Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Emotional Expression versus Aggression at Meetings - how to tell the difference?

[Sharon Villines (sharon]

> On May 3, 2016, at 11:35 AM, Lynn Nadeau / Maraiah <welcome [at] olympus.net> 
> wrote:
> 
> My personal first impression is noticing the difference between "I" and "you" 
> statements. "I" statements can be like Marshall Rosenfeld's formula, for 
> example: When X happens, I feel Y, because I value Z. Of course you can't say 
> "When YOU act like a jerk...." It helps, too, to be specific, not just "you 
> always/you never". (The "you" can be a reference to the  whole group, 
> sometimes stated as "we".)
> 
> Thus, "I" can be an expression of emotion; "you" can be aggression.

I agree but as a writer, the first thing I was taught is avoid “I" as often as 
possible, and to use the editorial “we” and “you.” To say “I think” is a waste 
of words. If I say it, unless I quote someone, I think it.

Since I do research and read research often, I am rarely speaking as an “I”, 
but it is a good reminder. In the opposite direction, however, there is such a 
thing as knowledge beyond my own opinion. I go nuts when people say, “Well 
that’s just your opinion,” and then go on in Trumpian fashion saying things 
that have no factual basis. I remember weighing in on a polish that was being 
used in the CH on research that it could damage furniture. “Well, that’s just 
your opinion."

I was recently in a “conversation” with two people who object, always, to my 
speaking in hyperbole, as in "everyone is quick to respond to the needs of 
children under 7 but not to the needs of those over 70.” These two started 
lecturing me on “everyone” and “no one.” I should be more accurate and this 
offends people so they don’t listen to me. My opinion is that we should all be 
able to listen to other other people in their speaking style. I can learn to 
hear whatever communications style someone is using, but to insist that I speak 
their style I think is dictatorial and boring. What if we all spoke like our 
third grade teacher or in the language of Non-violent Communication or the 
current psychobabble. No diversity there.

A brand new member with no dog in the fight was listening to our 
“conversation.” I asked her if she knew what I meant or did she think I was 
literally saying “no one” and “everyone.” She said she understood perfectly. 
She happens to be a writer and editor as well but still, I think most people 
would understand the meaning and not “correct” the expression as inaccurate and 
invalid.

Not disagreeing with Maraiah in a specific instance, but adding another 
perspective. 

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC
http://www.takomavillage.org