Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumPublic Forum: Power DynamicsCase StudiesFrame shocking: example

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Frame shocking: example

#1 · January 12, 2021, 12:15 am

John inspired with the Franzese thread, but I think this one belongs here rather than there, since frame shocking was aimed at him.

Franzese: (yelling at son)
Daughter: (defending brother) Dad, you're not in the mafia anymore!
Franzese: (speechless)

She wanted to stop the fight going on and to stop his father's onslaught, and that's where frame shocking can come in handy. It worked.

Matthew Whitewood, John Freeman and selffriend have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#2 · January 12, 2021, 4:58 am

He threw in some power moves in the pre-amble before starting on the story.

My Michael Junior and I, we had a rough time for a while.
We had a bit of a rocky relationship.
He's a stubborn kid. I don't want to get into it. (Sounds a bit passive aggressive; like there are unresolved past issues)
But he's great now. (One-up, you only say this to someone when you feel more powerful than him; also implies it's mostly not your fault for the rocky relationship)
Most of you know "He's going to be running slices because he's a chef".
Doing a great job.
For a while, we were like oil and water.
We really went at it.

I think he wanted to frame the story as not so much like he was reprimanding out of line.
Because the frame shocking "Dad, you're not in the mafia anymore!" could paint the picture of an over-domineering father.

My intuition tells me that there's an element of social climbing in absentia.

I think frame shocking can leave a lasting impact on a person for many years to come.
Even someone so calm and collected like Michael Franzese can be left speechless with a well-timed frame shock.

He was smooth at using the environment (drinking wine) as a casual way of changing the topic:

By the way, if you notice, we are all drinking wine.

Then he moves on to talk about what impact has he had on his daughters' relationships.
I believe he knew that he would be framed as a positive alpha role model on this topic.

From getting frame shocked by his daughter to letting his daughters paint him as a positive alpha role model.
Very strategic frame shift.

#3 · January 12, 2021, 12:52 pm

Yeah, he does throw some power moves and humblebragging sometimes, I think he's very good at self-promotion.

Matthew: Sounds a bit passive-aggressive; like there are unresolved past issues

I didn't personally see passive-aggression, considering his position and relationship.

Keep in mind he's the father.
And got that "rightful attitude" of the guy who feels like he's the head of the household.
It's a judge power move, in a way, but it's what you can expect from a father who feels like the head of the household to say that, which in my opinion makes it fair.

Matthew: My intuition tells me that there's an element of social climbing in absentia.

Similar as above.
Considering he's the father and head of the household, I didn't see social climbing.

You can't social climb on those who are obviously below you, so that makes it again a judge move (ie.: "he wasn't so good, I didn't appreciate, but now he got better, and I appreciate. Now he's got my blessing, not before."

Matthew: I believe he knew that he would be framed as a positive alpha role model on this topic.

Yeah, right :).

He was also smart in preparing for the topic to say "your mom told me you compare me to the guys you're dating, positive or negatively, not sure". He was most likely confident it was a positive comparison for him, but smart enough to present it neutrally and the ladies do the talking.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#4 · January 12, 2021, 1:52 pm

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on January 12, 2021, 1:52 pm
Maybe I'm reading the situation wrong in this case.
Also not sure if I'm veering off from the frame shocking theme of this thread.
I wanted to talk about his lead-up to the story with his daughter frame-shocking him.
Keep in mind he's the father.
And got that "rightful attitude" of the guy who feels like he's the head of the household.
It's a judge power move, in a way, but it's what you can expect from a father who feels like the head of the household to say that, which in my opinion makes it fair.
From his videos, I do think his family views him as the head of the household.
If his family views him as the head of the household, I would say that it is fair for him to make judgments about his family behaviours and the family environment as well.
"He's a stubborn kid. I don't want to get into it."
I felt that this is a general statement about his son, which can be viewed as criticism.
This frames that, whenever there's a disagreement, his son is being the rebellious one.
And his son is not around to give his perspective.
In my opinion, I think it could have been phrased as
"There were quite a few instances where he was quite stubborn."
It may be the case where, if the relationship is not equal, the more powerful person can give more generalised feedback about the other.
Rather than giving feedback on specific instances.
Similar as above.
Considering he's the father and head of the household, I didn't see social climbing.
You can't social climb on those who are obviously below you, so that makes it again a judge move (ie.: "he wasn't so good, I didn't appreciate, but now he got better, and I appreciate. Now he's got my blessing, not before."
I was mentally drawing analogies to Obama's acts of social climbing.
I do think that, in Obama's cases, he undermined and used more socially aggressive behaviour.
Obama is also the leader of a giant social pond, the whole of America, so he may not necessarily have the most influence in other smaller ponds.
As such, he can engage in social climbing to elevate his own status relative to other ponds.
That would be social climbing.
Here, it is more of a judge move from a father to a son.
He is sharing his views as the head of the family.
His intention was not to push his son down to climb up.
Rather he preferred his son to be a different type of person.
I suppose judge moves have different dynamics from social climbing.
A judge frame suggests you have the power to evaluate the other person.
While social climbing has elements of dominance and aggression.

Maybe I'm reading the situation wrong in this case.
Also not sure if I'm veering off from the frame shocking theme of this thread.
I wanted to talk about his lead-up to the story with his daughter frame-shocking him.

Keep in mind he's the father.
And got that "rightful attitude" of the guy who feels like he's the head of the household.
It's a judge power move, in a way, but it's what you can expect from a father who feels like the head of the household to say that, which in my opinion makes it fair.

From his videos, I do think his family views him as the head of the household.
If his family views him as the head of the household, I would say that it is fair for him to make judgments about his family behaviours and the family environment as well.

"He's a stubborn kid. I don't want to get into it."
I felt that this is a general statement about his son, which can be viewed as criticism.
This frames that, whenever there's a disagreement, his son is being the rebellious one.
And his son is not around to give his perspective.

In my opinion, I think it could have been phrased as
"There were quite a few instances where he was quite stubborn."

It may be the case where, if the relationship is not equal, the more powerful person can give more generalised feedback about the other.
Rather than giving feedback on specific instances.

Similar as above.
Considering he's the father and head of the household, I didn't see social climbing.
You can't social climb on those who are obviously below you, so that makes it again a judge move (ie.: "he wasn't so good, I didn't appreciate, but now he got better, and I appreciate. Now he's got my blessing, not before."

I was mentally drawing analogies to Obama's acts of social climbing.
I do think that, in Obama's cases, he undermined and used more socially aggressive behaviour.
Obama is also the leader of a giant social pond, the whole of America, so he may not necessarily have the most influence in other smaller ponds.
As such, he can engage in social climbing to elevate his own status relative to other ponds.
That would be social climbing.

Here, it is more of a judge move from a father to a son.
He is sharing his views as the head of the family.
His intention was not to push his son down to climb up.
Rather he preferred his son to be a different type of person.

I suppose judge moves have different dynamics from social climbing.
A judge frame suggests you have the power to evaluate the other person.
While social climbing has elements of dominance and aggression.

#5 · January 13, 2021, 9:41 pm

Yeah, I think it also depends on how you see and interpret the relationship between father and son.

I don't see it as a relationship of equals, at least as long as the kid is not out of the house and independent.
And until the kid is it's fair of the father to demand a certain behavior that he wants in his house -within limits, of course-.

Also, I don't personally see much value taken at all.
"Stubborn" is barely a criticism, the way I see it.
It's one of those traits that can either be positive or negative, depending on the situation.

Most of those Obama examples were different in my opinion.
For example, when he says:

And then... They can't handle a bunch of CNBC moderators

Anything similar in this situation would have bee something like:

He is so stubborn... And then, he can't even handle his mother yelling at him

Quite a different feel, no?
That would have been nasty and value-taking towards his son.

Imagine how differently it would feel if the kid then suddenly showed up on the video.
Then he could say "yeah, I'm a bit stubborn and I was a bit of a rebel". Not much value lost, right?

Imagine the Republican candidates showed up in that Obama's video and said "Yeah, I was criticizing Obama and then couldn't handle a bunch of CNBC moderators". They would lose a lot of status, no?

BUT, it's very possible we see it differently here and both opinions are valid :).

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#6 · January 17, 2021, 5:31 am

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on January 17, 2021, 5:31 am
Yeah, I think it also depends on how you see and interpret the relationship between father and son.
I don't see it as a relationship of equals, at least as long as the kid is not out of the house and independent.
And until the kid is it's fair of the father to demand a certain behavior that he wants in his house -within limits, of course-.
I'm on the same page that it is not a relationship of equals.
The father has more influence on how the son grows up than the son has on the father's life.
And the father provides the resources and environment for the son.
Demanding certain behaviour within limits is fair because the father built that environment for the family to live in.
I think in this case, he was referring to an example in the past where his son was living with him.
And he was recollecting about the relationship back then.
So he was describing the dynamics in the house.
Also, I don't personally see much value taken at all.
"Stubborn" is barely a criticism, the way I see it.
It's one of those traits that can either be positive or negative, depending on the situation.
Quite a different feel, no?
That would have been nasty and value-taking towards his son.
I see what you mean.
Now I view this in a similar light.
He didn't really push down his son or frame him in a submissive light.
I'm thinking back to the differences when I lived in Europe vs Asia.
My experience is that stubbornness has a more negative connotation in Asia due to the community culture with associated social pressures to conform.
Now people in Asia have seen the value of pursuing individualistic endeavours and interests.
Stubborn has increasingly less of a negative connotation.
But he's great now.
Most of you know "He's going to be running slices because he's a chef".
Doing a great job.
This is probably not a disempowering judge frame from the overall context.
It is more like he acknowledges that his son has done well for himself.
Additionally, being a chef is probably what his son chose for himself.
I tend to be cautious whenever someone tells me "You're great now" and "You're doing a good job".
Because the person may be setting up a yardstick that he is the authority and I have to measure up to his expectations.
Like, in the Emmanuel Macron and Donald Trump example, Donald Trump says "He will be a great president."
In this case, it's worse because Donald Trump adds "It’s my prediction. It’s only a prediction"
This is a very different circumstance because both of them are presidents and are in a highly political environment.
So who is one to say that the other will be a great president by his own yardstick.
This compliment is a power move among the other power games that Donald Trump plays.
Here it is a totally different dynamic.
Michael Franzese actively contributed as an influential father figure towards his son growing up.
So he is proud of what he contributed to his son's success.
Actually, it's a value-adding move to his son because Michael Franzese is a positive, influential figure.
Now everyone will be thinking "I want to check out what restaurant his son manages and what are the dishes that he makes."
Whenever someone has contributed and influenced your life positively, it is fair for them to take some credit whether through a positive judge frame or highlighting what they did.
Especially if you took more from them than they did from you.
Lucio, thanks for talking through the dynamics here.
BRING BACK TO FRAME-SHOCKING BY HIS DAUGHTER ON FRANZESE
Franzese: (yelling at son)
Daughter: (defending brother) Dad, you're not in the mafia anymore!
Franzese: (speechless)
This really highlights how frame-shocking can be used to stop an interaction that is not progressing productively.
So people can take a pause and think about how to move the interaction forward more productively.
After the frame-shocking, the daughter can put in a leading statement like
Daughter: Let's talk about how each of you feel about this situation. (family environment not mafia, so we can talk more about feelings)
OR How does each of you feel about this situation? (less authoritative)

Yeah, I think it also depends on how you see and interpret the relationship between father and son.
I don't see it as a relationship of equals, at least as long as the kid is not out of the house and independent.
And until the kid is it's fair of the father to demand a certain behavior that he wants in his house -within limits, of course-.

I'm on the same page that it is not a relationship of equals.
The father has more influence on how the son grows up than the son has on the father's life.
And the father provides the resources and environment for the son.

Demanding certain behaviour within limits is fair because the father built that environment for the family to live in.

I think in this case, he was referring to an example in the past where his son was living with him.
And he was recollecting about the relationship back then.
So he was describing the dynamics in the house.

Also, I don't personally see much value taken at all.
"Stubborn" is barely a criticism, the way I see it.
It's one of those traits that can either be positive or negative, depending on the situation.
Quite a different feel, no?
That would have been nasty and value-taking towards his son.

I see what you mean.
Now I view this in a similar light.
He didn't really push down his son or frame him in a submissive light.

I'm thinking back to the differences when I lived in Europe vs Asia.
My experience is that stubbornness has a more negative connotation in Asia due to the community culture with associated social pressures to conform.
Now people in Asia have seen the value of pursuing individualistic endeavours and interests.
Stubborn has increasingly less of a negative connotation.

But he's great now.
Most of you know "He's going to be running slices because he's a chef".
Doing a great job.

This is probably not a disempowering judge frame from the overall context.
It is more like he acknowledges that his son has done well for himself.
Additionally, being a chef is probably what his son chose for himself.

I tend to be cautious whenever someone tells me "You're great now" and "You're doing a good job".
Because the person may be setting up a yardstick that he is the authority and I have to measure up to his expectations.

Like, in the Emmanuel Macron and Donald Trump example, Donald Trump says "He will be a great president."
In this case, it's worse because Donald Trump adds "It’s my prediction. It’s only a prediction"

This is a very different circumstance because both of them are presidents and are in a highly political environment.
So who is one to say that the other will be a great president by his own yardstick.
This compliment is a power move among the other power games that Donald Trump plays.

Here it is a totally different dynamic.
Michael Franzese actively contributed as an influential father figure towards his son growing up.
So he is proud of what he contributed to his son's success.
Actually, it's a value-adding move to his son because Michael Franzese is a positive, influential figure.
Now everyone will be thinking "I want to check out what restaurant his son manages and what are the dishes that he makes."

Whenever someone has contributed and influenced your life positively, it is fair for them to take some credit whether through a positive judge frame or highlighting what they did.
Especially if you took more from them than they did from you.

Lucio, thanks for talking through the dynamics here.

BRING BACK TO FRAME-SHOCKING BY HIS DAUGHTER ON FRANZESE

Franzese: (yelling at son)
Daughter: (defending brother) Dad, you're not in the mafia anymore!
Franzese: (speechless)

This really highlights how frame-shocking can be used to stop an interaction that is not progressing productively.
So people can take a pause and think about how to move the interaction forward more productively.

After the frame-shocking, the daughter can put in a leading statement like

Daughter: Let's talk about how each of you feel about this situation. (family environment not mafia, so we can talk more about feelings)
OR How does each of you feel about this situation? (less authoritative)

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.

#7 · January 17, 2021, 12:23 pm

Yes, great addition on how to move forward from the "shock", Matthew.

That's what was missing there.

Another good way of moving forward could be to actually be honest and go partially meta on the technique, such as:

Daughter: (smiling) You didn't see that coming, did you. Well, let me be honest, I said it on purpose to make you two stop because I felt it was turning nasty. (now add some compliment to rebuild rapport and move towards win-win) And you're such a great father and we can do better. So now that we've taken a breather, how about we...

Of course, that would have required some very advanced skills that she couldn't have at her age and level of experience, so she probably did well enough with the shocking part :).

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#8 · February 1, 2021, 9:55 pm

Now that I understand frame shocking a little bit better, I've noticed that Charlie Houpert refers to frame shocking as state-breaking questions:

Man: "The art fellows want you to know that any deviation from your instructions will have consequences."
Thomas: (state-breaking question) "What's your dog's name?"

Charlie also makes a note of avoiding letting others use their own state-breaking questions on you:

I think Charlie is right in terms of frame-shocking and state-breaking questions at least having a lot of overlap. Charlie also references Tony Robbins while referring to Tony's frame shocking as a "surprised-based state-break":

And, once again, the state-breaking question (this time using a familiar example Lucio used):

What do you guys think?