Ramblings of an itinerant rocket scientist...

I think the question is, would you have been as open to being helped if they had known?

People react differently to those who are open to advice and help than to those who say over and over again that they can't ask for help or accept it when it's offered. After a while, offering help or advice to the second sort of person wears you out, and you stop trying because your help and advice get thrown back in your face like they're crap.

From:

I'm just as open to being helped over here as over there... the difference is that going indirectly and watching it from over here means that I can see constructive suggestions over there, instead of just getting flamed again over here. Your comment here... seems to be another example of flames.

A big reason why I am reluctant to ask for help or accept what's sometimes offered as help or advice... is the way in which it is offered. If someone uses obscenities, or angry words, or blaming statements in such a way that I feel like I'm being belittled or made wrong... the defenses go up, my feet dig in, and my ability to glean useful signal from the flaming background noise is reduced.

Baseball bats do not improve bandwidth...

From:

aquaeri.livejournal.com

I was going to make a comment that perhaps you take even mildly critical suggestions much more negatively/defensively when you're sure they're directed at you than when you don't think they are. But I don't think I have to, because this looks to me like the perfect example.

I honestly don't see anything inflammatory in what

griffen wrote.

And I fully expect that you will regard this comment as inflammatory, too. Feel free to unfriend me.

From:

Hm... you don't see anything inflammatory there? Interesting. The use of "c#$p" or other 4-letter words in ordinary dialogue is itself inflammatory, IMO. But I suppose it depends on one's sensitivity to that kind of language.

It also seems to me that imputing physically-violent acts to another person, as a figure of speech "[noun] get thrown back in your face..." is pretty inflammatory?

Or even the opening sentence of his comment, which I felt was trying to skip over my question and redirect the thread -- without addressing what I'd asked about. That felt annoying to me, albeit not flaming.

YMMV, I guess. And maybe I'm just over-sensitized, nowadays. I'm a bit curious about where the "feel free to unfriend me" meme (you and

mary919) is coming from, since that's not something I'd considered. I mean,

griffen is on my FL, after all, despite his past hostility to me at various times. (wry grin)

From:

wordweaverlynn.livejournal.com

The use of "c#$p" or other 4-letter words in ordinary dialogue is itself inflammatory, IMO.

Depends on your milieu.

From:

It's a four-letter word only by virtue of having four letters. Trust me, if I'd wanted to be inflammatory, I could have hauled out a whole bunch of cusswords, none of which have four letters. I was simply saying what was on my mind: that I, and many others, have offered you help many times in the past and have had it rejected as if it was a substance that emits from the rear end, rather than help. And on the receiving end, it does feel exactly like you're throwing it back in my face. And because of that, I'm tired of trying, because it's a consistent reaction with you.

I find it interesting that once again, instead of listening to the message, you've chosen to nitpick the presentation. I was also trying to tell you that at this point, I can no longer afford to let myself care if my comments help you or not, because it's become quite obvious to me over the years that you refuse to accept any help offered, regardless of how it's offered, if it requires even the slightest bit of change from you.

My comment was not intended as an attack; you simply chose to take it as one.

From:

I'm happy regarding your intentions, regardless of how I felt about the choice of words used, etc.

As to how much and where I've changed over the past few years... ask those who are close to me. (shrug) I respond much better to perceived carrots than perceived sticks.

From:

In my experience (which is admittedly based on your posts to your LJ because that's all the interaction I have with you), you have not changed much at all since I met you. You still talk about the same issues, you still don't respond to help, nor can you bring yourself to ask for it, and you still get offended if anyone disagrees with anything you say about the world, no matter how miniscule the disagreement is compared to the places they're agreeing with you.

As far as the other, and also in my experience, you don't respond to either carrots OR sticks if they come with any criticism at all, or any feedback that isn't 100% positive. I could be piling carrots in front of you and you'd still focus on the single twig that made it into the pile - and then reject it all and feel justified in doing so, as you did with my first comment to this post because I dared to use the word "crap" and the metaphor "throwing it back in my face."

Essentially, you're asking me to sugar-coat my feedback and make sure I never, ever say a single thing that might possibly offend you, and that's one thing I'm not going to be able to do for you, Brian. To be honest, I'm flabbergasted that you managed to take offense at the first comment I made, when I was doing my level best to be calm and neutral. At this point, no matter what I say, you'll manage to find an attack in it somehow, because your triggers are so many and often so unusual that there's no avoiding them.

From:

tenacious-snail.livejournal.com

I met

brian1789 almost four years ago, so all of my data is during that time frame.

I've seen that where he used to respond as though attacked to things that were at a 4 on a scale of 10, at all times. These days, its usually more like around a 7, most of the time. If he's already feeling stressed or sleep deprived or like he's been attacked in another quarter, he's more likely to start responding at a 6 or a 5. If the perceived attack is coming from someone who is in his category of "perceived attacker", you can probably subtract a number off of that.

I think both of you have assumptions on how the other is going to behave (attacking/feeling attacked) that makes this cycle actually harder to get out of, because interactions are colored by past experience and assumptions, so that any data that supports those assumptions are given more weight.

(for reference, my own "am going to perceive myself as attacked" would probably be at around 8 or 9 on that scale).

From:

patgreene.livejournal.com

I would like to point out that in the last two posts that I've seen you and Brian cross words on in *his* journal, you have expressed a level of unpleasantness you would not brook in your own.

Had it been me, I myself would have gotten somewhat defensive at your first response to him, and certainly at the suggestion I had made no progress at all in 5 years.

And yes, he has changed, even if it is not apparent in his LJ. Part of the issue is that he posts about these things when he is feeling unsettled or confused, and less likely to be relying on new behaviors than old, ingrained ones. Or when other stresses are occurring.

From:

So saying "No matter what I say or do to try to help you, you ignore it or reject it, so I'm not going to try anymore" is a level of unpleasantness I wouldn't tolerate in my own journal? I must say I'm surprised at your response as well (not to mention that I disagree with you on that point).

He wanted to know if he would get the same response here as he got indirectly in someone else's journal. My answer is no, because the way he responds to offers of help and suggestions for change makes that kind of response impossible. I was simply letting him know why it wasn't possible for me to give that kind of a response; when I do, it gets rejected out of hand.

And he may have changed. As I said, based on his LJ (which is the only interaction I have with him) it does not appear that he has. I will take what you and others have said about there having been real change off-LJ, as well as what you have said about how he uses his LJ, into consideration and try not to assume that there has not been change simply because it is not apparent in his LJ. I would appreciate an acknowledgment that at this distance and through this medium it's quite difficult to see that, however.

From:

Hey Griff--
I tried to reach you in IM to confirm that it would be OK to look at the communication BETWEEN you and Brian (since you have not explicitly given permission for feedback, although Brian essentially has in this particular entry). In the interests of not waiting around for about three days till we catch up with one another, I'm going to go ahead. I am acknowledging here, though, that you haven't asked, and that it might be uncomfortable. I hope that it will be helpful to you, Brian, and anyone else reading, however. Let me know if it's too much, though.

In response to THIS comment, yes, it's difficult for you to see how he has changed at that distance. He HAS changed, though. Others have mentioned fewer and less intense flame wars, and I'll agree. In person, I see even more change. It's not rocket fast, it's not direct, and it's not necessarily without backtracking. But that's true for most folks when they are working on their "stuff." I know it's true for me. :^)

I will also submit that it's difficult for you to see change because of your own filters. You expect him to be a certain way based on past experience, and so you see that. It might be easier to see change if you try to "put on fresh eyes." I also find that wherever I personally have issues, I will be more sensitized to those issues in others. So you may be projecting some of your own stuff onto him as well.

Anyhow, I'm gonna head back up to the top of the thread in a little bit (need to attend to some other stuff first), and make a few comments about where I perceive your interaction went awry. Hope that's OK; please let me know if it's not.

(hugs), and best wishes on the stressful stuff in your own life right now.

From:

cyan-blue.livejournal.com

Jay's changed tremendously, both online and offline, since I've known him (beginning in 2005).

In terms of his online presence, which is what you have more exposure to, there has been a great deal of change. He used to get into frequent flame wars on LJ, and these days he gets into very few. Even the longer debate threads, like the recent trans one, are far lighter in tone than the ones 2 years back, and the threshhold is a lot higher for "things that make him bristle."

He also asks for help more in composing his initial LJ posts. Jay doesn't type very rapidly, and so he often manages to sound more terse than he means to; hence, for posts on sensitive topics these days, he sometimes passes them through one or more of his partners for feedback before posting them. We generally manage to catch "things that might inadvertently offend."

We're not yet as good about catching "when he's managed to obscure his main point entirely." For instance, I thought his post on the trans stuff was a simply a "public service announcement," letting people know that his avoidance and eye-averting was about his stuff, not theirs. In fact it was an indirectly-phrased request for help, intended to read more along the lines of "Hey, how do other people cope with these feelings of discomfort when a person looks different?"

Jay has been, and remains, uncomfortable at asking directly for help, since his sense of safety involves not being in anyone else's debt. In our own relationship, we're trying to find ways that he can phrase his preferences in ways overt enough to ping my New York radar (I don't catch subtleties well), without having to make them into requests. I was grateful for his mentioning in the trans thread that he didn't like earrings - this put the info out there where I could see it, but didn't either obligate me to change anything nor put him into my debt if I chose to stop wearing them around him.

Speaking of our own relationship, perhaps you saw my anniversary post to him yesterday? There is much love, and much growth, spoken of therein. In our relationship, he does take feedback, and work to change things. He stretches his boundaries frequently. He works a lot on things like learning to say no, and examining what models of polyamory fit us all best, and being a support to his partners, and making his language gentler, and opening up to new levels of trust.

The saying "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" applies in his case. If I go to him with tearful angry words about something he's done wrong, that'll make for a bad afternoon. That won't be because he's unwilling to see that he's done wrong - it'll be because he'll deeply internalize the judgement and shame that I'm heaping upon him, and fold inward, retreating to a safer emotionally withdrawn place. If I go to him with a calm request, "Hey, would it be possible to do things X way instead of Y way," then he'll be able to consider things from neutral emotional ground, and will often want to be of help where he can. I think this holds so for most people, actually.

And it's important to remember that he's from the south - phrasings that sound neutral to northeastern ears will often sound like aggression and hostility to southern ones. This may be some of why your attempts to gentle your words are still coming across like thunder to him. Using terms like "crap" or saying that he always throws things back in your face - those are going to be fighting words in his book. Sugar-coating may make us northerners impatient, but to a southerner, the effort to do so is a necessary gesture of goodwill, to establish trust.

From:

You probably should read my comment to Griff about his side of this, and then read this one. Go ahead, I'll wait. ;^)

All of that said (i.e., if he'd spoken from his own experience, it likely would have been better), you ARE oversensitive IMO, in that your level of sensitivity is greater than the "norm" of this particular social group. Griff WAS speaking from his own experience--to him it DID feel like getting his own words thrown back in his face. I don't think it was hyperbole, even. OTOH, you ARE countersuggestive, and you often reject direct suggestions, even when you've asked for them. Honestly, I think you need to QTIP a bit more. This might also be a good place to apply "Miller's Law," and try to imagine how what he is saying could be true for him, rather than (for instance) dismissing his words as "inflammatory." (You can still do that even if he isn't using "I-language," BTW; it's just easier to forget.)

Would they have helped you as much if they'd known who they were helping? Probably not, because you've shown that you usually won't listen, or at least only reluctantly. But the only way for you to know is to ask... and then actually listen. That requires receptivity, rather than defensiveness. It wouldn't be easy for you (anymore than not being defensive is easy for me. *wry smile*). I'm guessing you have the inherent abilities, though you might not have all the skills to make it easy.

(hug)

From:

wordweaverlynn.livejournal.com

QTIP?

From:

Quit Taking It Personally. Sometime I strive to do, but often fail at myself. *wry smile*

From:

mary919.livejournal.com

I sort of stuck my head in here commented and then just left it-- I read your long post today and came back to see where this all went.

MY "unfriending" comment was only because I felt like (because I don't know any of you offline), I was perhaps sticking my nose in where it didn't belong. But I have been lurking, admiring the dynamic you all have established, and had something to say. So I risked it all (or my access to it all :>) and said it.

I didn't mean to imply that you were the sort to go off unfriending willy nilly, but only that you might understandably not welcome comments from lurkers... or strangers :>... about this at least.

Anyway... it seems to have grown into another interesting and productive conversation.

From:

wordweaverlynn.livejournal.com

A big reason why I am reluctant to ask for help or accept what's sometimes offered as help or advice... is the way in which it is offered.

Boy, do I know that one. I'm also *very* sensitive to perceived motivations. My ex-mother-in-law was oppressive in her generosity, because I was never free to say, "No, thanks." It was a huge power struggle.

I have a terrible time asking for help, but I have learned, slowly, with much therapeutic help and a few good sweeties and good friends, that it's really OK to ask. But it's wise to take your time and come up with alternative strategies -- both of which you're doing.

One thing you might also consider is that the ways one asks for help are as important as the ways it is offered.

Some people prefer the direct approach: "I'm feeling lonely. Can you come over?" ""Please hug me." "Can you please do X? No is an OK answer." If I'm not triggered, I can often do this -- with the few people I (mostly) trust.

Others respond much better to an indirect approach, in which Person A indicates their crushing load of work/worry/whatever, and Person B sympathizes, and gradually help is offered and accepted without Person A ever saying, "I need help," or Person B saying, "I'll help you."

There are plenty of times I cannot ask for help but would accept it if it were just given without being offered. This is deep PTSD territory, though, and applies to only about four people.

I have a hard time responding generously to an approach that strikes me as angry, self-pitying, passive-aggressive, or critical -- even though I've been known to use it. (Working on that.) "Nobody ever helps me." "I know you're too busy with your life to care about what happens in mine." "You're so selfish, you never even noticed that I was upset last night."

These stances are usually self-defensive, designed to prevent the inevitable betrayal or letdown from hurting. But they seem to stand in the way of the help being given, too.

I don't know -- it's all difficult. But figuring out what approaches work for you and for those you're likely to ask is a useful exercise.

From:

So at the risk of going "over the net" (out of my experience, and into yours or someone else's), I'm going to comment on what I see in your comment that might have made it difficult for Brian to hear.

The big issue that I see is that you are giving your experience, but speaking it in general terms, e.g, "you stop trying," rather than "I stopped trying." If I'd spoken these words at the Effective Influence conference, I'd have been called on this for sure (and was!). I was told that my words would have more impact, be more effective, if I would speak from my own experience using "I-language." For me I would often speak from my perspective, but phrase it as me being part of a group. Sometimes this was as a result of me trying to build a "we" with the other person, but what I heard is that by trying to create it rather than allow it, it tended to distance them from me, rather than draw them to me. Other times it was me trying to say that it wasn't "just me" (me claiming membership in a larger group) but it still had the effect of distancing, and sometimes offending.

I'm guessing that some of this was at work here. If you'd phrased all of this from only your own experience, and told of the effect that his words and actions had had on you--and left out the generalities--it might have been easier for him to hear. At the very least Brian likely wouldn't have felt like he was being dogpiled by an invisible army of "people" rather than just hearing how he had affected you.

Take with appropriate salt, and do let me know if any of this is unclear. I hope this is helpful.

From:

karenbynight.livejournal.com

I would have phrased this much differently, but in essence this is the same as my answer. I would have been less likely to respond to a query directly from

brian1789, because I feel that my advice in the past has made little difference.

Whether that's a problem with my presentation, my advice, or the recipient's interest level doesn't really matter in the long run. Life is busy, and so I eventually optimize actions that don't appear to have useful results into non-action.

From: