How do I validate when validation statements are the cause for being accused of being a narcissist only wanting people to think that I’m caring?
Sounds like you do want to validate genuinely, which is a good foundation. You've gathered data that whatever you were trying with her, wasn't working. So, you're ready for a new approach. Close so far?
One idea is to pivot from validation
statements to validation
words, tones, body language, and/or sounds. Sometimes you'll see the phrase here: Less is more.
She seems to be reacting to, perhaps, either the length of the validation statement, the structure, or both. (Or, theoretically, something else, but experimentation with length and structure can show you if that's the case).
Wonder how it would go to REALLY decrease the # of words... and transfer that thought and energy in to genuine warm tones, body language, and single or two-to-three word "I'm tracking" type utterances. I'm thinking...
Instead of "having to describe" that "you hear what she is saying and it would be frustrating"...
Let's take it down to:
"Ugh babe... sucks"
or
"Ugh..."
or
"No she didn't!"
or
"No way..."
and with all of those, tone (warm and "with"/"together"/"joining") and body language (mildly incredulous at how other people act... NOT how she acts... joining together with her) may be incredibly crucial.
This may sound strange, but picture, perhaps, someone at the hairdressers, unloading to the barber about their crazy boss. The barber doesn't say: "Joe, you are completely right... anyone in your situation would be justified in feeling frustrated and upset"... even though that is true. The barber says "No way..." "OMG, did he really..." "Ugh..."
There is a sense that the barber is there to listen and sort of track along and join with the frustration, without having to be explicit that (a) the barber definitely supports the client, and (b) there is any kind of therapeutic or "correct" relationship. It's just one person listening 99% of the time
in that specific interaction* and tacitly joining with the speaker, without having to explain verbally why he's joining with the speaker. It's the actions -- of tone, body language, and brief utterances -- that convey the "with-ness" and "on the same team" message.
Curious if
really paring down the words, and upping the genuine "with-ness" body language/non-verbal comms, might make a difference for you.
*I wouldn't necessarily recommend this stance for all your interactions. It may take developing a certain radar, if you haven't already, to pinpoint when it's crucial to go to 99% warm listening/minimal verbal, and when more "average" communication is workable.