[...]
>Didn't you advise that we should take the side of the friend and thell them that the other person is a b------d for treating them this way? Didn't you say pretty much that this is how one treats one's friends and not by telling them that the fault might be theirs?
I use both 'tactics'. It are the details that matter here.
From the very moment that someone 'discovers' that a friend is oftentimes (or "always") playing the victim role, rather than really being a victim, it is tempting to 'remember' this each next time that this person complains about someone else.
Personally, I prefer to 'discover' that this friend has certain skills, a certain knowledge of the world and a certain idea about justice that causes new cases that are perceived by this friend as victimization and perceived by others in a different perspective.
Other times I apply the same Gestalt as this friend (afterall, friends do share many opinions).
And there are many occasions where I use a combination. First I kind of confirm their emotion ("he's indeed a b___d"), only later I make certain mild critics ("perhaps it was not wise to start yelling at him").
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
