Image of a screenshot of Twitter of a screenshot of Facebook.
The Facebook screenshot reads:
Fun fact about me: When I'm having a conversation with you, I will periodically bring up personal experiences from my own life, interspersed withing your own stories that you're telling me. I'm not doing this to try and make the conversation about me, or to take away from your own experience. Actually, what I'm attempting to do, is to try and show you that I do, in fact, understand what you're trying to tell me, and that I am giving your story my full attention.
It can really be off-putting to some people, so if I've ever done this to you during a conversation, I just wanted to make sure you know that I wasn't trying to take over your story, I was just doing my best to connect with you in the moment.
The screenshot of Twitter reads:
This. I am fully aware that I do this. And I feel so guilty every time, but this. Understand this.
So, what ways do we know to demonstrate active involvement with someone's story? And when are they appropriate or inappropriate?
Can you think of any more? Are there cultural variations? Any other observations?
This is my big problem. In a group where people are telling stories about themselves, when it’s my turn, my stories are inappropriate somehow. In 50+ years, I still haven’t figured out what I say that’s wrong,
I’ve spent ages analysing my stories compared to others and I can’t figure out the difference, and no one will tell me. Is it the content (seems comparable) or how I tell it?
It seems better to just say ‘pass’ in those situations and stop engaging.
I suspect most of the time, when folks won't tell you what you did wrong, they don't really know themselves. Either that or it's some stupid power play thing where they think you're trying to challenge their status.
Other option - tell the stories you want to tell, and everyone just has to learn that's what to expect from you.
Thank you, that helps.
Although if it’s that, I’ll never figure it out. I can’t even begin to relate to that enough to identify it.
Are you being inappropriate or are you just misreading their reaction? My brother, who is neurodivergent, got very upset recently because he said he made a joke that offended everyone he worked with over a video chat. When I got the details from him, what actually happened is no one laughed and he thought that meant he had offended them.
I’m not sure there’s a correct answer to that, because the answer is technically yes, I think I’ve been inappropriate sometimes but also yes, I’ve been been told to stop sharing by several peers as an adult in several different settings, but not by anywhere near the number of peers I had.
Logically, it doesn’t make any sense to let a tiny percent outweigh the majority. It doesn’t feel nice, though.
e: tried to clarify
You forgot mirroring-repeating what they said back to them as if it was your input. "So what you're saying is..."
Like you're a movie character taking a phone call, and you have to provide exposition for the audience? That's pretty funny
If they get really proficient at it, they'll start talking like Dora the Explorer.
You would think it would be obvious when you're doing it, but as long as you don't overuse it you're good.
60% of the time it works every time.
Other forms of back channeling like ah, ok, yes, I see, wow?
'Back channeling' - that's a new one on me.
There's also a sort of ironic pushback - "no way! Get out of here! You've gotta be kidding!". This one feels like a trap tbh, haha.
in my case, I only like the first two and the rest bother me lol
As speaker or listener? All that active listening stuff feels so unnatural to me, and if anything it's harder to listen if I try to do it myself.
both
I think everything there is what people tend to want except point 1
That, to me, stemmung from my prior experiences, would reduce conversation down to office talk.
Real conversations aren't like diatribes in the movies, which are really monotribes cuz of singular authors.
The monotribes seem to flow so easily from character to character because, in reality, they are all flowing from the same source.
Real life talking isn't Person A rants esoteric and emotional and B-unit responds with body language like a fucking NPC. Real talk is two people fleshing out a topic that's outside themselves, or if it's a part of themselves, it's disassociated with to be put under the spotlight. Thru the sharing of experiences with Topic© the 2 parties can assess their knowledge as well as the others knowledge, and glean useful insights, strategies, or get advise that they might not have thought of
Seriously, this is the only form of conversation that even makes evolutionary biological sense. In a world where, once you leave to comforts of society and remember that, as much as a pain in the ass as other people are, without them, alone in the wild, 99% of us are something's lunch. We forget that little fact really fast. There is nothing more valuable to a person, to their safety, survival, and sanity as another person is. Idk, otherwise just seems like a pov born out of non-introspective privilege.
Fucking I'll nod along and play supporting character if, and only if, there's a paycheck attached, and that's it, end of story.
I'm afraid however much you might not like it, those rote conversations do serve a purpose. It's the same purpose that other apes fill by picking each other's fleas - it establishes who is part of the group, who they consider worthy of their time. There's probably apes that don't like grooming and don't see the point in it, but they'll still struggle if they don't engage with it in some way.
And that's why I started my own business and work for myself, so I can decide when I've had enough of the social pecking/preening order.
Before that tho, I very loudly would only hear what is physically said and completely ignore any subtext. This was not/is not an uncommon thing from me. E.g: "What was that? Oh hey, that's sweet of you! I appreciate your interest in the fulfillment of my physical needs. Were you offering me a hand? It's only polite if i offer you the same. Hey boss! I might need a few minutes with Ms Classy over here, be right back" them: "I said go fuck yourself", me: "did you not hear a thing I said? You might need this more than me, your heads aaaaaaaaaall clogged up".
Just say what you mean. Communication is simple. Sarcasm/passive-aggressiveness/subterfuge require both parties to play along the same rules. Don't play. Take everything 100% literal. I refuse the game. They can learn how to use the actual words they mean. I understand the nuance, the implied, the undertones, the jockeying, I am hyper aware of the power dynamics - I just don't care. I prefer honesty and directness. This doesn't mean I'm crass or I disregard trauma or processwork in other people. People deserve respect. I'll work on the side that build my periphery people up than the side that uses social interactions to cut them down. And unfortunately, there's enough pain in this world and I don't have fucking time to address the HOAs thoughts on my garage door being open while I carry groceries in.
Anyone is worth time. Say something interesting, or something real -not dressed up in pretense, niceties or forcing allusions. An honest question is a simple example, being like 'yo, this might make me dumb but is there a better way to use this tool? It seems harder than someone would intend."
No one responds to that with ridicule, people just offer the help, because the earnesty is appreciated. In fact people generally respond to a humble earnest request as if it's refreshing for them to hear; whole demeanors change almost instantly, as if some hot knowledge just cut thru the social butter (to mix my metaphors).