[brains.problems and solutions]
Mar. 10th, 2005 01:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wispfox(this does all presume that I have sufficient energy, as interacting with people about things they have problems with is high effort for me, always, because I put so much energy into _listening_ on all possible levels. This is also something I strongly prefer to do in-person and when I'm not otherwise distracted. This is also more or less how I try to deal with my own problems, although I may not have the luxury of waiting until I have sufficient energy in that case, which can be a problem)
Other people's posts are causing me to notice that I appear to have some strange combination of supposedly women's and men's habits as far as what I do when people I care about have problems that they tell me about. My default reaction seems to be nothing more than wanting to dig deeper into what's going on, as some sort of combination 'yes, I care, and I want to know what's going on' and 'I need more information in order to know what I can do to support/help you' thing. I will probably, however, preface the information gathering with some sort of expression to indicate that I'm listening and care. (and I note that the people to whom I tend to get close tend to correctly interpret intense interest on my part as meaning that I care about them and what's going on)
I try to not assume that people's summaries of what is going on is the entirety of what's going on - even if I'm solely thinking about it from their perspective and not thinking about anyone else involved - because if it were something that were easily summarized, I tend to expect that they will probably already have solved the problem.
Else, I would expect that they are venting about something for which they don't want to do what would have to be done to fix it, or it's something over which they don't have control. If I already know that they are venting, I will tend to not offer suggestions because I tend to assume people who are venting already know the possibilities and don't want to hear them repeated. If, however, there are post-venting things said, I might follow up on those with information gathering.
The above expectations will, however, be modified if I'm dealing with someone that I know well enough to know that the problem is a special case in terms of it being something that they are known to have trouble coping with or figuring out (for me, these types of problem cases tend to include 3-D awareness things like getting to unfamiliar places, and organizational stuff like planning things), or if it's seems that they are in or near to a panic state. If the former, I will spend less time with my initial attempt at getting my mind around the problem, and more time with gently suggesting solutions or other ways of looking at the situation. If the latter, my energy will go toward getting them _out_ of (or away from) the panic state, first. (If someone is behaving in a way that seems... strange for them, I'm likely to suspect that the reasons falls into one of these two camps, and be more alert for such possibilities)
So, first reaction is 'I need more information', always. Partly because I'm damned curious as to how people's brains work, and partly because very few people do a very good job of summarizing what's going on without leaving something stuff out (me, I do a terrible job of summarizing _anything_ if I'm still actively processing on it), and it's not always immediately apparent what sorts of things people assume are known or 'obvious'.
The very beginning of information gathering for me, though, is _not_ specifically about the problem, but about their reactions to it and their current mental state, because I need that information to know how to proceed. Indeed, they might not _want_ me to be trying to help or show sympathy, and I need to know that, too. (I note that if it's someone I don't know well enough, I'm unlikely to even start this process, because I know that information gathering from someone one doesn't know can feel very invasive)
So, in summary, it appears that I:
a) do my best to gauge mental state and probable needs based on that state
b) indicate sympathy/understanding/caring depending on the situation and what seems to make sense for the person (some people really _don't_ like expressions of sympathy when they have problems, some people need them, some people appreciate them. If the former case, I will generally use my curiosity to indicate caring, and not add anything else in. If I can't tell, I tend toward small amounts of verbal or touch-based indications of caring, because I prefer to not leave such things as assumed)
c) if not a case of venting (sometimes even if a care of venting, if I'm curious or confused about something), try to get more information about the problem and what's going on (I may or may not intersperse sympathy expressions in here, if I feel like they are needed. These tend toward physical contact, if possible, because that way I'm not interrupting the explanation by saying things they have to process. Note that I also tend to include verbal expressions which indicate that I am listening, as well as body language saying the same thing. I will increase the verbal expressions of listening if there is no visual input)
d) if not a case of venting, suggest possible ways of looking at it or solving the problem that the person has not already mentioned having done. I may or may not have probed their thoughts on the possibilities I first thought of during the information gathering phase. And the information gathering phase and the suggestions phase are very strongly intertwined.
And all of this is pretty much instinctual, but not entirely. I know this _because_ it's so high effort for me, and because if I try to do these kinds of things when I'm tired I will forget important pieces. I'm also sure that it's been refined over the years, as I got better at understanding other people and how they think. I _know_ I got better at figuring out how to phrase things so that it's obvious that I just want the information, and not that I'm judging them based on it (or something). And I definitely incorporated the how to not accidentally appear to be blaming people thing, where you talk about stuff in terms of how it seems to you, rather than in terms of things they are doing 'wrong' (or whatever). I also tend to mention early on in getting to know people that I'm not trying to be rude or pushy and that they can _always_ tell me to leave them alone or refuse to answer a question. I may be curious, but that doesn't mean I can't accept that it's not something someone else is comfortable with.
Information gathering will also often be more brief when dealing with people that I know well enough to have a decent sense of what they are likely to expect to be known or obvious. Does, however, mean that it's more likely that there will be cases of running headlong into spots of confusion, but the people who I know well enough to do this with are also people who I know well enough to know that backing up to figure those things out is ok.
So, probably, my default is more strongly toward the suggestions/problem-solving side of things, but I appear to have trained myself to include some bits of stuff to go around that to cope with the possibility that suggestions are not wanted, or that I don't have enough information. Neat!
Note that I've never tried to put this into words before, so it's entirely possible that I missed things that I do, or missed special cases, or mis-phrased things.
Note also that this is more or less what I would prefer that people do if I am talking about problems I'm having, but that my default assumption when dealing with any and all people is that people _will_ forget things (because _I_ sure do!), and therefore I have myself set to expect that and be able to cope with that probability. Does mean that people _not_ forgetting my preferences will be greeted with immense pleasure, though.
Other people's posts are causing me to notice that I appear to have some strange combination of supposedly women's and men's habits as far as what I do when people I care about have problems that they tell me about. My default reaction seems to be nothing more than wanting to dig deeper into what's going on, as some sort of combination 'yes, I care, and I want to know what's going on' and 'I need more information in order to know what I can do to support/help you' thing. I will probably, however, preface the information gathering with some sort of expression to indicate that I'm listening and care. (and I note that the people to whom I tend to get close tend to correctly interpret intense interest on my part as meaning that I care about them and what's going on)
I try to not assume that people's summaries of what is going on is the entirety of what's going on - even if I'm solely thinking about it from their perspective and not thinking about anyone else involved - because if it were something that were easily summarized, I tend to expect that they will probably already have solved the problem.
Else, I would expect that they are venting about something for which they don't want to do what would have to be done to fix it, or it's something over which they don't have control. If I already know that they are venting, I will tend to not offer suggestions because I tend to assume people who are venting already know the possibilities and don't want to hear them repeated. If, however, there are post-venting things said, I might follow up on those with information gathering.
The above expectations will, however, be modified if I'm dealing with someone that I know well enough to know that the problem is a special case in terms of it being something that they are known to have trouble coping with or figuring out (for me, these types of problem cases tend to include 3-D awareness things like getting to unfamiliar places, and organizational stuff like planning things), or if it's seems that they are in or near to a panic state. If the former, I will spend less time with my initial attempt at getting my mind around the problem, and more time with gently suggesting solutions or other ways of looking at the situation. If the latter, my energy will go toward getting them _out_ of (or away from) the panic state, first. (If someone is behaving in a way that seems... strange for them, I'm likely to suspect that the reasons falls into one of these two camps, and be more alert for such possibilities)
So, first reaction is 'I need more information', always. Partly because I'm damned curious as to how people's brains work, and partly because very few people do a very good job of summarizing what's going on without leaving something stuff out (me, I do a terrible job of summarizing _anything_ if I'm still actively processing on it), and it's not always immediately apparent what sorts of things people assume are known or 'obvious'.
The very beginning of information gathering for me, though, is _not_ specifically about the problem, but about their reactions to it and their current mental state, because I need that information to know how to proceed. Indeed, they might not _want_ me to be trying to help or show sympathy, and I need to know that, too. (I note that if it's someone I don't know well enough, I'm unlikely to even start this process, because I know that information gathering from someone one doesn't know can feel very invasive)
So, in summary, it appears that I:
a) do my best to gauge mental state and probable needs based on that state
b) indicate sympathy/understanding/caring depending on the situation and what seems to make sense for the person (some people really _don't_ like expressions of sympathy when they have problems, some people need them, some people appreciate them. If the former case, I will generally use my curiosity to indicate caring, and not add anything else in. If I can't tell, I tend toward small amounts of verbal or touch-based indications of caring, because I prefer to not leave such things as assumed)
c) if not a case of venting (sometimes even if a care of venting, if I'm curious or confused about something), try to get more information about the problem and what's going on (I may or may not intersperse sympathy expressions in here, if I feel like they are needed. These tend toward physical contact, if possible, because that way I'm not interrupting the explanation by saying things they have to process. Note that I also tend to include verbal expressions which indicate that I am listening, as well as body language saying the same thing. I will increase the verbal expressions of listening if there is no visual input)
d) if not a case of venting, suggest possible ways of looking at it or solving the problem that the person has not already mentioned having done. I may or may not have probed their thoughts on the possibilities I first thought of during the information gathering phase. And the information gathering phase and the suggestions phase are very strongly intertwined.
And all of this is pretty much instinctual, but not entirely. I know this _because_ it's so high effort for me, and because if I try to do these kinds of things when I'm tired I will forget important pieces. I'm also sure that it's been refined over the years, as I got better at understanding other people and how they think. I _know_ I got better at figuring out how to phrase things so that it's obvious that I just want the information, and not that I'm judging them based on it (or something). And I definitely incorporated the how to not accidentally appear to be blaming people thing, where you talk about stuff in terms of how it seems to you, rather than in terms of things they are doing 'wrong' (or whatever). I also tend to mention early on in getting to know people that I'm not trying to be rude or pushy and that they can _always_ tell me to leave them alone or refuse to answer a question. I may be curious, but that doesn't mean I can't accept that it's not something someone else is comfortable with.
Information gathering will also often be more brief when dealing with people that I know well enough to have a decent sense of what they are likely to expect to be known or obvious. Does, however, mean that it's more likely that there will be cases of running headlong into spots of confusion, but the people who I know well enough to do this with are also people who I know well enough to know that backing up to figure those things out is ok.
So, probably, my default is more strongly toward the suggestions/problem-solving side of things, but I appear to have trained myself to include some bits of stuff to go around that to cope with the possibility that suggestions are not wanted, or that I don't have enough information. Neat!
Note that I've never tried to put this into words before, so it's entirely possible that I missed things that I do, or missed special cases, or mis-phrased things.
Note also that this is more or less what I would prefer that people do if I am talking about problems I'm having, but that my default assumption when dealing with any and all people is that people _will_ forget things (because _I_ sure do!), and therefore I have myself set to expect that and be able to cope with that probability. Does mean that people _not_ forgetting my preferences will be greeted with immense pleasure, though.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-10 07:54 pm (UTC)This makes me want to rant: not at you, but at the stupid idiot people out there who think there's a "women's" and "men's" way of doing things, and if you do anything that can't be clearly classified into one of those two, very specific, categories, you're "some strange combination".
I mean, to me, it makes as much sense as saying the only two real foods are chili con carne and lemon mousse, and all other foods are some strange combination of the two.
Thank you for the space :-).
Re: Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-10 07:57 pm (UTC)Re: Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-10 10:49 pm (UTC)Re: Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-11 04:12 pm (UTC)I am fairly likely, however, to phrase things according to how other people are most likely to follow what I mean, as long as I'm not concerned about it giving people inaccurate information upon which to base assumptions.
I was - at the time - amused by the supposedly male and female ways of handling other people's problems, so phrased it in terms of that. (I am generally either really annoyed by or really amused by supposedly male and female behaviors; sometimes both at the same time)
Re: Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-10 08:09 pm (UTC)Re: Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-10 08:17 pm (UTC)(my god, that sounds disgusting)
Re: Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-11 12:23 am (UTC)Oh, I headed off to your journal and had a read, and a look at the pictures, and thought "Yep, this is someone I want on my reading list". But the decision had been made.
Re: Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-11 04:24 pm (UTC)Re: Warning: Gender rant
Date: 2005-03-12 10:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-11 12:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-11 04:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-11 04:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-11 04:19 pm (UTC)Wee! My god, I think we might start scaring people. ;)
(You do realize that the more commonality we keep finding, the more likely I am to inflict others with much commonality with me on you, right? ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-03-11 09:31 pm (UTC)*brain hurt* Ok I believe I have parsed this correctly and...
I am not afeared! (of you or of a combining of commonality with you, me and anyone else.)
Meow!
no subject
Date: 2005-03-13 06:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-13 09:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-14 03:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-14 04:24 pm (UTC)