What is the purpose of communication as opposed to, say, throwing a temper tantrum? I never have a problem about people saying how they feel because one of the core values implicit in authentic communication is a mutual respect for the other party's feeling. We don't have to agree in the slightest but we must acknowledge that the other person's feelings are valid and real. Not doing this most basic of skills will block all further progress towards edifying discourse.
Let me share an example. When my son comes to me and says, "I feel really bad about being grounded and not being able to see my friends," he is stating how he feels and I need to respect that, even though I am the one who grounded him. This is a much different statement than him saying, "You a**hole, you are a total waste for making me feel worthless because I can't go see my friends! I hate you!!"
The first statement is about his feelings, encapsulated as an "I feel" statement. He did not blame anybody or point any verbal fingers, he was speaking his truth about being grounded. That is the purpose of communication, to allow discourse about every realm of human emotion, not just the rosy ones. It is doubly important that those who are in a position of inferior power to be able to speak openly about how they feel, so that they have hope of being able to improve their position.
The second statement, however, starts of with an ad hominem attack, progresses to shifting blame away from his actions that caused his punishment, as well as blaming me for his emotional state, then culminating with a vicious verbal attack. Conversations are two-way affairs... dumping a s**tstorm on somebody while blaming them for it is one-way venting and an example of what so many people view as "speaking their truth." They get to yell at others, shift blame off of themselves for their actions while using manipulative, offensive language including ad hominem attacks.
If people don't have a strong argument, just strong feelings, they often go straight to the bottom of the triangle. So first rule of civil discourse is...No ad hominem attacks. One of my favorite quotes about these types of verbal attacks comes from Margaret Thatcher.
That is how people act when they are little kids, not responsible adults who are demanding that other adults take them seriously... how many people respect a child who is throwing a temper tantrum? Not me. Mastery of feelings and one's tongue has always been a sign of maturity.
Nobody can make me feel anything I don't want to, so if I get mad I chose to get mad. The same logic applies to the person I am speaking with, if they are upset they should just own their feelings and not blame me or others as the cause of those feelings. Personal attacks and disrespect have no place in communication that is aimed at understanding.
This "I need to be real" movement is a mask for a lot of people wanting to be rude and dump negativity without owning their part in it. It's just a pet peeve I have, because "speaking my truth and being real" on the one hand combined with "politically correct speech" on the other gives the Left complete license to throw verbal temper tantrums but then expect the opposition to muzzle itself. This style of communications hypocrisy leads to a lack of civility generally and a lot of rudeness but no actual understanding.
Speak what you need to speak, without hypocrisy, and remember to love the listener as well as yourself. That is how real truth is spoken.
Namaste.
As always images are from Google and should have links/credits imbedded in the image. If you like my work, please upvote, resteem, and leave comments...especially leave comments! I would love to continue our conversation:-)