NVC, for the record
Sandra Dodd
Because this was a lot of writing and it was on someone else's facebook page, I'm bringing it here to the Big Filing Cabinet that is the archives of Always Learning. :-) If I'm ever asked again, maybe I won't need to write it up.
If anyone wants to discuss NVC that's fine. What's below is long. It started off with someone I know recommending NVC to her husband (someone Ive met, who was at that moment on a different continent). I thought my commentary was invited.
I didn't know until the link was brought (mostway down) that the person who was defending it also teaches it for money. And I wonder (but didn't ask) whether he must (out of self interest) think that the information I'm offering freely is necessarily inferior to what he paid for and is now selling. Andy is the husband I've met, and the other guy I don't know. I whittled his name down a bit.
From here down is cut and pasted (with a touch of formatting and time stamps and "like" excised):
Andy:
what were the criticisms sandra had of it?
____________________
Sandra Dodd:
It's scripted and was designed for communication between warring factions, not between parents and children, or spouses. I've seen many people start off happy with it, and end up more critical than they started out. Having rules for communication (and judging people to be jackals if they don't follow the rules, or whatever) adds confusion rather than clarity, in my opinion. Anything that puts a filter between people can be a problem, unless they were ready to kill one another. Maybe using it for a little while wouldn't be so bad, but I've seen a partner insist on living there, and then if the other partner objects, it (NVC) becomes the point of contention.
December 4
____________________
Scott S:
Hey Sandra -
As I listen to you here and read through your writings around the topic of unschooling, I get excited to hear another person so committed to what I think of as empowerment and liberation. I'm new to unschooling and "gobbling up" all the information I can on the topic. The more I learn about unschooling, the more I think, "Wow. This rocks. This is what we need! And by "we" I mean the world! I absolutely LOVE that you care enough about this way of relating to children that you put effort into spreading it.
Some things you said brought up confusion and curiosity for me. My number one reason for valuing NVC as a tool stems from a huge respect for choice, which, yeah, is also the primary reason I am so interested in unschooling. I'm hoping you are up for a few questions that came up for me:
When you hear a person using NVC when communicating, and they are naming/guessing feelings and needs (the NVC process), does it seem clinical and/or inauthentic because of the amount of thought put into the process and that there even is a process? And perhaps the very naming (?labeling?) of those feelings and needs comes across as unnatural because the NVC you have heard differs drastically from how you are used to hearing people speak? It also sounds like you have concerns about efficiency in situations where a parent wishes to quickly deal with a child in a spontaneous and authentic manner? Also, and I realize I may totally be off - this is exploratory - I'm guessing you feel a natural skepticism around formulas and structures, which often conflict with a need for autonomy?
December 5
____________________
Sandra Dodd:
You used "autonomy" and "authenticity," which are also terms I avoid. Too many words and constructs in between people and other people, and even between people and their own thoughts, for me. I see people being very manipulative and whiney with NVC, but because they're following the script, they feel like they're doing something different.
I guess I like to hope people can learn to think and communicate directly and more clearly. It's possible that NVC works well for some kinds of people, and viscerally irritates other people at the same time. It wouldn't be the first or only thing that does that. Unschooling is one of those things, too. School is one of those things, too.
-=-When you hear a person using NVC when communicating, and they are naming/guessing feelings and needs (the NVC process), does it seem clinical and/or inauthentic because of the amount of thought put into the process and that there even is a process?-=-
It sounds like they're decided what they want my next move to be, and I can either "meet their needs" or be an uncooperative "violent" person. When they name or guess my feelings, it can sometimes be in the rude/intrusive/tacky range. It makes for unnatural "conversations."
December 5
____________________
Scott S:
Hey Sandra -
I appreciate you talking with me about your opinions regarding NVC! I've quoted your paragraphs below and added "Scott's reply" to each of them. I hope I don't come across below as overly defensive. I know I value NVC as a tool but I don't necessarily feel that it is a tool for everyone or feel a strong need to convince you. I do think of you as a person who influences many in the unschooling community and since I have so much respect for that community and Bea has told me so much good about you, I think, "Wow if this woman were to see the value of NVC in relation to parenting, it could be a really good thing." But again, I don't want to push it. There are many other great and equivalent tools out there.
Sandra said: You used "autonomy" and "authenticity," which are also terms I avoid. Too many words and constructs in between people and other people, and even between people and their own thoughts, for me. I see people being very manipulative and whiney with NVC, but because they're following the script, they feel like they're doing something different.
Scott's reply: I'm totally with you on less mediation and more efficiency in our communication. I actually see the practice of NVC as something that can help people to get more in touch with their own and others' deeper stuff (feelings/needs) so that it gets delt with instead of being swept under the rug. I'm curious why you avoid those two words (autonomy & authenticity). Would "liberty" or "freedom" or some other word work better for you than "autonomy"? I do see how "autonomy" can be unwieldy and not the most commonly known/used word. I do believe it to be a need we all have but yeah I would love to find a more useful replacement. Would "honesty" or "forthrightness" work better for you than "authenticity"? It sounds like you have experience some people using NVC to manipulate. I've heard of that. It's certainly possible.
Sandra said: I guess I like to hope people can learn to think and communicate directly and more clearly. It's possible that NVC works well for some kinds of people, and viscerally irritates other people at the same time. It wouldn't be the first or only thing that does that. Unschooling is one of those things, too. School is one of those things, too.
Scott's reply: I'm with you on "hoping people can learn to think and communicate more directly and clearly". I see NVC as merely one of many tools/exercises/modalities available to help us do these things. For me it is a tool of liberation as well as a tool to rewire my system to understand others on the deepest level possible (empathy). Secondarily, yes, a tool for resolving conflicts. For me, starting out as a person whom it might be fair to call narcisistic, NVC also helpmed me rewire so that when I'm listening to someone, I'm less likely to evaluable or morally judge what they are saying and more likely to listen from a place of compassion where I'm feeling like I'm in their shoes, *really* hearing them.
Scott said previously: "When you hear a person using NVC when communicating, and they are naming/guessing feelings and needs (the NVC process), does it seem clinical and/or inauthentic because of the amount of thought put into the process and that there even is a process?"
Sandra replied: It sounds like they're decided what they want my next move to be, and I can either "meet their needs" or be an uncooperative "violent" person. When they name or guess my feelings, it can sometimes be in the rude/intrusive/tacky range. It makes for unnatural "conversations."
Scott's reply: The more I hear you speak of NVC, the more I wonder if your exposure to it was through people who are beginners and/or people who are "manipulators". I say this because a very important part of NVC is that we distinguish between request and demand (a whole chapter on that). The author often (in the book and in his videos) states something along the lines of: "We pay dearly any time another person does something for us out of guilt, shame, obligation, or demand. We ONLY want people to do things out of pure joy of doing or giving from the heart." And yes, he encourages NVC newbs to practice and make mistakes. To take risks. To guess at what others are feeling/needing rather than "How are you?" or "Are you OK?" Have you ever asked a child to tell you what they are feeling or needing and gotten either nothing or a shrug or "OK"? vs "Wow when that blah blah blah happend I wonder if you were pissed off because you wanted more respect?" It's also about giving the benefit of the doubt to the other person, as in that they are honest and strong enough to say "No. That isn't what I'm feeling/needing." or even "Mind your own business." It's about trusting in others that they know themselves but may not necessarily have the words handy so yeah, we guess their feelings/needs out loud. Regarding "it sounds unnatural", here is a short article I wrote on the topic:
http://www.clearsay.net/nvc_sounds_unnatural.asp
ClearSay.net - Nonviolent Communication (NVC) Sounds Un-Natural
www.clearsay.net
Increase your personal power and empathy by learning how to recognize and speak needs in a compassionate and responsible manner.
December 7
____________________
Bea Marshall:
Hi Scott. Sorry it has taken me a while to read through your response to Sandra. I look forward to seeing how she replies to you. I ma finding this exploration of NVC really informative and helpful. Thank you both for engaging in the process
____________________
Sandra Dodd
Bea, I'm glad you tagged me, because I hadn't seen the response.
Scott wrote: "It sounds like you have experience some people using NVC to manipulate. I've heard of that. It's certainly possible." I haven't seen it used any other way. Its purpose seems to be for people who aren't getting their way to learn tricks for verbally controlling other people.
-=- Would "liberty" or "freedom" or some other word work better for you than "autonomy"? -=-
No. No jargon seems better than seeing others as separate people with preferences and giving them space to make choices we don't agree with.
Scott wrote:
" And yes, he encourages NVC newbs to practice and make mistakes. To take risks. To guess at what others are feeling/needing rather than "How are you?" or "Are you OK?" Have you ever asked a child to tell you what they are feeling or needing and gotten either nothing or a shrug or "OK"? vs "Wow when that blah blah blah happend I wonder if you were pissed off because you wanted more respect?""
Going from too-bland a question to too-intrusive a guess isn't a step toward a better partnership or friendship. I don't want people guessing, putting words into my mouth or thoughts into my head. If they think they know what I feel, and what they feel and what they think I should feel, that's fine for them. They should go off and have that conversation with themselves and leave me out of it.
If someone has the interpersonal intelligence to know when to wait, and give people time to process and to decide to talk when they're ready, that's many layers above having a script and a method they think will draw the other person to communicate before the time is right. To induce dialog unnaturally is intrusive. If the other person doesn't want it, then it's rude.
-=- It's also about giving the benefit of the doubt to the other person, as in that they are honest and strong enough to say "No. That isn't what I'm feeling/needing." or even "Mind your own business."-=-
AH! Then I'm right. They press the other person to the point of rudeness. That is not good, or kind, or relationship building.
-=-It's about trusting in others that they know themselves but may not necessarily have the words handy so yeah, we guess their feelings/needs out loud.-=-
Maybe they do have the words and don't want to share with that other person. Maybe they don't know and need some time to think. It's not everyone else's business what I'm thinking. I don't need to know what everyone else claims to need from me. If they need for me to know what they need, how did they come to feel they have that much right to probe and examine me? Or to put in their order as if it were a letter to Santa for what they want me to do and why?
-=-The more I hear you speak of NVC...-=-
I never speak of NVC. I do speak a fair amount, and I do give people ideas for being better partners within their families.
You've seen me write of NVC here, in response to a question. And these things I'm writing today are in response to a request from Bea. "The more I hear you speak of NVC" makes it sound like I'm out campaigning. I'm not. It's not something I recommend, and it's not something I like to have used on me. When someone says (or writes) "I need X... do you think you could do that for me?" I don't want to do anything for them. In worst cases, it seems like an adult form of wheedling and whining. I know it's not intended to be that, but the effect is in that direction.
-=--=- It's also about giving the benefit of the doubt to the other person, as in that they are honest and strong enough to say "No. That isn't what I'm feeling/needing." or even "Mind your own business."-=--=-
What if they're not "honest" enough? Then the NVC-armed player "wins"?
What if they're not "strong enough" to push back? Then NVC wins? Because it does seem that there is a winner and a loser in those exchanges, or else the requestor can (as I first said above) consider that the other person is being violent (or "not being 'non-violent'" and that's pretty convoluted.
This is giving me the willies: "It's also about giving the benefit of the doubt to the other person, as in that they are honest and strong ..." People should be able to subtly avoid a conversational direction another person wants to take. They shoudln't need to be "honest and strong" to have some privacy and to change the subject toward something less personal or loaded or sensitive.
Both of these are NVC-style:
(QUOTED FROM THE LINKED ARTICLE:)
***********
Clinical: I see and hear the food in your open mouth as you chew. I'm feeling disgust and worry about germs flying into my food. My needs for comfort and security and respect are not being met. Would you be willing to close your mouth while you eat?
Natural: I'm getting a bit grossed out by the open mouth chewing. Would you be up for talking about this with me?
************
Why should someone need to agree, during a meal, that they would be for talking about their table manners, later, with someone?
It quite depends whose table and whose food it is.
If I go to a restaurant with someone whose table manners are embarrassing, I won't go out again. That's natural.
If it's my table, I can say without words that it's gross by a look. Or I could say "I don't want to see your food."
If it's their table and their food, I can politely finish my meal and remember that if I want the friendship, to go to the movies instead of to dinner, or to play cards instead of going to a restaurant.
If it's one of my children, I would say (and did, when they were little), people don't want to see your food. It's nicer to chew with your mouth closed.
To say "I'm feeling disgust" to anyone is rude and unnatural, and it can't really be anything else. "I don't like it" should be enough, without any discussion of germs and comfort and security and respect. And it only an awkward grammatical half-step from "I'm disgusted by you," which is one more half step from "you're disgusting."
If the person doesn't care what I like, when I say "I don't like it," then I will avoid that person in the future. I can find someone else to hang out with at mealtimes.
From the linked article: "Second, the intended goal of NVC is not to speak in a formulaic manner. The goal is to use the formula to train our brains to more often empathize automatically. As we get more comfortable with listening and speaking from a place of empathy, our language will naturally reflect this."
The example, about the friend who chewed with his mouth open... that showed no empathy for him. It was manipulation to get him to chew with his mouth closed. And the "natural" example (which was also NVC) put him in a position to either discuss his habits later, or to be brave or honest enough to say "NO, I don't want to have an extended conversation with you about the way I eat."
-=- For me, starting out as a person whom it might be fair to call narcisistic, NVC also helpmed me rewire so that when I'm listening to someone-=-
Philosophical principles could have helped. Humility might have helped, without all that "rewiring."
http://sandradodd.com/humility
-=-I don't necessarily feel that it is a tool for everyone or feel a strong need to convince you. I do think of you as a person who influences many in the unschooling community and since I have so much respect for that community and Bea has told me so much good about you, I think, "Wow if this woman were to see the value of NVC in relation to parenting, it could be a really good thing." But again, I don't want to push it. There are many other great and equivalent tools out there. -=-
If you could persuade me that I'm wrong and you're right, that would be good for you, it seems, even though you worded it pretty politely.
There are ways to communicate nicely without any other "equivalent tools." Just by being nicer.
Years ago I started saying "Make the better choice" in a context other than parenting, but it worked there, and everywhere. My best advice (a tool, I guess) for people trying to change is to think before they speak or act, to give themselves two choices (or more, maybe, later) and choose the one that takes them nearer to the way they want to be.
I suppose NVC is that way too, but with a script and with rules and jargon.
Here's a quickie intro to that: http://sandradodd.com/decisions
and a longer explanation is down in this: http://sandradodd.com/parentingpeacefully
Sorry to fill your page up with so much, Bea.
There are only two places on my site (which has over 1000 pages) where NVC is mentioned. One is a copy of an interview in which I was specifically asked.
It's #2 here: http://sandradodd.com/interviews/naturalparenting2010
The other is here, and is someone else's writing, not mine (righthand box):
http://sandradodd.com/priorities
____________________
Bea Marshall:
I have no concerns you taking up my page! I am enjoying the exchange immensely. Thank you for taking the time to respond and be part of the discussion.
____________________
Scott S:
With respect, I'm bowing out of this conversation.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If anyone wants to discuss NVC that's fine. What's below is long. It started off with someone I know recommending NVC to her husband (someone Ive met, who was at that moment on a different continent). I thought my commentary was invited.
I didn't know until the link was brought (mostway down) that the person who was defending it also teaches it for money. And I wonder (but didn't ask) whether he must (out of self interest) think that the information I'm offering freely is necessarily inferior to what he paid for and is now selling. Andy is the husband I've met, and the other guy I don't know. I whittled his name down a bit.
From here down is cut and pasted (with a touch of formatting and time stamps and "like" excised):
Andy:
what were the criticisms sandra had of it?
____________________
Sandra Dodd:
It's scripted and was designed for communication between warring factions, not between parents and children, or spouses. I've seen many people start off happy with it, and end up more critical than they started out. Having rules for communication (and judging people to be jackals if they don't follow the rules, or whatever) adds confusion rather than clarity, in my opinion. Anything that puts a filter between people can be a problem, unless they were ready to kill one another. Maybe using it for a little while wouldn't be so bad, but I've seen a partner insist on living there, and then if the other partner objects, it (NVC) becomes the point of contention.
December 4
____________________
Scott S:
Hey Sandra -
As I listen to you here and read through your writings around the topic of unschooling, I get excited to hear another person so committed to what I think of as empowerment and liberation. I'm new to unschooling and "gobbling up" all the information I can on the topic. The more I learn about unschooling, the more I think, "Wow. This rocks. This is what we need! And by "we" I mean the world! I absolutely LOVE that you care enough about this way of relating to children that you put effort into spreading it.
Some things you said brought up confusion and curiosity for me. My number one reason for valuing NVC as a tool stems from a huge respect for choice, which, yeah, is also the primary reason I am so interested in unschooling. I'm hoping you are up for a few questions that came up for me:
When you hear a person using NVC when communicating, and they are naming/guessing feelings and needs (the NVC process), does it seem clinical and/or inauthentic because of the amount of thought put into the process and that there even is a process? And perhaps the very naming (?labeling?) of those feelings and needs comes across as unnatural because the NVC you have heard differs drastically from how you are used to hearing people speak? It also sounds like you have concerns about efficiency in situations where a parent wishes to quickly deal with a child in a spontaneous and authentic manner? Also, and I realize I may totally be off - this is exploratory - I'm guessing you feel a natural skepticism around formulas and structures, which often conflict with a need for autonomy?
December 5
____________________
Sandra Dodd:
You used "autonomy" and "authenticity," which are also terms I avoid. Too many words and constructs in between people and other people, and even between people and their own thoughts, for me. I see people being very manipulative and whiney with NVC, but because they're following the script, they feel like they're doing something different.
I guess I like to hope people can learn to think and communicate directly and more clearly. It's possible that NVC works well for some kinds of people, and viscerally irritates other people at the same time. It wouldn't be the first or only thing that does that. Unschooling is one of those things, too. School is one of those things, too.
-=-When you hear a person using NVC when communicating, and they are naming/guessing feelings and needs (the NVC process), does it seem clinical and/or inauthentic because of the amount of thought put into the process and that there even is a process?-=-
It sounds like they're decided what they want my next move to be, and I can either "meet their needs" or be an uncooperative "violent" person. When they name or guess my feelings, it can sometimes be in the rude/intrusive/tacky range. It makes for unnatural "conversations."
December 5
____________________
Scott S:
Hey Sandra -
I appreciate you talking with me about your opinions regarding NVC! I've quoted your paragraphs below and added "Scott's reply" to each of them. I hope I don't come across below as overly defensive. I know I value NVC as a tool but I don't necessarily feel that it is a tool for everyone or feel a strong need to convince you. I do think of you as a person who influences many in the unschooling community and since I have so much respect for that community and Bea has told me so much good about you, I think, "Wow if this woman were to see the value of NVC in relation to parenting, it could be a really good thing." But again, I don't want to push it. There are many other great and equivalent tools out there.
Sandra said: You used "autonomy" and "authenticity," which are also terms I avoid. Too many words and constructs in between people and other people, and even between people and their own thoughts, for me. I see people being very manipulative and whiney with NVC, but because they're following the script, they feel like they're doing something different.
Scott's reply: I'm totally with you on less mediation and more efficiency in our communication. I actually see the practice of NVC as something that can help people to get more in touch with their own and others' deeper stuff (feelings/needs) so that it gets delt with instead of being swept under the rug. I'm curious why you avoid those two words (autonomy & authenticity). Would "liberty" or "freedom" or some other word work better for you than "autonomy"? I do see how "autonomy" can be unwieldy and not the most commonly known/used word. I do believe it to be a need we all have but yeah I would love to find a more useful replacement. Would "honesty" or "forthrightness" work better for you than "authenticity"? It sounds like you have experience some people using NVC to manipulate. I've heard of that. It's certainly possible.
Sandra said: I guess I like to hope people can learn to think and communicate directly and more clearly. It's possible that NVC works well for some kinds of people, and viscerally irritates other people at the same time. It wouldn't be the first or only thing that does that. Unschooling is one of those things, too. School is one of those things, too.
Scott's reply: I'm with you on "hoping people can learn to think and communicate more directly and clearly". I see NVC as merely one of many tools/exercises/modalities available to help us do these things. For me it is a tool of liberation as well as a tool to rewire my system to understand others on the deepest level possible (empathy). Secondarily, yes, a tool for resolving conflicts. For me, starting out as a person whom it might be fair to call narcisistic, NVC also helpmed me rewire so that when I'm listening to someone, I'm less likely to evaluable or morally judge what they are saying and more likely to listen from a place of compassion where I'm feeling like I'm in their shoes, *really* hearing them.
Scott said previously: "When you hear a person using NVC when communicating, and they are naming/guessing feelings and needs (the NVC process), does it seem clinical and/or inauthentic because of the amount of thought put into the process and that there even is a process?"
Sandra replied: It sounds like they're decided what they want my next move to be, and I can either "meet their needs" or be an uncooperative "violent" person. When they name or guess my feelings, it can sometimes be in the rude/intrusive/tacky range. It makes for unnatural "conversations."
Scott's reply: The more I hear you speak of NVC, the more I wonder if your exposure to it was through people who are beginners and/or people who are "manipulators". I say this because a very important part of NVC is that we distinguish between request and demand (a whole chapter on that). The author often (in the book and in his videos) states something along the lines of: "We pay dearly any time another person does something for us out of guilt, shame, obligation, or demand. We ONLY want people to do things out of pure joy of doing or giving from the heart." And yes, he encourages NVC newbs to practice and make mistakes. To take risks. To guess at what others are feeling/needing rather than "How are you?" or "Are you OK?" Have you ever asked a child to tell you what they are feeling or needing and gotten either nothing or a shrug or "OK"? vs "Wow when that blah blah blah happend I wonder if you were pissed off because you wanted more respect?" It's also about giving the benefit of the doubt to the other person, as in that they are honest and strong enough to say "No. That isn't what I'm feeling/needing." or even "Mind your own business." It's about trusting in others that they know themselves but may not necessarily have the words handy so yeah, we guess their feelings/needs out loud. Regarding "it sounds unnatural", here is a short article I wrote on the topic:
http://www.clearsay.net/nvc_sounds_unnatural.asp
ClearSay.net - Nonviolent Communication (NVC) Sounds Un-Natural
www.clearsay.net
Increase your personal power and empathy by learning how to recognize and speak needs in a compassionate and responsible manner.
December 7
____________________
Bea Marshall:
Hi Scott. Sorry it has taken me a while to read through your response to Sandra. I look forward to seeing how she replies to you. I ma finding this exploration of NVC really informative and helpful. Thank you both for engaging in the process
____________________
Sandra Dodd
Bea, I'm glad you tagged me, because I hadn't seen the response.
Scott wrote: "It sounds like you have experience some people using NVC to manipulate. I've heard of that. It's certainly possible." I haven't seen it used any other way. Its purpose seems to be for people who aren't getting their way to learn tricks for verbally controlling other people.
-=- Would "liberty" or "freedom" or some other word work better for you than "autonomy"? -=-
No. No jargon seems better than seeing others as separate people with preferences and giving them space to make choices we don't agree with.
Scott wrote:
" And yes, he encourages NVC newbs to practice and make mistakes. To take risks. To guess at what others are feeling/needing rather than "How are you?" or "Are you OK?" Have you ever asked a child to tell you what they are feeling or needing and gotten either nothing or a shrug or "OK"? vs "Wow when that blah blah blah happend I wonder if you were pissed off because you wanted more respect?""
Going from too-bland a question to too-intrusive a guess isn't a step toward a better partnership or friendship. I don't want people guessing, putting words into my mouth or thoughts into my head. If they think they know what I feel, and what they feel and what they think I should feel, that's fine for them. They should go off and have that conversation with themselves and leave me out of it.
If someone has the interpersonal intelligence to know when to wait, and give people time to process and to decide to talk when they're ready, that's many layers above having a script and a method they think will draw the other person to communicate before the time is right. To induce dialog unnaturally is intrusive. If the other person doesn't want it, then it's rude.
-=- It's also about giving the benefit of the doubt to the other person, as in that they are honest and strong enough to say "No. That isn't what I'm feeling/needing." or even "Mind your own business."-=-
AH! Then I'm right. They press the other person to the point of rudeness. That is not good, or kind, or relationship building.
-=-It's about trusting in others that they know themselves but may not necessarily have the words handy so yeah, we guess their feelings/needs out loud.-=-
Maybe they do have the words and don't want to share with that other person. Maybe they don't know and need some time to think. It's not everyone else's business what I'm thinking. I don't need to know what everyone else claims to need from me. If they need for me to know what they need, how did they come to feel they have that much right to probe and examine me? Or to put in their order as if it were a letter to Santa for what they want me to do and why?
-=-The more I hear you speak of NVC...-=-
I never speak of NVC. I do speak a fair amount, and I do give people ideas for being better partners within their families.
You've seen me write of NVC here, in response to a question. And these things I'm writing today are in response to a request from Bea. "The more I hear you speak of NVC" makes it sound like I'm out campaigning. I'm not. It's not something I recommend, and it's not something I like to have used on me. When someone says (or writes) "I need X... do you think you could do that for me?" I don't want to do anything for them. In worst cases, it seems like an adult form of wheedling and whining. I know it's not intended to be that, but the effect is in that direction.
-=--=- It's also about giving the benefit of the doubt to the other person, as in that they are honest and strong enough to say "No. That isn't what I'm feeling/needing." or even "Mind your own business."-=--=-
What if they're not "honest" enough? Then the NVC-armed player "wins"?
What if they're not "strong enough" to push back? Then NVC wins? Because it does seem that there is a winner and a loser in those exchanges, or else the requestor can (as I first said above) consider that the other person is being violent (or "not being 'non-violent'" and that's pretty convoluted.
This is giving me the willies: "It's also about giving the benefit of the doubt to the other person, as in that they are honest and strong ..." People should be able to subtly avoid a conversational direction another person wants to take. They shoudln't need to be "honest and strong" to have some privacy and to change the subject toward something less personal or loaded or sensitive.
Both of these are NVC-style:
(QUOTED FROM THE LINKED ARTICLE:)
***********
Clinical: I see and hear the food in your open mouth as you chew. I'm feeling disgust and worry about germs flying into my food. My needs for comfort and security and respect are not being met. Would you be willing to close your mouth while you eat?
Natural: I'm getting a bit grossed out by the open mouth chewing. Would you be up for talking about this with me?
************
Why should someone need to agree, during a meal, that they would be for talking about their table manners, later, with someone?
It quite depends whose table and whose food it is.
If I go to a restaurant with someone whose table manners are embarrassing, I won't go out again. That's natural.
If it's my table, I can say without words that it's gross by a look. Or I could say "I don't want to see your food."
If it's their table and their food, I can politely finish my meal and remember that if I want the friendship, to go to the movies instead of to dinner, or to play cards instead of going to a restaurant.
If it's one of my children, I would say (and did, when they were little), people don't want to see your food. It's nicer to chew with your mouth closed.
To say "I'm feeling disgust" to anyone is rude and unnatural, and it can't really be anything else. "I don't like it" should be enough, without any discussion of germs and comfort and security and respect. And it only an awkward grammatical half-step from "I'm disgusted by you," which is one more half step from "you're disgusting."
If the person doesn't care what I like, when I say "I don't like it," then I will avoid that person in the future. I can find someone else to hang out with at mealtimes.
From the linked article: "Second, the intended goal of NVC is not to speak in a formulaic manner. The goal is to use the formula to train our brains to more often empathize automatically. As we get more comfortable with listening and speaking from a place of empathy, our language will naturally reflect this."
The example, about the friend who chewed with his mouth open... that showed no empathy for him. It was manipulation to get him to chew with his mouth closed. And the "natural" example (which was also NVC) put him in a position to either discuss his habits later, or to be brave or honest enough to say "NO, I don't want to have an extended conversation with you about the way I eat."
-=- For me, starting out as a person whom it might be fair to call narcisistic, NVC also helpmed me rewire so that when I'm listening to someone-=-
Philosophical principles could have helped. Humility might have helped, without all that "rewiring."
http://sandradodd.com/humility
-=-I don't necessarily feel that it is a tool for everyone or feel a strong need to convince you. I do think of you as a person who influences many in the unschooling community and since I have so much respect for that community and Bea has told me so much good about you, I think, "Wow if this woman were to see the value of NVC in relation to parenting, it could be a really good thing." But again, I don't want to push it. There are many other great and equivalent tools out there. -=-
If you could persuade me that I'm wrong and you're right, that would be good for you, it seems, even though you worded it pretty politely.
There are ways to communicate nicely without any other "equivalent tools." Just by being nicer.
Years ago I started saying "Make the better choice" in a context other than parenting, but it worked there, and everywhere. My best advice (a tool, I guess) for people trying to change is to think before they speak or act, to give themselves two choices (or more, maybe, later) and choose the one that takes them nearer to the way they want to be.
I suppose NVC is that way too, but with a script and with rules and jargon.
Here's a quickie intro to that: http://sandradodd.com/decisions
and a longer explanation is down in this: http://sandradodd.com/parentingpeacefully
Sorry to fill your page up with so much, Bea.
There are only two places on my site (which has over 1000 pages) where NVC is mentioned. One is a copy of an interview in which I was specifically asked.
It's #2 here: http://sandradodd.com/interviews/naturalparenting2010
The other is here, and is someone else's writing, not mine (righthand box):
http://sandradodd.com/priorities
____________________
Bea Marshall:
I have no concerns you taking up my page! I am enjoying the exchange immensely. Thank you for taking the time to respond and be part of the discussion.
____________________
Scott S:
With respect, I'm bowing out of this conversation.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]