Possible Conversation Tool to Improve Communication

[ArleighBurke]

My uBPDw and i were chatting last night. She was telling me that when i talk about any topic, she assumes that I must support that topic (unless I specifically say otherwise). So if I say "I read an interesting article about abortion law in America, and whether they should be allowed after a rape or not" - even though I havn't specified which side of the arguement I sit on, she would get triggered because she fears that I may support the opposite side to her, and what does that mean for her safety, and our children, and how can she stay married to a man whose values are different to hers... .and now her emotions are off and racing.

She suggested that (rather than she maintain an open mind and if in doubt ask me what my stance was) that I should pre-empt any converstion with my stance, to avoid confusion. Eg "I don't condone this at all, and I don't want it in our relationship, but I was talking to someone at a party yesterday who had a threesome with his wife... ."

Apparently this method will help her to not react poorly. We shall see... .  It's so hard to work out what is "true" and what is "crap-used-to-justify-my-feelings"... .  So this method may work, or may not. It may help you talk with your pwBPD, it may not.

[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.

[waverider]

pwBPd suffer from catastrophizing, that is they jump to assumption of worst case scenario very quickly. Your stance is unknown on a topic they find touchy. your stance could be good or bad (in their view). If it is bad its a threat, it could affect them, it could be bad for them, it is a threat, frightening, they must fight it. by this stage adrenaline has kicked and they have lost sight of what was actually said, anxiety and panic have taken over.

Disclaimers up front is a good idea even if sometimes it actually feels like copping out. Sometimes you can work around this by framing it as a question. "What do you think about something I read about today?... ." This way you are validating her opinion and it sets her mind along the path of what her thoughts are rather than presuming what yours are.

[formflier]

 

I would try it a few times and see if it works.  Perhaps later ask a direct question if the conversation "felt" better to her.

If you are doing what she asks and repeatedly she is describing how you have "fallen short", "Poor Will, you tried so hard but are still a screwup kinda thing" then it is more likely she is using this as a control device or game playing.

My sense is this is genuine. 

If she tries to tweak what you say, remember to be calm, use "help me understand how this helps, ", etc etc.


FF

[Sunfl0wer]

It sounds like she found a way to communicate quite well to you her experience.

Since her sense of identity is likely enmeshed in yours, it makes sense that she is 'on the look out' to either confirm and feel validated of this identity, or 'looking out' for threats to it.

Another way to bring up any topic may be to ask her thoughts first on the topic, give that tons of validation, then chat a bit about topic?  Maybe helping her solidify her identity and affirming it ahead of time to try to get her more relaxed vs 'on look out?'

Idk... .my thought is... .

What happens when you first express your stance before the topic, and it is different to hers?

Or what if she hears your stance, but really is on the 'look out' and decides it is ' not enough' on 'her side?'

Maybe new topics need preemptive validation?

[IsItHerOrIsItMe]

Idk... .my thought is... .

What happens when you first express your stance before the topic, and it is different to hers?

Or what if she hears your stance, but really is on the 'look out' and decides it is ' not enough' on 'her side?'

Maybe new topics need preemptive validation?

That's the next step... .what do you do when you actually disagree?   That's the proof/justification my w uses for her controlling behavior.  After all, if we disagree on X how can she trust my judgement on Y... .

It makes validation tough, since we've had the discussion 100's of times and to her I'm not validating her feelings because I still think X.

[JH68]

even though I havn't specified which side of the arguement I sit on, she would get triggered because she fears that I may support the opposite side to her, and what does that mean for her safety, and our children, and how can she stay married to a man whose values are different to hers... .and now her emotions are off and racing.

She suggested that (rather than she maintain an open mind and if in doubt ask me what my stance was) that I should pre-empt any converstion with my stance, to avoid confusion.

To me this sounds like your wife is asking you to do a better job of walking on egg shells.  Consciously or subconsciously, I'm often on the look out for triggers and try to avoid them.  In other words, I walk on eggs shells.  Being codependent I tend to take responsibility when my BPDw gets upset.  In other words, I blame myself when eggs break.  I've had to learn that no matter how much I try to avoid triggering her, I will never be 100% successful.  Ultimately, it is her responsibility and her problem when she flips out.  I'm all for learning better communication skills to avoid triggers; but I've also learned to let go of the idea that my wife will never get angry if just do everything perfectly.  Sometimes, it is simply impossible to predict what will trigger her.  When the inevitable happens and she dysregulates, I try to avoid JADE, pick up the discussion when things cool down, and remember that her dysregulating is not my fault.

[waverider]

Lack of personal sense of self means she wants to copy your views, so ultimately you are responsible for them, ergo your views have to be what she wants hers to be. A kind of reverse projection in order to validate her own "wishful view of reality"

eg She wants ice cream for breakfast everyday> you have to agree it is a good idea, to keep your blood sugar levels up. If you dont agree then you are responsible for believing she is unhealthy. She can't take responsibility for that conclusion. How can she trust you to make responsible decisions for her if they are not what she wants to hear?

There is only one truth, hers, your job is just to back that up, otherwise you are wrong and are demonstrating your inability to grasp reality.

This is the trap we fall into when we just validate all the time. It is important to keep your truth and continually highlight there is more than one view of the world.

[ArleighBurke]

So I want to say words to the effect: "I'm not saying your view is wrong, I just believe something different."

But since she sees in black and white she'll never accept there could be 2 rights... .

Perhaps: "I can accept that's right for you. It's just not right for me."

[formflier]

 

Language matters:  Try to make it "softer".

Right sounds a bit harsh.  Personally I stay away from opinion also, because there can still be control battles over whose "opinion" is better.

Point of view is really a better descriptor.  That is what I use.

As far as how to "present" this.  I would use some active listening, make sure you get her point of view right and you appreciate her sharing it, that you have a different point of view and that you can still see and support her point of view.

You will have to play around with it some to make it sound natural. 

If she goes into "why" you have this or that point of view, try not to get bogged down in details.  In fact, blaming your point of view on "intuition" or things like that is probably best than a long detailed thing about why you think something.

The more ammo you hand them, the more they have to toss back at you.

FF

[waverider]

When expressing your view say it once, dont try selling it or even try to get her to accept your view.

For many things its just not worth bothering.

If she wants to believe the moon is made of cheese what does it matter? Do you really need to tell her its just a rock?

[ArleighBurke]

It's interesting - these techniques I'm learning for my BPD wife I also am teaching my kids - to use on each other.

My current lesson I teach the kids is "explain once, then drop it". Seems to stops lots of debates.

[waverider]

It's interesting - these techniques I'm learning for my BPD wife I also am teaching my kids - to use on each other.

My current lesson I teach the kids is "explain once, then drop it". Seems to stops lots of debates.

they are life an communication skills, which normally are optional to get by, but essential for dealing with pwBPd.

Hence we say we are improving us as a minimum regardless of what else happens

[Chilibean13]

So I want to say words to the effect: "I'm not saying your view is wrong, I just believe something different."

But since she sees in black and white she'll never accept there could be 2 rights... .

Perhaps: "I can accept that's right for you. It's just not right for me."

My H likes to talk about controversial topics quite frequently. LIke the OP I have learned that if I give an opposite opinion it can lead to him dysregulating. I never thought of the idea that he cannot see 2 rights due to his black and white thinking. If I give a different opinion than his then he wants me to "defend" it with proof. If I give an alternative perception in favor of the person he views as the persecutor then I become the enemy too.

I've come to the point that I cannot discuss politics or other hot topic conversation pieces. When he wants to talk about them I just ask him questions about his opinion on the situation. Most of the time I'm not on either side of the issue so I don't care one way or the other. I don't need to put an opinion out there because I have no dog in the fight. I validate what he thinks and let him have his opinion and then the conversation ends.

[IsItHerOrIsItMe]

My H likes to talk about controversial topics quite frequently. LIke the OP I have learned that if I give an opposite opinion it can lead to him dysregulating. I never thought of the idea that he cannot see 2 rights due to his black and white thinking. If I give a different opinion than his then he wants me to "defend" it with proof.

My w will also demand "proof" for any and all moral opinions... .She'll then quote the bible and can't acknowledge there may be any interpretations other than hers (after all, it's not her opinion... .it's God's... .).

When expressing your view say it once, dont try selling it or even try to get her to accept your view.

For many things its just not worth bothering.

If she wants to believe the moon is made of cheese what does it matter? Do you really need to tell her its just a rock?

Do I need to tell her?  No... .but:

• "Your my husband and I'm interested in your opinion" (just not interested enough to listen the first 10 times I said "it's a rock"... .)
  
  



• 
  
  "I'm your wife & it's important to me... .so I don't understand why you won't spend time documenting your view of the moon's 'rocky-ness'.  You've been with me outside at night when there's been a definite moldy-oder in the air... ."
  
  

It's getting to the point I need boundaries for everything... .even "I will not discuss the moons status... .rock vs. dairy"

[formflier]

[ (after all, it's not her opinion, it's God's, ).

This is a tough one.  And really, the best way I have found to deal with it is to let her believe what she wants to believe while making it no big deal that you believe something else.

Worst one I ever deal with was my wife moved a troubled boy into the house, she said that since this was her "ministry" that she got to do what she wanted and didn't have to ask me and I couldn't do anything about it.

FF