The closest word I can think of is a sycophant but that’s too strong word and not exactly what I’m looking for. The word I’m thinking of has negative connotations and it’s for someone who is friends with different groups but only at a superficial level and isn’t necessarily honest about who all they’re friends with. This person would be seen as untrustworthy.

  • Identity3000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    What about a “social climber”? Someone whose friendships are based on calculations about who can help them succeed in other ways?

  • GiveOver@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Snake / snake-in-the-grass has the connotations of fake loyalty, not sure if it’s specifically amongst several groups but it fits.

  • Akuchimoya@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I know people who were Christians in Afghanistan, who were outed to the government (Taliban). The word they use is “spy”. It may not be the normal, English use of the word, but it’s the word that real-life people who have been on the receiving end of the betrayal use.

    • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I know people who were Christians in Afghanistan, who were outed to the government (Taliban). The word they use is “spy”. It may not be the normal, English use of the word, but it’s the word that real-life people who have been on the receiving end of the betrayal use.

      This is basically what i mean; someone who you can’t fully trust about their allegiance.

      That is really awful what happened to those people; are they ok now?

  • H1jAcK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Is this person known to be friends with each group, by each group? Or are they trying to keep their connections hidden, as well?

    • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      They keep their connections hidden; it is the other groups who when asked state that they are friendly with this person.

      • thantik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Honestly I’d feel quite attacked if I were on the other side of this questioning.

          • thantik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            You’re actively having people ask who their friends are, and they’re being guarded about it.

            If you felt like you might be kicked out of a group of friends that you really liked, because of your association with someone THEY didn’t like; wouldn’t you be a little guarded too?

  • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Only words I can think of are “lickspittle” and “toady,” but those are both for people who are overly nice to people in authority. Maybe “disingenuous?”

    • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      disingenuous

      disingenuous could definitely be it; they’re not straightforward about their intentions.

      • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Interacting with different groups of people has nothing to do with being earnest or forthright.

        I have friend groups that dont interact, but it has nothing to do with them. These are people from differnet parts of my life like work or different hobbies that could co-mingle, but life is too complicated to actually sort that out. I dont really overly discuss one group with another unless interests cross. It’s nothing personal, it’s simply that these groups largely exist in separate parts of my life, so they tend to stay there.

  • thantik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I’d call them normal. What kind of psychopath has multiple friend groups, but is only “loyal” to one of them?

    Or counter to that…

    Cautious? I’ve known plenty of people who had just been hurt by past friendships, so they were cautious about putting themselves out there too much for fear of getting hurt.

    • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      If you’re friends with someone, wouldn’t you want to know if they’re also friends with someone problematic?

      • thantik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        No. Because as a friend, it’s not my job to dictate my friends-friends. I’ve had plenty of friends that were friends with my enemies. I’ve had friends that were friends with ex-cons, etc. No problems.

        • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’ve had friends that were friends with ex-cons, etc.

          you do you but I would definitely want to know if my friends were close with people who’d been in prison. If I worked in a field where they do background checks i would absolutely need to know if my friends were friends with those in prison. There’s a difference between dictating who people are friends with and knowing who people you give information to are close with.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Every where does background checks, these days. In any case we don’t really care about your friends; and outside of ts/sci type clearances, nobody runs checks that deep (or even has the ability to- you need to provide close contacts for them to run a check)

            • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              I live in Asia, if you tell the wrong person you are a democracy supporter you can get arrested or on a watch list

              • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 months ago

                Surveillance states need not apply, but they’re still running checks for employment basically everywhere.

                In any case, political crimes (“democracy supporter”) are just more justification to not care, imo.

                • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  In any case, political crimes (“democracy supporter”) are just more justification to not care, imo.

                  you are saying you want people to not care about who they share information with when they live under a state that will arrest you for many more reasons than someone in the west would expect?

        • Kanzar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Ex-cons might not be the best group to use in your example…

          If I had a friend who kept the company of fascists, I’d probably drop them real quick - notably as the current iteration of fascists are intent on ensuring people like me are dead or ground under their boot.

          On the flip side, just because I had a disagreement with someone doesn’t mean other friends can’t be friends with that someone - it takes a lot to be called “an enemy” of myself.

          • thantik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Why? If they’re Ex-cons, they’ve done their time and they deserve to be treated the same as everyone else.

            They’re a perfect group to use in my example.

            • Kanzar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              It’s precisely that they should be treated the same that I don’t believe they make a good example as someone you wouldn’t want to be associating with.

              You shouldn’t care that mates of yours hang with ex-cons, so there is no conflict to be had there.

              I wasn’t remarking on the incidence rate of fascists, merely commenting on their views.

          • Dnn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            If I had a friend who kept the company of fascists, I’d probably drop them real quick

            Not a good way to make them see reason. I know it’s hypothetical but if you’re friends shouldn’t you put in some effort to help instead of just drop them?

            • Kanzar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              Given how out and proud the sentiments are expressed, the friend can’t say they didn’t know… I wouldn’t waste much time trying to have them see reason. You don’t accidentally join a dinner party where everyone else is a white supremacist, or an anti-vaxxer, or where everything they don’t like is woke and thus should be eliminated.

              Either way I said probably… Which would likely follow as certainly after an attempt to see if maybe they have been wilfully ignorant (still not a good look).

  • credo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    You all are harsh.

    “A social butterfly is a slang term for a person who is socially dynamic, successful at networking, charismatic, and personally gregarious. Usually, social butterflies don’t belong to a particular group, but rather jump from one group to another.” Wilipedia

    • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Hmm I think it’s fine if someone is a social butterfly, they don’t have bad intentions etc. I am talking about someone who seems like you can trust them but actually they have other loyalties, I live in a place where people get arrested for supporting democracy for example

      • reinei@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I heard them called “bats” because they flap around between different groups and are associated with darkness thus “shady”!

        • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          I heard them called “bats” because they flap around between different groups and are associated with darkness thus “shady”!

          hahahahah

      • wahming@monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        If we’re talking where consequences of their friendships get you thrown in jail, traitor is a pretty good word.

  • MrsDoyle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Such a weird concept - you don’t trust someone who has a wide variety of friends? I have several very different hobbies/activities, so naturally there’s little overlap in my friend groups. Most of my friends are like this - for example one belongs to three choirs and I don’t know any of those friends. Or her kayaking friends, or her work friends. I’m giggling thinking how baffled she’d be if I started questioning her “loyalty”. Even my very closest friends have other friend groups I’m not part of. So what?

    • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      no, it’s normal to have a variety of friends

      i’m talking about people with loyalty to a specific ideology and they are not honest about who they are in contact with, i live in asia in an area where you can get in a lot of trouble if you support democracy and if you share such information with the wrong person you can get in a lot of trouble

      • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Reminds me of a line from ‘Catch-22.’ I may have the wrong character name.

        Orr would defend his Communist friends to his Fascist freinds and he would defend his Fascist friends to his Communist friends. No one ever defended Orr because he was too weird.

        • Pat12@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Orr would defend his Communist friends to his Fascist freinds and he would defend his Fascist friends to his Communist friends. No one ever defended Orr because he was too weird.

          yes this is basically what I mean

          • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            In the book, the character was sincere. He really did try to see both sides and get along with people. It never seemed to work.

            To answer the original question; a good term would be ‘two-faced.’ Someone who pretends to be a friend and then gossips about you with others.

            ‘Wishy-washy’ is a person who simply goes along with the majority without having strong opinions of their own.

            • matjoeman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              I agree. I think ‘two-faced’ is the best i’ve seen based on OP’s various comments in the thread.