Quote from B on May 27, 2022, 4:48 pm

Thank you Lucio.

I am finding that some people also continue always escalating even when I don’t straight talk, but just try to address power moves.

I am getting the feeling that with some there comes a moment where you either need to fade them, or go meta in front of everyone.

Otherwise they will escalate forever.

Quote from B on May 28, 2022, 2:01 pm

So the factors that should be taken into account in deciding whether to straight talk are:

• who has more leverage in the relationship (the more leverage the other person has on us, the less advisable to straight talk; examples where it is not advisable may be being a small child, or an employee);
• whether the other person has good character or not (the more character-disturbed or machiavellian the other person, the less advisable to straight talk; exaggerated examples where it is not advisable may be being a small child to an abusive parent; or being an employee to a psychopathic boss);
• the degree of potential independence we have from the other person (the more we can easily find an alternative to continue interacting with the other person, the more it is possible to consider straight talk, as if push comes to shove we can exit easily; as an example, it is easier to straight talk to a client or a boss if I can find other clients or work easily, but not if the one in front of me is my first and only customer or job; another example is if you care losing a friend or not);
• the degree of power-intelligence of the person wanting to do the straight talk (the more you are power-intelligent and aware of what is going on, the more you can straight talk; if you instead don't understand what's happening, you trying to straight talk will simply give the other person an opportunity to play victim, guilt-trip you, deflect, blame you, find an easy excuse, and even continue abusing you while feinting taking ownership of what you say);
• the degree of disempowerment that would derive from avoiding straight talk (the more publicly, strongly or repeatedly a power move disempowers you, the more you simply have to straight talk if you don't want to lose face, dignity and respect relative to the power mover and/or in front of everyone).

While the decision should ideally take into account every factor, there are situations in which one factor alone may be enough to choose whether or not to straight talk (examples: if someone humiliates you as an adult publicly in front of all your acquaintances, you simply must straight talk; on the other hand, if you are a small child and your abusive father does the exact same thing to you, you probably cannot straight talk).

And the fact that power-intelligence is one of the factors in deciding whether to straight talk seems to confirm that the ability to straight talk comes after learning to address specific power moves in isolation.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on May 29, 2022, 2:29 am

It's a good overview, Bel.

I tried to look up previous threads as I think we discussed this topic before as well.

We might have reffed to "when to go assertive" or "when to speak directly".

I think it's an important topic in social skills / power dynamics and a common sticking point.

I also remember John in his journal went through a phase of wanting to default assertiveness and then eventually growing out of it and into a more fluid approach.
And I remember Ali once did out-of-place assertiveness with a woman who was giving a lot to him, but happened to miss a call they had scheduled (so value-accountancy, who is giving a lot and who is taking more is also part of the equation).

Might do a mini-lesson on this topic to help clarify.

Quote from John Freeman on May 29, 2022, 2:31 pm

Yes, that is what I learned from you BTW.

I think everything is a tool. Assertiveness, Aggression, Frame control, Laughs, friendliness signals, etc.

Social skills is all a matter of context. Is the person an equal or a superior? Is the person friendly or unfriendly? How has been your behavior/mindset until then.

So we tend to overblow the importance of the tools/behavior/mindset we lack the most.

That being said, I do believe that assertiveness is how adults relate to one another in most daily situations. Once again it’s a matter of context. Most of the times we have no problems being assertive in one context (with a waiter in restaurant) but trouble in others (with our boss at work).

So I do believe it’s important to find case studies and general principles. I believe that to learn these it’s mostly important to go from specific situations we encounter and expand from there.

So it’s more: in what situations am I not assertive? How do I feel about it? Am I not assertive because I’m afraid of the consequences? Are these consequences real or imagined? Why do I feel like that?

Then it’s about the what is assertivity and how to go about it, which PU provides.

I think mistakes in learning are unavoidable, and this is how we learn. By correcting. So I believe in specific situations and correcting from them.

Social skills is complex and subtle, that’s why it’s so long and difficult to learn.

That was longer than expected. :)

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on July 10, 2022, 12:46 pm

Quote from Bel on May 28, 2022, 2:01 pm

So the factors that should be taken into account in deciding whether to straight talk are:

• who has more leverage in the relationship (the more leverage the other person has on us, the less advisable to straight talk; examples where it is not advisable may be being a small child, or an employee);
• whether the other person has good character or not (the more character-disturbed or machiavellian the other person, the less advisable to straight talk; exaggerated examples where it is not advisable may be being a small child to an abusive parent; or being an employee to a psychopathic boss);
• the degree of potential independence we have from the other person (the more we can easily find an alternative to continue interacting with the other person, the more it is possible to consider straight talk, as if push comes to shove we can exit easily; as an example, it is easier to straight talk to a client or a boss if I can find other clients or work easily, but not if the one in front of me is my first and only customer or job; another example is if you care losing a friend or not);
• the degree of power-intelligence of the person wanting to do the straight talk (the more you are power-intelligent and aware of what is going on, the more you can straight talk; if you instead don't understand what's happening, you trying to straight talk will simply give the other person an opportunity to play victim, guilt-trip you, deflect, blame you, find an easy excuse, and even continue abusing you while feinting taking ownership of what you say);
• the degree of disempowerment that would derive from avoiding straight talk (the more publicly, strongly or repeatedly a power move disempowers you, the more you simply have to straight talk if you don't want to lose face, dignity and respect relative to the power mover and/or in front of everyone).

While the decision should ideally take into account every factor, there are situations in which one factor alone may be enough to choose whether or not to straight talk (examples: if someone humiliates you as an adult publicly in front of all your acquaintances, you simply must straight talk; on the other hand, if you are a small child and your abusive father does the exact same thing to you, you probably cannot straight talk).

And the fact that power-intelligence is one of the factors in deciding whether to straight talk seems to confirm that the ability to straight talk comes after learning to address specific power moves in isolation.

Since I'm linking to this from PU, I'd like to add:

• How embedded in your life they are

Generally speaking, and contrary to what most non-strategic folks may think, the closer and more "embedded" in your life they are, the more you want to use soft techniques for distancing.

That's because an enemy close by is far worse than an enemy far away (P.S.: when the Godfather said "keep your enemies closer", he meant to say that your enemies should not know they're enemies).