--- In [email protected], Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Okay....I thought about this for awhile and I think I > came upon why this is happening and this entire > exchange demonstrates the point. > > Sometimes you say something to somebody with no intent > to insult or offend the other. But the other person is > offended by what you say. For instance I'll say > something to my wife and she's offended by it. I only > know she's offended by it because she tells me so. > There is no intent in my communication to offend her, > but she is offended. How can that happen? My words > mean one thing to her and something different to me. > When I work with couples, this happhappens the time. > The real mess starts if one or both people insist that > the intent of their communication is the only meaning > that occuoccurredis is what is happening between > AkasAkasha myself. > > AkasAkashaat I see happening with the "tacky" > communication is that you are teasing out all the > possible logical implications of the communication: a > quasi deconstruction. If this is done with any > communication you end up with a welter of meanings > that will contradict one another in many instances. > The intent of my "tacky" communication was not to > insult the DimiDimickswever, it is quite easy to > deconstruct the communication and logically arrive at > the meaning both you and Judy came to. What sticks in > my craw is your privprivilegingr meaning over my > intent and then ,it seems, insisting that this is the > actual/real/true meaning of my communication. You then > go on to question why I'm saying "these things"-these > things being the logical implication that now has been > marked by you as the intent of my communication. I try > to say that I didn't mean that and you say that I did. > Obviously this is going to irritate me. For example, I > find many of your responses to me to be dripping in > passive-aggressive sarcasm. To me you seem to be angry > at me and waiting for any opportunity to discount me > (thus the "fuck face" comment). You are flabbergasted > at some of my responses to you. Well, that is what > your responses initially mean to me. But when you > state that you had no intention of insulting me and I > re-read your post, then I understand, to a greater > degree, the intention of your post. I still find the > comments offending, but now I understand that your > intent was not to insult me so I just chalk it up to > miscmiscommunicationen this occurs between us or > between anybody, the miscmiscommunications not lie in > one person only ("...where does this come from inside > Peter?") but is the result of the > non-identical,assumptive or "meaning" generating world > of both people.
Or, as Vaj described the same process in two words a few weeks ago, Ashkenazy overclocking. Look it up. It's a fascinating syndrome, one that sheds much light upon Internet chat boards such as this one. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
