![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wispfoxSo, I apparently have a thing in my head where, if conversing about an emotionally charged topic with someone whose opinion I care about, and they appear to have an opinion but don't share it, I will think it's a topic to avoid and be hyper-aware of any future reactions to that topic. This combines interestingly with the fact that, if I'm emotionally distressed, I am unlikely to remember information that is shared with me, nor what my reaction to said information was. And, generally, emotionally charged topics have a higher than normal likelihood of my being emotionally distressed.
This results in me being uncertain about what's surrounding a particular topic which is apparently to be avoided, unconsciously avoiding talking about it but being highly paranoid about possible reactions when I do bring it up, and not generally consciously aware enough to just _ask_ about it. This is true even if the opnion was shared, if it was shared when I wasn't able to process it due to my own distress. The fact that I have stuff in my head causing me to be especially aware of avoiding topics is why I noticed this happening (and mentioned it), and why I'm aware that I do it, now. Theoretically, being aware of it will make it less likely to happen again.
I wonder, though, if sharing one's opinion via a written format (eg, email) - if it appeared that I may not have been able to parse what was said to me - might counteract the tendency for me to not remember things shared with me when emotionally distressed, because then I can go _back_ to it later (and am likely to; I tend to return to informational sources if I can, if I realize that parsing wasn't working). Of course, the problem there is that I don't get any of the remaining lines of communication, so it'd be more difficult to interpret if said communication isn't very clear. On the plus side, asking me if I'm able to parse new information _does_ work, presuming one can interpret (potentially verbal) hand-wavy. And presuming one will remember to mention it again when things aren't so fraught, because it's almost certain that if I wasn't able to process new information, I won't remember to bring it up.
Bah. Sometimes my brain annoys me. This would be an example!
This results in me being uncertain about what's surrounding a particular topic which is apparently to be avoided, unconsciously avoiding talking about it but being highly paranoid about possible reactions when I do bring it up, and not generally consciously aware enough to just _ask_ about it. This is true even if the opnion was shared, if it was shared when I wasn't able to process it due to my own distress. The fact that I have stuff in my head causing me to be especially aware of avoiding topics is why I noticed this happening (and mentioned it), and why I'm aware that I do it, now. Theoretically, being aware of it will make it less likely to happen again.
I wonder, though, if sharing one's opinion via a written format (eg, email) - if it appeared that I may not have been able to parse what was said to me - might counteract the tendency for me to not remember things shared with me when emotionally distressed, because then I can go _back_ to it later (and am likely to; I tend to return to informational sources if I can, if I realize that parsing wasn't working). Of course, the problem there is that I don't get any of the remaining lines of communication, so it'd be more difficult to interpret if said communication isn't very clear. On the plus side, asking me if I'm able to parse new information _does_ work, presuming one can interpret (potentially verbal) hand-wavy. And presuming one will remember to mention it again when things aren't so fraught, because it's almost certain that if I wasn't able to process new information, I won't remember to bring it up.
Bah. Sometimes my brain annoys me. This would be an example!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 05:38 pm (UTC)I've done similar behavior in the past, and had it blown up in my face hardcore. Doesn't mean I won't do it again (I can be a slow learner), but hopefully someone (maybe even me ;P) will notice the behavior and bring up the fact that I'm doing it.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 05:41 pm (UTC)If I'm in a normal state, and not having trouble processing (I think it's apparent when I am, although I'm not certain), then meta-discussion would be precisely right. If I'm not processing well, wait until I am (if you can figure out how, help to get to a reasonable state is good).
I've done similar behavior in the past, and had it blown up in my face hardcore.
Ditto, on both. It's why I have a fairly good awareness of when I'm avoiding topics, so as to be able to _do_ something about it. Would, of course, prefer to avoid the problem in the first place. ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 05:41 pm (UTC)