While scrolling online I came across a video of a girl saying “Can someone explain why being evil as heck is just accepted now?” I could not help but agree. So many times when I’m on the internet, I’ll find a video of someone doing something they love, like cosplaying or dancing, and the top comment of the video is “Why is nobody hating?”. A truly awful thing to say. Most people know that when you post anything about yourself online, you should expect criticism because it’s the internet. The whole world can see it. But comments like these aren’t criticism; they are just true nastiness and are so common and widely accepted. On any website I visit, I can almost always find someone saying something incredibly disrespectful, and people agree. This makes using the internet and social media extremely exhausting.

Obviously, to avoid this, all you have to do is turn off your phone and talk to people in real life, right? Wrong. Something I’ve been noticing is that this lack of empathy and respect for others is not just isolated to the internet. People are using the same passive-aggressive phrases, speaking disrespectfully about people as soon as they leave their presence, and generally treating each other with the kind of casual cruelty that used to be reserved for comment sections. It is impossible to distinguish real from fake relationships with people because of how normalized this behavior has become.

I remember all the positivity movements that were so prevalent just a few years ago. Body positivity, anti-bullying, Black Lives Matter, I could go on and on. Despite the deep social impact these movements had, it now feels as if they never happened. The same people who preached kindness are the same ones who are bullying others on the internet and masking it as “dark humor” or just jokes in general. This cultural shift towards cruelty raises many concerns about the role of empathy in society and what happens when we start to lose it. I want to explore how this trend connects to more profound emotional detachment issues using Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Sigmund Freud’s Civilization and Its Discontents. These works will help us understand the psychological and societal costs of our empathy shortage and why we must start caring.

What was considered rude or inappropriate is now just part of the online experience. I will say, posting things publicly is not for the weak. Cruelty has become so normalized that people online genuinely don’t see anything wrong with it. When you call it out, you are seen as a “snowflake” who shouldn’t be on the internet if you’re going to be so sensitive. When people interact with your posts online, they divorce you from your humanity. Your posts are not seen as products that took time and energy to create. They only see posts as entertainment, which is the problem. When someone shares a happy moment or does something harmless, their first instinct isn’t to support or try to understand them. It’s to tear them down for being somewhat different. Hate comments, mocking duets, and cringe compilations are not only tolerated but rewarded with likes, shares, and clout (attention). All of these rewards that are being given for being mean are desensitizing us and causing a shortage of empathy. The reason why internet behavior is slowly creeping into real life is because of how used to rudeness online we are. It’s normal for someone on the internet to call someone stupid for just a tiny mistake because of how normalized it’s become. We are starting to copy the same coldness in real-world interactions with other people, without even knowing, because it seems normal, and nobody calls people out on their behavior.

This kind of numbing is something Sigmund Freud would say is a perfect example of how society deals with its troubles. In Civilization and Its Discontents, he writes, “Life, as we find it, is too hard for us; it brings us too many pains, disappointments, and impossible tasks. In order to bear it we cannot dispense with palliative measures. We cannot do without auxiliary constructions…[including] intoxicating substances, which make us insensitive” (Freud 41). In this quote, Freud says that we all have different coping mechanisms to deal with the hardships and pain in life. He says that intoxicating substances are one of these ways and that they make us insensitive to the pain and hardships we experience.

Now of course most people would assume he meant things like alcohol or drugs because the internet can’t intoxicate you. But I think he would consider modern-day internet use intoxicating. Scrolling is intended to be addictive. Apps like Instagram and TikTok are meant to give you that small dopamine rush to keep you on the app. It’s an endless cycle of entertainment, but not just the happy memes and cute cat videos. Cruelty as entertainment is widespread, which is what’s making us insensitive to pain. We laugh at people’s hardships and mock people for being different. Over time, this constant exposure is bound to desensitize us to the rudeness online and in real life. Freud would see this as a massive danger to society. Instead of coping with life in healthy ways or even just using the internet as an inclusive community where everyone can exist on it without judgment (which was its original purpose), we log onto a world that has been teaching us to make fun of others, be hateful, and profit on others’ pain which eventually makes us forget how to care at all.

But why? Why is it that after years of preaching kindness and being taught love, so many people are resorting to hate? I believe this is another thing Freud can explain using his theories on the id, ego, and superego. In short, the id is the part of us that acts on impulse and wants instant gratification. The ego is the rational part of us that balances out the id’s desires. And the superego is our sense of mortality shaped by our culture, upbringing, family, etc. It teaches us things like guilt, kindness, and shame. Using his logic, you can argue that the internet is where the id gets let loose. In real life, our egos and super egos keep us in check. They stop us from insulting strangers because they give us our morality, but because of the animosity and little to no consequences online, we act on our impulses and say the first things that come to mind. And since the internet doesn’t hold us accountable, our superegos weaken. There is no risk in leaving a mean comment on someone’s post because nobody knows who you are. There’s no risk in creating hateful content because it’s so liked among people that you could get famous off of it and make money. Because of the low risk and constant exposure to meanness and getting rewarded for it, it weakens our moral compass, aka our superegos. What we used to think was disrespectful is now funny, and what used to be sweet moments or people having fun is now cringe. This explains why people choose to say or do wrong on the internet even though we’ve been taught kindness.

Freud even explains a scenario like this in his writing, which makes me believe he would understand this viewpoint. He says, “A child who has been very leniently brought up can acquire a very strict conscience. But it would also be wrong to exaggerate this independence; it is not difficult to convince oneself that severity of upbringing does also exert a strong influence on the formation of the child’s superego. What it amounts to is that in the formation of the child’s super ego and the emergence of a conscience innate constitutional factors and influences from the real environment act in combination” (Freud 124). Here he is saying that the super ego is shaped by upbringing and if someone were to grow up in an environment where rules, and empathy aren’t emphasized, they will develop a weak sense of morality. This logic is why Freud would most likely have an issue with the modern-day internet. It’s a space that gives people the freedom to act without consequence and doesn’t give people the same morality as real social interactions do. This kind of freedom over time, weakens the superego or reshapes it

Why should we care though? Some might read this and say, “So what, people are a little meaner? Just toughen up. Not everyone will be nice to you, and that’s fine.” But to this, I say you are missing the bigger picture. If we live in a world where empathy is something that not everyone has to have, it will lead to disaster, and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein shows that. In the book, the monster and Victor both have no empathy for each other, which leads to both of their downfalls and the many deaths of innocent people. The monster tells Victor about his journey after Victor abandoned him. The monster went through so much hardship, was never accepted by anyone, and couldn’t form any genuine relationships because he was so ugly. After his story, the monster explains how he wants a female version of him made so that he can feel love and finally be happy. He will stop killing people as long as he gets a female counterpart. Victor reluctantly agrees, but then backs out because of his own selfish reasons, like only thinking about the other version of the monster will affect him, and not thinking about it will benefit others. He doesn’t consider the monster’s feelings and destroys the female version he made. His lack of empathy is why the monster goes on a spree and makes it his mission to torment Victor. However, Victor is not entirely to blame. The monster also didn’t have empathy for Victor and his situation. This monster had already killed two of Victor’s family members and sent him into a massive depression. Victor destroys the female counterpart because he doesn’t trust that the monster will be non-violent if he makes her. Rightfully so, because what has he done to show trust? They are both clouded by their own judgment and don’t look at the other side. This lack of empathy for one another causes them to both make rational choices, Victor not helping the monster, and the monster killing many people. If we let go of empathy, we will let go of what makes us human. This will lead to many disasters, like the one shown in Frankenstein.

If Victor had seen the monster as more than a mistake, more than just an ugly man, and more than just an abomination, he could have been spared so much pain and hardship. A simple act of empathy could have spared his life and many others and given both of them a chance at peace. This is also true for us. When we choose cruelty over compassion, whether online or in person, we lose our humanity and peace. We make the world a colder place for everyone. Internet culture is trying to convince us that meanness is normal, mocking others is harmless, and being empathetic is weak, when in reality it’s not. Empathy is what brings us together, and it’s what reminds us that we are more than just our Ids. If we want to make the world a happier place, we need to keep seeing each other as whole human beings. Not as entertainment. Not as enemies. But as people who need understanding, love, and patience.

Works Cited

Freud, Sigmund. Civilization and Its Discontents: The Standard Edition. 2010.

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: The 1818 Text. Edited by Charlotte Gordon, 2018.