Invalidation

Post Reply New Topic

Overall, invalidation is, IMO, a very serious issue and one close to my heart, as two people who are very close and dear to me have responded to invalidation from others with self harm (cutting). This very simply summarises it:

http://eqi.org/invalid3.htm

Everyone has experienced invalidation at some time, some people have grown up with it on a daily (hourly) basis; so I really believe we have to take it seriously as a form of harm. We all bring "baggage" to a topic like this; and the words people use, while clear, don't always clearly indicate the intention (or the tone) of what is said; an innocuous comment can be said in a malicious tone, and carries a very different meaning from the same thing said with kind intention.

On forums we don't get to hear the tone as clearly; misunderstandings arise. Most of the outbreaks of extreme conflict on WP start with one person invalidating another - often someone with a grouch invalidating an OP. (I am not referring to this thread, I mean generally). Then, sometimes, a bit of mobbing goes on, then defenders of the OP enter the fray, then they get abused, and the thread proceeds to uproar/being locked. How familiar is that?? There's a world of difference between saying "I disagree with that view" (disagreement with acceptance of the other's right to differ implied) and "you are a fkg idiot if you think that" (a power trip). Who needs it? I have nearly left WP several times because of the latter kind of hostility.

If we could stop invalidation for just a day - the world, and WP, would be a better place I think. It's a valid topic Dianthus; thank you for raising it. The length of the thread and the strong feelings it has evoked show how important an issue it is. Kraftie, I know you mean well towards others and that's your point of view; you and I have very different takes on this issue, though as I said, we all have different levels and kinds of baggage re any topic.

I've spent a lifetime being "invalidated." I know how if feels...trust me.

I think we are in agreement about the PHENOMENON; where we may not agree is the METHODOLOGY in dealing with it.

I've known people who have cut themselves. I know somebody who committed suicide.

I'm not naïve about the issue. I'm not in some ivory tower.

My feeling is: If one becomes enveloped by something like "invalidation," one could become immersed in it--become blinded by it--even drown in it. In this case, one has a view of it which precludes seeing a way out of it.

Frequently, immersion in certain ideas creates a situation where one is stymied, and is in a state of checkmate.

I was immersed in myself until I was 5 1/2 years old. I was stuck in a whirlpool that I could not extricate myself from. When I was 5 1/2 I saw a slight glimmer of life outside of that whirlpool, through (at first) a very small lit in the armor. Instinctually, I knew I had to force the small slit to become a big slit. The only way I could do that is to not think about being in the whirlpool.

I have noticed that with certain people it's like they just sap my energy. I've been dealing with people trying to convince me that I might be invalidating someone somewhere with my posts (though no one has actually said I have hurt them, it's just a possibility) and they've ended up invalidating my feelings and experiences because I don't fit what they think I should be saying... or something like that? I'm not really sure, they're not being clear except that I need to stop talking and just accept what they say as truth even though it's not...

How do you respond to that? There doesn't seem to be any way to get them to understand what they're doing, because it's like they don't actually see me as a person, they just see something I wrote and think someone might get offended or something. And that's why I want to be a hermit, because a lot of these people who are invalidating my experiences and feelings didn't start out like this.

People will get offended no matter what. And they don't want to be convinced otherwise--especially in the heat of "battle."

A difference of opinion does not "invalidate" anybody. It's just the way of the world. Not everybody can have the same opinion. It's just not possible.

Why let people make you become a hermit? You're ceding your right to your opinion in this instance. You have a voice, too. And your voice may very well be the right one.

Just because I won't back down doesn't mean I'm being aggressive. I'm not an aggressive person--I'm quite passive, actually. It's just that I know I have the right to exist, and nobody is going to take that away from me. I will not be "invalidated" in that way.

If people want to insert some kind of other meaning into what I say, go right ahead. But I know what I"m saying and what I mean.

I'm not sure whether you mean people on WP are doing this to you, or people in your personal life (or both?)

How you might respond depends on the circumstance, setting, the nature of the relationship.


If it is happening in your personal life, say with a friend - you could seek clarification using the 'anything else' technique:

"I notice how you continually say I might upset someone by saying x because they might disagree; well, you can't please everyone all of the time. Is there a particular reason you keep saying this to me?"

And they might respond, "well you say xyz and I don't agree with that".

You: "Ok, we can agree to disagree on that, I'm ok with us having different points of view; anything else?"

They: "Well Susan was upset when you didn't like her new dress"

You: "OK, I was asked for my opinion and that was it - I didn't like her new dress. However I guess I could have found something to like about it, the colour was ok. Anything else?"

They "Well you shouldn't say things that upset people"

You: "I don't set out to upset people, and all of us unintentionally upset others from time to time. Anything else?"

If they genuinely care for you, they will seek some point of compromise/acknowledge your right to hold different opinions; if they don't care about you or your feelings, they will just endlessly continue to try to diminish you by replaying the past so that you are always shown in a negative light. And you will have gained a lot of information about where they are really coming from. I hope this is in some way helpful...

PS: Watch out for their use of "shoulds". When someone is always telling you what you "should" do, it's sometimes a sign of a very controlling, dominating personality, who is insensitive to the feelings of others.

It's elsewhere on the internet, and they've made it pretty clear they don't care about me.

And don't worry, kraftie, there's no way I can actually not run my mouth off online. I need people to talk to, to bounce ideas around with so I can get a better understanding of everything around me. It's just after dealing with people who only care if their opinions are validated, it leaves me completely emotionally exhausted and I need a break.

My recent interaction has shown that much of their personalities. :/

I've been greatly enjoying reading all the posts in this thread, and realizing that validation means that we acknowledge someone is feeling a certain way and we should respect that and not dismiss it. It doesn't mean their feelings are the truth of reality, and validation isn't praising them... I think I've been seeing people claim it to mean all those things so much that I started believing it, especially since my experiences and feelings weren't apparently valid.

You said in a previous post, something along the lines that you dislike academic study of invalidation. However to some extent I do want to approach this subject from what you might call an academic perspective.

I started this thread off with a list of invalidating statements, because I think the language itself is important. I think the way people use language (their first language) is reflective of inner attitudes and intentions and beliefs. It's not an accident that the words come out of a person's mouth (or fingers) that way.

I think it is very interesting to examine the semantics associated with invalidation. I like it and I enjoy talking about it, and if others don't that is fine, no one is being forced to participate.

I would also like for people reading this thread to feel comfortable reflecting on their own experiences with being told statements like the ones in the list, and to validate their own genuine feelings and perceptions associated with such statements.

For instance, I've seen many people on this forum talk about the very first one on the list (being told to "smile" and I experienced that one quite a lot myself growing up). That's a common one for people on the spectrum, along with the comments like don't look so sad, don't make that face, etc.

This can be doubly invalidating for autistic people, because first off the message is given that it's not okay to have or show certain emotions...but additionally, because people assume that we have emotions that we may not even have in that moment. It's disorienting because the person is told not to do something, that they are not doing, and assumed to feel something that they do not feel (or did not previously, but following this comment may indeed begin to feel sad or angry that they were misunderstood and/or commanded to display a different emotion). In essence, it's a psychological double bind.

Furthermore, people in general are usually brought up to deny or suppress their own feelings for the sake of honoring someone's good intentions...so if the person apparently meant well by saying something like "cheer up" it may be socially unacceptable for a person to express their real thoughts or feelings about hearing this comment.

Using "good intentions" or "meaning well" as a way to negate a person's feelings is a very common form of invalidation.

More than anything, I want to encourage people here to validate themselves...to validate their own feelings, emotions, perceptions, etc.

However, this type of comment really does not foster that:



When you make an absolute statement like "where there is none" it is a flat denial that any other perspective could be valid.

It implies that the person who feels invalidated, and/or perceives it happening, does not have valid feelings or perceptions.

Using the word "finding" implies that the feelings and/or perceptions about invalidation are not genuine, and are somehow irrelevant.

But when you say "finding invalidation where there is none" it implies that a person who does this is downright delusional.




I like the last part of what you said..."believing in our own validity."

However, I would not make it a "have to"...I don't believe we "have to" do anything about the feeling of invalidation. The "have to" is what makes it invalidating, because it becomes a command about how a person should change their feelings.

I don't think we are in agreement about how invalidation happens, or what it looks like.

On the internet, think there are cultural differences towards invalidation.

For me IRL invalidating can a cultural form of affection, to a non native, an Irish compliment would be recieved as an insult, because its not the intent, its the impact. Here though, all sorts of comments on personal flaws are genuine terms of endearment, it comes from an emotionally stunted place, we undermine another as a form of reinforcement. It would be much too intense to just say a nice thing in direct terms.

Discussing how a statement has hurt you will be met with unmerciful slagging/ribbing and possibly a permanent nickname related to the thing that hurt you.
There are two general options, engage in a slagging match, whereby you focus on every flaw in the other person and make gentle jokes about them each time you meet this person, like an ongoing game of emotional chicken/nervous, or you laugh at their jokes about you, tell them they're an eejit and treat it as water off a ducks back.

It could make your mind melt, lol.

On a serious note it does make identifying intended invalidation more difficult, its necessary to make that distinction here, from a cultural perspective, intent is the actual measure, not the impact.

I have heard lot of those things. What is worse is when I would be having anxiety or when my brain would be acting up so I would be worrying and worrying and my dad would tell me I was getting too excited or I was getting upset over nothing or that worrying was a waste of time of energy. My parents would sometimes get mad at me for my anxiety and people also don't like to hear my same compulsive thoughts over and over when I am very upset about something or hurt. It's like I can only talk about it once and they are done. I have had some online friends who listened to me whine about it over and over including my husband.

I have also gotten there is nothing wrong with me and being told I am normal. I knew that was BS when I was ten, eleven, and twelve.

Is it invalidation when on the news (BBC) everyday virtually when a reporter uses "everybody" thinks this or that, or "nobody" would ever have imagined... I get offended by these absolute groups all the time, because I don't or do think these things. Are they just pushing their propaganda or are these reporters just thoughtless and not screened for such assumptions?

When a reporter says that "everybody" thinks a certain way, it's an obvious generalization--and it's quite wrong.

One could feel invalidated based upon the generalization--but why?

It would be useful, I believe, for the "invalidated" person to discern the absurdity of these statements. These thought patterns are "valid," not "invalid." Why let something cause you to feel "invalidated"--when it's patently not true?

Just because someone thinks I'm a fool doesn't mean that I am actually a fool. I don't believe that line of reasoning constitutes a smokescreen of denial. Rather--I believe it serves to remind a person of the truthfulness of his/her validation.

I really make an effort, within real life, not to "invalidate" someone. I listen to what people say, and attempt to offer an objective analysis. I never claim to have the right answers; in fact, I almost always say that what I say (especially when it is "advice") is based on subjective experie

Ironically (not to feel sorry for myself), but I'm "invalidated" all the time, and I have to fight the Quagmire which is preconceived notions. I have to constantly prove my own validity. That's the way of the world, like it or not.

It's a Social Darwinist world. I don't believe in that philosophy at all.

But you can't back down----otherwise, you will invariably put yourself deeper into the quicksand, and isolate yourself further from the world (I believe).

I am a believer in the concept of "invalidation."

When I'm in conversation with somebody, I don't make "invalidating statements" like the ones stated in the article.

If somebody is cutting one's self, though (which is an expression of extreme anger at one's self), I can't "validate" that action. I have to try to prevent it, somehow. The emotion is valid--the actions resulting from the emotion, in my opinion, should not be made out to be valid

If somebody, in the throes of emotion, expresses sympathy with something like Nazi ideology, I can't just "validate" these sorts of thoughts. I will make an attempt refute those thoughts, no matter how "invalidating" my refutations appears to be. Advocating an ideology which killed millions of people is not "valid" in my book.

Obviously, the above is an extreme example--but there are certain things which are not "valid," and should not be made to be "valid" out of fear of "invalidating" someone.

I also strongly believe that one must offset people seeking to "invalidate" you by "validating"yourself in your mind. This is not false--it's usually true, actually.

I don't believe my opinion should be "set in stone." It's merely my opinion, based upon what I've experienced.

Can I ask what a good, not invalidating response would be to the following?

The school phoned my husband to come collect our child early for because he was too upset. My husband, who is at home and is unemployed, did not answer the phone. They phoned me, I phoned him, still no answer. He has anxiety about answering phones... I had to leave work early to do it. I had to ride my bike home, get the car from home, and drive to the school. Then go back to work. I hope you can see how this is kind of irritating. So later after I came back again, I asked him what we can do to avoid this in the future. He doesn't know. He tells me how incredibly stressful it is to answer a phone. I am trying to be understanding, but it is also very stressful for me to be responsible for doing everything for this family. I don't think asking him to answer the phone is asking too much. I didn't really say anything- my default these days is to just not talk about it, because I really don't know what to say. So you tell me, what should I say? Something that is not invalidating, yet changes this situation.

I haven't read all 14 pages of posts, so forgive me if I'm misinterpreting something here. But, I want to make a few short points.

I think kraftiekortie is right that, to feel invalidated, I have to accept the invalidation. I have to recognize the statement as invalidating and accept the invalidation as true. If I shrug it off, than I am not invalidated. Or if I don't recognize that the other person is trying to be invalidating (which could be quite common for me, I often don't recognize when someone is trying to insult me, trying to flirt, or trying to marginalize my feelings).

I think this is a good list, and it is helpful, but I also think that context and underlying meaning are very important because a lot of these statements can be made by someone who is really trying to help and be supportive. I can see how they can be invalidating, if they are intended to be so, but if they are meant sincerely, they are not invalidating.

Someone mentioned when their husband tells them they are overreacting. I also find this helpful because I know that I can overreact to things, and I don't always know when I am. It doesn't mean I'm not entitled to my emotions, because of course I am, but it is helpful to understand when I might not be experiencing something clearly. If I am angry about something but my husband tells me he thinks I'm overreacting, I can still be angry (and he's still going to hear it) but I may be less inclined to try to do something about whatever is making me angry and thus save myself embarrassment in the future once I realize there is nothing to be done.
I've had times when I've done something or said something to someone because I was angry about something they did and then later, sometimes many years later, I look back and figure out that the situation was different than I originally thought and there was no reason for me to be so upset. And then I get embarrassed about what I did or said. So if someone can reign me in a little bit, I'm happy for it.

I've experienced a lot of these statements from my parents, and it was damaging because I grew up to believe that my opinion, my feelings and my comfort are less valid and less important than everyone else's, so, Dianthus, you are right. I think the error is in this article's assumption that these statements are always invalidating and hurtful. Sometimes they can be helpful and correct.