# Does dense urbanity make people meaner?



## -KwK345- (May 23, 2007)

A lot of people say that people in the big Northeastern cities are kind of mean. Do you think the urbanness of the cities puts people on edge, or do you think it's just the fast-paced Northeastern way of life? If there were a city the size and density of NYC in the South, do you think the people in that city would be a little rude or do you think the people would still have the southern hospitality?


----------



## LtBk (Jul 27, 2004)

Nope.


----------



## poshbakerloo (Jan 16, 2007)

isn't southern hospitality only reserved for straight, white, Christians? (lol) I used to live in London but currently live and work in Manchester and I think I'm pretty nice to people


----------



## MPOWER (Jun 12, 2007)

Visit NY :lol: Dude be honest...
Ive been in NY and most people were friendly. I was happy as i have never been before. The same with London..
Now im back in my Village and im just pissed, maybe its the opposite..


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

I'd say that, provided someone has minimum standards of living and housing (heating, running water, basic space, sewage, garbage collection), the living arrangement in which one lives is unrelated to their "meanness".

Living in Manhattan or in Evanston, WY or in Houston, TX or in Pierre, ND doesn't make one's better or worse on its own. Same goes for the type of housing one lives in: suburban, townhouse, commieblock, exurb, low-rise apt., condo etc.


----------



## htkatayama (Feb 20, 2010)

Aren't the Japanese known for their politeness? It's as dense as it gets in those islands.


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

poshbakerloo said:


> i*sn't southern hospitality only reserved for straight, white, Christians?* (lol) I used to live in London but currently live and work in Manchester and I think I'm pretty nice to people


no, they are pretty nice to most people. 

People that live in big cities tend to be cocky and arrogant, looking down upon those in smaller towns/cities. I don't know if they are meaner though.


----------



## intensivecarebear (Feb 2, 2006)

the crappy weather on the eastcoast generally makes people surlier imo


----------



## Plumber73 (Mar 3, 2005)

htkatayama said:


> Aren't the Japanese known for their politeness? It's as dense as it gets in those islands.


That's what I was thinking.


----------



## Dimethyltryptamine (Aug 22, 2009)

I think that high density increases your chances of coming across someone who IS mean (2,000 people/sqm vs. 200 people/sqm more people, greater the chance), but it doesn't necessarily _"make someone mean"_. With that said, if you do get in the way of someone (generally business man or woman) who is in a rush, and you are walking with 4 people side-by-side, expect an earful. Also there is escalator and walking etiquette etc. when in big cities.


----------



## Chicagoago (Dec 2, 2005)

I don't think it makes people mean at all.

I think a lot of people from smaller areas and less rushed areas really confused "meanness" for people just adjusting their reactions to others because of the extreme levels of people all around them.

I know in small towns people seem less rushed, and lots of time people will wave at passing cars, say hello if they happen upon someone walking down the street - give a smile, make eye contact, etc.

If I were to do that on the way to work in Chicago I'd be smiling and saying hello to a couple thousand people the whole way to work. I'm not being MEAN, but I really don't incorporate acknowleding random strangers into my day. I'm also more in a rush to get around everyone and get to work more quickly. It doesn't stress me out, it's just the way I go about my life.

People also comment how clerks in grocery stores, restaurants, etc. are more "mean" in larger cities - and I can see how that would come off. I go back to the small town and the clerks are all chatty, smiling, how are you, it's nice out today, blah blah blah. Here you just deal with so many people, your normal reaction to not be overly in someone's face rubs off on how you interact in line or buying things in a store. The clerk normally goes about his/her own business, and you do the same. 

Being in a larger city brings a lot more anonymity, and a lot of people like that fact and appreciate it. I know I'm one of those people. 

I certainly don't have contempt for people around me - I just don't have time or energy to really care about what they're doing. If someone stops me with a question or something I'll be happy to answer though.

I'm just as nice here as I was growing up in a small town 500KM away - I've just adjusted my mannerisms and reactions according to what "fits" here.


----------



## Gerrad (Dec 17, 2006)

I think the opposite is probably true. The more suburban and isolated people are the more suspicious they tend to be towards other people. Cities basically force you to interact on some level with a lot of different people.

And there's a difference between "meanness" and just a lack of patience and I think it's the latter that often gets confused with the former for people who don't live in large dense urban areas.


----------



## Kensingtonian (Nov 8, 2008)

in small towns people have to be nice because the chances of meeting someone again are high. If you're an asshole it might come back to bite you in the ass, so people are fake nice.

in big cities people are more real because they know they'll never see the person again. The nice people in big cities are GENUINELY nice.


----------



## ukiyo (Aug 5, 2008)

I don't think so at all..



Kensingtonian said:


> in small towns people have to be nice because the chances of meeting someone again are high. If you're an asshole it might come back to bite you in the ass, so people are fake nice.
> 
> in big cities people are more real because they know they'll never see the person again. The nice people in big cities are GENUINELY nice.


I don't know about western large cities but in Japanese big cities it's similar with rural cities. There is a "community feel"(your neighborhood) even in giant Tokyo. I used to think Tokyo people are cold (not mean, they are very polite just not friendly) because they live in such a large and busy city but then I realized that Osaka is the opposite and is also a giant city, so it's just the culture.

I know in US NY'ers are known to be rude, but what about people from other dense US cities? I've never heard that stereotype about them before.


----------



## niterider (Nov 3, 2009)

London has some nice people, but on the whole service/interaction standards are low (especially compared to US standards) and my impression is that people ARE meaner, but it seems this is due to overcrowded accommodation, transport, public spaces etc.
Also, as many dense cities are also large major cities, they tend to have a more transient populace, which lends itself to less community cohesion in my experience.
Medium density cities, which offer the benefits of compaction but allow 'room to breath' without over-congestion and relative privacy tend to be more liveable imo.


----------



## PragmaticIdealist (Jun 22, 2009)

The optimal size of a city is 35,000, according to sociologists. 

Additional people create a phenomenon, known as _deindividuation_ whereby residents feel more anonymous and are, therefore, more likely to engage in crime and to create other societal problems. So, that general feeling of anonymity probably leads to a certain sense of indifference to the well-being of other citizens because the social pressures to be polite may be absent.


----------



## PragmaticIdealist (Jun 22, 2009)

I like very much the concept of self-contained urban villages that provide the benefits of both small towns and big cities.


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

PragmaticIdealist said:


> The optimal size of a city is 35,000, according to sociologists.


According to _marxist_ sociologists who never took into account the role of technologies and transversal individualization (e.g., the fact emo groups, for instance, can use facebook, MSN, mIRc and other tools to tightly connect themselves with other like-minded people living in the other side of the country rather than with the next-door model planes' fan).


----------



## intensivecarebear (Feb 2, 2006)

^^
Good god enough with the "Marxist this" and "Marxist that"... it's so tired and overdone:bash:
Try, just try to make an argument without accusing anyone who doesn't share your world view of being a 'Marxist' or 'radical'


----------



## niterider (Nov 3, 2009)

Anyone who thinks Facebook, online messaging groups etc are a substitute to real-life interaction and society are living in a dream world. They complement real life communities but if that's one's sole mean of searching for social interaction, then I feel sorry for that person.


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

niterider said:


> Anyone who thinks Facebook, online messaging groups etc are a substitute to real-life interaction and society are living in a dream world. They complement real life communities but if that's one's sole mean of searching for social interaction, then I feel sorry for that person.


What I meant to say was this. Once technology used to "isolate" people, specially one-way TV and mass media at general. But now, suppose I live in Omaha, NE. 70 years ago, my "social universe" would be my neighbors, maybe my fellow believers in a church, maybe the members of a local club, and my coworkers. Geography played a very strong role in determining with whom I would interact in a daily basis.

Now, with Facebook, MySpace and all sort of things (including this forum) I can find people who think and act like me even if they don't live in my immediate vicinity. I can (indeed, I already did long ago) ditch any expectation that physical closeness will be a source of people to meet. I can find someone who shares my ideas and views living in the other side of the city, or in a nearby city where I can drive to etc. Even in the university, a plethora of forums and online tools mean I could (now I'm in grad school) easily navigate a huge college and find people I really WANTED to be with, not people I HAPPENED to be with. I took of "randomness" out of my cycle of meeting new people to a great extent. I feel empowered, because now I exert some degree of control on my social life. People just don't 'come by' as they did on my middle schools days.

I (and most people) am not among those replacing all contact and intimacy by online friendship, online sex and those things. Still, technology makes possible for every tech-savvy out there to actively look for people they want to contact, even in environments that already have close proximity naturally (a church, an university etc). I don't remember, for the last 4 years, any friend or date that I haven't, first, met or significantly contacted online prior to any relevant and meaningful real relationship. I don't think I'll ever, on my own, make any new friend, let alone find a date, without a close online connection (no pun intended) beforehand.

So, the role of urban arrangements in people's collective life is fading away - for good. I really don't care (honestly) about whether the nearest grocery shop is 5-min walking or 15-min driving away, as long as I have fast Internet connection, reliable cellphone coverage for my smartphone etc.


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

PragmaticIdealist said:


> The optimal size of a city is 35,000, according to sociologists.
> 
> Additional people create a phenomenon, known as _deindividuation_ whereby residents feel more anonymous and are, therefore, more likely to engage in crime and to create other societal problems. So, that general feeling of anonymity probably leads to a certain sense of indifference to the well-being of other citizens because the social pressures to be polite may be absent.


What sociologists exactly?


----------



## thecarlost (Nov 6, 2005)

Analyzing a dense urban area as a system, i'm not sure if this "meanness" would have to be revised first as an problem in individuals from these systems. Or is the "meannes" a matter of study isolated from the city scheme.



Gerrad said:


> I think the opposite is probably true. The more suburban and isolated people are the more suspicious they tend to be towards other people. Cities basically force you to interact on some level with a lot of different people.


^ This.

In other hand, suburbs or low density scenarios are founded in the economical segregation of niches, allowing skepticism to others from other systems.

Poor public transport coverage may also draw this asymptotical effect.


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

thecarlost said:


> In other hand, suburbs or low density scenarios are founded in the economical segregation of niches, allowing skepticism to others from other systems.
> 
> Poor public transport coverage may also draw this asymptotical effect.


Unless 90%+ of adult population uses car to commute and do their errands, so the only ones affected would be the tiny minority that can't afford a car/have lost their license. Such numbers are not unheard of in medium-size cities in US, outside major metros, where no organized transit systems exist at all (except for very specific needs like an university shuttle or point-to-point service for disabled).


----------



## thecarlost (Nov 6, 2005)

Suburbanist said:


> Unless 90%+ of adult population uses car to commute and do their errands


In most U.S. cities the percentage of car ownership for doing "anything" is basically high. I don't really know if it is 90 or 95 per cent, though.

So, yes.



> the only ones affected would be the tiny minority that can't afford a car


Massive car presence creates among other things, the "meanness" of power and domination above others who share the common space of a street and do it without a car, still a minority but not less important.

I've seen pedestrians being privated from their right of crossing a street by compulsive drivers. More than "meanness" it is perhaps a sample of "rudeness"; a path of behaviour commonly developed in areas where the transit is mostly car oriented, such suburbs and low density areas.

Greetings from downtown!


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

If having a car is a requirement for full citizenship....that's not freedom. 

(I'm speaking as someone who could buy one easily, but chooses not to)


----------



## jefferson2 (May 31, 2008)

i don't really think its a factor

people are less interested in each other in big cities, which is a function of there being so many other people, but this doesnt neccessarily make them 'meaner'

there are plenty in mean people in small towns, i think its related to other things than population density. it may have to do with tolerance or culture


----------



## Marathaman (Jul 24, 2007)

I think its the opposite. Urban living makes people more civilized.


----------



## Northsider (Jan 16, 2006)

I'll say this: I find nicer people in NYC and Chicago than I ever do in small Podunk towns. Sure the people in Podunk Indiana are nice, _if they know you_. People in those kinds of towns are very hesitant to help outsiders and are very suspicious of people they don't know. In big dense cities, people are used to strangers and wouldn't shy away from helping someone out (directions, etc...). 

Yes, sometimes people from urban cities come off as rude...but don't take it this way. Urban cities like NYC, Boston, Philly, even Chicago have a much faster pace compared to the south...we need to get on with our daily routine and if it means pushing past you on the subway staircase, so be it. I guess you could look at it on the flipside: Why are people in the south so slow and why does it feel like everyone is in a daze? Of course these are both gross exaggerations on both sides of the argument.


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

Mean? Maybe..
Tougher? No. :lol:


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

Northsider said:


> I'll say this: I find nicer people in NYC and Chicago than I ever do in small Podunk towns. Sure the people in Podunk Indiana are nice, _if they know you_. People in those kinds of towns are very hesitant to help outsiders and are very suspicious of people they don't know. In big dense cities, people are used to strangers and wouldn't shy away from helping someone out (directions, etc...).
> .


I was raised in small town ‘Podunk’ Indiana, and for the most part, this is true.
There is a strong “Us and them” mentality, half the time it isn’t even about things like race, religion, etc, as much as it is people who have never lived there. If your family doesn’t have a name in a small Indiana town, don’t bother trying to get into the social life and don’t bother going to one of the churches (if you are Christian), you will often be seen as an intruder almost.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

It once did for HK. HK had the rudest people on earth!

http://hongkongmassacre.com/2009/06/3-hong-kong-rude-locals/

*#3: Hong Kong rude locals*
by Hong Kong Massacre Editor on June 30, 2009

Living in Hong Kong turns you into the very thing you hate – an ill mannered person with no moral sense or respect to humanity. Is being treated like a human being too much to ask? Or is it in the genetic make up of a local to be rude and impolite? 

There moments where you just want to take out your ice pick and stab someone to death. The a-typical moment is when you are taking the MTR. You are in a rush and on your own merry way. As you enter the platform, you see a relatively empty turnstile and make a beeline for it. Just before you reach it, you notice that the adjacent turn stiles are quite empty as well. But since you are a decent human being, you keep to your initial route. You have a gap of 5 centimetres between you and the turn style in front of you and all of a sudden some idiot cuts into you and enters the turn style. It’s at that very moment fumes of fury puff out of your nose and you reach for your ice pick.

If you leave Hong Kong for longer than a month on business, you will most likely forget the dodgem car arena at the airport. Be prepared to be bowled over by a mainlander despite the massive expanse of space around you. Don’t expect them to stop to help you pick up your bags, much less apologize. There are morons who cut in front of you at the last mili-second, causing you to stumble.

These moronic life forms cannot walk in a straight line and despite being generally taller and bigger than most people here, they will still knock into you. Or they are walking beside you and suddenly decide to cut right in front of you. People here just don’t look at where they’re going and they bump straight into you. The worst thing is they don’t even say sorry! Open your eyes you bloody idiot. Either that, or get a GPS implant!
Other examples of when you want to kill locals are when the backs of your feet are consistently trodden on by people walking too close behind you, when you get elbowed by grannies or when someone rudely reaches across your face to get tooth picks. You’ll also get elbowed by grannies and rude men as they rush to the MTR $2 device on top of Hollywood Road just to get a discount.

Unfortunately, every expat that comes to Hong Kong very quickly catches this disease and becomes far worse than their local counterparts. They too become discourteous and bad-mannered, are rude to people and have no regard to other human beings. In particular, the French men are the worse, they are slam the phone without saying good-bye or thank you and are an embarrassment to the gwai-lo. Once or twice you get the newbie gwai-lo who apologizes upon grazing you slightly. You feel bad for not apologizing in return but invariably, you have resorted to being the very thing you hate. As the saying goes, if you can’t beat them, join them.


----------



## foadi (Feb 15, 2006)

im a professional petitioner. i approach hundreds of random ppl every day and have worked in hundreds of cities all over the US - from the densest of dense, to rural podunk towns. my opinion? there is no correlation between rudeness and population density.


----------



## mWoods (Dec 11, 2009)

In any densely populated area resources are scarcer. People compete for things they otherwise wouldn't have to compete for were they in a less populated area, such as a small to medium size town. Things like parking spaces, room to walk on a sidewalk, transportation (cabs, trains, subways), apartments, etc. The competition for these types of resources is fierce in a densely populated area. I think this constant competition tends to foster a certain state of mind. I don't think it's nastiness for the sake of nastiness as much as it is a natural reaction to one's condition.


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

In a less dense area, basics like "transportation options" might not exist at all. That would make me "mean."


----------



## TheCanadianEuro (Oct 4, 2009)

...if you want both,live in Canadian cities hehe.But really,especially in Toronto,its not much of a difference walking down the street.


----------



## Wey (Jul 8, 2008)

I have come to think just the opposite of that - adensification causes social bonds to develop stronger.


----------



## zaphod (Dec 8, 2005)

What kind of city? ones in developed countries, ones is poor countries? fast-paced business centers, laid back bedroom communities?

The first matters because there may or may not be a collision of cultures which highlight some difference in behavior. The second is also an issue. The average neighborhood in Houston is probably much less densely built up than some old village in Spain, but it's still a big city where everyone is in a mad rush and there will be plenty of road rage, for instance.


----------



## Suburbanist (Dec 25, 2009)

thecarlost said:


> Massive car presence creates among other things, the "meanness" of power and domination above others who share the common space of a street and do it without a car, still a minority but not less important.
> 
> I've seen pedestrians being privated from their right of crossing a street by compulsive drivers. More than "meanness" it is perhaps a sample of "rudeness"; a path of behaviour commonly developed in areas where the transit is mostly car oriented, such suburbs and low density areas.


This is just prejudice. I could say massive cellphone uses creates stress in enclosed spaces, massive skateboarding deprives pedestrians of the right to calmly walk in a plaza, massive congregation of soccer fans on match days creates violence and sometimes riot depriving citizens of a normal Sunday rest and enjoyment in their streets and parks etc.




mhays said:


> If having a car is a requirement for full citizenship....that's not freedom.
> 
> (I'm speaking as someone who could buy one easily, but chooses not to)


So that is your option. A lot of modern comforts are practical requirements for "full citizenship" as you said. Think of electricity, telephone, bank accounts, health insurance. One can survive in the biological sense without those, but modern life brought "add-ons" to our basic level needs (food, water, clothing and shelter). Car is just one of them. If one lives in a society where having car is almost mandatory to exercise your rights and bear a normal life but choose not to buy a car, it is one's and one's only problem - like the hippies in the 70's who decided to live without electricity, or the Amish, or any nuts who decide to live like a lone-wolf in the Alaskan wilderness.

Have money, is physically able to drive but don't want to buy a car: it's is your problem, don't complain the city is unreachable then.


----------



## Gzdvtz (Oct 25, 2009)

> Does dense urbanity make people meaner?


quite possibly, more people and more traffic > more stress etc + ppl dont know each other, big cities are impersonal and all this could lead to people being meaner, ruder. the thing is it doesnt happen everywhere.


----------

