The Disorienting Dilemma Podcasts with purpose

In this episode, Jake shares a disorienting dilemma he experienced recently when visiting a place that used to hold massive importance to him. The emotions this left him with were unexpected to say the least. Chris joins in on the discussion, connecting Jake's story to one of his own - a camping trip from his youth that went unexpectedly (and dramatically) awry, and how the feelings he experienced then were reflected in a recent trip to the hospital. 
Through these anecdotes, discussions on neuroscience, and insights into human behaviour, the guys dive into the subject of change. Most notably, the internal changes that occur when leaving an important person, place, or project that we've invested ourselves into. 

In this deeply personal episode, Chris and Jake explore how even small moments of exclusion can leave lasting scars by threatening our sense of belonging and social identity. They connect a story from Chris' past to the recent Republican response to the State of the Union, showing how identities can be built up but also quickly torn down by social groups.
The Power and Peril of Social Identity
Our identities are significantly based on and empowered by the groups we belong to, according to social identity theory. We derive self-esteem from our group memberships and the status of those groups. "Prototypical leaders" who embody a group's norms are seen as representatives, gaining influence. But this also makes identity precarious - the group can withdraw their endorsement at any time.
Senator Katie Britt carefully followed the playbook of how she was supposed to present herself as a young female conservative leader. But Republicans immediately mocked and criticized her speech, undermining her identity as a rising star. As Chris puts it, "I can go from prototypical leader, hey, we're gonna do this. We're gonna make this happen. Everybody rally around to 'Yeah, but you're not invited to the pool party.' And it's just it's a it's a it's a weird human dynamic that we have."
A Formative Moment of Exclusion
Over 20 years ago, Chris was excited to continue hanging out with a volunteer group in Halifax and attend a pool party. But then he was told "Oh, not you Chris. You're not invited." This moment still sticks with Chris today. It tapped into deep fears of not belonging.
"Somehow I got 'Oh, not you, Chris. Not your this. You're not invited.' I felt really like that made sense. Like I could see it made sense. But it still affected me and I have thought about that often on for years about why I wasn't invited and why I cared one way or the other. Like why did that bother me?"
Chris was in his early 30s at the time, married with kids, while the others were in their early 20s. They saw Chris as more of a "fun boss" than a close friend to invite along. The age and life stage difference, while not huge, was enough to classify Chris as outside the in-group.
Missed Opportunities for Bridging Divides
Jake found himself caught in the middle, between his friendship with Chris and this younger friend group. He saw it as a chance to vouch for Chris and bring him into the in-group. "I could have protest I could have I did nothing. Yeah. Let it Yeah. Okay. I guess, because I wasn't it wasn't my house. It wasn't my pool. I was tagging along."
But Jake went along with it and didn't speak up, something he later regretted. It was a missed opportunity for what the two call "social bridging" - building connections across boundaries. Jake admits he was afraid of losing his tenuous status in the group if he challenged them.
Reflecting on Exclusion, Identity and Inclusion
The pain of exclusion, even in small doses, comes from it threatening our social identity and sense of belonging. Our identities feel solid but are actually quite fragile, since they depend on recognition from groups. "Ingroups" and "outgroups" form easily and can lead to:
Favoritism toward one's ingroupsStereotyping and denigration of outgroupsExclusion of those seen as outsidersLeaders and influencers can use their social capital to build bridges between groups. But it requires bravery to stick your neck out and bring others in, risking your own status. Ultimately, fostering inclusion means expanding our circles of who we see as part of "us."
By reflecting on past hurts and missed opportunities, we can gain insight into how to do better moving forward. Recognizing our own experiences of exclusion can motivate us to ensure others feel embraced. And when we witness someone being left out, we have a chance to be the one to invite them in.
Key Concepts
Social identity theory - Developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner, it says our sense of self significantly comes from our group memberships

In an era marked by rapid change and increasing complexity, the ways we communicate, understand ourselves, and engage with society are constantly evolving. Just as new slang terms like "mewing" and "rizz" can spread like wildfire among younger generations, leaving older folks scratching their heads, the meanings we ascribe to our experiences and the stories we tell ourselves about the world are also in flux. As we grapple with this shifting landscape, we have a powerful opportunity to question default assumptions, seek out new perspectives, and intentionally shape our individual and collective identities.
The Fluidity of Language
One fascinating lens through which to view this process is the fluidity of language itself. The arbitrary nature of the words and phrases we use to convey meaning becomes strikingly clear when we consider how quickly new terms can emerge and gain traction within specific subcultures or age groups. What may sound like nonsense to an outsider can hold deep significance for those in the know. This realization invites us to reflect on the narratives we've inherited about our history, our society, and ourselves - narratives that often remain unquestioned, even as they profoundly shape our worldview.
Stories We Tell Ourselves
Take, for instance, the incomplete historical accounts many of us learned in school, which glossed over the brutality of colonialism or the atrocities of slavery. By seeking out more nuanced information and grappling with uncomfortable truths, we can begin to tell ourselves a more honest story about how we got here and what responsibilities we bear in the present. This process of challenging ingrained beliefs and assumptions is rarely comfortable, as it strikes at the core of our identity and sense of belonging. Yet, it is through this very discomfort that genuine growth and transformation become possible.
Identity and Social Change
As we navigate this path, restorative practices offer a powerful framework for facilitating constructive dialogue and fostering a more inclusive sense of "we." By coming together in a spirit of deep listening and shared responsibility, we can begin to break down the "us vs. them" mentality that so often divides us. This requires a willingness to de-center ourselves and create space for perspectives that may differ from our own. It means acknowledging our individual and collective roles in perpetuating social issues and injustice, even when doing so challenges our self-image. Ultimately, it is through this hard work of building trust, empathy, and understanding that we can begin to heal past harms and create a more just and equitable future.
Restorative Practices
Of course, this is easier said than done. The principles of restorative justice - such as focusing on repairing relationships rather than assigning blame, or prioritizing forward-looking solutions over punitive measures - can feel counterintuitive in a culture steeped in individualism and retributive thinking. That's why the role of skilled facilitators is so essential in holding space for difficult conversations and guiding participants toward constructive outcomes. By modeling curiosity, vulnerability, and a commitment to the greater good, these facilitators help create the conditions for true transformation to occur.
As we strive to evolve with intention in our personal and professional lives, we must recognize that this work is ongoing and often uncomfortable. It requires a willingness to question ourselves, to sit with complexity, and to embrace the disorienting dilemmas that can catalyze growth. But in doing so, we tap into a wellspring of potential for positive change. By committing to restorative practices in our relationships, our organizations, and our communities, we not only deepen our own self-awareness and empathy but also contribute to a larger cultural shift toward a more interconnected and compassionate world.
In the end, the stories we tell ourselves matter immensely - not only

This episode originally aired September 7, 2022. 
Did this episode get you thinking, or did we miss the mark? Let us know by leaving us a message on SpeakPipe.
Good friends will give truthful feedback, even when it’s embarrassing, because they care. It’s the spinach in teeth moment or the toilet paper dragging from the shoe. Better to hear it from them than to secretly get roasted by others who, see the missteps but, say nothing. Melissa Mackay is that kind of good friend.
While driving along listening to the Cancel Culture episode from Season One, she was yelling back at the speakers about all the things she thought Chris and Jake didn’t get quite right. She reached out to Jake with some feedback and generously agreed to jump on the mic to help diversify the conversation.
In this episode we talk about the issue of Sexualized Violence. We recognize this topic can be challenging and encourage you to take care as you listen. Below are some resources in the event you need support or want to learn more.
For more information:https://www.rw.institute/
Follow Disorienting Dilemma on Twitter:@podcastdilemma
Resource and Support Links:US: National Sexual Violence Resource Center | National Sexual Violence Resource Center(NSVRC)Can: Ending Violence Association of Canada Find Help Across Canada - Ending ViolenceAssociation of Canada
Can you hear me now?: “By looking past the negative connotation that accompanies the phrase“cancel culture,” we can begin to hear the voices of those who were previously silenced by their marginalized and undue place in society’s hierarchy. Anne Charity Hudley, the chair of linguistics of African America at UC Santa Barbara, explained to Vox, “From my point of view, for Black culture and cultures of people who are lower income and disenfranchised, this is the first time you do have a voice in those types of conversations.”
Cultivating Space to Learn: “There are blurry lines between being held accountable and getting cancelled. We live in a society that is seeking to redress historically imbalanced levels of accountability while still relying on a punitive justice system. We’re trying to fix an imbalanced system with broken tools. Advocating for accountability falls short when it doesn’t revolve around empathy. Restorative justice is the answer—but we’re not there yet.”
Reverse Cancelled - Amber Heard: “Although jurors were considering civil libel claims and not criminal abuse charges, the verdict largely vindicated Depp’s allegations that Heard lied about abusing her. During testimony, Heard detailed dozens of instances of assault, and Deppemphatically denied ever abusing her. In 2020, a U.K. judge in a civil libel case found that Depp assaulted Heard on a dozen occasions. For Scartz, who directs the clinic at the University of Georgia’s law school, the concern is about the assumptions some will make that women are lying. She fears abusers may be newly emboldened to paint their accusers as liars in retaliation for them coming forward.”
Can I come back yet?: “Thanks so much to our industry for once again telling us that survivors don’t matter,” tweeted writer and producer Sarah Ann Masse. To outraged critics, Louis CK’s comeback was like five years’ worth of progress undone. But looking back, it’s hard to believe we were ever so confident in our ability to permanently separate a massively successful entertainer from an audience that still clamoured for his work. Even when Louis CK began popping up at comedy clubs in late 2018, the response from media folks and comedy scene critics was a chorus of “too soons” — as if their opinions mattered, when audiences at these events greeted him with wild applause.”
Trevor Noah on Twitter: “I said counsel Kanye not cancel Kanye”: “If you like me, or if you like anyone in your life, I hope you’d have the ability to say to that person, ‘Hey, I think what you’re doing here is wrong. I think you may be h

Shocking images of bloodshed in war-torn regions can spur reactions ranging from momentary sympathy to outrage driving donations or protests. Yet what causes some global crises to utterly capture international attention while others fade into the backdrop of normalcy? The spotlight's fluctuations on the enduring Israeli-Palestinian conflict prompt difficult questions about the psychological tendencies shaping which human struggles we prioritize for action or concern.
In the previous episode on this podcast, “Clashing Perspectives, Shared Humanity: Finding Common Ground in Divided Times” the hosts reflected on writer Ta-Nehisi Coates' firsthand impressions visiting Palestine. He spoke about the duty not to “behold evil and just stand there.” As the tragic costs now escalate in Gaza once more, an examination of complicity and moral questions feels compelled for all who care about our shared humanity.
Probing Our Reactions to Distant Suffering
Such immense suffering often fails to capture global concern. Some crises like Syria’s human carnage can completely dominate headlines and social feeds while Gaza’s ongoing humanitarian emergency remains largely an ambient background artifact surfacing intermittently at clashes then fading again.
The sheer statistical scale of devastation in Gaza may exceed thresholds of human comprehension, causing cognitive numbing rather than emotional connection. Yet likely a bigger factor are unconscious biases dividing global populations into perceived “in-groups” more intrinsically tied to our sense of identity versus more abstract “out-groups” viewed as dissimilar others.
Extensive research shows human brains are essentially wired to show favoritism towards one’s own groups over outsiders as an evolutionary survival adaptation. This in-group partiality that privileges immediate tribal protection can unconsciously manifest today in perceiving some groups’ welfare as less worthy of concern.
While not overt malice, such embedded blindspots can enable indifference towards others’ adversity. Confronting Gaza’s deterioration requires grappling with subtle biases that allow disregarding certain groups’ wellbeing if not tied closely enough to our own concept of identities meriting consideration.
Examining Historical Precedents of Dehumanization
There are chilling common patterns seen historically across some of humanity’s darkest chapters that demonstrate immense dangers of unchecked “us versus them” antagonism.
From the Holocaust to Rwandan genocide, preludes almost always included propaganda campaigns that socially designated the other group as deviant, criminal or fundamentally threatening. Such branding justified stripping basic rights and protections based not on individuals’ actions but broadly applied group labels. With outgroup members branded as dangerous rather than fellow humans, otherwise unthinkable oppression toward them became permissible within societies.
While not equating current Israeli policies to such past atrocities, the predictable psychological continuum remains: when one group’s humanity starts consciously or unconsciously weighing less in society’s eyes, graver injustices incrementally become more palatable. Preventing future oppressions requires vigilant self-interrogation whenever we catch ourselves rationalizing harms against whole groups branded as problematic or inferior. Because latent bias whispering “some lives matter less” insidiously enables systemic abuse if left unchallenged.
Grasping the Human Reality Behind Headlines
The sheer humanitarian emergency in Gaza is often reduced to politicized abstraction in media coverage. However, the harrowing statistics convey sobering human realities:
Over 70% of Gazans are refugees displaced from homes and livelihoods77% youth unemployment rate depriving young people economic mobilityMajority lack regular access to electricity, clean water and other basics
These conditions exacerbated

Conflict seems ubiquitous in modern society, whether simmering tensions around inequality or openly violent clashes rooted in complex geopolitical and historical dynamics. Making sense of these multifaceted disputes requires moving beyond surface-level takes towards more thoughtful examination. Jake and Chris model this approach through an earnest discussion around flashpoint issues like the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.
While acknowledging the intrinsic intricacy of such topics, the guys ultimately emphasize a human-centric framework focused on identity, universal needs, and everyday choices over reductive political analyses. Their conversation explores how ordinary institutions and individuals are implicated within broader social rifts, sparking reflection on our own responsibility to cultivate courage and wisdom in the face of turmoil.
Understanding Core Human Needs
When discussing tense conflicts, Jake advocates starting from a place of shared humanity rather than entrenched societal divisions. All people require basic safety, dignity, and agency regardless of ethnicity, religion, or other facets of identity. And deprivation of these fundamental needs often fuels intergroup clashes as marginalized communities resort to extreme measures, whether peaceful protests or violent insurgencies.
But conflicts tend to obscure these common roots in favor of dichotomous portrayals of innocents versus aggressors. Chris touches on the unconscious cognitive biases underlying such black-and-white conjectures, which assume one’s own group wholly justified while opponents embody unprovoked malevolence. In reality, the hosts suggest ordinary individuals on any side rarely desire harm without cause but merely react to accumulated injustice or perceived existential threats.
By recognizing the broadly similar motivations behind even enemy tactics, we can better empathize across ideological barriers. And identifying universal human requirements like security, community, and self-determination opens potential avenues for addressing unmet needs fueling tension. But first acknowledging the equal personhood beneath conflicting agendas represents an essential paradigm shift.
Drawing Connections Across Identity-Based Struggles
When exploring ethnic segregation enacted through Israeli governance, writer Ta-Nehisi Coates immediately contextualizes these policies against the backdrop of historical racial oppression in America. Social divisions concentrated along identity lines all share underlying roots in consolidating power by a dominant hierarchy over minority groups.
Whether separating facilities based on race or restricting settlements along religious affiliations, segregation serves to constrain marginalized life opportunities and liberties. And Chris emphasizes how easily one can view such institutional barriers as mere logistical conveniences rather than intentional subjugation when not subject to their constraints. clean
But Jake argues that tracing continuity across what may seem disconnected struggles is crucial for solidarity. Those facing persecution for any aspect of identity commonly organize across causes in recognizing the universality of their disempowerment. Such grassroots activism counterbalances embedded social systems by channeling collective outrage against widespread indignities into coordinated demands for equality from those upholding the status quo.
So realizing identity becomes weaponized to selectively confer rights and freedoms is vital for cultivating allyship across diverse marginalized factions. Though details differ, the underlying motivations and oppressive tactics echo painfully across groups barred from full participation. Solidarity thus emerges organically between the oppressed regardless of background details.
Business Responsibility Amidst Conflict
When institutions maintain operations within volatile warzones and occupied territory, are they passively enabling violence through inaction? The hosts debate what