Conversations with Nana

Imagine you and your partner are decorating a room in your house and trying to determine just where to hang a large framed picture. Part of the fun is trying out different views, getting feedback, and deciding together. There is not much enjoyment in the other person merely saying, “Hang it there.” Together, you ask each other, “What do you think about this arrangement?” and while one holds the picture in place, the other steps back to look. “A little more to the left, and down,” you say. “Like this?” “Almost. Just a little more to the right this time.” And so it goes. Each one reflects what the other has said, checks to be sure, and then assesses the overall effect. Listening and responding in this way is an extraordinary tool for furthering relationship and intimacy because you are working together and accurately building on each other’s views.

The actual skill of effective listening has four simple parts. First, there is a spirit in the listener of remaining non-judgmental. No matter what you hear, try to understand it without condemning it. When you negatively judge another, the other person feels attacked and usually becomes defensive. Defensiveness means withdrawal, and withdrawal means we can no longer hear what the other person has to say when it’s his or her turn to respond. You are merely receiving information, the same way you would learn without negativity about all the various trails on a hike. An example of a non-judgmental response to shocking information might be something like, “This sounds difficult for you,” or, “I can see why you are upset.”

Second, understanding does not mean agreeing or approving. Even if you do approve, listening as a way to improve relations works best when neutral. Approval is such a tricky device. Praise and approval might feel calming in the moment, but they eventually can feel conditional and even scary to someone who is experiencing doubt. In your bestowing approval instead of just listening, an insecure person can be left with the haunting possibility that, as you approve, there will also times when you disapprove. Eventually, you will get to have your chance to respond, so for now don’t take sides for or against. Example of a neutral response: “It’s hard for me not to have an opinion here, but it’s your story, not mine, and whether or not I approve is not important.” Or, if you feel strongly that you have to agree or disagree, you might say something like, “I have some ideas about this but for now I just want to hear all of what you want to say. If you want my opinion, ask me afterward.”

Third, questions are for clarification not interrogation. Have you ever heard someone say, “Why did you do that?” and you knew they were not asking a question at all, but really saying, “You shouldn’t have done that”? Be sure that if you ask a question you are really asking something and not slipping in a statement or a demand in question form. The true spirit of questioning means you are trying to understand all the steps in the other person’s thinking and behaving. For example, you might ask, “How is it that you decided to do it that way?” This version may seem the same as the “why” question above, but in fact it sounds less threatening and more sincere. Once again, understanding is the goal.

Finally, fourth, listening for understanding includes a summing up or a subtle paraphrasing. Sometimes this means going just a step further than the speaker, and guessing a deeper meaning behind the words. If you guess correctly, the speaker feels honored, relieved, and trusting that you really do understand. If you are incorrect, and if you haven’t made too big of an assumption, the speaker will probably realize that you are trying to understand, and can elaborate further and clarify the meaning for both of you. Examples of paraphrasing might include, “It seems you are saying,” “Let me make sure I get this, you are saying…”

The attitude behind listening well includes one of wanting to help the other person clarify his or her best course. When others need validation for their feelings, or struggle with self-understanding or decision-making, or need help in expressing their thoughts and feelings, this kind of listening is a gentle aid. It helps people hear themselves and thus provides a self-correcting mechanism. Even when we are out of touch with our own answers, they are still there waiting to be tapped. When another person listens well, repeats back to us what we are saying, and generally encourages us to keep talking, something eventually resonates within. At that moment, we feel empowered, and grateful to the friend who so graciously allowed us some talking space. The interesting paradox about listening well is that after, the other person, who now feels accepted, safe, relaxed, and open, is usually very receptive to hearing what you also have to say. Now you can take sides, approve or disapprove, agree or disagree, or even offer a negative opinion without causing damage. Once people believe that they are truly understood, they are much more willing to hear another point of view.

On the other hand, there are occasions when listening this way simply is not the right approach. The kind of listening we have been talking about is designed for drawing out other people. But, there will be times when you think the other person has been drawn out a little too much already and it’s time for the communication to become more of a two-way affair. Or you may sometimes want to share your own viewpoint right away, without listening first. There will also be those occasions when you are just too tired or preoccupied to listen or when you are unable to be accepting, so that any attempt would just sound like an insincere gimmick. At such times it is better to just say that you are not able to listen now and then plan together a better time.

Also, you may sometimes realize that you are only listening to avoid having to talk about yourself or take a stand. Nothing is more disturbing to a person than to reveal highly personal thoughts and stories, and then get nothing personal in return. If you find yourself in any of these situations, it’s probably better not to try to listen in this four-part way. To draw another out only to offer a blank wall in return may feel like a betrayal. The key is to try to match the other person’s approach, maybe even asking at the beginning, “Is this a time you just want me to listen, or are you asking for my opinion?”

The dictionary defines ‘need’ as something required because it is essential, a basic necessity such as food, or anything else necessary to live a healthy life. In the best of worlds a person should not have to bargain for needs. In comparison, for the discussion below, something we ‘want’ out of pleasure or desire is not a life sustaining necessity. As the old song puts it, “the object of my affection” may be emotionally sustaining and thus life enhancing, but by definition the certainty and timing of its arrival and the level of achievement can be variable, maybe even a far-fetched dream.

Most of us enjoy getting what we want. But sometimes what we want is not the same as what other people want. When desires are at odds we may think that in all fairness we have to compromise. We each give up something in order to create a middle ground where at least some part of the wish list is realized. Sometimes compromises work because we realize that at least we are getting some approximation, but many times they just end up with no one feeling fully satisfied. Negotiation, on the other hand, is a dialog that considers all sides and keeps going until everyone feels satisfied. As you can probably guess, this is not necessarily a fast process. When quick decisions need to be made, such as in emergencies or by deadline, negotiation just won’t work as well as unilateral decision-making. Someone has to take control and literally steer in one direction or another. But some people get hooked on this kind of decision-making and don’t want to give it up when the emergency has passed. When others seem reluctant to fall into line, people who like to control often retaliate with statements such as, “You have a problem,” or “My way or the highway,” in order to win the round. Negotiators, on the other hand, look at the situation from everyone’s angle. In other words, “We have an issue at hand; let’s look at all the possibilities.”

Imagine that you are trying to make an important decision with a friend or immediate family about something that concerns each person. In a negotiation, everyone involved first analyzes the situation according to his or her own perception. Advantages and disadvantages, and costs and conveniences are considered, including finances and such intangibles as time, emotions, or privacy, for example. Each person makes a clear, direct statement about what he or she wants and how to go about getting it. But unlike a demand, everyone is offering information for discussion, seeking a better understanding. Ultimately, you still may not get your exact wish, but you will at least know that your ideas were clearly heard and considered.

So far in this negotiation scenario everyone is polite and cooperative. What is missing, of course, are the scenes of frustration, feelings of deprivation and betrayal, even distain and loneliness over the gaps between various desires. In order to end up in a true negotiation, hidden yet active attitudes and emotions must be addressed openly, and that takes time and patience. Some negotiations eventually account for each person’s desire, while others operate on the understanding that one person’s wishes will be met this time and the other person’s next time. In other words, the spirit of negotiation is that each person comes away satisfied at some point now or in the near future.

Imagine finding a way to meet halfway. This is not the same as the meeting halfway that means compromise. You each still have your own ideas, which still may be at odds. However, now, instead of declaring what you each want, you are asking each other to help in getting needs met. Nothing has changed, really. You still each want what you want. But now you are engaged in a spirit of helping each other accomplish those wants. Most people want to be helpful and find it much easier to support your point of view from this mutually beneficial position. If nothing else, at least your attitudes are softer and aligned. Often from this position, one or the other may conclude that he or she can step back this time, seeing how important this issue is to the other person. You both have the satisfaction of knowing that one of you has what he or she really wants, and that the other’s wishes will be equally considered on other occasions.

Imagine that you are no longer taking opposite stances at all. This is yet another version of negotiation, this time facing issues as a team rather than as individuals or opponents. Language changes from “I” and “you” to “we,” as in, “How shall we handle this situation?” Perhaps this sounds deceptively the same as the previous style of meeting halfway. However there is an important difference. The crucial point here is that no one claims ownership of any of the ideas, wants, or needs. Rather than “I want…” the team approaches each issue and claims it together. Of course, there will always be times when you independently want something and this style of negotiation would only sound like false pretense. In those cases, you can return to assertive or mutually helping styles. But, in cooperative relationships there will also be times when sharing in partnership becomes more important than holding on to one’s personal wants. This kind of sharing greatly enhances intimacy.

To defend oneself when under attack is considered the right of a free society. In American law even counter-attack is permitted under the guise of self-defense. Specifically, martial arts teachers tell us the first line of defense is to run away, to avoid fighting whenever possible. If avoidance is not possible, the next successive steps are first to disarm, then forcefully stop your opponent when disarming is not enough, and finally, when all else fails, to kill. Given this time-honored method, perhaps ingrained from ancient times, it stands to reason that such methods would apply in non-physical attacks as well, the kind we sometimes call personality clashes or character attacks. In fact, many times a verbal defense is upheld as the constructive and intelligent thing to do. Sometimes you must defend yourself to set the record straight and to correct inaccurate interpretations. An example might be public debates, which are designed to be calm and educational. Or, you may simply want to inform another about who you really are in any given moment, such as a person who might say, “I would never sanction cruelty to animals,” when defending eating meat. This kind of defense is straightforward and designed to educate without hostility.

But sometimes situations occur where simply offering a differing point of view is not effective, or leaves you feeling vulnerable, because you sense a personal attack coming from the other person. Perhaps you feel you are being unfairly judged, or the person is drawing negative conclusions that will eventually hurt you. To become defensive in such cases stems from the same motive as in physical attack, to protect, resist, or avoid. If the defensiveness works, then you have successfully avoided potential harm. However, defensiveness in the personal context usually only works temporarily at best because the cause of the attack is never addressed.

Imagine some typical defensive strategies: When someone criticizes, for example, you can create a diversion with unrelated excuses or problems, like the old ploy ‘the dog ate my homework.’ Or, better yet, you can turn the situation around so that someone else, maybe even the person speaking, gets the blame, as in, “It’s not my fault, you should have…” The resulting confusion should give you enough time to figure out other maneuvers in case the topic eventually comes back to you. You also can become intellectual and analytical, drawing on logic and rationalizations about extenuating circumstances to explain away the behavior in question. The other person may not only be awed by your intellectual superiority, they may actually forget — for a while — that you have failed to say anything related to your actual attitude or feelings. This is also a good time to throw in what’s called a false apology or false agreement, where you quickly acquiesce in order to stop the conversation, but don’t really mean what you say. It temporarily robs your opponent of his or her argument, but unfortunately doesn’t improve or change anything and eventually the issues arise again.

Another favorite for defense is denial, which can be as simple as refusing to admit to being a part of the problem, or as blatant as claiming there is no problem in the first place. Walking away from the conversation fits in here, including such variables as forgetting, falling asleep, getting drunk, changing the subject, daydreaming, reading, watching TV, reading text messages, etc. Guilt is a good defense, too. Some people have guilt down to an art form so that the other person ends up not only dropping the confrontation, but feels terrible for bringing it up at all. On a lighter side, joking your way out of a corner helps, at least until the other person stops laughing and realizes nothing has changed. When all else fails, and you still are determined not to have an honest and open encounter with the other person, you can make a direct counter attack, bringing up any and all smoldering grudges from the past and insulting the person where you know it will hurt the most.

To be fair, staying in control and feeling okay about oneself is what defensiveness is all about. Creating a defense when under attack is actually a survival skill that usually is successful at least partially in achieving what it intends, to protect the individual from feelings of hurt, anger, anxiety, and inadequacy. Often these skills are formed in early childhood. Consider, for example, the child who declares, “Not me!” when asked to admit to a current bad deed, or the toddler who bursts into tears and whimpers when caught in a forbidden act, or collapses into a temper tantrum when he or she does not get his way and perceives the parent as an enemy. Defensiveness, then, the way it is defined within the context of a relationship, is an old ploy, a learned technique that has worked so well in the past it has become an automatic protective habit. The problem is that in protecting the individual, the relationship is left exposed and at risk. If defensiveness is left unchecked, the heart of the partnership will eventually be sacrificed because defensive reactions keep the cycle of hurt going, allowing words to get out of control, and causing fights to last much longer. Defensive attacks and counter-attacks are a win/lose game, where the current winner feels clever and almost heroic while the loser feels resentful and unheard, making sure to keep at a distance in the future.

Once the automatic reaction becomes a habit, the prospect of facing a confrontation head on creates anxiety and feelings of powerlessness, thus reinforcing the need for avoidant behavior. Whether the attack is real or imagined, each use of a protective response confirms the need to remain on guard. In the most obvious reality, you may feel attacked when you truly are being ridiculed, insulted, accused, demeaned, or in any way treated in a mean-spirited manner. In other words, when someone is being mean to you, you may very likely get the point without too much internal debate. The other person is lashing out, you justifiably recognize the attack, and your recognition brings about the feeling of being emotionally assaulted.

However, we may also feel attacked when we believe we are being attacked, but the other person’s actions and intentions are really innocent. The other person does not realize he or she is in dangerous territory, but is merely making you the recipient of his or her judgments, interpretations, or firm opinions. In cases where your tender spots are so obvious to you, you cannot help but assume the other person is taking direct aim. Finally, we may feel attacked without anyone else doing anything in particular, just because we expect to be treated badly. All of these possibilities can produce the kind of instant defensive reactions that attempt to either run away or attack in return. Defensiveness becomes a kind of emotional Aikido, with the flexibility of side steps and diversions.

Of course, most of us would never deliberately choose behavior designed to eat away at our relationships. One step in breaking the defensiveness cycle is to recognize that a defensive reaction causes loss of balance and erodes trust. In order to really understand the difference, a person needs to practice with a trusted friend who will cooperate by not attacking or punishing. A beginning practice response might be to simply state how the situation feels on the inside, such as, “I’m in a turmoil right now,” or “I’m so upset, I don’t know what to say.” When the friend responds with empathy and kindness rather than digging in further, you can begin to see how a strong and loving partnership works. Both partners are working to uphold the other, not cause pain or distress. Once you can see the difference, it will be easier to take the risk of standing your ground without malice. Standing your ground non-defensively means allowing the other person to empty him or herself of whatever anger or resentment has built up without taking anything personally. In essence, you are saying, “You are angry with me. Tell me more about it. Tell me everything.” Thus you are building a bridge to mend the relationship rather than building a wall to keep the other person out. A non-defensive response is reminiscent of the New Testament admonition to turn the other cheek as if for a second assault, when what actually happens is that the angry person softens and becomes more reasonable. Typically, when the antagonist feels truly heard, he or she replaces further onslaught with a more sincere explanation of the problem.

A person who automatically becomes defensive will have to apply extra concentration in order to stop the reaction. A helpful and painless way to begin to change the defensive habit with behavior modification is to carry a small notebook and pencil. Place a mark in the notebook every time you react defensively. Don’t judge it or condemn yourself, simply note it. At the end of each day tally the number of marks. After several days you most likely will see a decline in your defensiveness due to your heightened awareness and concentration — not to mention a natural desire to want to win the notebook contest. Another method is to say out loud each time you become aware, “I’m getting defensive.” Usually, the announcement itself is enough to interrupt the pattern. The first few times may feel embarrassing, but embarrassment quickly passes when you experience the warm reception — even relief — this kind of announcement usually produces in the other person. Most people are grateful to move out of a reactive and into an interactive conversation once more.

One word of caution, however: These methods may only work well when the other person is also wanting to strengthen the relationship. If you find yourself continually attacked regardless of your good intentions and conversational skills, you may find you are dealing with someone who only wishes to tear down, to win at all costs. Some people become even more angry or withholding when their defensiveness is pointed out, because they perceive the observation as negative criticism rather than a helpful guideline. In such cases, if professional mediation is not possible, the best course may be to slip away with as much kindness as you can muster, and ultimately refuse the contact.

Finally, while it is personally expansive to monitor oneself for positive change, pointing out the other person’s defensive behavior and poor social skills may be intrusive and abrasive, instead of unifying and helpful. Abrupt and unilateral demands for change are often not received well. The unique combination of people in each relationship is always the ultimate guide to timing and exposure.

Voice tone can change the meaning of a word or sentence. What seems innocent in structure may actually harbor a hidden message in tone. The other person hears and responds to a tone that you may not even be aware is there. A harsh tone hiding behind neutral words allows the speaker to deny that any damage was intended, but the sting of sarcasm, ridicule, or anger is there anyway. Much of the time people are sincere when they say they mean not to hurt. They truly cannot hear the anger or hostility. Bringing a tape recorder to the next conversation may sound a bit drastic, but that may be all it takes for someone’s tone and intention to start to converge. Ultimately, your responsibility as speaker is to admit, at least to yourself, any negative feelings. Sarcasm, ridicule and anger show up even when we try to hide them. Denial compounds the problem because the other person not only detects the tone, he or she no longer can trust the speaker’s integrity.

While saying no to a request, for example, a warm and friendly tone of voice is helpful in conveying your good intentions. Offering a reason for your decision may soften the blow and make it easier for others to understand, however, you are never obliged to give an excuse. As a matter of fact, others sometimes may hear your explanation as an opportunity to reason with you and change your mind. Stating the reason for saying no may leave you feeling generous in providing an explanation, or the opposite, resentful, as if you are asking permission. When and to whom we give reasons for saying no is determined each time by the circumstances, for example the level of intimacy and one’s personal style.

How we use our eyes is an integral part of language. Looking at the other person is a necessary part of effective communication. Some people find that they look directly at another when they are speaking but not when listening, and for some others it is the reverse. While staring is not a good idea, at least an occasional meeting of the eyes implies interest, which makes the conversation much more satisfactory. Other elements of facial expression include an occasional nod, or smile — or even a raised eyebrow. And a well placed “hmmm” always helps to show the person that you are still listening. No one wants to converse with a blank, unreadable front. Use your eyes and face to convey interest, or even disagreement, if appropriate.

Physical distance and posture also play a role in communication. Distractions such as text messages or the infamous “multi-tasking” of listening while doing something else are not credible reflections of caring or intimacy. Attention, interest, and sincerity are more convincing through face-to-face encounters. If the conversation gets heated or feels emotionally uncomfortable, an automatic and natural defense might be to turn and even take a few steps away. The dilemma here is that while you have created a zone of comfort for yourself, the message you may be conveying to the speaker is one of impatience and disinterest. If the conversation is so threatening to you that you cannot face it head on, it might be best to call a time out. The other person may need to calm down and find more non-threatening ways to engage with you, and/or you may need to take a few breaths while coming to terms with your fears. People “read” you much more than they hear you, so facial expressions, gestures, tone of voice, and physical positioning all need to match the words we say.

Speaking directly, instead of indirectly, means saying what you mean. An indirect style attempts to avoid conflict by avoiding the point, or using words so euphemistically that interpretation is not clear. Sometimes we are embarrassed, or scared, or we feel uncomfortable asking outright for what we want, so we drop hints instead and hope the other person comprehends. One woman reported her hurt feelings that her husband did not recognize her inner turmoil and merely accepted her response of “nothing,” when he asked if something had upset her. She believed that he should automatically realize how she felt. As well as speaking in a ‘round-about’ way, the least effective and most frustrating thing is to say nothing at all and then wait for someone to read your mind. The other person should have known, we tell ourselves. But he or she didn’t and our silence didn’t help.

Direct language, saying what you mean without subterfuge, is most effective when you already know what you want or would like to happen before you even start the conversation. Knowing ahead helps keep focus and avoid misinterpretation. Most likely, though, many conversations are not so carefully crafted in advance. Directness sometimes may require a previous awareness of the direction you want the conversation to go. Speaking directly also requires courage because there is the greater chance you will be clearly understood and the other person won’t like what is heard. Furthermore, some cultures value harmony and peaceful encounters far more than clarity that may turn out to be abrasive. In instances where cultures clash, Americans often appear rude or domineering to people with other styles of communication. Ultimately, authentic communication is culturally based: a blend of awareness of self, the other, and personal integrity.

Hidden requests are another instance of indirect communication. One example is using a statement to ask a question. A person is curious about something and says, for example, “I see you have a …” in the hope the other person will explain the presence of the object. Perhaps the speaker feels a direct question is prying or too invasive. However, the point is that he or she commented anyway, so that the curiosity is still apparent, although not so obvious. If the other person is familiar with this style, most likely an explanation will be forthcoming. But if the hidden question is not recognized both sides may leave the conversation unsatisfied, considering the other person may wonder what the speaker’s intention was in pointing out the obvious.

On the other hand, some ask a question that sounds caring, but is really a false concern covering a hidden request or demand. An example might be, “Do you feel like…?” Even though we use the word “feel,” we really aren’t asking about someone’s feelings. Another version is in the pseudo question, such as, “Why don’t you…?” This is not really even a question, but a direction that implies that there is no good reason not to do as asked. The other person complies — often begrudgingly — to the kind sounding, but empty, words. These kinds of indirect messages are called unilateral, meaning only one person gets to make all the decisions. If you are not aware of the impact of indirect language, you will probably be surprised when the other person starts to feel manipulated and becomes angry. Examples of direct language: “Here’s a way you could help me. Would you please do….?” “I’d appreciate it if you would….” “This needs to be done. Will you do it?”

In cases of choosing direct versus indirect language, there are different right ways to communicate. Language is a culture’s best attempt to come together in understanding. Social values, such as practicing kindness, demonstrating intelligence, maintaining control, respecting privacy, or honoring social position, vary from culture to culture and even family to family. Feeling honest within one’s style and yet recognizing the need for different styles in certain situations is the heart of diplomacy. If you cultivate first the notion that mutual understanding is the goal and that mistakes and misinterpretations can be corrected, the words and style you use have the best chance of shining through.

Language is a powerful tool when used effectively, but, on many occasions, nothing can be more problematic than words. Once, while visiting a foreign country, I developed enough of an upset stomach to make  a visit to the town’s local doctor. As the taxi driver was returning me home, I realized I didn’t clearly understand the meaning of the doctor’s words. “What did he mean,” I asked the driver, “when he said to avoid meat for the next few days – chicken, too?” “Meat is meat,” he nodded emphatically, as if he had successfully  cleared up my confusion.

Most of the time we make ourselves fairly clear and most of the time we understand others fairly well. But then there are those times when we just can’t seem to get it right. For example, no matter what we say, the other person is offended, or hurt, or angry, and we are left muttering things like, “I was only trying to say…,” or, “I didn’t mean it that way.” Sometimes the reverse is true, as well. Even though the other person denies it, we know what we heard and what we heard is insulting, wounding, or maddening.

When accused that his almost constant cigar might be a phallic crutch, the famous psychiatrist, Sigmund Freud, contradicted his own theory and responded, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” Just as with symbols, specific words have different meanings to different people. What one person hears may not be what the other person intends. After awhile, of course, couples and close friends develop a kind of code language, and many ambiguous words or phrases are correctly understood in the context of the relationship. The word “love,” for example, has many interpretations and is often used in code. For example, when one partner spontaneously calls to the other, “I love you,” the disguised intention may be a question, such as, “Is everything all right between us?” The tone of voice and quality of the corresponding, “I love you, too,” can be a sufficient answer in itself. But even if you are familiar with the codes, sometimes it is smart to double-check just in case this is one of those times the code doesn’t apply. In general, if you note any ambiguity or are left with any doubt, ask, perhaps even probing for substitute words that will add clarity.

Some conversations are demonstrations of the old saying: “Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.” Words such as “if,” and “try” may be a good choice when you are unsure and want to leave an opening, as in, “If I get done on time….” or “try to arrive on time.” However, in some circumstances, they may leave you sounding weak and unreliable even to yourself. Phrases that convey personal strength include, “I will… / I plan to…/ my intention is…/ I want to…/ I’m going to…” and “when it happens…” (instead of “if it happens.”)

Some people value assertive statements, such as, “I will be there on time,” as evidence of commitment and integrity, while others may be suspicious of too confident a stance that may prove to be a false promise if unexpected circumstances interfere. From these latter types of people you might hear something closer to the old country expression, “I’ll be there if the creeks don’t rise.” Choosing the best way to express oneself is often a trial and error blend of personal style, the needs of the listener, and a mutual understanding that develops over time.

Sometimes, especially in an argument, words can loom too large, such as,  “always,” or “never.” When others hear them, they usually pretty quickly can think of an exception. Then your real point gets missed in the debate about the timing and frequency of the infraction. Finding a reasonable middle between saying nothing and exaggerating can reduce a lot of unnecessary friction. A less argumentative approach might include such tempered words as, often, sometimes, frequently, infrequently, seldom, or not often. And the best approach would be to give specific examples without any vague or sweeping language at all.

We need to recognize the power or lack of power that certain words provide. When faced with the unpleasant task of having to say no to someone who is counting on a “yes,” we may try to soften the blow by diminishing our role in the ‘no,’ as in, “I wish I could, but I can’t,”. This tactic may succeed in letting you off the hook, but if used too often, you may begin to feel and look like a victim buffeted about by out of control circumstances, or that you can only avoid situations by manipulating or lying. In addition, the person with the request may begin to think of you as someone incapable of strength of will. A simple practice experiment might be to substitute any sentence where you might usually say, “I can’t,” with the stronger “I have decided not to…” or even, “I’m not going to….” just to see if you experience an internal shift in self-concept.

Another example of troublesome language is “should.” Of course, there are many valid obligations in our lives, such as childcare, or even safeguarding personal health, obligations that take on a kind of moral duty. But the word itself is the problem, not the actual obligation. When confronted with so many things a person should do, rather than wants to do, he or she may feel trapped in a bullying approach to life. If the situation in question truly warrants a call to duty and responsibility, try to break down the task into small manageable pieces and try to find something pleasant about each step. For example, you should pay rent in a timely manner. Perhaps in meeting this obligation, you can choose your favorite pen to write the check, and choose your favorite mug to sip your favorite beverage. It sounds ridiculously small, but in each step you are saying that you are in charge, and that’s empowering. When we enjoy what we do, we usually feel good about ourselves and are more likely to have successful interactions. In general, continually saying, “I should….” or “You should…” results in feeling pressured, trapped, victimized, bullied, or resentful. Making the chore or duty a choice by creating manageable small steps, or saying, “I choose to do this at this time,” results in feeling in control, empowered, at peace with the chore, confident about your ability.

Perhaps the most problematic little word is “but.” We tend to use it as a connector between a complimentary phrase and a critical one, thus canceling out the compliment, as in, “I care about you, but…” A simple solution is this:  either break the connection between the two sentences altogether — first compliment, then pause, then bring up what’s bothering you — or, use the word “and” instead. “I care about you, and this is what’s bothering me,” is much more inviting and implies that what you say next is because you care, not in spite of it.

Effective language involves saying what you really mean in a way that can be heard. Let’s say you are angry, or hurt, for example, and want to share this part of yourself with your partner. Typically, we say, “You make me mad.” In other words, “you are in control of my mood.” One story tells of two associates who stop at a local newsstand every day on their way to work. The vendor is surly and irritable, but each time, the one man smiles and wishes him a pleasant day, while the other man takes on the bad attitude of the vendor. After several days the offended man questions his friend, “That guy always manages to ruin my day, why do you always treat him so nicely?” The other responds, “Why should I let him be in charge of how I feel?” When we lead with “You make me…” we have put the other person in charge. What the other person most likely hears is the blame, which feels like an attack. There is nowhere to go when blamed except to retreat, defend, and/or possibly counter attack. Taking responsibility for your own reactions would lead you to say, “I’m mad,” thus, hopefully, opening up a dialog for understanding. When you keep it personal and say, “I am (insert the feeling you want to express),” you still get to be mad or hurt, and the other person has a better chance of hearing what you have to say. Since many people view anger as a toxic substance, any amount of room to breathe is appreciated.

What could be a better gift than advice? A worried and confused person tells you about a problem or a complaint. You listen until you see a solution, and then you respond with the best course of action. Your advice in response to the other person’s spoken need is timely and helpful. Or so it would seem. But often when people point to an area and say they want some changes, there is a chance that they are in the early process of thinking out loud, trying out ideas, maybe just wanting to complain a while before they actually take any action. Not that one doesn’t need or want advice — often it’s a welcome relief to a difficult predicament — but timing is the issue here.

Other than wanting your advice, there are several reasons people might tell you about their problems. They may be simply trying to make a human connection without really wanting an answer at all. Regardless of how helpless or confused people seem at these times, they may only want to hear themselves talk — not listen to anybody else’s opinion.  Or, they may simply be asking for confirmation that they really do have a problem, rather than trying to solve it. Advice given too soon feels interruptive and shocking. Sometimes people even become insulted, as if you have implied that they are incapable of solving the problem on their own. Of course, there are those times when we really do think the other person is incompetent. We feel important and needed and giving advice lifts our self esteem. We like to be in control. Or, we simply want to send a message that complaining is not okay and we will put an end to it right away. Sometimes we even give advice when no one has asked for it.

So there you are, seeing the other person’s negative reaction to your advice and feeling pretty foolish for misreading the whole situation. The other person is angry, or worse yet, hurt. You were only trying to be helpful, you say to yourself. What could possibly have gone wrong? For one thing, sometimes when people complain, they secretly feel (or hope) that they are exaggerating. Your agreement that there is truly a problem and your ready solution appears to them as if you are saying you think there is indeed something wrong with them, and, furthermore, you don’t accept them the way they are. They are often shocked out of their temporary self-sorrow and downright insulted by your suggestions for change. Or the fact that you skipped a few moments of empathizing and sympathizing and jumped right into problem-solving, causes them to believe that you think of yourself as the better, smarter person. In the end, you both end up feeling attacked.

However, even though the other person may not follow your advice, the act of getting advice can be extremely helpful. Sometimes your ideas can generate other solutions that someone can customize to suit his or her style and needs. The best help, therefore, is first to ask if some ideas on your part would be welcome. For example, you might begin with, “Is this one of those times you would rather I just listen, or are you asking for my input?”

Once it is clearly established that your ideas are wanted, the next step is to offer suggestions rather than advice. Brainstorming together is a good idea when you want to avoid the “you think you are better than me” accusation. Ask questions, such as, “What do you think about this?” or “How do you think it would be for you if….?” and really listen to the answers. You will be building intimacy while solving problems at the same time.

If you sense that someone is truly not asking for an immediate piece of advice, the best thing is to ask what he or she hopes will come of the conversation. Usually people know what they want to happen before they even begin. Responses other than giving advice that may or may not be appreciated include listening without interrupting, offering sympathy (Oh, that must be so hard”), simply agreeing that there really is a problem (“No kidding, you really do have a mess on your hands”), dismissing the problem altogether (“This will look a lot better after you sleep on it”), or minimizing the problem (“It could be a lot worse…”), and empathizing (reflective listening, for example). Listening carefully first and empathizing by checking in with the person to make sure that you really understand what is being said are excellent bridges to an eventual timely offering of suggestions and advice. Once people feel heard and understood, they usually feel safe and ready to hear what you have to say.

Finally, and perhaps the most important part: One of the problems with advice is that it often produces an unspoken result. The person receiving the advice fears you will be hurt if your advice is not taken, or that if you go to the time and trouble to outline a response, you are expecting it to be followed. He or she may become angry due to the sense of obligation about following your prescription. It’s helpful in those moments if the person could say something like, “I may not end up doing this exactly, but I really appreciate what you are telling me. I will add it to all the other possibilities.” Even if the other person doesn’t actually make such a statement, you are wise to “hear” him or her saying it in your head, and for you to say the equivalent out loud as a reminder to you both.

No matter how perceptive and insightful your suggestions are, you can be most helpful when you are prepared that ultimately they may be completely disregarded, or only halfheartedly tried, or only partially taken. In the moment, the person may feel relief and gratitude to be presented with such a practical solution, only to later “forget,” or discover he or she simply is not ready to follow through. The other person’s achievement or lack of success is no reflection on you or your good advice. You are merely a signpost on the road, or maybe the current mode of transportation – the responsibility and motivation for problem solving lies within the person.

Creating a lively and satisfying relationship requires cultivating cooperation, communication, respect, and love in the same way you cultivate a garden — carefully, patiently, and with considerable effort at times. Gardens keep calling us back because they are beautiful, but also because they keep changing — growing wildly at times. They make us pay attention the same way a lively romance does. Keeping your relationship feeling fresh and colorful is a highly individual endeavor and the methods you use will need changing and revitalizing from time to time.

One of the most straightforward ways to change the pace of everyday life is to literally change the scene through a holiday or vacation. Sometimes, believe it or not, the vacation may even be one away from each other. Both vacations together and apart can be nourishing depending on timing and the individuals involved. A mini vacation might be as simple as a drive in the country, dinner out at a new or favorite restaurant, or maybe a picnic with real dishes, glasses, silverware, and cloth napkins. While for some people the cost of the event may play a part in what makes it special, the actual effort expended, such as preparing a special dinner at home, perhaps with a decorated theme, may be the real gift for some.

Another successful behavior is to give a gift from time to time for no particular reason. Gifts can be wrapped or unwrapped, expensive or not, practical or useless, meaningful or just funny, purchased or hand-made. Examples of traditional gifts include flowers, or one flower, a carefully picked handful of wildflowers or even sheaves of grain, or perhaps a potted plant or sapling that you both plant together. Less traditional gifts might include a drawing, a poem or song you write or find and maybe record, something sewn or built by hand, or even doing a chore the other person normally does. The pleasure of the moment can be enhanced with a scavenger or treasure map leading the person to your special gift. Another way to enliven and prolong the gifting moment is a game of draw with a variety of gifts available to choose.

Variety is of course important, however the real gift is the time and energy it takes to think of it in the first place. A fun game to play is for each person to think of all the possible gifts each might give and to write each one on a separate piece of paper. From time to time, especially when someone is feeling low, hold a drawing. The result can be a gift you really will give, or just one you wish you could give if you had the means. Many people believe hand-made gifts are the best because they are original, and are made with loving intentions. Others are captivated with some commercial item. With gift giving you can have fun and be creative.

And finally, or rather, in addition, saying something positive about the person is a special gift in itself. Sometimes even more profoundly received is to say something positive about the person to someone else within that person’s hearing. It becomes harder for a person to believe you are merely flattering when you are heard saying the words indirectly. The dictionary defines ‘gift’ as a thing given willingly to someone without payment. The gifts given in a loving relationship are extended beyond the dictionary definition to include: given with thoughtful intention, without obligation, and without expectation on the recipient’s part. In other words, gifts of the heart.

I wrote the following piece in 1994. Judging from the current films on some of the cable TV channels, it doesn’t look as if much has changed.

I’ve watched a lot of pornography in my life. It’s not that on a lonely Saturday night I think to myself, “I’ll go to the video store and get a really hot movie.” But over the years many of the men I’ve been with seem to think this very thing. Apparently, in the everyday world of dating, watching porn becomes another form of mutual entertainment, the way watching together any good movie can be entertaining, something to do together to pass the time. Except with pornography there is an inevitable direction and end in mind beyond visual entertainment. The movie is designed to enhance the sex that follows.

The operative word here is enhance. Rather than feeling entertained and my sex life energized after watching porn, I find most of the movies boring, repetitive, and predictable. “Poor exploited woman,” I say in a sarcastic attempt to lighten up the moment. But, at a glance, at least, the women in these movies don’t appear exploited. They are pretty, with great bodies, and are far more limber than I could ever be. They seem…well…hungry, and what the man has is the only thing that will satisfy them. They aren’t afraid to make lots of noise, to grab what they want, and to enjoy the ride. Or so they want me to believe. If they are victims, it is from having all gone to the same school of bad acting.

I remember one movie in particular. I think it was called Harem Nights, or Harem something. The movie was so bad, I can’t forget it. The cast was composed of the same faces I had seen many times before. Apparently a production company can only afford so many actors. They were given an assortment of scarves and cheap big jewelry, which they strung about in ways vaguely reminiscent of old Sinbad movies. If there was a plot, I don’t remember it – probably something about the male star sneaking into the harem late at night. But what I do remember was how much fun they were having. It was almost as if the director had some film left and a little time, and so he (this surely couldn’t have been a woman director’s idea of art) said, “Quick, kids, we’ve got some scarves, let’s make a movie about a harem.” They were laughing and rolling around, stepping on each other’s lines, clearly making it up as they went along. Eventually, of course, the big equipment came out and the scarves slipped away, and everybody seemed satisfied as the moaning subsided. But for once, I could see the humanity behind the scenes, and truthfully, it looked like they were having a great time.

Did that scene hurt me in any way? No. Nor did it turn me on. Watching naked bodies thrusting and arching, women breathing as if in Lamaze training, crying out “yes, do it” and other variations on the theme, actually leaves me cold. There, that’s the way pornography hurts me. After watching such a thing, while my lover is now sufficiently turned on, I, on the other hand, have to quickly dream up some fantasy of my own and try to displace the nonsense I just saw. I have to work harder to “get there” than if I hadn’t seen the movie at all. And in the back of my mind, I can’t help wondering why he needs that film now? Aren’t these movies designed for those days and nights of singular masturbation? Does he really need to see her in order to deal with me? That’s a possibility that hurts. Or perhaps it’s not her he’s watching at all, but him. The male actor becomes a kind of heterosexual role model: This is how we men do it with women. While I am looking at her and thinking, “Why can’t I look like that?” perhaps my partner is looking at him and thinking, “I am that.”

Once I was with my women’s support group on an overnight retreat, and one of the women brought along two videos (yes, it was that long ago) as a surprise. Rather than our watching with feminist anger and criticism, her intention was for us to have our own version of “boys night out”. The first film was similar to the dozens (hundreds?) available at any video store, and we watched with playful interest. We assessed the male star from every angle, both his performance and his apparatus. Were we having fun? A little. Was it at anyone’s expense? A little, but no more than one might evaluate the acting and appearance on any TV commercial. Did we now expect our mates to look like the star? Of course not, although who knows what anyone secretly wished. Unexpectedly, the second film turned out to be something different. It began with a man talking to us, the audience. He was giving us a serious warning, telling us that what we were about to see was only one form of sexual expression, and that although it was between two consenting adults, we may be offended. This film, he explained dryly, was not for everyone. The film was about S/M and bondage, with the man in the dominant position.

What struck me about this second film was the warning. Somehow, I doubt the Internet and films of today go to such lengths to warn their viewers. Perhaps the director back then was only protecting himself (or herself?) from potential trouble, and really didn’t care whether he offended anyone or not. But I found the speech sensitive and ethical. I began to think about all the violent (non-porn) movies I have seen on TV, both inadvertently and by choice. What if the director or producer made such a warning before each film – not the quick letters rating, but an actual artist to viewer conversational admission? Perhaps a fatherly, handsome man or an attractive, professional looking woman could appear at the beginning and say:

“This movie is the product of someone’s imagination and won’t be for everyone. Not only will there be episodes of violent death and physical pain deliberately inflicted throughout the film, the characters you see portrayed will show no typical human emotions of sorrow, remorse, longing, grief, or joy. They will kill and maim other human beings, and not be emotionally or psychologically affected by their behavior. They will only engage in trivial romances based on physical appearance or the proximity of the other during times of danger. They will handle all encounters with a reactive nature, and show no regard for introspection or self-growth. Warning: watching this movie may cause you to believe that death is meaningless, torture and suffering are necessary avenues to personal power, and relationships happen only by chance.”

As a woman who doesn’t make pornography, but only occasionally watches, I don’t find the typical American porn films hurtful to me at all. Aside from an occasional stab at feeling physically inadequate, which many TV commercials or magazine ads can also do, the most problem I have with them is that they are boring. On the other hand, I think pornography has hurt some of the men I’ve known. Maybe they know that ordinary women don’t look like the on-camera, air brushed types, and maybe experience has shown them that they don’t act that way either. But while they know what real women aren’t like, where do they learn what they are like? The vast majority of films involving overt sexuality, whether labeled pornography or a box office hit, teach only the fantasy, and don’t teach anything about how an ordinary woman really does act. If she isn’t loudly moaning and verbal, or if she doesn’t have an orgasm at all, why wouldn’t a man think something is wrong—if not with his performance, then with her?

Pornography and most other movies have taught some of the men I know that women are supposed to be a visual feast, are supposed to be easily aroused no matter what is going on in their lives, are supposed to think that sex is the most important part of their day. And when that doesn’t turn out to be the case, instead of taking it like a man, which means like a grown up, instead of turning to their women (and this type of man usually goes through a lot of women) and saying, “Teach me about the real world,” instead they turn back to pornography to fulfill the fantasy. So that eventually, ordinary sex with an ordinary woman becomes boring after awhile, and pornography must be included in the foreplay. Some women I know make a valiant effort to go along with the program rather than fight it. They wear filmy lingerie and garters. They are constantly on the alert for an element of surprise. But eventually their priorities change, especially in raising children, or they get old, or just plain tired. In the several cases I’m thinking of, the men hadn’t fallen in love with an actual person, and when their fantasy woman finally folded, they simply slipped away.

Censorship, education, lawsuits, and femme porn all have been suggested as possible solutions. I think a good place to start to repair some of the damage is with the porn industry itself. Lately, there are a few smart women who are making porn videos for men and women, slipping in the erotic and gentler side of sex along with the visual and robust. The next step might to begin to work genuine characters with emotionally diverse relationships into the purely sexual. This will take cleverness on the part of the producer and director for they will have to do something intelligent within very little time. If the interpersonal parts take up too much footage, the viewer might simply get bored and move on. And it will take patience on the part of the male audience. Men may have to put up with a little boredom, too, until they get used to the idea that the people in the movie, who still are enthusiastically cavorting and bumping their bodies together, actually do have a story, and a psychology, and a deeper tenderness than the “Oh baby,” variety. In other words, the sex scenes would not be about having a change of character, as in the typical ‘librarian/school teacher/secretary with thick glasses and a bun’, who suddenly shakes down her hair and reveals lacy underwear. The sex would be a natural progression of the character’s unfolding discovery of pleasurable feelings. Simply having sex would not cause the stars to gain power and stature. Rather the sex, wilder and juicier than ever, would be the end result of each of them coming to terms with their own innate personhood. But then, that wouldn’t be pornography, would it?

August 1994

1.            Walk in the light even if you don’t think you deserve to.

2.            Listen for instructions.

3.            When called, say yes.

4.            Ask for obstacles to be removed if you are on a good path, and for obstacles to be placed if you are not.

5.            Look for the signs and accept their direction.

6.            Affirm the light within you. Avoid doubt.

7.            Use your light as a beacon for others.

8.            Be one with the light.

9.            Be one with all.

10.          Be one.

11.           Be.

12.           Let gratitude and love overcome you.

There is no way to explain the secret. You either get it or you don’t.

Most will think they get it. They will interpret each part from their own view and continue to live as before, assured in the interpretation. You will recognize them when they try to teach you.

Some will think they don’t get it, but they want to. They will strive to understand. They listen to many teachers. These are the seekers. Some of these will hear truth and use it. Many will remain searching.

A few will follow their paths, changing when it seems they must change, attending to their wounds until they are standing again, taking more steps, attending to wounds, healing, stepping, attending… You will know these because they will accompany you and seek to be accompanied. They will not judge or condemn you, and they will not try to make you learn their path.

All are teachers to each other.

12/29/08

Sages tell us be one with the bird.

I am sitting on the couch on my front porch, overlooking the expanse of yard that sweeps up to the wall of hibiscus and the wooden gate. Lazing on the porch would be a luxury anywhere else, any other time. But I’m retired now, and the place is a Costa Rican village where the heat and humidity overwhelm the day. Sleep is not the issue, but rest and stillness prevail, respite from the baking sun and drenching side effects of sweat, thirst, and languor. The porch is wide and long, the length of the front of the house, buttressed by sturdy wood beams dividing the front and balancing the weight of the roof’s extension. From my view on the couch, the yard is neatly framed, with parts of sky and garden edges hidden, a carefully boxed in world. Within this portrait, there is a wire that extends from the roof edge out into the yard and up to the electrical pole on the road’s edge beyond my gate, the perfect perch for the occasional tanager, pausing in the day between avian errands. And one has landed now, calling out his random announcement, I am here, Here I am.

To be one with the bird is to be the bird, ride his wings, see the great swatches of earth as he sees them through his beady bird sight. Today I am feeling more generous, not needing to abscond with the bird and his secrets, but rather to welcome this visitor into my solitude, or is it loneliness? Today I want to share more than overtake. I want to be my own bird, become one with all birds, or perhaps any, or just my one visitor above. It is possible this bird does not see me because he is in sunlight while I am in shadow, tucked into a couch behind wooden pillars and low cement walls. I want to be seen, not in the usual startling way, but to be known in the company of birds.

It starts with a few breaths, natural reminders of the real world, calming, peace making, smoothing. The hardest part is next, turning off the volume of my mind. I am, I want, I need, all must dissolve in this moment, languish effortlessly in the heat, slip into oblivious shadows. Surfacing now are sensations of the body, no definitions, no explanations, no expectations. The feathers come first, cooling actually, unlike fur. Spiny pins extend outward into finer and softer replicas of themselves, until I am covered in feathers. Wings fold against me. I stretch first one and then the other, long and sleek then back again, tucked up to me like a shield. A shudder runs through my body as I ruffle myself, each feathery spear standing up and then flattening like the ripple of a wave. My legs have become rough spindles spreading into smooth claws.

I cannot restrain myself another moment, and I fly.

From inside the porch I fly up into the air. I circle once my visitor on the wire, out of respect and greeting, before I land several feet away along his perch. I have no voice, but of course he sees me. He is alert, but not wary. I hop along the wire to be a little closer, to see if I may approach even more. He does not fly away, or move away, and I know I am welcome. I hop again, then again, until we are side by side. He does not mind me at all as I begin to preen, not me, but him. First, I rub my head along his side, gently, slowly. He is kind, he does not stir. I begin to nuzzle the back of his neck, carefully maneuvering my beak along the quills of his feathers, scraping, smoothing, massaging.

When love is removed from the realm of the mind, which is needy and constricting, when love is allowed to fly expansively, without definition or expectation, what amazing and wonderful realms we can reach. Having met my visitor, I am ready to fly back, like Cinderella running to the carriage before midnight’s stroke exposes her other self, before my mind slips back into gear and says something shattering and foolish, like, oh, look, I am a bird.

On the couch again, I consciously breathe into myself, the self of skin and hair. The bird on the wire, suddenly alone again, calls out once with insistence before he swoops down. He hovers between the porch beams, directly before me, only a foot or so away, studying this human on the couch. We face each other for what seems like seconds, until, either satisfied or thoroughly confused, he flies away.