Clear communication vs manipulation and "therapy speak"?
August 2, 2022 3:35 AM Subscribe
Some of the answers to this question about how to communicate with cis het white men were really difficult to read, and I'd like to understand why.
Yes! This is yet another "help I'm neurodivergent !" question from me :)
I've only recently realised how much of my attention is consumed by figuring out how to communicate with other people so they understand me and are not offended. Apparently not everyone does this. Who knew. But reading that thread was upsetting, as some of the Brand New Ways I've been learning that made me feel all confident in myself, are apparently "therapy speak" and seen to be manipulative and fake?
So Devon Price, in their book "Unmasking Autism" mentions studies that show how neurotypical people often perceive autistic people's attempts to communicate clearly as fake and manipulative, because the autistic person is so clearly following rehearsed scripts. So for example, if I were to say "when you do x, I feel y, so it would help me if you did z."
I was surprised at how seeing people in that thread calling this manipulative and fake (maybe they didn't even do that, but that's how it came across to me) touched a deep nerve of hurt for me. I felt like, not only do I have to spend all my time feeling around other people's reactions like blindfolded person in a room full of mousetraps, but I'm dishonest while I'm doing this?
After a lifetime of being trained to put my own needs second and hide how incredibly uncomfortable I am around most people, it's super hard to just ignore the fact that even my most earnest attempts to communicate can just be dismissed and misunderstood.
As I'm typing this, I can see that a lot of this is about a need to control other people in order that I feel safe, and that attempt to control is something that people will react badly to, if they sense that's what I'm doing. But this is not just some anxiety dream I've conjured up, people genuinely react badly if I, a female person, speak directly and bluntly to them, or don't check super carefully that I'm not being too intense, too loud, too timid, too meek, too serious, too whatever.
It feels like the world is telling me to be authentically me, but at the same time, grabbing and prodding and poking me to only act in this one particular baffling and painful way, and also never to show that I know that I'm being manipulated, and that this mask is actually me, don't worry :) :)
Have you dealt with this struggle yourself, and do you have any advice on how to do this particular balancing act? Maybe some "therapy speak" traps to avoid, that people find particularly obvious?
I've only recently realised how much of my attention is consumed by figuring out how to communicate with other people so they understand me and are not offended. Apparently not everyone does this. Who knew. But reading that thread was upsetting, as some of the Brand New Ways I've been learning that made me feel all confident in myself, are apparently "therapy speak" and seen to be manipulative and fake?
So Devon Price, in their book "Unmasking Autism" mentions studies that show how neurotypical people often perceive autistic people's attempts to communicate clearly as fake and manipulative, because the autistic person is so clearly following rehearsed scripts. So for example, if I were to say "when you do x, I feel y, so it would help me if you did z."
I was surprised at how seeing people in that thread calling this manipulative and fake (maybe they didn't even do that, but that's how it came across to me) touched a deep nerve of hurt for me. I felt like, not only do I have to spend all my time feeling around other people's reactions like blindfolded person in a room full of mousetraps, but I'm dishonest while I'm doing this?
After a lifetime of being trained to put my own needs second and hide how incredibly uncomfortable I am around most people, it's super hard to just ignore the fact that even my most earnest attempts to communicate can just be dismissed and misunderstood.
As I'm typing this, I can see that a lot of this is about a need to control other people in order that I feel safe, and that attempt to control is something that people will react badly to, if they sense that's what I'm doing. But this is not just some anxiety dream I've conjured up, people genuinely react badly if I, a female person, speak directly and bluntly to them, or don't check super carefully that I'm not being too intense, too loud, too timid, too meek, too serious, too whatever.
It feels like the world is telling me to be authentically me, but at the same time, grabbing and prodding and poking me to only act in this one particular baffling and painful way, and also never to show that I know that I'm being manipulated, and that this mask is actually me, don't worry :) :)
Have you dealt with this struggle yourself, and do you have any advice on how to do this particular balancing act? Maybe some "therapy speak" traps to avoid, that people find particularly obvious?
What seems to work for me for me is phrasing in the common vernacular, especially since over here not many ppl go thru therapy anyway and per restless_nomad, honestly it's jargon. But it wasn't that big of a leap for me to make because I've always been conscious of codeswitching as a non-western anglophone so i just take it as a given.
The other thing that can be challenging is communicating good natured intention via humour because that can also be subjective and self-deprecation can veer too much into self-abasement which is uncomfortable because it's also an emotional manipulation tactic, and really the part where ppl find it manipulative is simply because in the wild, while not delivered in therapy jargon, manipulative ppl do use displays of their emotional state as a means to elicit reaction they want.
The needle to thread is trying to communicate the effect of their action on your emotional state without turning it into a demand 'to make you feel better'. Usually by expressing the action item but in a way that's clear it's not on them to fix eg "this is making me feel upset, so gimme a minute i need to process it", rather than "please do this for me". Emotionally manipulative ppl tend to leave that bit unspoken or as the next step of receiving offers of mollification from others.
In these circumstances it's not really you. They're being triggered by negative associations of the past (think, "well, what do you want from me??"). The neurodivergent challenge here is to both read the cues enough without catastrophizing the reaction. This is difficult.
posted by cendawanita at 5:31 AM on August 2, 2022 [3 favorites]
The other thing that can be challenging is communicating good natured intention via humour because that can also be subjective and self-deprecation can veer too much into self-abasement which is uncomfortable because it's also an emotional manipulation tactic, and really the part where ppl find it manipulative is simply because in the wild, while not delivered in therapy jargon, manipulative ppl do use displays of their emotional state as a means to elicit reaction they want.
The needle to thread is trying to communicate the effect of their action on your emotional state without turning it into a demand 'to make you feel better'. Usually by expressing the action item but in a way that's clear it's not on them to fix eg "this is making me feel upset, so gimme a minute i need to process it", rather than "please do this for me". Emotionally manipulative ppl tend to leave that bit unspoken or as the next step of receiving offers of mollification from others.
In these circumstances it's not really you. They're being triggered by negative associations of the past (think, "well, what do you want from me??"). The neurodivergent challenge here is to both read the cues enough without catastrophizing the reaction. This is difficult.
posted by cendawanita at 5:31 AM on August 2, 2022 [3 favorites]
I think the reason people find this offputting is because it makes it sound like you've spent a lot of time thinking about what to say, which people don't like, since that is often a sign that they have done something wrong, or at least done something that you find offputting/strange. I think the negative reaction to it is essentially embarrassment about having said or done something that warrants a seriously-thought-out reply.
I think there are basically two approaches to dealing with this:
posted by wesleyac at 5:33 AM on August 2, 2022 [8 favorites]
I think there are basically two approaches to dealing with this:
- Just don't interact with people who are bothered by this
- Replace your scripts with ones that sound more casual and off the cuff, but say basically the same thing
posted by wesleyac at 5:33 AM on August 2, 2022 [8 favorites]
When I was learning NonViolent Communication as a part of an ongoing series workshop, i often practiced with roleplays and scripts. I'd take those scripts into my life and sometimes came off as robotic, inauthentic, or manipulative.
The thing is, that's how it usually starts. Because new things aren't natural to us yet.
But with practice, you begin to modify the scripts to something more natural to you. And you begin to understand what the scripts are getting at.
And with more practice you begin to get curious about how someone else is feeling. And about how you are really feeling.
Also i agree with the above comment saying that it helps to be among people who are also doing The Work (therapy, spiritual work, etc). They will have the most grace for another person working to improve themselves.
posted by jander03 at 5:35 AM on August 2, 2022 [8 favorites]
The thing is, that's how it usually starts. Because new things aren't natural to us yet.
But with practice, you begin to modify the scripts to something more natural to you. And you begin to understand what the scripts are getting at.
And with more practice you begin to get curious about how someone else is feeling. And about how you are really feeling.
Also i agree with the above comment saying that it helps to be among people who are also doing The Work (therapy, spiritual work, etc). They will have the most grace for another person working to improve themselves.
posted by jander03 at 5:35 AM on August 2, 2022 [8 favorites]
And honestly, to continue my comment above, one way to present your authentic self is to own your communication style. The subconscious part of ourselves, especially for those with a good sense of social cues, can detect your honesty. It's unfair but trying-too-hard can also make any tactical attempts hard because it reads as insincere regardless. Think about how people share their opinions on their dislike or ambivalence with wellness gurus or financial planner coach types.
Couple that with a high tendency to have rejection sensitivity dysphoria, it means we tend to catastrophize the social responses we receive or could register. Just keep at it, is my only advice as an internet stranger. Those who respond with equally good nature will see that's just how you are and horrible mean assholes will rip you apart regardless anyway.
posted by cendawanita at 5:43 AM on August 2, 2022 [5 favorites]
Couple that with a high tendency to have rejection sensitivity dysphoria, it means we tend to catastrophize the social responses we receive or could register. Just keep at it, is my only advice as an internet stranger. Those who respond with equally good nature will see that's just how you are and horrible mean assholes will rip you apart regardless anyway.
posted by cendawanita at 5:43 AM on August 2, 2022 [5 favorites]
I'm the OP from the question you linked to. I'm sorry that the thread caused these bad feelings, but I'm happy that you felt safe and empowered enough to post this question here!
I agree with what other commenters have said above, especially about when this way of speaking sounds like a script. Listeners might react by thinking:
- This doesn't sound like Friend's normal way of speaking.
- It sounds like a script. It sounds like they're reciting something they memorized.
- Why are they reciting something? Why can't they just say what's on their mind?
- This script is probably from a book. It's not even Friend's actual words. I wonder who the writer is and if they have an agenda. Is this even how Friend really feels or are they just repeating something that they feel like they should say?
What really sucks is when you're just using a script template and filling in your honest thoughts and feelings, but the listener thinks that the whole thing is scripted and maybe written by someone else. They don't recognize that you're just using it as a structure and you're saying something real.
Something that has helped me is being open right at the beginning when I need to talk in a way that may sound scripted or unusual in some other way. I'll say something like, "Look, I know this sounds like hippie nonsense, but bear with me for a minute - I need to do it like this." This way, I'm getting ahead of that "this is fake" reaction and I'm asking them to work with me.
posted by cadge at 5:58 AM on August 2, 2022 [16 favorites]
I agree with what other commenters have said above, especially about when this way of speaking sounds like a script. Listeners might react by thinking:
- This doesn't sound like Friend's normal way of speaking.
- It sounds like a script. It sounds like they're reciting something they memorized.
- Why are they reciting something? Why can't they just say what's on their mind?
- This script is probably from a book. It's not even Friend's actual words. I wonder who the writer is and if they have an agenda. Is this even how Friend really feels or are they just repeating something that they feel like they should say?
What really sucks is when you're just using a script template and filling in your honest thoughts and feelings, but the listener thinks that the whole thing is scripted and maybe written by someone else. They don't recognize that you're just using it as a structure and you're saying something real.
Something that has helped me is being open right at the beginning when I need to talk in a way that may sound scripted or unusual in some other way. I'll say something like, "Look, I know this sounds like hippie nonsense, but bear with me for a minute - I need to do it like this." This way, I'm getting ahead of that "this is fake" reaction and I'm asking them to work with me.
posted by cadge at 5:58 AM on August 2, 2022 [16 favorites]
I have to say that I am incredibly suspicious of anyone who uses "when you do x, I feel y" language.
In my experience, the emotions are almost invariably very negative (anxiety, anger) and not proportional. For example, "When you leave the house, I feel anxious" or "When you talk to other people, I feel jealous." The expectation is that Person B needs to do all the emotional management by curtailing their actions, and that because the request was made using therapeutic language, it is now legitimate.
It doesn't necessarily mean that the techniques are invalid for all uses and with all people, just that because of my experiences, if you come at me with a script I assume that you're trying to use an appeal to authority to manipulate me. I suspect I am not the only one out there.
posted by kingdead at 6:07 AM on August 2, 2022 [29 favorites]
In my experience, the emotions are almost invariably very negative (anxiety, anger) and not proportional. For example, "When you leave the house, I feel anxious" or "When you talk to other people, I feel jealous." The expectation is that Person B needs to do all the emotional management by curtailing their actions, and that because the request was made using therapeutic language, it is now legitimate.
It doesn't necessarily mean that the techniques are invalid for all uses and with all people, just that because of my experiences, if you come at me with a script I assume that you're trying to use an appeal to authority to manipulate me. I suspect I am not the only one out there.
posted by kingdead at 6:07 AM on August 2, 2022 [29 favorites]
If somebody asks a question about how to communicate with people who don't like therapy speak, you're going to get answers about why people may not like therapy speak, but that isn't representative of all people or even most people.
I don't know to what extent you're open with the people in your life about being neurodivergent, but people who care about you at any level, and even just at the we naturally care about humans level, will appreciate clear communication about how best to interact with you.
If scripts help you with that, and/or take away some of the challenges/stress of navigating confusing social minefields that other people just seem to take for granted, I wouldn't worry about it too much.
posted by willnot at 6:10 AM on August 2, 2022 [7 favorites]
I don't know to what extent you're open with the people in your life about being neurodivergent, but people who care about you at any level, and even just at the we naturally care about humans level, will appreciate clear communication about how best to interact with you.
If scripts help you with that, and/or take away some of the challenges/stress of navigating confusing social minefields that other people just seem to take for granted, I wouldn't worry about it too much.
posted by willnot at 6:10 AM on August 2, 2022 [7 favorites]
One thing that has struck me in many years of being around people who are in therapy (and therapy-adjacent roles and fields), and as someone who has done a lot of therapy: when someone uses therapeutic scripts or jargon, it doesn't feel like they're putting new learning into effect for themselves, it feels like they're doing therapy on you. Inexpertly and clunkily. There's also a sensation when you're on the receiving end of it that feels non-consensual---like, "Hey, you're not a therapist and I'm not ok with you treating me like I'm a patient of yours to fix!". Sometimes this comes down to intent, which can be very difficult to address in the best of interactions, and even more difficult in interactions where one person is already at the point of speaking up about something about the dynamic.
One way I've felt better on both sides of the interaction is by re-ordering and breaking apart that formula. So instead of, "When you do A, I feel B, and would you please do C?" I start with "Hunh, I'm feeling B." Then letting yourself notice just that, and giving the other person time to hear that, allows the whole exchange to shift. After saying this, you might notice or say to yourself, "I have strategies for handling feeling B and I will do that." (Like breathing, taking a break, defusing the tension, humor, etc.). And the other person might say, "Oh, I didn't know you were feeling B. If there's something I'm doing to contribute to that, I'm sorry. Do we need to pause and figure it out?" Or they might ignore your feelings. Or they might one-up you. Or they might turn on you. But all of those--your own and the other person's engagement with your feelings statement, are helpful and give you both a chance to "be here now" and course-correct if needed.
You might then choose to say, "Yeah, when you A, I feel B" full stop. Again, from here you both have options. You might follow it by saying, "A isn't wrong, but it's difficult for me to stay in the convo when you do A." Or you might say some version of, "Whoa, A clearly violates our interaction norms" (full stop -- not leaping to "Please do C!"). You might choose a different step forward in the interaction. The other person might. You might both have a convo about, "Oh did you think A was not a norm for us? I did." (For instance, there are unspoken norms about what situations can be addressed with humor. One person might use humor, another might think it's beyond the pale.)
Anyway, only after a few slowed-down steps you might arrive at, "Could you please do C instead of A?" And you've gotten there together, or you've had more information in the interim to navigate together. You might still choose to exit the convo. They might still feel therapized and exit. But it gives both people the opportunity to collaborate conversationally rather than to feel objectified and manipulated.
posted by cocoagirl at 6:14 AM on August 2, 2022 [15 favorites]
One way I've felt better on both sides of the interaction is by re-ordering and breaking apart that formula. So instead of, "When you do A, I feel B, and would you please do C?" I start with "Hunh, I'm feeling B." Then letting yourself notice just that, and giving the other person time to hear that, allows the whole exchange to shift. After saying this, you might notice or say to yourself, "I have strategies for handling feeling B and I will do that." (Like breathing, taking a break, defusing the tension, humor, etc.). And the other person might say, "Oh, I didn't know you were feeling B. If there's something I'm doing to contribute to that, I'm sorry. Do we need to pause and figure it out?" Or they might ignore your feelings. Or they might one-up you. Or they might turn on you. But all of those--your own and the other person's engagement with your feelings statement, are helpful and give you both a chance to "be here now" and course-correct if needed.
You might then choose to say, "Yeah, when you A, I feel B" full stop. Again, from here you both have options. You might follow it by saying, "A isn't wrong, but it's difficult for me to stay in the convo when you do A." Or you might say some version of, "Whoa, A clearly violates our interaction norms" (full stop -- not leaping to "Please do C!"). You might choose a different step forward in the interaction. The other person might. You might both have a convo about, "Oh did you think A was not a norm for us? I did." (For instance, there are unspoken norms about what situations can be addressed with humor. One person might use humor, another might think it's beyond the pale.)
Anyway, only after a few slowed-down steps you might arrive at, "Could you please do C instead of A?" And you've gotten there together, or you've had more information in the interim to navigate together. You might still choose to exit the convo. They might still feel therapized and exit. But it gives both people the opportunity to collaborate conversationally rather than to feel objectified and manipulated.
posted by cocoagirl at 6:14 AM on August 2, 2022 [15 favorites]
I agree that you shouldn't worry too much about the accusation of manipulation - in the broadest sense that covers any attempt of communication. If I don't want to have any effect whatsoever on my audience, I don't waste any energy opening my mouth. Even if I just want to provide information the other person might act upon or not as they wish, at minimum I would want them to take in that information and consider it when they make their choices.
For me, manipulation is only a problem when you use unfair means such as hidden agendas, gaslighting, threats of punishment and (emotional) blackmail, that make it harder or impossible for me to reject your attempts. Therapy-seak in contrast should be fair game.
Doesn't mean I doesn't make me instinctively wince a bit though. Not because I think it's unfair or something, just because it usually heralds the start of a difficult conversation. Point is, you're introducing this topic, because you need me to change something (ideally, presumably, some behavior; minimally my own expectations of how you are going to react to certain things). But requests can be uncomfortable even if they are communicated fairly, openly, clearly, simply because it's not always quite certain yet that they can be easily met. So this need for a change is destabilizing, it opens up a new avenue of failure for me - that's just not fun to contemplate, and my kneejerk reaction is one of discomfort.
But hard conversations are sometimes necessary, so I personally know, that I just need to get over myself here. And the necessary conversation doesn't get any easier or harder if you use therapy speak or not. So don't worry about it - it really makes no difference either way.
Therapy-Talk is "things need to change"-talk, and lots of people have issues with change. It's tempting to think that there is a set of magic words that makes these conversations less hard - for some that's therapy talk and for some that's the opposite of that, but I generally suspect it's all a red herring and the packaging just doesn't matter that much. But I generally feel that tone arguments are pointless derails. "You have this totally legit need, but I probably can't do it, because I just don't have it in me" is not an easy thing to admit for anyone; it's easier to say "I might totally do that, if you had just asked me in the right way".
For me, these conversations will always be fraught, because there's always a possibility that you have a perfectly reasonable need that I cannot meet, because it clashes with another perfectly reasonable need of mine, and it's still probably good that we had the talk, so we could at least demonstrate our goodwill and adjust our expectations, but it's always going to be painful in some way and we should both be allowed to feel a bit miserable about it. I don't think disappointment is something horrible to be avoided at all costs, I think it's often an important moment of actual progress in a relationship - you can build a stronger connection, once you see each other more clearly. But in the moment, it's never fun, potentially having to disappoint someone.
My only worry about therapy talk is that you might think I'm not going to feel miserable because you used the magic words, and that's just setting me up for failure again, because that's just not how it works for me. But you do very much have the right to make me a bit miserable sometimes in such a way! That's just growing pains!
Of course it's one thing to say "Eh, people just need to get over themselves" and quite another to suffer the consquences when they very much don't. I try to give them a bit of patience - sometimes people react very badly in the moment, and come around eventually after a bit of a cooling-off-period. They might get very defensive and dismissive of my complaint and never ever explicitely admit that I might have a point, but quietly stop or at least cut down on the vexing behavior anyway (maybe just to humour me, just do avoid a repetition of the argument, whatever), and sometimes that's enough for me. I don't need all my boundaries understood by everyone, I just need them to be respected.
But there are some people in my life, where I have no reason to assume that this sort of conversation could possibly lead to anything productive, and then I just save my breath and try to find a way to work around them. It's very important for me, that I get opportunities to be my full authentic self, but I don't need to be my full authentic self with every single person I interact with. Being real with each other sometimes requires hard conversations, and hard conversations require trust, that you don't owe to everyone you meet.
posted by sohalt at 6:24 AM on August 2, 2022 [11 favorites]
For me, manipulation is only a problem when you use unfair means such as hidden agendas, gaslighting, threats of punishment and (emotional) blackmail, that make it harder or impossible for me to reject your attempts. Therapy-seak in contrast should be fair game.
Doesn't mean I doesn't make me instinctively wince a bit though. Not because I think it's unfair or something, just because it usually heralds the start of a difficult conversation. Point is, you're introducing this topic, because you need me to change something (ideally, presumably, some behavior; minimally my own expectations of how you are going to react to certain things). But requests can be uncomfortable even if they are communicated fairly, openly, clearly, simply because it's not always quite certain yet that they can be easily met. So this need for a change is destabilizing, it opens up a new avenue of failure for me - that's just not fun to contemplate, and my kneejerk reaction is one of discomfort.
But hard conversations are sometimes necessary, so I personally know, that I just need to get over myself here. And the necessary conversation doesn't get any easier or harder if you use therapy speak or not. So don't worry about it - it really makes no difference either way.
Therapy-Talk is "things need to change"-talk, and lots of people have issues with change. It's tempting to think that there is a set of magic words that makes these conversations less hard - for some that's therapy talk and for some that's the opposite of that, but I generally suspect it's all a red herring and the packaging just doesn't matter that much. But I generally feel that tone arguments are pointless derails. "You have this totally legit need, but I probably can't do it, because I just don't have it in me" is not an easy thing to admit for anyone; it's easier to say "I might totally do that, if you had just asked me in the right way".
For me, these conversations will always be fraught, because there's always a possibility that you have a perfectly reasonable need that I cannot meet, because it clashes with another perfectly reasonable need of mine, and it's still probably good that we had the talk, so we could at least demonstrate our goodwill and adjust our expectations, but it's always going to be painful in some way and we should both be allowed to feel a bit miserable about it. I don't think disappointment is something horrible to be avoided at all costs, I think it's often an important moment of actual progress in a relationship - you can build a stronger connection, once you see each other more clearly. But in the moment, it's never fun, potentially having to disappoint someone.
My only worry about therapy talk is that you might think I'm not going to feel miserable because you used the magic words, and that's just setting me up for failure again, because that's just not how it works for me. But you do very much have the right to make me a bit miserable sometimes in such a way! That's just growing pains!
Of course it's one thing to say "Eh, people just need to get over themselves" and quite another to suffer the consquences when they very much don't. I try to give them a bit of patience - sometimes people react very badly in the moment, and come around eventually after a bit of a cooling-off-period. They might get very defensive and dismissive of my complaint and never ever explicitely admit that I might have a point, but quietly stop or at least cut down on the vexing behavior anyway (maybe just to humour me, just do avoid a repetition of the argument, whatever), and sometimes that's enough for me. I don't need all my boundaries understood by everyone, I just need them to be respected.
But there are some people in my life, where I have no reason to assume that this sort of conversation could possibly lead to anything productive, and then I just save my breath and try to find a way to work around them. It's very important for me, that I get opportunities to be my full authentic self, but I don't need to be my full authentic self with every single person I interact with. Being real with each other sometimes requires hard conversations, and hard conversations require trust, that you don't owe to everyone you meet.
posted by sohalt at 6:24 AM on August 2, 2022 [11 favorites]
that attempt to control is something that people will react badly to, if they sense that's what I'm doing. But this is not just some anxiety dream I've conjured up, people genuinely react badly if I,
right, they will. and?
what I mean is that you have it all except for the crucial connecting piece, which is that your need to make sure people aren't offended or don't react badly is what being controlling is. that is that thing. that's what people are reacting to when they find someone emotionally controlling.
someone said a similar thing to me once and I was upset about it for like a whole year, so if I could say it kindly I would. I don't think anyone can, without misrepresentation, because it is an essentially harsh thing to hear.
it doesn't feel like being controlling, it feels like wanting to do the right thing. but what it is, and what you did outright acknowledge, is trying to behave in such a way that other people neither feel nor express emotions you don't like (offense, dislike, disapproval.) you can behave in a way you think is pleasant and ethical, and that's good, and you should. but you can't make other people like it and you can't shift your whole personality for each person or group of people you interact with. never mind whether it's wrong or not, it can't be done and it doesn't work. after a certain threshold is passed, the more you try to keep people from reacting in the way you don't want, the more annoyed they will be.
this is not an impossible problem to solve but I do not think that careful study and many efforts of will are the ways to solve it.
posted by queenofbithynia at 6:38 AM on August 2, 2022 [29 favorites]
right, they will. and?
what I mean is that you have it all except for the crucial connecting piece, which is that your need to make sure people aren't offended or don't react badly is what being controlling is. that is that thing. that's what people are reacting to when they find someone emotionally controlling.
someone said a similar thing to me once and I was upset about it for like a whole year, so if I could say it kindly I would. I don't think anyone can, without misrepresentation, because it is an essentially harsh thing to hear.
it doesn't feel like being controlling, it feels like wanting to do the right thing. but what it is, and what you did outright acknowledge, is trying to behave in such a way that other people neither feel nor express emotions you don't like (offense, dislike, disapproval.) you can behave in a way you think is pleasant and ethical, and that's good, and you should. but you can't make other people like it and you can't shift your whole personality for each person or group of people you interact with. never mind whether it's wrong or not, it can't be done and it doesn't work. after a certain threshold is passed, the more you try to keep people from reacting in the way you don't want, the more annoyed they will be.
this is not an impossible problem to solve but I do not think that careful study and many efforts of will are the ways to solve it.
posted by queenofbithynia at 6:38 AM on August 2, 2022 [29 favorites]
I would take a look at this Captain Awkward question for a fairly extreme example of how this kind of therapeutic NVC boundary language can be weaponized in a frankly manipulative and abusive way. I'm absolutely not saying that all of this kind of communication is like that, but I think there's a reason people are wary of it—if you make a request, it's just a request, but if you communicate your request in this kind of way, it can feel equivalent to saying "if you don't do what I want you are abusing me."
posted by derrinyet at 6:44 AM on August 2, 2022 [8 favorites]
posted by derrinyet at 6:44 AM on August 2, 2022 [8 favorites]
It can be super helpful to just say off the top - "Hey can we have an honest conversation? I'm not good at being delicate or hinting, and I would love to know how you really feel, and share how I really feel."
It can also help to directly ask people for their impressions, like some variation of "I really care how you feel, and I don't want it to feel like I'm putting you on the spot, so if you want to tell me now, or later, or in writing, I am really interested in understanding your take on this situation."
Thanking people is good too, like some variation of "I feel so relieved that we're talking. This has been on my mind and I really want us to be on the same page. Thank you for being open to a real convo about this. I'm open to this kind of communication any time."
Honesty can extend to the CONTENT of what you're saying ("when you do X I feel Y") and it can ALSO be further extended to discuss the STYLE of how you talk (some variation of "can we talk openly, I want to know how you feel, being hinty is hard for me, I would love to just be sincere about this and I hope that's ok with you"). I think having convos about the style / envelope / procedure of the convo really helps people feel that the "therapy" talk is about being vulnerable and open, not manipulative.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 6:49 AM on August 2, 2022 [8 favorites]
It can also help to directly ask people for their impressions, like some variation of "I really care how you feel, and I don't want it to feel like I'm putting you on the spot, so if you want to tell me now, or later, or in writing, I am really interested in understanding your take on this situation."
Thanking people is good too, like some variation of "I feel so relieved that we're talking. This has been on my mind and I really want us to be on the same page. Thank you for being open to a real convo about this. I'm open to this kind of communication any time."
Honesty can extend to the CONTENT of what you're saying ("when you do X I feel Y") and it can ALSO be further extended to discuss the STYLE of how you talk (some variation of "can we talk openly, I want to know how you feel, being hinty is hard for me, I would love to just be sincere about this and I hope that's ok with you"). I think having convos about the style / envelope / procedure of the convo really helps people feel that the "therapy" talk is about being vulnerable and open, not manipulative.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 6:49 AM on August 2, 2022 [8 favorites]
The problem with scripts is that they're, well, scripted, and there are two main problems with that. First, when you use a script, you're not reacting naturally to the flow of a conversation; you're fitting a conversation into a template. And while I see the benefits of that, there are drawbacks as well - specifically, that the conversation becomes more stilted and formulaic. A lot of being a "good conversationalist" is figuring out how to hide the structure of a conversation so that it seems natural. Second, probably more importantly, you're not using your own words. You're quoting someone else, and aside from sounding fake, it's also pretty hard to converse with someone quoting someone else. Why wouldn't I just converse with the person you're quoting instead? (In some cases of therapy-speak, I might actually have already.)
Here's an analogy: Have you ever watched any sort of school or community theatre? Because that's scripted, too, and yet there's a vast difference in how actors read scripted lines. Some actors are almost professional-level, where they really try to understand the character they're portraying and portray the character naturalistically. Others are super awkward and sound like they're just reading lines from a cue card. And which play would you rather go see?
So my advice is to approach scripted lines like an actor, but the good news is that the character you're playing is... yourself. When you get a script, don't just take it as, like, the Word of God. Ask how your character (you) would say those lines, and rewrite them as necessary to sound more in-character. Better yet, since you're probably going to be delivering these lines in different contexts, to different people, rewrite them a couple of different ways. That way, if you use the same script twice with the same person, that interlocutor won't think to themselves "here we go again"; it'll sound like a new conversation.
One suggestion I made in the other thread was, when having a "when you do x, I feel y, so can we z?" conversation, to lead with z instead of x. That feels more natural to me. Example from my life: my wife is really destination-focused on road trips, so when she plans road trips, it's usually straight there, as quick as possible, no dilly-dallying. But I'm fairly picking about when I eat, and I like eating new places, so if it were up to me, I'd plan a lunch break in the middle of our road trip. When I talk to my wife about this, I don't say "when you plan a road trip without a lunch break, I feel like my needs aren't being taken into account, so could we plan to stop for lunch next time?" That seems, well, fake and scripted. Instead, I'd say something like "hey, why don't we stop for lunch around ____?" And then, before adding anything else, I'd give her some space to respond. Because if she says "yeah, sure, no problem", then I don't have to go into the whole "my needs aren't being taken into account part", because she's now taking them into account. If she says no, I can go into the "well, when you don't do that, I feel like..." part, but I'm not going to lay that on her if I don't have to, right? I also rephrased it ("why don't we" instead of "it would help me if we"), and used some casual language ("hey") to make it clear that this is not a Serious Conversation or me Doing One of My Things. I don't claim to be a master communicator, but I think this has worked well for me. Hope it helps.
On preview, I think nouvelle-person's idea of meta-conversation is pretty smart and would pay off. Also, I'd like to add that, while Metafilter is obviously just a subset of life and maybe not representative of everything, you've always come across as a warm and engaging communicator to me on here.
posted by kevinbelt at 6:51 AM on August 2, 2022 [6 favorites]
Here's an analogy: Have you ever watched any sort of school or community theatre? Because that's scripted, too, and yet there's a vast difference in how actors read scripted lines. Some actors are almost professional-level, where they really try to understand the character they're portraying and portray the character naturalistically. Others are super awkward and sound like they're just reading lines from a cue card. And which play would you rather go see?
So my advice is to approach scripted lines like an actor, but the good news is that the character you're playing is... yourself. When you get a script, don't just take it as, like, the Word of God. Ask how your character (you) would say those lines, and rewrite them as necessary to sound more in-character. Better yet, since you're probably going to be delivering these lines in different contexts, to different people, rewrite them a couple of different ways. That way, if you use the same script twice with the same person, that interlocutor won't think to themselves "here we go again"; it'll sound like a new conversation.
One suggestion I made in the other thread was, when having a "when you do x, I feel y, so can we z?" conversation, to lead with z instead of x. That feels more natural to me. Example from my life: my wife is really destination-focused on road trips, so when she plans road trips, it's usually straight there, as quick as possible, no dilly-dallying. But I'm fairly picking about when I eat, and I like eating new places, so if it were up to me, I'd plan a lunch break in the middle of our road trip. When I talk to my wife about this, I don't say "when you plan a road trip without a lunch break, I feel like my needs aren't being taken into account, so could we plan to stop for lunch next time?" That seems, well, fake and scripted. Instead, I'd say something like "hey, why don't we stop for lunch around ____?" And then, before adding anything else, I'd give her some space to respond. Because if she says "yeah, sure, no problem", then I don't have to go into the whole "my needs aren't being taken into account part", because she's now taking them into account. If she says no, I can go into the "well, when you don't do that, I feel like..." part, but I'm not going to lay that on her if I don't have to, right? I also rephrased it ("why don't we" instead of "it would help me if we"), and used some casual language ("hey") to make it clear that this is not a Serious Conversation or me Doing One of My Things. I don't claim to be a master communicator, but I think this has worked well for me. Hope it helps.
On preview, I think nouvelle-person's idea of meta-conversation is pretty smart and would pay off. Also, I'd like to add that, while Metafilter is obviously just a subset of life and maybe not representative of everything, you've always come across as a warm and engaging communicator to me on here.
posted by kevinbelt at 6:51 AM on August 2, 2022 [6 favorites]
For what it's worth, as someone who (I think gently) criticized therapy speak in that thread, I was imagining something very different from "when you do x, I feel y, so it would help me if you did z." (I was imagining, and projecting from personal experience, something much more along the lines of, "you are obviously angry because I reminded you of something your mother did and you need to stop denying it." Which is very different.)
I apologize if my comments made you feel bad; that certainly wasn't my intention, but it often happens. I'm definitely not the right person to offer any advice on how to talk to neurotypical people, but I will be following this thread with interest. Empathy and best wishes.
posted by eotvos at 7:42 AM on August 2, 2022 [4 favorites]
I apologize if my comments made you feel bad; that certainly wasn't my intention, but it often happens. I'm definitely not the right person to offer any advice on how to talk to neurotypical people, but I will be following this thread with interest. Empathy and best wishes.
posted by eotvos at 7:42 AM on August 2, 2022 [4 favorites]
Best answer: Here's a script I use and teach that seems to work wonders in a range of circumstances:
"I think [x]. What do you think?"
Variations:
"I feel [x]. How do you feel?"
"I want [x]. What do you want?"
The only complexity I sometimes use and recommend is this one:
"I heard you say [x]. Is that what you said?"
The grammatical and cognitive structure is very simple (it could not be more simple). The mode is mutual knowledge exchange. Any appeal to or reliance on authority outside the two talking is nonexistent.
posted by desert exile at 7:45 AM on August 2, 2022 [13 favorites]
"I think [x]. What do you think?"
Variations:
"I feel [x]. How do you feel?"
"I want [x]. What do you want?"
The only complexity I sometimes use and recommend is this one:
"I heard you say [x]. Is that what you said?"
The grammatical and cognitive structure is very simple (it could not be more simple). The mode is mutual knowledge exchange. Any appeal to or reliance on authority outside the two talking is nonexistent.
posted by desert exile at 7:45 AM on August 2, 2022 [13 favorites]
The reaction to therapy language in that previous thread is honestly one I share, despite having been in therapy for most of my life. But I travel in highly therapized circles (as well as highly political ones) and I have had to just sort of roll with a LOT of jargon-y language--so for what it's worth, just because someone bristles a bit at the language doesn't mean
-They'll react with over-the-top anything
-They won't be your friend.
If you're legitimately concerned that the people around you will react hatefully and with verbal or emotional (or physical?) violence to phrasing on your part that is, at most, mildly awkward and kind of off-putting, then I would like to gently suggest that you're not hanging out with "neurotypical people" but with fucking assholes.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 7:59 AM on August 2, 2022 [6 favorites]
-They'll react with over-the-top anything
-They won't be your friend.
If you're legitimately concerned that the people around you will react hatefully and with verbal or emotional (or physical?) violence to phrasing on your part that is, at most, mildly awkward and kind of off-putting, then I would like to gently suggest that you're not hanging out with "neurotypical people" but with fucking assholes.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 7:59 AM on August 2, 2022 [6 favorites]
Best answer: People have great insights in this thread as to what it feels like to be someone who is (very reasonably, I tend to think) suspicious of therapy-speak so... I'd like to offer the converse! I was raised 'speaking therapy', it is completely natural to me, and it's culturally common in the milieu I live in. So when you ask have you been there: yes and it's excruciating. I share your feeling of "okay hold on well wait a second!!" when people say, as above, that when you do x i feel y makes them think they're being manipulated because one is trained to say that specifically not to manipulate people, right? Like, that phrase was designed and scripted to mean, in therapy-speak, 'I am expressing as neutrally as possible emotional information you might not have about the inside of my own brain.' But inevitably that's not always how it's actually used, by any of us, because it's... a communicative phrase in a particular dialect, so it can be used in different contexts.
You learn these tools, they're fantastic, they are meant to make you feel more confident in uncertain waters, and then you realize that these tools are also subject to the treadmill of human discourse and can be used and abused in different and difficult ways and therefore people react to them badly sometimes because it sounds dishonest to them. Fuckin' sucks!
I try to think of it like eye contact or physical touch. I had to attend classes to learn how to make eye contact. And I discovered, holy shit! It's an incredibly powerful tool to signal attention and to read emotion for neurotypical people in some cultures. And then as years went by I realized that my hard-earned eye contact skills were not always applicable, in other cultures it's rude and hostile and for a lot of neuroatypical people it is baffling and aggressive and exhausting. There is no single rule that will resolve all eye contact situations, no decision tree that will allow you to successfully navigate every eye contact decision. So this new tool that often is helpful, sometimes is very harmful. Same with hugging. Sometimes you'll go in for the hug or have someone else go in for the hug and be like 'oh shit this was totally the wrong choice for this social situation.'
By and large it's been fine. I'd rather have these tools than not have them. I'm not autistic myself, but I too end up in situations where I can't read someone's emotions or discover that I've been misreading their emotions. I literally don't know what I would do other than just explain how I feel and ask them to explain how they feel. Most of the time it's okay. Sometimes it's not, and I have to use another approach. In those situations it is reasonable to be frustrated, but it's not unreasonable of the other person to have a different cultural or personal attitude, either. I don't think you are manipulative for wanting to feel safe. But as you say-- there is no way to control every social situation.
posted by peppercorn at 10:07 AM on August 2, 2022 [18 favorites]
You learn these tools, they're fantastic, they are meant to make you feel more confident in uncertain waters, and then you realize that these tools are also subject to the treadmill of human discourse and can be used and abused in different and difficult ways and therefore people react to them badly sometimes because it sounds dishonest to them. Fuckin' sucks!
I try to think of it like eye contact or physical touch. I had to attend classes to learn how to make eye contact. And I discovered, holy shit! It's an incredibly powerful tool to signal attention and to read emotion for neurotypical people in some cultures. And then as years went by I realized that my hard-earned eye contact skills were not always applicable, in other cultures it's rude and hostile and for a lot of neuroatypical people it is baffling and aggressive and exhausting. There is no single rule that will resolve all eye contact situations, no decision tree that will allow you to successfully navigate every eye contact decision. So this new tool that often is helpful, sometimes is very harmful. Same with hugging. Sometimes you'll go in for the hug or have someone else go in for the hug and be like 'oh shit this was totally the wrong choice for this social situation.'
By and large it's been fine. I'd rather have these tools than not have them. I'm not autistic myself, but I too end up in situations where I can't read someone's emotions or discover that I've been misreading their emotions. I literally don't know what I would do other than just explain how I feel and ask them to explain how they feel. Most of the time it's okay. Sometimes it's not, and I have to use another approach. In those situations it is reasonable to be frustrated, but it's not unreasonable of the other person to have a different cultural or personal attitude, either. I don't think you are manipulative for wanting to feel safe. But as you say-- there is no way to control every social situation.
posted by peppercorn at 10:07 AM on August 2, 2022 [18 favorites]
As someone who has been pretty critical of therapy-speak in this thread and the other, I want to clarify that speaking like that is just irritating; it won't make me not want to be friends with someone. My wife is a therapist. So yeah, when she goes into therapy-speak, I kind of roll my eyes, but like, not so much that I wasn't interested in *marrying* her. It's kind of like people who pronounce the word "nuclear" as "nucular". Do I prefer that they'd pronouce it "new-klee-er" instead? Yes. Do I enjoy conversations about nuclear science with these people? Not really. Am I still friends with them though? Yeah, if they have something else that's cool about their personality.
posted by kevinbelt at 10:14 AM on August 2, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by kevinbelt at 10:14 AM on August 2, 2022 [2 favorites]
Depending on the extent to which you'd be comfortable with it, if I were your interlocutor I'd appreciate something along the lines of, "I'm [however you'd characterize yourself], so my communication style can sometimes rub people the wrong way when I don't mean to, but . . ." This would help me view our interactions going forward through a mutually beneficial lens.
It makes me a bit sad that my siblings and I didn't figure out our mother was neurodivergent until it was too late, because having that understanding could have had a positive impact on our interactions/relationships with her over a period of decades.
posted by slkinsey at 10:46 AM on August 2, 2022 [1 favorite]
It makes me a bit sad that my siblings and I didn't figure out our mother was neurodivergent until it was too late, because having that understanding could have had a positive impact on our interactions/relationships with her over a period of decades.
posted by slkinsey at 10:46 AM on August 2, 2022 [1 favorite]
Best answer: As others have pointed out, I think there's a huge selection bias in who answered the question you linked (which is fine! People who answered are those for whom it struck a chord!), and you shouldn't take it as representative of the population as a whole.
And I really, really, really want to echo what queenofbithynia and sohalt said. You can do your best to interact honestly and ethically, and then you really can't control (and absolutely should not try to control) how the other person responds. There are a lot of folks who act like "therapy speak" or Non-Violent Communication or whatever is a "get out of jail free" card that excuses them from facing consequences for their words, or is a magic wand that will automatically grant them their desire. It's not, and the expectation that it should be is a large part of why any use of it can rub people the wrong way. But it's just a way of communicating that tries to make things clear, honest, and non-accusatory, but communication and human interaction and human needs in general are just messy and confusing and not always solvable by any given person. As sohalt says, we sometimes blame word choice or tone for that messiness, but it's not generally the real reason for the conflict.
John Gottman, who's one of the couples-therapy pioneers of "active listening" and making sure you choose the exact right words, eventually found that successful happy couples often talked to each other in ways that were directly opposed to what he had been teaching. It's really less about the word choice than it is about the relationship. Being respectful, open, authentic, and ethical in your own actions can set the stage for positive interactions, but they can't guarantee it, because relationships take multiple people and they each have their own baggage.
posted by lapis at 11:55 AM on August 2, 2022 [6 favorites]
And I really, really, really want to echo what queenofbithynia and sohalt said. You can do your best to interact honestly and ethically, and then you really can't control (and absolutely should not try to control) how the other person responds. There are a lot of folks who act like "therapy speak" or Non-Violent Communication or whatever is a "get out of jail free" card that excuses them from facing consequences for their words, or is a magic wand that will automatically grant them their desire. It's not, and the expectation that it should be is a large part of why any use of it can rub people the wrong way. But it's just a way of communicating that tries to make things clear, honest, and non-accusatory, but communication and human interaction and human needs in general are just messy and confusing and not always solvable by any given person. As sohalt says, we sometimes blame word choice or tone for that messiness, but it's not generally the real reason for the conflict.
John Gottman, who's one of the couples-therapy pioneers of "active listening" and making sure you choose the exact right words, eventually found that successful happy couples often talked to each other in ways that were directly opposed to what he had been teaching. It's really less about the word choice than it is about the relationship. Being respectful, open, authentic, and ethical in your own actions can set the stage for positive interactions, but they can't guarantee it, because relationships take multiple people and they each have their own baggage.
posted by lapis at 11:55 AM on August 2, 2022 [6 favorites]
Best answer: "The problem with scripts is that they're, well, scripted, and there are two main problems with that. First, when you use a script, you're not reacting naturally to the flow of a conversation; you're fitting a conversation into a template..."
This kind of thing is really not an appropriate thing to say to a neurodivergent person. It's basically saying "why can't you sound more natural (i.e. neurotypical)?" This is not helpful and is in fact harmful.
I don't mean to single out one comment; multiple comments in this thread are doing this, which is a shame.
posted by splitpeasoup at 12:40 PM on August 2, 2022 [12 favorites]
This kind of thing is really not an appropriate thing to say to a neurodivergent person. It's basically saying "why can't you sound more natural (i.e. neurotypical)?" This is not helpful and is in fact harmful.
I don't mean to single out one comment; multiple comments in this thread are doing this, which is a shame.
posted by splitpeasoup at 12:40 PM on August 2, 2022 [12 favorites]
Best answer: I just want to thank you for making this thread. I am ND. I use therapy speak and can't help it as I've been in the personal development world my entire adult life and was raised by two PhD psychologists. I have had two therapists ask me if I intimidate my partner because of the way I talk. (My partner keeps up just fine, but it gives you insight into how I sound as a regular person not wearing my therapist hat.)
I honestly had no idea people have such a big problem with NVC communication structure. It never occurred to me that it could be seen as manipulative because the whole point is to not be that. To be as clear as possible. And in my case I tend to over-communicate so it helps me whittle down my message too. I had no idea people thought using that framework means they feel compelled to comply. Like... You can still refuse? Or say "sorry that conflicts with my own needs but let's see if we can find a compromise."
This is one of the things I really struggle with as a ND person, this sense that things have to feel natural - which for many people means relying on subtext and nuance and hints and holy cow that is the hardest thing ever to navigate with any clarity. Then they get mad when you ask them to be more explicit. And then I think I'm trying to own my stuff, do you just not want to own yours? Am I breaking an unspoken rule trying to be a conscious/intentional/mindful person asking someone close to me to be a conscious/intentional/mindful person? Am I supposed to just get moody instead of use my words or what? Then there's the whole... Trying to be interdependent in a culture that is warped towards independence and how that fits with this belief that we are all responsible for ourselves (which is true but we should also be able to have a give and take and some amount of reliance on others for our important needs, and if someone doesn't want me to express my needs then does that mean they don't want a mutual/reciprocal relationship or what?).
I'm autistic and have very few friends, and those that I do know I've only gone that route occasionally and it was fine, but it's useful to be aware that some people will take this approach as something very different from what is intended.
Although I also feel, like you, that I really can't win. I can't understand the subtext style of communicating but apparently relying on a preexisting structure is a problem too. How will I ever make more friends when there are so many unspoken expectations to even get past that first level with people?
posted by crunchy potato at 2:47 PM on August 2, 2022 [6 favorites]
I honestly had no idea people have such a big problem with NVC communication structure. It never occurred to me that it could be seen as manipulative because the whole point is to not be that. To be as clear as possible. And in my case I tend to over-communicate so it helps me whittle down my message too. I had no idea people thought using that framework means they feel compelled to comply. Like... You can still refuse? Or say "sorry that conflicts with my own needs but let's see if we can find a compromise."
This is one of the things I really struggle with as a ND person, this sense that things have to feel natural - which for many people means relying on subtext and nuance and hints and holy cow that is the hardest thing ever to navigate with any clarity. Then they get mad when you ask them to be more explicit. And then I think I'm trying to own my stuff, do you just not want to own yours? Am I breaking an unspoken rule trying to be a conscious/intentional/mindful person asking someone close to me to be a conscious/intentional/mindful person? Am I supposed to just get moody instead of use my words or what? Then there's the whole... Trying to be interdependent in a culture that is warped towards independence and how that fits with this belief that we are all responsible for ourselves (which is true but we should also be able to have a give and take and some amount of reliance on others for our important needs, and if someone doesn't want me to express my needs then does that mean they don't want a mutual/reciprocal relationship or what?).
I'm autistic and have very few friends, and those that I do know I've only gone that route occasionally and it was fine, but it's useful to be aware that some people will take this approach as something very different from what is intended.
Although I also feel, like you, that I really can't win. I can't understand the subtext style of communicating but apparently relying on a preexisting structure is a problem too. How will I ever make more friends when there are so many unspoken expectations to even get past that first level with people?
posted by crunchy potato at 2:47 PM on August 2, 2022 [6 favorites]
Part of it I think is that the style of nonviolent "when you do X i feel Y" is designed specifically to disrupt a more direct "hey don't do X" - primarily because folk would actually say "doing X makes you a jerk".
I got to witness the direct convo the other day. Sure they could have said "when you leave me on my own to carry stuff I feel upset" or whatever. What they said was "hey you left me to carry all this heavy shit and I dropped some now I'm upset, can you make sure we have brought everything in before fleeing" and the other person responded with why they hadn't helped more, and then they went about their business.
For someone who is conflict avoidant that is TERRIFYING and UNCOMFORTABLE but ...it absolutely did its job. Nobody called anyone names or maligned their character. It was direct and to the point. The therapy speak version of it is designed to redirect maladaptive communication, but has been taken up to redirect everything including actual direct communication. To me, it also borrows a lot of trouble by extrapolating out of the incident into a feeling that may or may not actually be relevant. Someone not helping you the way you wanted may make you feel neglected or abandoned but that is definitely escalating a situation when the incident is "I dropped things".
posted by geek anachronism at 3:56 PM on August 2, 2022 [11 favorites]
I got to witness the direct convo the other day. Sure they could have said "when you leave me on my own to carry stuff I feel upset" or whatever. What they said was "hey you left me to carry all this heavy shit and I dropped some now I'm upset, can you make sure we have brought everything in before fleeing" and the other person responded with why they hadn't helped more, and then they went about their business.
For someone who is conflict avoidant that is TERRIFYING and UNCOMFORTABLE but ...it absolutely did its job. Nobody called anyone names or maligned their character. It was direct and to the point. The therapy speak version of it is designed to redirect maladaptive communication, but has been taken up to redirect everything including actual direct communication. To me, it also borrows a lot of trouble by extrapolating out of the incident into a feeling that may or may not actually be relevant. Someone not helping you the way you wanted may make you feel neglected or abandoned but that is definitely escalating a situation when the incident is "I dropped things".
posted by geek anachronism at 3:56 PM on August 2, 2022 [11 favorites]
Hi, I recognize this feeling. Not exactly. I’m not upset that some people feel therapy-speak is manipulative and fake, but I was upset when I stumbled across the idea that some people think asking questions to show interest and get a conversation going is intrusive and like an interrogation. The other thread mentions this disconnect, but I came across it a while ago, though probably still on AskMetafilter. I had that feeling of “Hey, I spent a long time trying to get the hang of this, now I can have conversations and some people are saying THAT’S not how having conversations works!?”
And as I’ve been reading this thread and remembering that earlier feeling, I’m now remembering a slower version of the same thing happening in my 20s, realizing that the way conversation and friendship building happens in novels is not really a good reflection of the much slower and less interesting ways those things happen in real life.
I don’t think I’m neurodivergent but I was shy and got less practice at conversation because I was avoiding people. I feel like I have had to build these social skills one scary and tedious piece at a time and whenever I realize I STILL haven’t got the whole set or the bigger picture I feel sad and frustrated and can be spiraled right back to the shame of an 11 year old with no friends and no idea how to make them.
I am 53 and I feel like even in the last 5 years I have made big advances, partly because I discovered Metafilter! A lovely anonymous space where people just tell you what they’re like and what’s going on their heads.
The other great resource in this ongoing project of “Jenny’sCricket learns to talk to people” is Captain Awkward, linked in this thread and I think the other as well. I can’t recommend her enough.
Maybe we can be excited that there’s more to learn instead of feel ashamed that we haven’t learned it all already? (Maybe? Feels hard)
posted by Jenny'sCricket at 2:59 AM on August 4, 2022 [4 favorites]
And as I’ve been reading this thread and remembering that earlier feeling, I’m now remembering a slower version of the same thing happening in my 20s, realizing that the way conversation and friendship building happens in novels is not really a good reflection of the much slower and less interesting ways those things happen in real life.
I don’t think I’m neurodivergent but I was shy and got less practice at conversation because I was avoiding people. I feel like I have had to build these social skills one scary and tedious piece at a time and whenever I realize I STILL haven’t got the whole set or the bigger picture I feel sad and frustrated and can be spiraled right back to the shame of an 11 year old with no friends and no idea how to make them.
I am 53 and I feel like even in the last 5 years I have made big advances, partly because I discovered Metafilter! A lovely anonymous space where people just tell you what they’re like and what’s going on their heads.
The other great resource in this ongoing project of “Jenny’sCricket learns to talk to people” is Captain Awkward, linked in this thread and I think the other as well. I can’t recommend her enough.
Maybe we can be excited that there’s more to learn instead of feel ashamed that we haven’t learned it all already? (Maybe? Feels hard)
posted by Jenny'sCricket at 2:59 AM on August 4, 2022 [4 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
- some of "therapy-speak" is jargon - it has specific meanings that are not necessarily transparent to someone who hasn't encountered them in context. Jargon makes specific and clear communication easier between people who know the jargon but can be hard to follow for someone who doesn't. If someone is hearing words that don't quite make sense to them, but they can tell they make sense to you, they can be confused and defensive.
- Some of "therapy-speak" is direct communication about emotions, something not everyone is comfortable with. This is, I think, a lot of the "it's manipulative" reaction - by communicating clearly and directly about your emotions, you are removing the option to ignore, elide, or dismiss those emotions, which is what people uncomfortable with emotions would prefer. It feels "manipulative" because it forces people to either engage with the emotions or overtly decline to.
The thing is, all communication is "manipulative" in this sense - you are choosing what to communicate and how with the intention of getting a particular kind of reaction. Most people just aren't conscious of this, and being forced to become conscious of this is uncomfortable. (This is part of why therapy is uncomfortable!) It's not a bad thing in itself, it's just another potential reaction you have to take into account to successfully communicate.
And yeah, this is exhausting, tedious, and no-win. This is why basically all of the people I voluntarily spend time with are people who have been to lots of therapy, or at least are people who are intensely interested in communication as a topic in itself, and can have conversations about it and about how they're being understood without becoming reflexively hostile. You're not doing anything wrong, per se, it's just that it's impossible for any given communication style to work with everyone and you're gonna get failures, miscommunications, and unpleasant interactions. (This happens even with therapy-speak! Witness *waves hands at MetaTalk*)
posted by restless_nomad at 4:46 AM on August 2, 2022 [41 favorites]