By Bob Cox
Shortly after watching the conclusion of the third
presidential debate, I was particularly struck by an impassioned exchange
between two Trump surrogates and two Clinton surrogates. When one of Clinton’s
supporters, Patty Solis Doyle said she felt offended when Donald Trump referred
to the illegal aliens from Mexico that have committed crimes in our country as
bad hombres, my eyes rolled right along with the Trump supporters. Why? Because
our society has seemingly become so hypersensitive to anything that we say and
that no matter how benign it may be, it has the potential to offend somebody
somewhere.
Just as I was about to dig that trench a little
deeper in my mind, the voice of reason came to me like a message in a bottle
that had been dropped from the sky when Van Jones stood up for Doyle by saying “You
don’t get to determine what offends me..I don’t get to determine what offends
you.” In other words, as long as the offending party fails to acknowledge that
what they’ve said was offensive; then real understanding can never take place.
Just like trench warfare during WWI, both sides dig in deep with no man’s land
in the middle.
A few weeks ago, my wife Diana and I invited my son
Bobby out to dinner to celebrate his birthday but the evening quickly unraveled
when the topic of an upcoming speech he was about to give in school came up and
he told us that he really didn’t want to hear any feedback from either of us.
Those words felt just like a dagger in a very lopsided gift exchange: A nice
meal out and a bag of thoughtful gifts for a punch in the gut. Diana and I were
deeply hurt, offended and angry by his insensitive remark.
As he went on to explain his reasons, the trench
only got deeper as he said that we frequently injected our unsolicited and
unwelcomed advice on other family members. After the initial impact of that
unexpected message was delivered, I told him how offensive his remark was,
especially in light of the fact that he knows how much Diana and I treasure the
exchange of deep, meaningful and soul searching ideas. We were both looking
forward to hearing what he had to say on the fresh topic of lucid dreaming,
something he’s very passionate about, but once he made that comment, I told him
I wasn’t open to hearing his speech under those conditions.
During the uncomfortably quiet drive home, I had
more time to process the dysfunctional exchange from the restaurant. I told him
going forward, if he wanted to share something with us, he would need to be open
to our feedback because we both have strong opinions on a number of subjects.
If he didn’t want our opinions, he would be wise to not bring up the subject.
I explained that whenever I feel inspired to share
anything I’ve written with Diana, I have to be emotionally prepared to handle
whatever comes out of her mouth. Sometimes I’m not and on those rare occasions,
I resist the urge to share with her and everyone stays in their happy place. On
the other hand, when I do have the courage to speak and the tolerance to listen,
we usually have a powerful and dynamic exchange of thoughts, feelings and ideas
and I am exponentially richer for it.
As far as being the giver of unsolicited advice, I
could double down by saying that’s his problem and then grab the nearest metaphorical
shovel. Instead, I think I’ll work on that character flaw by asking for
permission to provide feedback upfront so that I have the freedom to express my
thoughts openly and honestly with the goal of having a truly authentic dialogue.
No comments:
Post a Comment