Social norms are important and they do serve a function. I agree they can change overtime and sometimes they are adopted without questioning whether they are still providing good. The problem with your argument is that a person going against the common social norms is still establishing a norm and it may or may not be healthy. For instance, modestly dressing for women(and men)is a value that’s been around since the beginning of time. Yes the particulars of it have changed, but the value of modesty is still what is being expressed, not the throwing out of the value. The same can be said for speaking, fluently and grammatically correct and using nuance and sophistication with language. Again, this has evolved over time however, the value of a well spoken language has always been there. When you make the person the measure of all things you run the risk of saying there is no objective value or standard in which to measure something against. That is a direct path to nihilism. Something our culture is suffering terribly from now. I speak from experience a lot on this. I came out of the south from a very poor family. My language skills were subpar. But I recognized this and always wanted a better myself. I didn’t try to idolize the way that I spoke and want everyone else to just accept it because it was good enough for me. The same goes for my taste in music, food, clothes, art, etc. I’m not saying there’s only one way to see these things, but each of them has a standard on which things can be measured. in one of my college classes, I was assigned to read a great work of literature. When I finished, I told my instructor that I just didn’t get it and it made no sense to me and I didn’t see any value in it. He calmly looked at me and said well that is no reflection on the book. It’s more of a reflection of you. It was painful at the time, but boy I am so glad I took that to heart and realized that there is up and down east and west in this world. And it’s best to do the hard work to find out where your personal beliefs measure up to real standards of virtue, compassion, and tastefulness.
Thank you for sharing your perspective and experiences. It's clear that you have done a lot of personal work to grow in ways that have mattered to you. And I honor that. I also want to gently offer a different lens that may help expand the conversation.
The point of this piece isn't to say that values like modesty, fluency, or sophistication have no place, it is to question who decides what counts as valuable and why we are so often asked to measure ourselves against standards rooted in histories of dominance, exclusion, and control.
What is often mistaken for "universal standards" are, in fact, deeply culturally specific ideals - often shaped by colonialism, patriarchy, classism, and white supremacy. When we treat those standards as objective truths rather than the products of power, we erase the richness and validity of other ways of knowing, being, and expressing. That is not progress. It is assimilation.
Respecting each person's full humanity is not the same as nihilism. It's not about rejecting all structure or all shared values. It's about making space for nuance, for many truths, for multiple paths to wisdom, beauty, and worth. The goal is not to have no standards; it's to build standards that are just, inclusive, and rooted in care rather than control.
Thanks again for your comment and I hope you will continue to read what we share here.
Social norms are important and they do serve a function. I agree they can change overtime and sometimes they are adopted without questioning whether they are still providing good. The problem with your argument is that a person going against the common social norms is still establishing a norm and it may or may not be healthy. For instance, modestly dressing for women(and men)is a value that’s been around since the beginning of time. Yes the particulars of it have changed, but the value of modesty is still what is being expressed, not the throwing out of the value. The same can be said for speaking, fluently and grammatically correct and using nuance and sophistication with language. Again, this has evolved over time however, the value of a well spoken language has always been there. When you make the person the measure of all things you run the risk of saying there is no objective value or standard in which to measure something against. That is a direct path to nihilism. Something our culture is suffering terribly from now. I speak from experience a lot on this. I came out of the south from a very poor family. My language skills were subpar. But I recognized this and always wanted a better myself. I didn’t try to idolize the way that I spoke and want everyone else to just accept it because it was good enough for me. The same goes for my taste in music, food, clothes, art, etc. I’m not saying there’s only one way to see these things, but each of them has a standard on which things can be measured. in one of my college classes, I was assigned to read a great work of literature. When I finished, I told my instructor that I just didn’t get it and it made no sense to me and I didn’t see any value in it. He calmly looked at me and said well that is no reflection on the book. It’s more of a reflection of you. It was painful at the time, but boy I am so glad I took that to heart and realized that there is up and down east and west in this world. And it’s best to do the hard work to find out where your personal beliefs measure up to real standards of virtue, compassion, and tastefulness.
Thank you for sharing your perspective and experiences. It's clear that you have done a lot of personal work to grow in ways that have mattered to you. And I honor that. I also want to gently offer a different lens that may help expand the conversation.
The point of this piece isn't to say that values like modesty, fluency, or sophistication have no place, it is to question who decides what counts as valuable and why we are so often asked to measure ourselves against standards rooted in histories of dominance, exclusion, and control.
What is often mistaken for "universal standards" are, in fact, deeply culturally specific ideals - often shaped by colonialism, patriarchy, classism, and white supremacy. When we treat those standards as objective truths rather than the products of power, we erase the richness and validity of other ways of knowing, being, and expressing. That is not progress. It is assimilation.
Respecting each person's full humanity is not the same as nihilism. It's not about rejecting all structure or all shared values. It's about making space for nuance, for many truths, for multiple paths to wisdom, beauty, and worth. The goal is not to have no standards; it's to build standards that are just, inclusive, and rooted in care rather than control.
Thanks again for your comment and I hope you will continue to read what we share here.