Lulu: This is relevant to your interests: Carolyn Hax discusses the “Where are you from?” question. Tired of being asked, ‘No, where are you really from?’
Ashley: Wow, yeah. I did used to get annoyed at that, because it gets tedious having the same conversation over and over.
Lulu:Agreed. People are trying to show interest and just inanely commenting on anything and they don't think about whether you've had that conversation over and over. I rarely make those kinds of comments, but it's out of an opposite kind of insensitivity
Ashley: You don't care about other people!!!
Lulu: It doesn't occur to me to ask!!
Ashley: It’s one of the things I like best about you!
Lulu: hahahaha
Ashley: But yes, in general I would just say the overall region (she could go with "pacific islands" or even "asia", probably?) and then deflect further questions.
"Oh, WHERE in Asia?"
"We moved around a bit. I lived near Beijing for a while." You know, if "near" is like Boston to San Francisco...
Lulu: People always ask where even though they wouldn't know what you meant if you responded correctly
Ashley: And in that regard, I'm with the LW, because she knows which will be the confusing part of the answer, and that's where conversation stalls or you get stuck in explaining your weird cultural customs and how to pronounce your name. And then you find yourself giving a lecture on palatalized consonants, and then no one is happy! She just needs to find an appropriately generic response and then practice it until it's just like, "My name is blah. What's your name?"
Lulu: Does it help to be like "Ha ha, everyone always asks me that"? I feel like that would make me feel ashamed, as a questioner, but then, I like to be original.
Ashley: I've said that a few times too, but it didn't seem to register. I don't find the question offensive, like she seems to, though, so Carolyn is right that she seems to be taking a lot of offense at a fairly innocuous question. I think it's boring but I don't find it offensive, so my responses aren't meant to embarrass or anything, but just to avoid me having to explain my whole life story again.
Lulu: That's what she says she wants too - a way to end the conversation.
Ashley: But she seems too offended based on the side remarks in the letter.
Lulu: I'd say it's not fair, but it's also not necessarily offensive in that people are just well-meaning dopes. It's not even really a race thing, just an anything-unusual kind of thing.
Ashley: There's always something...
Lulu: I always have to explain my lazy eye and my crippling social phobia
Ashley: ….
Lulu: I had blue hair for a while; if you dye your hair blue you end up having a lot of blue hair conversations,
but you brought that on yourself, really. Same with tattoos. You can assume if you see a tattoo that the person wouldn't mind discussing it, since they proudly placed it on a prominent body part, but it’s not an assumption you can make about ethnicity / accents / injuries / genetic abnormalities / etc.
Ashley: I imagine it is tiring to hear the same comments over and over about your dumb tattoo you got when you were 18
Lulu: YES I branded my forehead with PANTERA RULES. NO I don't have strong feelings about Pantera right now.
Showing posts with label carolyn hax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label carolyn hax. Show all posts
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Facebook Etiquette: there's less than you might think
It's been a long time since we posted on Carolyn Hax, both because she is usually unimpeachable, and because her RSS feed URL changed, like, a month ago, and I didn't notice. Today's second letter on Facebook etiquette, from an oddly tech-savvy grandma, piqued our interest!
Ashley: Obv she's wrong. EXCEPT. When there's a big event that you're expecting to occur in your family, it's KIND OF your responsibility to keep track of it. That doesn't need to be on Facebook. From the letter, it seems like the sister knew about the pregnancy but not the day of birth. If she was interested, why didn't she call up and ask how things were going?
Lulu: True, the responsibility of keeping track of all interested parties and disseminating information to each one should not fall entirely on the shoulders of the person who has the interesting life, who is presumably busy.
Ashley: Hypothetical here. Let's say I have a thing coming up, an exam or something. It's a big deal for me but I don't assume it is for anyone else. I post on FB. If people want more details, they ask me. Why would I inundate the world with details if they don't care? Wouldn't that be the grilled cheese for lunch equivalent? You can't bitch about FB being too crowded with details and then demand more details!
Lulu: Wait... which one are you arguing against?
Ashley: Both of them! They're both wrong.
Lulu: Answering the LW's question directly, no, there's no rudeness in failing to check fb even if you went to the trouble of creating an account and friending someone, because people open fb accounts for different reasons. "For a lark" or "to play games" or "to check every blue moon when I'm bored" are legit, and you'd still friend people/accept friend requests, because it would be weirder not to.
I think if you want to know something about someone, you should contact them using whatever means of communication is most comfortable for you. Check their fb, call them, whatever. It's not their fault if they fail to contact you in the way you want.
It's also nobody's responsibility to keep up on your preferred method of making announcements. If you really want a specific person to know something, contact them directly; don't assume the message got to them unless you get a confirmation (response to post, email back, they say "uh-huh", whatever).
So, yes, I disagree with both of them too.
Ashley: Yay!
Lulu: This reminds me of a question I read awhile ago. Someone thought it was rude for people to post a lot, because it pushes the 'meaningful' posts off. It was like the opposite of this LW with her grilled cheese posts. Let's see if I can find it. I don't think we discussed it, which makes it more difficult.
Ashley: We didn't. I didn't read it.
Lulu: Yeah, when I search for "facebook" in my gmail I just get this:
1. You can use "Top News" instead of "Most Recent" and it will weight the posts which have comments and likes.
2. Using the pulldown under "Most Recent" you can filter to show only the most recent posts from the people in a particular friend group. So you can create a friend group consisting only of your most interesting friends.
3. To ignore specific people, you can click the 'x' which appears in on the top left corner of a news post on mouse over, and the dropdown offers an option to 'hide all by' that person. They will be added to your "hidden" list which you can also manipulate if you go to "Edit Options" under "Most Recent."
It does not need to be a problem that your friends are boring! No need to complain that people are being rude by being boring! It does not need to be a problem! As Miss Manners says, it's much harder to ignore them in person.
Ashley: I know! I'd rather have them on FB!
Lulu: What do you think about this second remark about how people are rude for not commenting? Like there's some kind of currency of comments and it's like Lendle borrowing and lending or something, where you earn the right to post a status update by commenting on other people's?
Ashley: Or like slash fic. Didn't you once say you'd only write a sequel to a story if you got to a certain number of comments?
Lulu: That was off the record. Anyway, it was to gauge interest!...
Okay, I do feel like the fanfic community is a specifc place where comments do serve as currency, to a certain extent. They are the only payment writers get. I sometimes feel like a taker for posting stories more than I read and comment on other people's work, but I've been assured by multiple readers that that's okay. There are enough people who only comment and don't post to make up for it.
So even within fanfic where "getting feedback" is a goal people are openly working for, it's still understood that certain people will 100% post and 0% comment, certain people will 100% comment and 0% post, and there is room for that.
And I never felt that that was a thing on Facebook.
Ashley: Right. I certainly don't comment on FB (maybe once a month?) and I never thought I was rude! I'll respond to other people's comments. Like if someone likes my sweater or something, I say thanks!
Lulu: I VERY RARELY comment unless someone asks a question. I never felt that there was any social pressure to comment. I think that social pressure is just in the LW's imagination.
Ashley: Agreed.
Lulu: There is also a Miss Manners from April 1 about Facebook invites, which i found in the process, but here, MM is right. Don't use Facebook invites if you need an RSVP.
In conclusion:
Facebook is good for some things and not others!
If you have preferences for what method to keep in contact with, you should use that method! To keep in contact! But don't expect others to know which method is best for you.
Post whatever you want to post! Read whatever you want to read!
GIVE US COMMENTz0RS LoLoLoL!!
Recently, I had the following conversation with my sister:Carolyn's response basically amounts to "leave me out of it," an unusual but fun choice coming from an advice columnist.
Me: “I’m taking care of my grandson until his mom and the new baby come home from the hospital.”
Sis: “WHAT? When was the baby born? Why didn’t you tell me?”
Me: “Well . . . we posted it on Facebook . . .”
Sis: “Oh, I never bother with that!”
Maybe I should have given her the news personally, but at the same time, I feel slighted that she’s not interested in me enough to read my “public” news.
It’s not the first time I’ve run into this sort of thing — I’m not young, and neither are most of my friends. Many are technologically challenged. Some don’t understand that “I had a grilled cheese sandwich for lunch” means “I don’t have exciting news, but I’m alive and well,” rather than, “I’m going to force you to read every tedious detail about my life.” I understand that.
But having gotten to the point of opening a Facebook account and becoming “friends” with me, would you say there’s any rudeness in failing to check it occasionally?
Oh my goodness.Lulu: You're supposed to keep up religiously with all your fb news feed posts? What if you have hundreds of friends? I think I'm the only person I know with a two-digit number of friends, and even I miss tons of updates if I happen not to check for a day or two.
If the outcome you want is to get along with your sister, then learn from this without prejudice and start sharing big news with her (and others) directly. If what you want is to find fault with your sister, then you’ll have to look somewhere else.
Ashley: Obv she's wrong. EXCEPT. When there's a big event that you're expecting to occur in your family, it's KIND OF your responsibility to keep track of it. That doesn't need to be on Facebook. From the letter, it seems like the sister knew about the pregnancy but not the day of birth. If she was interested, why didn't she call up and ask how things were going?
Lulu: True, the responsibility of keeping track of all interested parties and disseminating information to each one should not fall entirely on the shoulders of the person who has the interesting life, who is presumably busy.
Ashley: Hypothetical here. Let's say I have a thing coming up, an exam or something. It's a big deal for me but I don't assume it is for anyone else. I post on FB. If people want more details, they ask me. Why would I inundate the world with details if they don't care? Wouldn't that be the grilled cheese for lunch equivalent? You can't bitch about FB being too crowded with details and then demand more details!
Lulu: Wait... which one are you arguing against?
Ashley: Both of them! They're both wrong.
Lulu: Answering the LW's question directly, no, there's no rudeness in failing to check fb even if you went to the trouble of creating an account and friending someone, because people open fb accounts for different reasons. "For a lark" or "to play games" or "to check every blue moon when I'm bored" are legit, and you'd still friend people/accept friend requests, because it would be weirder not to.
I think if you want to know something about someone, you should contact them using whatever means of communication is most comfortable for you. Check their fb, call them, whatever. It's not their fault if they fail to contact you in the way you want.
It's also nobody's responsibility to keep up on your preferred method of making announcements. If you really want a specific person to know something, contact them directly; don't assume the message got to them unless you get a confirmation (response to post, email back, they say "uh-huh", whatever).
So, yes, I disagree with both of them too.
Ashley: Yay!
Lulu: This reminds me of a question I read awhile ago. Someone thought it was rude for people to post a lot, because it pushes the 'meaningful' posts off. It was like the opposite of this LW with her grilled cheese posts. Let's see if I can find it. I don't think we discussed it, which makes it more difficult.
Ashley: We didn't. I didn't read it.
Lulu: Yeah, when I search for "facebook" in my gmail I just get this:
me: I have poked you.Lulu: Oh, here we go, Miss Manners from March 25.
me: you will be notified of the poke next time you log into facebook.
me: just so there are NO SURPRISES.
Ashley: I HAVE POKED YOU BACK YOU JERK
me: WHAT
What do you think about Facebook “friends” who post things that no one cares about, like “I took a nap today” or “I woke up feeling grumpy today” or “I got my oil changed today”?Miss Manners responds,
Also, and even more annoying, are people who post lots of pictures and comments about themselves, their kids, their vacations, etc., but never comment on anyone else’s posts. Please share a little Facebook etiquette for everyone!
What a gift those sites are for bores. If someone came up to you at a party and said, “I got my oil changed today,” how long would it be before you had to excuse yourself because you thought you heard your mother calling you?Lulu: The thing is, this doesn't need to be an etiquette issue. Facebook HAS TOOLS FOR THIS..
The good part is that it is easier to escape bores who have not cornered you in person.
Politeness in any form of discourse requires taking into consideration what would interest the listener, which is exactly the element that is missing in bores. It is a particular danger of Internet postings that what might interest one person is not of widespread interest.
Miss Manners is willing to imagine that the oil change would be of interest to someone planning to use the car; the nap would interest someone directly concerned with that person’s health or ability to stay up late for festivities that day; and the grumpiness might serve as a warning to keep out of his or her way.
No doubt there are general announcements intended for an entire circle of friends: births, for example, or “I won the lottery.” But one has to be totally besotted with someone else to be fascinated by the mundane details of that person’s everyday life — as indeed, bores are with themselves. You may be sure that they do not bring this sort of thing up because they want to hear about your oil change.
1. You can use "Top News" instead of "Most Recent" and it will weight the posts which have comments and likes.
2. Using the pulldown under "Most Recent" you can filter to show only the most recent posts from the people in a particular friend group. So you can create a friend group consisting only of your most interesting friends.
3. To ignore specific people, you can click the 'x' which appears in on the top left corner of a news post on mouse over, and the dropdown offers an option to 'hide all by' that person. They will be added to your "hidden" list which you can also manipulate if you go to "Edit Options" under "Most Recent."
It does not need to be a problem that your friends are boring! No need to complain that people are being rude by being boring! It does not need to be a problem! As Miss Manners says, it's much harder to ignore them in person.
Ashley: I know! I'd rather have them on FB!
Lulu: What do you think about this second remark about how people are rude for not commenting? Like there's some kind of currency of comments and it's like Lendle borrowing and lending or something, where you earn the right to post a status update by commenting on other people's?
Ashley: Or like slash fic. Didn't you once say you'd only write a sequel to a story if you got to a certain number of comments?
Lulu: That was off the record. Anyway, it was to gauge interest!...
Okay, I do feel like the fanfic community is a specifc place where comments do serve as currency, to a certain extent. They are the only payment writers get. I sometimes feel like a taker for posting stories more than I read and comment on other people's work, but I've been assured by multiple readers that that's okay. There are enough people who only comment and don't post to make up for it.
So even within fanfic where "getting feedback" is a goal people are openly working for, it's still understood that certain people will 100% post and 0% comment, certain people will 100% comment and 0% post, and there is room for that.
And I never felt that that was a thing on Facebook.
Ashley: Right. I certainly don't comment on FB (maybe once a month?) and I never thought I was rude! I'll respond to other people's comments. Like if someone likes my sweater or something, I say thanks!
Lulu: I VERY RARELY comment unless someone asks a question. I never felt that there was any social pressure to comment. I think that social pressure is just in the LW's imagination.
Ashley: Agreed.
Lulu: There is also a Miss Manners from April 1 about Facebook invites, which i found in the process, but here, MM is right. Don't use Facebook invites if you need an RSVP.
In conclusion:
Facebook is good for some things and not others!
If you have preferences for what method to keep in contact with, you should use that method! To keep in contact! But don't expect others to know which method is best for you.
Post whatever you want to post! Read whatever you want to read!
GIVE US COMMENTz0RS LoLoLoL!!
Friday, April 15, 2011
Liveblogging the Carolyn Hax Chat
Lulu: Carolyn Hax chat is NOW NOW NOW
Ashley: Okay, so the first question...
Lulu: Oh, good catch. I wonder if that would change Carolyn's answer.
Ashley: I don't care about 15 vs 16, and I would totally do the same thing (minus the gossiping). They just might want to stop talking about it enough for everyone to judge them.
Lulu: Yeah, I wonder how all these people are finding out about it. Maybe the daughter talks about it?
Anna: It sounds like the LW is getting judged, not the daughter. The LW is a terrible parent, not the daughter is a slut or anything.
Lulu: Right, but if the daughter tells her friends, and her friends tell their parents, the parents might judge the parents. Like, the daughter's friends don't judge, they think it's awesome. They're like, "Well, MARLENE's parents let her have sex. They are TOTALLY COOL WITH IT."
Ashley: I see. Right. Ooh, there's a followup comment in the chat from another reader.
Ashley: I was just showing off that I caught it.
Lulu: So what's our advice? We're thinking denying and feigning ignorance would have been good strategies when it originally came up, but what can the LW do now?
Ashley: Change the subject, I guess. What do people do when others bring up topics they don't want to discuss?
Lulu: Yeah, I guess "I'm not going to discuss my daughter's personal life" works anytime.
Ashley: It is weird to say that if you gleefully discussed it before. Maybe,
"well, let's agree to disagree" and then shut up about it.
Lulu: Should we post this RIGHT NOW? SUPER TIMELY!
Ashley: DO IT
Ashley: Okay, so the first question...
My daughter is a few weeks shy of 16. She is a good student, a good athlete, and very popular at school. She has a boyfriend who is (I believe) about a year older than she is. We assume they have sex, because she came to me six months ago and asked for advice about birth control. I'm okay with this, and in fact feel rather lucky that she was responsible about it. But everyone else seems to think I am a negligent or somehow terrible parent for knowingly allowing a teenager to be sexually active. I'm at the end of my rope with the judgments. What do you think?Carolyn responds,
I'm with you on a few things: I would rather my kids be open with me, even if it meant I had to learn about and then condone their sexual activity at 16; if I got the news about the sexual activity the way you did--by being asked about birth control, by a 16-year-old--I would not stand in the way, and if fact would try to help the birth-control process along; and I think people are out of line in judging you.Ashley: "A few weeks shy of 16th birthday" is 15. And six months ago is definitely 15. And while 16 is fine in most states, 15 may in fact we illegal. If that's the case, the parents should at least not advertise that they know about it. They can get charged with neglect, and possibly endangerment.
The one thing that really stopped me was your parenthetical. Maybe it's misleading, but it makes it sound as if you don't really know/know much about the boyfriend. If I'm wrong about that, great, but if you aren't well acquainted with him, then I think it's your job to get to know him.
Lulu: Oh, good catch. I wonder if that would change Carolyn's answer.
Ashley: I don't care about 15 vs 16, and I would totally do the same thing (minus the gossiping). They just might want to stop talking about it enough for everyone to judge them.
Lulu: Yeah, I wonder how all these people are finding out about it. Maybe the daughter talks about it?
Anna: It sounds like the LW is getting judged, not the daughter. The LW is a terrible parent, not the daughter is a slut or anything.
Lulu: Right, but if the daughter tells her friends, and her friends tell their parents, the parents might judge the parents. Like, the daughter's friends don't judge, they think it's awesome. They're like, "Well, MARLENE's parents let her have sex. They are TOTALLY COOL WITH IT."
Ashley: I see. Right. Ooh, there's a followup comment in the chat from another reader.
Why are you violating your daughter's privacy by discussing this deeply personal topic with anyone other than 1. her and 2. her other parent?Carolyn responds,
Oh duh, I totally missed that. Thanks.Lulu: Yup. We just covered that!
Ashley: I was just showing off that I caught it.
Lulu: So what's our advice? We're thinking denying and feigning ignorance would have been good strategies when it originally came up, but what can the LW do now?
Ashley: Change the subject, I guess. What do people do when others bring up topics they don't want to discuss?
Lulu: Yeah, I guess "I'm not going to discuss my daughter's personal life" works anytime.
Ashley: It is weird to say that if you gleefully discussed it before. Maybe,
"well, let's agree to disagree" and then shut up about it.
Lulu: Should we post this RIGHT NOW? SUPER TIMELY!
Ashley: DO IT
Monday, November 15, 2010
Password protection
Ashley: Did you read Carolyn's chat from Friday? There's an interesting comment that she agrees with:
Ashley: Precisely!
Lulu: Some things are just private. Personal emails/chats with friends, for example... (Unless you publish them on your blog.)
Ashley: Galahad knows I write [erotic fiction], but I don't want him reading [truly sick and wrong story Lulu is constantly goading Ashley to finish]. It's for his own good!
Lulu: I don't think I would be tempted to read my partner's email, if I had that access--and in fact the times when I've auto-logged-in I've just logged out again--but I can imagine someone for whom it would be a temptation, and it doesn't necessarily mean they are a bad person. Just curious, or impulsive, or a lover of hilarious pranks. Sometimes it's kinder to help a person keep themself out of trouble.
Ashley: Yeah. I know the idea is nice of trusting your partner not to look, but there's just basic protections you take that are not a reflection on the partner. It's just you not being retarded.
Lulu: Although... I know we have discussed passwords before... and I am pretty sure you could just log into my email any time you wanted.
Ashley: Yeah, same here.
Only reasons to hack email: You have been kidnapped and the police need leads.Lulu: I don't think it's a dealbreaker if your partner password protects things from you!
You have expressed that you are likely to commit suicide and he is trying to find you.
You are a strung out crack/meth/heroin user and maybe something found in your email will help convince you to go to rehab.
Other than that - deal breaker.
Flip side - if you are in a long term & committed relationship and your partner has things password protected even from you (for no good reason) I also see that as a dealbreaker. I don't check my husbands email, but I could if I wanted to - he knows this so I have no need to and never have.
Carolyn Hax: Looks good to me, thanks.
Ashley: Precisely!
Lulu: Some things are just private. Personal emails/chats with friends, for example... (Unless you publish them on your blog.)
Ashley: Galahad knows I write [erotic fiction], but I don't want him reading [truly sick and wrong story Lulu is constantly goading Ashley to finish]. It's for his own good!
Lulu: I don't think I would be tempted to read my partner's email, if I had that access--and in fact the times when I've auto-logged-in I've just logged out again--but I can imagine someone for whom it would be a temptation, and it doesn't necessarily mean they are a bad person. Just curious, or impulsive, or a lover of hilarious pranks. Sometimes it's kinder to help a person keep themself out of trouble.
Ashley: Yeah. I know the idea is nice of trusting your partner not to look, but there's just basic protections you take that are not a reflection on the partner. It's just you not being retarded.
Lulu: Although... I know we have discussed passwords before... and I am pretty sure you could just log into my email any time you wanted.
Ashley: Yeah, same here.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Like, um, things just, you know, suck.
Ashley: I am on a boat!
Lulu: You are on a boat!
Ashley: It's weird chatting from a boat.
Lulu: Do we have any advice today?
Ashley: There's that person in Carolyn Hax's most recent live chat who was upset that her coworker used "like" all the time.
Like, wherever: I have a coworker who talks like a valley girl. I have to sit very close to her in the office and she talks...a lot. Every sentence usually contains at least 3 "likes" and 2 "you knows," and she talks very fast. It is starting to drive me crazy.
I am also a young, female professional. (we are about the same age.) I like this girl. She is very nice, and as far as I can tell, good at her job, as long as she is not talking. I would even like to be friends with her, possibly outside of work, but despite the fact that I find her stories/life/company interesting, I cannot stand to listen to her for more than 30 seconds. I don't catch any other words that come out of her mouth because my brain unconsciously goes to the repetitive "likes." It's very distracting in meetings. Sometimes I miss the jist of what she is saying completely.
Ladies of the world, give up the teeny bopper speak!!!
On the one hand, I am VERY conscious of my own speech these days, and I have almost completely eliminated the extraneous "likes" and "you knows." But I still have to sit near her and listen all day. Any advice on how I can 1) learn to hear what she is actually trying to say through the fog of poor word choice or 2) kindly and tactfully suggest she notice her bad habit? (is there a way to tap into her subconscious?)
Lulu: Ohmigod. At dinner on Sunday, my family were all spontaneously complaining about the young people today saying "like" too much! And casual swearing.
Ashley: Oh no. I do both!
Lulu: So do I! My dad was like, "If you drop the f-bomb all the time, you rob it of its power."
Ashley: Why do you want it to have power?
Lulu: I know, right? I was going to casually swear to make a point, but my eight-year-old cousin was there, and even I'm not that uncouth.
Ashley: Young people today!
Lulu: Young people today! Actually, this reminds me of that The Vine column recently, where a schoolteacher asked for parent-friendly alternatives to "sucks." Sars suggested "eats a bowl of bees."
Ashley: Ha.
Lulu: Also, I argued that "like" has a different shade of meaning than "said" when you say "I was like... he was like..." I was like, "It's not what you SAID, it's what you were LIKE."
Ashley: Right, it's more how you said it than what you said.
Lulu: Yeah, it's a paraphrase, or an attitude, e.g. "I was like, wtf", describes your manner and facial expresion!
Ashley: You can use it that way deliberately. That isn't the case here, though. It's the space-filler "like." "It was, like, thirty degrees out, so we, like..."
Lulu: Like "um." Right you are. What did Carolyn say?
Carolyn Hax: My inclination for helping you understand her better would be to make overtures toward friendship, but I can't advise that knowing she drives you nuts. In most cases, liking a person will help you get past (or at least regard with more forgiveness) the traits that drive you nuts, but this is a next-door colleague; if it doesn't work, you'll have to back out of a friendship with the person sitting next to you. Too much at stake there.
And, unless you're her boss and responsible for the way she represents the company, I don't think it's your place to coach her out of who she is. [...]
But maybe just posting this will be a PSA to anyone who, like, uses "like" in lieu of commas.
Lulu: Well, I basically agree with that. Although I'm not sure I agree that it's inherently a problem. I mean, a lot of people that I know use "like" that way, and so do I. It's basically transparent to me now.
Ashley: If you're actually using "like" every third word, that's a bit much, but everyone has verbal tics.
Lulu: Some people seem to place a lot of premium on speaking without hedges or "ums" or "likes", but those people? Speak so slooooowly. At least "like" is like "loading..." It lets you know there is more to come.
Ashley:: In the letter, the person mentioned that one of the problems was that the girl talked really fast.
Lulu: When you talk fast you need verbal pauses! Your brain can't keep up.
Ashley: My boyfriend, Galahad, can do it. He doesn't use "um" or "like," and still talks quickly.
Lulu: Truly, he is blessed.
Ashley: He trained himself to do it.
Lulu: So did the letter-writer. I think that's part of what bothers her so much; you hate what you see in yourself, or your former self. When she asks for "any advice on how to try to understand her," I don't think she actually wants it. I think she wants to find this woman difficult to understand because that makes her grown up! and mature!
Ashley: I do find that if I don't like someone, I find it more difficult to filter out their verbal tics, because i'm so focused on disliking them. It's just one more annoying thing. Whereas if i want to understand what someone is saying, verbal tics don't prevent me from doing so.
Lulu: Yeah. I guess I question the idea that everyone needs to speak perfectly. The judgement of any verbal tic as good or bad, mature or immature, educated or stupid is arbitrary, right? I mean there are good and bad speakers -- I'd rather listen to Patrick Stewart give a speech than a Real Housewife of Jersey or what have you -- but unless speaking to clients is a component of your job, the way you speak is irrelevant.
Ashley: Yep. If she had a stutter, all this would be unconscionable to say.
Lulu: I guess the idea is that you can't control a stutter.
Ashley: Some people really can't control the like-insertion though.
Lulu: Totally. A stutter is viewed as a speech impediment, and "like" is viewed as a lazy choice. I think people who have eradicated "like" from their vocabulary may be overestimating how easy it is for others, the same way parents with easy, quiet kids judge parents of hyperactive kids.
Ashley: Before "like" there was "um" and "er". Some people place different levels of importance on the like-business.
Lulu: Somebody later in the chat suggested they go to Toastmasters and learn public speaking together.
Ashley: Can you imagine how that conversation would go?
Lulu: Oh, this reminds me of something. Do you remember the Notmydesk about stuttering? He was critiquing an advice column!
Ashley: I don't remember it!
Lulu: Oh, it was a twitch. Still, I think it highlights an important point for both discussions. Learn about it and talk about it are both overreactions in this situation. Carolyn's right--let it go.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Here, have some feelings
In yesterday's column, Carolyn Hax answers a daughter who asks for advice after overhearing her parents fight. The original letter states,
And the reply:
Lulu: I think putting pressure on yourself to help - even by doing extra chores and downplaying your own problems - is just the way to make yourself miserable. It won't help the situation in any appreciable way. If anything, it's enabling.
Ashley: Yeah, positively reinforcing the parents' negative behavior! If you really want them to stop fighting, you say, "If I can hear you fight, I do no chores that day. Kthxbye."
Lulu: Parenting the parents!
Ashley: Behavioral psychology, now for adults!
There is also an odd vacillation, frequently within the same paragraph, between treating the writer as a child and as an adult (and never, really, as a teenager). For example, Carolyn goes from:
to:
Ashley: And Carolyn just drops that in as if it's intuitive (and to her, maybe it is, but I certainly don't expect a teenager to be able to do this with no guidance).
The feelings bit is another problem; there is little indication in the letter that the girl is actually distressed about the fighting. Mostly, she states that she doesn't know what to say/do, and this seems to be the source of the distress. As in, she's uncomfortable being in the situation, but she doesn't necessarily worry about the possible consequences or What It All Means. Carolyn reads a lot into those few lines; obviously, she probably has more information than we do, but from that letter, we would not necessarily assume the girl had so many feelings.
Ashley: I have trouble dealing with people who are fighting or otherwise having emotions in my presence. I can't deal with my mom crying at all! But it's not because I have particular feelings about it, it's because I'm socially inept. I'd love a script to follow beyond the, "You know I don't do this! Call your other daughter!" that I do right now...
The last problem may just sum up our overall concerns; Carolyn seems to be projecting a lot of her own personality into the response. That can't necessarily be helped (and we're undoubtedly doing the same), but usually she takes much better care not to assume other people react as she would.
So, what should the letter writer do?
Lulu: Basically, there IS nothing she can do, because you can't fix someone else's relationship. It will only hurt her if she lives and dies by how well the relationship is going.
Ashley: Yeah. I don't see why she should get involved at all. At some point, you have to realize that your parents are people in addition to being parents, and that people occasionally fight and do stupid things and make things unpleasant for people around them. And you have no control over their actions and decisions; whether they are your parents or not.
Lulu: I think I'd spend a lot of time at my friends' houses. Or pick up some school activities. Make the home situation just one part of her life.
Ashley: Yeah, less time being involved in family life is probably a good call, if only for college applications.
My parents are fighting more and more, and now in front of my brother and me (we're in our teens). When they are alone and fighting we can hear them, and I see my mom afterward and see that she has cried. I don't know what to say or do.
I believe my parents won't end up splitting because it has been a tough year for us, with my dad losing his job and then finding another. What can I do to help them, and what can I say to my parents after I have heard them fight?
And the reply:
What you've said here is important for your parents to know... You don't have to launch into a big statement -- just "Mom, I hear you and dad fight, and I'm worried about you. I'm worried about us." If she's not ready to talk -- say, if she brushes you off with "Everything's fine" -- wait for a better opportunity, and say then that you'd like to talk to her. Approach your dad the same way. [...]Usually, we agree with Carolyn, or at least see merit in her advice, but this is so completely alien to both of us that we have trouble even beginning to understand. Carolyn advises the girl to do more chores and altogether focus on making her life perfect so that she's not a burden on anyone in any way? How is this a good life lesson?
Sometimes you will have to do more for your family during tumultuous times -- tidying up, laundry -- and sometimes you will have to ask less of them. As tempting as it may be to try to help your parents, though, do watch carefully for the line between being transparent with them and disappearing into their mess. [...]
You (and your brother) are on the seam between childhood and adulthood. You can't stomp your feet and expect to be made whole, and you can't shoulder the kind of responsibility an adult can. [...]
In a way, this intensely personal strain you're feeling has a universal remedy: Be loving to others, be flexible in your expectations, be good to yourself. No matter what form the outcome takes, you will get through this, and so will they.
Lulu: I think putting pressure on yourself to help - even by doing extra chores and downplaying your own problems - is just the way to make yourself miserable. It won't help the situation in any appreciable way. If anything, it's enabling.
Ashley: Yeah, positively reinforcing the parents' negative behavior! If you really want them to stop fighting, you say, "If I can hear you fight, I do no chores that day. Kthxbye."
Lulu: Parenting the parents!
Ashley: Behavioral psychology, now for adults!
There is also an odd vacillation, frequently within the same paragraph, between treating the writer as a child and as an adult (and never, really, as a teenager). For example, Carolyn goes from:
When you're both ready, don't speak your mind so much as your feelings: "When you guys fight, I feel ... " sad/helpless/scared, whatever describes where you are.Ashley: Because clearly the LW can't have an opinion about what's going on; she can only have feelings!
to:
As tempting as it may be to try to help your parents, though, do watch carefully for the line between being transparent with them and disappearing into their mess.Lulu: She's both talking down to teenagers and using emotional language I'm not sure they would understand.
Ashley: And Carolyn just drops that in as if it's intuitive (and to her, maybe it is, but I certainly don't expect a teenager to be able to do this with no guidance).
The feelings bit is another problem; there is little indication in the letter that the girl is actually distressed about the fighting. Mostly, she states that she doesn't know what to say/do, and this seems to be the source of the distress. As in, she's uncomfortable being in the situation, but she doesn't necessarily worry about the possible consequences or What It All Means. Carolyn reads a lot into those few lines; obviously, she probably has more information than we do, but from that letter, we would not necessarily assume the girl had so many feelings.
Ashley: I have trouble dealing with people who are fighting or otherwise having emotions in my presence. I can't deal with my mom crying at all! But it's not because I have particular feelings about it, it's because I'm socially inept. I'd love a script to follow beyond the, "You know I don't do this! Call your other daughter!" that I do right now...
The last problem may just sum up our overall concerns; Carolyn seems to be projecting a lot of her own personality into the response. That can't necessarily be helped (and we're undoubtedly doing the same), but usually she takes much better care not to assume other people react as she would.
So, what should the letter writer do?
Lulu: Basically, there IS nothing she can do, because you can't fix someone else's relationship. It will only hurt her if she lives and dies by how well the relationship is going.
Ashley: Yeah. I don't see why she should get involved at all. At some point, you have to realize that your parents are people in addition to being parents, and that people occasionally fight and do stupid things and make things unpleasant for people around them. And you have no control over their actions and decisions; whether they are your parents or not.
Lulu: I think I'd spend a lot of time at my friends' houses. Or pick up some school activities. Make the home situation just one part of her life.
Ashley: Yeah, less time being involved in family life is probably a good call, if only for college applications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)