A line or a square?
When we think there are two components of dialogue: 1. what they said 2. what I said we assume that language is infallible.
In reality, there are four: 1. what I intended to say 2. how they interpret what I said 3. what they intended to say 4. what I interpret what they said
In reality, I have to acknowledge that just because I intended well doesn’t mean that my words might not be misinterpreted and understood from a different context; one that might potentially be hurtful.
In reality, words said with good intentions might be hurtful when they ignore the blind spots of my lived experiences. Both these are valid: a) my feelings, in reaction to the words b) the good initial intention, despite the words used.
When we can only be in control of what we say, I advocate this:
Be responsible for your own communication. You are responsible for both your intentions and the words you select, and whether they are appropriate for the context.
Be curious and cautious about others’ communication. When others might conflate intention and action, acknowledge both. You are allowed to speak up if actions have hurt you, even if the intentions were good.
The words we speak have more dimensions than their surface meaning.
Let’s treat it as such.
Hi, I’m Lucy (The Egg Girl), and I’m still learning, what about you?
Most forgotten poem of the month, which in itself is a bit ironic because it is a poem about forgetting.
Most popular poem of the month, about shifting views and managing criticism.
