Sometimes my nosy consciousness probes my mind about whether or not I code switch, and also questions if that is inherently a good or bad thing. 

​

I think, in general, code-switching has a connotation of diluting one’s authentic or most natural self in order to appease and blend in with a certain crowd of (typically white) people. It’s a survival instinct, to mimic the people you’re around in hopes that they will accept you as their own and come off as a nonthreat or nonoutsider. There are more harmful examples of code-switching such as feeling the need to switch from African American Vernacular Language to ‘white’ American English in a business setting because it implies that there’s one ‘proper’ way to speak in order to gain respect. However, does it hold the same heavy moral weight in other contexts?

​

Something that I've gained in college and from just experiencing more years, in general, is having many different types of friend groups rather than just keeping one main small circle. Like many others who juggle this balancing act, each group is reflective of different aspects of my personality and various interests. 

​

Within my friend group from home, there’s an inside joke of what’s referred to as ‘Cheer Lily’: the version of myself I turn into around the friends I’ve made from cheerleading. Cheer Lily is bubblier and brighter than the Lily they get. From their observations, her voice is slightly higher-pitched, not quite to the extent of a customer service voice, but definitely perked up. She softens up on the biting commentary and sarcasm that normally spits out at them and voices opinions on matters of Taylor Swift, Bachelor Nation drama, and of course, cheer stuff.

​

Cheer Lily is just one of the many Lilys that come out depending on people and social situations. In this aspect, I have a wide contextual identity, but do the personalities I adopt compromise core characteristics of me that have deeper roots? In other words, am I being fake?

​

Some of my friends have very strong, unwavering personalities that I’ve rarely seen bend. I, however, have always found it incredibly easy and natural to match the energies of the people I talk to without it feeling like I’m not acting like myself. Don’t get me wrong, I have experienced moments of reflection when I’ve realized my behavior around a new group of people was strange for me and did not enjoy the fact that I felt the need to act outside of my character. But the qualities I swing between normally feel effortless and extensions of me.

​

There are many plausible explanations for this difference, two of which are: I’m actually not acting like myself in most of these forms and am purely a people pleaser, or, my personality is extremely fluid and enjoys manifesting itself in different ways. 

​

To go about testing these two claims, you could observe how I act when these differing friend groups mix and how I act when I’m alone. Which Lily will dominate? The true Lily must be the one that survives the battle royale of all Lilys. 

​

The outcome is a parade of all Lilys who brought her respective friend group to the battlefield, a polite taking of turns rather than conflicting internal showdowns of how to act. While I am rather unscathed by these appearances, it always catches my friends off guard to see another form of Lily. 

“You act differently around them.”

​

Some mean it as a purely factual statement, but others insinuate confusion and slight judgment. There’s an instinctive verdict that when a person can code switch, there is one code that is the ‘real’ one. But in my perspective, this seems like a very limited view.

​

Refusing to acknowledge the multi-faceted and complex nature of a person’s personality suggests that there is a fragility in our conscience, a need for the reassurance that there is black and white or right and wrong. Perhaps we are uncomfortable accepting the grey because it forces us to consider the messy and uncomfortable that can challenge our preconceived notions and blur our perceptions. Life is much easier when we can generalize complexity into simple conceptions of good and bad to validate the decisions we make in our own narratives.

​

In one person’s story, I am a character that plays a specific role in their universe. But I am another Lily in someone else’s world as well. These individual Lilys that exist in their respective universes create a metaverse that encapsulates the full spectrum of who I am as a person. Being genuine and being one is a false equivalence.

​

All of these Lilys are derived from different parts of me. Student Lily doesn’t use big words to sound smart, she uses them because they accurately express her thoughts at the time. Friend Lily doesn’t bring up her thoughts of how economic concepts she learned in class apply to a situation, not because she dumbs herself down but because her friends simply do not care about economics. All of the Lilys will bring up her cat.