Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 4 guests, and 34 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
 Trending Topics(Posts)
1.Ask Amy's very bad advice on affairs2
2.The Joke Thread2
3.Things men want1
4.Hearts Blessing1
5.Financial counselor says communication is key when mixing money and marriage - Grand Forks Herald0
6.Daughter says father made ominous threats if his wife sought a divorce - Portland Press Herald0
7.A Straight Spouse Of A Gay Husband Speaks Out0
8.Rise Above Past Relationship Failures - Psychology Today0
9.Toxic Relationship dynamics0
10.Women Who Don't Orgasm - Psychology Today0
*By replies in last 2 weeks.
In The Media(Posts)
Woman urges NC lawmakers to end child marriage: For her it was a ‘life sentence’3
COVID-19 and the Increased Likelihood of Affairs3
Does anyone remember this story?3
Validation to find-win-win slutions2
Things men want4
These Are The Signs You're Dating A Narcissist3
Girlfriend's 'controlling' list of 22 rules for boyfriend goes viral: 'She sounds crazy'9
What Divorced Men Wish They Had Done Differently In Their Marriages7
Alienation of Affection / Criminal Conversation9
Would you pay your ex a 'break-up fee'? - BBC3
more >>
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 6 of 16 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 15 16
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #77896
03/06/11 10:48 AM
03/06/11 10:48 AM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 17,282
The Castle Aaaggghh...
herfuturesbright Offline
Member
herfuturesbright  Offline
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 17,282
The Castle Aaaggghh...
I think f3 has a good grasp of why my friend's very blunt approach worked. I was miserable, and I knew in my hearts of hearts that I had to confess......but I was terrified to do so. But I knew I needed to....but.....I called this friend in part because I respected her values and I knew she would be gut level honest and not hold back.

Of course, I took 5 pregnancy tests with my first because I wanted to be SURE they were right! smile

Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: herfuturesbright] #77943
03/06/11 03:49 PM
03/06/11 03:49 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Thanks HRF. The level of trust you had for her was key.

Perhaps you would have been convinced to reveal the A even if your friend hadn't told you she would if you didn't.


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #77967
03/06/11 04:49 PM
03/06/11 04:49 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
As this thread has moved along, seems we've arrived at the issue of the reciprocal nature of Validation. "What to do after you validate them?"

Here's a thought. In a great relationship, after you validate him/her, she/he then validates you. Of course in meeting a person who doesn't know how, after you validate them, then you share what you are gonna do, share it clearly enough so that they could validate you if they wanted, and then go for it.

I think that at a more abstract level, validation provides great amounts of data from the person who is being validated to the person who is validating. As fddlr3 points out, when she validates someone she often is now much better informed about what is going on in the person before her, and thus makes perhaps a "more informed" decision about what she will do next.

As I work in a business situation and as I have to make a decision, I often validate the employees who disagree with my ideas, so that I can get more clear what they are thinking and as a result may change my decisions. I think the process of reciprocal validation provides the optimum flow of data between people. While it may postpone action for a bit, during the actual communication, the decision process I see as much better informed, decisions are wiser. Besides I don't think validation takes long. Better decisions, based on better data, with small overhead. Good idea.

Quote:
Example: Guy comes to me and tells me smack about one of my friends behind my friend's back. I think this is a perfect situation of "gossip". Now, I hate gossip as a pernicious habit. So I listen to the guy, validate him, get clear even about why he is telling me this stuff (true or false, I don't know/care), and why he is telling it to me now. Ok, I got it and am clear.

Now is my time to decide what I want to do. Remember, my goal is to not have gossip going on around me - a boundary. People can gossip all they want as long as I am not there.

So I say to this guy, "I am writing down and taking notes on what you are saying. I am dating it. Thanks for being so open."

"Now you have a choice. In three days, I want you to go to my friend and tell him all this smack you just told me. I want him to hear it from your mouth, not mine."

"Of course you don't have to do what I want. No one does. But on the other hand, if I don't hear from you or him that you've done it, in four days I am going to deliver these notes to him and tell him what you've told me today. Tis your call."

If the guy says, "Why would you do that?" I help him understand me (almost validate) by saying, "Cuz I don't want gossip around me. I really don't like it."

My whole goal is to a) take care of this situation, b) stop this person from gossiping again to me, c) clean up the space around me - make it free of gossip.


I learned this technique/skill from an old guy who lived many years in backwoods Alaska. Cool guy.

Now, I believe Validation helps people become wiser and to make better decisions. Conversely, when I forget to validate or forget to PreValidate, I tend to do things that later I wish I hadn't.

A gal came to me, pointed out that I tended to validate all the time and asked what I would do if Osama Bin Laden walked into my room. I said, "I would probably kill him right fast." She asked why. I replied, "Cuz I make sense, too."

I think PreValidating and particularly Validating often helps you make those tough decisions - the ones that might seem confrontational, or blunt, or Geico-like. Helps me make the decision to be in a client's face or to be more kind or something in the middle. One size doesn't fit all, I believe.

That Geico ad implies that R. Lee Ermey would not make a good therapist. From what I know about him, I think the "Sarge" would be a great therapist.

Speaking of Ermey and actors, when you see people Validating each other, I think it looks like two people taking turns interviewing each other. Fddlr3, to me, you are showing this. Online I think this is a bit slower, not like people yelling one message and then vanishing, but more like taking some time to really get it from each other.

Personally, I preferred the Geico ad with Maxwell, the pig. Joy alway gets to me. thumbsup


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #77998
03/06/11 06:06 PM
03/06/11 06:06 PM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 17,282
The Castle Aaaggghh...
herfuturesbright Offline
Member
herfuturesbright  Offline
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 17,282
The Castle Aaaggghh...
Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: herfuturesbright] #78001
03/06/11 06:21 PM
03/06/11 06:21 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
I smiled once again, just hearing that sound. Love it. Thanks, for hearing and Validating me.


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #78260
03/07/11 06:09 AM
03/07/11 06:09 AM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Thanks Mr A.!


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #78263
03/07/11 06:25 AM
03/07/11 06:25 AM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Here's a thought. In a great relationship, after you validate him/her, she/he then validates you.
Absolutely!

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
As I work in a business situation and as I have to make a decision, I often validate the employees who disagree with my ideas, so that I can get more clear what they are thinking and as a result may change my decisions. I think the process of reciprocal validation provides the optimum flow of data between people. While it may postpone action for a bit, during the actual communication, the decision process I see as much better informed, decisions are wiser. Besides I don't think validation takes long. Better decisions, based on better data, with small overhead. Good idea.
This has been my experience as well. Even when the validation only goes one way, the fact that the other person feels heard and understood goes a long way towards confidence that whatever choice is made, their input will have been considered. I had a number of those at work just last week, in fact. I also find that I never have to be in someone's face when asserting my needs or expressing what my choices are. Which is a different (but complementary) topic from validation and listening.

In addition to not taking long, validation actually shortens the process in my experience. It tends to eliminate the time wasted due to mis-communication and mis-understandings.


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #78366
03/07/11 03:33 PM
03/07/11 03:33 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
(Continued)

Pondering the example of Gossip Guy.

In a similar situation, what I might have done is to use a gentle challenge instead of what I judge to be an ultimatum. Also, any time there is a question like "Why would you do that?"
I might have responded with something that my mentor calls an "override". It is spoken gently but firmly (and works best if the voice drops a bit at the end.) In this situation, it would be something like "So you would find that uncomfortable." (Note: the "so" actually seems to be crucial in most circumstances, having tried it all kinds of different ways in practice groups.) If he responded with "Damn right!" then I might say "So you're choosing to tell him."

Validation or no, the objective is the same - to not have gossip, and also to maintain a positive relationship with this person as well. Your approach was quite effective and did achieve that goal, I would guess; what I'm offering is another way.

Perl programmers have an expression TMTOWTDI (pronounced "Tim tow dee). It stands for "There's More Than One Way To Do It." Same here.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
A gal came to me, pointed out that I tended to validate all the time and asked what I would do if Osama Bin Laden walked into my room. I said, "I would probably kill him right fast." She asked why. I replied, "Cuz I make sense, too."
I am wondering if you would be willing to explain the "sense" of this further.

BTW - somewhere there seems to have been a gender confusion. Last I checked I was a guy. Wait a sec ... <checking> .... Yup, a guy! smile


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #78398
03/07/11 04:52 PM
03/07/11 04:52 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
Great stuff. I think they are all good points. How'd you learn it? What was your journey? Fascinating.

That last bit about "efficiency," I particularly resonate with, and I'm reflecting someone's comment back a while, that all this navel gazing is a wast of time.

I believe that Sandra and I work about 10% as hard as we did in those middle days of our relationship and we probably get 50x more out of our relationship than we did back there. Oh oh, is the "normal" type of communication skills a huge distraction and waste of time - at home and in business.

It's how I've come to see it.


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #78568
03/07/11 09:26 PM
03/07/11 09:26 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
Originally Posted By: fddlr3
Pondering the example of Gossip Guy. Validation or no, the objective is the same - to not have gossip, and also to maintain a positive relationship with this person as well. Your approach was quite effective and did achieve that goal, I would guess; what I'm offering is another way.


Yup. yup. Great points. Lots of ways to skin that cat.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
A gal came to me, pointed out that I tended to validate all the time and asked what I would do if Osama Bin Laden walked into my room. I said, "I would probably kill him right fast." She asked why. I replied, "Cuz I make sense, too."
I am wondering if you would be willing to explain the "sense" of this further.


Sure. Let's see. First thing I think was the context of the question. I believe the gal was caught into learning that Validation does not have to do with agreeing or approving. So I wanted an example, and she offered one, where the result of PreValidation or Validation might be pretty blunt.

I think my response was also set into my then current framework of beliefs that a) I'm a trained killer (not very good or in practice), and b) as I PreValidate Osama, he is there for a reason of his, c) that he wouldn't be in my office if it was not somehow to kill a bunch of Americans, and d) he's wanted dead or alive, and e) I have no idea what weapons he is likely to be carrying or what kind of people he is likely to be leading at this very moment. And so I spoke up that I would probably err on the side of caution and "off" him. Then later we could talk. smile

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
BTW - somewhere there seems to have been a gender confusion. Last I checked I was a guy. Wait a sec ... <checking> .... Yup, a guy! smile


Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding.


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #78603
03/07/11 11:08 PM
03/07/11 11:08 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
How'd you learn it? What was your journey? Fascinating.
Thank you Al - very much appreciated, especially considering the source!

Do you want the long version or the Cliff Notes??

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I think my response was also set into my then current framework of beliefs that a) I'm a trained killer (not very good or in practice), and b) as I PreValidate Osama, he is there for a reason of his, c) that he wouldn't be in my office if it was not somehow to kill a bunch of Americans, and d) he's wanted dead or alive, and e) I have no idea what weapons he is likely to be carrying or what kind of people he is likely to be leading at this very moment. And so I spoke up that I would probably err on the side of caution and "off" him. Then later we could talk. smile
LOL!

I think that the point was made to her, and the dramatic nature made it one that would likely be remembered.

Not a trained killer (good or otherwise) that response wouldn't be in my toolkit. For myself, not having any evidence that Bin Laden himself was a direct threat, I would want to listen and try to understand where he is coming from. If, as you state, everyone makes sense, since his "sense" is not one I comprehend, I would very much like to.

I judge this to be very important, since Bin Laden is the current-events version of Hitler - and in my experience as soon as anyone brings in Hitler, they are implicitly acknowledging that they don't have a leg to stand on.....DOH! crazy

Seriously, though, I genuinely believe that many of the world's problems and conflicts could be avoided if only the world leaders would take your classes.

Perhaps you are familiar with Marshall Rosenberg, who teaches Nonviolent Communication (NVC) - flowmom referred to it on the Whiteboard. (I've read one of his books, but haven't studied NVC per se). He has a very inspiring story of being yelled at and called a "murderer" by a Palestinian and how he listened and validated. The story is here . Although the substance of the responses are different than if you (or I) were there, the essence is the same, I believe. Namely, to hear and validate the man, recognizing that he is actually expressing pain, even though it comes out as blame and accusations.

Instead of Lizards, Rosenberg's uses giraffes and jackals as his animals.


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #78972
03/08/11 07:45 PM
03/08/11 07:45 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
I did not study Rosenberg, but I've heard nothing but good about him and NVC. I've run into NVC all over the place. Sounds like really valuable stuff.

I think he does a different take on what drives people and focuses on "pain." I don't. I flip the coin and look at the as yet unfulfilled desire for profound joy ( Biological Dream) that I believe is buried in everyone's unconscious. Same thing, I guess.

Thanks fddlr3


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #78985
03/08/11 08:20 PM
03/08/11 08:20 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
smile

This is where it gets into the "post-validation" issue.

For myself, if the presenting thoughts and feelings are painful, then I validate them (understanding that this is not identical to what I understand your definition of validation is). What I have found is that difficult or painful feelings, if unvalidated or unheard, keep coming up. When a person feels really heard there is a noticeable, physical shift, a relaxing. This is when they are approaching the "look up" point. And what is often there at the look up is the flip side of the original pain - the desire for joy, for example, as you say, or the wish to be happy and fulfilled. So I think we end up in the same place.

Thank you Al!


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #79247
03/09/11 03:00 PM
03/09/11 03:00 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
I would like to express some thoughts about why I have found the use of "I" to be less effective when listening than using only "you."

When listening, I try to be as invisible as possible. This allows the speaker to be able to focus their attention more on their own feelings. The more that I, the listener, am the focus, I have noticed that it tends to pull the speaker away from their feelings and on what I am thinking. My experience has been that the more "I's" are in my responses, the more aware the other person is of me, and this is not what I want at all when listening.

Writing this, I am feeling frustrated that I cannot show how this works with the tone of voice. The words themselves seem inadequate in conveying how I experience this process. Maybe there are some things that simply don't work in print.

I tend to get a lot of pushback on this point, perhaps because so many have learned "active listening" via the "I hear you say ..." template. IRL, when it is tried both ways (with and without the "I") it is reported to me that without seems to be more effective. At least by those who have indeed tried it.


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #79288
03/09/11 04:52 PM
03/09/11 04:52 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
Originally Posted By: fddlr3
I would like to express some thoughts about why I have found the use of "I" to be less effective when listening than using only "you." When listening, I try to be as invisible as possible....


Thanks for sharing you views so clearly. I love it that each couple I work with or individual adapts whateverthehell I teach to their own needs and uses that. I do not believe that there is a correct way to do communication. My joy is in watching a couple communicate flawlessly and have them teach me how they do it. Frequently when they teach me, they describe what they do in one fashion, but when I watch they seem to be doing other things.

I hear your frustration at not being able to share by showing. I will just have to PreValidate and salute you for the work you do. I think it would be fun to have a video tape of you doing it. Remember, I believe this works well for you. And I believe "what works" is cool.

I built my learned ways of communicating with Sandra around Mirroring. That teaching tool I think creates a certain discipline that is different from what you are doing in many ways. One of the differences is that Mirroring focuses on the reciprocal roles of Sending and Receiving - guiding one into Sending clearly and flawlessly while the other is guided into Receiving clearly and flawlessly. And then switching sides. Since no one is ever perfect, the word "flawlessly" includes specific ways to recognize and recover from slips and stumbles. Reciprocal roles to me means that both people learn both roles.

The end effect is that people communicate flawlessly.

Or if one is trained and the other is not, communication runs smoothly cuz there is at least one person who knows both Sending and Receiving principles and skills, well. I often think of these situations as the "therapy situation" (one person is a Communication Expert) and the "home situation" (both are Communication Experts). Home can be much more relaxed because either person can slip and the other can fix things up.

I think what you are describing (being invisible) is what I call the "therapy situation."

The great thing I believe is that the "therapy situation" is ideal for communicating with children. And children learn from examples. Thus parents who know how to use those great communication skills (yours or mine) tend to raise kids who pick it up. (Well, gee, that is the way mommy/daddy talks/listens.)

One of the scary things found in studies in the late 1970's, was that individual therapy tended to destroy relationships/marriages. I recall friends/therapists who read these studies and who refused to see individuals who were in a relationship. They didn't want to break up the relationship.

I believe the underlying cause of that tendency of one-to-one therapy to destroy marriage had to do with communication. Here's a story I tell myself about this. "If I see a therapist, who is an expert communicator, who knows how to hear and understand me, I get to love it. I really develop an appetite for that therapist or for therapy - that space where I easily feel heard and understood. Communication is soooo nice. Then I go home to my partner who is a 'hopelessly flawed' communicator. I almost never feel heard or understood. I am interrupted all the time. It's no fun. I compare the two situations, my therapist (easy and fun), my partner (difficult and a pain in the butt), and over time I resent my partner more and more. The therapist seems to be able to chat with me easily and pleasantly. Why can't my partner??? My partner doesn't even try! Aarrgggh. Ok, get rid of partner."

The problem was that the Therapist was a Communication Expert and the client never learned to be one, nor did the partner at home. I believe it takes only one Communication Expert to make communication smooth. (By the way, I use this principle in running groups, (See Communologue on my website.) being at the beginning the only Communication Expert and eventually guiding more and more attendees into how to do it.)

Perhaps those principles of Communologue, or of having a Communication Expert present, can be adopted to Marriage Advocates.

Just some more thinking.


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #79465
03/09/11 10:18 PM
03/09/11 10:18 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I do not believe that there is a correct way to do communication.
I see it the same way. I also believe that there are ways that are more effective than others. I come to this conclusion not because of some pre-determined theory, but based on experience. One of the delights I get from the classes I attend is that we practice different ways of responding. The arbiter of what was more or less effective is the one playing the role of speaker. It is remarkable how small differences in a response can affect how a response is received.

One thing I was working with the other night had to do with the energy in the response. The words were identical, and I responded with different levels of energy to a critical remark that was said with intensity. Okay, it was less deliberate on my part - since I tend to be somewhat low-key to begin with, the feedback was that the speaker was not being "reached" by my responses. My coming with much lower energy than they caused a disconnect, and they didn't feel my response "got" them - until I raised the intensity of my response to just below theirs. When I was able to do that, I could see them visibly relax at that point. The words were the same in all cases - the only difference was the intensity, and my early responses were clearly not as effective as the later ones. Does that mean they were "wrong" or even "ineffective?" No - they were what they were, neither right nor wrong. Give a choice, I would pick the higher-intensity response - and since I have observed this phenomenon over and over, would (for myself at least) work on always matching the speaker's intensity in similar situations.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I hear your frustration at not being able to share by showing. I will just have to PreValidate and salute you for the work you do. I think it would be fun to have a video tape of you doing it. Remember, I believe this works well for you. And I believe "what works" is cool.
I'll work on that. Actually I do have some videos of me coaching another person listening and validating someone, but the person is not comfortable with it being shared.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I built my learned ways of communicating with Sandra around Mirroring. That teaching tool I think creates a certain discipline that is different from what you are doing in many ways. One of the differences is that Mirroring focuses on the reciprocal roles of Sending and Receiving - guiding one into Sending clearly and flawlessly while the other is guided into Receiving clearly and flawlessly. And then switching sides.
I recognize this style from Hendrix's IMAGO work. With my wife, it is more the case of reciprocal over time. If she has something important to communicate, I listen without any expectation of reciprocation in that moment (at least that is the intention- not 100% successful there). If something comes up that I do want to say, then when she is fully heard and knows I understand, then it is my "turn." If not, however, then that's the end of that interaction.

If I have something important to say, then (ideally) she likewise listens without expectation of her saying anything - unless something comes up that she has input for.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Since no one is ever perfect, the word "flawlessly" includes specific ways to recognize and recover from slips and stumbles. Reciprocal roles to me means that both people learn both roles.
There is a wonderful phrase from Pia Mellody: "Perfectly imperfect." Which I take to mean something similar to "flawlessly" including the slips and stumbles. In the case of my wife, we do "know" both roles since we both study from the same person. However, even if my wife didn't, it wouldn't change how I approached our communication.
Originally Posted By: ATurtle

Or if one is trained and the other is not, communication runs smoothly cuz there is at least one person who knows both Sending and Receiving principles and skills, well. I often think of these situations as the "therapy situation" (one person is a Communication Expert) and the "home situation" (both are Communication Experts). Home can be much more relaxed because either person can slip and the other can fix things up.
Not being a therapist, I would have to come up with a different term. There is no difference in how I approach interacting with someone who has learned these skills and someone who hasn't.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I think what you are describing (being invisible) is what I call the "therapy situation."
Perhaps - except that I try to be invisible when listening regardless of to whom.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
The great thing I believe is that the "therapy situation" is ideal for communicating with children. And children learn from examples. Thus parents who know how to use those great communication skills (yours or mine) tend to raise kids who pick it up. (Well, gee, that is the way mommy/daddy talks/listens.)
That's why I think that every couple about to get married would benefit by first learning this! With children I have seen it make all the difference. And they seem to pick the skills up much more quickly than adults.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I believe the underlying cause of that tendency of one-to-one therapy to destroy marriage had to do with communication.
A couple of weeks ago, a marriage counselor my wife and I once saw attended a communications class taught by my mentor (I help her out on these classes). She was very impressed with what she was learning and said she intended to start using it in her practice.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I believe it takes only one Communication Expert to make communication smooth.
I totally agree with this. The attendees at these classes are overwhelmingly women, many of whose partners would rather have their head in a vice than take a communications seminar. While it can be frustrating, I believe a crucial element of them learning communication skills is to validate/prevaliate their partner in that. And since it only takes one to tango in this case, it is how they respond (or react) that makes the difference, not what the other person does.


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #79897
03/10/11 07:25 PM
03/10/11 07:25 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
Originally Posted By: fddlr3
One thing I was working with the other night had to do with the energy in the response.


I like your observations on this. The way I explain it, if a person has a high energy send and I respond with low energy, they can easily think that I am giving in to their energy. If I respond or track their energy level (not the content, mind you) up and down, they will tend to feel safer and relax. I think it a matter of maintaining at the energy level the Friend-Friend tone. Besides, people who use high energy may either a) be trying to bully me or b) feeling very passionate at the time. Rising to their energy level balances out the bully situation or proves that I can accept their passion. Either way it seems to work.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
I recognize this style from Hendrix's IMAGO work. With my wife, it is more the case of reciprocal over time. If she has something important to communicate, I listen without any expectation of reciprocation in that moment (at least that is the intention- not 100% successful there). If something comes up that I do want to say, then when she is fully heard and knows I understand, then it is my "turn." If not, however, then that's the end of that interaction.
You may have missed that I built my communication style based on Harville's work. I actually differ strongly from his group's teaching. I've had a lot of clients, ex-Imago, who visit me to learn the "other stuff."

One reflection was that I believe Imago was based on being taught in a workshop. The tool, Couple's Dialogue, was a thing/skill you could teach in 20 hours of workshop and then the couple would take it home and practice. As a teaching tool for a 20 hour session, I don't think it bad. But at home we, and I imagine most couples, learn from it and modify it all over the place. Some, certainly the trainers, seem to more or less rigidly stick to the weekend format of couple's dialogue. I think that the way you go about communicating is right on for how couples would have improved on Imago couple's dialogue.

I was taught to say that "all you have to do is keep dialoguing" - meaning to use couples dialogue. I learned to throw that out. I re-framed Mirroring as a teaching tool (not a goal) which teaches the skills necessary to make people feel heard, and the goal is to learn how to easily make people feel heard, and then later understood. One of those many skills is actually mirroring. One of the skills is knowing when to mirror. One of the skills is knowing how accurately you need to mirror at this point. One of the skills in patience. One of the skills is how to handle questions. One of the skills is how to handle the flow of words. etc.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
Not being a therapist, I would have to come up with a different term. There is no difference in how I approach interacting with someone who has learned these skills and someone who hasn't.

Well, I think of you as a therapist - my definition of the term. And I imagine there are differences that you say there are not.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I think what you are describing (being invisible) is what I call the "therapy situation."
Perhaps - except that I try to be invisible when listening regardless of to whom.


Bet I can split hairs on this one. My goal is to be visible, so that they can feel heard and validated by someone. I want them to experience talking to someone. I want them to learn to speak simply and candidly while simultaneously thinking a bit about the status of the "other." I want to be facilitating, while not invisible.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
That's why I think that every couple about to get married would benefit by first learning this! With children I have seen it make all the difference. And they seem to pick the skills up much more quickly than adults.


I think it interesting that Mirroring came from studies of what a three year old child is needing when they say, "Dad, I'm a ninja turtle." As I understand it, Mirroring came from studies of child development. I often teach that if a kid says something and you mirror, the child's brain development speeds up. If you ignore the kid or correct them, their brain development slows. I think it is nice to have the easy ability to Mirror in my pocket - so to speak.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
A couple of weeks ago, a marriage counselor my wife and I once saw attended a communications class taught by my mentor (I help her out on these classes). She was very impressed with what she was learning and said she intended to start using it in her practice.


Yep. I believe there are lots of Marriage Counselors who have a lot to learn. I certainly do.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I believe it takes only one Communication Expert to make communication smooth.
I totally agree with this. The attendees at these classes are overwhelmingly women, many of whose partners would rather have their head in a vice than take a communications seminar. While it can be frustrating, I believe a crucial element of them learning communication skills is to validate/prevaliate their partner in that. And since it only takes one to tango in this case, it is how they respond (or react) that makes the difference, not what the other person does.


Good one. Seems to me usually people like to follow, learn from others. They hate being pushed. You might check in your class for how many are clingers who have an avoider at home and whom they regularly overwhelm with talk. Topic #2.

By the way, in my experience, most clingers are women and most avoiders are men. You and I are probably somewhat odd men out.


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #80036
03/11/11 12:28 AM
03/11/11 12:28 AM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
I appreciate the comments regarding energy. I think we are pretty much in alignment that matching energy is an important element to the process.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Besides, people who use high energy may either a) be trying to bully me or b) feeling very passionate at the time. Rising to their energy level balances out the bully situation or proves that I can accept their passion. Either way it seems to work.
That has been my experience as well. I like how you put this!

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
You may have missed that I built my communication style based on Harville's work. I actually differ strongly from his group's teaching. I've had a lot of clients, ex-Imago, who visit me to learn the "other stuff."
I think his approach to dialogue is a very good first step, especially for a couple that really struggles with communication. I think it's so valuable to slow things down and take turns listening and reflecting until the other feels they have been understood. I also have observed that taking it out of the sterile workshop/counselor's office environment can be most challenging. I was once told by a therapist whose spouse was also a therapist that "we don't use that stuff on each other." That felt very uncomfortable to me. There is a phrase "eating your own dog food" that I think is applicable! It's very encouraging to hear that you have modified it (for the better, from what I've seen!) and also that couples are themselves adapting it to their own circumstances.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
One of those many skills is actually mirroring. One of the skills is knowing when to mirror. One of the skills is knowing how accurately you need to mirror at this point. One of the skills in patience. One of the skills is how to handle questions. One of the skills is how to handle the flow of words. etc.
Indeed! Not to mention knowing when to hold 'm, knowing when to fold 'em ... wink

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Well, I think of you as a therapist - my definition of the term. And I imagine there are differences that you say there are not.
I take that as a compliment! smile And I believe you are right, although the differences seem subtle to me, and they have to do with whether the person with whom I'm interacting has studied the skills or not. When they have, there is a more discerning sense of what is going on - they are aware that I am listening in a certain way, and are able to switch and listen to me more readily than one who has not. I have some friends who contact me just to listen to them, if you can believe that. It actually has helped me with boundaries, since I am happy to do that when it is comfortable for me and convenient.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Bet I can split hairs on this one. My goal is to be visible, so that they can feel heard and validated by someone. I want them to experience talking to someone. I want them to learn to speak simply and candidly while simultaneously thinking a bit about the status of the "other." I want to be facilitating, while not invisible.
You win the bet! wink

I'll have to think about this some more.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I think it interesting that Mirroring came from studies of what a three year old child is needing when they say, "Dad, I'm a ninja turtle." As I understand it, Mirroring came from studies of child development. I often teach that if a kid says something and you mirror, the child's brain development speeds up. If you ignore the kid or correct them, their brain development slows. I think it is nice to have the easy ability to Mirror in my pocket - so to speak.
Very nice indeed! And wonderful that children would be approached with that energy rather than being made wrong so often. (Was that Haim Ginnott's work?)

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Yep. I believe there are lots of Marriage Counselors who have a lot to learn. I certainly do.
This one was quite special - she introduced us to Hendrix's work and facilitated some very helpful work on childhood stuff. Not only is she is always learning, but is also on her own journey herself. This translates into more of a partnership when working with her than a Counselor/Client one.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Seems to me usually people like to follow, learn from others. They hate being pushed. You might check in your class for how many are clingers who have an avoider at home and whom they regularly overwhelm with talk. Topic #2.
This seems to be a very consistent pattern with many people.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
By the way, in my experience, most clingers are women and most avoiders are men. You and I are probably somewhat odd men out.
I am definitely odd, as my wife is wont to remind me. grin
What I have found in learning these communication skills is that they have been a great leveler in that regard. My proclivity is actually towards the avoider, and this has helped me move more towards my wife, who has clinger tendencies. Interestingly, the more I move away from the avoider, the less she tends to cling. I'm sure you have observed this phenomenon in many couples.


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #80108
03/11/11 03:37 AM
03/11/11 03:37 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
Originally Posted By: fddlr3
That has been my experience as well. I like how you put this!
Tis fun to chat with someone who focuses so hard on this. I am grateful to you and for you sharing you ideas and differences. I am glad you are teaching and sharing your thoughts.

I enjoy this. I wonder how many are reading our give and take and are following or getting lost or in between.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
I think his, Harville Hendrix, approach to dialogue is a very good first step, especially for a couple that really struggles with communication. I was once told by a therapist whose spouse was also a therapist that "we don't use that stuff on each other." That felt very uncomfortable to me.


You may get a kick out of this. A significant step forward for Sandra and I occurred as we a) noticed many many Imago Therapists not using the skills they were teaching and b) noticed Imago Therapists exploding into communication fights with each other. I was lucky enough to have tapes or transcripts or emails of some of these explosions. I found, in every case, MasterTalk was at the center of the explosion. When therapists shifted from being dialogical, which they were all trained in, into using MasterTalk then Bloooowwwweeeee. What a great set of wake-up calls. Great learning for us.

Originally Posted By: fddlr3
I take that as a compliment! smile And I believe you are right, although the differences seem subtle to me, and they have to do with whether the person with whom I'm interacting has studied the skills or not.


Twas, is a compliment.


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #80906
03/13/11 03:19 AM
03/13/11 03:19 AM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I enjoy this. I wonder how many are reading our give and take and are following or getting lost or in between.
I too am very much appreciating the interaction. It is especially enjoyable to hear the depth of thought that has been put into this.

It is my hope that if anyone reading has any questions, concerns, or disagreements that they chime in.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
You may get a kick out of this. A significant step forward for Sandra and I occurred as we a) noticed many many Imago Therapists not using the skills they were teaching and b) noticed Imago Therapists exploding into communication fights with each other. I was lucky enough to have tapes or transcripts or emails of some of these explosions. I found, in every case, MasterTalk was at the center of the explosion. When therapists shifted from being dialogical, which they were all trained in, into using MasterTalk then Bloooowwwweeeee. What a great set of wake-up calls. Great learning for us.
I guess "physician heal thyself" never goes out of fashion!

One thing I am coming to accept more and more is the extent to which effective communication is largely a function of my attitude than any particular technique.

Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Twas, is a compliment.
smile


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #81021
03/13/11 04:53 PM
03/13/11 04:53 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,309
Colorado
LovingAnyway Offline
Member
LovingAnyway  Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,309
Colorado
Al,

If you click on the "Peer Counseling" forum link, it shows a list of the threads in the forum. How many replies and how many views.

So do answer your question...1148 views.

smile

See? I heard you.

LA


The Paradoxical Commandments

Married 28 years/Together 30
Recovered 10 years
MALovingAnyway@gmail.com
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #81222
03/14/11 11:30 AM
03/14/11 11:30 AM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,705
F
ForeverHers Offline
Member
ForeverHers  Offline
Member
F
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,705
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
I enjoy this. I wonder how many are reading our give and take and are following or getting lost or in between.


So you think that people are incapable of following such a discussion unless they agree 100% with what is being said, even though the two of you don't agree 100% with what each other believes in? Perhaps you equate not agreeing 100% with being "lost," since you also seem to equate "my way" with being "the only" way.


Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
You may get a kick out of this. A significant step forward for Sandra and I occurred as we a) noticed many many Imago Therapists not using the skills they were teaching and b) noticed Imago Therapists exploding into communication fights with each other. I was lucky enough to have tapes or transcripts or emails of some of these explosions. I found, in every case, MasterTalk was at the center of the explosion. When therapists shifted from being dialogical, which they were all trained in, into using MasterTalk then Bloooowwwweeeee. What a great set of wake-up calls. Great learning for us.


[Comment removed...original intact in the Thunderdome.]

Last edited by AntigoneRisen; 04/25/11 02:17 PM. Reason: TOS Violations - Hot Button Issues Go In The TD
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: ForeverHers] #81430
03/14/11 08:59 PM
03/14/11 08:59 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
AlTurtle Offline
Retired Therapist
AlTurtle  Offline
Retired Therapist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 908
Northwest Washington State, US...
Welcome back, Foreverhers, and thanks for keeping your posting short. I've got stomach flu and not too much energy.

Originally Posted By: ForeverHers
So you think that people are incapable of following such a discussion unless they agree 100% with what is being said,

Wow, were do you get this stuff. I think if I wanted to express the opposites of my beliefs, your sentence might be close. As it is, I doubt I have suggested that people need to agree with me at all, even a tiny bit, in over 20 years. I fight for their right to disagree completely.

Originally Posted By: ForeverHers
even though the two of you don't agree 100% with what each other believes in?
I assume fddlr3 and I are refining our understandings of where we disagree. I'm enjoying the differences.

Originally Posted By: ForeverHers
Perhaps you equate not agreeing 100% with being "lost,"

Thanks for asking. I was making up that our conversations were on several areas at Marriage Advocates and I moved some of them to the new Topic #3b on MasterTalk and people might have trouble finding the pieces. Again, I don't get where you get your idea that Agreeing in important to me. Tisn't.

Originally Posted By: ForeverHers
since you also seem to equate "my way" with being "the only" way.

Wow! Ok, so you believe that I think my way is the only way? Did I get that?

I don't think that stuff is coming out of me. What's going on in you?

Tis all I can handle today, I think. But you and I seem to be so different, that I think we should chat slowly and in little bits. Makes for good communication, I believe.

Thanks for showing up.


Principles are simple. Applying them is a tough U-Do-It project. Go 4 it!
Al Turtle
Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: AlTurtle] #81605
03/15/11 04:08 AM
03/15/11 04:08 AM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,705
F
ForeverHers Offline
Member
ForeverHers  Offline
Member
F
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,705
Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Welcome back, Foreverhers, and thanks for keeping your posting short. I've got stomach flu and not too much energy.

Sorry to hear that are not feeling well. I hope you get over it soon and back to robust health.


Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
ForeverHers: So you think that people are incapable of following such a discussion unless they agree 100% with what is being said.

AlTurtle:Wow, were do you get this stuff. I think if I wanted to express the opposites of my beliefs, your sentence might be close. As it is, I doubt I have suggested that people need to agree with me at all, even a tiny bit, in over 20 years. I fight for their right to disagree completely.

Well, since you ask, it's how I feel. Glad to hear that the feeling isn't the truth.

Where do I get this stuff? I suppose it's because of the way you have ignored practically every question I posed to you, especially related to your concept of MasterTalk. Ignoring someone is, in my opinion, the exact opposite of validation and seems to send the message "do as I say, not as I do."

I also suppose some of it is due to the rather impersonal nature of posting on systems like this. I tend to favor using all 5 senses in communication and find the "written word only" means of communication to be severly limiting, and often detrimental, to good conversation, listening, and understanding.


Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
ForeverHers: even though the two of you don't agree 100% with what each other believes in?

AlTurtle: I assume fddlr3 and I are refining our understandings of where we disagree. I'm enjoying the differences.

I am enjoying reading about the differences and the give-and-take too. I especially liked fddlr3's references to what is lost in communication that is not face-to-face and the potential difficulties it can present to validation and long-term helping of others who present with their issues on systems such as this. It's one of the reasons I have for years advocated for direct joint Marital Counseling for people seeking to recover their marriages as being an essential component of recovery efforts.


Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
ForeverHers: Perhaps you equate not agreeing 100% with being "lost,"

AlTurtle: Thanks for asking. I was making up that our conversations were on several areas at Marriage Advocates and I moved some of them to the new Topic #3b on MasterTalk and people might have trouble finding the pieces. Again, I don't get where you get your idea that Agreeing in important to me. Tisn't.

See the earlier referenced feelings and reactions to previous attempts to engage discussion on points of disagreement.


Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
ForeverHers: since you also seem to equate "my way" with being "the only" way.

AlTurtle: Wow! Ok, so you believe that I think my way is the only way? Did I get that?

I don't think that stuff is coming out of me. What's going on in you?

Call it "guruitis" I guess. As I have repeatedly said in several posts, I agree with a lot, the majority, of the things you have written. But I do disagree with the MasterTalk definition being applied to all situations because it implies, if not directly states, that there is no "true truth," and that is something that I disgree with because of my faith. I don't agree that "all things are relative," which seems to be the underlying premise of your distain for anything that states or implies a 'single truth' and forms the basis of the term "MasterTalk".


Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Tis all I can handle today, I think. But you and I seem to be so different, that I think we should chat slowly and in little bits. Makes for good communication, I believe.

We may be quite different, and we may be quite similar in many ways. I don't know you well enough to speculate one way or the other. I'm good with slowly and in little bits, because this method of communication (BBS style, delayed, without inflection, posture, facial expression, etc.) is very limiting.


Originally Posted By: AlTurtle
Thanks for showing up.

And I thank you for taking the time while not feeling well to show up too.



In Christ-like love at all times.

So that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves have received from God. (2Cor 1:4b)

Re: Validation and Invalidation [Re: Fiddler] #81738
03/15/11 03:11 PM
03/15/11 03:11 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
Fiddler Offline
Board of Directors
Fiddler  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,219
Monterey, CA
I want to continue with some more thoughts about how I approach listening/validation. First a recap of what I think I've already said.

My sole purpose when listening is to understand the message that the speaker is sending and, ideally, have them know that I understand. The reason I say "ideally" is that I have no control over whether this happens or not; I can only do my part to the best of my abilities and skills.

An assumption I have is that whenever I perceive there to be a "charge" beneath the presenting thought (for example, when I perceive that the other person's Lizard has shown up), there is an underlying message that is what is really being expressed. That is, in these areas what is really trying to be communicated cannot be found in the words themselves as they are expressed to begin with. So listening is the process of decoding that hidden message.

There are two elements I have found to inhibit the process of decoding the message: (1) The use of the word "I" which directs the attention of the speaker towards the listener; (2) Asking questions.

I have noticed that directing the attention of a speaker towards the listener tends to take them away from getting in touch with what they are trying to express, the message beneath the words. Often someone is not even aware of what they might actually be expressing.

This is why I find the "so you…" to be more effective than "I hear you say …" The former directs attention to the speaker (what is meant), whereas the latter directs attention to the listener (what the lister heard). The two responses "mean" the same thing; however, I don't want the speaker to be thinking about what I "heard" but rather what they are thinking and feeling.

There are (at least) two reasons I avoid direct questions. The first is that (especially in a "charged" area where there be Lizards), receiving a question tends to trigger unpleasant emotions. This may harken back to childhood where questions often meant the child's Lizard was under attack. "Who ate the cookies?" "Why did you do that?" etc. So I have found that, questions often create feelings of being unsafe, even slightly fearful.

The second reason I eschew questions when listening is that even if no emotions are triggered, a person often has to go to their "heads" to answer, and I have noticed this tends to direct them away from what they are feeling and meaning. In other words, when the focus is on the "answer" it is away from themselves. So how do I ask a question? I'm glad you asked! With a statement of course! It turns out that every question can be rephrased as a statement, and I have found that phrasing a question as a statement tends to facilitate the speaker going deeper into what they are expressing.

So for me, phrases like "Did I get that right?" are avoided. IRL, it is usually clear, if not from the words, then from the body language or the tone of voice that I may not have been accurately reflecting them, or there is something discordant in what I have said. I find saying something like "So that's not quite it" to be more helpful in facilitating the process.

Since what is often taught emphasizes asking questions and statements like "I hear you say" or "If I understand you correctly", I am offering alternatives that I have found to be useful. Consider trying them on for size to see if any of this might work for you.


"Grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change, the courage to change the one I can, and the wisdom to know that one is me."
Page 6 of 16 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 15 16

Moderated by  Fiddler 

Newest Members
Love_Smacked, starfire, JoyfulMimi, bruers, shattered72
2048 Registered Users
Latest Topics(Posts)
Hearts Blessing5
Woman urges NC lawmakers to end child marriage: For her it was a ‘life sentence’3
63 Marriage Facts1
COVID-19 and the Increased Likelihood of Affairs3
Updates Divorce Stats4
no more rainbow members?9
BR - The Art of War - Sun Tzu5
Questions & Answers About Marriage---responses from 7-10 year old kids4
seeing new members on mobile version5
Return of the Goddess31
Community Information
2048Members
1Penalty Box
6Suspended

42

Forums
8500Topics
463397Posts
 
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1
(Release build 20180111)
Page Time: 0.032s Queries: 15 (0.011s) Memory: 3.4372 MB (Peak: 3.8793 MB) Zlib enabled in php.ini Server Time: 2021-12-02 01:02:21 UTC