Overcomplicated

You did illustrate it Holy Hannah. I believe that context of usage is relevant

Madgran -- The problem is that people who use it in a negative sense don't realize they are using it as a shut-down/invalidation tool.

On a site full of people who are estranged and communication issues often play a part in estrangement... Isn't it beneficial to learn that the best way to not have to 'worry' about how the recipient is 'taking' a statement is to not use it at all?

This is part of why I was always in 'conflict' with my 'mom'. She refused to listen when I would say, "When you say x,y,z I don't appreciate 'it'. Please do not." Instead, she too would justify her 'right' to say what she said and how it is not 'negative' like I am saying it is...

Ok. I understand the problem in a "real life" and difficult relationship, as with your 'mom'.

So what would be a good way for a poster to suggest coming to an understanding with another poster, when having a discussion on a subject, that they have different viewpoints and can't agree on ..... in a way that won't cause problems and will avoid a thread going round in circular arguments, anger and potential derailment?

This is real life. We are real people.
These relationships also matter.

How about

I hear you and I need some time to think about what you are saying, I hope you will also consider my thoughts on this. (nobody is wrong)

Or

I've already said more than I actually know about this subject

lol

*This is real life. We are real people.
These relationships also matter.*

I'm not saying they don't matter. I just think the context of phraseology is different and communication is adapted by it's very nature.

I understand your point from your context. My understanding is different. We have discussed it without descending into argument and derailment . That is good! ?

I'm smiling .. ?

Why does there need to a specific conclusion to a discussion to begin with? The answers are perfectly clear -- just not the answers that.are wanted?

need to be ?

Madgran -- What some often forget is that perception is in the eye of the receiver. How the person intends something and how the recipient interprets 'it' are two different things. Reality is, the person who says something can mean/intend 'it' however they want... The recipient gets to decide how to interpret that message. The speaker doesn't get to decide that the recipient understood 'wrong' -- They interpreted 'it' from their perspective which is valid and only gas-lighters try to tell a recipient they are interpreting the message 'wrong'.

My 'mom' would sell that all the things she said to Me weren't meant in a "negative way" and yet that was how I saw it. The problem is, she didn't even care enough to understand my point of view was, "I don't care how you meant 'it'... It still hurt Me."

That's the part my 'mom' refused to grasp... Her "best intentions" were unhealthy and 'best intentions' don't always end with a positive result. My MHI's as an example of "best intentions" gone wrong...

No period .. lol .. ?

The period thing wasn't at you HolyHannah .. ?

Why does there need to a specific conclusion to a discussion to begin with? The answers are perfectly clear -- just not the answers that.are wanted?

There doesnt need to be a conclusion to a discussion per se. But a circular discussion becomes pointless. Its not about answers wanted or not wanted. It's just about discussion and gaining understanding and not making comments that introduce a nastiness or shut down mutually respectful discussion

Thankyou Holy Hannah, yes I understand about perception is in the eye of the receiver as is the interpretation. Mutually respectful discussion in a non abusive relationship with both listening, can create better understanding. In an abusive relationship, no, as you describe.

Online, in threads, differing perceptions in different receivers create difficulties. Allowances for different perspectives and experiences sometimes appear in very short supply. As I said, not sure there is a solution , which is a shame

Madgran77

*Why does there need to a specific conclusion to a discussion to begin with? The answers are perfectly clear -- just not the answers that.are wanted?*

There doesnt need to be a conclusion to a discussion per se. But a circular discussion becomes pointless. Its not about answers wanted or not wanted. It's just about discussion and gaining understanding and not making comments that introduce a nastiness or shut down mutually respectful discussion

Thankyou Holy Hannah, yes I understand about perception is in the eye of the receiver as is the interpretation. Mutually respectful discussion in a non abusive relationship with both listening, can create better understanding. In an abusive relationship, no, as you describe.

Online, in threads, differing perceptions in different receivers create difficulties. Allowances for different perspectives and experiences sometimes appear in very short supply. As I said, not sure there is a solution , which is a shame

No, there's no lack of understanding how readers perceive things- They may agree or disagree, which in itself is understandable- All contributors appear to understand that and offer allowance for differences of opinion- When they don't they may attack the poster/s, eventhough they don't have to-

But there's nothing the matter with not buying into another's point of view- Especially when being told to-

It isn't a carousel, there's no brass ring-

That ain't a shame-

m.youtube.com/watch?v=5ntk3NJkzSU

[VERSE 1]
Many times i've passed a church, and wished that I believed Many times I've looked around and wished that I could see The power that would safely guide and someday set me free And I've longed to know the meaning of triumphant jubilee

[VERSE 2]
Well old white men write books about faith and healing love And old white men look happily onto others from above
In the name of sweet religion they would lay their claims on me And ask me to to be grateful for triumphant jubilee

[Chorus]
They wanna bring me shame
Well there ain't no shame
You better look away, bow your head and pray cuz I won't feel shame

[VERSE 3]
Any man can own the right to do just as he please
And any man can walk away from love he wants to leave
There I'll be left standing with a child and a dream
So I will find my own way to triumphant jubilee

[Chorus]
They wanna bring me shame
Well there ain't no shame
You better look away, bow your head and pray
Cuz I won't feel shame
Well there ain't no shame
You better look away, bow your head and pray, cuz i won't feel shame
You better look away, bow your head and pray cuz i won't feel shame

Many times i've passed a church and wished that I believed

rosecarmel -- "But there's nothing the matter with not buying into another's point of view- Especially when being told to-"

Exactly. I don't care if anyone buys my Round Earth view. Anyone is free to believe whatever Flat Earth theory they have that is contrary to my perspective/reality.

I certainly don't demand anyone validate me or my perspective. I really don't even care if anyone responds but if I spark a healthy thought/reflection in another, then I see value in that itself.

Also I should add, there is a large distance between asking not to be invalidated and demanding to be validated.

It's funny how asking for a negative to stop can get translated/turned equal to demanding for the polar opposite.

I've never understood that nuance either. It's like Me asking/begging to not be teased/mocked. Asking to NOT be bullied doesn't = you need to shower Me with praise.

What it actually means is, "If you can't say anything nice? STF up."

In my experience, those swings in expectations illustrate unhealthy thinking/mentality. It's like my 'mom' couldn't think of a 'thing' in between "you are wonderful" and "you are worthless" and she is/was compelled to say something.

So if you're the Scapegoat, you know which end you are going to hear... And saying nothing? Nope. It was her place to remind everyone else of their 'place' -- good or bad.

HolyHannah

rosecarmel -- "But there's nothing the matter with not buying into another's point of view- Especially when being told to-"

Exactly. I don't care if anyone buys my Round Earth view. Anyone is free to believe whatever Flat Earth theory they have that is contrary to my perspective/reality.

I certainly don't demand anyone validate me or my perspective. I really don't even care if anyone responds but if I spark a healthy thought/reflection in another, then I see value in that itself.

Exactly-

Further, each person has the ability to understand greatly, but that ability can be obscured by denial or something else -- think how the moon hides behind clouds-

Prior to understanding that I didn't cause what happened to me I saw things differently- After I learned that I didn't cause what happened to me I was able to "properly" hold myself accountable for what I caused-

It is of course up to the individual to proceed-

One time someone told a bunch of us that words didn't matter, meaning that you could hear even the most abusive words and identify what's being said is abusive, but have zero emotional response to those words- And by remaining calm, see things more clearly, determine what you won't put up with and what to do about it- He warned that people will not see the compassion in the action you take right away but by taking it they will have no choice but to consider it- And that for some, it will unfortunately be the extent of it-

rosecarmel -- "After I learned that I didn't cause what happened to me I was able to "properly" hold myself accountable for what I caused" -- Oh yes.

I was mostly self-destructive so my healing was mostly forgive myself. It's easy to get emotional when one feels attacked/invalidated/not believed. What emotion you feel and how you respond to that emotion is what makes something healthy or not...

I have issues with the 'confusion' between Me saying, a statement is factually "invalidating" (by definition) and I felt "invalidated" by the statement and that gets turned to Me demanding 'validation'? I don't understand what I have said where, that took that train on its route...

There's an undertone of unhealthy dynamic when someone feels/says/intimates, "Well, if you don't believe ME, I'm not gonna believe YOU." Beliefs and realities are not transactions or tokens...

It's not like, "Okay... I'll believe/back your anti-vaccine mentality is not a 'good enough' reason for your child to have estranged and you ignore the fact I slapped my adult son multiples times and agree that's not a 'not good enough' reason for No Contact with Me." or is it?

Either way, both of those are very good reasons for No Contact... So they are 'Flat Earth' views and no I won't "agree to disagree" on them. Nor will I buy a sanitized/later telling of an estrangement story where those facts/truths are no longer mentioned/deemed relevant...

HolyHannah

Also I should add, there is a large distance between asking not to be invalidated and demanding to be validated.

It's funny how asking for a negative to stop can get translated/turned equal to demanding for the polar opposite.

I've never understood that nuance either. It's like Me asking/begging to not be teased/mocked. Asking to NOT be bullied doesn't = you need to shower Me with praise.

What it actually means is, "If you can't say anything nice? STF up."

In my experience, those swings in expectations illustrate unhealthy thinking/mentality. It's like my 'mom' couldn't think of a 'thing' in between "you are wonderful" and "you are worthless" and she is/was compelled to say something.

So if you're the Scapegoat, you know which end you are going to hear... And saying nothing? Nope. It was her place to remind everyone else of their 'place' -- good or bad.

A shift in perception can cause a shift in expectations/preferences and lead to positive change- I don't know anybody well enough to make an assessment straight out of the gate, if the change will result in something beneficial or not-

My mother and I could have used another lifetime to talk- But after not talking for years, we each noticed the other had changed- It wasn't a perfect relationship but that wasn't what either of us were after- We both made an effort- Sometimes 50/50, sometimes 60/40, sometimes almost radio silence depending upon what all was going on in our lives-

I continue to hold the view that kindness isn't always recognized- So I try to keep an open mind and consider what anyone has to say a lesson- Nice or not-

As a scapegoat, I can depend upon being treated as less-

HolyHannah

rosecarmel -- "After I learned that I didn't cause what happened to me I was able to "properly" hold myself accountable for what I caused" -- Oh yes.

I was mostly self-destructive so my healing was mostly forgive myself. It's easy to get emotional when one feels attacked/invalidated/not believed. What emotion you feel and how you respond to that emotion is what makes something healthy or not...

I have issues with the 'confusion' between Me saying, a statement is factually "invalidating" (by definition) and I felt "invalidated" by the statement and that gets turned to Me demanding 'validation'? I don't understand what I have said where, that took that train on its route...

There's an undertone of unhealthy dynamic when someone feels/says/intimates, "Well, if you don't believe ME, I'm not gonna believe YOU." Beliefs and realities are not transactions or tokens...

It's not like, "Okay... I'll believe/back your anti-vaccine mentality is not a 'good enough' reason for your child to have estranged and you ignore the fact I slapped my adult son multiples times and agree that's not a 'not good enough' reason for No Contact with Me." or is it?

Either way, both of those are very good reasons for No Contact... So they are 'Flat Earth' views and no I won't "agree to disagree" on them. Nor will I buy a sanitized/later telling of an estrangement story where those facts/truths are no longer mentioned/deemed relevant...

"I have issues with the 'confusion' between Me saying, a statement is factually "invalidating" (by definition) and I felt "invalidated" by the statement and that gets turned to Me demanding 'validation'? I don't understand what I have said where, that took that train on its route... "

Oddly enough, when making such a statement, it invalidates another's story and results in defensiveness and refusal to do so unless you validate them- Even if their story isn't true-

HolyHannah

rosecarmel -- "After I learned that I didn't cause what happened to me I was able to "properly" hold myself accountable for what I caused" -- Oh yes.

I was mostly self-destructive so my healing was mostly forgive myself. It's easy to get emotional when one feels attacked/invalidated/not believed. What emotion you feel and how you respond to that emotion is what makes something healthy or not...

I have issues with the 'confusion' between Me saying, a statement is factually "invalidating" (by definition) and I felt "invalidated" by the statement and that gets turned to Me demanding 'validation'? I don't understand what I have said where, that took that train on its route...

There's an undertone of unhealthy dynamic when someone feels/says/intimates, "Well, if you don't believe ME, I'm not gonna believe YOU." Beliefs and realities are not transactions or tokens...

It's not like, "Okay... I'll believe/back your anti-vaccine mentality is not a 'good enough' reason for your child to have estranged and you ignore the fact I slapped my adult son multiples times and agree that's not a 'not good enough' reason for No Contact with Me." or is it?

Either way, both of those are very good reasons for No Contact... So they are 'Flat Earth' views and no I won't "agree to disagree" on them. Nor will I buy a sanitized/later telling of an estrangement story where those facts/truths are no longer mentioned/deemed relevant...

For me it's vegan fanaticism-

Vegan: If you stop eating meat, less animals will be slaughtered-

Me: Ok

Vegan: Replace the meat with soy and pretend the production of it that kills animals in the fields and the fertilizer that causes nutrient pollution and algae blooms is less damage to the planet, therefore better overall-

Me: No

rosecarmel -- I love that... "Oh look at all the pretty cows in that field... We can't eat meat or drink their milk... We are abusing those poor animals..."

Me a realist/Round Earther -- "So farmers are supposed to keep those cows as pets? Who is going to pay for that and for what reason should we keep/breed/maintain these animals?"

Dysfunctional thinkers always see things from their perspective and rarely think past 'it'...

If a cow doesn't have a practical use - for food, milk, trade or sale/money? Why would anyone want/need a cow?

You can't want something to exist/have a life if it doesn't have a purpose for BEING. Does a vegan just want a cow to be so it can 'be' a cow? Or does the cow being alive and the Vegan not eating 'it' make the Vegan better in some way versus the person that IS okay with eating the cow...

rosecarmel - I agree that you need to validate people's views, as it is their genuine response to a situation, before you can enter into a meaningful dialogue. Otherwise, as you rightly point out, the person will become defensive and then any effort at communication is doomed to failure.

I also agree with you that sometimes we may need to settle for something which is less than we would have wished for, but is the best which can be achieved - like making the best dish you can with the ingredients available. If you cannot change a situation, then the next best thing is to change your reaction to it. Otherwise, it just takes up too much head space and causes damage to our mental health as well as impacting on our other relationships.

I don't think anyone would ever be expected to validate what they know is a lie.

I don't think anyone would be expected to validate what they think is a lie.

I don't think anyone is expected to validate anything, they can ignore it if they wish.

But to invalidate someone when you don't know or cannot be sure it isn't the truth is thoughtless and unkind

To constantly continue to invalidate someone else's truth that you don't know or can't be sure is a lie, is just plain bullying.

Validating a lie causes damage to people by enabling them to behave badly and get away with it which harms both of you.

In my opinion anyway

Starblaze -- As I said, there is a large gap between asking to not be invalidated and demanding to be validated.

I really can't follow some leaps in 'logic'...

HolyHannah

Dysfunctional thinkers always see things from their perspective and rarely think past 'it'...

If a cow doesn't have a practical use - for food, milk, trade or sale/money? Why would anyone want/need a cow?

You can't want something to exist/have a life if it doesn't have a purpose for BEING. Does a vegan just want a cow to be so it can 'be' a cow? Or does the cow being alive and the Vegan not eating 'it' make the Vegan better in some way versus the person that IS okay with eating the cow...

Eat or don't eat meat is a personal choice- I respect both- I have issues with one or the other being "better"- Agriculture impacts the planet- Eat that first- Then we can talk- Otherwise, the discussion of not eating meat frequently bypasses damage done- They say they are more conscious yet don't want to talk about damaged caused by the growing of their food choices- Meh ..