What do you suggest if one person's "truth" is just, like, really awful or sort of inherently violent towards the other person in the relationship? I live in a rural area of Texas, and if I get in a disagreement about, say, politics or some sort of social issue with someone, it's very likely that they believe that (for instance) gay people are inherently immoral, or that black people are inherently inferior. I'm not talking about matters of policy or how they vote or something, but of core beliefs about people. Do you think this kind of skillful communication can work in that sort of situation, or would this be an instance where long-term avoidance might be a good idea? What if you are "trapped" in a relationship with that sort of person, by blood or marriage or proximity or some other factor (such as being in community together)?
do you often observe dynamics where one person tends to far more often (and/or more genuinely) be the "listener" and the other the "speaker" in these sorts of situations
I have experienced situations where I will try to empathize with the other person and compromise and really get where they are coming from, and I do it over and over, and then when it's their turn, they just...don't really get it. Like, they'll pretend to understand/accept what I am saying (pretend is not quite the right word--they're not trying to be insincere--but they just genuinely don't get it but want to be accommodating and not be a jerk, so they just go through the motions)
Donal MacCoon wrote:(1) A speaker and a listener take turns
When I tried to renegotiate our relationship to a peer level, it didn't go well. The disrespect on his side is palpable. So I respond with compassion, for him and for me. Poor guy - so lonely, so damn competitive. Poor me - so desirous of his respect for being a functional person. This way, I keep my goodwill toward him, and that allows me to maintain my balance - and peace.