Is it safe to have this conversation?
When I first thought about this topic, I was considering the elements that go into safety, which I will get to in a minute. But, then I also remembered what Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff say in their book, “The Coddling of the American Mind.” They assert that we have developed a culture of “safetyism,” where we mistake emotional challenges for actual danger. This desire to stay safe at all costs means that we avoid anything that might challenge our point of view, and thus, we never hear a different point of view. We protect ourselves to the extent we close ourselves off. This might be behind some of our inability to have these discussions productively. How much of this is true for you?
Back to what makes a conversation safe. Questions to think about:
Are you talking to a safe person? Can they be trusted? There are some clear red flags that someone can’t be trusted. If they’ve been physically abusive in the past, even if not directly to you, then they aren’t safe. Obviously, if they’re physically violent, then it also won’t be a safe conversation. Even if they’ve been verbally abusive, yelling and name calling, they’re not safe.
Is the environment safe? Do you have privacy or is it possible people could overhear and try to intervene? These are the types of conversations that need space and time — and no interference.
Are you yourself in a good place? HALT is a good mnemonic to remember the basics. Don’t have the conversation if you (or the other person) is Hungry, Angry — about something else, perhaps — Lonely or Tired. If they or you are feeling any of this, hold the conversation for another time.
Further, consider your level of mental well-being. Have you been traumatized by something? Are you recovering from a traumatic experience? One metric to use to judge this is whether your reactions are out of proportion to the immediate stimuli. You may not realize it yourself. It may be that other people mention it. If you’re overreacting, then maybe there’s something else going on besides what’s in front of you. If so, stop the conversation. You need to uncover the source of the problem before you go any further. Otherwise, you won’t get anywhere.
If you’ve had trauma in your life, you need to heal before you consider having a difficult conversation. I haven’t read the whole book yet, but “The Body Keeps the Score” has some tips for healing. It is possible to heal. I know because I am recovering from trauma myself. It isn’t all gone, but it is a lot better, and there are times I can have these conversations successfully now.
Back to Haidt and Lukianoff. They make the point that cognitive behavioral approaches can help to develop our ability to have difficult conversations. The principle behind cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is to gradually increase the level of challenge. This might take some work! And if you’re recovering from trauma, CBT techniques probably won’t work until you’ve done some healing.
I will illustrate the safety of a conversation with stories of two different challenging conversations I had in one day. One was in the chat of a Zoom meeting with people I really don’t know. I was able to politely challenge something someone in the chat said. Then a different person asked me to explain more, which encouraged me to continue. That made it feel safer. Because of that level of safety, I was able to expound on my point. My heart was pounding, but I felt proud that I was able to get my point across and at least some people listened. That was a good step toward building my ability to have these conversations. It was relatively safe because of the people involved, the venue (it was online) and my level of involvement (I didn’t really know the people involved, so it wouldn’t be a big deal if I didn’t communicate clearly.)
Later that day, I had an in-person conversation with someone close to me. I’d been feeling good from that positive experience earlier in the day and was trying to flex my ability to have these conversations, which is why I challenged what he said. But his reaction was very different. He accused me of personally attacking him, not that I was commenting on what he had said. The conversation wasn’t safe. I shut down emotionally. It seems I picked the wrong person or the wrong situation. I won’t do that again with him.
It’s easier online, and the people were different.
When has it worked for you to challenge what someone said and when hasn’t it worked? What made the difference?
And please spread the word about this newsletter to people you think would like it.
This was indeed a very interesting topic that I’ve never really given much thought about openly but have been aware consciously and so I am always in the habit of quiet observation and/or I test the waters with unassuming statements related to the subject matter of my point of view before speaking my opinion and making my side of an argument. I also have a tendency to put out there that this has been what I’m exposed to and that I’m aware of other opinions to the contrary and that if what I say does not agree with them, that’s ok. If they felt that just one aspect of what I said was meaningful, that’s ok, too. But, if I start to feel something escalating, I also know that I may have triggered something unconscious and suppressed within them and so I just stop, give them the courtesy and respect of listening and know that they have some healing to do and that their attack was not about me but about them, whether they realize this or not. Too many folks are unaware that many have traumas that have not healed or are barely healing. I, too, have been in darkness but working through them gives me a step up every time and more tools to have in my tote bag to deal with the next fall. I loved this article. Thank you.