Safety in Diversity

During my work as a youth addictions counsellor, when I had questions about the union I belonged to my colleagues would frequently mention this man Greg (not his real name, of course, but I swear this guy would be the first person to say, “you can refer to me by my real name on your blog!”) who was the union representative for our organization. Every time Greg came up in conversation the tone of their talk would change dramatically and I inquired about this. The only thing they could say was, “He’s just such a character, so eccentric in his own way; you’ll understand when you meet him.”

Finally I met Greg when he visited our rural satellite office on union business one day. He was in his 60s  and tall, with thinning dyed-brown hair. He was dressed in sneakers, baggy pajama-style 80′s pants, t-shirt, leather jacket, and dark sunglasses. Greg reeked of cigarettes and he smiled easily with a big, sincere grin. He also exuded both confidence and compassion. Greg was clearly an expert on union affairs, so we shortly got down to business and he provided us with the information he had come to communicate. When we concluded our meeting Greg gave us all big hugs before he left.

I ended up working directly with Greg a few times and over recent years I’ve seen him occasionally. The last time I saw him he came to my office on union business and he was wearing actual pajama pants. When our meeting finished I walked Greg out to the reception area and gave him a tight hug. After he walked out the receptionist asked me, “was that one of your previous mental health clients?” When I explained who Greg was, a woman sitting in the waiting room overheard and exclaimed her disapproval of his “highly unprofessional” attire. “Didn’t you see his jacket?” I asked them, “It had the union logo on the front and back.” Neither of them had.

I’m pretty sure my work isn’t the only place where Greg stands out or raises some eyebrows. He is now in his late 60s and he does not conform to any of the norms in this neck of the woods for a male his age. Labels do not conveniently fit Greg, and because of this I feel safer.

In a world where people let their freak flag fly there is room for all of us to show ourselves.

I sing when I’m blasting down the ski hill. I am comfortable with crying in public. And ever since I was old enough to know what it was I have never wanted to be married. Are these things ‘normal’? My clothes and car may appear conventional but I know my perspective is uniquely my own. Sometimes, however, others feel threatened by my personal choices and the way I live.

Earlier this year a rumour circulated around town that I was “inappropriate” with teenagers. That was briefly scary for me, but the worst part was that I received the news from my son. I was upset that he heard someone thought his mom might be a predator of teens. The Boy was not confused about me in the least, but he was angry at the person who told him it might be true. Who starts a story like that?? Probably someone who can’t fathom why a woman could be completely content being single; probably someone who doesn’t think it’s possible for an adult female to have many close and playful relationships with male youth; probably someone who has a picture in their mind of what it means to be a 40 year-old woman and can’t accept evidence that contradicts this picture.

Last month I went on a real, live date with a man. The next day I was with my girlfriend at the dirt jumps and during a break I exclaimed to her, “I went on a date yesterday!” She replied, “Who is the lucky man? Or woman?” That last question filled my heart with encouragement. The fact that we were friends but she had never labeled me with a sexual orientation made me feel like it was safe for me to be whoever I was in this relationship. My friend accepted me whether I was straight, queer, or whatever!

Trying to cram someone into a certain type of box is conflict-inducing behaviour. Please leave it at home.

Posted in Conflict Resolution | Comments Off

Listening When You Disagree

Get Lucky by Katherine Center

There would be a major leap towards peace if we all got better at listening to people whom we disagree with. As I’ve written here before, conflict arises from differences that make us uncomfortable. And there’s a large spectrum of ‘comfort’!

On one side would be completely comfortable where you feel safe and secure. Usually this is in warm, familiar environments and/or with highly familiar people. The other end of the comfort spectrum would basically be fight, flight, or freeze – major fear reactions. Note that ‘fight’, something usually connected with anger, actually arises from fear. This is an excellent piece of writing on how scared we can be about differences and change; so scared that we sometimes act cruelly and violently towards others in deeply unconscious ways.

So when was the last time you talked with someone you really disagreed with? How did that go? Was it a back-and-forth dialogue? Or more of a debate? And what was the emotional climate like?

There is a reason why people tend to hang out with others who are like-minded. It’s way easier and it just feels better!

Being a vegetarian in a group of hunters or a union activist amongst hard-core capitalists might bring up feelings of righteousness, defensiveness, or even aggression. Those feelings don’t usual make us feel very relaxed, willing to open up, or curious. But these last qualities are precisely what are required to make love not war where there is an us-and-them perception.

One of my heroes, Chris Guillebeau, wrote in his first book: “Almost everyone says they are open minded but when it comes down to it most of us are deeply uncomfortable with change.”

Open minded is being able to listen to those who think differently than us. In certain situations it can feel like the other is WRONG in the biggest way, even in a highly dangerous way. It can come down to having the impulse to kill or being terrified they might kill us.

If you ever try to convince someone of your view remember that by doing so you will only further entrench their view. Every time you say ‘but…’ to them, you are being adversarial and argumentative, so that’s the attitude you will get back. It takes a lot of courage to shift our fear of differences to curiosity about differences.

And the number one mistake people make? When letting others air ideas that we have feelings about, we confuse listening to the idea with agreeing with the idea. Listening to opposing views doesn’t have to mean you agree with opposing views! By asking questions that start with ‘what’ and ‘how’ and being genuinely curious about the person who holds the opinion that differs from yours, you will be demonstrating that you are open minded and thoughtful. Validate how the person feels and thinks, and then offer something like, “in my experience…” or “one way I look at it is…” Then you will be actively building the pieces of peace.

Posted in Communication, Conflict Resolution, Feelings, Listening | Comments Off

Why Equal Airtime is So Important

For me personally, relationships can be made or broken over the idea of equal airtime. If you take up a majority of the verbal space between us I will usually judge you as being unconscious and cut you some slack. After all, you can’t change something you have no awareness of. This is me choosing to make the most generous assumption about you that I can. If I am struggling under the weight of heavy bad feelings (which thankfully is a rare thing; I am very grateful for my regular practices that help here), my pained mind may default to assuming you are self-important and don’t care what I think/feel/have to say. And then I start to get angry.

I have friends that I limit my time with because they talk too much when we are together. I have also dropped friends for this reason. My two essential criteria for spending time with people are: equal airtime and fun. I find a LOT of things fun because I enjoy physical play, cooperative work projects, intense intellectual stimulation, and emotional intimacy, so the fun part is usually easy to achieve. The equal airtime part is my challenge.

One major area of my life where equal airtime does not apply is in my relationships with young people. Because of the way oppression works, as an adult I am in the oppressor role vis-à-vis children and teens. So in order to re-balance this inequity I intentionally give them as much air time as they want. Whether I’m with my own kid, or some kid that I mentor, or kids that are friends with my kid, or kids I’m related to or friends with their parents, or just kids I know from around town, I am purposeful about offering them more listening than they regularly get to have.

There is also a pool of people I have long-term important relationships with (certain relatives, some old family friends & neighbours) where I have mentally given those individuals a life-long free pass to take up whatever quantity of airtime they want when we are together. This decision is based on love and compassion, and also on wanting/needing these people in my life so therefore accepting the reality and limitations of these relationships.

Unequal airtime can lead to conflict. Re-balancing the airtime in a relationship is an excellent conflict resolution strategy.

When one person in a relationship takes up a majority of the airtime it may send the following messages to the other person:

  • what I have to say is more important than what you have to say
  • your thoughts aren’t as interesting to me as my own thoughts
  • you have no insight to offer
  • I am the central person in this relationship
  • your job is to listen to me (and maybe to take care of my feelings)
  • I don’t care what you think

The above ‘messages’ are never transmitted verbally or even consciously (except in the most dysfunctional/abusive relationships). Instead they are more like an impression or idea that begins to creep into the head of the person who gets less airtime.

Obviously this kind of dynamic can lead to overt conflict or, more likely, it will become a smoldering-under-the-surface that can infect the relationship in camouflaged ways. In mediation the parties may not get precisely equal amounts of airtime but there is an intention that each person will have a chance to express themselves fully, say everything they need to, and be heard by the other person. Listening is the best conflict management tool that exists, so if you’re in a conflict the first thing to tell yourself is, “I need to listen.”

Equal airtime conveys that both parties in a conversation are equals; they both have valid contributions to make to the dialogue; they both have valuable opinions, thoughts, and feelings.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Communication, Feelings | Comments Off