Invalidation

Post Reply New Topic

Yep...and good intentions.

I agree with the sentiment here that it really depends on who the person is, and also the context. Sometimes those phrases are okay. Personally, I'm usually alright with that type of response. If you were joking (actually joking), I want to know. I'm not going to waste my time being hurt about something that never actually happened.

This is something I'm trying to work on with the way I communicate with my husband though because I know it upsets him. It's hard to think of other things to say sometimes though. I like this from the website you linked:
First accept the feelings, then address the behavior.

But I'm not really clear on how to do this honestly. My instinct is to say "That's a stupid thing to freak out over" because it is a stupid thing to freak out over, but he usually knows that intellectually, so me stating it doesn't help him.

Generally speaking, I think it doesn't really matter how you intended it- it mostly just matters what the impact was. This is on a feminism website but I think it's relevant: http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/07/int ... ly-matter/

I believe you could say "It's a stupid thing to freak out over" using slightly different words.

And make sure you convey to him that you know that he KNOWS this intellectually. I believe that helps.

And try to make it into a humorous moment--bring back some funny memories based upon the present situation.

He'd be more inclined to respond positively, since you did not "invalidate" him.

Now...where'd you get that idea?

What I suggested is called "being diplomatic."

Rather than exclusively focus on the actual words people use, try to notice who - among the people you interact with regularly - trivialise what you say, discount what you say, or try to isolate you or your points of view. This is a shift to the tactics invalidators typically use, rather than the literal approach to the words that they use. Both matter - the words, the intentions behind them, and the pattern of behaviour.

But applying the "TID" analysis soon shows the pattern and if you find someone is doing this to you consistently, you are being disrespected and invalidated.

Invalidation is harmful, especially when it is sustained over time and aimed at one person by another. And invalidating the harm that invalidation does is itself a form of discounting!

I'm not "pooh-poohing" anything.

I don't think anybody would like it if somebody "flew off the handle" for no apparent reason. People must learn not to "fly off the handle" for any old reason. That's part of being civilized. I don't care what anybody says.

People are entitled to their opinion.

Yep...they do.

And it could, quite possibly, not be productive for EITHER party.

There should be a balance of validation from others and lack of validation from others.
All validation all the time is as bad as no validation at all.