Socializing No.2) Please critique my argument style- I accept all advise.

[SunnyVibes]

Hey guys, this is my second argument post. Please read arguement 1 too.

Structure:
Girl goes back on agreement
I ask for her to stick to it
Girl starts shifting blame
I tell her it’s her responsibility to bring up her problem on her own time.
Girl may or may not leave.


Conversation two:

Girl: You’ll need to go get groceries yourself.

Me: Well I need food and you agreed to get it today morning.

Girl shouting:
Well you should have thought of that and you’ve been X, Y and Z

Me: Right now withholding help because you have problems with me. It’s your responsibility to bring up problems at your own time, right now let’s focus on my problem.

I have two other options here:

One:
Hey, I see you are experiencing negative emotions.
If you bring up your problems at a later time, I can discuss it, but right now I want to talk about my problem.


Two:
Hey, right now you are going back on an agreement because you feel negative. This will have a bad effect on me. Don’t do that.
(I think the girl doesn’t care because they won’t help anyways).

If anyone has a different opinion on how to handle, please advise.

 

[Rakehell]

I’m not sure what you’re trying to accomplish, but your attempts at correcting behavior come across as weak.

If you have a problem with someones treatment of you, complaining about it, or inversely demanding that they treat you a certain way, looks incredibly dense and submissive.

Bad form to argue with girls or people in general who you aren’t in deep relationships with also, if that’s the case with these examples.

Read this Practical Frame Control

 

[SunnyVibes]

Hey @Rakehell,
Can you be more explict about weak behavior and submissive behavior?
I don’t understand how sticking to the topic while displaying healthy non-toxic behavior like blame shifting, gaslighting, verbal humiliation is weak.

 

[Rakehell]

Can you be more explict about weak behavior and submissive behavior?

Sure

Girl shouting:
Well you should have thought of that and you’ve been X, Y and Z

Me: Right now withholding help because you have problems with me. It’s your responsibility to bring up problems at your own time, right now let’s focus on my problem.

Here you’re going about it in a logical way. You want groceries, she said she’d get your groceries, now she won’t get your groceries. So you ignore the fact that she doesn’t want to get them now, and press her on it.

The emphasis on it being a problem, and demanding for her to acknowledge it, is what comes across as weak and needy.

You need to address her emotions first, and she will be more open to doing it afterward. Or treat it as no big deal when she first brings it up, and withdraw attention from her since she’s not willing to invest at the moment.

Again read this Practical Frame Control

 

[SunnyVibes]

Sure

Here you’re going about it in a logical way. You want groceries, she said she’d get your groceries, now she won’t get your groceries. So you ignore the fact that she doesn’t want to get them now, and press her on it.

The emphasis on it being a problem, and demanding for her to acknowledge it, is what comes across as weak and needy.

You need to address her emotions first, and she will be more open to doing it afterward. Or treat it as no big deal when she first brings it up, and withdraw attention from her since she’s not willing to invest at the moment.

Again read this Practical Frame Control

@Rakehell

Hmm, I am against a few long term effects of this.
1.Continuously taking care of the woman’s emotion if I want her to invest is akin to the girl reducing investment and me increasing my investment to address her emotions and produce good feelings.

2. Two, by placing her emotions as something to be addressed first instead of addressing my problem, I implicitly set a pattern that her needs come before mine and are more important than mine-which seems needy to me because of the implied inferiority.

3. I did handle emotions. Mine. I told her that her actions will have a bad effect on me.

4. It reduces my humanity. The thought process of a person who feels the need to convince another person is either of the following:
a) everything is this person’s responsibility and if they want something, then they need to persuade the other person.
b) they believe they are inferior, and so have to convince another person to invest at all points.

person a is strong sure, but won’t have a sense of reliability on another human being. This is largely true, but this mentality leads to no trust. why socialize lol.
person a follows the paradigm of point 2.

person b is just inferior. this person follows point one.

I think the point you’re making is expressing reliability=neediness/weak.
I don’t agree with that. I think there is a balance.

Thoughts?

 

[topcat]

3. I did handle emotions. Mine. I told her that her actions will have a bad effect on me.

Nope. You didn’t handle your emotions, you asked her to help you handle them.

This is why your approach is weak and submissive.

Your emotional regulation is your responsibility and a powerful man handles his, without burdening others with them (his ability to do this is in large part what makes him powerful).

You help her regulate her emotions because you in fact want something from her and by helping her manage her emotions you create the mental space in her to help her give you what you want.

 

[Rakehell]

1.Continuously taking care of the woman’s emotion if I want her to invest is akin to the girl reducing investment and me increasing my investment to address her emotions and produce good feelings.

Addressing her emotions isn’t meant to be a literal thing.

What I mean is this.

A person is angry/emotional with you, regardless of if they agreed to something. Their emotions will lead them to not want to do what they agreed to do when they were in the headspace to do it.

It’s not a business deal or a legally binding contract. She isn’t obligated to follow through. YOU are the one asking for value.

Addressing her emotions could be as simple as waiting till she’s out of her funky mood until you ask her to do something for you. Acknowledge they exist before you try to hold her to something.

 

[SunnyVibes]

Nope. You didn’t handle your emotions, you asked her to help you handle them.

@topcat,

1)

Me: Right now you’re withholding help because you have problems with me. It’s your responsibility to bring up problems at your own time, right now let’s focus on my problem.

I am controlling my emotions, meta framing the situation and focusing on myself. Not asking her to handle my emotions.

2)

I have two other options here:

One:
Hey, I see you are experiencing negative emotions.
If you bring up your problems at a later time, I can discuss it, but right now I want to talk about my problem.

I am controlling my emotions, I am acknowledging her emotions, telling her I care enough to handle them, and saying I want to discuss my problem first.
Not asking her to handle my emotions.

3.

Two:
Hey, right now you are going back on an agreement because you feel negative. This will have a bad effect on me. Don’t do that.
(I think the girl doesn’t care because they won’t help anyways).

I am meta framing, explaining that it might have an effect on me( this may be slightly weak because the framing implies it will cause me trouble, though I doubt it and would like an explanation why it’s weak if possible), and telling her don’t do that.

If there is any other point where I’m weak than point 3, I don’t understand and would like an explicit answer.


Further, I addressed this:
You help her regulate her emotions because you in fact want something from her and by helping her manage her emotions you create the mental space in her to help her give you what you want.

The thought process of a person who feels the need to convince another person is either of the following:
a) everything is this person’s responsibility and if they want something, then they need to persuade the other person.

person a is strong sure, but won’t have a sense of reliability on another human being. This is largely true, but this mentality leads to no trust. why socialize lol.

I am emotionally regulated. Expressing a problem does not mean I can’t solve it myself. I am choosing to tell the other person, you need to solve this because you agreed. Also, I am choosing not emotionally regulate the other person because doing so is disrespectful to my time and plans, which the other person is ignoring.

Thoughts?
Also, I’m interested how you’d frame your response to this situation if you want to share.

 

[SunnyVibes]

Addressing her emotions isn’t meant to be a literal thing.

What I mean is this.

A person is angry/emotional with you, regardless of if they agreed to something. Their emotions will lead them to not want to do what they agreed to do when they were in the headspace to do it.

It’s not a business deal or a legally binding contract. She isn’t obligated to follow through. YOU are the one asking for value.

Addressing her emotions could be as simple as waiting till she’s out of her funky mood until you ask her to do something for you. Acknowledge they exist before you try to hold her to something.

@Rakehell,
I understand the principle you describe. I already offered this option.

Me:
“Hey, I see you are experiencing negative emotions.
If you bring up your problems at a later time, I can discuss it, but right now I want to talk about my problem.”

I am acknowledging her emotions, showing I care enough to discuss them but indicate I care about integrity and my problem.

I think this fits with what your response.
Is this weak/submissive frame control?

 

[Rakehell]

Me:
“Hey, I see you are experiencing negative emotions.
If you bring up your problems at a later time, I can discuss it, but right now I want to talk about my problem.”

Yes you’re addressing it logically which is ineffective. If your goal is compliance in the moment you need to address it now, in a way that physically pushes her past that emotion.

She will not be willing to hear you out logically if she does not like you when you’re trying to get your point across, so she will still feel angry and noncompliant. Even if you change the subject from what she is feeling.

Girl: You’ll need to go get groceries yourself.

“Oh okay, howcome?”, or “no worries”(withdraw attention, unbothered), is really all it takes to get a dialogue going where she’ll still get your groceries and like you more for getting them.

Can you see how this is much different than disregarding why she’s saying no, and doubling down on the fact that she agreed to prior?

 

[StrayDog]

@SunnyVibes yeah but how did it all fluff out in the end? She get your groceries for you?

 

[Adventurer]

Girl: You’ll need to go get groceries yourself.

You : You said you'd go, what's the problem ?

Girl : explains

You : find a solution and show you're a leader

OR 2nd possibility

Girl: You’ll need to go get groceries yourself.

You : You said you'd go, what's the problem ?

Girl : gives you a lame excuse not worth adressing

You : ok (ignore her for a while)

 

[topcat]

Also, I’m interested how you’d frame your response to this situation if you want to share.

Her: I’m no longer longer getting your groceries

Me: are you serious? why’s that?

Her: *reasons*

Me: That’s disappointing. Cool, well don’t if you don’t want to… *proceed to come up with a contingency plan to get my own groceries*

I’m also withholding attention from this chick and moving on with my life if this is a big enough violation.

 

[StrayDog]

Her: I’m no longer longer getting your groceries

Me: are you serious? why’s that?

Something that has helped me immensely in life, which I learned from FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss master class, is to avoid why questions when possible when negotiating (be it hostages, business, relationships, otherwise). This is because the answer to why questions tend to have complex layers to them and aren't always simple to them. They can have a series of "whats" and "hows" wrapped up in them. They even have dynamic elements that don't necessarily have to immediately do with the situation at hand "why? well because my father left when I was 11 and ever since there was this sinking feeling that...."

Basically when presented with a "why" people tend to clam up, or retreat, or get defensive (or at least that chances of them doing such are way higher). This is because they don't necessarily have an immediate answer, they might not know "why", or at least having thought on all the elements.
Also, if the reason "why" is wrapped up in a bunch of negative emotions, they are typically going to get in the way of genuine response. So your chances of getting straight response are slim.

Chris Voss instead advocates for "what" and "how questions." These are leading questions, that allow the other person to reflect on specific elements of what is taking place. It takes the pressure off of having to come up with a "why." Plus, a series of "what" or "how" questions can basically lead you to a "why" any how, because it allows the conversation to unfold one step at a time, without having to unpack it all at once.

"I was under the impression you were going to go do that. How did you come to this decision (not to)?"
"What brought you to this decision"
"You, had said early that you would. What is the issue?"

"is" questions can work well as well

"is there something keeping you from doing it?"

"you had agreed to earlier. Is there a reason you're not following through?"

There are tons of different ways to phrase these questions, and each one has its own tone and implication, but principle is the same. You are asking questions that lead the conversation in a constructive direction.

@SunnyVibes by trying to prove a point with this girl, you are creating conflict where there does not need to be. If there is an issue, simply get down to the bottom of it (there are many negotiation techniques that can get you there.)
If she is not being reasonable in that moment, there is not point in arguing with her. Let her know she is not being reasonable and move on with your day.

"Dang, I might have planned my day wrong. I thought you were going to follow through with that"

Or if you want to be a bit more clear/pointed
"Well you did agree earlier and now you are backing out with out a clear reason, which feels pretty unreliable (when you express how you are feeling in a reasonable way, and a calm tone, that is okay), and I am questioning how much I can count on you for these sorts of things. But any way, I have things to do (proceed to disengage), and this conversation isn't really going any where so I am going to go now."

Now she knows exactly what your issue is with her communication is. She gets to think about how she might be fucking up and losing your confidence, and you can go about your day.

When a woman who is invested in you catches wind of the fact that, A: you are being reasonable, and B: she is losing your trust/confidence, she will usually do what she can to not fuck up "you know what, I was just being lazy. I'm on it. Didn't mean to seem unreliable"

If she is continually unreliable you get to consider how much easier your life would be without such a leaky investment, and perhaps even leave. If it comes down to it.

But also, know when to just let certain things slide. Not everything is worth hashing out. And if a relationship is for the most part solid otherwise, maybe just chose your battles wisely and focus on the bigger picture.

 

[topcat]

Something that has helped me immensely in life, which I learned from FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss master class, is to avoid why questions when possible when negotiating (be it hostages, business, relationships, otherwise). This is because the answer to why questions tend to have complex layers to them and aren't always simple to them. They can have a series of "whats" and "hows" wrapped up in them. They even have dynamic elements that don't necessarily have to immediately do with the situation at hand "why? well because my father left when I was 11 and ever since there was this sinking feeling that...."

I hear that, and it’s good to note. But i won’t even lie to you, I don’t really care what her reasoning is when i ask “why”. The intent really is to just give her an outlet to vent and get a thumb on where she’s at emotionally.

For something like a chick not getting my groceries, I’m already coming up with contingencies and moving on from the bitch.

Also, why am i relying on a girl to pick up my groceries anyway..

 

[StrayDog]

Also, why am i relying on a girl to pick up my groceries anyway..

haha, true. Only time I've had a girl pick up groceries is when we are dating proper like, and have made plans to cook together. Never had her drop the ball of something like that.

what and how questions can be applied to all manner of situations though, and isn't just about conflict resolution in more invested relations.

Works well, in managing logistics during pick up, or deep diving, and so on.

Also, I hear you about asking "why" as an opportunity to let her vent. But it is pretty open ended and can lead in a lot of directions. Where as "what" are "how" questions can still give her the same opportunity while also leading the conversation in a more desirable frame.

Just my two cents on the matter

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

Personally I'm not going to seriously date any more girls who don't do groceries, shopping, cooking, cleaning and so forth. This girl I was with the past 6 months did all that stuff and again, call me an old-fashioned square, but that's what my mom did for my dad and to me, that's the way it's supposed to be.

You want a career, you go girl, good luck to you. You can have my dick if you're otherwise fun and sexy but you won't get a commitment. I have big things to do in life and business, so I need a woman in my corner... not one who's in her own corner looking out for her own professional future.

just my 2c and to each their own btw.

 

[topcat]

Personally I'm not going to seriously date any more girls who don't do groceries, shopping, cooking, cleaning and so forth. This girl I was with the past 6 months did all that stuff and again, call me an old-fashioned square, but that's what my mom did for my dad and to me, that's the way it's supposed to be.

You want a career, you go girl, good luck to you. You can have my dick if you're otherwise fun and sexy but you won't get a commitment. I have big things to do in life and business, so I need a woman in my corner... not one who's in her own corner looking out for her own professional future.

just my 2c and to each their own btw.

i hear that too. I mean if i’m fronting the bill for her upkeep, that goes without saying. I’m not in the habit of doing that though..

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

i hear that too. I mean if i’m fronting the bill for her upkeep, that goes without saying. I’m not in the habit of doing that though..

It's an interesting topic, what should a girl-friend or wife do with the 24 hours she has in a day?

I used to encourage girl-friends to have their own job, and chip in on bills, etc. Even though I didn't need the financial help from them. I just wanted to have that completely separate and the frames clean.

These days I prefer a girl-friend support me with her time and effort, because that also ends up supporting the relationship. Her help around the house and in my business is very useful.

For example, I used to hire private chefs, but I've found it's just not the same as a meal prepared by a girl who loves you.

I also replaced one of my assistants with my girl-friend, and it created team spirit as she was helping in my business.

More stuff to talk about over dinner that way, too, as we're working on the same projects together.

In other words - these days I've come to appreciate the traditional roles inside of a relationship. I think this becomes even more important and useful if and when there are kids in the picture.

2c. only, not telling anyone what to do or what's right or wrong.

 

[topcat]

It's an interesting topic, what should a girl-friend or wife do with the 24 hours she has in a day?

I used to encourage girl-friends to have their own job, and chip in on bills, etc. Even though I didn't need the financial help from them. I just wanted to have that completely separate and the frames clean.

These days I prefer a girl-friend support me with her time and effort, because that also ends up supporting the relationship. Her help around the house and in my business is very useful.

For example, I used to hire private chefs, but I've found it's just not the same as a meal prepared by a girl who loves you.

I also replaced one of my assistants with my girl-friend, and it created team spirit as she was helping in my business.

More stuff to talk about over dinner that way, too, as we're working on the same projects together.

In other words - these days I've come to appreciate the traditional roles inside of a relationship. I think this becomes even more important and useful if and when there are kids in the picture.

2c. only, not telling anyone what to do or what's right or wrong.

I’ve definitely seen in my relationships (i tend to run open MLTR don’t ask don’t tell dynamics) that after some time the girl starts angling for ways to have a more relevant position in my life. Essentially she needs a job to do, probably because it helps them feel secure and guaranteed them an important position in your life. I tend not to have a job for them to do, favouring independence over interdependence, leading them to grow increasingly restless and deflated as time goes on…

We’re veering off topics, but this in an interesting point of discussion worth delving into in a separate thread..