Once you learn of the OF/UF pattern, it’s hard to avoid seeing it
September 13, 2016 10:59 AM   Subscribe

"in your relationships with other people, you’re almost certainly an overfunctioner or an underfunctioner. Faced with a challenge, you either switch into fixing mode, taking control, attacking the to-do list, and offering supposedly helpful advice; or you pull back, pleading for assistance, hoping others will take responsibility, and zone out. Put that way, it sounds like OFs are the productive (if slightly irritating) ones, while UFs are freeloading losers. But the true situation’s much murkier, and more interesting, than that."

"The problem – according to Murray Bowen, the psychologist who developed the distinction – is that OFs and UFs get stuck in a mutually reinforcing trap. The OF takes on more than his or her fair share of responsibility for (say) housework, parenting, or finances, because otherwise they don’t get done. But that just reinforces the UF’s dependency, so now those tasks really don’t get done, and the OF must do even more."
posted by jenfullmoon (77 comments total) 46 users marked this as a favorite
 
By MeFi's Own oliverburkeman.
posted by MonkeyToes at 11:11 AM on September 13, 2016 [1 favorite]


But that just reinforces the UF’s dependency, so now those tasks really don’t get done, and the OF must do even more.

So, in the end, it's always the Pointy's fault.
posted by sparklemotion at 11:12 AM on September 13, 2016 [27 favorites]


Yeah, this resonated with me.

Breaking the pattern is tough, because the OF needs to step back and do less, which means potentially letting bad things happen and tolerating the resulting anxiety.

I operate this way in a professional context, but it doesn't actually work. What happens is that another OF swoops in immediately and does the work, and then I look like a curmudgeon.

In a personal relationship context, I think this is a bit simplistic to describe relational give and take, at least when it occurs in a functional context. Neither my SO nor I are completely OF or UF. Probably the relationships most in need of some help are the ones where the roles sink completely into these troughs, or (to use another Mefi favorite) where most of the emotional or domestic labor is concentrated on one partner.
posted by selfnoise at 11:13 AM on September 13, 2016 [6 favorites]


I am the very definition of an "insufficiently motivated employee."
posted by Kitteh at 11:14 AM on September 13, 2016 [8 favorites]


The true binary is this: people either Suck, or they are Rad. But! It is the people who Suck who are actually the good ones! Ahhhh-ha-ha
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:14 AM on September 13, 2016 [38 favorites]


Isn't this just the codependency pattern with a new name? I don't think codependency just relates to substance abuse but all kinds of dependency/caretaking relationships where there doesn't need to be one (ie major illness)
posted by GospelofWesleyWillis at 11:22 AM on September 13, 2016 [6 favorites]


I think of this dichotomy as Frank Grimes/Homer Simpson. And a lot of times it's situational; sometimes I'm the Homer, sometimes I'm the Grimey.

For me it depends on one or more of the following: how necessary I consider the task, how emotionally invested I am in it, whether I consider myself the best person to do it, or how annoyed I am when it doesn't get done or gets done the wrong way.
posted by Metroid Baby at 11:23 AM on September 13, 2016 [15 favorites]


The true binary is this:

we're not. Binary, that is. Sometimes we OF, other times we UF. Occasionally, we nail it.
posted by philip-random at 11:23 AM on September 13, 2016 [5 favorites]


Sometimes we are cool; other times, totally sweet.
posted by selfnoise at 11:24 AM on September 13, 2016 [13 favorites]


The OF takes on more than his or her fair share of responsibility for (say) housework, parenting, or finances, because otherwise they don’t get done. But that just reinforces the UF’s dependency, so now those tasks really don’t get done, and the OF must do even more.

*lies down and weeps*

I'm so tired, you guys.
posted by soren_lorensen at 11:30 AM on September 13, 2016 [46 favorites]


My wife and I occasionally talk directly about this, though not in these exact terms. Usually it's more like, "I really care about how [thing] gets done, and you seem to not care as much, so can I just be the one to care about [thing]? You can handle [other thing], which I care about to some extent, but it will be better if you just handle it as you see fit. Thanks."

Currently my [things] include loading the dishwasher and most of the finances, her [things] include pet care and getting our child to do homework. That last one is actually an example of a [thing] I care TOO MUCH about, so it is better if a less emotionally invested person does the [thing].
posted by Rock Steady at 11:30 AM on September 13, 2016 [20 favorites]


Is this emotional labor repackaged?

I can be an OF at work, which is often unwelcome in a giant bureaucracy where no one wants to admit everything is fucked up and also can go over poorly with castle-in-the-air, just spitballin', don't talk to us about practicalities! types (not described the article.)
posted by Squeak Attack at 11:31 AM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm of af.
posted by bondcliff at 11:32 AM on September 13, 2016 [5 favorites]


I don't think Bowen really said that everyone does one or the other and is always in that position in all relationships. I remember his theory being presented as more, "When this pattern happens, it creates dysfunction in families."
posted by lazuli at 11:35 AM on September 13, 2016 [3 favorites]


of course, there are those of us who are either an OF or a UF in the streets, but the opposite of that in the sheets
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:37 AM on September 13, 2016 [35 favorites]


I'm transfunctional. I'm function-non-conforming, I'm function fluid.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:38 AM on September 13, 2016 [29 favorites]


I think I intuitively understood what this article proposes. What I have been unable to figure out is: how do you deal with someone in your life that is (90%) UF but believes themselves to be (90%) OF?
posted by penduluum at 11:42 AM on September 13, 2016 [5 favorites]


Is this emotional labor repackaged?

I feel like emotional labour is just one of the many things that people can be either OF and or UF about. Including, of course, how much the OF folks love to complain about the UFs.

What I have been unable to figure out is: how do you deal with someone in your life that is (90%) UF but believes themselves to be (90%)OF?

Both people can be right, if they have different definitions of "F," so you'd need to start there I think.
posted by sparklemotion at 11:47 AM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm actually OF, but at a slower speed than my ex - I get things done, and not "too late"...but eventually rather than right away. My ex was also an OF but with a higher time threshold, so she ended up doing most stuff before I got around to it, and then resenting it. After we split, I became the primary parent, and was able to prove my OF-ness. FWIW.
posted by Greg_Ace at 11:47 AM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


Also, I have this terrible habit of wanting to get something done in a particular way, but never actually doing it, to the consternation of everyone else involved. This is the worst kind of person to be. Don't be me.
posted by Metroid Baby at 11:51 AM on September 13, 2016 [18 favorites]


"If you’re reading this, and if you’re interested in these kinds of questions in general, the chances are you’re prone to overfunctioning, like me."
However, the chances are equally good that you are merely bored and idly reading clickbait, like me.

(OTOH, I wish I could get paid for writing four paragraphs of pithy, but rather glib theorizing. It'd be like getting paid to comment on metafilter. OTOH, Thank Christ I don't have to.)
posted by octobersurprise at 11:51 AM on September 13, 2016 [6 favorites]


Once you learn the confirmation bias pattern, it's hard to avoid seeing it
posted by memebake at 11:52 AM on September 13, 2016 [73 favorites]


I basically do just the right amount of functioning since I don't have any work or life partners. Though if we're being honest, it's a bit of overfunctioning at work-work and underfunctioning at house-work.
posted by ktkt at 11:53 AM on September 13, 2016 [7 favorites]


In Italy, the binary division I was taught was that everyone can be divided into either 'furbo' or 'pignolo.' Furbos are always trying to scam Pignolos or work the system; Pignolos are always trying to apply petty rules and bureaucracy to thwart Furbos and retain their position of power.
posted by Coda Tronca at 11:54 AM on September 13, 2016 [19 favorites]


how do you deal with someone in your life that is (90%) UF but believes themselves to be (90%) OF?

My husband married me!
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 11:55 AM on September 13, 2016 [6 favorites]


Is this emotional labor repackaged?

Maybe just regular labor?
posted by atoxyl at 11:56 AM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm actually OF, but at a slower speed than my ex - I get things done, and not "too late"...but eventually rather than right away.

Doesn't that make you NF (normal functioning?).

I feel like the OF/UF binary only makes sense in light of the dynamics of actual relationships. If you look at a "get things done NOW" person relative to a "get things done when they need to be", the latter is UF relative to the former. But if the "get things done when they need to be" person ends up with a "get some of the things done after problems start resulting, they become the OF.
posted by sparklemotion at 11:57 AM on September 13, 2016


This is so real in older sibling-younger sibling relationships, too. Older siblings are default OFs, younger siblings are forced by habit into UFness.
posted by c'mon sea legs at 11:59 AM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


I was an UF, until I realized that nobody was going to swing in and save me, so I partitioned my personality into "present me" and "future me" and present me is the OF who takes care of things so that future me doesn't have to worry about it anymore.

Also UF in general sounds a lot like learned helplessness, which is something that happens to a lot of depressed people.
posted by BuddhaInABucket at 12:03 PM on September 13, 2016 [11 favorites]


I've held off from commenting until now. Glad to see someone else stepping in.
posted by chavenet at 12:04 PM on September 13, 2016 [30 favorites]


There are two kinds of people: those who believe in binaries and all the other kinds.

More seriously, as much as I enjoy learning new frames to look at things through, I vastly prefer broad concepts with room for nuance (i.e. emotional labor) than flat binaries (this one, introvert/extrovert, Asker/Guesser) even when the binaries really do illuminate something I hadn't seen before. People are just way too prone to sticking everything in boxes and not exploring any further.
posted by restless_nomad at 12:08 PM on September 13, 2016 [12 favorites]


But here’s one that’s useful nonetheless: in your relationships with other people, you’re almost certainly an overfunctioner or an underfunctioner.

Is there any evidence that this is "almost certainly" true in all cases, and that there only a vanishingly small number of people either function the correct amount or switch from overfunctioning sometimes to underfunctioning at other times? I'll accept that it's not hard to observe the dynamic at work, but there doesn't seem to be any attempt here to support that claim that this describes virtually all of human interaction and that the great majority people are slotted into one roll or the other.
posted by layceepee at 12:15 PM on September 13, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm actually OF, but at a slower speed than my ex - I get things done, and not "too late"...but eventually rather than right away.

Doesn't that make you NF (normal functioning?).


That was certainly my viewpoint - which my ex did not share.
posted by Greg_Ace at 12:18 PM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


i'm 1000% OF (and a jerk about it) and the way I deal with it is by reminding myself that humanity has managed to survive all these years without my invaluable contribution, then I'm able to let it go a little bit.

i also got into the habit of "paying myself first", in the sense that I make sure i do fun things for myself. this continues to be hard because RESPONSIBILITIES. but over time.

i realize (for me at least), that it's not about UFs not doing their fair share, but it's about me not being able to enjoy life. So as long as i make sure I reward myself, then I care less about what the UFs are (or aren't) doing.
posted by bitteroldman at 12:18 PM on September 13, 2016 [4 favorites]


More seriously, as much as I enjoy learning new frames to look at things through, I vastly prefer broad concepts with room for nuance (i.e. emotional labor) than flat binaries (this one, introvert/extrovert, Asker/Guesser) even when the binaries really do illuminate something I hadn't seen before. People are just way too prone to sticking everything in boxes and not exploring any further.

Well, that's because there's two kinds of people...
posted by leotrotsky at 12:19 PM on September 13, 2016 [3 favorites]


I like to stay away from over functioning people, they "help" me by hurting me and won't leave me alone. Just let me struggle along or actually help without strings attached.
posted by xarnop at 12:22 PM on September 13, 2016 [8 favorites]


However many kinds of people there actually are, I'm sure it's a power of 2. I wouldn't find it hard to believe that there are exactly 512 kinds of people.
posted by clockzero at 12:22 PM on September 13, 2016 [5 favorites]


I also can't help but feeling their is some ablism involved in this way of thinking, there doesn't seem to be any room for reasons some people might struggle with daily tasks or getting things done of which the reasons are many and varied and can even be studied in non-human animals. Or for divergent skillsets to be present in which some people are focused on things other than dishes.
posted by xarnop at 12:26 PM on September 13, 2016 [5 favorites]


Someday we will finally come up with the one true personality dichotomy that truly describes everything and everyone perfectly and I can finally change my Twitter bio from "Underfunctioner; Type-B; INTP; round; ask-culture; introvert; cat person; blue energy dominant; understands binary; 7-crosser; snooze button user; non-exempt; Android; alcohol drinker; non-smoking; blue-state; Millennial; white collar; semi-woke; Beach Boys; round-earther; Star Destroyer beats Enterprise; Samus in Smash Brothers; White Album; Fast 5; not easier to ask forgiveness than permission; ICQ<AIM; elevator taker; indoorsy; hot dog agnostic; burrito qua burrito, not in bowl; sweet tooth; chocolate; pessimist; poptimist; My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy; Menshevik; iconodule"
posted by Copronymus at 12:26 PM on September 13, 2016 [33 favorites]


That's way longer than 140 characters...
posted by Greg_Ace at 12:30 PM on September 13, 2016


However many kinds of people there actually are, I'm sure it's a power of 2.

From a genetic perspective, with there being only 4 nucleobases, I think this is necessarily true.
posted by enjoymoreradio at 12:36 PM on September 13, 2016 [5 favorites]


I think I used to be a lot more of an OF, but now I just worry about my shit and let other people worry about theirs, so long as it is not having a negative impact on me. So If you want to get a hellacious sunburn, that's fine. I will offer you my very well-researched best-in-class sunblock, but if you don't use it, that's up to you.
posted by Medieval Maven at 12:48 PM on September 13, 2016 [3 favorites]


Huh, I was just getting around to writing this piece. Thanks for taking care of it, oliverburkeman!
posted by condour75 at 12:52 PM on September 13, 2016 [5 favorites]


What drove me nuts about this as an OF is that essentially the solution given here was "let 'em fail, don't step in." I can tell you from experience at work with this is that:

(a) if I don't step in, things never, ever get done, and the UF's will never do it because they don't care/there aren't consequences to them/whatever. After awhile my supervisor would order me to stop doing their work so she can see how much work they are doing, which was either none or next to none.
(b) Should my supervisor get fed the heck up and start whip cracking on people and saying they have to start working on the pile and submit totals of how much they did on the pile, they will do....some, and then stop, and since supervisor has way too much to do to literally stand over people babysitting their workload, they get away with it.
(c) They will also straight up do the work WRONG pretty frequently, which leads to us getting complaints, which leads to...
(d) me, the OF, ends up having to do double the work doing cleanup on the UF's mistakes.

Bottom line is: if I don't do it, it doesn't get done. If I let the UF fail, I end up being the one assigned to clean up the UF's mess of failure. Which is to say, letting them fail or "giving them a chance" to pick up the load only means I end up doing more work in the long run. Which means I might as well be doing it all alone in the first place because the UF's don't care and aren't going to be affected in the way that I am.

Happily, the situation I just griped about has been changing and the people who don't want to be doing that task aren't doing it any more and it's going to people who will do it...but man, it was annoying as hell.
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:06 PM on September 13, 2016 [3 favorites]


BuddhaInABucket: "Also UF in general sounds a lot like learned helplessness, which is something that happens to a lot of depressed people."

I kind of wondered about this too, and felt that the article was a bit shitty in that respect. In the way that the article described it, I'm very much a UF person - not because of laziness but because of shyness and insecurity. When something needs doing I tend to think that other people are better qualified or more knowledgeable than me, so I hang back and wait. If no-one does take charge, I'm perfectly happy to try to solve the problem myself. But the world is filled with people who seem terribly convinced of their own ability, so there's usually no shortage of people offering their opinions and solutions for every situation under the sun. Me, I'm shy and I'm not confident - so I tend to let other people take charge regardless of whether they're actually competent to do so. I'm not entirely thrilled to discover that now I get to be labelled "underfunctioning" too.
posted by langtonsant at 1:10 PM on September 13, 2016 [9 favorites]


Interesting! In almost all situations, I am normally the OF and Mr. Kinnakeet the UF. Recently a change in our dynamic has flipped this around.

I've learned that my increasing hip pain is due to a dysplastic joint which needs replaced, and surgery is in six weeks. In the meantime Mr. K has become sensitive to the fact that doing pretty much anything causes me pain, so now when I see something that isn't being attended to that I'd normally just do, and I start doing it because I HAVE to, he is made to feel instantly guilty and angrily jumps up to do whatever the thing is right away. Afterward he apologizes for complaining but it's clear he hates this.

I'll be very happy to resume our normal chore codependence when the dust settles as the current state of things is driving us both crazy.
posted by kinnakeet at 1:16 PM on September 13, 2016


I already feel guilt and shame, and I haven't even clicked the link.
posted by DrAstroZoom at 1:16 PM on September 13, 2016 [6 favorites]


I'm definitely a UF with periodic bursts of OF.
posted by delight at 1:36 PM on September 13, 2016 [1 favorite]


in your relationships with other people, you’re almost certainly an overfunctioner or an underfunctioner.

I am most certainly not one or the other. Hey, OF, please stop blithely categorizing people according to a strict binary in order to make sense of your world and feel accomplished.
posted by desuetude at 1:48 PM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


No, no, no. There FOUR different personality types and everyone falls neatly into just one type! I've seen a couple of different schemes for personality types other than Meyers-Briggs but it's the most famous.

The thing is, as much as these things frame things in absolutes, I don't think they're really meant to be applied that way. People are complicated and they don't fit into boxes but if you eliminate some variables you can get put together a simplified model of some aspects of it. All models are wrong, some models are useful, as it were. As long as you remember that these things are trends and tendencies rather than hard and fast rules, there are useful things to learn and apply here.

Myself, I'm a pretty kick-ass UF. I hate taking charge but if no one else will do it, I'll step up and I do a good job of it. I'm good at it, I just don't like it.
posted by VTX at 2:08 PM on September 13, 2016 [3 favorites]


There are days when it seems like VHS mode.
posted by clavdivs at 2:34 PM on September 13, 2016


There FOUR different personality types and everyone falls neatly into just one type!

Word of god says sometimes people don't and we get a Hatstall.
posted by jeather at 2:56 PM on September 13, 2016


Ooooo, can we talk about the subset of OFs who invent unnecessary tasks or processes that they can OF at and criticize UFs over? Like people who believe that using a dishwasher is morally wrong, auto-pay for bills is "dangerous," Only Apostates Eat Spaghetti Sauce From Jars.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 2:57 PM on September 13, 2016 [20 favorites]


...the micromanaging boss who’s surprised to find that the more they meddle in their underlings’ work, the more they need to, because they have taken on their responsibilities that's what you do to meddling micromangers.
FTFY
posted by MtDewd at 4:03 PM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


I prefer to split people up into police procedural, medical drama, legal drama or sitcom. Then I turn off the TV.
posted by srboisvert at 4:20 PM on September 13, 2016 [3 favorites]


Is this emotional labor repackaged?

Not necessarily:

“For overfunctioners,” says Brené Brown, “it’s easier to do than to feel.”

And if the solution is to learn how to potentially letting bad things happen and tolerating the resulting anxiety , then the UF may be doing more emotional support rather than operational (if we're splitting very relationship into a pairing of one UF and one OF). Especially if you're in a situation where you literally can't do anything but wait.

But I am quite clearly a lazy UF (outside of work).
posted by ghost phoneme at 4:37 PM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm UHF.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:59 PM on September 13, 2016 [1 favorite]


I get an itch whenever "science" describes "kinds of people". I much prefer to talk about kinds of behavior. Or patterns. Or habits. Because when we talk about "kinds of people", that implies that the habit is not changeable.

Damn near any habit is changeable.

The "OF" kind of habit is really, really common among the parents of my clients. It is an anxiety-driven habit. Specifically, it is maintained by the teenytiny jolt of relief you get when you do it or when the thing you want done, gets done. So technically it is an escape-maintained behavior because teenytiny momentary escapes from anxiety are the reinforcer that keep it fueled.

However, then you're setting up your "UF" for the inverse habit: prompt-dependent behavior. Which is to say, they only do the thing when they're nagged.

This is a terrible idea when you're a parent, and yet the terribleness of the idea seems completely invisible to a lot of parents. Here is the modal script in my office:

Parent: "I have to nag him to do his homework or he won't do it!"

Me: "Why does he need to do his homework?"

Parent: "So he can get into a good college!"

Me: "And then he will promptly flunk right back out of that good college, because he has not developed the skill of working independently."

Parent:

Me:

Parent: "But I have to nag him to do his homework or he won't do it!"

Me: [drinking intensifies]
posted by PsychoTherapist at 5:07 PM on September 13, 2016 [37 favorites]


Harriet Lerner and Brene Brown both do a great job of explaining how to change the behavior/pattern/dynamic (because it is on a case by case basis and *not on a person level*). Both do so in layperson language. I can't remember which (or possibly both) of them explain the resolution in this way (paraphrasing, because the linked article does a crap job of it):
If you are the OF, you need to be more free to fail yourself. Which will allow the UF to step up, and both of you to have a more complete relationship, where you're good at one thing and maybe help them out, and they're good at another thing and maybe help you out. Instead of you being good at all the things (or pretending to be).
posted by BekahVee at 5:20 PM on September 13, 2016


/squints/

When I was a kid, we called this "type A" and "type B," I think.
posted by a power-tie-wearing she-capitalist at 6:15 PM on September 13, 2016 [1 favorite]


"When something needs doing I tend to think that other people are better qualified or more knowledgeable than me, so I hang back and wait. If no-one does take charge, I'm perfectly happy to try to solve the problem myself. "

Oh, I don't think that's UF'ing at all. UF'ing to me is the person who won't take care of anything until someone nags the shit out of them, and then makes it as painful as possible, slow, grumbling, etc. so that you won't ask them again. Or alternately, someone who breaks down in a puddle of tears hoping someone will rescue them.
posted by jenfullmoon at 6:16 PM on September 13, 2016


Oooohhhh yessssss. This dynamic completely tanked my marriage. I notice they don't get into the part about the UF developing a sadistic, passive-aggressive streak and delighting in watching the OF pushed to the brink of a nervous breakdown from overwork and complete lack of practical or emotional support. Maybe that's chapter 2.

I am capable of feeling just fine, thank you for your concern, Brene. I'm also really, really glad to be out of this marriage being sure that I can do a damn fine job of parenting the kids, managing my finances, maintaining my house and car. I've also learned enough that as I move back into the dating world, I keep my natural, bounding, git-'er-done tendencies somewhat in check, to be sure that the guys I date have initiative and gumption too. All in all, I'm glad to be on the OF side of the line. Live and learn.
posted by Sublimity at 6:21 PM on September 13, 2016 [3 favorites]


What drove me nuts about this as an OF is that essentially the solution given here was "let 'em fail, don't step in." I can tell you from experience at work with this is that:

I think OF / UF is not absolute but relative: on a sliding scale, a person will perceive people below them as UF and above them as OF, and if an organization is successful at hiring and promoting OF people, the bar to be considered "OF" will be very high indeed especially as you go up the ranks.

I'm sure almost all C-level execs consider 99% of the population UF types which in their mind perfectly justifies their large salaries.

Companies just accept that most entry level workers are UFs, the rare ones that are OFs are quickly identified and promoted upwards. There's no point complaining about UFs, some companies just fire them if they can, or keep them if they will. With good close supervision and a well structured work environment any UF can produce high quality work, so I would say the onus is on the company to provide that, not the UF to change themselves, the same way companies have to provide sufficient IT infrastructure and a good work environment.
posted by xdvesper at 6:24 PM on September 13, 2016 [1 favorite]


That's sort of the problem with making everyone either OF or UF: I'm not going to plan something down to the smallest detail (outside of work, work I'm a bit more OF). I see a problem on the horizon, I have a general idea of how to solve it, maybe a vague notion of backups. When it's time to deal with it, I deal with it. For example: I did my homework at the last possible moment (so sometimes other classes if I knew I could get away with it), but I did it well enough to get good grades. I'm also not waiting for someone to nag me to do it and I don't fall apart waiting for someone to fix it.

If we look at is as a continuum, then I'm probably a bit in the middle. I can plan ahead if needed, it's just not my instinct. So depending on who I'm dealing with I'm either OF or UF. I guess the key is to find someone around your same level.

Honestly, the more I think about it, maybe I just don't play (or work) well with others.
posted by ghost phoneme at 6:59 PM on September 13, 2016


This is just a recasting of previous dichotomies, such "Type-A personality" versus its negation, and a discourse of "acceptance" and/or what some sociologists term responsibilization. Or the old "20% of people do 80% of the work". The harm comes from making these kinds of psychologically essentializing simplifications, that some people are this and others are that. See wikipedia:

"The implications of psychological essentialism are numerous. Prejudiced individuals have been found to endorse exceptionally essential ways of thinking, suggesting that essentialism may perpetuate exclusion among social groups[23] (Morton, Hornsey & Postmes, 2009). This may be due to an over-extension of an essential-biological mode of thinking stemming from cognitive development.[24] Paul Bloom of Yale University has stated that "one of the most exciting ideas in cognitive science is the theory that people have a default assumption that things, people and events have invisible essences that make them what they are."

The author admits writing from an OF point of view, but doesn't consider the extent of bias in the very text. The rhetoric of this dyad, "overfunctioning" versus "its own lack", is predicated on not examining what to function means in the full sociopolitical context. So it contradicts itself by revealing this gross excess of irresponsibility.
posted by polymodus at 7:20 PM on September 13, 2016 [1 favorite]


Well, a UF probably wouldn't get around to writing an article. Not without a lot of nagging, anyways.
posted by ghost phoneme at 7:45 PM on September 13, 2016 [1 favorite]


Having read the Lerner book he mentions, I've adapted one of its tricks. Whenever I feel locked into a pervasive OF/UF dynamic with someone in the rule of OF, I find a way to say "hey I wanted to ask your advice / ask for your help on something," revealing a vulnerability and approaching them with a respect for their strength and capability (even if I haven't been seeing a lot of it and have come to doubt it exists). Nine times out of ten, they say something smart or do something helpful, and we manage to get out of those roles for awhile.
posted by salvia at 8:33 PM on September 13, 2016 [4 favorites]


Yeah this article(? I only saw a couple of paragraphs, guess that's an article technically?) seems like something I would have come up with while high to explain the nature of my relationship with my ex. Except that I would have never had the gall to try to get it PUBLISHED?!?! Let alone the brazenness (and pure masochism) to share it with said ex after I came down and realized just how very reductive it was.

So I guess I'm an UF, in the (reductive) world in which the author lives anyhow.
posted by some loser at 9:05 PM on September 13, 2016


I am an OF. My mother is OF, as was her mother.

My significant other is a UF.

When I moved in with him, my mother told/warned me of specific things not to do for him. "You'll hate him within the first six months." I listened to her.

Turned out to be questionable advice. He still doesn't do stuff for himself. His (OF, of course) mother swoops in and buys him underwear and reminds him to pick up prescriptions.

The compromise I have had to make for my own sanity is having my mother-in-law much more involved in my/his day to day life than I would like. I gently remind him that his mom will be dead some day and he's gonna have to do this crap himself. Sometimes it spurs him to take initiative; other times it falls on deaf ears.

Hopefully MIL has lots of years left to OF for her son.
posted by tippy at 9:44 PM on September 13, 2016 [2 favorites]



(a) if I don't step in, things never, ever get done, and the UF's will never do it because they don't care/there aren't consequences to them/whatever. After awhile my supervisor would order me to stop doing their work so she can see how much work they are doing, which was either none or next to none.


Your supervisors sound amazing. When I've tried something similar, nobody has picked up (their own) slack and because everyone had come to rely on me to do so, suddenly supervisors and bosses were giving me shit foot suddenly doing læs work than before (completely ignoring that I was STILL doing more work than the rest of my department, on the same or smaller pay grade than all of them).

This sort of shit is why I eventually left. My situation became untenable once I started getting shit for not routinely going above and beyond.
posted by Dysk at 11:33 PM on September 13, 2016 [1 favorite]


Some are born OF and others have OF thrust upon them by other UFs. Sigh.
posted by bleep at 12:06 AM on September 14, 2016 [4 favorites]


The "OF" kind of habit is really, really common among the parents of my clients. It is an anxiety-driven habit. Specifically, it is maintained by the teenytiny jolt of relief you get when you do it or when the thing you want done, gets done. So technically it is an escape-maintained behavior because teenytiny momentary escapes from anxiety are the reinforcer that keep it fueled.

Oh my god, this this this this this cannot favorite this point enough. I'm chronically overextended specifically because I am always so tempted to volunteer when someone needs a hand with something I'm good at, or there's a fraught discussion to mediate, or I can just see that one small change that would make that whole thing so much better and then whooops fuck where did my day go? But the anxiety hit of grabbing the thing and doing it right is so, so addictive.

On the other hand, because I tend to overextend myself elsewhere on things where I can volunteer my expertise or time.... my partner winds up picking up slack at home and on stuff like 'making sure everyone eats food' and 'is the laundry folded?'. Which is understandably irritating, and so they tend to micromanage a bit, and one of the things we've had to work on a bit is me pushing to not be reminded so that they don't do the EL of reminding me to take actual downtime/fold the laundry/get up on time, and I can remember that I am, in fact, capable of doing these things when left to my own devices, especially if I am forcibly including them in my own energy budget.

It's fucking hard for both of us, though, because then the basket of laundry takes a bit longer to fold and we're still running a bit late while I readjust, and the problems I can see sitting around me where it would take just one tweak are still there and so tempting, and saying 'no, I cannot help with this Important Task because laundry' is still hard...

I'm working on it. It's a work in progress. Satisficing is my watchword.
posted by sciatrix at 12:22 PM on September 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


Ooooo, can we talk about the subset of OFs who invent unnecessary tasks or processes that they can OF at and criticize UFs over?

I like to stay away from over functioning people, they "help" me by hurting me and won't leave me alone. Just let me struggle along or actually help without strings attached.


I think in the codependency model they talk about codependency as a means of control, not just doing what needs to be done (obviously not in a work context where you can't walk away) but staying with a person who needs you because you want to feel needed. I'm usually a UF due to chronic depression but I've been the codependent /OF in a few relationships and it made me feel strong. I kept saying to myself, "I'm strong, I can handle this." Then I finally said, "sure I can, but why?"

I think it's very telling that people stay in relationships with serious UF's and then both sides have a lot of anger and passive-agressiveness. It's like, if it's so shitty and dysfunctional, why don't you leave? I think there's a lot of secondary gains going on there.

I used to attract OF's and there was definitely a thing on the part of the other person where they put me down a lot; I finally got them out of my life. They needed me to feel superior to as much as I needed them to get me out of my depression. But having depression, I did have to confront my own lack of consistent effort. There is definitely a dysfunctional bond that happens and perpetuates itself.
posted by GospelofWesleyWillis at 12:39 PM on September 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


What's the term for overfunctioners who see the need to do things that are completely unnecessary?

Come on, some situations just resolve themselves, you busybodies.
posted by mikeh at 2:12 PM on September 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Is there any evidence that this is "almost certainly" true in all cases, and that there only a vanishingly small number of people either function the correct amount or switch from overfunctioning sometimes to underfunctioning at other times? I'll accept that it's not hard to observe the dynamic at work, but there doesn't seem to be any attempt here to support that claim that this describes virtually all of human interaction and that the great majority people are slotted into one roll or the other.

As the father of identical twins, I'll confirm that you can have two people who are very much alike in a zillion ways and still mostly see the differences.

So yeah, I'm pretty sure that for any two people, one of them is at least slightly more X and the other is slightly more Y and when they're the only two people in the room those differences will probably seem significant. I'm not sure that proves that X and Y are legitimate categories worth using to label people.
posted by straight at 4:31 PM on September 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


So yeah, I'm pretty sure that for any two people, one of them is at least slightly more X and the other is slightly more Y and when they're the only two people in the room those differences will probably seem significant. I'm not sure that proves that X and Y are legitimate categories worth using to label people.

Right, but the simple fact that a third person might be slightly less X, making the not-X person the X person in that situation (e.g., Bob underfunctions in relationship to Carol, but overfunctions in relationship to that uber-slacking Jane) pretty much proves that categories are not static labels on people but should be used (as they were originally intended by Bowen!) to describe relationship dynamics.

I think they're very useful vocabulary, but they're verbs, not nouns. People are not overfunctioners or underfunctioners. People overfunction or underfunction in certain situations or in certain relationships, and that can lead to problems, and that is pretty much the only way I have ever seen the terms used in psychology or therapy. The author of this article is making a leap that makes no sense to make.
posted by lazuli at 5:43 AM on September 15, 2016


These sorts of There Are Two Kinds of People things are easy to make fun of, but I will confess that I thought of the framework today in line at Less Popular Burrito Chain Restaurant. In front of me was a woman who knew exactly what she wanted, to the point that she kept using the full, branded name for the type of meat she wanted, repeatedly confusing the staff as they tried to process her request. Classic overfunctioning. Behind me was a man who, when asked if he wanted cheese, seemed to panic as if he'd never considered that this might be a possibility for his taco salad. "This man is underfunctioning," I thought to myself in the 10 second pause before he mumbled a no and sort of shuddered at the effort of figuring it all out. As for myself, reader, I found the perfect-functioner's triple point and transcended the dichotomy: I ordered off menu.
posted by Copronymus at 9:34 AM on September 15, 2016


« Older Big Sugar Shenanigans   |   We don't serve string here Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments