Doubling Down and Gaslighting

I'm sure that manipulative, controlling people have been around ever since, well, people have been around. But lately I've been hearing a lot of two different terms describing what seems to me to be essentially the same thing.  They are "doubling down" and "gaslighting". When someone espousing something false is confronted with the truth, hopefully...with the caveat that the truth-speaker is tactful...the recipient will receive the message and process it in a rational manner, perhaps changing their viewpoint if reason dictates or maintaining their position if that is called for.  But too often nowadays, I see folks take contradictory input as a personal attack on themselves, and their ego takes over as they even more vehemently reiterate their obviously flawed perspectives.  That's "doubling down" and is also indicative of "gaslighting", which is when someone tries to alter your perception of reality by preying upon your own fears and self-image, bringing whatever is discussed down to a contest for domination instead of truth-seeking.  Even if not precisely the same, I see the two tactics as being intimately interwoven, and I am becoming increasingly adept at noticing them when practiced on me...

Quote of the Week...from Paul Simon

There are two sorts of people in the world: Those who listen and those who are thinking about what they are going to say next.                                                     ---Paul Simon

Over the years I've generally liked Paul Simon's music...especially when he was collaborating with Art Garfunkel earlier on.  Let's see, my favorite songs from them are Scarborough Fair, Fakin' It, I am a Rock, America, The Boxer and Cecilia.  With Paul Simon as solo artist, I liked his Duncan and Boy in the Bubble above the rest.  The above quote of his doesn't really have anything to do with music per se...it's more about folks in conversation or in small group settings.  From my experiences and perspective, it all comes down to the felt expectations within the situation.  Within the context of the conversations or group discussions, am I expected to be an active, talking participant? This is especially relevant in small groups where they go around a circle to focus on each person...groan, you can bet that I'm thinking of what I'm going to say before my "turn" in these scenarios instead of listening to others!  With any situation, listening is a skill that must be learned. And sometimes taking a little time before one speaks his or her mind to the other can go a long way to understanding more deeply the thoughts behind what is being said. Listening empathetically doesn't mean that I agree with what you're saying, but rather that I esteem you enough to want to understand the full message and intent behind it...and also implicitly invite you to show me the same level of respect when I am talking.  And sometimes, when the opportunity within a discussion does arise for me to speak, it might behoove me more to repeat and clarify what I had just heard...just to make sure I got it right...before I sound off about my own reactions...

Podcaster Gives Suggestions for Better Communication

On a recent Mindset Mentor podcast, personal development coach Rob Dial approached the subject of effective communications, which incidentally turned out to be the title of an English class I took in my senior year of high school.  Except that back then the teacher...as was overwhelmingly the case during that time...didn't really teach anything.  Dial, on the other hand, has broken the subject down to interpersonal interaction...usually on a conversational level...with three key elements to his presentation.  They form the acronym L-U-V, coined by psychologist Karol Kumpfer: listen, understand, validate.  This in itself wouldn't be of much help to me, but Dial expands upon them.  With "listen", he decries the way most exchanges go, with silence beyond a brief pause something awkward and to be avoided, and the two sides often thinking more about what they're going to say next than actually picking up what the other is saying.  Instead, Dial suggests that the listener give the speaker his or her undivided attention and, whenever a pause happens, count "one Mississippi" to three before speaking.  This gives the other a chance to continue, often going into a deeper and more meaningful mode of expression. Listen without judgments, and with empathy toward the speaker...for we all have different life experiences leading to where we are today.  With "understand", the idea is to convey that through one's expressions, head nodding, "uh-huh" type cues, and so on, that the speaker is understood (I'm already pretty good with this).  And "validate" is to let the speaker know that you are not there to "fix" them and render judgment, but instead that you are interested in their viewpoint, asking follow-up questions to express that interest and their worthiness as a speaker.  Dial noted that many families have this problem where parents tend to listen to their children with the aim of "fixing" any perceived problems...leading to the kids clamming up and becoming secretive (that was the case with me when I was growing up).  I think all these suggestions are valuable as long as I am focused on communicating in a proactive way...but that's only half of the formula as I see it.  I think all of what Rob Dial presented would be self-evident if I myself, as a speaker, had over the course of my formative years regularly experienced conversations in which the other attentively listened without judgment or interruption and affirmed the worth of my opinion or narrative, not seeing my message as a problem that they were supposed to fix or a challenge that they needed to put down.  The spiritual saying "Do unto others as you would have them to unto you" is the proactive path, but most folks actually learn to "Do unto others as they do unto you"...