Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
What to do when a friend always makes you initiate the conversation first
Hi everyone,
Recently I have come across a move which I feel dis-empowers me, one of my friend usually does not call me or text me first, it is me who usually has to initiate contact and when I do so X talks to me well, but when I do not contact X, after a long time, I get a text that says "you haven't called in a while", and further tasks me "call X when I' m free".
To deal with this, I usually just give an excuse that utilizes X, like
Me: Yes, we haven't been in touch X, since you started working yy company our times do not match now. Let's talk soon.
While my reply feels genuine, it still is not optimal because, a mobile is a two way street, X can call me anytime too.
I can bring up this aspect, but it makes me wonder if it would come across as me being thin-skinned and over-reactive.
I feel the above situation underlines another major issue since in my life I have observed that, it's usually me who initiates most calls and texts, and in case I don't initiate, the relationship fades away gradually. It might be because of some action I do/don't. People who don't normally initiate, what is that they do different?
Thank You.
Hi Maverick,
I’ll follow the other responses on this thread as I was for a long time in a similar situation, and haven’t quite understood this myself.
My hypotheses on some things that could be happening in these situations:
- one could be simply dealing with a frenemy or a narcissist, or worse;
- one could be unconsciously telegraphing an insecure attachment, ie whereby (unconsciously) one is signaling that he accepts to have to “do something” to be in a friendship;
- these could be power moves that may indicate that the other person is not really interested in maintaining contact, and is just seeing how far he/she can go in pushing the other to expend more and more effort for no returns or diminishing returns;
- it could derive from having adopted a low power, submissive stance for a significant period of time, so much that the other person may have picked up on this and started to think one can be pushed around.
I also was on the receiving end of a similar but opposite behavior, ie “I’ll call you” but then I would not receive any call.
What I did to stop this behavior from others was simply to not call them anymore, even not answer their messages like these at all, and let relationships die. I got to a point where I was ready to lose everyone, and I mean everyone in my life.
But I understand it’s not optimal. So my take on how to respond, if this happened now:
Him: you haven't called in a while
You: You still a positive fellow I see!
And
Him: call me when I' m free
You: (if you want to maintain open the possibility of a relationship): Maybe we’ll catch up in the future. Talk soon!
You: (if you want to send a stronger message or close the “relationship”): ‘Course, I’ll call you tomorrow (and then never call).
Hi Maverick,
A quick note, do you mind if I adjust the title so it's a little more descriptive? That way, it'll be easier for other members to find this thread (and potentially leave responses) in the future.
For example:
- What to do when a friend always makes you initiate the conversation first
- How to respond when a friend often makes you be the one to call first
To be sure I get it right:
Quote from Maverick on December 18, 2022, 11:08 amand further tasks me "call X when I' m free".
Ssince this is the main part and main power move, what does he exactly say, is it like this:
Him: You haven't called me in a while, call me when you're free
Or when he is free, as Bel interpreted it (and which would be a major power move)?
Because if my initial interpretation is good, the tasking part is not very power-taking, since the "when you're free" is quite power-protecting.
What's more disempowering though is the fact that he expects that one party calls -you- while the other -him- doesn't.
That's definitely off.
And that's what I'd address.
The collaborative format is something like:
Hey mate, been a while indeed. Same back to you, let's call each other soon and see if we can manage to talk
Then I personally would not call unless he's someone close or someone I really like.
The tasking back / mirroring format:
Hey mate, been a while indeed. Same back to you, call me as well and we'll see if we can talk
If he's someone close, then I may even call, and yes, raise it on the call with direct talk:
Just one thing mate, please let me say this very honestly and straight and with the preface that I really like you and you know that I think. When you tell me to call you it feels strange because I expect a friendship to be a two way street where both friends call each other, rather than one telling the other to call him, and never calling himself, if that makes sense to you
As for the general principle:
Many relationships do fade away indeed, but never totally since what's been, is always much easier to restart.
I personally only keep the great ones alive.
And even those ones, they're under the frame that "we're close, no matter if we don't stay in touch".
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 18, 2022, 8:07 pm
The collaborative format is something like:
Hey mate, been a while indeed. Same back to you, let's call each other soon and see if we can manage to talk
Then I personally would not call unless he's someone close or someone I really like.
The tasking back / mirroring format:
Hey mate, been a while indeed. Same back to you, call me as well and we'll see if we can talk
That’s very helpful for me.
In these lighter cases where the message was just “call me”, when I had to power-protect I would answer “yes, let’s talk soon”.
But your extended format is better because it conveys the message clearly.
While “yeah, let’s talk soon” has a feeling of “I don’t think I can say this out loud”…
Also, mirroring back the other move with “long time indeed”: I’ll implement that immediately.
Ali might thread bust me for mixing the streams. So I m happy to move to 'work' sub if it needs own thread.
I ve seen this one at work too as 'Transitioned could you setup a meeting' from a peer normally in a group meeting chat because otherwise they wouldn't bother grandstanding. Obviously if it was yr boss you d just do the task.
Normally I sideline it by saying 'we can have a chat offline' so I haven't agreed to do anything. Any ideas on a way I could sound warmer and still not accept the tasking?
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 18, 2022, 8:07 pmIf he's someone close, then I may even call, and yes, raise it on the call with direct talk:
Wanted to add some details on this:
Albeit direct talk is a great option, it's not my usual go-to option.
The other option, and the one I most often go for, is just to behave higher power and/or sub-communicate my "demand for more respect / power protection" with behavior (like with the answer in the original message).
Most people, and especially the ones who act dominant/high-power have an innate sense for power dynamics.
So they'll get the message when they see you checking their power moves / not calling / doing the same back on them / etc...
Now the real question becomes how they will react.
If they adjust: great, it's a strong signal they're probably great people and, in truth, it was on you to act higher power.
If they don't adjust, then it's fair to ask yourself: did they like you and wanted a friendship, or... What else?
Maybe they only enjoyed you as a squire, as a lower-power friend (which could be fair, if that's what you were compared to him), or as someone they could boss around (definitely not cool)?
If I realize they don't adjust in spite my sub-communication is pretty clear, then I might de-prioritize the relationship or fade away because my mindset is "I'm not the type of guy to take that sh*t".
Hi Bel
one could be simply dealing with a frenemy or a narcissist, or worse;
- one could be unconsciously telegraphing an insecure attachment, ie whereby (unconsciously) one is signaling that he accepts to have to “do something” to be in a friendship;
- these could be power moves that may indicate that the other person is not really interested in maintaining contact, and is just seeing how far he/she can go in pushing the other to expend more and more effort for no returns or diminishing returns;
- it could derive from having adopted a low power, submissive stance for a significant period of time, so much that the other person may have picked up on this and started to think one can be pushed around
I also feel that it might be one or maybe even all of the reasons for encountering such responses although what triggers such responses, I will have to identify.
Him: call me when I' m free
You: (if you want to maintain open the possibility of a relationship): Maybe we’ll catch up in the future. Talk soon!
You: (if you want to send a stronger message or close the “relationship”): ‘Course, I’ll call you tomorrow (and then never call).
I meant to say,
Him: Call me, when you are free ( I should call him him whenever I'm free)😅
Thank you for the for the answers Bel.
Hi Ali
A quick note, do you mind if I adjust the title so it's a little more descriptive? That way, it'll be easier for other members to find this thread (and potentially leave responses) in the future.
I don't mind if you change the title, The one's you suggest would be more descriptive, like you said.
Thank You
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 18, 2022, 8:07 pmTo be sure I get it right:
Quote from Maverick on December 18, 2022, 11:08 amand further tasks me "call X when I' m free".
Ssince this is the main part and main power move, what does he exactly say, is it like this:
Him: You haven't called me in a while, call me when you're free
Yes, he wants me to call him when I'm free, (I understand it is not very dis-empowering, but still feels like empty tasking? I really can't call him when I'm not free)
What's more disempowering though is the fact that he expects that one party calls -you- while the other -him- doesn't.
That's definitely off.
And that's what I'd address.
Yes, it seems like he is so used to me calling him that, it is taken for granted, but when I stop it he checks in with a message as if to say "dude why are you not calling me anymore".
Hey mate, been a while indeed. Same back to you, call me as well and we'll see if we can talk
Placing the ball in their court, time to see what they do or if they accept the new frame. Thank you for this gold nugget.
Most people, and especially the ones who act dominant/high-power have an innate sense for power dynamics.
So they'll get the message when they see you checking their power moves / not calling / doing the same back on them / etc...Now the real question becomes how they will react.
If they adjust: great, it's a strong signal they're probably great people and, in truth, it was on you to act higher power.
If they don't adjust, then it's fair to ask yourself: did they like you and wanted a friendship, or... What else?
Maybe they only enjoyed you as a squire, as a lower-power friend (which could be fair, if that's what you were compared to him), or as someone they could boss around (definitely not cool)?
I knew this was dis-empowering, but was not really sure how to re-empower myself without escalating it or going for a direct talk, now after all these answers here on the forum, I got some effective methods.
Thank you Lucio
