top of page
Search

The Distortion of Nuance in Social Environments

Writer: Nicole White
Nicole White
Aug 17
5 min read

In discussions around workplace abuse, or even just what we've accepted as normal workplace functioning, there is usually discussion around nuance and perception, what this means, and how they impact an individual's or a group's experiences. While nuance is always going to be an inherent part of the human experience, sometimes it is inferred to manipulate or control narratives rather than invite genuine inquiry and clarity.


Nuance

Merriam Webster's dictionary defines nuance as "the subtle distinctions, complexities, or variations that shape how we perceive, interpret, and remember events, emotions, and relationships. It goes beyond simple, binary or surface-level understanding, capturing the shades of meaning, feeling, or value that exist between extremes."


The consideration of nuance then is about acknowledging the complexity of our experiences and perceptions- in all of their glory. Not just the parts that make us comfortable, or that align with our narratives and perceptions.


However, the term 'nuance' is often used in the opposite way- to justify not having a concrete answer or reasoning for behaviors, to minimize someone else's experiences, to victim blame, to dismiss, or to deny reality (gaslight). Sometimes, nuance can be introduced through the use of euphemistic language (read more about that here):


  • "She wasn't lying, she was just strategically shaping narratives."

  • "Everybody makes mistakes."

  • "Nobody is perfect." (What exactly does perfect even mean in this case?)

  • "Everyone has accountability when there is conflict." (True sometimes, but other times conflict occurs as a result of someone targeting someone who has done nothing at all... The nuance is that universal accountability is not true all of the time.)


These types of statements allow people to create false equivalences with harm (treating one isolated mistake and repeated patterns of harm in the same way, for example). Our biases, affiliations and beliefs can lead us to ignore nuance for some people or situations and over-use (or misuse) it for others. For example, the normalization of workplace politics- even though completely dysfunctional and abusive, is seen as "ok" because it's familiar.


This normalization of dysfunction has become our default, because it dismisses the hard stuff (things we can't or don't want to deal with) the fastest, and because it creates an illusion of false harmony and comfort. It's easy to say "we all have room to change" which in a general sense is true- but in a specific circumstance, it may not be. This is true nuance, and this is what we can learn to recognize and hold space for when identifying, acknowledging, and holding people accountable for abusive behaviors at work and other social spaces.


Where Do We Start?

When questions of abuse and dysfunction arise, in my own experience or in observing others, here are just a few questions I might ask myself to help navigate and understand the situation:

  • What else could the behavior(s) mean?

  • What is the difference between what was intended and what was actually done? What could have been done to achieve the intended outcome without harm? Why wasn't this an option from the start?

  • How was that behavior mutually beneficial? Was it?

  • Are people normally hurt by this (these) behavior(s)? If so, what makes a person do it anyway?

  • What outcomes were they expecting? Why?

  • Who benefits from someone being marginalized/ostracized/minimized? Why?

  • What behaviors have I noticed from this person/group before? What's the pattern?

  • What narrative do these behaviors support? Why?


Asking critical questions like these can help surface true nuance, from manipulation disguising itself as nuance. If we are to discuss one side of nuance (the variations in perception that exist) then we need to be able to discuss all sides (or most since we can't know everything) of an issue- not just those that are socially acceptable or "low hanging fruit".


If it's likely that someone "mistakenly" ostracized someone, then it is just as likely that they chose that behavior on purpose. When nuance is introduced to mute one perception or narrative and not others, then you should question the role of nuance in that situation.


The ability to hold multiple truths is also valuable and connected to the idea of nuance. The whole nature of nuance is in its complexity- when things are nuanced, it's often true that multiple realities/truths are happening at once:


  • Yes, people do intentionally harm others. And there are more of them than you think. The concept of "good" and "bad" is also nuanced and our perception of each differs based on our own culture, biases, values, beliefs and experiences.

  • No, abusive people don't look like monsters, and they are not abusive toward everyone (only people they are threatened by or people they feel can't do anything for them). They are those with a well-maintained image which they can hide behind to abuse others. That is the mask of an abuser.

  • No, the person who speaks up about abuse is not a "perpetual victim". Describing what has happened (or is happening) to you and using abuse to avoid accountability are not the same things.

  • Yes, people who are targeted can create boundaries and make choices aligned to their well-being. No this does not erase or excuse the abuse done to them.

  • No, not every action with negative (or positive) impacts is intentional. But patterns are undeniable. A behavior is "unintentional" maybe once. After that, it is no longer unintentional.

  • No, not every person at work is "bad". But there are people in every workplace who prioritize their own self-interest and will treat people in whatever ways to achieve social or financial status or power. That is not subjective- it's a reality.

  • Not every leader is intentionally dysfunctional- they are often forced to lead within dysfunctional systems. And there are also intentionally abusive people posing as leaders for their own upward advancement or to maintain the status quo. And still, there are "good" leaders doing their best to treat people right and operate within broken systems. All of these are present simultaneously in every organization.


Just because nuance is complex doesn't mean there isn't a clear resolution or explanation for behavior or situations. There are always going to be multiple factors involved, just because of human nature.


However, being able to examine all sides and come to those conclusions is key in effectively identifying root causes for problematic behaviors. If you notice one narrative or viewpoint being pushed over another in the name of nuance, then that may actually signal manipulation. Clarity, discernment, and awareness are always key.


Help The Workplace Unfiltered reach more people! If you found this article useful, please comment, like and share/repost!

 
 
 

Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet
Add a rating
bottom of page