I’ve often wished that conversation norms shifted towards making things more consensual. The problem is that when two people are talking, it’s often the case that one party brings up a new topic without realizing that the other party didn’t want to talk about that, or doesn’t want to hear it.
Let me provide an example: Person A and person B are having a conversation about the exam that they just took. Person A bombed the exam, so they are pretty bummed. Person B, however, did great and wants to tell everyone. So then person B comes up to person A and asks “How did you do?” fully expecting to brag the second person A answers. On it’s own, this question is benign. This happens frequently without question. On the other hand, if person B had said, “Do you want to talk about the exam?” person A might have said “No.”
This problem can be alleviated by simply asking people whether they want to talk about certain things. For sensitive topics, like politics and religion, this is already the norm in some places. I think it can be taken further. I suggest the following boundaries, and could probably think of more if pressed:
Ask someone before sharing something that puts you in a positive light. Make it explicit that you are bragging. For example, ask “Can I brag about something?” before doing so.
Ask someone before talking about something that you know there’s a high variance of difficulty and success. This applies to a lot of things: school, jobs, marathon running times.
The problem is, if a conversational topic can be hurtful, the meta-topic can be too. “do you want to talk about the test” could be as bad or worse than talking about the test, if it’s taken as a reference to a judgement-worthy sensitivity to the topic. And “Can I ask you if you want to talk about whether you want to talk about the test” is just silly.
Mr-hire’s comment is spot-on—there are variant cultural expectations that may apply, and you can’t really unilaterally decide another norm is better (though you can have opinions and default stances).
The only way through is to be somewhat aware of the conversational signals about what topics are welcome and what should be deferred until another time. You don’t need prior agreement if you can take the hint when an unusually-brief non-response is given to your conversational bid. If you’re routinely missing hints (or seeing hints that aren’t), and the more direct discussions are ALSO uncomfortable for them or you, then you’ll probably have to give up on that level of connection with that person.
“do you want to talk about the test” could be as bad or worse than talking about the test, if it’s taken as a reference to a judgement-worthy sensitivity to the topic
I agree. Although if you are known for asking those types of questions maybe people will learn to understand you never mean it as a judgement.
And “Can I ask you if you want to talk about whether you want to talk about the test” is just silly.
True, although I’ll usually take silly over judgement any day. :)
I’ve often wished that conversation norms shifted towards making things more consensual. The problem is that when two people are talking, it’s often the case that one party brings up a new topic without realizing that the other party didn’t want to talk about that, or doesn’t want to hear it.
Let me provide an example: Person A and person B are having a conversation about the exam that they just took. Person A bombed the exam, so they are pretty bummed. Person B, however, did great and wants to tell everyone. So then person B comes up to person A and asks “How did you do?” fully expecting to brag the second person A answers. On it’s own, this question is benign. This happens frequently without question. On the other hand, if person B had said, “Do you want to talk about the exam?” person A might have said “No.”
This problem can be alleviated by simply asking people whether they want to talk about certain things. For sensitive topics, like politics and religion, this is already the norm in some places. I think it can be taken further. I suggest the following boundaries, and could probably think of more if pressed:
Ask someone before sharing something that puts you in a positive light. Make it explicit that you are bragging. For example, ask “Can I brag about something?” before doing so.
Ask someone before talking about something that you know there’s a high variance of difficulty and success. This applies to a lot of things: school, jobs, marathon running times.
Have you read the posts on ask, tell, and guess culture? They feel highly related to this idea.
Malcolm Ocean eventually reframed Tell Culture as Reveal Culture, which I found to be an improvement.
Hmm, I saw those a while ago and never read them. I’ll check them out.
The problem is, if a conversational topic can be hurtful, the meta-topic can be too. “do you want to talk about the test” could be as bad or worse than talking about the test, if it’s taken as a reference to a judgement-worthy sensitivity to the topic. And “Can I ask you if you want to talk about whether you want to talk about the test” is just silly.
Mr-hire’s comment is spot-on—there are variant cultural expectations that may apply, and you can’t really unilaterally decide another norm is better (though you can have opinions and default stances).
The only way through is to be somewhat aware of the conversational signals about what topics are welcome and what should be deferred until another time. You don’t need prior agreement if you can take the hint when an unusually-brief non-response is given to your conversational bid. If you’re routinely missing hints (or seeing hints that aren’t), and the more direct discussions are ALSO uncomfortable for them or you, then you’ll probably have to give up on that level of connection with that person.
I agree. Although if you are known for asking those types of questions maybe people will learn to understand you never mean it as a judgement.
True, although I’ll usually take silly over judgement any day. :)