When Fairness Threatens Belonging

A student becomes concertmaster of his high school orchestra.

He has been part of the group for years and is friends with many of the other students.

A senior had also been a strong candidate for the position. After the decision is made, she begins criticizing the new concertmaster openly during rehearsals. She questions his decisions, spreads stories about him, and makes it increasingly difficult for him to lead.

The senior is confident, outspoken, and socially influential. She has a large group of friends.

The concertmaster is quieter.

Many students can see what is happening. They may not believe the stories, and they may know that the concertmaster is being unfairly targeted.

But openly remaining close to him may mean crossing the more dominant student.

Now imagine that you are one of his close friends.

You have known him for years. You do not believe the stories being told about him.

Do you continue behaving exactly as before?

You can still sit beside him, talk to him after rehearsal, and include him in plans. But doing so may make your own position less comfortable. You may become unpopular with people whose friendship you also value. You may find your own place in the group becoming less secure.

The easiest response is to step back a little.

Not completely. Just enough.

Perhaps you still speak to him privately but become quieter around the group. You stop inviting him. You become less available.

You can tell yourself that you are not taking sides.

If you are not especially close to him, stepping back is even easier. You barely know him. You do not know every detail of the conflict. Why risk your own friendships over something that does not directly involve you?

That reasoning makes sense.

One close friend steps back a little. One acquaintance keeps some distance. Someone else decides not to get involved.

No single choice seems very important.

Together, they create something much larger.

The concertmaster becomes increasingly isolated.

No one held a meeting and decided to exclude him. No one announced that he should be pushed out. People simply made small choices to protect themselves.

The unfairness is sharper because he is still serving the group. As concertmaster, he continues helping lead rehearsals and carrying responsibility for the orchestra.

When everyone else steps back, the cost does not disappear. It falls largely on the person already being targeted.

The concertmaster keeps his position.

But he loses something else.

Belonging.

When does self-protection become complicity?

And the consequences may not end with one person.

One concertmaster may be able to endure the unfairness. The next may be pushed out by it.

Once unfairness is allowed to work, the group itself begins to change.

What stops unfairness from becoming the rule after that?