"When I feel that I have to walk on eggshells in a diary it is a sign something is wrong. Sometimes one has to say exactly how one feels and it is also sometimes necessary for those hearing these sentiments just to listen for a while and take note." - LaFeminista
Stop. Tune in. What's really going on? No, not the other guy. What's going on with you?
Tune in below the fold
Even in real life, many of us become more aggressive when we are determined to be heard. It doesn't always help us to actually feel heard, though. Fairly often becoming aggressive causes the target and those who witness the aggression to "walk on eggshells" as they worry about saying the wrong thing. They might avoid certain topics or even steer clear of the aggressive person altogether in their effort to prevent what they see as another explosive outburst. Some will themselves react aggressively or become defensive and dig in their heels.
Here on the internet the same dynamic easily goes sideways, often by accident. Don't gt me wrong, it can happen intentionally when trolls arrive at Daily Kos specifically to derail a diary. We all know what that looks like and how frustrating and distracting it is when it happens. But this diary isn't about trolls. This diary is about those of us who engage vigorously, sometimes more aggressively than we should. It's incredibly easy to switch over from responding to fighting.
Since the Isle Vista shooting many Kossacks have posted very expressive rants and made very aggressive arguments, in diaries about misogyny, assault, and sexual violence. The cathartic aspects were healthy for some and those early authors inspired many people to write publicly about their experiences with assault, domestic violence, rape, and PTSD. One downside is that many people were startled or triggered by the aggression and hostility they read. Escalation in comment threads lead to pie fights and escalation in diaries lead to aggressive rebuttal diaries with provocative titles such as "Are men really clueless? and "Dear men, STFU!" Many readers and quite a few authors were shocked and dismayed by the raw emotion, the anger, rage, and hostility. Some feel betrayed by people they "thought they knew." Consequently, many are walking on eggshells, afraid to post their honest thoughts. Some have given up, announcing they will skip diaries about abuse, domestic violence, and rape.
What to do?
Stop and bear witness. Whenever you feel uneasy or on edge become mindful of your focus and tune into your breathing. Take a few deep breaths, exhale more slowly with each one. Pause for a second or two between them. In as few as 3-5 breaths you can lower your stress as your brain gets the message that danger has passed.
My diary about vernacular, euphemisms, and triggers was also indirectly about problems with being misunderstood and not feeling heard. In it, I featured two authors at opposite ends of the problem, and dedicated my diary to both of them for their courage. I felt that I understood something about their diaries that they and others were missing. So I invited them to attend and to share their thoughts about the way I attempted to bridge their ideas. What they had in coming was an invitation to bear witness.
To their credit both of them visited my diary, read it, and posted their honest thoughts. Neither was persuaded by my argument, but they did engage sincerely with me, and each other. Both expressed that they were able to consider their opponent's diary in a new light. To me this means that even when people claim "This is so stupid! I'm done!" they might just be really frustrated and all out of ideas. I think many who've expressed that level of frustration are indeed willing to re-engage, if only they receive some respect and understanding.
In essence, we all want to be affirmed and to feel heard.
My working hypothesis is that except for trolls, any diary or a thread can become dysfunctional whenever an author or guest has been startled or triggered by an image, word, or story, or by an unexpected shift in the emotional tone of the dialogue. If we are aware of it we can stop, take a break, and regain our bearings before we respond. If we are not aware, and react aggressively or abusively we can unintentionally transform the healthy tension of opposing views into escalation of a personal conflict. Aggressive speech often interferes with our desire to be heard, especially on the internet where visual cues and body language are not in view. The text is all we see. When you see a post in all caps, do you notice the words first? Or the ALL CAPS? Most of us notice the person seems to be screaming on the internet. It's distracting, and we don't usually care why; we just want them to stop.
An alternative is to simply stop and bear witness.. Kos has long used a living room as a metaphor for a diary; the author is the host and readers are the guests. Notice if the author was telling a personal story. If they were, be a gracious party guest and stay in story-telling mode. Notice how people respond to your posts. Consider asking yourself, did they just change the subject or escalate from vigorous debate into fighting? In either case, the conversation is effectively over. The best thing to do is usually to de-escalate or leave. Far too often as soon as anyone changes the subject from the topic of the diary to focus on the participants, it's off to the meta races with no one looking back. Far too often the emotional tone shifts from thoughtful engagement to "How Dare You?!" and the tit for tat game of "my best insult" begins.
In contrast, when there is resonance between the story and the reply the story-teller is more likely to feel heard.
Common replies that switch out of story-telling mode: debating, problem-solving; investigating what happened, explaining why it happened, horning in on a detail, probing about something not mentioned, using counter-factual statistics or policy ideas to start a debate. (aka picking a fight)
Unintentionally dysfunctional replies: – posting your own rant, changing the subject to something about yourself (both very easily shift the emotional tone), amplifying the aggressiveness in the thread and pairing a true statement with an ad hominem or insult. The later is extremely common here at Daily Kos and we all should stop doing it. The reason reply rants are a problem is that they escalate conflict. Readers may get triggered by the reply and forget they wanted to understand or support to the original story-teller.
Our words, ideas, and logic matter, but so too does the emotional tone we set. Unfortunately, the word STFU! in the title of that diary announced the wrong emotional tone. That alone probably caused many people, men especially, to assume the diary was just another rant, and they would be wise to pass on by. If my hunch is correct, it means that many other people who might really welcome the concepts I laid out, may have skipped the diary too, thinking it would be just one more meta war. That diary will be republished in two parts as part of this series, Walking on Eggshells: How it Happens and How to Stop. If you missed them the first time, I invite you to take a look when they publish later this week, probably sometime tomorrow and Saturday morning.
Thanks for reading.