Formflier's BPD detector and reactions continued

[Cat Familiar]

I thought I'd continue this thread because there are several comments that haven't yet been addressed by formflier.

[PLEASE - NO RUN MESSAGES]

PLEASE - NO RUN MESSAGES This is a high level discussion board for solving ongoing, day-to-day relationship conflicts. Members may appear frustrated but they are here for constructive solutions to problems. This is not a place for relationship "stay" or "leave" discussions. Please read the specific guidelines for this group.

[Cat Familiar]

I'll start with the male/female dynamic. I don't know if you truly get how vulnerable women feel in responding to ads sometimes, FF. We're going to an unfamiliar house and conducting business with people we don't know.

Your communication to me seemed a bit hostile. It doesn't surprise me that this woman might feel a bit threatened and be willing to lose money rather than see you again.

I don't even want to get into the argument of whether or not the stroller was broken.

Another way you could have handled it would have been to say, "Bring it over and I'll see if there's something I've overlooked and can fix it. And if not, I'm happy to give you your money back. Sorry for the inconvenience."

In that way, you preserve your honor without trying to shame her.

[formflier]

 

Is telling someone they have offended you and requesting an apology... .or making a refund contingent on an apology really shaming someone?

Never crossed my mind...

What part of the communication was hostile?  There was no intention to be hostile.

Direct... .clear... .to the point... .

I don't see how asking her to bring it over and let me fix it preserves my honor.  It seems to ignore the speech... rant... suggestion... .all of that stuff she hinted at or said...

I'll also tell you that you are not the first person to tell me that I come across as hostile... .my take is it is mainly a military/civilian thing.  I'm direct... .I don't beat around the bush... .you know where you stand with me... .no doubts.

There is no name calling (I only do that with buds... .people that I clearly like... .or people that I really don't like... .and have no interest in ever restoring a relationship with.

Maybe that's the angle that some don't understand... or I haven't explained well. 

The goal is not to shame... .it's to provide a pathway to restoration.  A clear pathway... .

If the other person chooses to walk that path... .then great... .r/s restored... press on.

If not... .we go our separate ways... .

Keep the questions coming... .I really do find it fascinating the different reactions and ideas people have to this situation.

Right now... .if I could go back in time... I would ask her to clarify what she meant before saying anything else...

That's where I'm at with it right now...

FF

[KateCat]

This happened yesterday, right? Is there some way both of you can still feel better about this?

[GaGrl]

My DH is a retired Army infantry officer, also worked Intelligence a number of years. I'm OK with the military perspective and direct/assertive communication.  I'm still working in corporate America - an executive coach and in the "trenches" of  politics, strategy, you name it. I deal with people wrapping emotion and triggers around their work transactions every day and having to work through the dynamics of what they are creating for themselves and their teams.

All that to say that... .your reaction to the buyer's initial (more than accusatory) communication was, to me, equally as rude and aggressive (not assertive) as her initial (really ineffective) approach. You immediately reached an impasse... .zero to 60 in ten seconds.

If someone in a similar  transaction "demanded" an apology of me as a condition of a refund on defective merchandise, I would quickly decide ... ."Uh-uh. This guy is mixing transaction with emotion, and I'm not ok with where he's going. I just wanted my $$$ back. It's not worth this level of conflict if that's the case. I'm out $30 and so be it... .not worth the war."

The insertion of a demand as a new element of the transaction is where I'm confused.  Why did you need the buyer to subjugate herself or her position in order to resolve a transactional conflict? You felt insulted and could not move forward until she alleviated your emotional hurt? You needed to even the playing field?

Help us understand.

[formflier]

This happened yesterday, right? Is there some way both of you can still feel better about this?

I feel fine about it... .especially since I have a big announcement... .check for new post from me!

FF

[formflier]

Help us understand.

She didn't just ask for a refund... .

I don't deal with people that deal with me in that manner... .I set boundaries... rules... .conditions... whatever you want to call them.

Not really about a level playing field... or at least I don't think that.

I laid out a pathway she would walk to get what she implied she wanted... .(and that I didn't think she deserved or I was responsible for)... .

More later... .

FF

[formflier]

You immediately reached an impasse... .zero to 60 in ten seconds.

See... I would say this was efficient. 

I didn't waste her time... .or mine.  We got to the bottom line... .rather quickly.

My goal was not her happiness... or unhappiness... .

Again... more later... keep the perspectives coming...

FF

[Seoulsister]

The goal is not to shame... .it's to provide a pathway to restoration.  A clear pathway... .

If the other person chooses to walk that path... .then great... .r/s restored... press on.

If not... .we go our separate ways... .

FF

Placing that type of condition on the situation (by demanding an apology) kind of puts her at your mercy. She's rude, clearly, but forcing someone to ingratiate another (with an apology which we all know wouldn't be genuine) seems a bit self-righteous.

[KateCat]

The insertion of a demand as a new element of the transaction is where I'm confused.

I am confused here as well. I believe both parties to a contract are expected to remain within "the four corners" of that contract. Whether or not a party is rude; a party is ex-military or anything else.

I guess if I were practicing the art of the deal with the likes of Donald Trump I would be expected to know "how he rolls" and all that. But then I wouldn't be inclined to enter into a contract with him.

I say return the money.

[OffRoad]

My take on this is that if you simply wanted to be direct, a response could have been "The brakes were working the last time I used it. It offends me that you automatically assume I sold you something with the intent to harm children."

or a more elaborate "Are you aware you have cast aspirations on my character by implying that I knowingly sold you a defective stroller, and your assertion that you don't expect me to refund your money?"

Or simply responded "What?" to her first text, giving her the opportunity to clarify herself.

Simply called her on her bad behavior. I sometimes think that having dealt with pwBPD for as long as we have, we forget that there are OTHER pds and just plain rude people and we can deal with them in a forthright manner, not have to go around left field like we do with our pwBPD.

Immediately jumping to "You were rude to me, unless you give me an apology I won't give you your money back." is not the norm in a conversation. Really. It isn't. Ask some people you know that don't deal with pwBPD, and see what they say.

[formflier]

 

I guess to respond I was showing her a pathway back into the 4 corners... .

If someone decides to exit the contractual parameters... .well... you don't have to deal with them.

Just to be clear... .for others that may come along... .there is no contract... .but I think the example is a good one.

FF

[formflier]

Immediately jumping to "You were rude to me, unless you give me an apology I won't give you your money back." is not the norm in a conversation. Really. It isn't. Ask some people you know that don't deal with pwBPD, and see what they say.

I agree... .that is not a normal conversation... .so... I didn't handle is "normally"... .

And... if I did have a time machine... .I would have asked her to clarify... .maybe even used my "help me understand"... .

FF

[KateCat]

I'm too lazy to call my nephew just now, so if an attorney specializing in contract law would like to correct me on the following, I will gladly withdraw this opinion:

There is a valid contract: an oral contract with an offer, an acceptance and an exchange of "consideration" on both sides: $30 for a jogging stroller.

This contract does not fall under any of the subcategories of contract required to be in writing according to the "Statute of Frauds." This contract is expected to be honored by both parties.

[formflier]

I'm too lazy to call my nephew just now, so if an attorney would like to correct me on the following, I will gladly withdraw this opinion:

There is a valid contract: an oral contract with an offer, an acceptance and an exchange of "consideration" on both sides: $30 for a jogging stroller.

This contract does not fall under any of the subcategories of contract required to be in writing according to the "Statute of Frauds." This contract is expected to be honored by both parties.

I can see that... .I get the point.

There is no warranty given or implied. 

She inspected the product to her standards... gave $30... and left with stroller.  Contract done.

FF

[KateCat]

Well, we will just have to take the case to "Judge Judy" and see who she spanks.

[formflier]

 

I'm ready! 

[Cat Familiar]

I thought I'd repost the initial exchange of words:

jogging stroller: FF, this is (ladies name). We bought the stroller from you last weekend. I clearly asked if it was in working order and if anything needed replacing. You told me just wear and tear, but in working order. This stroller has no brakes! The hand brake and the foot break are both completely broken. Thank God I didn't put my kids in this very unsafe stroller. I don't expect you to agree to return the stroller, though that would be the right thing for you to do. However, I do encourage you to consider the consequences of selling completely unsafe items for the use of children.

My kids are 2 months and 2 years old. I can't imagine you would be alright with someone ripping off your wife by selling her something that would put your boys in harms way. I'm very disappointed. 2:08 PM

Me: I'll return your $30 with return of the stroller and an in person apology for the lecture and apparent aspersions against my character 2:53 PM

jogging stroller: I'll talk to my husband about when we can get back to (ff town). You should review our exchanges. At no point did I accuse you of being a bad person. I made 3 points: 1. I asked clearly if anything needed replacing and you answered clearly "no" 2. Please be considerate of safety in the future when selling children's items 3. Put yourself in our shoes- you wouldn't want your wife in this situation. I did not insult you. I want you to be aware that selling a broken stroller can be very dangerous. I appreciate that you are willing to return it. 3:07 PM

Me: I feel insulted. I'm a (ff age) year old man... .do you really think that I have no idea that a broken stroller is dangerous? 3:10 PM

jogging stroller: I understand. I felt taken advantage of and that someone was turning a buck on my me in a way that could hurt my babies. I felt insulted, too. Let's call the broken brakes an oversight and make our returns with no hurt feelings 3:15 PM

Me: no 3:15 PM

Me: stroller... .genuine in person apology,, and you get your $30 back 3:16 PM

jogging stroller: Apologize for what? You told me the stroller was in working condition and it's not. I know a bike shop that will repair it and donate it to charity. Id rather flush $30 and the stroller than give an apology that is undue and run the risk of anyone else getting on this death trap. We're done here. Don't spend your $30 all in one place 3:25 PM

Me: Your choice... 3:27 PM

[Cat Familiar]

Is telling someone they have offended you and requesting an apology... .or making a refund contingent on an apology really shaming someone?

Never crossed my mind...

What part of the communication was hostile?  There was no intention to be hostile.

Direct... .clear... .to the point... .

The first thing you said was that you'd return the money with the "return of the stroller and an in person apology for the lecture and apparent aspersions against my character."

To me, this upped the level of the conflict in addition to being very rude.

When I first read the woman's email to you, I thought she sounded very accusatory and hostile. Now I read it again and she sounds very upset and protective of her children, granted a drama queen, but not unreasonable.

As the exchange goes on, you sound huffy and self-important. You have not addressed her concerns, yet you expect her to apologize to you.

She claims the stroller is broken.

You explain to us that you did not test it, yet disagree with her assessment, and say there's no possibility that both the hand brakes and foot brakes could be broken.

Basically your communication to her is "How dare you insult me by telling me the object I sold you is not in the condition I claimed and that it is dangerous?"

She was not artful in how she presented her complaint to you, but she was worked up about the safety of her children.

You, on the other hand, took her communication as a personal insult and insisted that in order for her to get her money back, she had to not only apologize, but to make a "genuine in person apology."

Sorry, FF. The more I read this, the more my sympathy is with her.

[formflier]

You have not addressed her concerns, yet you expect her to apologize to you.

Her concern was getting her $30 back... correct? 

Handled that in my first 4 words... .

FF

[123Phoebe]

Is telling someone they have offended you and requesting an apology... .or making a refund contingent on an apology really shaming someone?

When that someone is being subjugated to the will or command of another, yes, I believe so.

Never crossed my mind...

This is what I find disconcerting.

The goal is not to shame... .it's to provide a pathway to restoration.  A clear pathway... .

If the other person chooses to walk that path... .then great... .r/s restored... press on.

If not... .we go our separate ways... .

I'm reminded of the saying, "I'm easy to get along with, when things go my way."

jogging stroller: I understand. I felt taken advantage of and that someone was turning a buck on my me in a way that could hurt my babies. I felt insulted, too. Let's call the broken brakes an oversight and make our returns with no hurt feelings 3:15 PM

I feel that "she" is the one who provided the clear path forward and "you chose" not to take it, making yet another stipulation for refunding her money -- a "genuine" in person apology.

I don't see how asking her to bring it over and let me fix it preserves my honor.  It seems to ignore the speech... rant... suggestion... .all of that stuff she hinted at or said...

Because it would have been an honorable position to take.

I'll also tell you that you are not the first person to tell me that I come across as hostile... .

Well, add me to the list.

You have not addressed her concerns, yet you expect her to apologize to you.

Her concern was getting her $30 back... correct? 

Handled that in my first 4 words... .

FF

FF, seriously?

Okay, I think I am done here.

[PeppermintTea]

I think it's fine to tell someone they've offended you. I don't think that you can request (demand) or make a condition of an apology. Either that is offered freely by the person once they understand they offended you... .or it is meaningless and pointless.

So I could understand FF saying something to the effect of:

"I dislike the tone of your text and feel offended that you're calling my integrity into question. I will refund the money to you. Lets arrange a time to do this exchange."

Then she knows you're offended (and that you are a guy with integrity as you're offering the refund) and it is her value system that dictates whether she will apologise or not.

In that exchange you only really needed to tell her that she had offended you.

[formflier]

In that exchange you only really needed to tell her that she had offended you.

Then... I suppose she should be fine by telling me she wants her $30 back?  And leaving it at that...

[Notwendy]

It's interesting that the responses to this incident are so that the women seem aligned in their response.


The key to this, FF, is not if you are right or wrong, or about your honor, but if you can see perhaps how this is felt from another perspective, and if you can have some empathy for the woman.

She isn't your wife, or your family, and while that is your main priority here, how we see and empathize with others is an internal skill - one we own. When we use this, it can be applied to any relationships.

When people I barely know trigger me, or get me upset, I see this as an opportunity to learn something that could possibly help me with my family and people I know.

The difference in how we see this is whether we look outward or inward. We need to do both. I have to filter if I think someone is being unreasonable. However, I also have to examine my reaction to that- because how I react is the part I can control.

So turning this inward. Let's say I sold someone a stroller for $30, and that person called me the next day to tell me I was a dishonorable person. Sure that would upset me. I would not want someone to think this. However, the person does.

I can't control how someone else thinks, but my honor is on the line. How do I fix this? My internal code of ethics would be that I would be feeling somewhat embarrassed to sell someone something that might be defective. I say might because I don't know what happened, but one possibility with any used item is that it can possibly break, and maybe it was just bad luck that this did at the time.

What determined that it would break? I don't know but it just happened and this is the situation to deal with. Now, I have a situation where my ethics are on the line, and so I have choices. I could do what you did, make the case that this person has to apologize to me. Does that fix my honor? Well maybe I would get the satisfaction of eliciting an apology in exchange for $30 but that is not a sincere apology.

A sincere apology comes without strings attached ,and even if you were able to get a sincere apology, you would not know in that situation.  You can not buy sincerity for $30.

The only repair to my honor that I can think of is to let her return the stroller and give her the money back. This way, she has seen that I did not rip her off. She may or may not think I am an honorable person, but that is the only possible way to restore her belief that I didn't rip her off. For me, I have repaired the issue. I have the stroller back, she has the money, no harm done.

[PeppermintTea]

In that exchange you only really needed to tell her that she had offended you.

Then... I suppose she should be fine by telling me she wants her $30 back?  And leaving it at that...

Yes she should. She didn't stop at that, but if FF is playing to his values and being the guy with the integrity he didn't  need to reciprocate in kind... .

Just my thoughts.

PT

[Notwendy]

Also, the idea that this is about her insulting FF is also an assumption. We know nothing about the woman. An insult is a possibility, but it may not be about FF at all.

The woman might be like this to everyone, might have a mental illness, may be under serious stress and was just at the breaking point with the stroller.

What she really wanted was the money back for a stroller she believed was broken. So, she didn't say it in the best way, or the right way. Is this the place for holding up boundaries, or giving someone the benefit of the doubt.

There is a time and place for either choice.

[formflier]

For me, I have repaired the issue. I have the stroller back, she has the money, no harm done.

As I've said before... .I find the reactions and input to this fascinating... .the different points of view that people bring.

Would I be viewed differently by women if I made a speech about being unemployed (although this just changed!   ) and suggesting that the woman just wanted to take food and resources ($30) away from my babies...

Essentially going "Papa Bear"... .to her "Mama Bear"... ?

I do see... and I can empathize that it is possible she felt harm would come to her kids... .or that I didn't care about them... or some such thing. 

Interesting exchange...

FF

[Notwendy]

It could add empathy if your children were hungry and you sold it to feed them, but again, asking her for an apology won't feed them.

A focus on this exchange is the woman's insult to your honor and your attaching an apology as a condition for her refund. If this is about needing the money for your kids, then that is another aspect.

If underlying this exchange, was a need to keep the $30, then this was not mentioned to the woman. However, by adding the contingency of an apology to getting her money back, the odds were tipped more in your favor for keeping it.  If you needed the money for your kids, then this could have possibly been the motivator for the verbal exchange more than ( or in addition to) your honor.

Another option might have been to ask the woman to let you pay her back over time or fix it yourself. That might feel humiliating though, and that is understandable. Or since she was already mad, she could have gotten madder. However, one doesn't really know how she'd react if the response had been to say you had no idea the stroller would break, would she bring it back to be fixed, or let her be paid back in installments?

Again, this is not to pick on you FF, or say right or wrong -you have had significant stresses- but to discuss the different ways a situation can be seen.

[formflier]

If underlying this exchange, was a need to keep the $30, then this was not mentioned to the woman.

Nor should it have been (IMO)... .it's not her business.  (and in reality... .is a minor motivator... .sure money is tight)

The business we had was a stroller.

She made a choice to introduce additional business to the transaction/communication... .I made a choice to address that... .as succinctly as possible.

I totally see the different points of view... .it's interesting to understand and learn about peoples life experiences and how they effect what they do today.

I've obviously been raised and had life experiences that say when people are rather casual about casting aspersions... .I shut that down... .rather quickly.

Unfortunately... .it is rare that I have cut people a break and had it not bite me in the a$$... .and when people are held to account... .usually the rest of the people straighten up.  (this point could be a bit out of context... .this would be when I was Skipper of an organization... .but it's still about human nature.)


FF

[Seoulsister]

For me, I have repaired the issue. I have the stroller back, she has the money, no harm done.

As I've said before... .I find the reactions and input to this fascinating... .the different points of view that people bring.

Would I be viewed differently by women if I made a speech about being unemployed (although this just changed!   ) and suggesting that the woman just wanted to take food and resources ($30) away from my babies...

Essentially going "Papa Bear"... .to her "Mama Bear"... ?

No. To me, the back stories/genders of either of you have no bearing. It's more that two wrongs don't make a right. It was a purchase gone wrong with an inconsiderate buyer. Your demand gives the seller the upper hand and places the buyer in a groveling position.