Invalidation

Post Reply New Topic

QFT

I would say people who are traumatized tend to be very sensitive--even though they might not show it or admit it.

I am listening to a book and the author says people usually want one of three things from someone listening, sympathy/empathy, solutions, or stories you've been there or know someone who has. And that the other person will be angry if you don't give them the type of response they want.....I guess find it invalidating.

and the person who wants mainly sympathy, the person who wants mainly solutions, and the person whose misery loves company are all totally different types of people, and woe be onto the one who can't read the person correctly. the sympathy seeker who is given solutions/suggestions will feel invalidated, the solution seeker who receives sympathy or company will feel poo-poo'ed, and the company seeker who gets instead sympathy or solutions will feel either poo-poo'ed or otherwise invalidated.

Last edited by auntblabby on 27 May 2015, 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

A person who conveys his/her feelings wants the other person to really LISTEN to him/her. To not listen, and to criticize without forethought, leads to a feeling of "invalidation."

Most of the time, the person who conveys the feelings doesn't necessarily need a solution. They might not even want the person to convey a solution at all. All they need, in essence, is a "partner for the moment."

I think that's interesting. Would you say it's true?...

is it ok to ask the suffering person if they want solutions? [rather than having to mind-read]

When someone tells me their story, I usually tell them a similar story I experienced to let them know I understand what they went through. One woman told me "No matter what people say, you talk about yourself." It's like I have no idea what to say to people.

In my experience, what I've stated is true in at least some instances (pertaining to the fact that people don't want "solutions").

Yes, I do believe people want others to LISTEN to the.

JustKillingTime: In my opinion, you did nothing wrong. You were actually wise in what you did. I believe most people would respond to your approach. It often works with people who do not like to confront their situations directly (probably the majority of people).

People should learn that others are not always there to "invalidate" them. They feel, genuinely, a desire to help.

Last edited by kraftiekortie on 27 May 2015, 6:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

it is tough, to be sure, to know if one person wants to hear somebody else say "that happened to me also, I know it sucks" versus "awww, that's horrible, I can't imagine having to go through that."

Last edited by auntblabby on 27 May 2015, 6:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think so too.



Well, I understand your intent, but you know this is an invalidating comment, yes?

People have reasons for feeling whatever they feel...valid reasons...of course that's not to say that a person "should" feel the way they do either. But it's not to say that they shouldn't feel that way either.

The whole point is that people are allowed to feel whatever they feel...there's no right or wrong way to feel about anything. It doesn't have to have a "reason" that seems okay or makes sense to others. There is always a reason but sometimes we don't even know what it is.



Again...see above, lol.

thank you Dianthus

I remember this situation from an A Level Psychology book, it was a story about a certain American Indian tribe, who when in school and one was asked a question they wouldn't answer in fear of offending / shaming others who didn't know the answer.

How can you progress? If someone is stuck (on a question, in a troubling dilemma) then surely they may need / want / benefit from advice?

In the case of the American Indians, logic would ask, how do you know that the others don't know?

As far as I can tell from reading both the list and the website it comes from, the very attempt to tell somebody to have different feelings is the invalidation. You are not supposed to ever tell somebody how to feel, just accept that that's how they feel.

On the one hand, I can understand that. On the other hand, framing it the way that list and website does just turns people into villains and victims. If intent counts for nothing, if it doesn't matter that somebody was only trying to help or to say what they thought was the right thing, where does that leave people who have a hard time predicting the effect of their words?

I'm NT and that list is too full of freighted social nuance for me. Adhering to its' rules requires ninja skills of saying the right thing. I sure don't don't have those ninja skills of always saying the right thing even though I lack an AS diagnosis. On the one hand, posts prior to mine make it clear that many AS people have heard these things before and felt invalidated. On the other hand, there are a gazillion [i]more[/i posts (not in this thread) by people who have endlessly been accused of being the invalidator for saying the wrong thing and making other people even more upset. Saying the right thing is hard. This list makes it infinitely harder. So much harder that giving up and just not communicating at all is easier.

As I said upthread, it works great in a therapist's office, but not so much outside it. It just shuts down all possibility of communication and fosters a villain/victim dynamic.


And just as I was about to post, I see there are a dozen posts that happened while I was typing so hopefully mine is still relevent.

I guess there is no getting around asking the suffering person if they have any plans for dealing with whatever is wrong.

It's really a integral part of a considerable amount of Native American culture to be modest, and to not "make waves."