Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Defending against "you're a genius"
But going fully meta requires relatively more social effort.
As such, even when I am not angry, people may think that I am angry or frustrated.
I don't think it's the issue. I think it's more about the tone and the intention. Do you defend? Or do you counter-attack? These are not the same.
We would like the attacker to invest more in his attack.
This achieves 2 things:
- The attacker exposes his aggression more outrightly
- He invests more into the interaction. This makes your counter-attacks less likely to be seen as over-investing.
Got it. Advanced stuff. He overextends so he's more vulnerable to a counter-attack. Ok you answered my question above. I think counter-attacking is effective of course. However, I believe more in defending. IÂ think when you defend you don't create more aggression by adding your own to the interaction.
We can do this through the techniques in Power University like
- Surfacing
- Show me the hand technique
- Giving them rope, Scorched Earth Technique
My issue of seemingly over-reacting can be resolved by getting the attacker to invest more in the attack.
Yeah, badass. As I said above I like Peace. I'd rather make Peace because I'd rather invest my energy in other things than useless conflicts. If it's a conflict for something important ok, but otherwise no thanks.
But going fully meta requires relatively more social effort.
As such, even when I am not angry, people may think that I am angry or frustrated.
I don't think it's the issue. I think it's more about the tone and the intention. Do you defend? Or do you counter-attack? These are not the same.
We would like the attacker to invest more in his attack.
This achieves 2 things:
- The attacker exposes his aggression more outrightly
- He invests more into the interaction. This makes your counter-attacks less likely to be seen as over-investing.
Got it. Advanced stuff. He overextends so he's more vulnerable to a counter-attack. Ok you answered my question above. I think counter-attacking is effective of course. However, I believe more in defending. IÂ think when you defend you don't create more aggression by adding your own to the interaction.
We can do this through the techniques in Power University like
- Surfacing
- Show me the hand technique
- Giving them rope, Scorched Earth Technique
My issue of seemingly over-reacting can be resolved by getting the attacker to invest more in the attack.
Yeah, badass. As I said above I like Peace. I'd rather make Peace because I'd rather invest my energy in other things than useless conflicts. If it's a conflict for something important ok, but otherwise no thanks.
Matthew Whitewood, Stef and Transitioned have reacted to this post.
Matthew WhitewoodStefTransitioned
We can certainly replace "counter-attacks" with "drawing your boundary" or "asserting yourself".
I am on the same page as you.
Often, after drawing a boundary, I will seek out a collaborative frame whenever possible.
But going fully meta requires relatively more social effort.
As such, even when I am not angry, people may think that I am angry or frustrated.
I don't think it's the issue. I think it's more about the tone and the intention. Do you defend? Or do you counter-attack? These are not the same.
I have experimented using fully meta in a calm tone.
People don't accuse me of over-reacting, but sometimes they did accuse me of over-analysing.
Not that big of a deal because I would go on to explain why it is important to clarify the situation.
But Lucio's techniques of drawing them out work even better. Much better.
We can certainly replace "counter-attacks" with "drawing your boundary" or "asserting yourself".
I am on the same page as you.
Often, after drawing a boundary, I will seek out a collaborative frame whenever possible.
But going fully meta requires relatively more social effort.
As such, even when I am not angry, people may think that I am angry or frustrated.
I don't think it's the issue. I think it's more about the tone and the intention. Do you defend? Or do you counter-attack? These are not the same.
I have experimented using fully meta in a calm tone.
People don't accuse me of over-reacting, but sometimes they did accuse me of over-analysing.
Not that big of a deal because I would go on to explain why it is important to clarify the situation.
But Lucio's techniques of drawing them out work even better. Much better.
Stef has reacted to this post.
People don't accuse me of over-reacting, but sometimes they did accuse me of over-analysing.
Could you give an example of a situation?
People don't accuse me of over-reacting, but sometimes they did accuse me of over-analysing.
Could you give an example of a situation?
Someone used sarcasm along the same lines as in the topic of this thread.
Him: Wow you're a genius! (in a sarcastic tone)
Me: When someone makes a mistake and you tell them they're genius, you are using sarcasm to exploit their mistake to push them down to feel superior. It is a one-upping type of "joke" where you can hide your one-up move under the guise of humour. Imagine you spill someting on your shirt, and I say "wow you have awesome dexterity". That's the same dyanmic going on. (Full meta part)
This discourages people from being comfortable and honest with their mistakes. (Shame the person for playing games)
Let's help people out of their mistakes rather than capitalising on their mistakes and pushing them down. (Frame a collaborative atmosphere)
Third Party: Matthew, I think you're over-analysing the situation.
Me: What makes you think I"m over-analysing?
Third Party: You seemed to read very deeply into his remark.
Me: Yes, it is important for me to explain what is going on here. It is a sarcastic, one-up type of joke. Anyways, ... (to move on from this situation)
Someone used sarcasm along the same lines as in the topic of this thread.
Him: Wow you're a genius! (in a sarcastic tone)
Me: When someone makes a mistake and you tell them they're genius, you are using sarcasm to exploit their mistake to push them down to feel superior. It is a one-upping type of "joke" where you can hide your one-up move under the guise of humour. Imagine you spill someting on your shirt, and I say "wow you have awesome dexterity". That's the same dyanmic going on. (Full meta part)
This discourages people from being comfortable and honest with their mistakes. (Shame the person for playing games)
Let's help people out of their mistakes rather than capitalising on their mistakes and pushing them down. (Frame a collaborative atmosphere)
Third Party: Matthew, I think you're over-analysing the situation.
Me: What makes you think I"m over-analysing?
Third Party: You seemed to read very deeply into his remark.
Me: Yes, it is important for me to explain what is going on here. It is a sarcastic, one-up type of joke. Anyways, ... (to move on from this situation)
Stef has reacted to this post.
Oh yeah, see Lucio's remarks it's all in there. If you invest so much it makes you look like he really hurt you. It does not follow the micro-agression response law. The guy told you a short stupid statement and you kind of escalated.
Oh yeah, see Lucio's remarks it's all in there. If you invest so much it makes you look like he really hurt you. It does not follow the micro-agression response law. The guy told you a short stupid statement and you kind of escalated.
Lucio: I think this has its place in PU:
You: When someone makes a mistake and you tell them they're genius, it feels like you're attacking and making fun of them (note; you need the "making fun" part, you can't leave the "attacking" part alone, because since this is covert aggression, he can always go undercover with the usual "I was just joking"). Some people (keep it impersonal, it leaves him less room to defend saying "not me, that wasn't my intention) that as a way of feeling superior, but it's actually just annoying (and not what a good friend / supportive friend would do)
I think goes for all cases against these types of push-down sarcastic jokes.
Question below, is that the word you meant?
Some people (keep it impersonal, it leaves him less room to defend saying "not me, that wasn't my intention) do that as a way of feeling superior, but it's actually just annoying (and not what a good friend / supportive friend would do)
Also what if he says: "I was not attacking you, don't take it personally dude!" ?
Lucio: I think this has its place in PU:
You: When someone makes a mistake and you tell them they're genius, it feels like you're attacking and making fun of them (note; you need the "making fun" part, you can't leave the "attacking" part alone, because since this is covert aggression, he can always go undercover with the usual "I was just joking"). Some people (keep it impersonal, it leaves him less room to defend saying "not me, that wasn't my intention) that as a way of feeling superior, but it's actually just annoying (and not what a good friend / supportive friend would do)
I think goes for all cases against these types of push-down sarcastic jokes.
Question below, is that the word you meant?
Some people (keep it impersonal, it leaves him less room to defend saying "not me, that wasn't my intention) do that as a way of feeling superior, but it's actually just annoying (and not what a good friend / supportive friend would do)
Also what if he says: "I was not attacking you, don't take it personally dude!" ?
Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.
Oh yeah, see Lucio's remarks it's all in there. If you invest so much it makes you look like he really hurt you. It does not follow the micro-agression response law. The guy told you a short stupid statement and you kind of escalated.
Yes, next time, I will draw them out and then go meta like what Lucio suggested.
Going meta works well among socially savvy people.
But it falls flat when people are not so savvy.
Going meta is capped by the social intelligence of the people around.
Quoting from this thread from Lucio on Trump's covert aggression:
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano in Attack & Offend, Then Say "But It's Okay"
Using others to go meta can be a risk in that sense since they might either not understand the dynamics, not understand your intention, or simply prefer to side with the other person.
Oh yeah, see Lucio's remarks it's all in there. If you invest so much it makes you look like he really hurt you. It does not follow the micro-agression response law. The guy told you a short stupid statement and you kind of escalated.
Yes, next time, I will draw them out and then go meta like what Lucio suggested.
Going meta works well among socially savvy people.
But it falls flat when people are not so savvy.
Going meta is capped by the social intelligence of the people around.
Quoting from this thread from Lucio on Trump's covert aggression:
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano in Attack & Offend, Then Say "But It's Okay"
Using others to go meta can be a risk in that sense since they might either not understand the dynamics, not understand your intention, or simply prefer to side with the other person.
Lucio Buffalmano, John Freeman and Stef have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJohn FreemanStef
Using others to go meta can be a risk in that sense since they might either not understand the dynamics, not understand your intention, or simply prefer to side with the other person.
Important point.
Using others to go meta can be a risk in that sense since they might either not understand the dynamics, not understand your intention, or simply prefer to side with the other person.
Important point.
Thank you, John! added it now and linked here.
Edit: and yes, the "do" was missing.
Thank you, John! added it now and linked here.
Edit: and yes, the "do" was missing.
A possible reply:
Him: I was not attacking you, don't take it personally dude!
You: I would not say it's an attack. (take away the cover)
It's a one-up joke. (most people should be able to see that it is one-upping)
It comes across as exploiting a mistake to feel superior. (going meta in short)
A possible reply:
Him: I was not attacking you, don't take it personally dude!
You: I would not say it's an attack. (take away the cover)
It's a one-up joke. (most people should be able to see that it is one-upping)
It comes across as exploiting a mistake to feel superior. (going meta in short)
Stef has reacted to this post.
