Quote:
Originally Posted by Medusa
A question for folks:
Is understanding the responsibility of the person wanting to be heard or the responsibility of the person listening?
Thoughts?
|
I think this is a really compelling question. I think my answer is, "both and neither" and, "it depends."
I think it's human nature to want to be heard/understood by others - especially if one is invested in relationship with said others - and even more so if the non-understanding party is actively harming or promoting the harm of the party wanting to be understood.
I think it's also human nature to be more receptive when one feels heard, understood, accepted, respected and not too stressed out. Even under those circumstances, few people want to feel like they are being preached at or condescended to.
The burden of being understood is so great when it comes to populations outside of overculture expectations. I do think the privileged party in any circumstance has a greater responsibility to attempt to understand the dynamics of inequality, because the burden to teach and see understanding is too high for those who do not share a privilege. And ignorance when it comes to issues of equality leads directly to perpetuation of said inequality. Sometimes I think one of the biggest problems - in the U.S.? in the world? In humanity? - is that ignorance benefits the privileged while harming those who do not share the privilege. Because there is no apparent and strong loopback for most people's harmful behaviors associated with classism, racism, heterosexism, sexism, etc. - there is little to no incentive for most people to learn or change behaviors.
There's a saying: "When the student is ready, the master will come." We all have times in our lives when we have the opportunity to teach or to inform and we all have times in our lives when we have the opportunity to listen and learn. Often within a single conversation, all parties experience both roles. If you put the information out there, those who are ready and willing to receive it will do so, and those who aren't ready are not likely to be able to hear it at all.
If a person feels they have relevant information to share, I think the responsibility of that person is to share that information in a way that does not demean the intended audience. I don't think it does all that much good to repeat and repeat and repeat the same bit of information in the same way and expect the intended audience to become more receptive to it. Ideally, one could act as a sort of midwife to the intended audience's understanding - because new understanding really has to gestate within the person - but I think that takes more skill than most of us have.
As for the responsibility to listen: In this day and age, we are all bombarded with so much information that none of us can take it all in. I think it's a choice whether one has the time and inclination to hear another person, though if there are indications that one's actions or inactions are causing another person or group of people *harm*, there is a greater responsibility to learn or self-examine. If one is invested in the relationship, part of that investment is the willingness to do one's best to *hear* the other's perspective and to accept the limitations another person has to hearing.
People have to be in the right place to share information in a way where it has the best chance of being received, and people have to be in the right place to be receptive to hearing and/or understanding. *Even when all parties try their best, I think it's to be expected that much of that effort will inevitably fall into a sort of black hole. In fact, I think an effort-black-hole exists in every relationship - where a certain amount of effort is never recognized by the other party. It's like a tax for being in that relationship.
(My use of the word "relationship" in this post is not referring to romantic relationships, but to any relationship between two or more people - up to and including an entire community).
Outside of all that, there's also basic learning theories to consider. When a person is first exposed to new information, it's helpful if it's related to information they already know. People can't go from zero to sixty when learning, so if a person really wants to be heard and their intended audience is not *getting it*, I think it's unreasonable to become too frustrated with the intended audience. If you are really invested in having another person understand you, you have to be willing to meet them where they are, be willing to spell it out and be receptive to learning from them as well as sharing information with them.
Easier said than done, all that.