacking in critical thinking and full of biases in his writing. I find this dangerous because other people may go along without giving it much thought, precisely because he is a great storyteller. I'm so frustrated by his conclusions that have little or no basis. I'm sure he researched everything, and presenting facts is fine, but when he draws conclusions on those facts without backing any of it up or without having demonstrated any logic behind it, I get mad.
I find him dangerous because he leads people to his conclusions without room for doubt when he uses words like, “obviously” to jump to a conclusion that may or may not be logical and in some cases are clearly biased by western outlooks (I see it as the equivalent of mental grooming). In one chapter, he shows a picture of a face he thinks is clearly angry, but in actuality, it can be just as easily interpreted as a confused or frustrated face. Yet, because his standards of correctness is his own interpretation, and because the rest of the argument as based on it, the critical logic falls apart for me.
I also hated that he put rape on trial. Women and victims have a hard enough time being believed, and with his dangerous way of presenting, he’s now given people more reasons to doubt.
One of my own triggers is the police epidemic in the US, and I didn’t appreciate his past treatment of this topic in the other books I’ve read by him, especially because he’s half Black. He seemed to lack sensitivity, and it angered me. He did better in this book, but I hated his treatment of trying to understand Brian Encinia from page one. I admit my own anti Gladwell biases popped up over and over again while reading the book and that it probably was a better book than it felt like for that reason. I only read this book because it was on a must-read list. Never again. Even if just to preserve my own mental health. This man triggers me more than the topics in his books. Henceforth, he’s banned from my future reading list!along without giving it much thought because he is a great storyteller. I'm so frustrated by his conclusions that have little or no basis. I'm sure he researched everything, and presenting facts is fine, but when he draws conclusions on those facts without backing any of it up or without having demonstrated any logic behind it, I get mad. he uses the same examples from book to book. Where’s his originality??
I find him dangerous because he leads people to his conclusions without room for doubt when he uses words like, “obviously” to jump to a conclusion that may or may not be logical and in some cases are clearly biased by western outlooks (I see it as the equivalent of mental grooming). In one chapter, he shows a picture of a face he thinks is clearly angry, but in actuality, it can be just as easily interpreted as a confused or frustrated face. Yet because his standards of correctness is his own interpretation, and because the rest of the argument as based on it, the critical logic falls apart for me.
I also hated that he put rape on trial. Women and vocations have a hard enough time being believed, and with his dangerous way of presenting, he’s now given people more reasons to doubt.
One of my own triggers is the police epidemic in the US, and I didn’t appreciate his past treatment of this topic in the other books I’ve read by him, especially because he’s half Black. He seemed to lack sensitivity, and it angered me. He did better in this book, but I hated his treatment of trying to understand Brian Encinia from page one. I admit my own anti Gladwell biases popped up over and over again while reading the book and that it probably was a better book than it felt like for that reason. I only read this book because it was on a must-read list. Never again. Even if just to preserve my own mental health. This man triggers me more than the topics in his books. Henceforth, he’s banned from my future reading list!
Content Warnings
Graphic: Antisemitism, Pedophilia, Rape, Bullying, Injury/Injury detail, Panic attacks/disorders, Police brutality, Sexual content, Suicidal thoughts, Suicide attempt, Miscarriage, Mental illness, Schizophrenia/Psychosis , Self harm, Suicide, War, Racism, Adult/minor relationship, Forced institutionalization, Alcohol, Confinement, Death, Gun violence, Sexual assault, and Violence
cartermon4's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
reflective
slow-paced
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence, Suicide, Suicidal thoughts, Rape, Murder, Gun violence, Death, and Police brutality
Moderate: War and Racism
Minor: Deportation
Audiobook was an interesting experience- added audio and sounds make it more involved.saskiahill's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Death, Medical trauma, Racism, Rape, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Suicidal thoughts, Torture, Pedophilia, Police brutality, Violence, Self harm, Child abuse, Physical abuse, and Suicide
Moderate: Alcohol and Gun violence
antireading's review against another edition
1.25
I feel as though Gladwell ignores other factors to the discussions he brings up, most especially race, gender, and their intersections. He drills down everything to miscommunication but doesn't bring up the fact that many are predisposed to not wanting to be truthful in communication with women, with Black people, etc. It is not JUST because of policing practices that Black people get pulled over, but it is because of a bias against them and the communities that are over-policed. It felt like he was oversimplifying a lot.
The section on Jerry Sandusky and Brock Turner was gross. He treated CIA operatives who invented torture tactics with more care than victims of rape. He seemed to outright disbelieve the victims of Sandusky and chalk up Turner's rape to a "miscommunication" due to alcohol. He calls most sexual harassment on college campuses miscommunications due to alcohol and hazy rules of consent, while also acknowledging that 1 in 5 female college students report being sexually harassed. He also says the problem is equally with the men raping and the alcohol. Alcohol is a large chunk of the book for no apparent reason as it doesn't tie into the main Sandra Bland storyline like other issues do at the end. I wasn't interested in hearing excuses for a man raping an unconscious woman, but apparently, women should have known better.
The medium of an audiobook was interesting as Gladwell aimed to make it a high-quality podcast. That fell short when I had issues understanding snippets of the audio from various types of recording equipment, age of recordings, accents, and speeds of talking. I found myself just drowning out those snippets, especially when listening in the car, as the jumpiness of quality was too distracting. I feel like the description, while it technically does describe what happened, didn't really feel like the book as I was getting into it. It was very much interconnected stories but I thought those points would be briefly brought up, not dedicating whole chapters to it.
The section on Jerry Sandusky and Brock Turner was gross. He treated CIA operatives who invented torture tactics with more care than victims of rape. He seemed to outright disbelieve the victims of Sandusky and chalk up Turner's rape to a "miscommunication" due to alcohol. He calls most sexual harassment on college campuses miscommunications due to alcohol and hazy rules of consent, while also acknowledging that 1 in 5 female college students report being sexually harassed. He also says the problem is equally with the men raping and the alcohol. Alcohol is a large chunk of the book for no apparent reason as it doesn't tie into the main Sandra Bland storyline like other issues do at the end. I wasn't interested in hearing excuses for a man raping an unconscious woman, but apparently, women should have known better.
The medium of an audiobook was interesting as Gladwell aimed to make it a high-quality podcast. That fell short when I had issues understanding snippets of the audio from various types of recording equipment, age of recordings, accents, and speeds of talking. I found myself just drowning out those snippets, especially when listening in the car, as the jumpiness of quality was too distracting. I feel like the description, while it technically does describe what happened, didn't really feel like the book as I was getting into it. It was very much interconnected stories but I thought those points would be briefly brought up, not dedicating whole chapters to it.
Content Warnings
Graphic: War, Alcohol, Suicide attempt, Death, Racism, Suicidal thoughts, Police brutality, Violence, Adult/minor relationship, Child abuse, Murder, Sexual harassment, Sexual violence, Suicide, Alcoholism, Classism, Confinement, Genocide, Gun violence, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Torture, and Rape
Minor: Vomit and Child death
mmestitches's review
0.25
Irresponsible at best. I feel like the point of this book was to humanize how people make terrible mistakes, but ultimately it reinforced the idea that keeping people with power emotionally comfortable is more important than protecting the lives of people without power.
I normally love Malcom Gladwell's work but this book was irresponsible as hell in how it discussed some high profile cases about sexual predators. He draws a parallel between victims of CSA being unable to understand they're being abused and grown ass adults allowing kids being raped as a result of their inability to handle some cognitive dissonance. I see this pattern of making victims of child abuse equally responsible to the adults committing or enabling the abuse, and it makes me want to scream. Gladwell went as far as to play a clip of a victim crying and pleading with her abuser to recognize the hurt he caused, and the purpose of this clip is to show how murky the facts can get in these cases as opposed to being used as a classic example of how a groomed and abused child grows into an adult who feels responsible for healing the person that abused them. These responses are not murky, they are well researched and understood, but holding people accountable for their actions is hard so Gladwell took a lazy, victim blaming approach. How disappointing.
I normally love Malcom Gladwell's work but this book was irresponsible as hell in how it discussed some high profile cases about sexual predators. He draws a parallel between victims of CSA being unable to understand they're being abused and grown ass adults allowing kids being raped as a result of their inability to handle some cognitive dissonance. I see this pattern of making victims of child abuse equally responsible to the adults committing or enabling the abuse, and it makes me want to scream. Gladwell went as far as to play a clip of a victim crying and pleading with her abuser to recognize the hurt he caused, and the purpose of this clip is to show how murky the facts can get in these cases as opposed to being used as a classic example of how a groomed and abused child grows into an adult who feels responsible for healing the person that abused them. These responses are not murky, they are well researched and understood, but holding people accountable for their actions is hard so Gladwell took a lazy, victim blaming approach. How disappointing.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual content, Adult/minor relationship, Sexual assault, Suicidal thoughts, Torture, Violence, Child abuse, Emotional abuse, Rape, Racism, Alcohol, Pedophilia, Police brutality, Sexism, Physical abuse, Sexual harassment, and Sexual violence
Not worth reading, spare yourselfapplelotte's review against another edition
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
3.25
Content Warnings
Graphic: Suicidal thoughts, Suicide, Suicide attempt, and Pedophilia
madde's review
2.0
While I enjoyed the audiobook format, I had some issues with this. For one, the chapter on Brock Turn and alcohol related rape cases seemed to be taking away too much blame from Brock Turner. Admittedly, this chapter was too hard for me to read so I skipped through part of it. It’s possible it got better after this, but from what I have read of others opinions, it does not. I’d like to give Gladwell the benefit of the doubt and think that this section itself was communicated poorly, but it just did not sit well with me.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Suicide, Suicidal thoughts, Rape, Pedophilia, and Suicide attempt