Junk Mail
Poor Kobe.
If reports are to be believed, first she said yes. Then she said no.
Or she said yes but she meant no.
Or her body said yes while the little invisible voice in her head shouted - or whined - no! no! no!
Or maybe she just meant to say no. But she forgot.
Poor Kobe. It's so hard to know what a person means. Especially when they say one thing and later say - or don't say - something else.
It's hard to know what a person means. Unless, of course, you take them at their word.
But, I'm finding that some people don't want to take others at their word. Some people don't even want to hear other people's words.
Apparently, there's a fairly strong sentiment out there that actions speak louder than words. For some, perhaps actions are gentler than words. Perhaps actions are viewed as truer than words.
Or, maybe it's just that actions can be interpreted favorably while words are what they are...favorable or not. One can perceive actions however they want. Far more easily than one can perceive words.
"But when he walked out the door with his bags packed, he hugged me first - that's a good sign, right? He wouldn't have hugged me if he didn't love me and want me, right? He probably wants me back but didn't know how to NOT walk out the door with his bags packed! I know he technically said goodbye, but I don't think he meant it. I don't think that's what's really going on."
I grew up hearing that actions speak louder than words, but I never liked it.
If you want to say I Love YOu, just say it, damn it. Don't trust that your loved ones will figure out your love for them based on the fact that you brought home those free mugs and pens from the convention you attended. Sometimes a mug just doesn't speak loudly enough. Even a really nice mug.
But people seem to like those actions.
And I fear that too many people use the "actions speak louder" cliche to ignore words they don't like. I fear that too many people opt to rely on their own personal action interpretation instead.
And Kobe's not the only one having trouble reconciling the actions and words.
A friend asked me if others believed me when I said no. The answer wasn't simple.
There has historically been a large dichotomy in my life between those who are very close to me and all others.
For all others, I say no and that's the end of the discussion.
Period.
For those who are close, I've always had trouble saying no. That's not to say that I don't say no. I'm sure some family members would probably say I only say no. But yes, no and family is another essay entirely.
It's just that saying no to people you love is really difficult. And saying yes is what you want to do. Yes, you want to help. Yes, you want to be there. Yes, you want to see the movie they want to see or eat at the restaurant they want to eat at.
And, as I've written about before, saying yes really feels good.
But, as I've also written before, saying yes all the time isn't as good as it sounds. Saying yes all the time leads to situations of limitless expectations. And saying yes all the time places a burden on the other person to make all of the decisions.
But, healthy or not, it's still so much easier to say yes to those who are close.
The problem with saying no to folks in the inner circle is that they don't want to hear or accept the answer no.
It's kind of like the Seinfeld episode where George breaks up with a girl he's seeing.
It's a basic breakup. He tells her she's nice. That he likes her a lot. But that it's just not working.
And she says no. She refuses to authorize a breakup. She rejects his rejection.
It's a great scene.
"I don't want to be with you."
"I'm sorry. I can't accept that. We're still together."
In a legal dispute, before entering into mediation, the parties agree to accept the decision of the arbitrator. The concept is known as "binding." The process is called binding arbitration.
I thought about introducing the concept into my own life.
When someone asks me a question or extends an offer or invitation, I would provide a condition prior to answering.
"Do you agree to be bound by my answer?"
"You do not have to like my answer, but do you agree to accept my answer?"
"Without debate?"
"And without trying to impose guilt?"
"And without whining?"
"And without calling me five more times to make sure the answer's still no?"
It's a great notion. Getting everyone involved to sign off first on the understanding and terms of the communication. Sure, it might impact spontaneity, but think of all the post-discussion headaches that could be avoided.
But I haven't been able to introduce this concept into my life yet. First, I have to figure out how to say these things without sounding too cold and formal. And too lawyerly. I already get enough complaints about how I talk.
Now, the friend who asked me the original question has never said no. At least not that I've ever heard. If she has said no, I'm not sure what language she was using. Maybe it was a heretofore unknown foreign language and everybody just thought she was choking or coughing or gurgling.
She's just the quintessential yes person. She'll do anything. She's all go. She's game. She's with it. She's on it. She's along for the ride.
And I get the feeling she's tired.
She asked "how do you say no and get people to hear you?"
At first I was extremely proud because I knew I had the answer.
I told her "I refuse to negotiate."
When I was first learning litigation, I was lucky to have several fine mentors. One of them in particular was a really smooth guy. Not smooth in the slimy way, but smooth in the seamless, graceful way. He was a good guy.
He taught me to always determine when something was negotiable and when it wasn't. And, if it wasn't negotiable, he counseled me to say so and then refuse - gently and politely - to continue discussion. And, most important, he taught me NEVER to engage in discussion about why I wouldn't negotiate. Because once someone's got you talking about the "why" they'll get you talking about the "what"...
"Would you like to have animal sex with me tonight?"
"No, I do not want to have animal sex with you tonight."
"But why don't you want to have animal sex with me tonight?"
"There's not going to be a discussion about this."
"But why don't you want to discuss it?"
DON'T ANSWER THE QUESTION!! IT'S A TRAP!!!
If you are willing to discuss why you don't want to discuss animal sex, in short course you will be discussing the animal sex itself.
Well, in litigation, the strategy worked great. When I meant no, I said just said no. And that was it. It enabled me to set people straight, minimize those useless discussions that go around in circles, and reduce others' frustration.
Best of all, it really irked opposing attorneys. The calmer I was in saying that something wasn't negotiable, the more they wanted to discuss it. That part was fun.
And in real life, the concept of "negotiability" turned out to be completely helpful. If someone wanted to do something or discuss something that I had no interest in, I could just say no. If they pursued a debate, I could cut them off quickly - albeit gently and kindly - and let them know that my no was my final answer.
The problem with negotiability is that most people - not me, but most people - are human and not robotic. Most people, in the normal course of talking, forget to assess whether something's negotiable.
It's way too easy to let "no" slip out of your mouth and then realize you actually are open to negotiation after all. Once your partner, opponent, friend or foe hears "no" followed by negotiation, you've set a bad precedent. Basically, you've rendered the "no" meaningless.
But, there's a bigger problem with the concept of negotiability.
Many people don't trust their ability to determine a "no". If you're in litigation, other peoples' lack of trust in their own position is great. Because of that, I've been successful in getting around another person's "no" a good deal of the time.
But, for my friend, lack of confidence in her "no" really messes her up. If she's not confident in her "no," why would anyone else have confidence it it?
The key to the effective no is twofold.
First, you've got to know if you really mean no.
Second, you've got to stick to your no.
It's kind of like junk mail.
You get an email from someone named 2big4u at some domain called biggerisbetter. The subject line says "Be All 12 Inches You Can Be"....
You know the email's not from your mom.
And you're suspicious that it might just be that spam everyone's always talking about.
So, what do you do?
Well, if it's disgusting to you and if you NEVER want to see anything again from 2big4u, you block the email. One block and 2big4u is out of your life forever.
BUT, what if you're not sure? Should you open the email just to make sure your mom didn't change her email address to 2big4u? After all, she has been feeling confident since taking those "Yoga for Self Defense classes" at the senior center.
Or, maybe you should just open it to make sure it's not a joke from your spouse...after all, he has been trying to make you laugh recently...
Sure, go ahead...open it!
And welcome to the world of getting MORE spam from 2big4u plus lots of spam from the friends of 2big4u.
Here's the deal: you can't say no...and then be open to negotiation.
"Well, 2big4u, I don't want you to ever contact me because you're disgusting and vile, but let me just see if you said something worthwhile this time."
Remember...actions still speak louder than words.
Not that they should. And, as a lover of the english language, I wish they didn't.
But they do.
2big4u isn't listening to you say "eeeeuuuuwwww, gross." 2big4u is waiting for the click of your mouse. The click that says I'm open to getting or hearing or reading or considering more of this. Even though I thought I said no.
Poor Kobe. Poor, poor Kobe.
Maybe her actions and words didn't match. And maybe he got confused.
Who wouldn't?
But, damn, it's just not fair. Especially if she didn't say no until after she clicked his mouse.
|