Understanding Arguments Against NVC
A gem reader wrote: “In the experience I had, a woman said that she felt I was suggesting NVC ‘as a way to avoid confrontation,’ adding that she feels she ‘has the courage to deal with things directly.’”
Responses like this are common with NVC—and with any system of transformation. While some systems may be truly ineffective, most of the time it is people’s misuse of the system that results in unmet needs. Others then judge the system based on an individual’s ability to embody it.
Regardless of where the confusion arises from, the first thing that’s helpful any time someone offers an argument against what you are suggesting is to listen with empathy. Responding to the quoted comment above, you might make a guess about feelings of worry and anger. You might guess that needs for honesty and authenticity are present. In addition, the woman might have interpreted that she was being judged as incompetent in communication. She may have felt angry and defensive, wanting acceptance and appreciation for what she has to offer.
Whenever someone is learning a new skill or concept, they come up against old habits or ideas—even their own. You may see that your habits don’t help or that your ideas are inaccurate or arising from reactivity. Accepting this requires clarity and confidence that your worth and lovability are not dependent on how you perform in life. Without this confidence, anything new can be perceived as a threat to someone’s sense of worth and acceptance.
The more you honor and meet needs for empathy, respect, and being seen/heard, the more willing someone becomes to consider a new way of communicating, thinking, and relating. When someone criticizes your suggestion to do something new, they often need more trust and connection before they can take the risk of trying it.
Compassionate Communication (NVC) and Mindful Compassionate Dialogue (what we teach at Wise Heart) are systems meant to help us establish a quality of connection in which all needs can be honored. You are challenged to relate with radical self-responsibility, compassion, and honesty. You are asked to drop old strategies to meet needs in favor of risking vulnerability to create connection. Even those who are dedicated to this practice will fall back into old patterns of thinking, believing, feeling, and behaving. When they do, but still use ‘NVC language’ others may hold the system responsible rather than the person.
The challenge is radical in that it requires you to redefine terms like ‘honest.’ Mostly, when people say that they are honest and direct and don’t avoid conflict, they really mean they are willing to share their opinions and criticisms without considering the impact on others or the actual effectiveness of that behavior. True honesty requires self-awareness. It asks you to be attuned to your thoughts, interpretations, assumptions, biases, beliefs, reactivity, feelings, needs, and ability to undertake specific doable actions for collaborating with others and caring for yourself.
Speaking with this kind of honesty is not only challenging to do, it can be challenging to hear. When you encounter someone who can speak and behave from this level of awareness you know something is different. If shame or insecurity regarding your own experience is present, you may shrink away or imagine that they are trying to control everything. You might not trust that someone can bring clarity and confidence regarding their own experience and requests and still offer deep listening and acceptance for yours.
In this work, we hope to make empathic listening and self-responsible honesty a consistent part of every relationship.
Practice
This week, notice even a small instance in which someone argues against something you suggest. Experiment with offering empathy or simply asking the other person to share more about what they are thinking, feeling, or needing.