Thread: Introverts are bloody selfish! Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=029959
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
This thread is born out of a thread in All Saints but it's a frustration I live with all the time.
People, stop making a virtue of being introverted!
If you are so tied up in yourself and how people see you, what's the virtue in that?
Can't you just work on forgetting yourself for a while and simply enjoy life?
Is finding out what others are up to SUCH a huge chore that you have to curl up and run away if they so much as look at you?
FFS!!
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
Though extroverts are just as bad.
Can't you just enjoy life without forcing yourself on those around you? Is it such a chore to find out if the person you're with wants to hear everything about you before you splurge out your life details. What's wrong with a few seconds of silence that you feel the need to fill it with the sound of your voice?
FFS!!
Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If you are so tied up in yourself and how people see you, what's the virtue in that?
Can't you just work on forgetting yourself for a while and simply enjoy life?
Is finding out what others are up to SUCH a huge chore that you have to curl up and run away if they so much as look at you?
Unhellish answers:
1 - there isn't one, obviously. We just can't help it.
2 - we can't. Really. I've tried SOOO hard over the years and finally accepted it just doesn't work.
3 - unfortunately yes.
Can't you treat introversion like a disability rather than a life choice? I didn't choose to be this way.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Boogie--
I don't think anyone on the AS thread said extroverts are bad--just that some aspects of church can be uncomfortable for introverts. If you went to a Quaker meeting that practiced silence, or a silent meditation session, you might feel just as uncomfortable.
As with many differences, maybe think of it as being left-handed in a right-handed world. I'm not sure of any personality stats, whether in worship communities or general society. But it seems to me that there are lots of introverts, lots of extroverts, and lots of people in between. A wise worship community tries to find ways to acknowledge, accommodate, and honor all of them.
Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on
:
Goldenkey
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
I think it helps to start by understanding what an introvert actually is. Admittedly the definition does vary a bit, but I think Jung's original intent is the most helpful. It isn't social agility v. social awkwardness. One can be an introvert and navigate the social just fine. And the reverse. It is about where one is centered. Our behaviour is a result of various influences, not always a direct link, so looking at social abilities as a marker isn't completely helpful.
But to Boogie's complaint, it hammers and nails.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
It made me smile, to see introversion in hell.
However, it wasn't particularly funny, when I was young, as I got badgered with 'don't be shy' and so on. Fuck off, I am shy.
However, I got over that, and accepted the way I am. In fact, I socialize quite well, I just don't like people invading my space.
Selfish? Not sure about that. I think that's orthogonal to intro/extro. I've met plenty of extroverts who are fairly narcissistic. I used to know an MP, who was incredibly extrovert, talked all the time, to whoever, but if you sat with him for a while, you realized how me-me-me he is.
I think Merton said that as he went inside, he got more in touch with the world, a nice idea.
[ 16. March 2016, 09:39: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
I don't quite understand - I enjoy life, and I'm an introvert. It's not a virtue, it's just who I am. The problem especially for Christian introverts is that (some) churches are built around extroversion to an unhelpful degree, where extroversion really is seen as a virtue.
Introversion isn't a synonym for being anti-social, and extroversion isn't a synonym for being friendly.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
It's not just church, is it? I think extroversion has been extolled quite widely in Western culture. I remember at school being told that I had to come out of my shell, so fuck off to that.
I worked with quite a few people (in therapy) who had had their introversion pathologized in one way or another, so they had to destress themselves over it, and learn to accept themselves.
Of course, some introverts are the life and soul of the party, quite confusing really. Well, it's not black and white.
Posted by Spike (# 36) on
:
I'm an extrovert married to an introvert and I think the OP is total bollocks
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on
:
I'm not shy. I'm introverted as all hell though. I'm not proud of that, but I'm not ashamed of it either. When I did finally learn of the introvert/extrovert scale and what it means, it was a big relief. I was a student at the time, and there was tremendous peer pressure to always be out there, socialising, drinking, partying, in and out of each others' rooms all the time. The extroverts found this exhilarating. The introverts got burnt out and depressed very quickly. The culture was that you could get tired out reading books all the time so then you went off to the pub to recharge. My pattern was the exact opposite, but it was very difficult to express that, particularly as people tended to brand you as a loser if you did.
So learning that introversion was a thing was really useful. I am very, very introverted. I'd probably be happy doing 99% of my human interaction online. I like cats more than people.
That said, there has been a bit of a backlash in recent years, with introverts getting a bit snobby and superior. I've seen articles about "this is what introversion is" which were accurate and helpful, but I've seen many others which were snotty and entitled. And the people who are really into being introverted as a huge part of their identity often seem to see extroverts as basically mouth-breathing social whores, so I can understand the frustration.
I'm going to suggest, though, that the OP is based on a misunderstanding of what introversion is.
[ 16. March 2016, 10:40: Message edited by: Liopleurodon ]
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
My son was the shyest child I have ever met, he was selective mute until 8 years old. He is now a confident young man who loves and seeks out company.
He was (sensibly) encouraged to learn to socialise.
I have two friendly, sociable dogs. Like humans, dogs are social animals. We go walking and they run and play with lots of other friendly, sociable dogs. Then we meet one snappy, unpleasant thing which can't stand to have other dogs near it - why their owner brings it to a dog busy area I don't know. But some introverts remind me of this dog. 'Leave me alone' writ large. They 'shout' "Let me be myself" without allowing us chatty ones the same privilege.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
I'm going to suggest, though, that the OP is based on a misunderstanding of what introversion is.
I think you are right - I can't begin to imagine what it's like.
I find introverts are attracted to me my husband and closest friends are introverts. I have learned to chat very little at home - and that's fine, we get on well.
Don't get me wrong, I like being alone too - it's just that I adore being part of a big group, chatting and laughing. The best thing about teaching was the staff room imo.
Oh yes - this sums up my husband and close friends. They miss out on so much fun!
[ 16. March 2016, 10:48: Message edited by: Boogie ]
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on
:
Oh bugger off.
I spend my life having to justify a preference to recharge my batteries in peace and quiet.
I like people. I enjoy people. I just need my quiet time.
You try spending a week completely alone and then complain about how narcissistic we all are.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Well, I like being part of a big group. I am the classic life and soul of the party. However, I am an introvert, quite clearly. I remember living in a student house, and finding it intolerable, moved out on my own, ah, bliss.
I am also married to an introvert, so it's very quiet in our house!
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
My son was the shyest child I have ever met, he was selective mute until 8 years old. He is now a confident young man who loves and seeks out company.
He was (sensibly) encouraged to learn to socialise.
I have two friendly, sociable dogs. Like humans, dogs are social animals. We go walking and they run and play with lots of other friendly, sociable dogs. Then we meet one snappy, unpleasant thing which can't stand to have other dogs near it - why their owner brings it to a dog busy area I don't know. But some introverts remind me of this dog. 'Leave me alone' writ large. They 'shout' "Let me be myself" without allowing us chatty ones the same privilege.
Yeah, you don't understand what introversion is. The anecdote about your son? Irrelevant. Introversion is not shyness or social anxiety. Introversion is not rudeness. It's not about being self-absorbed either.
Introversion is just this: some people find being around people tires them out (introverts) while others find it energises them (extroverts). That's it. It runs in a scale. Most introverts have friends and family they love, and may even enjoy meeting new people. We just need more time by ourselves to recharge our batteries. I love alone time and find social groups exhausting. It's just the way I am and I can't change it. My whole family are the same. I'm not shy. I'm not rude. I will, however, turn down that party invitation in favour of sitting at home with a book and a cat, because life's too short to waste time doing things you hate.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Macrina:
Oh bugger off.
I spend my life having to justify a preference to recharge my batteries in peace and quiet.
I like people. I enjoy people. I just need my quiet time.
We all need our quiet time. But cringing when someone talks to you isn't about 'enjoying recharging batteries' or enjoying quiet time.
Why not try showing those people that you enjoy them?
quote:
Originally posted by Macrina:
You try spending a week completely alone and then complain about how narcissistic we all are.
You mean I wouldn't like it or I would? Not sure what you are getting at?
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I find introverts are attracted to me my husband and closest friends are introverts. I have learned to chat very little at home - and that's fine, we get on well.
Don't get me wrong, I like being alone too - it's just that I adore being part of a big group, chatting and laughing. The best thing about teaching was the staff room imo.
Oh yes - this sums up my husband and close friends. They miss out on so much fun!
Do you really not understand that not everyone has the same definition of fun as you? I'm not missing out on anything, because I'm not spending my time doing shit I hate. I can spend my life sitting at a sewing machine with an audiobook in the background and I guarantee that I am at least as happy as you are in a big group of people. And it's easier to organise.
I really tried to give you the benefit of the doubt but you're being really fucking stupid here. This is on a par with "ADHD people are stupid. Learn to sit down, shut up and focus on a textbook like I can, for hours on end, enjoying every moment of blessed solitude. You're missing out on so much fun AND knowledge!" Turns out that not everyone has the same brain.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Yes, that's quite familiar, people telling me what fun I should be having. Well, I bought into that during my youth, and felt miserable a lot of the time. Then I realized that my idea of fun was quite different.
Ah, quite simple really. People are different. It's an astonishing discovery, isn't it?
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
My son ... was (sensibly) encouraged to learn to socialise.
As has been said, this is irrelevant.
Yes, it's important for people to be able to socialise.
But, you know what? Being introverted doesn't make one unable to socialise - it's just that we need some down time to recover afterwards (and, possibly before to prepare).
And, being unable to socialise is as much a problem for extroverts. The problems they have socialising are different is all. Too much energy is as bad as too little.
Socialising is about communication, about listening as well as speaking. Some people talk too much, others too little. Some people listen and others don't. They're all failing to socialise. Meeting someone at a party and blurting out your entire life story without a break is just not on. IMO, better to sit in the corner and read the newspaper.
So, yes, encourage everyone - extrovert or introvert - to socialise. Encourage, not force people together against their will in contrived "sharing times".
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
It's my lunch break. I will spend it reading stuff up, working on RPG design on Google Docs, and avoiding contact. Why? Because I've had to communicate and be available for people all morning, and I need my withdrawal.
Missing out on fun? No, I'm missing out on nothing. I'm doing the things I like doing. I tried when I was younger having extrovert fun. It wasn't fun. It was noisy, confusing and stressed me out. That's not fun.
[ 16. March 2016, 11:16: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Jung has a nice story about two friends walking along a forest path, one introvert, one extrovert. They see a castle in the distance, and the extrovert exclaims with joy, come on, let's see if it we can get in, and have a look round.
The introvert is reluctant, but goes along with it. They walk round inside, and come to a library. The introvert enjoys looking at the old books and curios, but his friend now gets impatient, and wants to go outside again.
It's quite an amusing story really, and the moral is, (drum-roll), people are different!
Posted by Jack o' the Green (# 11091) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
This thread is born out of a thread in All Saints but it's a frustration I live with all the time.
People, stop making a virtue of being introverted!
If you are so tied up in yourself and how people see you, what's the virtue in that?
Can't you just work on forgetting yourself for a while and simply enjoy life?
Is finding out what others are up to SUCH a huge chore that you have to curl up and run away if they so much as look at you?
FFS!!
Except virtually non of that has anything to do with being introverted.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Liopleurodon wrote:
quote:
I really tried to give you the benefit of the doubt but you're being really fucking stupid here. This is on a par with "ADHD people are stupid. Learn to sit down, shut up and focus on a textbook like I can, for hours on end, enjoying every moment of blessed solitude. You're missing out on so much fun AND knowledge!" Turns out that not everyone has the same brain.
I think this is a crucial point, as it illustrates prejudice and intolerance. It ranks with 'pull your socks up' about depression, and other ailments. It also smacks of a monolithic view of people, which I find very peculiar.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Boogie--
Sounds like the problem is that you're unhappy with your close circle of introverts, and are taking that out on all introverts.
I'm sorry you're frustrated and unhappy--and, I'm guessing, lonely. But you really misunderstand introverts.
Why not find some extroverts to hang out with? Online, or off.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Thinking of the Canal Boat example Boogie gave on the AS thread, could I point out that if I were on a boat and manoeuvring a lock, and some random other boater started asking me where I came from and what I did and all that, I'd try, politely to end the conversation. I don't really see the point in sharing my life story with a total stranger, and I'd actually feel a bit miffed that someone thought it was appropriate to ask me to do so.
I'm really, really struggling to work out why the poor bloke who just wants to float down the canal is the rude one, rather than the total stranger who's just started trying to exchange personal details.
You may not realise this, Boogie, but talking about the things people always ask, "what are you doing at the weekend?" "where are you going on holiday" etc. etc. is actually really trying and tiring. I'd rather people didn't. If I want them to know I'll tell them.
We introverts nevertheless have to put up with a certain amount of this chit-chat, but it's hard work. We're constantly making allowances for you extroverts, but you don't realise it, but the moment we start suggesting you make allowances for us, it's a Hell thread.
[ 16. March 2016, 11:40: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Yes - sorry Boogie, but you've missed the point by a country-mile.
I've done various psychosometric tests and leadership tests and so on and my personality type is pretty odd ... which may not surprise anyone here.
In some ways I'm quite introverted - which doesn't mean I'm shy or socially awkward. It simply means that I draw on my own inner-resources or like my own company at times rather than seeking external affirmation ...
But at the same time, I can be quite extroverted - I'd be the one wanting to dash up to the castle, I like conviviality, I like company, I like banter, jokes ... I host events, I compere open-mic poetry evenings ... I can talk until the cows come home ...
And yes, I crave affirmation at times ... I want to be liked, I want people to notice me ...
So I'm a wierd mix of all these things.
My wife is very introverted and I wouldn't pretend that's been easy. As a consequence, our social lives have effectively developed in very different ways - and whilst we have some friends in common, for the most part we socialise separately - which doesn't mean we don't get on ...
As far as churchy things go - I've done the whole gamut from loud and lairy charismatic through to contemplative silence and all stations in between.
One of the things that bugs me at the mo' is how so many churches are trying to consciously position themselves as places which offer 'fun' ... well stuff that ... If I want fun I'll go to the pub, I'll organise an arts event, I'll go and read my poems somewhere and like the sound of my own voice ...
There's nothing worse than enforced jollity. 'Come to church folks, it'll be fun, fun, fun!'
No it fucking well isn't. The next person who tells me that church should be 'fun' will get a broadside that they won't find 'fun' at all.
You want fun? Well, fuck off and get a life ... go and join something, go to stock-car racing events or to Alton Towers (my idea of Hell) or disappear with your partner for a weekend of rampant sex ...
Just don't come round here expecting me to enjoy your piss-poor jokes in church of a Sunday morning or 'do the little actions' with the pre-schoolers.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Oh Flying Spaghetti Monster, action songs, now that's a subject for Hell if ever there was one.
Never liked them, even (especially even) as a child. Why exactly should I want to do this?
I used to have a particular hatred of the Hokey Cokey as well. You get on with it, I'll go on a mental Safari in the Jurassic period, much more fun.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
I did meet some brilliant people on canal boats, and had great chats. That's not inconsistent with being an introvert at all.
Well, we have a spectrum rather than a black and white distinction. My wife is an introvert, and remembers going to the pub in her nightie, and getting up on the table to sing, bloody show-off.
Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, that's quite familiar, people telling me what fun I should be having. Well, I bought into that during my youth, and felt miserable a lot of the time. Then I realized that my idea of fun was quite different.
Me too!! Isn't it wonderful when you discover that you're not actually an awful person for not enjoying the stuff other people enjoy!
I'm off to recharge my batteries in my lunchhour at work by finding somewhere quiet and reading a book and not talking to anyone. If I don't do that I'll be horrible and stupid all afternoon. [MORE horrible and stupid ]
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on
:
I Have Myers-Briggs profile INTP, with a very strong I. This is the ideal personality type for the work I do, which has been variously engineering/ IT/ Analytical/ Research. Doesn't mean I can't talk to people, I just prefer to go deeply into something ON MY BLOODY OWN.
My first year of college (living in halls) was the worst of my life. People popping in and out of my room, constant socialising, endless wackiness designed to ensure that extroverts never had to confront the gaping void at the centre of their souls. 2nd year, moved out into a bedsit. Bliss.
Extroverts in the workplace - god what a nightmare they are. Let's call a meeting, 2 hours of yada yada yada and at the end of that we'll pretend we've achieved something. FUCK OFF I'M WORKING.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Helen-Eva:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, that's quite familiar, people telling me what fun I should be having. Well, I bought into that during my youth, and felt miserable a lot of the time. Then I realized that my idea of fun was quite different.
Me too!! Isn't it wonderful when you discover that you're not actually an awful person for not enjoying the stuff other people enjoy!
I'm off to recharge my batteries in my lunchhour at work by finding somewhere quiet and reading a book and not talking to anyone. If I don't do that I'll be horrible and stupid all afternoon. [MORE horrible and stupid ]
Yes, it took me a long time to realize that too much exposure made me feel frazzled, and then I would become rather nutty and off-centre. I suppose I was about 40 when the penny dropped, and I overcame my shame about wanting to be alone sometimes. Not all the time, of course.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Why not find some extroverts to hang out with? Online, or off.
I do
I still enjoy staffroom banter twice a week and have lunch/coffee with chatty friends regularly. But fast flowing conversation isn't as easy to come by as it was in my yoof, that's true.
The meme I put up about 'we like to think before we speak' is fine when in a meeting, serious discussion etc where careful thought is needed. But when chatting - why?? Why not just let the conversation flow?
Seems like a need to be right over sociability to me.
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
The meme I put up about 'we like to think before we speak' is fine when in a meeting, serious discussion etc where careful thought is needed. But when chatting - why?? Why not just let the conversation flow?
Because when you think of 4 different ways of expressing an idea simultaneously, it's hard to pick the right one at extremely short notice. This results in mixing one's expressions and/or a stammer.
Typing on a computer is much easier, as there's a backspace key, allowing you to choose more carefully. In spoken conversation, I come across as even more of an idiot than I do online.
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on
:
You going to engage with anything that anyone has said about "my brain just plain doesn't work that way?" Boogie? Or are you going to just assume that everyone is being difficult when we fail to be you?
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
Typing on a computer is much easier, as there's a backspace key, allowing you to choose more carefully. In spoken conversation, I come across as even more of an idiot than I do online.
Maybe this is at the core of it - extroverts are less worried about what people think of them?
(I take everyone's points about recharging batteries - we all need to do that and have different ways of doing so)
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
You going to engage with anything that anyone has said about "my brain just plain doesn't work that way?" Boogie? Or are you going to just assume that everyone is being difficult when we fail to be you?
"Fail to see what I'm getting at" would be more to the point.
I think the Ship is pretty much full of introverts and sometimes they speak as if it is odd needing ordinary, everyday, normal conversation.
I also wonder, looking at the All Saints thread, why they go to Church at all? I go because my friends are there (having pretty much no faith in God left). Going through the motions alone, then going home alone - no contact. Is that really what Church is for?
Posted by Jack o' the Green (# 11091) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
Typing on a computer is much easier, as there's a backspace key, allowing you to choose more carefully. In spoken conversation, I come across as even more of an idiot than I do online.
Maybe this is at the core of it - extroverts are less worried about what people think of them?
I think you are misinterpreting an introvert's motives in many cases. Wanting to express yourself accurately, or trying to find a way of expressing yourself without causing unnecessary distress to someone else are other possible reasons for thinking before speaking. It has nothing to do with caring about what people think about you. I can see that particular trait in extraverts and introverts - they just sometimes manifest in different ways. They are not an intrinsic part of either.
Posted by Erik (# 11406) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Maybe this is at the core of it - extroverts are less worried about what people think of them?
You just don't get it. It's not about what people think of me. You ask why I have to think before I speak. Why can't I just talk without thinking and let the conversation flow? BECAUSE I CAN'T. I don't work that way. Don't you get that your essentially saying 'Why can't you be more like me?'
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Erik:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Maybe this is at the core of it - extroverts are less worried about what people think of them?
You just don't get it. It's not about what people think of me. You ask why I have to think before I speak. Why can't I just talk without thinking and let the conversation flow? BECAUSE I CAN'T. I don't work that way. Don't you get that your essentially saying 'Why can't you be more like me?'
And because we're constantly trying to work out when it's our turn to speak, and when it's allowed to talk over other people (it clearly is because people do it all the time) and whether we're dominating the conversation or whether we're boring people.
It doesn't "just flow".
Posted by Paul. (# 37) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
The meme I put up about 'we like to think before we speak' is fine when in a meeting, serious discussion etc where careful thought is needed. But when chatting - why?? Why not just let the conversation flow?
Because it's not a question of "letting" it flow. That conjures up an image of conversation being something with its own momentum and that it takes effort to stop it happening. Actually maybe that's true for extroverts.
For me, and I suspect other introverts, it's the opposite. Conversation can be very enjoyable but it requires effort to maintain. My default position would be silence*.
FWIW I think that meme borders on the smugness that Liopleurodon refers to. Fast-flowing conversation isn't something I do often because it's draining not because I'm so fricking deep and profound.
(*then there's the whole topic of having to figure out whether the person you're with is the sort who can enjoy silence with you, or is enduring it.)
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
You going to engage with anything that anyone has said about "my brain just plain doesn't work that way?" Boogie? Or are you going to just assume that everyone is being difficult when we fail to be you?
"Fail to see what I'm getting at" would be more to the point.
I think the Ship is pretty much full of introverts and sometimes they speak as if it is odd needing ordinary, everyday, normal conversation.
I also wonder, looking at the All Saints thread, why they go to Church at all? I go because my friends are there (having pretty much no faith in God left). Going through the motions alone, then going home alone - no contact. Is that really what Church is for?
There's a big difference between having chats with particular people and the sorts of bizarre practices mentioned in the AS thread.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Erik:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Maybe this is at the core of it - extroverts are less worried about what people think of them?
You just don't get it. It's not about what people think of me. You ask why I have to think before I speak. Why can't I just talk without thinking and let the conversation flow? BECAUSE I CAN'T. I don't work that way. Don't you get that your essentially saying 'Why can't you be more like me?'
Yes, it does look like that. But this is familiar to me. Throughout my life, extroverts have been saying to me, why aren't you X, Y and Z? Where X, Y, and Z are traits that they have.
If anything is narcissistic, this is it! And fucking intolerant.
I don't think all extroverts are like this, but some of them find it hard to actually see the other.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
TBH, and since this is Hell, Boogie's characterisation of introverts is the mirror image of "all extroverts are big mouthed, big headed, narcissistic "look at me! Look at me!" show-off arseholes who can't keep their stupid mouths shut for ten seconds"
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
That's one of the reasons for Hell, isn't it? I mean, you can let off steam, and saying something idiotic and exaggerated.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
That's one of the reasons for Hell, isn't it? I mean, you can let off steam, and saying something idiotic and exaggerated.
Well, yeah, with the fucking great target painted on your arse proviso.
Posted by goperryrevs (# 13504) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
But when chatting - why?? Why not just let the conversation flow?
In a conversation between an introvert and an extrovert, just letting the conversation flow will often mean the extrovert dominating the vast majority of the conversation and not actually getting to hear what insight the introvert might also have. If anything, extroverts need to take the initiative to listen rather than dominate conversations, and to become more comfortable with silence.
In terms of worrying what people think about people think of them, insecure people worry about that. You can get insecure introverted people and insecure extroverted people.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
That's one of the reasons for Hell, isn't it? I mean, you can let off steam, and saying something idiotic and exaggerated.
Well, yeah, with the fucking great target painted on your arse proviso.
Well, I think it fair enough that Boogie expresses her annoyance at introverts. I think some of her points are bloody stupid, but there we are.
[ 16. March 2016, 13:43: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Thinking of the Canal Boat example Boogie gave on the AS thread, could I point out that if I were on a boat and manoeuvring a lock, and some random other boater started asking me where I came from and what I did and all that, I'd try, politely to end the conversation. I don't really see the point in sharing my life story with a total stranger, and I'd actually feel a bit miffed that someone thought it was appropriate to ask me to do so.
I'm not a canal boat person, but I am a hill walker (though no where near as often as I would like). And, there is a sort of unwritten convention about "what to do when meeting someone coming the other way on the hill" (or, in my case, quite often going the same way but walking faster). It starts with a look at each other to acknowledge each others presence, a nod and a "hello". If you feel like a wee chat you slow down, if they also slow down then you can manage a "the weather's not as wet as I was expecting", "though the wind on the ridge back there is a bit nasty". You may feel more chatty and practically stop, if they do so as well then you can spend a couple of minutes talking about the route you've followed, maybe whether the view is as good as it is from some other mountain you've been up recently or whatever. But, certainly nothing more than that before you get on your way. The problem with the canal lock gate is that you're forced to stop to operate the lock gates, so the cues of slowing down aren't there.
Of course, if you're on a hill on your own meeting someone else on their own the chances of that being a meeting of two extraverts is quite low.
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on
:
Boogie, I loves you, I really do, but you've clearly confused being an introvert with ... sheee-it, Billy Bob, a whole bunch of other things that aren't being an introvert. There are introverted self-centred assholes and there are extroverted self-centred assholes. It would be just as stupid and wrong for me to say that extroverts can't have intimate relationships because they love crowds and one person just can't keep or hold their interest for very long.
Beg a host to do you a big, big favour and close the thread or change the title.
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
In terms of worrying what people think about people think of them, insecure people worry about that. You can get insecure introverted people and insecure extroverted people.
Technically* speaking, isn't not caring what people think about you a sign of sociopathy?
* 'Technically' in the sense of 'armchair-pop-psychologically'.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
And, caring too much about what others think of you is a sign of some other form of psychopathy.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
So, I finally took the time to read the AS thread in question and understand Boogie's frustration. The Church that would satisfy the bulk of the participants on that thread would drive people like her at least as mad as they feel. And how would that be fair?
I am a true introvert, and shy as well, but I have good social skills* and can be outgoing to the point that most people wouldn't twig on the introversion.
Most of the AS thread is discussing social anxiety rather than introversion, and church is a social activity. Can it be designed better?
Probably. Should it be? It depends upon the balance of the needs of the group. Not everyone will be perfectly happy.
That said, I do think that a Hell call was a bit OTT. AS is for commiseration, so the comments will tend to be skewed.
*Where these skill miss is when my need for separation outpaces social interaction.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
But cringing when someone talks to you isn't about 'enjoying recharging batteries' or enjoying quiet time.
Why not try showing those people that you enjoy them?
Stop for a moment and think. Does anybody cringe for the fun of it? Does anybody cringe if they have other options and can just turn the cringiness off like a tap?
It's like saying to me, "Why the hell don't you stop limping?"
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
... church is a social activity.
The way most services are arranged, yes. But it wouldn't have to be.
My parish used to have a Wednesday 7 am mass, which was wonderful. You'd walk into the chapel and it would be completely silent till the service started. At the peace everyone would say just the ritual greeting and shake hands or hug according to whether they knew each other or not. At the end, if you felt like talking, you could hang around, perhaps staying for breakfast and Bible study. If not, you could take off and no one would think you were rude -- they'd just think you had to go to work.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
One thing I find introverts do very well is hospital visits, when the person who's sick wants company but isn't up to lots of chat. An introvert can sit there quietly, maybe with a book, and just be with you--for hours on end if necessary. Extroverts seem to find that very difficult, since they're not getting the constant inflow of chat and interaction they need--and tend to wander off to the nurses' station to ask random questions. Or start pick-up conversations with your roommate!
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
So, I finally took the time to read the AS thread in question and understand Boogie's frustration. The Church that would satisfy the bulk of the participants on that thread would drive people like her at least as mad as they feel. And how would that be fair?
I am a true introvert, and shy as well, but I have good social skills* and can be outgoing to the point that most people wouldn't twig on the introversion.
Most of the AS thread is discussing social anxiety rather than introversion, and church is a social activity. Can it be designed better?
Probably. Should it be? It depends upon the balance of the needs of the group. Not everyone will be perfectly happy.
That said, I do think that a Hell call was a bit OTT. AS is for commiseration, so the comments will tend to be skewed.
*Where these skill miss is when my need for separation outpaces social interaction.
As far as I can see, she showed up on a thread about introversion and then got annoyed because people were talking about their experiences of being introverted on it.
Boogie, I'm going to say this again: being introverted is not something you choose. Extroversion likewise. I could ask you: why are you so clingy? Why do you need people to talk to you all the time, even when you're not going to build a relationship with them? Why are you so nosy, wanting to know what everyone's up to? What's wrong with you? Why aren't you more like me? You miss out on so much when you're constantly clouding your brain with all these completely irrelevant details!
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Being shy is one thing, being Aspergers or autistic is another thing. Some of the responses on this thread sound typical of the last two categories, and I doubt that they could overcome "being shy" if they tried.
Some extroverts can come across as quite shallow, like butterflies busily flitting from one brightly-coloured flower to the next without staying very long or getting to know much about it. Others can seem like a human radio station, in perpetual broadcast with chatter and song.
Some introverts can seem quite egocentric - "everybody's looking at Me, everybody's noticing Me/I think/I feel/Me Me Me." There is a difference between being that kind of introvert and just being a quiet person, confident in yourself and happy in your own company, but also able to enjoy being with others when the occasion arises.
As a child my basic instinct if people came near me was to run and hide, then observe them cautiously from a safe distance. I came to realize that actually, there can be a buzz from meeting new people, finding out what you have in common, enjoying some of the differences, sharing a joke or quip together, or even just a "isn't the weather awful today".
That's natural, easy and fun. It's spontaneous, and you choose to participate, or not. What they do in church settings is have a formally defined area of the service where you are obliged to spend a couple of minutes with someone whose company you didn't choose. The whole thing is artificial. It doesn't engender friendship because you don't get long enough to strike up a conversation, it's just a bit of box-ticking. "Have you spoken kindly to the person next to you in the pew/shaken hands with them? Fine, you've done the Peace, performed an action symbolic of (but not equivalent to) family and friendship in a Christian setting, that's your duty done for another week."
Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I also wonder, looking at the All Saints thread, why they go to Church at all? I go because my friends are there (having pretty much no faith in God left). Going through the motions alone, then going home alone - no contact. Is that really what Church is for?
*Glib smug response alert*
I thought I went to church because God was there. Friends there are a bonus.
/*glib smug*
Sorry for that - couldn't resist. Seriously though: I don't know what's the right kind of sympathy or commiseration or affirmation to express about not having much faith left. So please accept my failed attempt to express anything helpful whatsoever.
And that was not supposed to be a case study in why introverts find conversation difficult although it seems to have turned out that way...
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
Boogie may or may not have a point about the AS thread, but she advertised this thread as being about introverts in general - she specifically said it was about more than just church.
[ 16. March 2016, 15:41: Message edited by: Ricardus ]
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
The meme I put up about 'we like to think before we speak' is fine when in a meeting, serious discussion etc where careful thought is needed. But when chatting - why?? Why not just let the conversation flow?
The moment I knew my wife was The One For Me was when in the middle of an evening out at the pub we suddenly realised that we'd been sitting together in silence for about five minutes without it feeling at all weird or uncomfortable.
What's so great about conversation for its own sake? If there's something worth saying then say it, but otherwise why not just enjoy the quiet?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I also wonder, looking at the All Saints thread, why they go to Church at all? I go because my friends are there (having pretty much no faith in God left). Going through the motions alone, then going home alone - no contact. Is that really what Church is for?
It's not a party. It's the House of God, a dedicated space where you go to focus on God, hopefully without the distractions of a more secular place. All else is secondary. If you want to perceive it primarily as a social venue that's up to you.
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on
:
Idiotic OP based on a misunderstanding of the central concept.
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Idiotic OP based on a misunderstanding of the central concept.
Welcome to the Ship!
Oh, wait; you're not new. Just somehow in need of stating the obvious on page-2 of a thread where people have stated so at length. Thereby earning my displeasure because THAT's MY fucking job.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
There is a difference between being that kind of introvert and just being a quiet person, confident in yourself and happy in your own company, but also able to enjoy being with others when the occasion arises.
Yes, my husband is like this, and an excellent public speaker.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Idiotic OP based on a misunderstanding of the central concept.
OK, I'll just go and eat worms
quote:
Originally posted by Helen-Eva:
I don't know what's the right kind of sympathy or commiseration or affirmation to express about not having much faith left. .
Thank you ((hugs)) - joke! I know many people hate hugs!
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
It's not a party. It's the House of God, a dedicated space where you go to focus on God, hopefully without the distractions of a more secular place. All else is secondary. If you want to perceive it primarily as a social venue that's up to you.
Why have collective worship if it's not collective? I get that there need to be quiet times, times of silence, times of listening. But we are social animals, we were 'made' that way. To want to go into Church and have no contact with others, just God? - they may as well watch and listen to a service online. It's like trying to play football without any other players present.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Boogie--
Re "made that way":
You were made that way. Others, another way.
And, it seems a wide spectrum of folks are uncomfortable at being stuck in the other's milieu.
To quote "The Wizard Of Oz": What did you learn from this, Boogie?
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Idiotic OP based on a misunderstanding of the central concept.
Welcome to the Ship!
Oh, wait; you're not new. Just somehow in need of stating the obvious on page-2 of a thread where people have stated so at length.
Yeah, but I was briefer. Concision is one of my gifts as an introvert.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Why have collective worship if it's not collective? I get that there need to be quiet times, times of silence, times of listening. But we are social animals, we were 'made' that way. To want to go into Church and have no contact with others, just God? - they may as well watch and listen to a service online. It's like trying to play football without any other players present.
The point of going to church is to get to somewhere intended specifically to give people a dedicated space to be with God, which does not have (we hope) the usual sorts of external distractions. Some people cannot get that elsewhere in their lives and a service is provided to give people a chance, again, to focus on God at a particular time when otherwise they might not be able to do so.
The tradition I'm used to is one where you turn up for a service as people filed out of the door after the last one. Services were back to back, and very little time in between. The idea that people would actually use the church as a social centre and stop and have coffee afterwards is totally alien to what I know. Communion is a symbolic feast but also, a deeply private and personal moment.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
I finally went to read the AS thread on church being too extrovert for some people. Quite a nice ricochet effect, that Boogie then complains about them!
But this idea of turning to your neighbour to chat, reminded me of my callow youth, when I ran various therapy groups, encounter groups, and the like, where this was a basic structure. Get in pairs and chat, and then get in 4s and introduce your partner to the others, and then ... Well, it did sort of work in a way.
This was all very extroverted, and rather hippyish, (oh Esalen, oh Esalen), and I remember introverted people in such groups, who could easily be persecuted for not joining in. I wish I had protected them more.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
Boogie, I'm going to say this again: being introverted is not something you choose. Extroversion likewise. I could ask you: why are you so clingy?
I have no idea where you get 'clingy' from. I simply enjoy hearing people's stories, I enjoy biographies. Plenty of people like to tell their stories too. I would love those who have never done it to enjoy having an animated, spontaneous conversation with a group of people. Rather like my son, who learned to do this and now loves it.
Of course being introverted isn't a choice - but acting as if extroverts are like this simply to be annoying is a choice!
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
To quote "The Wizard Of Oz": What did you learn from this, Boogie?
That plenty of introverts are willing to explain how their brain works
Here is an interesting article.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
quetzalcoatl: But this idea of turning to your neighbour to chat, reminded me of my callow youth, when I ran various therapy groups, encounter groups, and the like, where this was a basic structure. Get in pairs and chat, and then get in 4s and introduce your partner to the others, and then ... Well, it did sort of work in a way.
This is still very common in trainings etc in Brazil.
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Why have collective worship if it's not collective? I get that there need to be quiet times, times of silence, times of listening. But we are social animals, we were 'made' that way. To want to go into Church and have no contact with others, just God? - they may as well watch and listen to a service online. It's like trying to play football without any other players present.
Firstly, idle chit-chat and forced physical intimacy are not the only ways of making contact with other humans. Secondly, most of the chit-chat at church has nothing to do with God or worship or the collective. Your insistence that everyone participate, and that they're selfish if they don't, sounds more like "We get together and play football, and we always play bridge at halftime. What do you mean you don't play bridge? Doesn't everyone play bridge? You really should learn; even my meathead golden Lab learned to play bridge. Why would you come to the game anyway if you didn't want to play bridge? How do you really get to know people if you can't play bridge with them?"
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
quetzalcoatl: But this idea of turning to your neighbour to chat, reminded me of my callow youth, when I ran various therapy groups, encounter groups, and the like, where this was a basic structure. Get in pairs and chat, and then get in 4s and introduce your partner to the others, and then ... Well, it did sort of work in a way.
This is still very common in trainings etc in Brazil.
I think it's still common in the UK. But it has one helluva drawback, that introverts are not catered for. I suppose you could argue that they should not be doing group training. But many companies do this because it's cheaper. Stack 'em high, sell 'em low.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Soror Magna, I insisted nothing of the sort. I dislike much of what happens in Church, especially forced interactions with those next to you.
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
The tradition I'm used to is one where you turn up for a service as people filed out of the door after the last one. Services were back to back, and very little time in between. The idea that people would actually use the church as a social centre and stop and have coffee afterwards is totally alien to what I know. Communion is a symbolic feast but also, a deeply private and personal moment.
A feast between you and God then? Like a drive in MacDonalds?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
A feast between you and God then? Like a drive in MacDonalds?
I don't know why you're resorting to that kind of analogy. More like a glass of wine and something special with and from someone you cared about. This is that time, set apart, for you to do so.
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Of course being introverted isn't a choice - but acting as if extroverts are like this simply to be annoying is a choice!
Yes, as is acting as though introverts are all selfish insecure miseryguts who are obsessed with being right all the time.
Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
This thread is born out of a thread in All Saints but it's a frustration I live with all the time.
People, stop making a virtue of being introverted!
If you are so tied up in yourself and how people see you, what's the virtue in that?
Can't you just work on forgetting yourself for a while and simply enjoy life?
Is finding out what others are up to SUCH a huge chore that you have to curl up and run away if they so much as look at you?
FFS!!
Right back at you. We exist,. Fuck off and get use d to it.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Since when does collective worship mean we have to be talking, talking, talking all the time? I value the collective aspect of worship very highly--that doesn't mean I want to "turn to my neighbor-on-the-right and describe one challenge I'm facing in my family life and ask for prayer for it." I'm happy being with people and ... just being WITH people. Particularly when we're all focusing as a group on someone else, that is, on God.
Do you not understand that "being with" people includes a helluva lot more than just talking?
I spent a day last week leading about twenty people in assembling confirmation banners. Those who wanted to chat, did so. Those who were perfectly happy getting on with cutting and gluing, did so. All good.
I like going in a group to see a movie, or to do something like paddling a canoe down a river. Neither requires extracting anyone's life story (though if both participants wish to do so, that's fine once the movie is over).
I like going to family reunions and just listening to everybody. There are quite a few people who are more than happy to do all the talking, and they find me valuable.
This is all collective, and all deeply valued by this introvert. And none of it requires me to do idiotic things like "share a heartfelt blessing with your neighbor" or some such during church.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
On Communion. It IS private and personal. It is also public and collective. One aspect does not cancel out the other. I have never had communion not-in-a-group, even hospitalized (family present), and I wouldn't want to do so because IMHO it loses something when you're the only member of the body of Christ present. Still, there are aspects of it that are only between God and the individual, and that's good too.
Think of a wedding. Getting married is often a very public, communal activity--we had 400 at our wedding--and even the state gets a look-in. Our wedding was extremely family-focused, and we spent our whole reception seeing to the comfort of our guests. That's good and fine and wonderful. But none of those people are going to be in the marriage bed.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
More like a glass of wine and something special with and from someone you cared about. This is that time, set apart, for you to do so.
And you need other people there at the same time?
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Of course being introverted isn't a choice - but acting as if extroverts are like this simply to be annoying is a choice!
Yes, as is acting as though introverts are all selfish insecure miseryguts who are obsessed with being right all the time.
Very true, very true.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Think of a wedding. Getting married is often a very public, communal activity--we had 400 at our wedding--and even the state gets a look-in. Our wedding was extremely family-focused, and we spent our whole reception seeing to the comfort of our guests. .
Yes - but you didn't run away after the service because you can't bear the coffee time afterwards. You didn't turn up, get married, then leave without speaking to anyone.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
You've gotta love these analogies. Yes, going to church every week is really like getting married. It's more like having sex, isn't it? Do you just roll over post coitum and fall asleep? Or do you have an in-depth conversation about the state of the EU negotiations? Maybe there is a middle way.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
More like a glass of wine and something special with and from someone you cared about. This is that time, set apart, for you to do so.
And you need other people there at the same time?
All right, all right. Forget the communion and the sermons and even the prayers. Let's all sit round in a circle and chat to each other for an hour. That'll be fellowship and we'll all feel enriched and fuller members of the human race for sharing our experiences.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
All right, all right. Forget the communion and the sermons and even the prayers. Let's all sit round in a circle and chat to each other for an hour. That'll be fellowship and we'll all feel enriched and fuller members of the human race for sharing our experiences.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Is that what you actually want from a church?
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Yes, as is acting as though introverts are all selfish insecure miseryguts who are obsessed with being right all the time.
Very true, very true.
'Selfish' is in the thread title.
'Miseryguts' is from your comments on introverts missing out on fun.
'Insecure' and 'obsessed with being right' are paraphrases of your speculation on why introverts don't jump into conversations.
If you've changed your mind, or feel I'm misrepresenting you, it would help the conversation if you extrovertly said so.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie
If you are so tied up in yourself and how people see you, what's the virtue in that?
I heard a talk given by a psychologist who specialized in this type of individual differences. He said that introverts are more aware of the feelings of the people they are dealing with than extroverts. The introverts are quiet observers.
Moo
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
This is reminding me of the Northern Lights cruise I went on. There was a lot of non-programmed time with nothing much going on outside to look at or photograph. I would go and sit in the forward facing lounge and knit what is at present an infinity scarf in colours of the aurora, rather than sit in my cabin. And there were people around me with other people they already knew, chatting away about all sorts of things, all cheerful and extrovert, and I wondered just why it is that I can't do that.
However, there were also other knitters, and after a while we got closer to each other and discussed yarns and stitches and socks and scarves and so on, I realise doing the looking at things other than each other that some people attribute to men, and it was rather nice.
Something similar happened with the photography.
But I still wonder why I can't do the chatty stuff. Listening to it, it does seem to be, on the surface, quite inconsequential, but also the sort of glue that holds communities together. The good sib root of gossip, really.
I do sometimes wonder if having not recognised my place at the bottom of the pecking order at one school where I was consequently excluded and even bullied might have established this. Or maybe they did that sort of thing because I was already socially incompetent.
I certainly don't want to be compelled to do chatty stuff anywhere. It does happen quite naturally at the end of Meeting, but if someone were to tell us to do it...aargh.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie
If you are so tied up in yourself and how people see you, what's the virtue in that?
I heard a talk given by a psychologist who specialized in this type of individual differences. He said that introverts are more aware of the feelings of the people they are dealing with than extroverts. The introverts are quiet observers.
Moo
Yes, I was thinking along those lines. I certainly know a lot of counsellors and therapists who are introverts, and are able to 'tune in' to somebody else. It doesn't mean that extroverts can't, but ironically, some of them can't see other people very clearly.
Another problem for some extroverts is wanting to do something, in a kind of busy busy way.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
Introversion is just this: some people find being around people tires them out (introverts) while others find it energises them (extroverts). That's it.
No it isn't, you are describing socialbility (sort of).
[ 16. March 2016, 19:05: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
... I dislike much of what happens in Church, especially forced interactions with those next to you. ...
See, now I really don't understand who/what you're upset about. I would have thought you'd have some respect for the folks who hate that shit even more than you do. (And who are worse at hiding it than you.)
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
No it isn't, you are describing socialbility (sort of).
Fascinating, thank you.
So that's where I got the word 'fun' from!
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
I'm an extrovert. My self-judgement may be flawed of course, but I don't feel that I'm unaware of other people's feelings.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Way to go on reading for comprehension, folks. The analogy was between wedding and communion, not the entire church experience. And the first rule of interpretation is not to press the analogy past the point of comparison, unless you want to doofus it up like some people do the parables. But whatever.
I looked at the link, and I want to know (and can't find out): what is the essayist's authority for what he/she says? Is that person a psychologist or what? Because a lot of what he/she said contradicts what I studied in the master's in counseling program. And the idea that extraverted activity leads to more happiness sounds, frankly, like bullshit.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
The linked study does not support the conclusions of the Tumblr article.
I quote:
quote:
First, causality of the extraversion–positive affect relationship was
not established in any of the studies. However, the point of the
studies was to investigate whether the extraversion–positive affect
relationship found in so many other studies also is evident within
person.
In other words, people acting more extravertedly are happier. However, there's no evidence that it's the extraversion state that's causing the increased happiness. Indeed, I suspect it's the other way around - when we're happier, we find it easier to adopt a state of extraversion. This tallies with my own experience far better than the converse.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
I think you're right.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Besides which, it's really only saying "introverts enjoy social interaction as well". Which we knew was true. It's just we enjoy it somewhat differently, and are perhaps more choosy as to who we enjoy it with.
I think this might be what Boogie's missing about church and introversion. We are socially interacting simply by being in the same place with (to a degree) the same intention. We don't need to talk endlessly about any subject that enters our heads. Indeed, as I've alluded to earlier, a perceived need to do so can be a barrier, like, for example, everyone asking what I did at the weekend on Monday morning at work. Not much, usual crap, and it's not as if you're really interested in me taking youngest daughter climbing, mending a puncture and pushing the java moss back where it's meant to be in the fish tank. Especially if you're the fourth person who wants the rundown.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Another problem for some extroverts is wanting to do something, in a kind of busy busy way.
Now I'm confused. I manage social interaction, but find it exhausting and would prefer to sit quietly with someone than talk about nothing of importance. Sharing feelings and personal stuff is almost impossible. Conversely I enjoy discussions of politics, the faith etc, and find such conversations refreshing. Which I always took to be fairly classic introversion.
But, I can't stop and do nothing. I need to be doing something. It might be something to watch on TV, a book to read, a computer game to play. The idea of a holiday which consists of sitting on a beach doing nothing all day is close to my idea of Hell - give me museums, scenery to admire, even a day shopping for shoes! Does that make me extrovert then?
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Another problem for some extroverts is wanting to do something, in a kind of busy busy way.
Now I'm confused. I manage social interaction, but find it exhausting and would prefer to sit quietly with someone than talk about nothing of importance. Sharing feelings and personal stuff is almost impossible. Conversely I enjoy discussions of politics, the faith etc, and find such conversations refreshing. Which I always took to be fairly classic introversion.
But, I can't stop and do nothing. I need to be doing something. It might be something to watch on TV, a book to read, a computer game to play. The idea of a holiday which consists of sitting on a beach doing nothing all day is close to my idea of Hell - give me museums, scenery to admire, even a day shopping for shoes! Does that make me extrovert then?
No. I'm exactly the same, and I score extremely highly for Introversion on the only scale in these MBTI type tests that has any validity (the F, J, I, S, P or whatever it is stuff is generally held by psychologists to be a load of dingoes' kidneys.)
[ 16. March 2016, 21:57: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
The linked study does not support the conclusions of the Tumblr article.
I quote:
quote:
First, causality of the extraversion–positive affect relationship was
not established in any of the studies. However, the point of the
studies was to investigate whether the extraversion–positive affect
relationship found in so many other studies also is evident within
person.
In other words, people acting more extravertedly are happier. However, there's no evidence that it's the extraversion state that's causing the increased happiness. Indeed, I suspect it's the other way around - when we're happier, we find it easier to adopt a state of extraversion. This tallies with my own experience far better than the converse.
Quite, but unlike most pop psychology on the internet it did actually link to studies you could then evaluate - but the key point, is that introversion and extraversion are not simply measures of sociability.
Alot of what people are posting on this thread read like rainbow statements. Does this describe you:
quote:
You have a great need for other people to like and admire you. You have a tendency to be critical of yourself.
You have a great deal of unused capacity which you have not turned to your advantage. While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to compensate for them. Your sexual adjustment has presented problems for you. Disciplined and self-controlled outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You pride yourself as an independent thinker and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof. You have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be pretty unrealistic. Security is one of your major goals in life.
[ 16. March 2016, 22:10: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
One of the great things about introverts is we're often very good at putting on a front. So we may be smiling because we like you, or we may be smiling and imagining what it would be like to wear your skin.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Yes, I'm aware of that; horoscope writers and MBTI practitioners (much the same thing) have done a number on that one for millennia in the one case and decades in the other. But perhaps what people are talking on here is sociability, and it's just that the terms "introversion" and "extraversion" have got appropriated from psychology (where they means something slightly different) to refer to sociability, much as to the discomfiture of palaeontologists the term "dinosaur" is appropriated to mean anything reptilian and extinct?
So, regardless of whether we equate this sociability with extraversion, unscientific use of the latter term as that may be, is there still a conversation to be had about differences in sociability and tolerance and understanding between people of different sociabilities?
One of the problems, I think, and one that leads somewhat to these rainbow statements, is that of polarisation. The human race is not divided into two groups. It has a scale, with some people more towards one end than the other. Probably the people who get most excited about it are the ones particularly near one end, because their sociability/extraversion {pick your term} or lack thereof is a significant factor in their day to day interactions with other people. But I would imagine that it's true for everyone that a social interaction can be (note can be) invigorating, and equally that too much of it can be tiring, that being able to recharge solitarily is useful to most people, but too much solitariness becomes trying. It's just at what point being in a group, or on one's own, flips from being a plus to a minus. Those who consider themselves (in the pop-psych sense) introverts are probably those with a low threshold of interaction becoming tiring; similarly the self-diagnosed extraverts have a low boredom threshold when they're on their own.
I work from home once a week. I love it, being away from the office and all the chat and interruption. I'd like to do it four days a week. But probably not five.
[X-post - response to Doublethink]
[ 16. March 2016, 22:26: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
I'm intrigued by how many people seem to manage the art of never being alone and have company 24 hours a day, without actually realizing it.
This is likely to be true of anyone in a relationship and full-time employment, especially if they have children, or lift-share on their way to a job in an open plan office. It's also true of people in shared houses or flats, and people who constantly keep in touch on their mobiles.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Of course being introverted isn't a choice - but acting as if extroverts are like this simply to be annoying is a choice!
Here's the problem: say there are people who value quiet, and peace, and other people who value noise and communication. That's fine, but put them in the same space, and the noisy people drown out the quiet ones. A quiet neighbour won't stop a noisy person being noisy, but a noisy neighbour stops a quiet person from having quiet.
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Macrina:
Oh bugger off.
I spend my life having to justify a preference to recharge my batteries in peace and quiet.
I like people. I enjoy people. I just need my quiet time.
We all need our quiet time. But cringing when someone talks to you isn't about 'enjoying recharging batteries' or enjoying quiet time.
Why not try showing those people that you enjoy them?
quote:
Originally posted by Macrina:
You try spending a week completely alone and then complain about how narcissistic we all are.
You mean I wouldn't like it or I would? Not sure what you are getting at?
I don't cringe when I talk to people. For fucks sake - how many times? I am not shy or anxious. I enjoy people and being around people. Don't imply I never show appreciation for the people around me.
If you are an extrovert you get your energy from socialising, after a week you would feel tired and drained from being completely alone. So do that before you complain about people who feel tired and drained from constant socialising.
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
I'm intrigued by how many people seem to manage the art of never being alone and have company 24 hours a day, without actually realizing it.
This is likely to be true of anyone in a relationship and full-time employment, especially if they have children, or lift-share on their way to a job in an open plan office. It's also true of people in shared houses or flats, and people who constantly keep in touch on their mobiles.
So non-hellish. I have a full time job as a nurse, this means when I am at work I usually have a lot of face to face contact with patients who require a lot of emotional support and empathy. I love my job.
I can't afford a house yet so I live in a shared house.
I am a millenial so yes I have my phone a lot.
What do I do? On my first days off or when I get home from work I shut the door to my room and chill out with netflix or the ship, if I am not tired I go for a walk around my city and get a coffee somewhere quiet. Usually I have at least one of my days off packed with people but when I don't get my quiet day in I get this horribly full busy feeling in my head and find I get irritable far more easily.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Of course being introverted isn't a choice - but acting as if extroverts are like this simply to be annoying is a choice!
You mean you're being a self-righteous fuckwit asshole* for some OTHER reason than to simply be annoying? Pray tell, what could that reason be?
____
*or arsehole east of the pond
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
To want to go into Church and have no contact with others, just God?
Please understand that your ideas of sociability and company aren't shared by everyone. I certainly want to worship as part of a community, which is exactly what I do singing and praying alongside others. That doesn't mean I want to chat to them every week.
For reference, I can spend hours sitting reading in the company of one or more of my family, and the only sound that any of us will make is offering the others a cup of tea at some point. And that's perfectly sociable, and there's no reason to fill the companionable silence with blether.
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
The meme I put up about 'we like to think before we speak' is fine when in a meeting, serious discussion etc where careful thought is needed. But when chatting - why?? Why not just let the conversation flow?
Seems like a need to be right over sociability to me.
Words are important. Opinions are important. If I value you, then I want to offer you my best - which means a carefully thought-out and correct statement. If I spoke without trying to be as accurate as I can, I would be lying to you, and I'm not going to do that.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
How did things get changed around so we introverts are allegedly attacking the extroverts? The OP was just the opposite.
I can't recall the last time I scolded an extrovert for following his/her nature. Generally the scoldings flow the opposite way.
Posted by Athrawes (# 9594) on
:
Part of the problem, Boogie, is that many extroverts aren't making the choice to be selfish and annoying - they are unaware that they may be selfish and annoying. I call them energy vampires, sucking the energy and joy out of me, without even noticing.
I am also a teacher, and also enjoy the staff room; not to chat, but simply to sit and *be* with people, to listen to their plans, stories and issues. We have 2 very extroverted staff who sound rather like you: lovely, friendly people who love to talk and laugh. You always know when they're there. You can hear their voice from the hallway, talking and laughing incessantly, filling every second of silence and every centimetre of space with their personalities. It can be fun to listen to, but a little bit goes a *long way*, and I am very glad when they go on duty! And when they're both there together, no one else gets to say a word. They are both totally unaware of how exhausting they can be to be around, or even how much they dominate the 'chat'. That doesn't mean I don't like them, but I pick and choose the times I am around them.
[ 17. March 2016, 01:05: Message edited by: Athrawes ]
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Here's the problem: say there are people who value quiet, and peace, and other people who value noise and communication. That's fine, but put them in the same space, and the noisy people drown out the quiet ones. A quiet neighbour won't stop a noisy person being noisy, but a noisy neighbour stops a quiet person from having quiet.
I'm not even entirely sure that is the problem - at least for me. I don't need silence to be content, I don't need to be on my own either. I need a break from interacting with other people. I'm able to fade out the background noise of other people. But, it needs to stay background noise.
What doesn't work is finding a quiet corner to read (or, for others it might be knitting), and have people come up and insist that I need to join in the fun by sharing with everyone what my favourite colour is, or what I think about some reality TV show I've no interest in. I'm not going to insist that others join in the fun of reading a good book, I'm not going to insist that they go and have their favourite colour conversation elsewhere.
All I want, all any of us wants, is a bit of respect and to be treated with some dignity. So, if you want your service to include a time to share prayer requests and concerns, fine go ahead but make it optional ("please feel free to sit quietly and pray if you prefer, please don't force others to talk to you").
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
So, if you want your service to include a time to share prayer requests and concerns, fine go ahead but make it optional ("please feel free to sit quietly and pray if you prefer, please don't force others to talk to you").
This would be unutterably lovely.
Truly, if they all want to get up and conga line around the sanctuary, that's fine too. Just don't make ME do it.
Since I think in analogies (apologies to the non-analogists), I'm going to riff off Athrawes' fine post. Extroverts who don't self-monitor (which is some, not all of them) are like the people who sit down in a pew and spread themselves and their belongings. Which is fine until you have to sit there as it's the last spot in church, and they stare blankly at you and only move when you specifically ask them to--and then, only enough for you to sit on one buttock. Not out of meanness, but because they haven't observed that you are a tad chubby, and they haven't connected that fact with the idea that their purse or jacket might be moved to another location. (Yes, this happened to me. Yes, I did everything short of saying "excuse me, but I happen to be fat." Yes, I spent the service on one buttock to avoid the shame of having to spell it out that way.)
Basically, if your (general your) personality naturally expands to fill the available mental and aural space, it's great if you can develop self-monitoring and observational skills sufficient to make room for the introverts who come in and don't want to say, "Shut up, wouldja?" Because they won't. But they'll be thinking it.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I'm not even entirely sure that is the problem - at least for me. I don't need silence to be content, I don't need to be on my own either. I need a break from interacting with other people. I'm able to fade out the background noise of other people. But, it needs to stay background noise.
I suppose when I was thinking "noise" and "quiet" I was thinking more metaphorically than not, but that probably wasn't terribly helpful given that they might sometimes be metaphors for themselves.
Being together can just mean being, together.
[ 17. March 2016, 01:38: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
For reference, I can spend hours sitting reading in the company of one or more of my family, and the only sound that any of us will make is offering the others a cup of tea at some point. And that's perfectly sociable, and there's no reason to fill the companionable silence with blether.
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on
:
Like so, so many other folks around here, I'm kind of an introvert. Big Surprise. I also work a customer service/retail job, hang around in coffee shops, talk to strangers about bicycling and transportation equity (usually working in a good feminist rant along the way), enjoy parties and the company of friends, and go to church.
Then I get home and wonder how the fuck I managed to do all that shit without freaking out.
Like, I hate small talk. Fucking hate that meaningless, pointless, waste-of-time bullshit. Don't ask me how my day is when I first get to work. I just got to work. My day just started, and the part that's passed has been 1. waking up, just like every other day; 2. making and drinking coffee, just like every other day; 3. reading the paper, just like every other day; 4. riding to work, just like every other day. So WHY THE HELL are you ASKING ME how it's going? IT'S THE FUCKING SAME AS IT WAS YESTERDAY AND THE DAY BEFORE, YOU MORONIC TWATWAFFLE! GROW A BRAIN AND FIGURE OUT THAT YOU'RE ASKING THE DUMBEST, MOST MEANINGLESS QUESTION EVER!
...I'm really not a morning person.
So, much as I love conversation, I hate pointless, "polite" questions. Much as I can talk all day about bikes while at work, I kinda turn quiet whenever somebody asks me for bike advice when I'm off the clock...unless it's an old Schwinn or something I don't have to sell, in which case, I can talk about a hobby, sure. I can do a job, punch a clock, and enjoy it, true, but don't ask me to work after hours. I know not to go off on my rants about the history of American urban planning or intersectional feminism in transit or the late 1980's in bike technology or aesthetic theory in Japanese ceramics or anything I studied in grad school, even if I occasionally do it anyway despite myself (and regret it once I'm home).
I like being around people. I like meaningful conversations. Can we skip the insincere bullshit, though? The acting like we Care, that God is calling us into Relationship with one another, trying to heal the rifts that keep us from Meaningfully Relating? Can we go without sharing our deepest fears we confess only before God? Our hopes and prayers for all people? Those are personal, pastor, and not all of us are ANYWHERE NEAR COMFORTABLE sharing that kind of deep and dark shit with people we see only in church—fuck, I wouldn't usually share any of that with my girlfriends, best friends, or family members, and wouldn't hardly expect to hear it from them!
Why do I go to church, then? Why hang around coffeeshops? Why work in retail? Why be a transit activist? Why be around people, when I'm supposed to hate them?
I don't hate people. I don't hate conversation. I just hate bullshit.
You want to find a great bike? Cool! Let's talk about what you love, what you want, what makes you happy. I don't care about the weather, I don't want to talk about how I am today, and no, I'm not exactly comfortable telling you my name.
On the street talking about transit? Hey, if you light into me talking about all the problems "you people" cause, I can calmly address your points. I can cite statistics and fact, and make a case. I can even tell you that we're doing X, Y, and Z to make things better. Please, however, do not call me your friend. I'm not. We just met.
Coffee shop? I'll talk to baristas. Ask about origin, sourcing, roasting, preparation, how that really cool Slayer dual-phase machine works. Cupping? I'm there. Let's talk procedure, water temperature, flavor notes. Latte art competition? Loud, raucous, like caffeinated Thunderdome? I'm quiet. Sure, there are lots of interesting people—but I'm focused on the process, the art, the competition, the craft. I'm in a groove, the same one I'm in when watching glassblowers, potters, artisans. Where do I work, what do I do? Who cares! Look, I overhaul bottom brackets, my hands still smell like grease, you don't really want to know about any of that. It ain't glamorous. Trust me, it ain't. I'm trying to get away from it right now. You're being polite asking, thank you, but I wish you'd let me get back to analyzing that rosette.
Church? Let's honor God together. Let's act in ways we can only do communally. It's different than private prayer. It's a form of action, of worship, of devotion that can't be offered alone. It's like raising a barn—it takes a community to do it. It may be a little uncomfortable, and I'll never learn to like sermons, but it's for the sake of God. Heck, I might even figure out that some people need the Peace, public declaration of prayer intentions, and a sermon the way I have to have the Kyrie, the readings, and the Eucharist. I crave order in my worship, a common devotion to God, free from small talk and overly earnest and (to my mind) insincere bullshittery about entering into Relationship.
So I tend to meditate on stained glass during sermons, grit my teeth and remind myself it's for other people who need it during the Peace, and not roll my eyes during oversharing during prayers. Some people need that the way I need a nice and orderly coming together to focus on God. It doesn't mean I'm not an introvert, this needing to be around people. It doesn't mean I'm unsocial, being an introvert. It may mean that I express my need for society differently than some other people do, and have trouble reading small talk and chatter as anything other than insincere, vacuous, and annoying.
As I keep thinking, maybe church is exactly what I need as an introvert—a sort of community and sociability focused entirely on God, on something greater than which cannot be thought. Maybe that's why I'm so inextricably drawn to the communion rail, to the Body and Blood; it's a bullshit-free community, a chance to come together and be united by Christ, skipping all the remarks about the weather and my weekend and focusing completely on the love of God and the mystery of faith.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
For reference, I can spend hours sitting reading in the company of one or more of my family, and the only sound that any of us will make is offering the others a cup of tea at some point. And that's perfectly sociable, and there's no reason to fill the companionable silence with blether.
I visit my mother for a weekend every month, and we invariably spend a measureable portion of the weekend reading, with occasional interruptions for tea and to read a particularly good line or two aloud. It's wonderful.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Macrina:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
I'm intrigued by how many people seem to manage the art of never being alone and have company 24 hours a day, without actually realizing it.
This is likely to be true of anyone in a relationship and full-time employment, especially if they have children, or lift-share on their way to a job in an open plan office. It's also true of people in shared houses or flats, and people who constantly keep in touch on their mobiles.
So non-hellish. I have a full time job as a nurse, this means when I am at work I usually have a lot of face to face contact with patients who require a lot of emotional support and empathy. I love my job.
I can't afford a house yet so I live in a shared house.
I am a millenial so yes I have my phone a lot.
What do I do? On my first days off or when I get home from work I shut the door to my room and chill out with netflix or the ship, if I am not tired I go for a walk around my city and get a coffee somewhere quiet. Usually I have at least one of my days off packed with people but when I don't get my quiet day in I get this horribly full busy feeling in my head and find I get irritable far more easily.
You see, I read this and think - what is it about your experience that makes you think you are an introvert ?
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
I visit my mother for a weekend every month, and we invariably spend a measureable portion of the weekend reading, with occasional interruptions for tea and to read a particularly good line or two aloud. It's wonderful.
Some of the times I treasure most with my late mother are the days we used to chat on the phone for hours. We would often both end up crying laughing about something which tickled us. Wonderful.
Fine sitting companionably with people you know - nothing wrong with that. But strangers/semi-starngers/aquaintances - the best way to get to know them, especially in groups, is to talk with and listen to them. This is very obvious imo.
My husband said the other day 'David is a great bloke you know, he really knows his stuff about gardens' I told him that five years ago! But that's how long it took to get to know him. I always tell friends who think he (my husband) doesn't like them 'don't worry, he'll chat to you fine when he's known you ten years'
Of course a few beers helps the conversation along too - can't get a word in edgeways then.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Here's the problem: say there are people who value quiet, and peace, and other people who value noise and communication. That's fine, but put them in the same space, and the noisy people drown out the quiet ones. A quiet neighbour won't stop a noisy person being noisy, but a noisy neighbour stops a quiet person from having quiet.
I'm not even entirely sure that is the problem - at least for me. I don't need silence to be content, I don't need to be on my own either. I need a break from interacting with other people. I'm able to fade out the background noise of other people. But, it needs to stay background noise.
What doesn't work is finding a quiet corner to read (or, for others it might be knitting), and have people come up and insist that I need to join in the fun by sharing with everyone what my favourite colour is, or what I think about some reality TV show I've no interest in. I'm not going to insist that others join in the fun of reading a good book, I'm not going to insist that they go and have their favourite colour conversation elsewhere.
All I want, all any of us wants, is a bit of respect and to be treated with some dignity. So, if you want your service to include a time to share prayer requests and concerns, fine go ahead but make it optional ("please feel free to sit quietly and pray if you prefer, please don't force others to talk to you").
It seems to me all you are wanting there is basic good manners, I am not sure that is determined by introversion / extraversion dimension.
[ 17. March 2016, 07:28: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
I'm sure it isn't. Which makes the introvert/extravert classification irrelevant. I'm sure someone has already questioned the relevance of going after introverts ...
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariston:
Like, I hate small talk. Fucking hate that meaningless, pointless, waste-of-time bullshit.
This sums up your long, rambling post.
You simply don't get it!
The small talk is a lead into conversation - it's the ice breaker, the sociable way of gently finding out if the person wants to chat.
So, me at the canal lock - "Have you come far?"
Other person "No, just from Foxton" silence.
Me - silence, do lock, go back on boat.
(That was an introvert, totally uninterested except for getting the lock done)
Next lock me "Have you come far?"
Other person "Yes, we came from Foxton today and .... chat about when they started, ehare they have been, when they are going home ... "
Me "What do you think about the refurbished pub at Foxton"
Other person "Not keen ... nice chat about beers etc"
(My type of chat )
PS Ariston - no need to shout
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
quote:
Originally posted by Macrina:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
I'm intrigued by how many people seem to manage the art of never being alone and have company 24 hours a day, without actually realizing it.
This is likely to be true of anyone in a relationship and full-time employment, especially if they have children, or lift-share on their way to a job in an open plan office. It's also true of people in shared houses or flats, and people who constantly keep in touch on their mobiles.
So non-hellish. I have a full time job as a nurse, this means when I am at work I usually have a lot of face to face contact with patients who require a lot of emotional support and empathy. I love my job.
I can't afford a house yet so I live in a shared house.
I am a millenial so yes I have my phone a lot.
What do I do? On my first days off or when I get home from work I shut the door to my room and chill out with netflix or the ship, if I am not tired I go for a walk around my city and get a coffee somewhere quiet. Usually I have at least one of my days off packed with people but when I don't get my quiet day in I get this horribly full busy feeling in my head and find I get irritable far more easily.
You see, I read this and think - what is it about your experience that makes you think you are an introvert ?
I get tired out with too much company and socialising and I very much enjoy my own company to relax and recharge.
Being introverted doesn't mean I hate people or don't want to interact with them, on the contrary I enjoy it, I just enjoy it for specific periods of time then I need to get away and be quiet.
Plus INFJ - we're just basically introverts who pretend to be extroverts.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
You see, I read this and think - what is it about your experience that makes you think you are an introvert ?
Yes, exactly. The "quiet day" is still filled with people. If you wander round a city, go to a coffee shop, hang out on the Ship or spend time on your phone you're still "being with people". You may not be actually directly speaking to them but their presence makes the experience what it is. The snatches of conversation, laughter, shouts, calls you hear in crowded places, the chat in a text-based medium, it's still company.
I'd regard someone as an introvert if they lived alone, worked from home full time on something like computer programming, and liked to spend their spare time getting away from people and going off into the wilds alone.
Contact with people is what keeps most of us relatively sane and knocks the corners off; too much isolation can send you nutty; but different people need different levels.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Fine sitting companionably with people you know - nothing wrong with that. But strangers/semi-starngers/aquaintances - the best way to get to know them, especially in groups, is to talk with and listen to them. This is very obvious imo.
You don't get it, do you. Talking isn't the only way you find out things about people. Sit and watch them for a bit. You might be surprised what you pick up from that. Family dynamics, relationship tensions, states of health, the way they live - the things people wear, the way they hold themselves, their body language, all of this can say so much. Spoken words can be deceptive but actually watch people and see what you can pick up. It can be fascinating, revealing, illuminating. We broadcast quite a lot about ourselves through the medium of our choices, conscious and unconscious. What people say and what they actually believe or do can be quite different.
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on
:
My apologies for not fitting your definition of introversion. I must try harder.
Still am one though, not apologising for that.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
The trouble with adopting a label is it comes with a set of definitions, sometimes those can turn into restrictions, or other people will expect certain criteria to be met. I wouldn't bother with the labels myself.
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
You see, I read this and think - what is it about your experience that makes you think you are an introvert ?
Isn't the issue (and I have the impression that you unlike me know what you are talking about) that most people are extrovert or introvert depending on circumstances, and people get labelled (or label themselves) introverts if the proportion of circumstances in which they behave introvertedly is greater than average?
Consequently Boogie is talking as though social interaction was totally foreign to 'introverts' and they'd love it if they gave it a try - when in reality they probably do give it a try, they just find it more effort and/or less rewarding than she does.
(To be fair, people are doing the same to her, in suggesting that she has no concept or appreciation of 'quiet time', when the likelihood is that she finds quiet time less rewarding, etc.)
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Fine sitting companionably with people you know - nothing wrong with that. But strangers/semi-starngers/aquaintances - the best way to get to know them, especially in groups, is to talk with and listen to them. This is very obvious imo.
You don't get it, do you. Talking isn't the only way you find out things about people. Sit and watch them for a bit. You might be surprised what you pick up from that. Family dynamics, relationship tensions, states of health, the way they live - the things people wear, the way they hold themselves, their body language, all of this can say so much. Spoken words can be deceptive but actually watch people and see what you can pick up. It can be fascinating, revealing, illuminating. We broadcast quite a lot about ourselves through the medium of our choices, conscious and unconscious. What people say and what they actually believe or do can be quite different.
I think the other point here is that "finding out about people" is only a small and actually quite superficial part of socialising. And even then, I find I learn a lot more about a person from their bookshelves than from talking to them.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Another problem for some extroverts is wanting to do something, in a kind of busy busy way.
Now I'm confused. I manage social interaction, but find it exhausting and would prefer to sit quietly with someone than talk about nothing of importance. Sharing feelings and personal stuff is almost impossible. Conversely I enjoy discussions of politics, the faith etc, and find such conversations refreshing. Which I always took to be fairly classic introversion.
But, I can't stop and do nothing. I need to be doing something. It might be something to watch on TV, a book to read, a computer game to play. The idea of a holiday which consists of sitting on a beach doing nothing all day is close to my idea of Hell - give me museums, scenery to admire, even a day shopping for shoes! Does that make me extrovert then?
No, it doesn't, as I was talking complete bollocks. I got muddled up, between talking about counselling and extroversion in general.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
You see, I read this and think - what is it about your experience that makes you think you are an introvert ?
Yes, exactly. The "quiet day" is still filled with people. If you wander round a city, go to a coffee shop, hang out on the Ship or spend time on your phone you're still "being with people". You may not be actually directly speaking to them but their presence makes the experience what it is. The snatches of conversation, laughter, shouts, calls you hear in crowded places, the chat in a text-based medium, it's still company.
I'd regard someone as an introvert if they lived alone, worked from home full time on something like computer programming, and liked to spend their spare time getting away from people and going off into the wilds alone.
Contact with people is what keeps most of us relatively sane and knocks the corners off; too much isolation can send you nutty; but different people need different levels.
I think your definition of "introvert" is rather narrow. There aren't many people who'd meet your definition. No-one with a family, for starters.
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Talking isn't the only way you find out things about people. Sit and watch them for a bit. You might be surprised what you pick up from that. Family dynamics, relationship tensions, states of health, the way they live - the things people wear, the way they hold themselves, their body language, all of this can say so much. Spoken words can be deceptive but actually watch people and see what you can pick up. It can be fascinating, revealing, illuminating. We broadcast quite a lot about ourselves through the medium of our choices, conscious and unconscious. What people say and what they actually believe or do can be quite different.
I've been on a number of training courses where they tell us that some random but large percentage of communication is non-verbal. The statistic is almost certainly generated by the logical process called 'abstrahando ab ano' but I suspect the underlying message isn't.
(By pulling out of the fundament.)
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Being an introvert doesn't mean living alone. I am married to one, and she is married to one. And we talk, sing, dance, laugh, get pissed, see friends, all without a safety net!
Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
What doesn't work is finding a quiet corner to read (or, for others it might be knitting), and have people come up and insist that I need to join in the fun
One of my favourite quotes (from one of the Hilary Tamar series but I forget which) concerns a young woman who finds herself at an orgy. Sex, drugs and rock and roll are on offer and she's told to do exactly what would make her feel good. She takes out a book and sits in a corner reading it. This causes consternation...
[ 17. March 2016, 09:10: Message edited by: Helen-Eva ]
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
A very enjoyable thread for me; it's brilliant reading different people's views on being alone, being with people, just being, etc.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Ariston: Like, I hate small talk. Fucking hate that meaningless, pointless, waste-of-time bullshit. Don't ask me how my day is when I first get to work. I just got to work.
I think there are different understandings about what small talk is, and what it is supposed to achieve. To many people, it isn't about an exchange of factual information.
Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
You simply don't get it!
The small talk is a lead into conversation - it's the ice breaker, the sociable way of gently finding out if the person wants to chat.
That's fine as long as it IS being used as an ice-breaker. I'm a sociable introvert who enjoys a good conversation.
Some people, however, don't treat the small talk just as an ice-breaker, they go on and on and on with meaningless, superficial waffle. And that is draining, a waste of my precious energy (and theirs, IMO). If you're going to engage me in conversation, make it interesting, for pete's sake.
I am surprised at some of the stereotypes about introverts. There is not one cookie-cutter size which fits everyone, as per Karl's point above. The idea that introverts don't want to have fun and never, ever go to parties is just plain wrong. I enjoy a party, as long as I can get some time-out to recharge the batteries.
Introverted is not the same thing as being shy. Shy people are usually introverts: that doesn't mean that all introverts are shy.
It's certainly not the same thing as being selfish.
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariston:
Like, I hate small talk. Fucking hate that meaningless, pointless, waste-of-time bullshit.
This sums up your long, rambling post.
You simply don't get it!
The small talk is a lead into conversation - it's the ice breaker, the sociable way of gently finding out if the person wants to chat.
So, me at the canal lock - "Have you come far?"
Other person "No, just from Foxton" silence.
Me - silence, do lock, go back on boat.
(That was an introvert, totally uninterested except for getting the lock done)
Next lock me "Have you come far?"
Other person "Yes, we came from Foxton today and .... chat about when they started, ehare they have been, when they are going home ... "
Me "What do you think about the refurbished pub at Foxton"
Other person "Not keen ... nice chat about beers etc"
(My type of chat )
PS Ariston - no need to shout
Oh. I'm so, so, very sorry for making you sit still, read examples from lived experience, and think. I know it's exceedingly hard to discuss something not bleedingly obvious if you're only used to talking about the weather, the banal details of your day, kids, etc.
My most sincere apologies.
In the interest of fairness, it seems only appropriate to warn you that this conversation is likely to continue along these lines. I regret to inform you that I'm just fine not discussing the weather, or the details of a weekday, or the other meaningless things that your mayfly mind will probably think part of polite discussion. I'm sure facebook would be quite willing to take them, though. Best put in an environment people can just scroll past on their way to something meaningful and interesting.
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I have no idea where you get 'clingy' from. I simply enjoy hearing people's stories, I enjoy biographies. Plenty of people like to tell their stories too. I would love those who have never done it to enjoy having an animated, spontaneous conversation with a group of people. Rather like my son, who learned to do this and now loves it.
Of course being introverted isn't a choice - but acting as if extroverts are like this simply to be annoying is a choice!
I'm sorry, the irony of this is exploding my brain. I didn't start a thread accusing you of being annoying or selfish. I used the word "clingy" deliberately to phrase something neutral in a negative way, in the exact way that you've been doing when talking about me. This was a very basic "if I talked about you the way you're talking about me, you wouldn't like it" comparison. And you complained that you don't like it whilst somehow completely failing to grasp the point.
Extroverts are not doing this in order to be annoying, although God knows I find it irritating to be asked if I have plans for the weekend by someone I'll never see again. It's just how you are. For fuck's sake extend the same courtesy to other people.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
One thing that used to interest me was the idea that most actors are introverts. This is a kind of cliche that is passed around, and I haven't been able to find any actual statistics on it.
People cite famous actors who are supposed to be introverts, e.g. people often cite Harrison Ford, but then it's really difficult to get more detail on this. He was a quiet kid at school, blah blah blah.
But at any rate, if there are quite a few introverted actors, it shows how complicated intro/extroversion is.
As others have said, some introverts socialize easily, are not shy, like parties, like performing, and so on.
I have also heard people say that they went through a life change, e.g. they were extroverted in their early life, and became introverted.
Posted by Cenobite (# 14853) on
:
I rarely venture into Hell, but saw this thread and thought I might find it interesting, which I certainly did!
One thing which I believe is a common characteristic of introverts (it is for me) is that I will generally only contribute to a conversation if I believe I have something to contribute. So if someone else has said what I would have said, then I don't repeat it. It can make me look like I'm not engaging in a group discussion, when the reality is that I am likely very interested and engaged, but I have spent so much time thinking through what I would like to say, that someone else says it before I do! And then there's no point (in my mind) in repeating it.
With this discussion, there is something I would like to contribute, which is my appreciation of the absolute brilliance of Adeodatus' quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
One of the great things about introverts is we're often very good at putting on a front. So we may be smiling because we like you, or we may be smiling and imagining what it would be like to wear your skin.
Posted by goperryrevs (# 13504) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Extroverts who don't self-monitor (which is some, not all of them) are like the people who sit down in a pew and spread themselves and their belongings. Which is fine until you have to sit there as it's the last spot in church, and they stare blankly at you and only move when you specifically ask them to--and then, only enough for you to sit on one buttock.
I've noticed a similar dynamic in church housegroups, where we have 'sharing time', where people chat about how their weeks have been, and ask for prayer for things they might be going through. In a group I'm in, most people talk for a couple of minutes, but one particular person, who is extremely extroverted, always takes up at least ten minutes - they just are unable to keep it short. They're probably oblivious that they've sometimes prohibited other people from sharing important things because they've taken so long, and they probably don't even realise that they talk for way longer than everyone else. But I wish they could learn to be as concise as everyone else, and not dominate things so much.
That said, this same person is invaluable during bible study time in terms of drawing out discussion, asking questions, and keeping the conversation going. Which shows we all have our strengths and weaknesses.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I think I get the acting thing. You put on a persona that isn't yours. You are, technically, not metaphorically, a hypocrite, behind a mask. This is freeing. And the interaction is provided for you.
Except with improv, which is definitely not something I get at all. Like small talk.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Cenobite: I rarely venture into Hell
(Another introvert lured into Hell by this thread. A couple more, and we can close the trap.)
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I think I get the acting thing. You put on a persona that isn't yours. You are, technically, not metaphorically, a hypocrite, behind a mask. This is freeing. And the interaction is provided for you.
Except with improv, which is definitely not something I get at all. Like small talk.
Yes, I think the persona thing is important. I did some acting a long time ago, and I remember how relaxed it felt. And we did improv, and that felt relaxed. I suppose it didn't matter, although I guess for a professional it matters a lot.
Posted by Cenobite (# 14853) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Cenobite: I rarely venture into Hell
(Another introvert lured into Hell by this thread. A couple more, and we can close the trap.)
Uh-oh - is it too late to escape?!
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
One thing that used to interest me was the idea that most actors are introverts. This is a kind of cliche that is passed around, and I haven't been able to find any actual statistics on it.
People cite famous actors who are supposed to be introverts, e.g. people often cite Harrison Ford, but then it's really difficult to get more detail on this. He was a quiet kid at school, blah blah blah.
But at any rate, if there are quite a few introverted actors, it shows how complicated intro/extroversion is.
Oh, this makes complete sense to me. Acting's adopting a persona, after all—and what better way to protect your core self in public than to completely adopt and inhabit a new self, a new facade? It's self-protection taken to an art form, the smiling face required to navigate society used on stage or screen. If you're used to dissociating and putting on a face for society, if you've gotten good at acting in one role, why not try on one or two more?
There's a part of me that wants to try improv comedy, but knows that, in order to do it, I'd have to completely dissociate. I couldn't be present at all—I'd become self-concious, freak out, lose my head on stage. I'd have to become someone completely different, adopt tropes and personae nobody would ever associate with me, down to gender, name, appearance...wait, isn't there a grand old tradition of comics cross-dressing, adopting unusual accents and names, and acting in completely bizarre ways they never would day-to-day?
That whole "living a lie" thing, of having to adopt a false front in order to protect your core self, crack jokes to distract anyone from getting too close to your base persona—seems pretty handy for an actor or comic, doesn't it?
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Or we may be smiling because we want to get in your pants.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
I have done a lot of improv theatre, and in my experience it involves your real self interacting with the real selves of other actors very much.
Yes you're playing roles, but an interaction on a rather personal level needs to take place to allow your creativity to interact with the other person's creativity.
[ 17. March 2016, 14:15: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
Posted by Firenze (# 619) on
:
My name is Firenze and I talk to people at bus stops.
Since my first action is usually to check the app on my phone which says when the next bus is due, my next is to communicate the news to anyone else at the stop. If, like me, they are sociable and bored by standing in a street in the cold, they will respond and off we go. This morning it was about early flowers and the beauty of winter sunlight.
I have also, in the past months, had occasion to offer conversational openings to people who either have a close friend or relative who is seriously ill or who are themselves ill, perhaps terminally so. If they want to talk, I will talk.
I do this because I genuinely need to communicate to and with other people. I can - and do - do fair amounts of silence and solitariness, and a deal of casual, trivial, getting-by-in-the-world social exchange. It is not an either/or, more a going with what is.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I have done a lot of improv theatre, and in my experience it involves your real self interacting with the real selves of other actors very much.
Yes you're playing roles, but an interaction on a rather personal level needs to take place to allow your creativity to interact with the other person's creativity.
Interesting. Play is learning, improv is pretty much a play experience. When kids on a playground act out stories, they are similarly "trying each other out."
(And I have thought about doing improv-- pretty recently too. Ariston, if you wanna do a long distance audio podcast version, hit me up. )
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Well, in old age, I now talk to everybody anywhere. It's something to do with not caring, if I look an idiot.
So I could describe my life in phases - up to 35, manically extrovert; 35-60 fiercely introverted, almost hermitic; 60 onwards, insanely chatty.
It just shows you, eh? There's nowt so funny as folk.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I have done a lot of improv theatre, and in my experience it involves your real self interacting with the real selves of other actors very much.
Yes you're playing roles, but an interaction on a rather personal level needs to take place to allow your creativity to interact with the other person's creativity.
You are obviously Strasberg-influenced, whereas I was trained in the British neo-realist tradition, e.g. Colin Welland. So it goes. <joke>
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
Extroverts are not doing this in order to be annoying, although God knows I find it irritating to be asked if I have plans for the weekend by someone I'll never see again. It's just how you are. For fuck's sake extend the same courtesy to other people.
I do, I do all the time.
Thus this thread. It was a knee jerk reaction, I confess. But, nonetheless - just as you get irritated by small talk I get very, very tired of curbing the fun side of my nature to keep my introverted friends and family comfortable.
I also confess to using the word 'selfish' in the title to draw people in to the conversation (boy, it worked!) I don't think introverts are any more selfish than anyone else - but I do think they are too concerned with what others think of them. 'I only speak when I feel I can contribute' 'I only like meaningful conversations' 'I need to think before I speak' 'I can't bear to be the centre of attention' all speak, to me, of self-consciousness which can look a lot like lack of interest in other people.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
But, nonetheless - just as you get irritated by small talk I get very, very tired of curbing the fun side of my nature to keep my introverted friends and family comfortable.
Then find some compatible people you can let it all out with and be as loud as you want with. There's no law that says you have to spend your spare time with people you can't be yourself with.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
Extroverts are not doing this in order to be annoying, although God knows I find it irritating to be asked if I have plans for the weekend by someone I'll never see again. It's just how you are. For fuck's sake extend the same courtesy to other people.
I do, I do all the time.
Thus this thread. It was a knee jerk reaction, I confess. But, nonetheless - just as you get irritated by small talk I get very, very tired of curbing the fun side of my nature to keep my introverted friends and family comfortable.
I also confess to using the word 'selfish' in the title to draw people in to the conversation (boy, it worked!) I don't think introverts are any more selfish than anyone else - but I do think they are too concerned with what others think of them. 'I only speak when I feel I can contribute' 'I only like meaningful conversations' 'I need to think before I speak' 'I can't bear to be the centre of attention' all speak, to me, of self-consciousness which can look a lot like lack of interest in other people.
Well that's where you're wrong. It's not about that at all. Bear in mind that contributing has a cost to us, so we need to make it count.
Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
But, nonetheless - just as you get irritated by small talk I get very, very tired of curbing the fun side of my nature to keep my introverted friends and family comfortable.
I can understand why that would be frustrating, and sympathise. I can sometimes be very voluble and opinionated (for an introvert) and I, too, get irritated when other people seem to want to squash someone having fun. I can also find it difficult to be in the company of introverts who are much more introverted than me. I'm a sociable introvert, and I appreciate a good conversation and a good laugh. But being an introvert, usually once I've expressed that ebullient side of myself, I will try to withdraw just so I can re-charge my inner batteries.
quote:
I don't think introverts are any more selfish than anyone else - but I do think they are too concerned with what others think of them. 'I only speak when I feel I can contribute' 'I only like meaningful conversations' 'I need to think before I speak' 'I can't bear to be the centre of attention' all speak, to me, of self-consciousness which can look a lot like lack of interest in other people.
No, that's not it. It's not always related to 'what people think of us'. Some introverts ARE excessively self-conscious, but it's a mistake to think that all of us are, or that we are all of the time.
The main reason why I 'only speak when I feel I can contribute' and I 'only like meaningful conversations' and I 'need to think before I speak' is because I am wired that way , NOT because I am actively suppressing anything, and not always because I care about what others might think. It's pretty much because the energy would literally drain out of me if I operated in any other way.
I need to think before I speak because a lot of other people are saying very worthwhile things. There's no point in my repeating them. It takes up precious time and energy. Introverts aren't repressing our natural personalities or our life-force. We are simply being ourselves.
Also, some of us have been bullied for being introverts. I was very quiet and shy as a child, and easily upset by verbal bullying. I am not shy as an adult, indeed I am a friendly person with fairly good social skills but I am still very much an introvert, and always will be. It doesn't mean that I'm not interested in people!
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariston:
There's a part of me that wants to try improv comedy... I'd have to become someone completely different, adopt tropes and personae nobody would ever associate with me, down to gender, name, appearance...
I have done this on occasion--not improv comedy, but becoming somebody almost completely different, usually for brief moments involving a telemarketer or a scary stranger on the street. It is amazingly fun. In one case I went totally sixteenth-century on their ass (you should have heard my Elizabethan), which doubtless confused the hell out of them but that was more or less what I wanted, wasn't it? In another case I spoke German to them and acted the part of a confused tourist--which got rid of the immensely tall, menacing beggar who was frustrated that his menaces weren't translating. (He replied in the good old unvarnished Anglo Saxon. )
There are so few opportunities to become a different person, that I treasure these memories, in spite of the scary or annoying cause. It actually gives me sympathy for the people who build harmless personas (NOT curious buddhist, then) on board Ship or elsewhere; I'd do it myself if I were not aware how many people would feel betrayed.
And I doubt I could keep it up for long.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
It's true, really, about the "need to think before we speak". The few occasions when I've rashly opened my mouth and "let it flow," the temperature of the room dropped ten degrees as everybody pondered whether to say something in reply or just tactfully ignore the turd I'd dumped. I have to do quality control on my speech if I don't want to experience those moments every freaking day. Whatever magic oil has touched the lips of the extrovert, I was off in a corner when God was handing it out.
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
...
You simply don't get it!
The small talk is a lead into conversation - it's the ice breaker, the sociable way of gently finding out if the person wants to chat.....
<blah> <blah> <blah>
(My type of chat )
...
One day your telephone rings. You answer, and the person on the other end of the line says, "Hey, remember me? We met at the lock on such-and-such. I have a problem. My mum has cancer and my car broke down and I'm having a really hard time getting her to her treatments. Could you possibly help us out?"
And yes, you might talk for a few minutes longer, and if it turns out that s/he lives in your area, you might be willing to help out. And if it turns out that mum is a demented, incontinent hag who hates dogs and smokes in your car, how long will you keep driving her around? What would you be willing to do for a person you talked to at a lock 8 years ago? Or the hundreds, maybe thousands of other people you've small-talked to? Are any of them important enough to you - based just on chit-chat - to make a significant personal effort or sacrifice years later? Or were all those conversations nothing more than entertainment for you?
All that pleasant chat, all that sociable human interaction is obviously very nice for you, but don't kid yourself or anybody else, it was never a relationship. One difference between introvert and extrovert is sort of like quality vs. quantity. You like to have lots of casual acquaintances. Introverts don't need or want that. I'm quite certain you have a few very, very intimate friends; so do most introverts. We all need that.
quote:
...I don't think introverts are any more selfish than anyone else - but I do think they are too concerned with what others think of them. 'I only speak when I feel I can contribute' 'I only like meaningful conversations' 'I need to think before I speak' 'I can't bear to be the centre of attention' all speak, to me, of self-consciousness which can look a lot like lack of interest in other people. ...
And maybe it looks like that to you, but one again, you've gotten it completely back-assward. Introverts are people who care so much about other people that they don't want to bore them or waste their time with irrelevant or meaningless or repetitive talk, they don't want to thoughtlessly say something stupid or rude, and they want to share the spotlight with everyone. That all sounds pretty un-selfish to me. And you're starting to sound pretty fucking self-centered expecting that every person you meet must provide you with what you want -- and if they don't, they're not interested in other people ... really? Maybe you're not as universally fascinating and engaging as you think you are.
Do you get it yet, or will I have to get the rolled-up newspaper?
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
One day your telephone rings. You answer, and the person on the other end of the line says, "Hey, remember me? We met at the lock on such-and-such. I have a problem. My mum has cancer and my car broke down and I'm having a really hard time getting her to her treatments. Could you possibly help us out?"
Interestingly, I did exactly that for our caretaker's wife (she needed to be transported to Christie's for radiotherapy) on three occasions. I hardly know him and have only chatted with him after school. No 'meaningful relationship' there.
Why not help out someone in need if you are available and able?
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
It's true, really, about the "need to think before we speak". The few occasions when I've rashly opened my mouth and "let it flow," the temperature of the room dropped ten degrees as everybody pondered whether to say something in reply or just tactfully ignore the turd I'd dumped. I have to do quality control on my speech if I don't want to experience those moments every freaking day. Whatever magic oil has touched the lips of the extrovert, I was off in a corner when God was handing it out.
For me it's more fundamentally that my natural thought patterns are not very verbal, and so there is always a slight lag while the translator module kicks in.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Soror Magna: All that pleasant chat, all that sociable human interaction is obviously very nice for you, but don't kid yourself or anybody else, it was never a relationship.
It is. It is perhaps shorter and less deep than other relationships that I have but to me, part of small talk is about recognising each other as human beings. And that's a relationship. Not all relationships involve driving each other to the hospital.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
Small talk has its uses. Don't write it off completely. A smile, quip, friendly word, exchange about the weather, etc may be banal but sometimes it can make a real difference to someone else. It may just be a small interaction but sometimes it can be enough to brighten someone's day or lighten their mood.
I've found myself that idle chat at a bus stop, in a queue, etc, can sometimes lead to sudden insights or helpful suggestions as much as a reassuring mutual grumble about the weather or the habitual lateness of buses.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I have done a lot of improv theatre, and in my experience it involves your real self interacting with the real selves of other actors very much.
Yes you're playing roles, but an interaction on a rather personal level needs to take place to allow your creativity to interact with the other person's creativity.
I think this is the very point at which improv is different from acting to a script. Especially if you're using "the method." You purposely bury your own self and put on some other personality.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
I think conversation matters. Small talk is not about being deep and meaningful and the subject is usually (almost) irrelevant. In a conversation with someone, whether it lasts a moment at the bus stop - or develops into a long lasting relationship, the reason for small talk is to show a positive emotional connection between two human beings - however fleeting.
I think that, while small talk may seem to be about nothing at all, it is really about understanding subtle communication. About responding to people with a sense of connection - in other words, being human.
I think the same about body language.
Of course we are not always in the mood for small talk - but to dismiss it all is to miss the point and to miss out a on great deal imo.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
Watching the English, by the anthropologist Kate Fox explains a lot about English conversational social rules - including small talk. I recommend reading it, to one and all, if you are English or have spent time in England it is somewhat addictive.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Watching the English, by the anthropologist Kate Fox explains a lot about English conversational social rules - including small talk. I recommend reading it, to one and all, if you are English or have spent time in England it is somewhat addictive.
Bought!
(for £2.81)
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
mousethief: I think this is the very point at which improv is different from acting to a script. Especially if you're using "the method." You purposely bury your own self and put on some other personality.
I have done improv when I was younger in the Netherlands, and in Brazil. I don't know which method our teachers used.
What I do know is that a lot of it was about being on stage with another actor. It was a lot about giving each other room, feeling when it's your turn to carry the scene and when it's the other one's, trusting the other one to take an idea you've come up with further, making the scene more about the relationship than about two actors individually.
Sure some self-reflection was involved, but it was very much a relational thing.
In fact, I am still using a lot of what I learned there in my personal and professional life (OK, this is something I'd say in a job interview but it is true).
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
You see, I read this and think - what is it about your experience that makes you think you are an introvert ?
Isn't the issue (and I have the impression that you unlike me know what you are talking about) that most people are extrovert or introvert depending on circumstances, and people get labelled (or label themselves) introverts if the proportion of circumstances in which they behave introvertedly is greater than average?
Consequently Boogie is talking as though social interaction was totally foreign to 'introverts' and they'd love it if they gave it a try - when in reality they probably do give it a try, they just find it more effort and/or less rewarding than she does.
(To be fair, people are doing the same to her, in suggesting that she has no concept or appreciation of 'quiet time', when the likelihood is that she finds quiet time less rewarding, etc.)
I suppose that to me, a lot of people are describing proportions of into/extra verted behaviour that appear to be pretty much average. Most human attributes are "normally distributed", ie, conform to the bell curve in their distribution across the population. Usually, you would only start considering such and such an attribute worth highlighting if it were a long way from average. Which is where some may get the idea that my definitions of introvert / extravert are quite narrow.
Coming back to the rainbow statement issue I mentioned in the thread - if some label describes virtually everyone - then it has little descriptive value at all.
Not liking small talk, or not liking people not responding to culturally standard non-verbal communciation (I am reading a book so don't start a conversation with me), or not understanding (or affecting not to understand) non-verbal meanings of episodes of speech (why ask how my day's going when I've only just got here) are not in themselves indicators of these two traits.
They may be indicators of various other things, but not necessarily introversion and extraversion.
I am unclear why anyone would especially want to identify with either characteristic, they convey nothing about a person's worth, likability or moral character.
Earlier on the thread, it was asserted that it is always introverts who get scolded about their behaviour, I don't think this is true - a lot of people also spend their lives being told they talk too much, are too loud etc. I suspect the more different you are from average, in either direction, the more grief you get given about it.
[ 17. March 2016, 19:11: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I think conversation matters. Small talk is not about being deep and meaningful and the subject is usually (almost) irrelevant. In a conversation with someone, whether it lasts a moment at the bus stop - or develops into a long lasting relationship, the reason for small talk is to show a positive emotional connection between two human beings - however fleeting.
I think that, while small talk may seem to be about nothing at all, it is really about understanding subtle communication. About responding to people with a sense of connection - in other words, being human.
I think the same about body language.
Of course we are not always in the mood for small talk - but to dismiss it all is to miss the point and to miss out a on great deal imo.
It might be all those things, but it's also extremely tiring and very hard to do. So some of us prefer not to do it too much.
Doublethink - I think I identify with the label because, to be honest, it gives me simple shorthand way of explaining why I prefer to eat my lunch on my own and don't want to go on works outings to noisy pubs. I don't really know or care whether that's classic introversion, but most people seem to understand it and are willing to leave me alone, which is what I'm after a lot of the time.
[ 17. March 2016, 20:18: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Earlier on the thread, it was asserted that it is always introverts who get scolded about their behaviour, I don't think this is true - a lot of people also spend their lives being told they talk too much, are too loud etc. I suspect the more different you are from average, in either direction, the more grief you get given about it.
I wonder if the difference comes in whom you get scolded by?
The average guy-in-the-street (or at a canal lock) has no idea whether you are usually chatty or not. He's more likely to yell at someone who is impinging on his peace (the extrovert) than to yell at an introvert for boring him.
But families--well, "You need to come out of your shell" seems to be a constant refrain, but I've rarely come across "put a sock in it!" though I'm sure it happens. The trouble is, they know your pattern and will criticize accordingly. (that is, extrovert members of the family will do so--introverts are more likely to seethe quietly until you get on their last nerve)
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Fortunately I'm an introvert from a family of introverts and so my behaviour has always looked perfectly normal to my family.
With the small talk thing though, I often wonder whether this is introversion or my touch of ASD. There is, of course, a hypothesis that they're the same thing, and ASDs can be seen as extreme forms of introversion.
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I think conversation matters. Small talk is not about being deep and meaningful
Wrong Planet periodically has threads explaining small talk. That's how I learned to make peace with it.
Great web site for people who never quite got socialized and therefore find social interactions operate by puzzling rules.
A Wrong Planet item on secrets of small talk
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Argh! It's one of those sites where all the quote marks render as question marks
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I prefer to eat my lunch on my own and don't want to go on works outings to noisy pubs.
I would consider a work outing to a noisy pub preferable to a work outing to a quiet pub. A noisy pub curtails the social circle, assuming there is someone you can feel comfortable with (another introvert who is going to be content sampling a selection of real ales) you can get your beers, sit in a corner in companionable silence, and no one will notice. In a quiet pub there will be a larger group around the table talking about the footie match last night, and you will be expected to join in the conversation.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
LeRoc, you're still in the realm of improv, though. I contrasted improv with acting to a script. I think they are very different. If I were playing Hamlet, for example, i would not be relating to the other actors on the stage as a twenty-first century American math teacher, but i would try to bury the 20 th century American and take on the persona of a16 th century Danish prince. What i did off stage would be irrelevant; i could leave ME behind and besomebody somebody else. My performance would be judged not by how well i got across my real self, but by how well i created the illusion that i was a16th century Danish prince having an existential crIsis.
(Apologies for the crummy typing; I'm on my phone. )
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
mousethief: LeRoc, you're still in the realm of improv, though.
My life is always firmly in the realm of improv
Maybe we're misunderstanding each other again. On this thread, various introvs were considering doing theatre, including both scripted theatre and improv. I suggested that if putting on a mask and not showing much of your 'core self' is what you're going for, improv (at least the kind of improv I did) might not be the thing that offers that.
Not that I'd want to stop anyone from doing improv.
Posted by Athrawes (# 9594) on
:
Boogie, you still seem determined to see introversion as somehow less, or unfriendlier, or inferior to being an extrovert, so I'll try again. Maybe an analogy will help.
Firstly, introversion/extroversion is about where you get your energy. It is a continuum, with a few people at the extreme ends, and most people somewhere in the middle, displaying traits from both.
Extroverts are like a solar panel - they take in their energy from social interactions, and like a solar panel, they simply need to be exposed to gain energy. It doesn't cost them anything, and the supply is limitless, provided they are interacting socially.
Introverts are battery operated. They carry a finite amount of energy with them, and need to conserve that energy, since social interactions use it up. They then need to recharge their battery. Small talk and chat use up energy which most introverts would prefer to save for important interactions, so they don't value it as much as an extrovert, for whom it is a source of energy.
I hope this helps you to understand that we are simply wired differently! Not less or more friendly/social/fun loving, but different.
If you really want to understand, then here is an experiment you can do. Take note of your energy level and mood. Set a timer for one hour and then spend that hour with no social interactions at all. You could read, watch a movie, go for a solitary walk, do some housework; anything you like as long as you are not talking or interacting with others. At the end of the hour, check your energy level and mood again. This may give you an idea of how an introvert feels after giving out energy socially.
[ 18. March 2016, 08:44: Message edited by: Athrawes ]
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
I am unclear why anyone would especially want to identify with either characteristic, they convey nothing about a person's worth, likability or moral character.
Well, I suspect for some posters it's because they've done Myers-Briggs.
FWIW I'm leery of identifying as an introvert because a.) I think 'introverted' describes behaviours, not people, and b.) I don't like using clinical terminology in a non-clinical context. However I'm pretty sure Boogie *would* describe me as an introvert - hence I perceive the OP as something of an attack.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I prefer to eat my lunch on my own and don't want to go on works outings to noisy pubs.
I would consider a work outing to a noisy pub preferable to a work outing to a quiet pub. A noisy pub curtails the social circle, assuming there is someone you can feel comfortable with (another introvert who is going to be content sampling a selection of real ales) you can get your beers, sit in a corner in companionable silence, and no one will notice. In a quiet pub there will be a larger group around the table talking about the footie match last night, and you will be expected to join in the conversation.
They don't do outings to quiet pubs. Fortunately I work with IT geeks so conversation would be more likely to be about the relative merits of various fantasy or science fiction settings, with plenty of one liners from Blackadder and references to Python, together with some whining about management and anecdotes about users dead from the neck up. Sometimes combined, as in "When I were a pimply faced youth, we didn't 'ave no fancy icons and GUIs. We 'ad a command line, an' we were grateful fer it!"
I can't abide what I refer to as "cavern taverns" - huge pubs with nowhere to sit and full of people shouting conversation at the tops of the voices to be heard over the music (seldom worthy of the name) which is turned up to max volume to be heard over the shouted conversations. Hell indeed.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Thank you Athrawes, your explanation really was helpful.
But this bit is not accurate at all.
quote:
Originally posted by Athrawes:
Extroverts are like a solar panel - they take in their energy from social interactions, and like a solar panel, they simply need to be exposed to gain energy. It doesn't cost them anything, and the supply is limitless, provided they are interacting socially.
Social interactions are, and always will be, complicated. They take work and effort, especially so if introverted people are around.
The supply is far from limitless if you are retired and live with introverts! Keeping quiet for their sake is a tiring effort and certainly not free from cost.
I also get my ideas (for my painting and teaching) when interacting, so my dogs are now my sounding boards (!) they don't reply but saying the stuff out loud helps a lot even without replies.
Don't get me wrong, I get on well with my husband and brother (who lives with us three days a week) but I find I have to find other friends to spend time with to recharge my batteries. On Saturday I am going out with two guide dog owners I met online, my husband is bemused - he doesn't see the point!
Posted by Athrawes (# 9594) on
:
Thanks for your clarification. As I said, it's a continuum. I suppose I was describing the extremes, and most of us are somewhere in the middle. I'm glad you found the analogy helpful, though. I also think social interactions are complex, and they certainly take thought and care to maintain. Pets are great, because you can talk to them, use them as sounding boards, interact with them, and it's not as complex. They just love you, regardless.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: I can't abide what I refer to as "cavern taverns" - huge pubs with nowhere to sit and full of people shouting conversation at the tops of the voices to be heard over the music (seldom worthy of the name) which is turned up to max volume to be heard over the shouted conversations. Hell indeed.
I'm an extrovert, and I dislike those too.
(Funnily, I think that in such a pub it would be easier for an introvert to go unnoticed.)
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: I can't abide what I refer to as "cavern taverns" - huge pubs with nowhere to sit and full of people shouting conversation at the tops of the voices to be heard over the music (seldom worthy of the name) which is turned up to max volume to be heard over the shouted conversations. Hell indeed.
I'm an extrovert, and I dislike those too.
(Funnily, I think that in such a pub it would be easier for an introvert to go unnoticed.)
Me too - too loud, you can't hear what anyone is saying.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: I can't abide what I refer to as "cavern taverns" - huge pubs with nowhere to sit and full of people shouting conversation at the tops of the voices to be heard over the music (seldom worthy of the name) which is turned up to max volume to be heard over the shouted conversations. Hell indeed.
I'm an extrovert, and I dislike those too.
(Funnily, I think that in such a pub it would be easier for an introvert to go unnoticed.)
Doesn't make up for the noise and there being nowhere to sit.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
This is something else which interests me, along with actors being introverts - the attraction of opposites. I remember an extrovert girl-friend I had, and life was quite difficult (for me), as she was a party girl, and most week-ends were filled with people staying with us, long dinner parties, tons of booze, and so on.
It used to knacker me. (I have a photo from that time, and my eyes look like pools of dead mud). My wife is quite similar to me, so we are pretty quiet, and tend to escape to salt marshes, and long beaches with few people, the call of the curlew and so on.
But I expect that you find both situations, that is, introvert and extrovert living together, and then intro/intro and so on.
There is another cliche, that two introverted people never do anything, as they are too quiet, but I don't really believe that.
[ 18. March 2016, 10:18: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: Doesn't make up for the noise and there being nowhere to sit.
I agree. I guess this shows that "small talk it tiring for us" isn't the whole story.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
I find it irritating to be asked if I have plans for the weekend by someone I'll never see again.
I tend to answer that by saying that my life as an intgrovert is interesting enough without having to make 'plans' for the weekend or for any other time. It's the seeming superficiality of extroverts that they need to invent contant distractions for themselves.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
I only ask "any plans for the weekend?" to colleagues whom I know reasonably well and with whom we'd already talk about off-work stuff normally.
I do ask "had a nice weekend?" to pretty much anyone on Monday, but that's easily answered with "yeah, it was OK".
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
That Wrong Planet page was interesting. Definitely showed that whatever inhibits my social interactions isn't the spectrum because I can read other people, and mirror them (I've had to work not to in the past because it made my interest too obvious). But it left me with a really tricky problem. My mouth won't let me smile like that. It's the wrong shape. Any tooth showing, top or bottom, and I look like an aggressive chimp, as I have to draw my lips back so far.
That can't possibly have been the problem at school, surely?
And I still can't do the verbal bit of small talk.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Don't get me wrong, I get on well with my husband and brother (who lives with us three days a week)...
(aside) ...uh, these are two different individuals, right? Just checking...
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Don't get me wrong, I get on well with my husband and brother (who lives with us three days a week)...
(aside) ...uh, these are two different individuals, right? Just checking...
Haha - very much so, but both very quiet fellas!
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
"Where you get your energy from" is not really a meaningful statement. It doesn't explain what it is that is difficult.
Though sensory overload seems to emerge from this thread as a theme. Separately from social demand.
Some folk may be imterested in this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_Integration_Dysfunction (there is something of an over emphasis om the connection with ASD).
[ 18. March 2016, 15:54: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
I find it irritating to be asked if I have plans for the weekend by someone I'll never see again.
I tend to answer that by saying that my life as an intgrovert is interesting enough without having to make 'plans' for the weekend or for any other time. It's the seeming superficiality of extroverts that they need to invent contant distractions for themselves.
This seems to misunderstand the purpose of the question, most often someone asking this is not seeking information, anymore than someone asking what you think about this morning's weather is at all interested in the weather.
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on
:
Indeed, social niceties are more meta than we tend to appreciate. The very act of taking time to acknowledge somebody has functional meaning to our lizard brain, and is a key component to social cohesion.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I only ask "any plans for the weekend?" to colleagues whom I know reasonably well and with whom we'd already talk about off-work stuff normally.
Which is why I hate going to the barbers' - especially as they often talk "laddish" stuff which really isn't me.
Call me a grouch ... but I like my hair cut with the minimum of conversation (although I don't want to be rude either).
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Hmm...in my experience, small talk about the weather can mean something or not. "Any plans this weekend?" usually does ask for at least a little information and can feel intrusive, depending on who asks.
Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Hmm...in my experience, small talk about the weather can mean something or not. "Any plans this weekend?" usually does ask for at least a little information and can feel intrusive, depending on who asks.
Yes - the danger is if you say "no" then they'll say "well in that case why don't you come alligator wrestling with us" or if you say "yes" then they'll say "can we come too?"
This makes me look awful doesn't it?
Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Call me a grouch ... but I like my hair cut with the minimum of conversation (although I don't want to be rude either).
Q: "How would Sir like his hair cut?"
A: "In silence."
No idea who said it but it's so true. Apologies for double post.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Helen-Eva:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Hmm...in my experience, small talk about the weather can mean something or not. "Any plans this weekend?" usually does ask for at least a little information and can feel intrusive, depending on who asks.
Yes - the danger is if you say "no" then they'll say "well in that case why don't you come alligator wrestling with us" or if you say "yes" then they'll say "can we come too?"
This makes me look awful doesn't it?
But you don't have to!
Open questions are the key.
"Nothing exciting, what about you?" is a perfect answer. You are not disclosing anything but you are, at the same time, showing that you are a friendly person.
[ 18. March 2016, 16:38: Message edited by: Boogie ]
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on
:
And then they say, "Why don't you come alligator wrestling with us? That's exciting!"
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
Or if you don't want the conversation to contnue, "oh just the usual", without the reciprocal question.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
And then they say, "Why don't you come alligator wrestling with us? That's exciting!"
To which the answer is "No thank you"
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Lyda*Rose: And then they say, "Why don't you come alligator wrestling with us? That's exciting!"
The answer to this is: "Nah, thank you. This has kind of lost its excitement for me after I've done it a couple of times already."
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Helen-Eva:
Yes - the danger is if you say "no" then they'll say "well in that case why don't you come alligator wrestling with us" or if you say "yes" then they'll say "can we come too?"
This makes me look awful doesn't it?
To be honest, it makes you look worried and distrusting of other people.
Being invited to an event shouldn't be an issue, in fact, it's great that they want you to join them - but a simple 'no thank you' suffices.
Posted by anne (# 73) on
:
"Recharging my batteries" I've found a useful response to enquiries about plans. Where 'nothing much' is a negative response which might invite helpful(!) suggestions about how you could fill the void, "recharging" is more positive - and for introverts it's an accurate description of 'doing nothing much.'
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Always best at the hairdressers to ask for magazines and just read. No need to talk at all, except for the necessary 'just a tidy up, please.'
I have in the past met people I know slightly at the station in the morning and had the polite one or two words, then, when the train comes, they say, 'oh well, I sit in this carriage' and walk briskly away. That suits me just fine.
M.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
M.: Always best at the hairdressers to ask for magazines and just read.
Er … these days if you want to read you don't need to ask for magazines.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
M.: Always best at the hairdressers to ask for magazines and just read.
Er … these days if you want to read you don't need to ask for magazines.
Good point.
There is much less small talk around since the advent of smart phones - which is to the detriment of society and social cohesion imo.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
I'd rather be in a quiet pub than a noisy one, if I'm going with people. That way you can actually talk to them in a relaxed atmosphere instead of having to shout over other conversations and over-loud music.
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
And then they say, "Why don't you come alligator wrestling with us? That's exciting!"
To which you can legitimately reply:
"That's very kind, but it's not my scene. I'm looking forward to catching up on cataloguing my cornflake collection this weekend. Have fun and let me know how it goes, if you're still alive on Monday!"
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
There is much less small talk around since the advent of smart phones - which is to the detriment of society and social cohesion imo.
The extrovert has lost his or her audience with the smart phone revolution, and part of their identity as well I suppose as often it is introverts who come out of themselves in the virtual world.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
There is much less small talk around since the advent of smart phones - which is to the detriment of society and social cohesion imo.
The extrovert has lost his or her audience with the smart phone revolution, and part of their identity as well I suppose as often it is introverts who come out of themselves in the virtual world.
Small talk has nothing to do with 'having an audience'. It is about finding out about the person you meet - it works like body language. We discover far more about people when we are easy and open with them.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I only ask "any plans for the weekend?" to colleagues whom I know reasonably well and with whom we'd already talk about off-work stuff normally.
Which is why I hate going to the barbers' - especially as they often talk "laddish" stuff which really isn't me.
Call me a grouch ... but I like my hair cut with the minimum of conversation (although I don't want to be rude either).
There is, apparently, an Ancient Greek joke book, which includes this one:
Barber: How would you like your hair cut, sir?
Customer: In silence.
Sorry, Helen-Eva, missed yoour post!
[ 18. March 2016, 18:27: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Small talk has nothing to do with 'having an audience'. It is about finding out about the person you meet - it works like body language. We discover far more about people when we are easy and open with them.
Small talk isn't an introvert/extrovert issue IMO. It's accepted politeness to speak when spoken to, (or used to be).
I do agree though that centuries old accepted forms of human interaction are changing rapidly with the advent of the smart phone and I-pad. Restaurant servers have reported dinning rooms full of people now eating in complete silence while scrolling and reading their LED attention demanders
It's disturbing, outrageous, and will be the death of us all .... says he using social media to say how terrible and fiendish IT is
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
There is much less small talk around since the advent of smart phones - which is to the detriment of society and social cohesion imo.
The extrovert has lost his or her audience with the smart phone revolution, and part of their identity as well I suppose as often it is introverts who come out of themselves in the virtual world.
You know, that's really interesting. My pet peeve with the "OMG I can't possibly look away from my phone for more than 2 seconds" people is that they are completely unaware of their surroundings, including people, cars, rapists, mailboxes, parking meters*, muggers, furniture, pets, children, you name it. This leads to behaviour which ranges from rude to downright dangerous. OTOH, texting is less annoying than YELLING BECAUSE YOU'RE ON A CELL PHONE. Anyway, it's obvious they don't give a rat's ass about anyone or anything else when they're playing with their gadgets.
So if those folks really are extroverts, I'd say it tells us just how much they care about other people. If you're in their audience, they love you. If you're not listening to them, you don't even exist. Heck, not only do you not exist, you're antisocial for not wanting to be their audience, and you're undermining the very bedrock of society.
-----
*Yes, I've seen someone walk into a parking meter while texting. In fact, there was a whole group of people waiting for the bus who watched it happen. Not one among us called out, "Watch out!" or "Stop!" Instead, we all looked at each other, laughed, and shared a precious moment of social cohesion.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
Why is txting/smart phone use so clearly more not giving a fuck than reading a book ? Come to that, how you know they are not reading a book ?
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Why is txting/smart phone use so clearly more not giving a fuck than reading a book ? Come to that, how you know they are not reading a book ?
People don't read books when walking down the street/crossing the road ime.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
I do, when the mood takes me.
(To clarify this is true of both papery objects and kindlyness.)
[ 18. March 2016, 21:31: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Why is txting/smart phone use so clearly more not giving a fuck than reading a book ? Come to that, how you know they are not reading a book ?
People don't read books when walking down the street/crossing the road ime.
I must confess I used to do that all the time, especially as a child walking home from school. Made the time pass so much more quickly.
Hubby and I used to go on dates where we'd each take a book and look up occasionally to share something we'd just read. Sometimes we'd be a whole family doing that at a nice restaurant after church. Nowdays we find we don't get enough time to talk so we don't tend to do that so much.
I don't enjoy reading ebooks as I do the real thing, but I suspect that's just what I'm used to-- a generational thing. Books to me are a very tangible pleasure.
[ 18. March 2016, 21:52: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Being invited to an event shouldn't be an issue ...
And we're right back where we started.
"Shouldn't" is not the point. "Is" or "Is not" is more like it.
I naturally panic (internally, with great effort to keep it out of my face!) when someone issues me an invitation that calls for an on-the-spot response, even if the response need be nothing more than "I'll have to check and get back to you." That simply will not occur to me until I take several deep breaths; the first thing that naturally occurs to me is Ohmigod ohmigod I-don't-know-what-to-say why-me what-should-I-do-now, and to be honest, a tinge of resentment because I feel I've been put on the spot. (Yes, I know this is irrational; it just happens to be the way I'm wired.) Several breaths later it occurs to me that I should say "Let me check and get back to you," and then I go home and take between half an hour to two hours to accustom myself to the idea, at which point I finally feel comfortable and can call them back and be truly enthusiastic.
I am willing to bet that you do not routinely experience panic when invited to do something like going out for coffee or seeing a movie.
I do. Does this make me a bad person? If so, I'm SOL, because I've tried to reprogram myself for nearly 50 years and it ain't happening. The most I can do is the kind of workaround described above.
[ 18. March 2016, 22:45: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Yo, I also read books when walking, unless the scenery is really something. Concrete canyons, meh. That's how I learned--walking long distances to school alongside concrete walls. In fact, much of my doctoral study was done this way.
And I never run into shit--I have excellent peripheral vision.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
What if I don't WANT the stranger I'm talking to to know anything about me? Can I say "It's none of your fucking business what I'm doing this weekend"?
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
You can, but you also can say; I'm doing out reach for my church. Do you go to church regularly?
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on
:
Chatting is cool, and some people are great fun to talk with even when they're total strangers. But those people who can't handle silence and always want to make small talk? I tend to presume their heads are very boring places.
Posted by St Deird (# 7631) on
:
I'm someone else who reads books while walking down the street. Pretty much always.
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I think conversation matters. Small talk is not about being deep and meaningful and the subject is usually (almost) irrelevant. In a conversation with someone, whether it lasts a moment at the bus stop - or develops into a long lasting relationship, the reason for small talk is to show a positive emotional connection between two human beings - however fleeting.
I agree. Which is why I've spent the last few hours lying on a couch reading the internet.
This evening, you see, I've got a family event - at which I want to have some excellent, meaningful, fulfilling conversation with my parents, sisters, and nephews. It'll be awesome. I don't want to crash and burn during the ridiculously long (3 hours) time of socialising, so I'm spending some time recharging, in total silence, to make sure my energy reserves are full in preparation for the party.
The reason mid-church "social" time annoys me is because it doesn't give me enough forewarning to charge up my energy reserves, so I'm suddenly having to make a great deal of conversational effort on my back-up energy supplies, which is hard and leaves me grouchy.
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I don't think introverts are any more selfish than anyone else - but I do think they are too concerned with what others think of them. 'I only speak when I feel I can contribute' 'I only like meaningful conversations' 'I need to think before I speak' 'I can't bear to be the centre of attention' all speak, to me, of self-consciousness which can look a lot like lack of interest in other people.
"I only speak when I feel I can contribute" ...because speaking takes effort, and I need to make sure I've got enough energy to keep making (occasional) contributions for the rest of the conversation.
"I only like meaningful conversations" - Well, I do. They're interesting.
"I need to think before I speak" ...because I have slow verbal processing skills, and not thinking means that I don't have the ability to form words.
"I can't bear to be the centre of attention" ...unless I've had time to build up my energy levels to manage the extra bits of effort that are involved in engaging the attention of the whole group.
They have jack-all to do with self-consciousness. Shut up about things you clearly don't understand.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
My pet peeve with the "OMG I can't possibly look away from my phone for more than 2 seconds" people is that they are completely unaware of their surroundings, including people, cars, rapists, mailboxes, parking meters*, muggers, furniture, pets, children, you name it. This leads to behaviour which ranges from rude to downright dangerous.
The terms and conditions for the free wi-fi at Japanese railway stations (specifically the Tokyo metro and the JR East Shinkansen platforms, being the only stations with free wi-fi I have used) include the statement that stations are crowded and busy places, with very real hazards on platforms, stairs and escalators. Therefore, one of the conditions of use is that people do not use their wi-fi devices while walking, and at other times remain aware of the people around them. (Approx. paraphrase from memory - sorry, I've no intention of walking to the local station to log in to check the actual wording).
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
People don't read books when walking down the street/crossing the road ime.
When she was a nipper, Mrs. C used to walk about twenty minutes home from the bus stop to her house, when travelling home from school. Without fail, she'd be reading a book the whole way.
Personally, I can't read satisfactorily whilst walking - I can't get in the zone.
Posted by Huia (# 3473) on
:
I think that the earthquakes in Christchurch have markedly changed my behaviour. I used to read while walking along the footpath, but now the footpaths are so uneven it's dangerous to do this unless you know the area well.
Also I talk more to strangers at bus stops etc. I think this is because we are all a bit jumpier than we were. Whereas I was often reluctant to engage in much small talk before because it irritated me, I am now more careful to greet people or at least acknowledge them. If they don't respond or are otherwise engaged with their technology, I am relieved and go back to reading my book.
Huia
Posted by M. (# 3291) on
:
Thinking more about this, following Lamb Chopped's thought of having to get accustomed to an idea. That's it exactly. I love socialising, when I know that's what I'm going to be doing. I'm happy to travel on the train with someone, when I know that's what I'm going to be doing.
LeRoc, going to the hairdresser is when I indulge in looking at trashy magazines about celebs I've never heard of. Reading on my phone doesn't do it.
M.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Small talk has nothing to do with 'having an audience'. It is about finding out about the person you meet - it works like body language. We discover far more about people when we are easy and open with them.
I don't want you or other random strangers to discover things about me. I want you to leave me alone so I can put my energy into conversations I'm interested in having.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Small talk has nothing to do with 'having an audience'. It is about finding out about the person you meet - it works like body language. We discover far more about people when we are easy and open with them.
I don't want you or other random strangers to discover things about me. I want you to leave me alone so I can put my energy into conversations I'm interested in having.
It's not about discovering details or secrets - it's simply a social thing - a signal that we are well disposed towards each other, friendly.
It's perfectly possible, in small talk, to signal that you are busy/need leaving alone but at the same time say a few friendly words in passing.
When I'm walking the dogs it's very rare that people who are passing don't have a quick word. Is this a cultural North of England thing?
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by St Deird:
They have jack-all to do with self-consciousness. Shut up about things you clearly don't understand.
This thread is my attempt to understand - the two I live with are not disposed towards explaining what's going on in their heads, so - as the Ship seems full of them, I thought I'd ask some introverts.
And I thank you all, I have found your answers fascinating and often bemusing. Unlike Susan Doris who is now an Atheist and was once a Christian, I was never an introvert and can't imagine what it must be like.
I have already explained that the title was to draw people in, sorry if that upset you - but this is Hell!
You are welcome to shut up if you don't want to engage (just as you do all the time, by the sounds of it )
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Being invited to an event shouldn't be an issue ...
And we're right back where we started.
"Shouldn't" is not the point. "Is" or "Is not" is more like it.
I naturally panic (internally, with great effort to keep it out of my face!) when someone issues me an invitation that calls for an on-the-spot response, even if the response need be nothing more than "I'll have to check and get back to you." That simply will not occur to me until I take several deep breaths; the first thing that naturally occurs to me is Ohmigod ohmigod I-don't-know-what-to-say why-me what-should-I-do-now, and to be honest, a tinge of resentment because I feel I've been put on the spot. (Yes, I know this is irrational; it just happens to be the way I'm wired.) Several breaths later it occurs to me that I should say "Let me check and get back to you," and then I go home and take between half an hour to two hours to accustom myself to the idea, at which point I finally feel comfortable and can call them back and be truly enthusiastic.
I am willing to bet that you do not routinely experience panic when invited to do something like going out for coffee or seeing a movie.
I do. Does this make me a bad person? If so, I'm SOL, because I've tried to reprogram myself for nearly 50 years and it ain't happening. The most I can do is the kind of workaround described above.
It doesn't make you a bad person, but you are describing a significant anxiety issue. You could be an introvert who also has an anxiety issue, but they are not the same thing.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Boogie--
Re your attempt to understand:
As far as your posts (not necessarily your thoughts and feelings), you seem more interested in insulting people who work differently than you. If you truly wanted to understand, Heaven or AS might've been a better choice.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
M.: Always best at the hairdressers to ask for magazines and just read.
Er … these days if you want to read you don't need to ask for magazines.
A lot of people don't have smart phones, and/or prefer actual, tactile, paper periodicals and books. (Me, on both counts.)
Plus an electronic device you're holding at the hairdresser's could easily be damaged: water, shampoo, hair products, hair spray, hair, and dropping the thing.
Posted by Kittyville (# 16106) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Boogie--
Re your attempt to understand:
As far as your posts (not necessarily your thoughts and feelings), you seem more interested in insulting people who work differently than you. If you truly wanted to understand, Heaven or AS might've been a better choice.
Thank you, Golden Key - you put that a lot more graciously than I could've (Hell notwithstanding).
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
kittyville--
Thanks. It took some of that dreaded "thinking before speaking(/typing)" thing.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Doublethink--you may well be right. But I'm not sure where introversion ends and anxiety disorder begins. Do extroverts have anxiety when faced with (say) a day of silent reflection?
Whatever the truth, it at least illustrates the slow verbal processing I'm dealing with--the inability to respond appropriately until WAY after the right time has passed. Which is why I can't just let the chitchat flow.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
I'd rather be in a quiet pub than a noisy one, if I'm going with people. That way you can actually talk to them in a relaxed atmosphere instead of having to shout over other conversations and over-loud music.
I'm that way with cafes and restaurants. Combination of overwhelming stimuli and trying to hear the conversation at my table (even with hearing aids) is both maddening and wearying.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Do extroverts have anxiety when faced with (say) a day of silent reflection?
I don't, not at all - but would I have to prepare myself for such times as I would be very bored. I went on a silent retreat once, which was fine because we had 'tasks' to do like making clay pots etc. In fact it was very enjoyable. But sitting in silence with nothing to do - hate it! But no - no anxiety, just frustrated boredom. Smart phones are the best invention ever for combating boredom I must say!
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
As far as your posts (not necessarily your thoughts and feelings), you seem more interested in insulting people who work differently than you. If you truly wanted to understand, Heaven or AS might've been a better choice.
No, I don't think so, I wanted to get personal.
I live with introverts and was frustrated with them at the time - so I wanted to vent and get some insight.
People have (rightly) had a go at me for my lack of knowledge and understanding, they could not have done so in AS or heaven.
I wanted honest answers and honesty sometimes is not in the least bit heavenly!
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
When I'm walking the dogs it's very rare that people who are passing don't have a quick word. Is this a cultural North of England thing?
When I'm walking (anywhere) I greet people I pass - whether it's walking to church or climbing a mountain. I say "Good Morning" or whatever, they say "Good Morning" or whatever, nobody breaks step.
I would find it odd in the extreme if some random stranger going for a walk wanted to stop for a chat.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
When I'm walking (anywhere) I greet people I pass - whether it's walking to church or climbing a mountain. I say "Good Morning" or whatever, they say "Good Morning" or whatever, nobody breaks step.
I would find it odd in the extreme if some random stranger going for a walk wanted to stop for a chat.
It happens all the time here!
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
When I'm walking the dogs it's very rare that people who are passing don't have a quick word. Is this a cultural North of England thing?
Yes, I don't have a dog myself but in more southerly parts of the country, the quick words might more likely be "Call your ******* dog off/does your dog have to do that there?" and "**** off you ****."
Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on
:
At risk of being more purgatorial than infernal, I think several sets of issues are being completely confused: introversion and extroversion, anxiety, social phobia (often linked, but by no means always), people vs. task orientation and social mores/feeling rules.
Picking my way through these various issues from a personal perspective, I am a person-oriented introvert, who suffers from anxiety. As such, I absolutely do collective silence and get a huge amount out of it, providing those there are truly engaging in it. From that point of view, Boogie's solution of smartphones is indescribably rude because it's utterly destructive. It is facile in the extreme to assume that nothing is happening because there is neither noise nor movement, or that something that is entirely outside of the collective agenda is not disruptive simply because it doesn't make any immediately obvious noise. The point there is that there is no task, and therefore nothing to engage the task-orientated, such as Boogie clearly is.
People-oriented introverts are, in my experience, utterly incomprehensible to the rest of the world, and anxiety makes it very hard for me to explain my own position. My anxiety can also make me voluble: from inside it feels like I am sounding the alarm, but this is clearly not how it comes across: it seems to be interpreted as extroversion, and/or disruptiveness.
There is also something about dogs and their owners: dogs have, as far as I can tell, little compunction in going up to anyone and everyone and engaging with them fully, and my observation and Boogie's description makes me think that a fair selection of their owners can be similar. I strongly suspect that this group is self-selecting, and should not assume that anyone outside it operates by the same rules. This may be painful, but there is pain for us all outside our own emotional type.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
It's not at all unusual in the North of England or in South Wales and other former heavy industrial areas - and it's even more pronounced in Ireland where everything talks to everyone else all the time.
It would be very unusual in London and the South East or (mainly) snooty towns like Cheltenham.
A chap I know from Stoke-on-Trent spent some time working in London. He used to see the same bloke on the bus every day going to work. One day, he endeavoured to strike up a conversation only to be met with a cold stare and, 'Do I fahking know you?'
Equally, my brother left the South Wales Valleys to work in Cheltenham for a while. He used to leave his lodgings to walk into work at the same time as the block who lived opposite. They'd walk side by side for some of the way. Likewise, he attempted conversation only to be greeted by a cold stare and a quickening of the step ...
That would never happen 'oop north' or in South Wales or in any other part of the UK where they don't go round with terminal rudeness as part of their make-up ...
It's a southern thing.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
I find it irritating to be asked if I have plans for the weekend by someone I'll never see again.
I tend to answer that by saying that my life as an intgrovert is interesting enough without having to make 'plans' for the weekend or for any other time. It's the seeming superficiality of extroverts that they need to invent contant distractions for themselves.
This seems to misunderstand the purpose of the question, most often someone asking this is not seeking information, anymore than someone asking what you think about this morning's weather is at all interested in the weather.
But how does one respond to this question without giving out information?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
There is also something about dogs and their owners: dogs have, as far as I can tell, little compunction in going up to anyone and everyone and engaging with them fully, and my observation and Boogie's description makes me think that a fair selection of their owners can be similar.
Dogs are uninhibited. Their owners have to be at least a little bit to some extent; when you have an animal companion that regularly bounds across spaces to enthusiastically greet completely unfamiliar people, fights other dogs and craps anywhere at short notice, you can't really be a shrinking violet yourself.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
But how does one respond to this question without giving out information?
"Got plans for the weekend?"
"Nah, not really/having a good rest/yes, thanks/just the usual/dunno yet/depends on the weather."
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
But how does one respond to this question without giving out information?
"Got plans for the weekend?"
"Nah, not really/having a good rest/yes, thanks/just the usual/dunno yet/depends on the weather."
You know, it really hadn't ever occurred to me that people asking what I was doing for the weekend didn't actually want to know, so I hadn't thought of a good reply that didn't seem rude; effectively saying "none of your business."
But apparently that's what people actually want. I will never understand you humans.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You know, it really hadn't ever occurred to me that people asking what I was doing for the weekend didn't actually want to know, so I hadn't thought of a good reply that didn't seem rude; effectively saying "none of your business."
But apparently that's what people actually want. I will never understand you humans.
You've got it!
Just as 'How are you?' does not require any information about your health. It's about making contact, showing a friendly face, being a social being. 'Fine thank you' is the usual answer. Having all sorts of health issues I tend to answer 'Still kicking thanks'.
This often raises a smile so I follow it up with 'Just don't ask me who!'
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Dogs are uninhibited. Their owners have to be at least a little bit to some extent; when you have an animal companion that regularly bounds across spaces to enthusiastically greet completely unfamiliar people, fights other dogs and craps anywhere at short notice, you can't really be a shrinking violet yourself.
Haha!
My best friend is - she hates all the doggy chat! So when we go together with our pooches I am careful not to indulge in any at all. When she walks him she chooses times when it's likely to be quiet and human-free.
Scrap the 'fights' bit please - most dogs are super friendly. The fighters don't want to be sociable, they want the other dogs to leave them well alone.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You know, it really hadn't ever occurred to me that people asking what I was doing for the weekend didn't actually want to know
It's OK, Karl: I'll share the corner of the pub with you. If I ask you what you're doing for the weekend, it's because I want to know. If I just want to acknowledge the presence of another person, I'll wish you a good [time of day as appropriate] or other similar non-interrogatory greeting.
If I ask you a question, it's more likely to be "I've not been to this pub before. What do they have that's good on tap?"
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
But how does one respond to this question without giving out information?
"Got plans for the weekend?"
"Nah, not really/having a good rest/yes, thanks/just the usual/dunno yet/depends on the weather."
You know, it really hadn't ever occurred to me that people asking what I was doing for the weekend didn't actually want to know, so I hadn't thought of a good reply that didn't seem rude; effectively saying "none of your business."
But apparently that's what people actually want. I will never understand you humans.
I usually try to use the ATM (Cashpoint) at my bank, one reason being the phony, insincere over-friendliness inside the bank. The tellers are apparently trained to ask each customer "So, what do you have planned for the rest of the day?" I usually give a non-answer of some sort. One day the customer at the next window answered "You don't want to know." Not taking a hint, the chirpy teller asked "Why not?" I was hoping the customer would tell her he was off to rob a bank.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Yes Pigwidgeon, I know what you mean. But, the kind of small talk (question) which doesn't need a specific answer is not at all insincere - it has a completely different purpose than ascertaining information.
Trained questions from cashiers/waiters etc are a different thing entirely.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
But how does one respond to this question without giving out information?
"Got plans for the weekend?"
"Nah, not really/having a good rest/yes, thanks/just the usual/dunno yet/depends on the weather."
You know, it really hadn't ever occurred to me that people asking what I was doing for the weekend didn't actually want to know, so I hadn't thought of a good reply that didn't seem rude; effectively saying "none of your business."
But apparently that's what people actually want. I will never understand you humans.
From acquaintances / strangers it usually means, I wish to signal that I am mildly positively disposed towards you but I don't know you well enough to engage in personal conversation, and/or, I am abnormally close to you for some reason for what feels like a prolonged period of time (slow moving lift, haircut, prostate exam etc) and wish to signal I am not hostile and distract us both from this embarrassing proximity with a neutral topic.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You know, it really hadn't ever occurred to me that people asking what I was doing for the weekend didn't actually want to know, so I hadn't thought of a good reply that didn't seem rude; effectively saying "none of your business."
But apparently that's what people actually want. I will never understand you humans.
You've got it!
Just as 'How are you?' does not require any information about your health. It's about making contact, showing a friendly face, being a social being. 'Fine thank you' is the usual answer. Having all sorts of health issues I tend to answer 'Still kicking thanks'.
This often raises a smile so I follow it up with 'Just don't ask me who!'
I thought that's what "hi" was for.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I live with introverts and was frustrated with them at the time - so I wanted to vent and get some insight.
Yet you've contradicted anybody who has bothered to try to give you insight. Doesn't seem like you wanted insight at all, only to be ugly to people different than you, probably to spite your frustrating relatives.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I live with introverts and was frustrated with them at the time - so I wanted to vent and get some insight.
Yet you've contradicted anybody who has bothered to try to give you insight. Doesn't seem like you wanted insight at all, only to be ugly to people different than you, probably to spite your frustrating relatives.
I have thanked people for their insights. I love my frustrating relatives and would never want to spite them, or even complain to them about how they are.
My 'contradiction' has simply been to explain the purpose of some (seemingly) pointless types of interaction.
Posted by roybart (# 17357) on
:
Boogie, how about a response something like this? ..."Wow! Thank you all for showing me what it feels like from the other side of things. You've given me a lot to think about."
I realize that that is not the best Hell-speak. But I for one am here to learn, even in Hell
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
I do thank you all for showing me what it feels like on the other side of things.
I would like to know more 'tho.
An lot of annoyance has been expressed about extroverts and the way we behave. But I see being extrovert simply as enjoying good company/animated, quick fire discussion in groups/chat/laughs.
We are not (generically) rude or attention seeking any more than introverts are.
Why the dislike?
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
I am abnormally close to you for some reason for what feels like a prolonged period of time (slow moving lift, haircut, prostate exam etc) and wish to signal I am not hostile and distract us both from this embarrassing proximity with a neutral topic.
I believe that this is an accurate statement of the way some people think, but it doesn't make any sense to me. I don't find sharing a lift with people embarrassing (even if we've been wedged in by a Japanese man in white gloves), if you're cutting my hair, I'm not embarrassed and I'd rather you weren't distracted, and I'm really not sure asking what I'm doing at the weekend whilst your finger is up my arse is going to improve matters.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
An lot of annoyance has been expressed about extroverts and the way we behave. But I see being extrovert simply as enjoying good company/animated, quick fire discussion in groups/chat/laughs.
If we have some kind of acquaintance and you come and start chatting at me, I am socially obliged to chat with you. There isn't a socially acceptable way for me to tell you to go away and leave me alone.
Furthermore, if I value you, I want to hear about your concerns, I want you to be able to ask me for advice if you're worried about something, and I want to be able to support you if you're upset. This means that if you come and talk to me, I assume it's important to you, and I put aside whatever I'm doing in order to make time for you. When it transpires that actually there's nothing important, and you just wanted a chat because you didn't want to sit in silence for half an hour, I feel like you've taken advantage of me.
(This is also my chief objection to the telephone.)
So there's one.
Here's another: several times in this thread you've said that you're not really bothered by accuracy in casual conversation, and would rather make mouth noises than think things though. I find that attitude offensive. If we're having a conversation, I want the best of you, not the first thing that pops into your head.
For me, conversation is hard work. Analytical, technical discussions are relatively easy; anything with emotional content is exhausting, and anything that asks me to analyse my own emotional response to something is the most difficult. So don't ask me how I feel about something and expect either a short or a quick answer.
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
If the purpose of small talk is to ease interpersonal relations, and lots of people say they find small talk difficult, isn't the conclusion that small talk isn't very effective at its aim?
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Ricardus: If the purpose of small talk is to ease interpersonal relations, and lots of people say they find small talk difficult, isn't the conclusion that small talk isn't very effective at its aim?
Undoubtedly. But it's what evolution and a bit of conditioning have given us.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Ricardus: If the purpose of small talk is to ease interpersonal relations, and lots of people say they find small talk difficult, isn't the conclusion that small talk isn't very effective at its aim?
Undoubtedly. But it's what evolution and a bit of conditioning have given us.
It is effective for some, ineffective for others and semi-effective for the rest.
Just like nearly every other trait.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Leorning Cnint, the first thing that comes into my head is the best of me, it's how I speak, how I think, how I am.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I do thank you all for showing me what it feels like on the other side of things.
I would like to know more 'tho.
An lot of annoyance has been expressed about extroverts and the way we behave. But I see being extrovert simply as enjoying good company/animated, quick fire discussion in groups/chat/laughs.
We are not (generically) rude or attention seeking any more than introverts are.
Why the dislike?
The annoyance is not about extroverts all-of-them-as-a-group. The annoyance is about extroverts who dislike introverts and tell them they are bloody selfish for behaving like themselves. The temptation to give tit for tat is what you are seeing on this thread.
If you want to go further, there are certain characteristic ways some extroverts are rude in certain situations (not all extroverts, not all situations). These include requiring introverts to do things deeply uncomfortable to them via public social pressure in church--as demonstrated by the All Saints thread. They also include such things as talking over other people (particularly those who are not extroverted enough to yell "shut up a minute, will you?" and saying things like "When are you going to come out of your shell and show people that you really like them?"
Remember, SOME extroverts, SOME situations.
No doubt there are corresponding introvert rudenesses.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
If the purpose of small talk is to ease interpersonal relations, and lots of people say they find small talk difficult, isn't the conclusion that small talk isn't very effective at its aim?
The fact it is a social norm suggests that a significant majority of people find it works. I sympathise with your point of view, it took me an unusually long time to learn the ropes - people were still explaining this to me explicitly when I was a postgrad. (I put this down to spending the majority of my childhood in an entirely different cultural setting on the other side of the world fwiw.)
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on
:
I literally had to teach myself how to do small talk, in the same way you might teach yourself a musical instrument or a dance routine.
I love a good conversation about God, the Universe, Politics, anything big I can get my teeth into but I had to work at the social chit chat and realise that I wouldn't get many conversations I liked if I couldn't engage a person first.
I'm pretty good at it now but I do have moments where I have to pause and think 'okay what next...' its difficult and distracting but it has become easier as I have grown older.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
If the purpose of small talk is to ease interpersonal relations, and lots of people say they find small talk difficult, isn't the conclusion that small talk isn't very effective at its aim?
The fact it is a social norm suggests that a significant majority of people find it works.
I think this overstates the case. It suggests that a majority of the people who set the social tone find it works. But that subset of a subset of humanity may not be in the majority.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Leorning Cnint, the first thing that comes into my head is the best of me, it's how I speak, how I think, how I am.
Does that make it difficult for filters between mind and mouth to operate?
I've had to work very hard to develop some of my filters, but it was necessary. Some are maybe 75-90% automatic, now; but I still consciously take a step or two back before I say anything, just to make sure.
[ 20. March 2016, 01:35: Message edited by: Golden Key ]
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Numbers are difficult to quantify given the variable definition by professionals, the complete misunderstanding by laypeople and the various nurture and cultural issues.
But a lot of comment in this thread is silly.
Introvert or extrovert, just deal with your own shit as best you can and be considerate of other people's shit.
Don't expect social activities, like church, to not be social or for everyone to be comfortable with being social. NOt rocket surgery, it really isn't.
And social anxiety is NOT FUCKING INTROVERSION.
It is a real problem that is a difficult thing to deal with, but recognising what it is is a step towards dealing with it.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Leorning Cnint, the first thing that comes into my head is the best of me, it's how I speak, how I think, how I am.
Seriously? You would never come up with something better to say if you thought about it for a minute?
In today's Washington Post: "Why smart people are better off with fewer friends."
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
In today's Washington Post: "Why smart people are better off with fewer friends."
Controversial researchers with questionable parameters.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Leorning Cnint, the first thing that comes into my head is the best of me, it's how I speak, how I think, how I am.
Seriously? You would never come up with something better to say if you thought about it for a minute?
As I said upthread, I get my best ideas in conversation.
It's great making plans and the plans unfold and change as you talk them through. My latest art project is a sculpture at a school. The art teacher and I were very much on the same wavelength - we talked it through and ideas flowed, changing and growing as we built on each other's input.
[ 20. March 2016, 05:41: Message edited by: Boogie ]
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
In today's Washington Post: "Why smart people are better off with fewer friends."
There are many different kinds of smart.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Macrina:
I love a good conversation about God, the Universe, Politics, anything big I can get my teeth into but I had to work at the social chit chat and realise that I wouldn't get many conversations I liked if I couldn't engage a person first.
I used to but the enthusiasm and passion of youth have given way to wanting something less intense. Sometimes it's just quite refreshing to turn to my neighbour at work and say "Did you see [programme] on the telly last night?"
When much younger I used to blurt out the first thing that came into my head. This is rarely a good idea as a conversation starter and I learnt to think before I spoke. It certainly wasn't the best of me.
There is a difference between that, however, and thinking out loud to bounce ideas off someone in a discussion, which can be hugely enjoyable and productive, and take you down avenues you never envisaged.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
There are articles around about talking to think or thinking to talk. According to this article (pdf) there is a cultural assumption that:
quote:
talking is a positive act because it is closely connected with thinking. Language and its verbal expression in talking can create, change, and signify thinking, and hence, one can generally equate talking and thinking.
but the article goes on to say:
quote:
the Western assumption about near equivalence of talking and thinking is still very pervasive and fundamental to the study of the mind, despite the abundant research to show that the positive meaning of talking is culturally specific rather than universal
The research concludes that thinking and talking are closer in American culture and do not necessarily relate in East Asian culture.
Talking things through is not necessarily that helpful, as many of us will know from meetings that go around in circles when the boss is thinking aloud and the rest of us are having to think fast on our feet to explain why we know that this idea is wrong. I'll often know that it's wrong, but I need time to produce a coherent argument against it. I would much prefer an agenda so I can think the ideas through before the meeting, then talk it through, then more nice quiet thinking time as to how I actually put that stupid idea I've just been dumped with into practice. Walking or washing up makes for good thinking time.)
eta: "an" not "and"
and verbs to match
[ 20. March 2016, 09:28: Message edited by: Curiosity killed ... ]
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
In today's Washington Post: "Why smart people are better off with fewer friends."
The picture that goes with that horrifies me. That must mean I'm smart, eh? Maybe just claustrophobic.
Age has a lot to do with it in my experience. When young, my brothers and old friends and I all lived happily in separate, big cities and only talked to each other a few times a year.
Now we're all retired, live in small towns by choice and talk on the phone a few times per week. They (the high IQ brothers) reinforce the idea that smart people who are busy with challenging jobs and projects don't want to be bothered with friendly chit-chat and yet they like the resources of a big city.
Now they're bored and can't watch a TV show without sending me a long detailed review. Bless 'em.
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on
:
When I sometimes tell folks I rarely get e-mails they are quite often a little envious as opposed to taking pity on poor ol' Nobby No-mates.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
In today's Washington Post: "Why smart people are better off with fewer friends."
Controversial researchers with questionable parameters.
Sure, but I liked the headline.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Leorning Cnint, the first thing that comes into my head is the best of me, it's how I speak, how I think, how I am.
Seriously? You would never come up with something better to say if you thought about it for a minute?
As I said upthread, I get my best ideas in conversation.
It's great making plans and the plans unfold and change as you talk them through. My latest art project is a sculpture at a school. The art teacher and I were very much on the same wavelength - we talked it through and ideas flowed, changing and growing as we built on each other's input.
I, by contrast, come out of these sorts of conversions utterly confused as to which bit was an idea we rejected, which bit was an idea we modified, which bit was a problem we later solved, what that solution was, and what we finally decided.
It's bad enough when such conversations happen via Email, but at least you can check back. It's hell when it was face to face.
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
I am in the interesting position of being an introvert with ADHD (probable - trying to get a diagnosis via work occupational health as it is so hard to do so as an adult on the NHS) and also an anxiety disorder - so my brain does work very quickly, rather like having lots of tabs open on a browser at once. Indeed, as I type this, I have rather a lot of tabs open! I work in retail/hospitality so try to use this to my advantage at work, and then use my time off to recharge. I don't live alone due to financial reasons (it is expensive, especially where I live in the South of England) but would love to. I am highly protective of my personal home space - I enjoy socialising outside of the home, but my home space is mine.
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I do thank you all for showing me what it feels like on the other side of things.
I would like to know more 'tho.
An lot of annoyance has been expressed about extroverts and the way we behave. But I see being extrovert simply as enjoying good company/animated, quick fire discussion in groups/chat/laughs.
We are not (generically) rude or attention seeking any more than introverts are.
Why the dislike?
In my case, it's not actually dislike. It was an attempt to bludgeon you with a cluebat. Clearly it didn't work.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
As I said upthread, I get my best ideas in conversation.
It's great making plans and the plans unfold and change as you talk them through.
If you are engaged in some kind of creative project, and you are conversing with a partner in that creative endeavour, then perhaps this is worthwhile (and there's certainly an advantage to early conversation, as it means not getting too wedded to an idea that your partner dislikes).
But that can't be most of your conversations - you said earlier in the thread that most of your conversations are general social lubrication rather than task-oriented. And in that context, quote:
As I said upthread, I get my best ideas in conversation.
starts to sound a bit like "I'm a parasite who wants to leech off you."
It's a question of expectations. If one person in a conversation has a couple of reasonably thought-out ideas and the other has word associations, it's not a symmetric conversation. You can still have a reasonable conversation, but it has to start with the second person asking the first person to explain something. It's not uncommon that the second person will spot a flaw in the first person's logic, in which case we will have achieved productivity.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
... starts to sound a bit like "I'm a parasite who wants to leech off you."
Horrible leeching parasite.
A more balanced view.
Posted by Athrawes (# 9594) on
:
I like your second chart, Boogie. The first one answers your question, though. With *some*, unaware, extroverts it does feel like they want your energy, regardless of whether have any or not... It can lead to wariness when interacting with extroverts.
Posted by Jemima the 9th (# 15106) on
:
Ah. It appears I'm an obnoxious introvert. Oh well.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
Ah. It appears I'm an obnoxious introvert. Oh well.
Don't feel bad. All the best people are.
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You know, it really hadn't ever occurred to me that people asking what I was doing for the weekend didn't actually want to know, so I hadn't thought of a good reply that didn't seem rude; effectively saying "none of your business."
Have you heard of Roman Jakobson's theory of Functions of Language?
(There's wikipedia article that I can't link to because of an apostrophe; it isn't the most thorough exposition there could be.)
[ 23. March 2016, 07:55: Message edited by: Dafyd ]
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Here you go.
Tiny Url is your friend when links won't link
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Dafyd--
You might try putting that errant link into TinyURL, which will give you an alias link that works.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Sorry for x-post.
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on
:
The UBB practice thread is ---> that way.
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on
:
Unfortunately for Boogie, small talk is probably going to be less and less common. Not because of a minority of introverts, but because of paranoid overprotective parents. I was raised to respond politely to strangers, but not to accept gifts or fall for any "your mom asked me to pick you up" shit. Subsequent generations of children were told to never speak to strangers at all and were driven everywhere so they never had to interact with strangers on the bus or subway. The latest generation shares nude pictures with their friends but still won't talk to strangers. Luckily, they have an app on their phone to tell them if there's anybody in the area that might want to have sex with them, because obviously you can't talk to a stranger to find out if they'd like to have sex with you ...
Posted by Nenya (# 16427) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I would like to know more 'tho.
I will say how it is for me. I'm an introvert married to an extrovert, so I suspect there are similar issues in our house to the ones in yours.
Whether I have simply learned extrovert behaviour, or am a high-functioning introvert, or what, I relate to much of what you say. I like and am interested in people. I like small talk and flatter myself that I'm quite good at it. I went to the hairdresser this week and was looking forward to hearing about her holiday. If the cashier at the checkout wants to hear about my plans for the weekend I'll tell them and ask about theirs. I will ask what time they finish their shift and whether they had an early start. We are all muddling through this life somehow, God help us, and need those touches of humanity along the way.
I too go to church mainly to see my friends. For a while, like you, I felt I didn't have much faith left. Now my faith looks so different to that of the con-evo congregation I have to change the way I talk and pray when I'm among them but I do it because they are people I love and because it's important for Mr Nen and me to be worshipping somewhere together.
I love being with people and doing all this, but it drains me and as an introvert it seems so much harder for me to get what I need to recharge my batteries. I really do need time on my own. Recently the smallest bedroom in our house became my study. I love it. It is my space and I spend as much time as I can there. Most of that time the door is open - ie, I'm fine to entertain visitors. On the occasions when the door is shut of course I expect to be interrupted if the house is on fire or someone is bleeding or my long lost cousin I haven't spoken to for 20 years is on the phone. But it absolutely is not ok just to walk in on me and it does not make it ok to knock first and preface what you're going to say with "Just a quick question." At times I have to lock myself in the loo just to get the uninterrupted solitude I need. What introvert has not done that on at least one occasion?
And in conversation, I am all for chit-chat, banter, light repartee, in their place. But if we are discussing things I'm thinking about, hopes and plans I have, things I feel strongly about, I am going to give thoughtful, measured responses and I mean them. Most of the extroverts in my life process things through their mouths and it drives me nuts. I think I have to invest emotionally in those things because they must mean them. Then, further down the road, they say something like, "Oh, the vast majority of things I talk about are just ideas I'm playing with." Don't do that to me! It's exhausting!
FFS.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
Ah. It appears I'm an obnoxious introvert. Oh well.
Don't feel bad. All the best people are.
Mental high-five!
Posted by MrsBeaky (# 17663) on
:
Nenya
I'm fairly sure we were separated at birth.....
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Nenya:
But if we are discussing things I'm thinking about, hopes and plans I have, things I feel strongly about, I am going to give thoughtful, measured responses and I mean them. Most of the extroverts in my life process things through their mouths and it drives me nuts.
After 40 years I don't even try to talk things through with my husband. I process things verbally by chatting to the dogs.
If I ask him anything I know the answer will be slow coming with no 'real' discussion. He's like you in a group, he's not silent and is socially perfectly competent. It's at home when he's relaxing that silence falls.
Hopes and plans and things you feel strongly about don't have to be set in stone either, you know - they can change and grow as you talk them through. He seems to have the idea that once he's said it he's committed to it. I once said "shall we have a fountain in the garden?" it was an idea a thought a possibility - I didn't especially want a fountain in the garden, I just very much wanted a nicer garden and to chat about how we go about it. He still mentions it as if I'm hankering after one! No - it was a passing thought! I just hope one doesn't turn up with one day as a surprise
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on
:
"OMG you actually thought I meant what I was saying?"
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
"OMG you actually thought I meant what I was saying?"
You've never discussed a variety of possible ideas for a project?
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
He seems to have the idea that once he's said it he's committed to it.
That's not quite it (at least in my case - I can't speak for Mr. Boogie). It's not that I am completely committed to anything I say: the point of a discussion is to come to an agreement, and I am open to being persuaded that it's a bad idea. But if the conversation goes: "Shall we have a fountain in the garden?" "Yes, OK - what kind were you thinking of?" "Actually I don't really want a fountain." then something really bizarre has happened.
quote:
I just very much wanted a nicer garden and to chat about how we go about it.
Were I to be having such a discussion, I would open with something like "I'd like to do up the garden - can we talk about it?" or "I'd like the garden to look nicer: how much do you care about it?" or something.
(The latter is an important question - IMO, there's a big difference between a conversation when we're both trying to agree on something we want to do together, and a conversation when I'm helping you refine your thoughts about what you want, but I don't actually care about the outcome.)
If I then wanted to suggest a fountain more as a means of sparking discussion than a definitive request for a urinating cherub, I would hang the suggestion with several caveats along the lines of "I'm not sure I'm really suggesting this."
I suspect you'd find this irritating
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
If I then wanted to suggest a fountain more as a means of sparking discussion than a definitive request for a urinating cherub, I would hang the suggestion with several caveats along the lines of "I'm not sure I'm really suggesting this."
I suspect you'd find this irritating
No, not irritating, contrived.
If I am close to someone I start conversations and I don't feel the need to consider what words to use - that's hard work and saved for work situations.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If I am close to someone I start conversations and I don't feel the need to consider what words to use - that's hard work and saved for work situations.
Oh good grief. In other words, you just open your mouth and out it comes without any thought or consideration for your hearers?
I think almost anyone, faced with "Shall we have a fountain in the garden?" would interpret that as "I've been thinking the garden could be enhanced by a fountain [i.e. I'm suggesting a specific design feature here], do you think this is a good idea?"
Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If I am close to someone I start conversations and I don't feel the need to consider what words to use - that's hard work and saved for work situations.
Sounds bloody selfish to me.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If I am close to someone I start conversations and I don't feel the need to consider what words to use - that's hard work and saved for work situations.
Sounds bloody selfish to me.
Not at all - my words are not unkind or selfish!
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If I am close to someone I start conversations and I don't feel the need to consider what words to use - that's hard work and saved for work situations.
Oh good grief. In other words, you just open your mouth and out it comes without any thought or consideration for your hearers?
The consideration for others comes naturally - but, yes - my words are my thoughts. (Otherwise I think in pictures)
Is that so terrible?
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Not at all - my words are not unkind or selfish!
Then you must be putting some kind of thought or filter on them.
I don't know, I don't get this. Why waste someone's time by blurting out the first thing that comes into your head when you don't mean it? I mean, you might as well say "Shall we have chicken curry for dinner tonight" and then respond with "I didn't really mean that and don't particularly want it."
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Because it's a suggestion, an idea, a thought. What I'd like is a conversation about it - to chew over ideas, thoughts.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Not at all - my words are not unkind or selfish!
Then you must be putting some kind of thought or filter on them.
Just because a person thinks in pictures and needs to verbalise to discuss their thoughts doesn't mean they have no filters.
But, for me, thinking in words is not natural - I can do it, but it's an effort. So - like I said - when relaxing at home it's nice to switch that need off a for a while.
This is not due to my extrovert nature but it is linked to it in some ways.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Because it's a suggestion, an idea, a thought. What I'd like is a conversation about it - to chew over ideas, thoughts.
But why not just get straight to the point and ask "Do you have any ideas how we could make the garden nicer" or "What would you like for dinner" instead of coming out with a random jumping-off point that's actually in practice irrelevant?
Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If I am close to someone I start conversations and I don't feel the need to consider what words to use - that's hard work and saved for work situations.
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
Sounds bloody selfish to me.
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Not at all - my words are not unkind or selfish!
Well those were your words about introverts so presumably they are not unkind or selfish when I use them either.
But the point is if you want to blurt out anything without a filter you place a burden on the listener that would be more effectively done in your head rather than theirs.
Are you going to think about your reply now? If not, why should I bother to respond?
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Because it's a suggestion, an idea, a thought. What I'd like is a conversation about it - to chew over ideas, thoughts.
But why not just get straight to the point and ask "Do you have any ideas how we could make the garden nicer" or "What would you like for dinner" instead of coming out with a random jumping-off point that's actually in practice irrelevant?
My middle name is 'random'
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
But the point is if you want to blurt out anything without a filter you place a burden on the listener that would be more effectively done in your head rather than theirs.
You haven't been listening to what I said.
I think in pictures - I don't 'blurt out'. My words are my thoughts.
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
Are you going to think about your reply now? If not, why should I bother to respond?
Patronising.
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on
:
Hell. Target. Back.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Hell. Target. Back.
I know
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If I am close to someone I start conversations and I don't feel the need to consider what words to use - that's hard work and saved for work situations.
Sounds bloody selfish to me.
Not at all - my words are not unkind or selfish!
How do you know they're not unkind or selfish, until you've heard yourself say them?!
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
May I try something? I've been thinking about this thread a bit, from the angle of risk-taking. Bear with me for a moment.
Suppose I meet someone at some work-related event, and I meet him again a couple of months later. The first time we chatted a bit, and I remember that he talked rather enthusiastically about his children. Or rather, I'm 90% certain that I remember him talking about his children. My memory about this kind of things isn't always perfect.
So, after a couple of months I meet him again. Asking him "how are your children?" might be nice. I like to show interest in people, and this could help to reinforce some kind of inter-human connection. But I'm only 90% sure that he talked about his children last time.
If I'm allowed to speculate a bit, what I understand from this thread is that introvert people would have a risk-averse behaviour here. "What if I misremembered and he doesn't have children? Or what if he has children but something bad happened with them in the intervening months? His feelings might be hurt. Better not bring this up."
Whereas as an extrovert, I would think "I may have misremembered him talking about his children, but it's worth the risk" (this is not a very conscious process).
This doesn't mean that I'm not aware of his feelings. Yes, I realise very well that if I'm wrong, his feelings may be hurt. I can empathise with that. But I'm willing to take this 90% chance here.
On a certain level you might say that this is selfish of me, and you may be right. After all, by taking this risk I'm not only putting potential embarrassment for myself at stake, but also the other person's feelings.
But I feel that this risk is worthwhile, because a positive result could be beneficial to both of us. If I'd let myself caught up in this long train of thought ("what if I misremembered etc."), it might very well lead to an unnatural, stunted conversation. A conversation that flows more naturally has advantages for both of us. So I go for it.
And if I may speculate a bit more, maybe it's these trains of thought that cost introverts so much energy.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Do you want to know how his children are? That's the only question that really goes through my mind. I might go as far as "would he like me to ask about his children", but it's a pointless train of thought because I have no way of knowing the answer to that before I do it anyway.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: Do you want to know how his children are?
Yes. I didn't express this very clearly, but when I ask such a question, my interest is genuine.
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: I might go as far as "would he like me to ask about his children", but it's a pointless train of thought because I have no way of knowing the answer to that before I do it anyway.
Okay. My speculation was that introverts might go into this train of thought anyway, even if it may be pointless (this is not an accusation; our thought processes aren't always rational). But what you're telling me is that I'm wrong here.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Patronising.
Oh come the fuck on. Your patronisation of introverts here has been thicker than chicken shit on the coop floor.
Posted by Graven Image (# 8755) on
:
I am an introvert always have been. I am not shy. I like people. but to much interaction makes me tired. Being around others drains my energy as is requires me to focus more attention outward. I need to recharge my battery by being alone. On the other hand my friend when she is tired seeks out a party to recharge. There is nothing better or worse about either one of us. It is just how we are. We both enjoy taking day long classes together in painting. At the end of the day I am ready for a good book and she wants to go out with friends. Likewise a quiet reflective service gives me energy while a busy active service drains my energy. Again not a good or bad thing.
.
Posted by AmyBo (# 15040) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
But the point is if you want to blurt out anything without a filter you place a burden on the listener that would be more effectively done in your head rather than theirs.
You haven't been listening to what I said.
I think in pictures - I don't 'blurt out'. My words are my thoughts.
You can't filter your fucking thoughts? What the hell? I'd never have a job if I said everything I thought.
Speaking as an introvert - hence all the lurking - you're really off base here. I have a ton of respect for your usual posts, but why the fuck should introverts have to change for your royal ass?
Sure, I have learned how to be social, I have learned how to chat about the weather and ask how the kids are and all that bullshit. Sometimes I care. Sometimes I am waiting for you to stop talking so I can say bye. Sometimes I'm staring at your lips wondering what it would look like for a slug to come out. I am always exhausted after, and I usually feel dirty. If the planets are aligned wrong I cry.
Just fucking acknowledge it's hard, we need our goddamned space, and meet us in the middle like a decent person? I can smile and nod and quietly imagine a huge slug, and you can not be a bitch because I didn't talk enough to meet your arbitrary standards.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
Brava, AmyBo!
And this --
quote:
Originally posted by AmyBo:
Sometimes I'm staring at your lips wondering what it would look like for a slug to come out.
-- I laughed hard enough to startle the cats.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
But why not just get straight to the point and ask "Do you have any ideas how we could make the garden nicer" or "What would you like for dinner" instead of coming out with a random jumping-off point that's actually in practice irrelevant?
My middle name is 'random'
That doesn't actually answer the question. It suggests a mindset a bit like a butterfly that flits around a topic, briefly settles on a corner of it then flits around it a bit more and may or may not abandon it completely in search of something else.
It's a difficult mindset to have as it would mean that a situation where focused, sustained attention is required, and questions need to be answered in a structured, logical way (or even a direct way) is going to be more of a challenge than it would be for most people. I wouldn't have thought it's a trait specifically linked with extroversion, though.
[ 25. March 2016, 04:33: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I think in pictures - I don't 'blurt out'. My words are my thoughts.
Why is thinking in pictures a counter to blurting out?
You are the one with a problem if you think that putting a fountain in the garden is intelligible as a picture for improving the garden without any specific reference to a fountain. You should do the work to turn that picture into some communication that is intelligible to other human beings rather than just blurting it out.
It seems amazing that you expect accommodation on this an a threat you started to say that introverts are "bloody selfish". And then you don't want to be patronized?
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Because it's a suggestion, an idea, a thought. What I'd like is a conversation about it - to chew over ideas, thoughts.
Which all sounds incredibly reasonable in isolation. But in practice how can anyone interpret an opening "shall we have a fountain in the garden?" as anything other than a suggestion, an idea, a thought to be chewed over about having a fountain in the garden? On top of which, how can anyone take that any way other than you've had an idea or a thought "let's have a fountain in the garden" and you want to have a conversation to chew over that idea. I don't think it's anything to do with being an extrovert, it must reflect a really bizzarre way your brain works that must make it absolutely hell to have a conversation with you - whatever position on the introvert-extrovert spectrum they are on.
I can see how a conversation could start "I think the garden needs a bit of a tidy up", maybe "it's nice having a big lawn, but it's getting a bit much to maintain, what if we take some of it out and replace it with something lower maintenance?". Those are clear, simple, but open questions that allow everyone to work on the same page. I can even see how within that conversation someone might throw in random ideas that they then rapidly dismiss, "what about a water feature, a fountain?" ... few minutes later after some discussion ... "oh, I never really wanted a fountain I was just playing with the idea, what about a rockery?". It's not my style, when I say something it's because I've at least considered it a bit and kind of like the idea, but I can see how other people would think that way. But, to start the conversation with a random thought, "let's have a fountain", when that's not something you want is incomprehensible. You must have a husband who really loves you if he puts up with that sort of behaviour, and I'm not surprised if he keeps visiting the garden centre to see if there are any water features he'd be OK with to satisfy what reads like a clearly expressed thought that a fountain might be nice.
But, whether you're introvert or extrovert saying something you don't actually mean is rude, confusing, selfish and dishonest. It's bad enough to tell a colleague you don't like "sorry, I've another appointment" (when you don't) when they suggest joining them for a drink after work, but to effectively lie to your husband???
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Nenya:
But if we are discussing things I'm thinking about, hopes and plans I have, things I feel strongly about, I am going to give thoughtful, measured responses and I mean them. Most of the extroverts in my life process things through their mouths and it drives me nuts.
After 40 years I don't even try to talk things through with my husband. I process things verbally by chatting to the dogs.
If I ask him anything I know the answer will be slow coming with no 'real' discussion. He's like you in a group, he's not silent and is socially perfectly competent. It's at home when he's relaxing that silence falls.
Hopes and plans and things you feel strongly about don't have to be set in stone either, you know - they can change and grow as you talk them through. He seems to have the idea that once he's said it he's committed to it. I once said "shall we have a fountain in the garden?" it was an idea a thought a possibility - I didn't especially want a fountain in the garden, I just very much wanted a nicer garden and to chat about how we go about it. He still mentions it as if I'm hankering after one! No - it was a passing thought! I just hope one doesn't turn up with one day as a surprise
It seems that you're using this approach to get your own way which seems a very passive aggressive form of behaviour to me.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Boogie--
There's nothing at all wrong with thinking in pictures. But if you go straight from that to translating those pictures *aloud*, without an intermediate step, ISTM there's a strong chance that you'll accidentally say something in a less than wise way, hurt someone, get yourself into trouble. And not even realize you've done it.
I wonder if maybe you could sometimes do a quick proofreading in your mind, before you speak? Or, in a situation like the garden discussion, maybe say "Let's brainstorm about what we might do differently with the garden".
I realize this would probably be very hard for you, but you might be saving yourself trouble in the long run.
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on
:
On the way you start conversations and ask questions, I had an almost identical situation with a former housemate.
Housemate: Do you think we should get a coffee table?
Me: No. I don’t like them. They take up space and get in the way.
Housemate goes away all pissed off. Turns out that she was asking me the question because she had already decided she wanted a coffee table and I was now in the way of her coffee table acquisition plans. Trouble is that I was naïve and straightforward enough to answer the question she actually asked, not the question she apparently meant. I really don’t like coffee tables. I told her so with no malice aforethought whatsoever.
I was pretty unrepentant. FWIW I don’t think introversion/ extroversion had much to do with it. I think it’s more about communication styles. She asked a misleading question and unfortunately for her, she got an honest answer. I claim no responsibility for hurting her feelings.
Also I too have an extremely visual mind/memory. However, being an extreme introvert, I take the time think my images through and try to come up with ways of putting them into intelligible words before talking about them to other people
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
la vie en rouge: She asked a misleading question
I'm not really sure about this. This is not how communication works.
[ 25. March 2016, 10:24: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on
:
Possibly. I still think it would have been better for her to be more direct and honest about what she wanted.
ISTM a much better way of starting would have been, “I would like to get a coffee table. How would you feel about that?” I might have still said I didn’t want one but she would have had her feelings hurt less.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
They are different sorts of questions.
"Do you want to get a coffee table/fountain?" invites a simple "yes" or "no" answer, with supporting statements expected. An inherently blunt, and probably discussion ending reply.
"I want a coffee table, what do feel about that?" is an invitation into a discussion of the merits and demerits of coffee tables. A "they take up too much room", "but, you can get small coffee tables, some even fold away when not in use and there's space in my room to store it when we don't need it" discussion that could end in a mutually agreeable purchase.
Posted by Nenya (# 16427) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If I ask him anything I know the answer will be slow coming with no 'real' discussion. He's like you in a group, he's not silent and is socially perfectly competent. It's at home when he's relaxing that silence falls.
So he is doing exactly the same as you with thinking with words - "When relaxing at home it's nice to switch that need off for a while." He doesn't want to come out with quickfire responses that he hasn't had time to think about properly. That exhausts him.
We had an almost identical situation some years back. Mr Nen suggested a water feature in the garden. I didn't want one, said so, and gave my reasons. In my book, end of discussion. But he kept on about it - admiring water features in other people's gardens, heading for the hard landscaping areas of garden centres..."How many times do I have to say I don't want a b****y water feature? It was only gradually I realised he wanted to explore ideas for making changes to the garden. Now we have made changes to our garden and it looks nice. But I still worry that he secretly hankers for a water feature because he made such a thing about it at the time.
In situations like that I stop engaging with the conversation. I feel I have not been heard or understood. So I stop talking and get accused of putting barriers up or shutting down.
Introverts can have what you describe as 'real' discussions fine, thank you very much, as long as we understand the subject in question and the rules of engagement. If you want to talk about ideas for making the garden nicer, and want us to throw in ideas without thinking about them, say so and we'll do our best. We may then need to lie down in a darkened room for a while on our own.
Maybe the answer for me and Mr Nen is to get a dog.
In LeRoc's scenario I'd say, "Weren't you telling me some interesting things about your children last time we met?" If the answer is yes, that's the conversation sorted for the rest of the evening. If not, all I've done is make myself look a bit forgetful with the implied compliment to them of "You're such an interesting person, it must have been you I was talking to."
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Nenya:
Maybe the answer for me and Mr Nen is to get a dog.
"Shall we get a dog?"
Posted by Nenya (# 16427) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
quote:
Originally posted by Nenya:
Maybe the answer for me and Mr Nen is to get a dog.
"Shall we get a dog?"
No.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
la vie en rouge: ISTM a much better way of starting would have been, “I would like to get a coffee table. How would you feel about that?”
You're being way too demanding here (and so is Alan).
If I've already decided that I want to buy something but the decision depends on someone else also, "Do you think we should buy X?" is a perfectly fine way of asking this. In fact, putting it this way can even be seen as avoiding to put pressure on the other person.
Or, let's look at it from the other side. Suppose that someone would ask me "Do you think we should buy X?" I would probably be observing tone and body language, and I'd pick up by simple empathy that this person *really* wants to buy X. I would then take this into account in the way I formulate my answer (be it positive or negative).
A couple of pages ago, it was said a number of times on this thread rather emphatically that introverts are more aware of other people's feelings than extroverts. If this is the case, shouldn't you have picked up on what your housemate wanted?
quote:
Alan Cresswell: They are different sorts of questions.
Perhaps a difference between introverts and extroverts is that we don't spend energy thinking about whether we're asking an open or a closed question?
Picking up on what I've said before, this means that I'm willing to take a risk that someone's feelings may get hurt. But the pay-off is an easier-flowing conversation for both of us.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
You're being way too demanding here (and so is Alan).
It's Hell. I'll be as demanding as I like.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Alan Cresswell: It's Hell. I'll be as demanding as I like.
Of course. But demanding that people take this kind of effort in formulating their questions outside of Hell (which is where la vie en rose's conversation with her housemate happened) may be a bit too much.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
And, maybe it's a bit much to expect other people to make the effort to decide whether or not an apparently straight forward question is actually about something else entirely.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Alan Cresswell: And, maybe it's a bit much to expect other people to make the effort to decide whether or not an apparently straight forward question is actually about something else entirely.
You're getting a bit too abstract for me here, and I've just had my first end-of-beautiful-spring-morning wine on my balcony. Could you apply what you're saying to something more concrete (like la vie en rouge's example)?
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
The example bashed around already is
"Shall we get a fountain?" being a simple question about whether to buy a garden water feature. A yes/no answer, with expected qualification.
But, really the question was "I want to revamp the garden, but a water feature isn't going to feature at all". Which isn't really a question at all.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Of course. But demanding that people take this kind of effort in formulating their questions outside of Hell (which is where la vie en rose's conversation with her housemate happened) may be a bit too much.
You're going to take up my time and effort with your conversation. It seems to me that asking you to phrase your opening gambit in a way that isn't misleading is a fairly basic part of common courtesy.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Alan Cresswell: And, maybe it's a bit much to expect other people to make the effort to decide whether or not an apparently straight forward question is actually about something else entirely.
Wait, I get what you're saying now. It was a reaction to me saying to lver "shouldn't you have picked up on what your housemate wanted?"
This spurred by lot of people saying "introverts are more aware of other people's feelings than extroverts" before on this thread. If this assertion is true, then this is indeed what I would expect.
quote:
Leorning Cniht: You're going to take up my time and effort with your conversation. It seems to me that asking you to phrase your opening gambit in a way that isn't misleading is a fairly basic part of common courtesy.
There's nothing misleading about asking "Do you think we should buy X?"
Look, all of us have probably read something about Communication Theory or about the different models that exist about inter-human communication. No serious scientist thinks that communication is about being able to put our thoughts in words as exactly as possible and then reconstructing these thoughts at the other end of the channel, and that getting better in doing this is the way to resolve the problems that arise in human communication.
Getting everyone to put their thoughts into words in a more exact way won't be the solution to your problems. This isn't even theoretically possible, and a failure to do this isn't a lack of courtesy.
(There's also a cultural dimension to this. Try living in Africa thinking that direct and exact communication is the solution to your problems.)
Human communication is messy, and it always will be. For an introvert, this leads them to worrying, which I think is what drains your energy. For me, it's part of the fun.
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
... There's nothing misleading about asking "Do you think we should buy X?"...
If you've already decided you want X and you don't really care about their opinion and the purpose of the conversation is to persuade the other person to go along, yeah, it is. I (foolishly, apparently) assume that if someone asks what I think about something, they want to know what I think and might actually take it into account.
The honest, non-passive-aggressive, non-misleading alternative would be "I really want a coffee table. Is that OK with you?"
People who ask "Do you ..." instead of having the guts to say "I want ... ", really should remember that one possible answer is, "No, I don't."
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: Do you want to know how his children are?
Yes. I didn't express this very clearly, but when I ask such a question, my interest is genuine.
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: I might go as far as "would he like me to ask about his children", but it's a pointless train of thought because I have no way of knowing the answer to that before I do it anyway.
Okay. My speculation was that introverts might go into this train of thought anyway, even if it may be pointless (this is not an accusation; our thought processes aren't always rational). But what you're telling me is that I'm wrong here.
It being pointless doesn't stop me from going down this train of thought. I couldn't not think these things. It'd be like trying not to think about pink elephants.
But it is tiring. I can see how talking without thinking would be less so, but I can't imagine how that would work. I can't say words if I haven't already thought them. For what it's worth, and I've no idea if this has anything to do with extro/introversion, but I think almost exclusively in words. Usually lots of them at once. There may be mental illustrations, but they're just that - illustrations. I can't imagine not thinking words.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
For what it's worth, and I've no idea if this has anything to do with extro/introversion, but I think almost exclusively in words. Usually lots of them at once. There may be mental illustrations, but they're just that - illustrations. I can't imagine not thinking words.
I think in words, and in images, and in feelings, and in mathematics. I don't speak any foreign languages well enough to think in them, although I'm told that those that do think differently in different languages. Oh, and I think in music, a little (but not very well).
My logical reasoning is exclusively verbal, though, and that tends to dominate.
A consequence of this is that I find it fairly easy (and not tiring) to discuss some product of analytical logic (because those thoughts are in words) or mathematics (because that's basically words too), but hard to discuss anything with emotive content because those thoughts aren't in words, and it takes significant self-analysis to find the correct word.
Posted by goperryrevs (# 13504) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
After 40 years I don't even try to talk things through with my husband. I process things verbally by chatting to the dogs.
This strikes me as very sensible, from the point of view of someone who isn't a verbal processor. It took me a long time to realise that a lot of the time, when my ex said something, she didn't necessarily mean it, which can be very frustrating. Sometimes when she said something, it was actually what she thought about things; other times, it was part of the journey of getting there.
From your husband's point of view, he probably spends a fair amount of energy trying to figure out what you actually think about things, due to your verbal processing.
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If I ask him anything I know the answer will be slow coming with no 'real' discussion. He's like you in a group, he's not silent and is socially perfectly competent. It's at home when he's relaxing that silence falls.
Everyone needs to be able to process things in their own way, and in their own time. Your way of processing things is to talk (what you would call 'discussion') and allow your thoughts to form.
His way of processing things is to have some time to think through it all. He is incapable of having a discussion until he has done this. This is incredibly important for you to grasp.
One day my ex phoned me about our daughter (7) having her ears pierced. This is not something I had ever considered - in my mind, it's something that you get done at 13+. She wanted to have an immediate conversation / discussion about it. I simply couldn't. She got frustrated with me 'because I was unable to discuss it'. Well, yeah, because I'd never thought about it. I knew what my emotional reaction was ("no way!"). But I needed time and space to figure out whether emotional reaction was reasonable or not. It was hard enough work just explaining that I could not have a conversation there and then.
But anyway, I spent a week thinking about it, talked to some friends whose daughters had their ears pierced, and asked a couple of other people what they thought. Then, I talked to my ex, and had an actual genuine discussion about it, much less heated, and came to an agreement. And it was fine.
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Hopes and plans and things you feel strongly about don't have to be set in stone either, you know - they can change and grow as you talk them through.
Sure, but what you're missing is that they can change and grow as you think them through as well as talk them through. And for a non-verbal processor, that's where that mostly happens. From our point of view, the conversation is where we gather more data. Then we can go away and feed it into the brain/computer and see what result comes out. But my computer cannot gather data and process it at the same time, in the same way that yours can.
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
He seems to have the idea that once he's said it he's committed to it.
I would guess that's your (wrong) perception because of the above. My ex has levelled the criticism at me that I'm inflexible / won't change my mind in a similar way. I am totally up for changing my mind, given new data. I'm very unlikely to change my mind during a conversation (in the way that she might). But give me things to think about, give me space to go away and think about them / research them, then come back and discuss it anew, I might well have changed my mind.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Soror Magna: If you've already decided you want X and you don't really care about their opinion
Whoa, where did that come from?
Deciding that I want X doesn't mean that I don't care about someone else's opinion.
quote:
Soror Magna: yeah, it is.
Then the problem is that you don't understand what 'misleading' means.
quote:
Soror Magna: People who ask "Do you ..." instead of having the guts to say "I want ... "
Guts have nothing to do with it.
quote:
Soror Magna: really should remember that one possible answer is, "No, I don't."
Yes, of course. Who said that I would have a problem with that answer?
LOL, the irony is thick here. You and others here say that we should express our thoughts more exactly. And now you've read at least three things into the question "Do you think we should buy X?" that aren't actually there.
quote:
Karl: Liberal Backslider: I can see how talking without thinking would be less so
I wasn't describing talking without thinking. I was describing talking without overthinking "what if the other person gets hurt / upset by what I'll say?" so much that it will stifle me.
quote:
Leorning Cniht: I don't speak any foreign languages well enough to think in them, although I'm told that those that do think differently in different languages.
Yeah, a bit.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Brava, AmyBo!
And this --
quote:
Originally posted by AmyBo:
Sometimes I'm staring at your lips wondering what it would look like for a slug to come out.
-- I laughed hard enough to startle the cats.
My dog is staring at me right now!
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
I think the roommate who wanted the coffee table didn't misphrase anything, didn't mislead anyone, or any of that stuff. It wasn't miscommunication at all. In fact, it was beautifully clear communication.
The problem was that she didn't like the answer she got, and was childish enough to get pissy about it.
That's not a communication problem. That's an attitude problem.
But "Shall we have a fountain in the garden?" meaning "I don't want a fountain, but I do want to make the garden nicer"--that IS a communication problem.
If your husband shows up with a fountain for your birthday, I hope you thank him nicely and rave over it.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
Fuck, I agree with Lamb Chopped. (I'm getting a bit fed up with people saying "Lamb Chopped is right again, as usual" on the Ship all the time.)
quote:
Lamb Chopped: If your husband shows up with a fountain for your birthday, I hope you thank him nicely and rave over it.
Or have a fight over it, and then make up in that special way that couples have.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I think the roommate who wanted the coffee table didn't misphrase anything, didn't mislead anyone, or any of that stuff. It wasn't miscommunication at all. In fact, it was beautifully clear communication.
The problem was that she didn't like the answer she got, and was childish enough to get pissy about it.
Of course if she had already purchased a table, and was trying to be coy about that fact with her question, that's another matter altogether.
quote:
If your husband shows up with a fountain for your birthday, I hope you thank him nicely and rave over it.
If you as a couple are in the habit of planning garden improvements as a team, and he shows up with a fountain without knowing beforehand whether or not you'd like a fountain in the garden, then you need to question your taste in husbands.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Fuck, I agree with Lamb Chopped. (I'm getting a bit fed up with people saying "Lamb Chopped is right again, as usual" on the Ship all the time.)
Lamb Chopped is fucking WRONG again, as usual.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I think the roommate who wanted the coffee table didn't misphrase anything, didn't mislead anyone, or any of that stuff. It wasn't miscommunication at all. In fact, it was beautifully clear communication.
The problem was that she didn't like the answer she got, and was childish enough to get pissy about it.
Of course if she had already purchased a table, and was trying to be coy about that fact with her question, that's another matter altogether.
I don't understand. To my mind, that would be even worse, and not another matter altogether.
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
If your husband shows up with a fountain for your birthday, I hope you thank him nicely and rave over it.
If you as a couple are in the habit of planning garden improvements as a team, and he shows up with a fountain without knowing beforehand whether or not you'd like a fountain in the garden, then you need to question your taste in husbands.
Clarifying: that remark was to Boogie, and it meant basically "By your wildly misleading question quoted upthread, you have given him legitimate reason to think you have a secret hankering for fountains, and must abide the consequences, hopefully graciously."
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Lamb Chopped: Lamb Chopped is fucking WRONG again, as usual.
(I'm not really following the garden fountain discussion. That's mostly because I can't think of it without a lot of sexual innuendo.)
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
If your husband shows up with a fountain for your birthday, I hope you thank him nicely and rave over it.
I would
But it won't happen, he doesn't do surprises - he's far too measured for that.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Lamb Chopped: Lamb Chopped is fucking WRONG again, as usual.
(I'm not really following the garden fountain discussion. That's mostly because I can't think of it without a lot of sexual innuendo.)
Drat you. You led me right into that one, didn't you?
[ 25. March 2016, 18:39: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
Posted by Nenya (# 16427) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Or have a fight over it, and then make up in that special way that couples have.
By putting the kettle on and making a nice cup of tea.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Nenya:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Or have a fight over it, and then make up in that special way that couples have.
By putting the kettle on and making a nice cup of tea.
So that's what they call it these days
It seems to me that some people on this thread are objecting to the fact that when we're communicating, there's always a subtext below the face-value of our words, and if we'd just make this subtext explicit, communication would be easier. I have to tell you that this subtext will always be there. And most likely, it will be more important than the 'literal' meaning that our words convey. This is what Communication Theory tells us.
"Do you think we should buy X?" almost never means: I'm absolutely neutral about buying X and now I'm conducting a completely independent poll about whether you think we should buy it.
(The Old Man and the Sea contains the sentence "Do you think we should buy a terminal of the lottery with an eighty-five?" Read the book and try to see if the Old Man is absolutely neutral about buying it.)
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Lamb Chopped is fucking WRONG again, as usual.
You know, what you do behind closed doors is not our business. Nobody can tell you you're fucking wrong, as long as it's mutually agreed-upon.
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I think the roommate who wanted the coffee table didn't misphrase anything, didn't mislead anyone, or any of that stuff. It wasn't miscommunication at all. In fact, it was beautifully clear communication.
The problem was that she didn't like the answer she got, and was childish enough to get pissy about it.
Of course if she had already purchased a table, and was trying to be coy about that fact with her question, that's another matter altogether.
I don't understand. To my mind, that would be even worse, and not another matter altogether.
Then it really WOULD be miscommunication and not merely being pissy about the answer she got.
quote:
Clarifying: that remark was to Boogie, and it meant basically "By your wildly misleading question quoted upthread, you have given him legitimate reason to think you have a secret hankering for fountains, and must abide the consequences, hopefully graciously."
I thought I understood what that exchange was about, and now I'm sure I don't.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
(The Old Man and the Sea contains the sentence "Do you think we should buy a terminal of the lottery with an eighty-five?"
I've been thinking about this for some time now but still don't understand the sentence.
Over here a lottery terminal is the in-store computer that prints your lottery ticket. The terminals aren't for sale.
As for buying it with an eighty-five, an 85-what?
I'm guessing that what he's actually saying is "Should we get a lottery ticket that contains the numbers 85" but if so it's a rather strange way of phrasing it.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Ariel: I'm guessing that what he's actually saying is "Should we get a lottery ticket that contains the numbers 85" but if so it's a rather strange way of phrasing it.
I think it meant a lottery ticket that ended on the number 85. (I guess in those days you could get prices based on the end numbers of the ticket, called a 'terminal').
If only those @%&!# extroverts would say exactly what they meant!
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
If only those @%&!# extroverts would say exactly what they meant!
And say it using their "indoors voice"--i.e., at a controlled, moderate volume.
Posted by Nenya (# 16427) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
If only those @%&!# extroverts would say exactly what they meant!
And say it using their "indoors voice"--i.e., at a controlled, moderate volume.
Is the talking loudly an extrovert thing? I thought it was just Mr Nen.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Some extroverts. Makes people fervently wish that the speaker would go far away.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Some extroverts. Makes people fervently wish that the speaker would go far away.
Especially if they're talking on a cellphone in an enclosed space like a bus or subway car.
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0