Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Judge power move: "you're not going to tell me that... "
This is a rather popular format and dynamic.
Imagine you said you do something, or like something.
Just as an example, you said that every once in a while, you like a burger with fries.
And the usual smartass chimes in:
Judge: Oh, don't tell me you're one of those people who enjoys junk food!
That sentence sets the yardstick for those who are good enough -those who eat well- and those who "not good enough people" -those who eat whatever falls under his definition of junk food-.
Now if you say "yes", you just self-framed yourself as "not good enough".
If you say "no", you just backtracked, and denied your own previous statement -bad-.
And you defend, which is what most people, you have also given him judge powers, since you're investing time and effort to make sure that this smartass -and the people who might be around- don't think badly of you-.
For the sake of clarity, defending would mean something like:
You: Well, I mean really just once in a while, maybe to celebrate something you know. It's not that bad if you eat it rarely.
I would also say something like:
If the ingredients are high quality, burgers and french fries are no different to what regular or even most health conscious people eat, they may even be less worse given the state of government sponsored disinformation about human nutritional needs ...
That works, Stef.
Challenging the frame of "what's good / not good".
Anything that avoids remaining within his frame can work.
If you can't think of anything, you can also mirror his exact format and then come back with whatever comes up first:
Oh, don't tell me you're one of those people who... Judges others for what they eat.
Or:
Oh, don't tell you're one of those people who... Believes that all burgers are unhealthy
Or:
Oh, don't tell me you're one of those people who... Is buying into that big fad of the keto diet
For another option how about?
"What the heck - why not. Everyone likes to have fun fun sometimes."
Now he s arguing against everyone and is anti fun
Quote from Transitioned on April 21, 2021, 4:20 amFor another option how about?
"What the heck - why not. Everyone likes to have fun sometimes."
Yes, it's a great one.
First, it avoids the major pitfalls -defending or being judged within his frame- by owning it, plus it changes the frame of eating burgers from negative, to positive.
As a final note, it's also a slight one-up back -"I am bad for eating junk food? Not at all, maybe, you're boring for being so stuffy-, which in this situation is well called for.
I would reflexively give a response like
Judge: Oh, don't tell me you're one of those people who enjoys junk food!
Me: Damn! Have you never had a burger before?
Judge: Never, I am health conscious.
Me: Looks like I won't be inviting you next time
If I cannot think of anything, I think my default response is "Damn!".
I am thinking about
Judge: Oh, don't tell me you're one of those people who enjoys junk food!
Me: (shakes head) Here we go
The first one is OK.
Imagine their disempowering frame as flowing towards you, and if you let it flow, you lose power and status.
That first kind of sets up an obstacle for their frame's advancement.
If they stop at it, if they down your new direction, then it works even better.
If you're dealing with more astute and/or hard-charging folks, they might keep up the game and repeat the same initial question and/or something similar that re-instates their frame of them disapproving of you.
"DAMN!"
"Damn" as a default response is OK-ish.
It somewhat damages control and avoids the worst mistakes.
But it's not ideal since it sub-communicates that "damn, you owned me" or "damn, you did really make a power move there".
That somewhat self-frames you as power-aware, but it also gives them props for trying to one-up you, which you don't necessarily want.
The head shaking with "here we go" is much better.
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on April 22, 2021, 12:28 am"DAMN!"
"Damn" as a default response is OK-ish.
It somewhat damages control and avoids the worst mistakes.
But it's not ideal since it sub-communicates that "damn, you owned me" or "damn, you did really make a power move there".
That somewhat self-frames you as power-aware, but it also gives them props for trying to one-up you, which you don't necessarily want.
I see what you mean Lucio.
Thanks for the feedback.
Looks like I have to re-wire my intuition a bit.
I still find navigating judge frames challenging at times.
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on April 21, 2021, 1:53 am, post #3
Anything that avoids remaining within his frame can work.
This is the key.
Don't remain in the judge's artificially set-up frame of what's good and bad.
That is what these 3 responses do:
- (Stef) If the ingredients are high quality, burgers and french fries are no different to what regular or even most health conscious people eat, they may even be less worse given the state of government sponsored disinformation about human nutritional needs ...
- (Transitioned) "What the heck - why not. Everyone likes to have fun fun sometimes."
- (Matthew) The head shaking with "here we go" is much better.
I think Transitioned's response works really well because of the following 3 factors that Lucio advised:
- Steps out of the judge's frame
- Make your own frame where now it's good to eat burgers because it's fun and social
- In terms of self-framing, it frames the judge as stuffy and you are the fun & social person
- Relatively short and concise
I would go with what I consider the most flexible and efficient way of responding to judge frames, which is : 'show me your hand .
Here's an example of that.
Judge: Oh, don't tell me you're one of those people who enjoys junk food!
Me :Â excuse me ? (aggressive tonality, as if to say : 'you better explain to me what the fuck you mean')
Judge : I mean junk food is bad, you should eat healthy if you want to live long and save the planet.
Me : No. The only thing that's bad here is your judgmental attitude bro. Chill and try to enjoy life a little.
And at this point you've shown you won't be letting him impose his judgmental frames over you, and no matter what he answers, you can just shrug it off with body language (head shaking, or simply ignore his eventual comeback)
NOW...
I have a question for you guys, and of course, for Lucio.
I think that dealing with judges and judgmental /condescending people, is the most important social skill. In particular, the one that can allow one to go from highly intermediate to advance.
In a way, we could say the most important skill is frame control in general.
But dealing with all forms of judgment - realtionship drama included - is one branch of frame control that almost works as a meta skill.
In this regard, are there any books or learning path that you recommend (For learning to master judge frames attack)?
Thank you,
NoLimits
I think it's a great way to handle it, NoLimits.
As for books/courses, look at a thread called "what to learn after PU" and the resources section.
But the long story short is that for social power dynamics, including judges and frames, PU is so far the best resource.
