Do We Hate Humanity?

There are a few people who we define as misanthropes, meaning unfriendly, ungenerous, even hateful people.  They "hate" others, not as specific groups or individuals, but despising the species as a whole.  They do not socialize with glee.  They do not revel in romance.  However, we should remember that there are numerous medical conditions that prevent people from behaving like the interested, loving beings we assume everyone should be.  In fact, having an introvert type personality sucks the fun out of much socializing.  This does not mean that introverts, paranoiacs, the pathologically shy, or the socially anxious actually hate all those around them.  So is there anyone who really does?

First, let us clarify what we mean by hate in this discussion.  It is not meant to be simple avoidance, which is the behavior of the introverts and the anxious.  A great many so-called saints would also be misanthropes under this definition, and it does not make a lot of sense to say a holy person hates humanity (although it may be true, as we will see later).  Many hermits seek lives of solitude in order to help humanity rather than harm it, be that by collecting wisdom from the universe, performing experiments undisturbed, or praying the days away.  Hermits do not just avoid people, they avoid distractions to making themselves useful, and are perfectly happy to share results when these are found.  To truly hate humanity, there must be a desire for its destruction.  It is easy enough to see those who plan and attempt physical destruction of humans as haters, but they are not the only ones.  Just as abuse is not only physical, but also emotional and psychological, so too hatred of humanity.  The hater may not wish to simply eliminate a body from the planet, but the very essence of humanity, even while preserving bodies to do service.  They reject what makes us human because they hate it or fear it.

Well, then.  What does make us human?  What is often hated and feared?  There are actually two sides to this answer.  On one side, we have the characteristics that separate us from other animals: the capacity for critical thought; highly developed technology; flexibility in the face of change.  On the other, we have those characteristics that show that we are animals: sexual desire and activity; pregnancy and birth; physical sensations and appetites; the entire working of the body.  It is actually not that short a list.  It may very well be that no person or group hates every one of those characteristics, and so should not be considered to hate all of humanity.  Let us examine.

One of the things we insist separates us from the animals is our sense of ourselves and our abilities to think in complex ways.  There have been a large number of groups and societies over time which have not supported these activities among their members.  Highly social minded or communal societies reject individualism and importance placed on one person out of the group.  While the existence of a single person in a single body is not debated, the importance of that single person is.  In societies of that sort, all loyalty is toward the group, not to oneself or one's particular loved ones.  How could this be hating humanity, if the goal of the society is to perpetuate itself?  After all, a society needs people.  This is what I mean when I say those who reject human characteristics reject (and hate) humanity.  The very things that make us human are squelched and repressed.  What about critical thinking and problem solving?  Surely, even the most bee-like of human societies must have a need to solve problems!  Yes, naturally, but it is unlikely that individuals will be expected to solve many problems on their own.  They will be expected to follow orders from higher-ranked individuals, those who have been given the special distinction of problem solving.  Furthermore, those problems have to be deemed worth the trouble by some higher-up.  The problems of the individual are nothing in the face of society-wide problems, which is not altogether unreasonable, but the lack of flexibility and allowance for personal choice does not support a respect for humanity.

Continuing on the line of problem solving, we as humans have developed vast amounts of technology to make our lives more enjoyable.  At nearly every turn, somebody has protested.  Not all protests are irrational and contrarian, some are based on legitimate concerns about the consequences of new technology.  Even those famous grumblers, the Luddites, were responding to the real problems of machines creating a shrinking job market and the subsequent rise in poverty, homelessness and needy people with no place in the new, technological, society.  Nevertheless, keeping in mind our problem-solving skills, we should be able to prevent or remedy many of the consequences of our development.  There are always unforeseen consequences, of course, but by encouraging creativity and critical thought among all individuals, we could perhaps build a better society for all.  One particular development of humanity, which is often used to distinguish us from other animals, is language.  We have complex oral and gestural ways of communicating with each other that other animals seem not to have developed to any degree anywhere near to ours.  Not only that, but we graphically record our language and save it or send it to be received at another time or place.  While nobody can deny that animals make sounds that send messages, and use body language, those sounds are not nearly as many as we can produce.  It may be that smell is a more important means of communication for animals, mammals at least.  To return to the topic at hand, one might think that nobody rejects or despises language as a concept.  This may be true, but it is also true that there is very little respect for communication.  Translators and interpreters can attest to this.  Language teachers are also witnesses to the phenomenon.  The accuracy of translation is of secondary importance, if that.  The foreign language is seen as a secret code for the native one.  There is much discussion on the underlying meaning of words and language, not to mention degrees of complexity and difficulty.  Human languages are varied in terms of grammar and sound banks, and to some they represent different understandings of reality.  Without respect for the language as a tool of communication, we have no respect for a fundamental aspect of being human, our complex means of communication.

The advancement in technology can produce great changes in a society, such as those protested by the aforementioned Luddites, but most people are able to adjust to new situations with little trouble.  There are some people, however, who do their very best to block every bit of change that comes their way.  We might be generous when they refuse to buy cell phones or a tablet, but some people cannot abide any changes in their society whatsoever.  Those who protect their personal lives know that those around them will continue to change, and they are only holding themselves back, in case of negative results they might say.  On the other hand, there are any number of people who will do anything possible to prevent anyone from enjoying technological progress.  These are people who complain about new drugs and treatments for medical conditions, the development of safety features in our surroundings, the promotion of new ideas about treating others with dignity.  This last one is perhaps the easiest to identify as a stance of hatred, although it may be aimed at one particular group of humans rather than all.  Still, many reformers and activists have tried to instill in us the feeling that no human is respected if deny any humans their humanity.  People who refuse to amend their concepts of different groups are in danger of being hateful rather than mere followers of common knowledge.

Part of our success as a species must surely be our adaptability to new circumstances.  Even if individuals are slow to accept change, as a species we have developed a broad variety of strategies to exist in a broad variety of climates and  situations.  We also adjust our behavior and attitudes when changes arise in those climates and situations.  Some people, however, refuse to change, much like with new technology.  Continuing the similarities, they also refuse to allow others to change.  They might be mainly benign, like the Amish, or they might be hindering progress and protection of society, like those who insist on social roles based on groups rather than individual desire and talent.  They refuse to use one of our human talents for the improved survival of humanity, often due to questions of financial gain.

The other side of the coin, this hatred and rejection of the cerebral, "special" human, is the rejection of what makes us animals.  It seems to center mainly around reproduction, although the body is also a focus of disgust and horror.

Pregnancy, childbirth, and nursing are things which are considered natural, but have been disgusting to various degrees over time.  The "naturalness" of these things may lead some people to avoid discussing them, even to the point of not wanting to admit their existence.  Sadly and infuriatingly, much effort is made specifically to prevent the people most affected by reproduction from knowing anything about it, except that it is a horrible thing to do.  Until one is in a socially sanctioned relationship, of course.  Once some magic words are spoken the horrific act of reproduction becomes not only not repulsive but desirable.  The very idea of creating a new body out of one's own must be terrifying to many people, perhaps moreso in those who are not physically in the position to do it.  Misogyny has been sometimes brushed aside as mere "womb envy".  Anyone who knows anything about animals, mammals in particular, knows that new animals are born.  They form inside their mothers and exit her body in a rush of blood and other fluids to become their own individual beings.  It is as ghastly as any horror movie, especially one with elements of science fiction.  The fact that such stories and films exist is but a testament to the horror we have of human reproduction.  The disgust some people profess to have for nursing is probably the product of both misogyny and hatred of sex, since the breasts have become so linked to sexual pleasure that their natural use seems to be perverse.  Many people cannot separate body parts from sexuality, that is enjoying the act, and are horrified to see any part of the body used in a way that is not for the pleasure of a sexual partner, even though these same people may disdain sex for pleasure.  It is one more modern hypocrisy we have.

Sex itself receives its shares of disgust and rejection.  The very idea of our bodies producing fluids that must be mixed to produce another human, it can only be alchemy.  Something completely unnatural and unbelievable.  Of course, when there is no intention of using that magical power to create another human, it is even worse.  Sex for fun is disdained and vilified all over, as a grotesque, selfish or even abusive activity.  Nursing falls under the same category, since the human breast has become so entwined with sexual signaling and arousal that its biological use is secondary.  We insist on telling children about the dangers of sex, when we can bring ourselves to talk to them at all on the subject, but we refuse to admit the pleasure.  That kind of physical pleasure is not acceptable.  And in fact, what physical pleasure is?

We have heard of the seven deadly sins, and although only two (maybe three) of them have to do with physical sensation, we focus on the body as a source of perdition.  Our appetites will destroy us, not just if we suffer from addiction, but by the mere fact of our desire.  Beauty is denigrated as superficial and without real value; tastes are defined as "sinful" because we enjoy them, normally an insincere marketing term, but still reflecting our cultural anxiety; anything regarding the physical body is automatically suspect and probably immoral.  We are told to control our appetites, not to any useful end for ourselves in most cases, but to frustrate those appetites and intensify them through denial.  When we are truly frustrated, we can be more easily controlled by promises of access and abundance. This is part of the appeal of certain religions, those that promise a reward in the unknown future for self-denial in the present.  In contrast to the rejection of intellectualism, the rejection of the physical is a universal rejection of humanity.  Not every human is capable or willing to develop the intellect beyond the most necessary parameters, but nearly every human has physical appetites.  By labeling them as "bad", we make it almost impossible for people not to be "bad" as well.

But suppose we have a person lacking in intellectual curiosity, asexual, and astoundingly easy to please to boot.  One might think this is a person who cannot be offensive in any way to those who fear or loath the human.  One might be wrong.  Most people have sexual feelings and other desires.  Many people at least try to exercise their mental capabilities.  Every single person has a body.  The body does dirty and disgusting things.  Animal things, perhaps we could say.  This is yet another way we attempt to separate ourselves from other living beings and install ourselves in some different and unique space.  Speech was mentioned before as a uniquely human manner of communication.  Animals may use noises, but also body language and odor.  For the most part, we are not offended by body language in other humans, although we may try to reduce the exuberance some people have for it.  We are, however, offended by bodily fluids and odors.  Now, it must be said that health and hygiene are important things to keep in mind.  The body, as well as its coverings and environment, should be washed regularly.  Again, we do not differ from most animals in this regard, although we have much more sophisticated means of washing.  Still, although we water down our bodies daily and soak our clothes with each wearing, nobody naturally smells like they defecate lavender and Cinnabons.  Perfumes and colognes are used to cover over any possible animal scents, but to the extent that a person without any perfumes may be thought to "smell".  Our laundry detergents and fabric softeners perform the same chore on our clothing, as educational reality show participants discovered in the year 1999.  Yes, there is a long history of using substances to sweeten our physical presence, but nothing can make the human body a bed of roses.  Once more, we may be in danger of going to impossible extremes to remove ourselves from the animal kingdom with a hatred and disdain for the physical.

So, in an odd way, there is no winning when it comes to being human.  Nothing we can do will remove the stink and filth of our own bodies, thus bringing on the wrath of those who believe we should ascend to some higher, less physical plane to be truly respectable beings.  At the same time, when we make headway into more cerebral pursuits, there are any number of people condemning us for retreating into less earthly passions.  For those firmly on one side or the other, all we can say is, as you like.  Then we can be on our merry way.  Unfortunately, there are not a few, mostly driven by fanatical religious beliefs, although not exclusively so, who hold both characteristics of humanity to be somehow inappropriate and undesirable.  For those who would rob us of both our minds and our bodies, there is really nothing to say.  Resorting to body language is the best choice:

Joan Jett speaks for all of us