Negotiating Silence

[Linus]

Something that just popped into my head: if someone responds to a post and only addresses one point, totally ignoring the other points of the post that they are responding to and focuses on that one point, is that silencing?

It's a challenge, IMO, because sometimes there isn't a need to respond to all points and sometimes it's a specific point that you want to address or feel you can offer an opinion/view on. But by doing the latter, I wonder if that feels like or accomplishes a silencing behaviour whether we intend to or not.


** the irony of this post doesn't escape me **

[Andrew, Jr.]

Linus,

I can only focus on 1 thing at a time. I can't focus or multi-task on 10 different things. It may seem to others like I may be ignoring them, but I'm not. I just am not able to do it the way others are. That is why I rely on other folks like yourself and Jack to help me to understand.

Andrew

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by Linus

Something that just popped into my head: if someone responds to a post and only addresses one point, totally ignoring the other points of the post that they are responding to and focuses on that one point, is that silencing?

It's a challenge, IMO, because sometimes there isn't a need to respond to all points and sometimes it's a specific point that you want to address or feel you can offer an opinion/view on. But by doing the latter, I wonder if that feels like or accomplishes a silencing behaviour whether we intend to or not.


** the irony of this post doesn't escape me **

Yes yes, or if we agree with a post, but do not comment on each an every word of everypost, or respond fast enough...are we in fact ignoring the post and silencing the poster?

[Lynn]

Originally Posted by Linus

Something that just popped into my head: if someone responds to a post and only addresses one point, totally ignoring the other points of the post that they are responding to and focuses on that one point, is that silencing?

It's a challenge, IMO, because sometimes there isn't a need to respond to all points and sometimes it's a specific point that you want to address or feel you can offer an opinion/view on. But by doing the latter, I wonder if that feels like or accomplishes a silencing behaviour whether we intend to or not.


** the irony of this post doesn't escape me **

I don't think it's silencing to only respond to one point. That may be the point that speaks to the individual responding. It could happen that way in a real time discussion, too. Are you saying that it may feel invalidating to the original poster, that they don't feel completely "heard"?

I have seen people post comments and when no one responds, they come back on with a pouty kind of tone, "No body likes me, why is everyone ignoring me? I'm not a cool kid" thing. I see it on another site a lot (not a b-f type site). I feel sad when that happens, but I don't think it's silencing to not respond to someone. No one should be obligated to communicate when they have nothing to say.

[Linus]

Originally Posted by Lynn

I don't think it's silencing to only respond to one point. That may be the point that speaks to the individual responding. It could happen that way in a real time discussion, too. Are you saying that it may feel invalidating to the original poster, that they don't feel completely "heard"?

Could be not heard but more that the focus is on some small point and not the overall context or point of the post. I mean, if someone asks a question at the end, I certain would expect responses to be based on the question but if the question is a culmination of an experience and no one reads the experience, then the responses may not necessarily help. It can also be a small specific point that isn't indicative of the whole post and could result in a view being taken out of context. I dunno if I'm being clear. I know I can talk in circles sometimes so if I have I apologize.

I have seen people post comments and when no one responds, they come back on with a pouty kind of tone, "No body likes me, why is everyone ignoring me? I'm not a cool kid" thing. I see it on another site a lot (not a b-f type site). I feel sad when that happens, but I don't think it's silencing to not respond to someone. No one should be obligated to communicate when they have nothing to say.

I've seen that as well. I have posted a few threads which I thought would be great discussions but no one has replied (although I got lots of rep feedback). I just wish some of it would be in the discussion but I suspect sometimes it's too sensitive of an issue to discuss. I won't get pouty over it (although I can if it helps start discussion ). I think when we start a thread we have to remember that it sometimes won't cause everyone to speak, respond, etc. Sometimes it will; sometimes people look at a post and see it as a vent/rant/PoV that they agree with and have nothing more that they could add (this is one of the reasons I thought the "Thanks" button would be good).

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by Linus

Could be not heard but more that the focus is on some small point and not the overall context or point of the post. I mean, if someone asks a question at the end, I certain would expect responses to be based on the question but if the question is a culmination of an experience and no one reads the experience, then the responses may not necessarily help. It can also be a small specific point that isn't indicative of the whole post and could result in a view being taken out of context. I dunno if I'm being clear. I know I can talk in circles sometimes so if I have I apologize.



I've seen that as well. I have posted a few threads which I thought would be great discussions but no one has replied (although I got lots of rep feedback). I just wish some of it would be in the discussion but I suspect sometimes it's too sensitive of an issue to discuss. I won't get pouty over it (although I can if it helps start discussion ). I think when we start a thread we have to remember that it sometimes won't cause everyone to speak, respond, etc. Sometimes it will; sometimes people look at a post and see it as a vent/rant/PoV that they agree with and have nothing more that they could add (this is one of the reasons I thought the "Thanks" button would be good).

Yes, the "thanks" button is great in many regards!

[Lynn]

Originally Posted by Linus

Could be not heard but more that the focus is on some small point and not the overall context or point of the post. I mean, if someone asks a question at the end, I certain would expect responses to be based on the question but if the question is a culmination of an experience and no one reads the experience, then the responses may not necessarily help. It can also be a small specific point that isn't indicative of the whole post and could result in a view being taken out of context. I dunno if I'm being clear. I know I can talk in circles sometimes so if I have I apologize.

No apologies necessary to me. I do find it odd when there is a response that isn't really pertinent to the post or discussion. It feels like the response is not based on an attempt to understand, but just a platform for the responder to air their views. It can range from annoying to appearing to be callous, depending on the situation. But, really, it may just be that the post wasn't completely understood by the responder. I know that sometimes people honestly believe they understand, when they don't.

I've seen that as well. I have posted a few threads which I thought would be great discussions but no one has replied (although I got lots of rep feedback). I just wish some of it would be in the discussion but I suspect sometimes it's too sensitive of an issue to discuss. I won't get pouty over it (although I can if it helps start discussion ). I think when we start a thread we have to remember that it sometimes won't cause everyone to speak, respond, etc. Sometimes it will; sometimes people look at a post and see it as a vent/rant/PoV that they agree with and have nothing more that they could add (this is one of the reasons I thought the "Thanks" button would be good).

I like the thanks button, too. Thanks for having it!

[apretty]

i think that silencing can only exist if there's some power imbalance. (and not a perceived imbalance, a true power imbalance.)

the other so-called silencing, isn't. what i hear being described is when someone feels 'misheard' or 'misunderstood' and that can be frustrating (or not) but it's really between you and you (or myself and i) and i'm sure it *feels* really real, but it's not a certain *thing* that's being done to you (or me) unless you happen to think that it is (and again, that's between you and you).

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by apretty

i think that silencing can only exist if there's some power imbalance. (and not a perceived imbalance, a true power imbalance.)

the other so-called silencing, isn't. what i hear being described is when someone feels 'misheard' or 'misunderstood' and that can be frustrating (or not) but it's really between you and you (or myself and i) and i'm sure it *feels* really real, but it's not a certain *thing* that's being done to you (or me) unless you happen to think that it is (and again, that's between you and you).

Ding! Ding! Ding! You are in my head. I see the word silencing being used a lot. I am still trying to understand if Silencing is indeed a two party act a lot of the time.

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by Linus

Something that just popped into my head: if someone responds to a post and only addresses one point, totally ignoring the other points of the post that they are responding to and focuses on that one point, is that silencing?

It's a challenge, IMO, because sometimes there isn't a need to respond to all points and sometimes it's a specific point that you want to address or feel you can offer an opinion/view on. But by doing the latter, I wonder if that feels like or accomplishes a silencing behaviour whether we intend to or not.


** the irony of this post doesn't escape me **

Are you speaking to the fact that I didn't answer you point by point?
Am I being silencing by not doing so? Or are you being silencing by expecting me to?

I, like many others on this site am differently abled. With a traumatic brain injury it is super hard for me to form cognitive thoughts on more than one thing at a time. I couldn't form an appropriate response to you feeling unwelcome because you are Trans or Canadian or what have you. I can speculate, but I don't know how that feels. I don't want to cheerlead so much as to learn. I thought I acknowledged with 'great points" because they ARE great points.

Part of the reason I started this thread is that I want to learn. So my question above comes from an open minded teachable headspace.

[Linus]

Originally Posted by SuperFemme

Are you speaking to the fact that I didn't answer you point by point?
Am I being silencing by not doing so? Or are you being silencing by expecting me to?

Heh.. no. It's because I didn't respond to all your points in the OP and also didn't address others completely either. Hence, the irony. I think, however, you've done a great job at trying to answer and address points as they come into play. Which, IMO, everyone feel like they have a part in this, are valued for their opinion and are not silenced.

I, like many others on this site am differently abled. With a traumatic brain injury it is super hard for me to form cognitive thoughts on more than one thing at a time. I couldn't form an appropriate response to you feeling unwelcome because you are Trans or Canadian or what have you. I can speculate, but I don't know how that feels. I don't want to cheerlead so much as to learn. I thought I acknowledged with 'great points" because they ARE great points.

Totally understand and completely get. This is much like me not understanding what it's like to live with being differently abled and others not being aware of the challenges that are added on with that, especially one that doesn't necessarily appear obvious.

Please be assured it wasn't directed at you but rather something that I remember from a previous discussion on a similar topic on an online game (since the premise of the game involved online discussion and politics, silencing was a common activity although it wasn't called silencing) and I've seen elsewhere online. One of the things I've noticed is that when this is done, sometimes two people -- both who have the same view but present it differently -- ended up arguing against each other over the smallest point (e.g., honor vs honour).

Part of the reason I started this thread is that I want to learn. So my question above comes from an open minded teachable headspace.

Always a good thing.

[SuperFemme]

Ok. Now I'd like to add something else to the mix.

What about Silencing through gossip? Shunning. Labeling of a person as a slut, a stalker, a gold digger or obsessed?

This is something we can all combat. Sending a pm to another member devaluing another member? It has been my experience that nobody ever goes to the person being shredded and *asks* before perpetuationg the bullshit.

Apretty spoke of a true imbalance of power. I think there is an imbalance of power in these kinds of situations. The most painful thing for me has been seeing a person in authority (or perceived authority) rip a member in public. For speaking a truth. For having a dissenting opinion. It sets an ugly stage.

[Arwen]

Originally Posted by SuperFemme

What about Silencing through gossip? Shunning. Labeling of a person as a slut, a stalker, a gold digger or obsessed?

This is something we can all combat. Sending a pm to another member devaluing another member? It has been my experience that nobody ever goes to the person being shredded and *asks* before perpetuationg the bullshit.

Apretty spoke of a true imbalance of power. I think there is an imbalance of power in these kinds of situations. The most painful thing for me has been seeing a person in authority (or perceived authority) rip a member in public. For speaking a truth. For having a dissenting opinion. It sets an ugly stage.

I think Silencing is a form of shunning/ostracizing. We will not all get along. That's a fact, Jack. But we can behave in socially acceptable ways towards one another.

However, then we have to determine what is "socially acceptable."

In some groups, it is socially acceptable to send PM's or talk about someone behind their back.

I've done this to you, SuperFemme. I am using this example because you and I discussed this. We repaired what I allowed to happen by listening to and by perpetuating some rather unpleasant gossip. It is one of the reasons I try my best not to say anything behind someone's back that I would not say to their face. It's an important thing in my life.

I have been silenced by others telling me that my way of communicating in written form is demeaning or belittling. I do have a dogmatic way of communicating. I do not like that I have hurt people unintentionally. However, I know for a fact that I have hurt people intentionally. Not proud of that but I will also not allow anyone to use that as a weapon to silence me.

I've set up some pretty firm boundaries about avoiding those who do gossip in mean ways. I have to quantify that with "in mean ways" because if gossip is talking about someone, then I gossip a lot. I talk about Pixiestars and how much I enjoy her company. I mention Shariberry's shopping abilities. I am a horrible gossip about Ashton's tour guide skills. Or tell someone that they must buy Diva's CD because it is most excellent. Or read any of the 9Word poets' work. ETC.

If gossip is mean-spirited, then I will self-correct myself. I will say out loud that I do not want to talk about someone behind their back and correct that behaviour. If I do not want to be around gossips, I can't be one, right? And Gods know, I've been one!

I do see gossip as Silencing. And again, I am sorry for what I did to you rather than go directly to you.

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by Arwen

I think Silencing is a form of shunning/ostracizing. We will not all get along. That's a fact, Jack. But we can behave in socially acceptable ways towards one another.

However, then we have to determine what is "socially acceptable."

In some groups, it is socially acceptable to send PM's or talk about someone behind their back.

I've done this to you, SuperFemme. I am using this example because you and I discussed this. We repaired what I allowed to happen by listening to and by perpetuating some rather unpleasant gossip. It is one of the reasons I try my best not to say anything behind someone's back that I would not say to their face. It's an important thing in my life.

I have been silenced by others telling me that my way of communicating in written form is demeaning or belittling. I do have a dogmatic way of communicating. I do not like that I have hurt people unintentionally. However, I know for a fact that I have hurt people intentionally. Not proud of that but I will also not allow anyone to use that as a weapon to silence me.

I've set up some pretty firm boundaries about avoiding those who do gossip in mean ways. I have to quantify that with "in mean ways" because if gossip is talking about someone, then I gossip a lot. I talk about Pixiestars and how much I enjoy her company. I mention Shariberry's shopping abilities. I am a horrible gossip about Ashton's tour guide skills. Or tell someone that they must buy Diva's CD because it is most excellent. Or read any of the 9Word poets' work. ETC.

If gossip is mean-spirited, then I will self-correct myself. I will say out loud that I do not want to talk about someone behind their back and correct that behaviour. If I do not want to be around gossips, I can't be one, right? And Gods know, I've been one!

I do see gossip as Silencing. And again, I am sorry for what I did to you rather than go directly to you.

, on the other hand, some people would way rather you (not you personally, the collective you) talked behind their backs than to their faces....In my part of the country it is not polite to say things to pople's faces and it freaks us out when someone does.

It really is difficult sometimes with all our cultural differences for us to communicate at all. Its a miracle that we do as well as we do.

[Arwen]

Originally Posted by apocalipstic

, on the other hand, some people would way rather you (not you personally, the collective you) talked behind their backs than to their faces....In my part of the country it is not polite to say things to pople's faces and it freaks us out when someone does.

It really is difficult sometimes with all our cultural differences for us to communicate at all. Its a miracle that we do as well as we do.

I am so Southern it hurts sometimes. I grew up in this culture of talking behing others' backs. I do not condone it. I have seen the damage it does. I have felt the damage. I understand what you are saying. I really do.

However, there are some traditions that need to be changed. If I would not say it to your face, I am re-teaching myself how to not say it at all. I'm thumperizing my life in that way because it is important to me personally.

I am giving up my right-by-Southern ability to say, "Did you see that dress Apocalipstic wore to the party? Bless her heart, it wasn't her best color." And all other variations of that type of talk. I am on a mission in my own life to eradicate it from all corners of my communication. If I wouldn't tell Jackhammer she is an ass to her face, then I won't do it behind her back. (NOTE: both examples are pure fiction! )

This really isn't about silencing so I'll (grin) silence myself on this. It's my own personal soapbox on something I do that I detest.

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by Arwen

I think Silencing is a form of shunning/ostracizing. We will not all get along. That's a fact, Jack. But we can behave in socially acceptable ways towards one another.

However, then we have to determine what is "socially acceptable."

In some groups, it is socially acceptable to send PM's or talk about someone behind their back.

I've done this to you, SuperFemme. I am using this example because you and I discussed this. We repaired what I allowed to happen by listening to and by perpetuating some rather unpleasant gossip. It is one of the reasons I try my best not to say anything behind someone's back that I would not say to their face. It's an important thing in my life.

I have been silenced by others telling me that my way of communicating in written form is demeaning or belittling. I do have a dogmatic way of communicating. I do not like that I have hurt people unintentionally. However, I know for a fact that I have hurt people intentionally. Not proud of that but I will also not allow anyone to use that as a weapon to silence me.

I've set up some pretty firm boundaries about avoiding those who do gossip in mean ways. I have to quantify that with "in mean ways" because if gossip is talking about someone, then I gossip a lot. I talk about Pixiestars and how much I enjoy her company. I mention Shariberry's shopping abilities. I am a horrible gossip about Ashton's tour guide skills. Or tell someone that they must buy Diva's CD because it is most excellent. Or read any of the 9Word poets' work. ETC.

If gossip is mean-spirited, then I will self-correct myself. I will say out loud that I do not want to talk about someone behind their back and correct that behaviour. If I do not want to be around gossips, I can't be one, right? And Gods know, I've been one!

I do see gossip as Silencing. And again, I am sorry for what I did to you rather than go directly to you.

I think gossip is inherently mean spirited. I also think that certain people are just a recipe for disaster when they bring out the worst in others.

I think one of the most healing moments for me was when you apologized to me. So please stop now, I forgive you. Your apology was a gift because it validated the months of crazy making. It was brave of you to do so and I am eternally grateful.

Interestingly, I chose to not engage and silenced myself during that time period. My health could not take the toxic nature of thinking about it. Yet the silence imposed was deafening.

There was not necessarily a power imbalance but at times it was perceived by me to be one. I had to do the work around that.

It's not unimportant that we live in a world where boundaries are being blurred about privacy and a demand to know is pervasive. Take the Tiger Woods incident. How dare he not make a statement! I want to vomit everytime I hear about it.

[amiyesiam]

I love the thank you button. It lets people know you like what they posted. It takes time to respond to posts.

Next when someone says they are differently abled and people are rude, etc to them it is wrong. Perhaps because I have worked with differently abled people for over 15 years I have strong feelings about this.

Sometimes some people don't spend enough time letting people know they are liked, appreciated, respected, etc.

[QUOTE=SuperFemme;18730]Ok. Now I'd like to add something else to the mix.

What about Silencing through gossip? Shunning. Labeling of a person as a slut, a stalker, a gold digger or obsessed?

This is something we can all combat. Sending a pm to another member devaluing another member? It has been my experience that nobody ever goes to the person being shredded and *asks* before perpetuationg the bullshit.
I have really strong opinions about the above. I don't do this period. And I can shut someone who tries to do it to me down in a heart beat.
send me something unpleasant about someone else and you will get back a well worded and well thought out response tailored to your pm. It will cover, point by point (all logic no emotion) why your pm is not acceptable and please don't do it to me again.
If you shut a gossip down from the beginning, most learn not to bother to come to you with negativity.
Another point on gossip: We tend to call other peoples gossip drama. When it is our drama/gossip we call it venting about our life, sticking up for our selves etc.
really would you want others to say about you, what you say about others?

[Diva]

Great thread, SF....it brings out some provocative thinking to be sure....

I don't often feel silenced. I understand, Words, what You are saying by the academic verbiage.....sometimes, it gets to be too much for me personally. But I don't feel silenced just because a poster might use a few bigger/more complicated/lofty words. I just have my dictionary close~by. A week doesn't go by that I don't learn a few new words! I may not have a clue what they meant, but by God, I've got a new WORD!

Now when I'm looking up every other word, I just go 'what is the point'? lol I may not SAY anything, but I don't feel silenced. I think that would be on me if I felt that way. You can't dismiss or silence me unless I give You persmission.

Someone mentioned the 'addressing every single post' or 'every point in a post'....and if someone ~ say someone whose comments we respect and admire ~ doesn't address it, doesn't mean they are trying to silence someone else. Maybe they didn't see it. Maybe it didn't speak to them at the moment they read it. And if we DID address each point, we'd wear out that "Multiple Quote Feature"!!!

This is a crazy deal, this on~line discussion stuff. It's hard to read tone, unless You might know the one posting and can hear their inflection. We don't always have that luxury.

I hope that made sense......thanks again, SF.....

[NJFemmie]

Originally Posted by Linus

Something that just popped into my head: if someone responds to a post and only addresses one point, totally ignoring the other points of the post that they are responding to and focuses on that one point, is that silencing?

It's a challenge, IMO, because sometimes there isn't a need to respond to all points and sometimes it's a specific point that you want to address or feel you can offer an opinion/view on. But by doing the latter, I wonder if that feels like or accomplishes a silencing behaviour whether we intend to or not.


** the irony of this post doesn't escape me **

I did have a nicely worded post for this and then I lost my internet connection ... basically ...

Some people in here have already nailed a part of this on the head - I think a lot of this so-called "dismissiveness" is based on the LOOK AT ME complex.

I admit that I don't answer EVERY single post in a thread - I don't find it particularly necessary - especially if others have already typed out what I was thinking on the matter. If I don't have anything to add to it - I won't. I have posted tons of stuff in my day without so much as an acknowledgment, and quite frankly, I can't take it personally. (Did I feel dismissed? perhaps - it depended on my mood that day...) Whether I was blatantly ignored, or perhaps they felt my comments were of no importance or use - is subjective (or would that be relative ...?) anyway, so ... I moved on.

Then, you have some posters who are ALL OVER THE PLACE with their rant - and frankly, I may just pull the pertinent information and comment on what I felt was the subject matter.

Words also stated it quite nicely - some use language/verbiage that makes my head want to explode. I have the occasional bout of ADD - I can't be bothered, sorry. I prefer the easy read - I am getting too old to play decipher this post, lol.

So - yes, I suppose it's a tricky matter ... but I think a lot of it is based on attention. Online forums are not the same as a face to face conversation, and that has to be the given. You cannot expect the same results and/or attention.