5 Common Phrases That Only Bad Listeners Use
If you want to piss off your partner, just say, “It is what it is.”
Conversations with bad listeners are root canal painful. The narcissists are easy to spot. They usually just change the subject or interrupt to make the conversation about themselves. But there are more subtle bad listening sins we are sometimes guilty of committing.
Here are a few to avoid if you want to be a better conversationalist.
1. “Why are you letting it bother you?”
Another version of this statement is “why do you care?” or “stop overthinking.” Or my personal favorite gaslighting phrase — “stop being so dramatic.”
A bad listener doesn’t want to plumb the depths of your hopes and fears. They merely want to stop talking about your problems so they can talk about their problems.
This dismissiveness can be exceedingly hurtful when it comes days or even moments after you dissect ad nauseam one of their problems.
This happened to me recently. A friend called upset because her boyfriend was acting weird. I dropped everything and counseled her for a good 45 minutes. A week later, I asked her for some career advice on an issue that was causing me anxiety.
Well, three minutes into the conversation, she said, “Why do you even care?” Followed by an eye roll and a “you are giving this too much energy.”
No, I was not giving it too much energy, but I was asking her to give it too much energy.
A narcissist’s kryptonite is other people’s problems. And telling someone they are giving their problems too much energy is the ultimate form of gaslighting. To a bad listener, other people’s problems are inconsequential or, even worse…not real problems.
To be clear, there are times when someone is needlessly ruminating, and you need to call them out on it. Self-awareness is healthy. Obsession is not. But asking someone to spend ten minutes discussing an issue that is bothering you is not obsessing. And anyone who can’t lend you their ear for ten minutes is a bad listener.
A narcissist’s kryptonite is other people’s problems.
2. “I know what you are feeling. I experienced the same…”
People who are bad listeners struggle to hold another’s pain and not make it about themselves. For example, you might tell a bad listener about an altercation with a loved one. They respond by immediately launching into a story about how they went through something similar.
Then instead of having the opportunity to vent or find a solution, you are counseling them.
This sleight-of-hand conversational trick is one of the most manipulative. These people erase your problems by breadcrumbing you into their problems.
To be fair, when someone relates another’s situation to their situation, their intentions are not always nefarious. Many people follow the age-old Dale Carnegie advice: “Try honestly to see things from the other person’s point of view.” Carnegie taught that you could not understand someone unless you walk a mile in their shoes.
Seeing a problem from another’s vantage point is called perspective-taking. Unfortunately, research shows perspective-taking clouds communication. Not only does it muddy the waters, but it also is more likely to lead to misunderstandings.
According to behavioral scientist and author Nicholas Epley, perspective-taking derails communication because humans suck at reading emotions. And most of us don’t realize just how bad we are at it.
In other words, there’s a Dunning Kruger Effect happening when reading people.
So Epley researched why we fail at reading others’ emotions. In a series of studies involving 2,816 participants, Epley asked participants to predict their spouse‘s opinion on a subject — activities, jokes, movies, art, etc. One group was asked to imagine themselves in their partner’s shoes. The other group was not primed with perspective-taking exercises.
The results: the couples who engaged in perspective-taking were less accurate in predicting their spouse’s emotions. Epley also found perspective-taking exaggerated perceived differences while increasing distrust and selfishness.
Epley advises that people engage in “perspective-getting” — asking the right questions to uncover someone’s beliefs, instead of perspective-taking — imagining someone’s vantage point and making assumptions.
So maybe instead of trying to picture yourself in your partner’s shoes, you should try asking questions about the shoes they are already in.
Seeing a problem from another’s vantage point is called perspective-taking. Unfortunately, research shows perspective-taking clouds communication.
3. “I am sorry, BUT…”
I used to be horrible at apologies. And it took some soul searching to undo the bad habit I call “sorry…but”
Nothing makes a rational human spit more flames than “I am sorry you feel that way, but…”
When you preface an apology with that phrase, you basically told someone that the real problem is their feelings, not your actions. That is not an apology. That is a justification.
The word “but” completely negates an apology. So if you are about to say the word “but,” ask yourself if your apology is sincere.
4. “What about the time you…”
Often when couples fight, one person wants to win more than they want to solve a problem (and win) together.
I had an ex who used to take this zero-sum approach. We couldn’t have constructive fights because the more I was wrong, the more he was right. And he needed to be right.
This zero-sum thinking is described by the Latin phrase— Mors Tua Vita Mea. It means “your death is my life.”
And one of the many ways we “kill” our partner is through the dirty pool conversational tactic called “whataboutism.”
Whataboutism is when you trot out a partner’s past offenses that lack relevance to your current offense. Whataboutism is tied to another Latin phrase — tu quoque, meaning “you also.”
For example, your spouse complains about the unfair distribution of chores, and you respond with, “What about the time you lied to me about your spending?” To be clear, lying is wrong. But if your partner’s “what about the time you…” misdeeds are irrelevant to your current misdeed, then you are not debating. You are deflecting.
When someone uses whataboutism phrases, try responding, “I want to address your issue, but can we please first solve the current one.”
This response reminds the person that they are using false equivalencies to defend themselves.
To be fair, what one person sees as a false equivalency, the other person might see as comparable. Take the above example. Maybe your spending is resulting in not being able to afford a housekeeper. Always hear your partner out before accusing them of connecting the dots.
If your partner’s “what about the time you…” misdeeds are irrelevant to your current misdeed then you are not debating. You are deflecting.
5. “It is what it is” — the evils of thought-terminating cliches (TTC)
Nothing makes me want to throttle a bad listener more than when you pour your heart out, and they just sigh and offer up some Orwellian Newspeak.
My pet peeve — “It is what it is.”
No, it only remains “what it is” when callous people are too lazy to give a f*ck.
This type of reductionist thinking is known as a “thought-terminating cliche” (TTC). A TTC is used to end the conversation when someone is indifferent to the other person’s feelings or doesn’t want to address a topic that has got too heated.
So instead of putting out the fire, they leave the kitchen.
Other hackneyed TTCs:
“We will have to agree to disagree.”
Yes, letting the small stuff go is vital to any healthy relationship, but not if the disagreement involves moral differences, such as gay rights, sexism, or racism. Those are not disagreements. Those are dealbreakers.
“God has a plan.”
Yeah, thanks for the magical thinking explanation for my debilitating problem. I will just wait for the big guy in the sky to solve this one.
“When you get to be my age, you’ll find that’s not true.”
Um, ok. I guess I will figure out this problem in the next decade…or when I have enough wrinkles to have a brain.
“You only live once.”
Sure, so you have carte blanche to pursue any hedonism even if it hurts others. That’s not being carefree. That’s being careless.
What do all of these phrases have in common? They halt a discussion by short-circuiting critical thinking. These phrases are the jargon of indifference or what Lionel Trilling called “the language of non-thought.”
Unfortunately, communication requires thought. Bad conversationalists use cliches because generalizations are far easier than dissecting an issue.
We are all guilty of occasionally being bad conversationalists. Avoiding these phrases is a start. But to truly be a good listener, you must want to listen.
Or, to quote another conversation truism from Dale Carnegie, “To be interesting, be interested.”
