angriness lessons

[godream]

Okay, so how does one go about getting better at semi-confrontations? I have this possibly-terrible reflex of backing down right away from any sort of real disagreement -- not even in the sense of "well, you're entitled to your opinion" although I do that too but in the sense of "okay, I'm sorry, do you want me to make it up to you?" even when in retrospect I realize I've done nothing wrong, and asking others shows that they think I've been more than reasonable too. But the reflex for anything remotely resembling an accusation is still: whoa, sorry sorry sorry, eek... and I should learn to do better at that before I get out in the Real World and it starts mattering.

In other news, I'm actually ahead on psets and such. Better gloat about it while it lasts...

Comments

[shaktool.livejournal.com]

Imagine your opponent's face glaring at you. While doing this, start grinning, and keep grinning for at least a minute. Do this often, especially in public.

Dunno if it'll work, but it sounds like a great idea to me. Take that, empathy!

[godream.livejournal.com]

And sooner or later everyone'll be too creeped out to argue with me anymore? ;)

[shaktool.livejournal.com]

There is a school of thought that happiness is so strongly linked with facial expressions that you can actually cause yourself to feel happier by smiling (but it has to be the right kind of smiling, saying "cheese!" isn't good enough). I find myself leaning a little towards this school of thought, believe it or not. And then throw in the Pavlov's Dog effect, and maybe you can convince yourself to feel glad rather than bad whenever people are angry at you. So, I was actually half-serious.

...Yes, I'm insane. But insanity and genius are not mutually exclusive! >:)

[(Anonymous)]

Ah--- I've heard that theory before, just didn't make the connection. Fair enough.

... :)

[godream.livejournal.com]

... that being me not-logged-in. Oops.

[jessiehl.livejournal.com]

Look at what the other person is saying, and separate the rational part from the non-rational/angry part. Then address them separately. Address the rational part with a rational point of your own. If you feel the need to address the non-rational part, you can apologize for having made them sad or angry or uncomfortable, which is not the same as apologizing for the actual action.

For example, you put up a poster that Foo, a friend of yours, believes is offensive to him. You do not believe the poster is offensive. Foo comes up and starts yelling at you or whining at you. You calm Foo down by saying "I'm sorry that you were so upset by this", then, once Foo has calmed down a little, explain why you do not believe that the poster is offensive.

Notice that this requires Foo to be reasonable enough to calm down a bit and hear you out once slightly calmer. If Foo isn't at that level of reasoning, this is unlikely to be a productive confrontation anyway, and should probably be avoided until Foo has gotten a little bit of a grip (if it appears after a suitable time interval that Foo is never going to get a grip, go ahead and have the confrontation, and play it by ear).

Sometimes a Neutral Third Party (TM) is useful, if you can find one and the conflict is big enough. I'm no picture of assertiveness myself (understatement), but I'm quite accustommed to being the neutral party.

[godream.livejournal.com]

That's really helpful... thank you.