From: esti@quads.uchicago.edu (Paul A. Estin)
Subject: Re: All mind and no heart?
Reply-To: esti@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Insanity Etc.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 18:23:21 GMT

Snark notes that people seem to be ignoring some distinctions he'd
like to keep clear, when dispensing advice concerning 'when one person
doesn't want to talk about it'.  "There's a couple of cases in RL
where I'm currently dealing with these sorts of problems, but in the
interest of their privacy I will speak in generalities for now.

"There seem to be some different-though-similar situations (and
accompanying suggestions) that are being lumped together, but which
don't seem to me to be the same case...

"1. Person 1 hurts, or situation otherwise comes up.  P2 discusses
issue with P1.  Consensus on this situation seems to be, once an issue
is brought up and discussed, it shouldn't be brought up again for a
while, because that will result in mere rehashing when there hasn't
been any time for progress to be made.  (More than one person made
this point to COAN, the poster of the original message.)

"2. P1 hurts.  It may not be possible for P1 and P2 to talk about the
issue at all; P1 may simply not wish to talk about it at all.  (Kateri
made this point first, I believe.)

"3. P1 hurts.  P1 may be looking for empathy or sympathy from P2, but
not for advice.  (Arty was one of the first to mention this situation.)

"4. P2 perceives difficulty with P1, but P1 doesn't wish to talk about
it."  (I think I saw this one in the thread somewhere, or else I may
simply be reading in my own RL situation. :)

"OK.  It seems that 1 and 2 are being confused, and while the 'proper
thing to do' in each case may be parallel, it certainly isn't the same
situation.  For me, the advice in case 1 (don't rediscuss an issue for
a while) is easier to take than in case 2 (maybe don't discuss it at
all).  I tend to be a sufficiently open person that I have trouble
empathizing with those who aren't similarly open; I have difficulty
imagining a personal issue which a sufficiently-close friend couldn't
get me to discuss.

"Similarly, I think people are confusing case 3 (don't give advice,
just lend an ear and compassion) with case 2 (don't even discuss it).
For me, I again find 2 to be difficult, while 3 is easier in
comparison, particularly if no advice does come automatically to mind.
(Sometimes, though, you really have to ignore a person's wish to
simply listen-without-giving-advice, if there really is a possible
solution which should be mentioned.)

"Finally, there seems to be a bit of a confusion between 2 (hurt
person P1 wishes not to discuss an issue) and 4 (P1 wishes not to
discuss an issue which is hurtful to P2 if left undiscussed).  As hard
as the conventional-advice in case 2 is for me to follow if I am P2, I
can manage it, whereas I don't think I can bottle myself when I find
myself in case 4.... I will just get angry without having an escape
outlet."

"Anyway, just trying to clarify my confusion without overly injecting
my own opinions (which are currently rather highly emotional).  Hope I
wasn't too general."

-----
"Yeah, but it gets real lonely as a moderate activist, standing alone with a
sign that reads 'Reasonable informed discussion of the issues, as soon as is
feasible!'." --James Nicoll

Paul Andrew Estin, net.Snark, R.A.C.W.P., UCSFC F.C./K.S., F.C.S.
paul.estin@um.cc.umich.edu  or  esti@midway.uchicago.edu
214 Beakes St. (home)  330 Packard Rd. (work)  Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Newsgroups: alt.callahans