I'll bet fully half of the arguments I've had with loved ones over the years had less to do with core disagreements than unfortunate timing: trying to be funny when my spouse was dead serious; feeling outraged by an injustice my friend was not of a mind to raise her blood pressure over; trying to fix someone else's problem when what he really needed was for me to listen.
It happens often. We may not be on opposite sides of an issue so much as different wave lengths, and it rarely ends well. If you've ever had someone suggest to you in the midst of an argument that you should calm down or stop "over-reacting," you also understand that even if there is some merit in the observation, pointing it out in that moment (or in that particular way) isn't helpful.
I wonder if social media hasn't increased this kind of miscommunication. A glance at any Twitter stream or Facebook feed reveals a jumble of largely unrelated reactions to life. In the old days, I mostly had conversations with people I was actively engaged with in some way--maybe attending a concert, taking a class, or working on a project together. We might not share all the same opinions, but riding together to a worship service, shopping mall, or Weight Watcher's meeting still provides a common denominator.
Without a shared experience, however, it takes more effort to really connect. We don't have to check in or tune in at all before we start posting. I can--and often do--post without much regard for what's going on with others. How can that possibly foster connection, which Dr. Brene Brown defines as, "the energy that is created between people when they feel seen, heard, and valued; when they can give and receive without judgment"?
Add to that the fact that inflection is notoriously hard to intuit online--a reality only marginally eased by the overuse of emoticons and exclamation points--as well as the way conversation threads form between unrelated people in the midst of very different experiences: one at work, another at leisure, some in a rush to post and run, others semi-permanently stationed at their laptops. It's a recipe for misunderstanding and conflict, especially if you haven't limited your online friends and followers to those who already think much like you do.
Social media is a place where our personal worlds converge and sometimes collide. I find this kind of disconnection particularly challenging when there is friction between commenters on my own Facebook page who clearly aren't attuned to one another. I feel compelled to act as a host. Do I stay out of it or try to moderate a bit, knowing I may further irritate everyone with my awkward peacemaking attempts?
a time to build up, a time to break down,
a time to dance, a time to mourn,
a time to cast away stones,
a time to gather stones together
I'm not sure how we improve these communications. As with most things, I suspect greater awareness, including self-awareness, would help. Your time to laugh may be my time to weep; your time to kill may be my time to heal. Your time to chill out and play games may be my time to garner support for a cause which is deeply important to me. My time to rail against injustice may be your time to regroup. My time to step out and take a risk may be your time to play it safe so you can focus on something completely different. Timing is everything.
I do know that telling someone who feels oppressed or mistreated to be patient is roughly as effective as suggesting, mid-dispute, that your spouse needs to calm down. Unless your goal is to escalate the argument, don't bother. We don't get to define the experiences of others or tell them how to feel. If you do relate to how the other person feels, empathy is likely to be more valuable than advice.
Embrace, reject, or equivocate with social media as you will, but may we never forget that there are real live human beings behind those various tweets and Facebook comments, each dealing with their own stuff, just as we are. Laughing, weeping, planting, reaping, each in due season.
No comments:
Post a Comment