Page 20 of 20 [ 313 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

dianthus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,138

07 Jun 2015, 6:21 pm

Amity wrote:
I think that it would be difficult to never invalidate another person, that would mean living your life for other people, instead of having a balance.

I agree it could be difficult, but I disagree that it would mean living your life for other people. That doesn't make any sense to me, and it seems like a really all or nothing perspective. Having a balance does not mean that you have to invalidate other people.

Quote:
How can one person care for another, if they do not resource themselves by caring about their own well-being too.


Too? I would say that people need to care for their own well-being first.



dianthus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,138

07 Jun 2015, 6:21 pm

Britte wrote:
Thank you for posting the list and for sharing your knowledge. I personally find it to be invaluable.


Thank you, I really appreciate that.



dianthus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,138

07 Jun 2015, 6:31 pm

WelcomeToHolland wrote:
dianthus wrote:
I would rather not intend any harm to other people, no matter how I feel towards them. Do you find that hypocritical?


Yes I do find it hypocritical.


That's quite a dilemma you've put yourself in. I hope you find a way out of it.



Amity
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,714
Location: Meandering

07 Jun 2015, 7:00 pm

dianthus wrote:
Amity wrote:
I think that it would be difficult to never invalidate another person, that would mean living your life for other people, instead of having a balance.

I agree it could be difficult, but I disagree that it would mean living your life for other people. That doesn't make any sense to me, and it seems like a really all or nothing perspective. Having a balance does not mean that you have to invalidate other people.

Quote:
How can one person care for another, if they do not resource themselves by caring about their own well-being too.


Too? I would say that people need to care for their own well-being first.


I did consider the use of the word too, but quite often parents seem prioritize their childrens needs above their own, the same if a loved one is ill, so it felt more accurate to use the word too in the context of balance within a relationship.

Ive said some of those things on that list to other people, I didn't intend to invalidate, regardless though I did invalidate them, and I reckon Ill do it again, no matter how hard I try not to.

So, never seems impossible, unless I walk around constantly prioritizing not invalidating other people. Its meant to be an absolute.
Quote:
Having a balance does not mean that you have to invalidate other people.
To me having a balance means imperfection, while trying not to invalidate.



Waterfalls
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,075

07 Jun 2015, 7:41 pm

WelcomeToHolland wrote:
Yes I do find it hypocritical.
---
Most of the advice was practical stuff about anxiety, nothing to do with invalidation (don't get me wrong, answering machines and caller id are good ideas but still not to do with speaking in a validating fashion). Yours was about how I should tell him how I feel, which is on the list in the OP of what not to say. I can't be bothered to go back and quote it but you can look- something like "but what about my feelings". Indeed I often think that, but that's invalidating. At the beginning of this thread I agreed but having read through it I changed my mind. I was confused for a while because what's being said doesn't make sense to me and I thought it didn't make sense because I was too stupid to understand it, but actually I think I understand it but happen to disagree. I just came to that conclusion just now. Sorry about that.

I think "but what about my feelings" is invalidating because if someone said that to me I'd feel they were making me guess how they feel and what to do. However, I don't feel I'm necessarily obligated to invalidate myself in order to validate others. If I am bothered by something and feel I need something, I don't see it as necessarily invalidating someone for instance who is screaming at me to say that I don't like being screamed at and please stop, or that I won't continue the conversation. Others might not agree, but I feel there's a big difference between an honest statement how I feel and what I want while acknowledging the other person may not comply, versus "what about my feelings". In your situation I don't see where you're wrong if you say you feel frustrated by all your husband is not doing, and he may in fact feel the same way. Nor does it have to be invalidating for you to have limits, we all need some limits what we tolerate from the world.



dianthus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,138

07 Jun 2015, 9:28 pm

Waterfalls wrote:
However, I don't feel I'm necessarily obligated to invalidate myself in order to validate others. If I am bothered by something and feel I need something, I don't see it as necessarily invalidating someone for instance who is screaming at me to say that I don't like being screamed at and please stop, or that I won't continue the conversation. Others might not agree, but I feel there's a big difference between an honest statement how I feel and what I want while acknowledging the other person may not comply, versus "what about my feelings".


I do agree with this and you raised a really good point. It's not invalidating to set limits. If I feel like the person is really directing their emotions AT me, and doing something that crosses my boundaries, I would ask them to stop. Or sometimes I would not even ask, I might just walk away and leave them to it. Sometimes a person can be so caught up in their own emotions that I feel like there really isn't anything I could say to them.

I've been in situations before where I felt like I had to tolerate people taking their emotions out on me, and I allowed some really abusive behaviors to go on...and inevitably I would have a knee-jerk reaction to fight back and attack the person. It would rise up like that because I had suppressed and invalidated my own emotions for so long.

"What about my feelings?" is exactly the kind of idea that would pop up in my mind at those times...not that I recall saying that exact phrase, I recall saying things that were far worse, but in any case it popped up like that because I had been putting all my feelings aside for the sake of the other person and/or whatever circumstances were going on.

It seems like people have the idea that not invalidating others means being self-sacrificing...well that kind of thinking sounds all too familiar to me, and it sounds like codependency. Also people keep talking as if not invalidating oneself and not invalidating others are two opposite polarities...actually, they go hand in hand.

Emotional invalidation arises out of not understanding and honoring emotions...including one's own. If a person invalidates their own emotions, it's pretty much inevitable that they will invalidate other people's emotions as well. It will just spontaneously arise out of a person's own self-talk, and come out in the way they talk to other people. Likewise if a person validates their own emotions, it is more natural to respect how others feel.



kamiyu910
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,036
Location: California

07 Jun 2015, 10:16 pm

btbnnyr wrote:
kamiyu910 wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
I don't find people ignoring me invalidating.
I don't need a lot of attention from others.

[...]


What if you're trying to talk to them and they refuse to acknowledge you at all?
Especially if they're talking to you while you're right there?
I try not to take offence to things, but being ignored/talked over is one thing that bugs me so much. I can never tell if I'm overreacting to it.


If someone doesn't want to engage with me, either online or in person, I just have to move on.
Usually, the person is not critical to my pursuit of the topic that caused me to try to engage them.
Perhaps other people will be more receptive.
If all the people I try to engage react the same way, then I am probably the one taking an ineffective approach and should try a different one.



That makes sense. I wish I could figure out a different approach. The one thing that's just really hard to move on from are people who are on my post, talking about me, and occasionally asking me questions and then ignoring the answer (I suppose that one could be explained by "they got the answer, that's done." but ignoring my questions or the comments with info? I just don't know... and I wasn't the only one who noticed and got mad, for once. That took me by surprise.)

There's a blogger online right that people have been mentioning off and on for the past 5+ years who takes anything said that doesn't agree with her views as an insult, and has even doxxed a woman because this woman asked for her money back on a product from the blogger. Sometimes there's no pleasing anyone, and why I try not to take anything as offensive, or try to figure out where the other person is coming from.


_________________
Your Aspie score: 171 of 200
Your Neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 40 of 200


WelcomeToHolland
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 583

08 Jun 2015, 10:37 am

dianthus wrote:
Waterfalls wrote:
However, I don't feel I'm necessarily obligated to invalidate myself in order to validate others. If I am bothered by something and feel I need something, I don't see it as necessarily invalidating someone for instance who is screaming at me to say that I don't like being screamed at and please stop, or that I won't continue the conversation. Others might not agree, but I feel there's a big difference between an honest statement how I feel and what I want while acknowledging the other person may not comply, versus "what about my feelings".


I do agree with this and you raised a really good point. It's not invalidating to set limits. If I feel like the person is really directing their emotions AT me, and doing something that crosses my boundaries, I would ask them to stop. Or sometimes I would not even ask, I might just walk away and leave them to it. Sometimes a person can be so caught up in their own emotions that I feel like there really isn't anything I could say to them.

I've been in situations before where I felt like I had to tolerate people taking their emotions out on me, and I allowed some really abusive behaviors to go on...and inevitably I would have a knee-jerk reaction to fight back and attack the person. It would rise up like that because I had suppressed and invalidated my own emotions for so long.

"What about my feelings?" is exactly the kind of idea that would pop up in my mind at those times...not that I recall saying that exact phrase, I recall saying things that were far worse, but in any case it popped up like that because I had been putting all my feelings aside for the sake of the other person and/or whatever circumstances were going on.

It seems like people have the idea that not invalidating others means being self-sacrificing...well that kind of thinking sounds all too familiar to me, and it sounds like codependency. Also people keep talking as if not invalidating oneself and not invalidating others are two opposite polarities...actually, they go hand in hand.

Emotional invalidation arises out of not understanding and honoring emotions...including one's own. If a person invalidates their own emotions, it's pretty much inevitable that they will invalidate other people's emotions as well. It will just spontaneously arise out of a person's own self-talk, and come out in the way they talk to other people. Likewise if a person validates their own emotions, it is more natural to respect how others feel.


This is a lot more realistic, from my experience, it's usually not a one-sided thing (one person is wrong, the other person is right). Anytime I have said mean or wrong things to him it has been a built up resentment coming to the surface like you said. Where I disagree is in the invalidation part- it seems opposite than what you're saying. When I validate myself and think, "My life sucks and my husband is useless and doesn't help me because he's as ass", I tend to start feeling resentful, and that's when I say the wrong things. When I invalidate myself, and think, "Get over yourself, your life is fine, stop feeling sorry for yourself, etc." I tend to be less resentful, and therefore more compassionate and nice. The rest of what you said sounds right though so it could just be my totally dysfunctional thinking, who knows, LOL.


_________________
Mum to two awesome kids on the spectrum (16 and 13 years old).


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

08 Jun 2015, 6:40 pm

WelcomeToHolland wrote:
So the other person has to change the way they feel about how you* feel? Isn't that kind of hypocritical? What should I say if I don't agree with the other person's reaction at all? I find it hard to completely separate "feelings" and "reactions" because reactions are deeply rooted in feelings.

It's possible to disagree with a reaction without being invalidating.

Quote:
E.g. a guy gets cut off while driving and he gets out of his car to shoot the other driver to death at a red light. He did this because he was angry about being cut off. One cannot really dispute that he was angry (if he wasn't, then he wouldn't be about to shoot the other driver to death). Also, since the other driver was indeed in the wrong, most people would agree that being angry about it is fairly justified and valid. I think many of the "invalidating" phrases listed in the OP could be said to this guy before he does shoot, although I do not think most people would actually be disputing his feelings or even saying that he is wrong to be angry- truly they are disputing his reaction based on his feelings.

This isn't realistic at all. In any real life scenario a guy like that has to be angry about something else before being cut off. Being cut off is just the trigger. He's also probably completely out of his mind, so it isn't really even reasonable to debate the morals of his decided action. It's better to just talk about the consequences for him. I mean, does anyone want waste a big chunk of their life away in jail for murder? Or get shot by police?
Quote:
"You're overreacting, don't take things so personally, calm down, think of someone else's feelings for a change, he probably didn't mean to do it, etc." all come to mind to me to dissuade him, even though I would absolutely believe that he was angry and even has a right to be. I guess you could say "I understand that you're angry but shooting this person is a bad idea", but as soon as I try to explain why it's a bad idea, I get back to the "invalidating" phrases (mainly, "think about someone else's feelings").

Those things probably wouldn't work though. They would probably just make him angrier. In that situation you have to be practical, not moral. Just try get him to reconsider. Maybe he has family. Remind him of that. Invalidating him won't work. That's what police are trained to do (or at least they should be). That is if they aren't in a position to immediately stop him.

Quote:
Do you understand what I mean about feelings and reactions? I feel like this isn't quite as much a black and white issue as the website in the OP makes it out to be. What would you say to this angry guy?

Honestly, I'd call the police and have them deal with him. If someones that angry and out of control I'd be at risk of getting shot myself if I interfered.