Talk:Silent treatment

Too narrow
This describes the silent treatment as exclusively a one-on-one thing, and always negative, but it's not. The "silent treatment" is frequently used by groups of people as a punishment for some perceived infraction by one or more members of the group. It is a very effective form of punishment which doesn't require any violence or other problem-causing actions. For example, in the book I was reading a few weeks ago, one boy at a military school does something which the others find extremely dishonorable and mean. Since they couldn't just beat him up over it without getting someone in trouble, all the boys at the school refuse to speak to him at all, and act as if he didn't exist. It causes him to break down in desperation after a few days. It calls it the "silent treatment" in the book. Even if there is another word for the concept as applied to groups of people (I see "group rejection" mentioned, but only on the talk page), a lot of people are going to type "silent treatment" into the search bar, and be brought here to a page discussing the silent treatment exclusively as a form of abuse by a single person over another. It is a much wider topic than that, and the article should reflect that, or direct curious people to the article which does discuss the other aspects of the topic..45Colt 16:51, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. This article is woefully biased. Silent treatment is "bad" like a prison sentence is: it hurts. And it is meant to. So what? Without differing according to intention and justification behind such behavior a sweeping generalizing article tenor "this is bad" is premature and untrustworthy. Added a POV tag. 31.16.250.52 (talk) 08:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think you are referring to sending to Coventry or ostracism.--Penbat (talk) 17:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Double standard?
If a man were to say to his wife, "You shouldn't be frigid toward me; we're in an intimate relationship and I'm entitled to sex" people would say he's being controlling, because she doesn't owe him sex. Yet if a woman were to say to her husband, "You shouldn't be silent; I'm your wife and I'm entitled to companionship, emotional support, answers to my questions, etc." people would again say he's the one being abusive by showing disregard for her needs. He wouldn't be let off the hook if he said, "I don't owe you conversation."

Increasingly, male-female committed relationships are viewed as situations in which women have rights but no obligations, while men are given obligations but no guarantees in return. The bias in this article seems to be part of that trend. It will probably be hard to correct, too, because men's rights activists aren't well-represented in university faculty, the mainstream media, the political class, and other "reliable sources," despite the manosphere's increasing popularity relative to those sources in terms of readership. One tin soldier rides away (talk) 13:43, 13 December 2016 (UTC)


 * This is not a double standard. Both spouses owe each other and are obligated to give presence and emotional support. The wife owes her husband this just as much as he owes it to her. You can create all sorts of double standards by comparing apples and oranges. Neither partner owes the other sex.
 * Both are obligated to communicate with and be a companion to each other. Neither is guaranteed sex. Mr. Fat Wiki (talk) 16:47, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm curious as to what elicited this talk page message, considering that it does not belong here — Python Drink (talk) 01:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Silent Treatment vs Tactical Ignoring
The page for Tactical Ignoring redirects here, but this article makes no attempt at covering the essential differences between the two terms. One trying to find out more information about intentional ignoring as linked in Attention seeking would instead be directed to this page, which makes selective ignoring out to be psychological manipulation. I will see what information I can pull from the Tactical Ignoring page before it was redirected and merge some of that information here. 129.15.64.252 (talk) 02:09, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I only edited this page because tactical ignoring redirects here. It is a different topic and should be split from this page. GBFEE (talk) 20:15, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Too negative
It seems to me that the Silent treatment article is very negative. I don't see only negative cases. I know (due to direct and indirect experiences) of abusive interactions where one of the way (still, it is a valid solution) to get out of it was due to cut the connection with the other person. Be it an abusive manager, partner, relative, "obsessed" internet users and so on.

For how I read the article it feels it tries to discourage the approach - pratically ignoring someone, - but this plays in the hand of people that aren't nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pier4r (talk • contribs) 18:32, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Adult Development Fall 2022
— Assignment last updated by Bnh12 (talk) 21:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Adult Development Winter 2023
— Assignment last updated by Toriwomack5 (talk) 20:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)