It's interesting to see how communication is twisted by expectation...
There's a conversation about a subject. in the course of it, another subject (we'll call it subject x) gets mentioned briefly as a problem relating to the subject. I interject to say that, while I have argued against subject x as a problem in the past, I feel that in this particular case problem x is less of a problem than problem y, and go on to talk about why I feel that problem y is the problem that should really be considered with regard to this subject.
Then, someone else interjects that I seem to be the one with the biggest problem with x, implies that it's more of a personal problem than a real problem, and says I've never given specifics about my problems with x (even though it's a subject I've discussed at length and in quite explicit details), and that we should be focusing on yet another problem, z, that is rather similar to the exact points I was making with problem y but from a slightly different angle. Still reaching approximately the same conclusion, too.
It frustrates me that there is such an expectation of me having a particular position on subject x that when I don't hold that position, for whatever reason, people still interpret my communication as if I did despite me outright saying that in this case I don't feel that way about x.
More and more, I think the resolution I came to in the essay on
thesongofdream entitled "Stormriding on Winds of Change" was a very good one, if my past approach to certain things has produced an effect which inhibits actual communication to this degree, even with people who to the best of my knowledge are unaffiliated with the groups directly concerned with subject x.
There's a conversation about a subject. in the course of it, another subject (we'll call it subject x) gets mentioned briefly as a problem relating to the subject. I interject to say that, while I have argued against subject x as a problem in the past, I feel that in this particular case problem x is less of a problem than problem y, and go on to talk about why I feel that problem y is the problem that should really be considered with regard to this subject.
Then, someone else interjects that I seem to be the one with the biggest problem with x, implies that it's more of a personal problem than a real problem, and says I've never given specifics about my problems with x (even though it's a subject I've discussed at length and in quite explicit details), and that we should be focusing on yet another problem, z, that is rather similar to the exact points I was making with problem y but from a slightly different angle. Still reaching approximately the same conclusion, too.
It frustrates me that there is such an expectation of me having a particular position on subject x that when I don't hold that position, for whatever reason, people still interpret my communication as if I did despite me outright saying that in this case I don't feel that way about x.
More and more, I think the resolution I came to in the essay on
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)