EXACTLY. That’s a huge part of what I said in my previous post. A lot of people don’t understand this, though. They think, “I’m solving their problem! What’s wrong with that?”
I liked this unit since it came with lifetime traffic and map updates. Make sure your city is covered by the traffic updates.
Ok. I’m just not getting it.
Why is it wrong to offer a solution?
Why is it right to complain about something expecting sympathy, without indicating that’s your reason for complaining? Especially since we’ve been over this again and again for 33 years and you must know by now that if somebody talks about a problem I’ll try to find a solution. Oh wait, that wasn’t you, but anyway, you know what I mean.
Great post, JThunder. Spot on.
Oftentimes even when we think we’re listening, we aren’t. We’re busy formulating what we’re going to say next. The danger in that is that you may completely miss the point. Your lonely guy story is a great example of that.
There’s a really great quote, but I can’t remember it off the top of my head. It’s something like “A conversation needs both talking and listening, and usually the talking is unnecessary.”
Why can’t you and this mysterious person come to a common ground? I have no problem saying “I tried to solve your problem, next time just tell me if you are only venting and I’ll know.” Why can’t you agree to try to come together? WHY IS IT SO HARD TO COMPROMISE?
That’s been discussed throughout the thread, but let’s try it again.
It is not wrong to offer a solution, but very often what wanted or needed is the offer of an ear. And sometimes there is no solution.
Take the example I gave earlier of my friend who was in the car accident. What solution could I have given her? A reminder to drive more carefully next time? That’s a lesson she got in a way that I could never give her. What she needed was someone to tell her story to, to emote to, to relate to her. I tried to give her exactly what she needed, and was a sympathetic ear.
Do you ever need to vent? Have you ever started a Pit thread with a long rambling rant? If so, why?
Anaamika is correct.
As Invisible Chimp said, sympathetic listening should be the default. If necessary, you can always ask, “Are you looking for a solution or do you just need a listening ear right now?” It’s not difficult. Any mature adult can do it.
Saying “What’s wrong with you? I’m solving your problem!” demonstrates that one doesn’t understand what the real problem is.
We promised in our marriage vows that we would never compromise. Anyway, that’s what she tells me. I was drunk because she was complaining so much. 
No, we did compromise a long time ago. It just pops up now and then because we aren’t paying attention. So she’ll come home telling me the story of why she had to stay late because the server went down because someone put something in front of the air conditioner again, and I’m working, or watching a really important episode of Judge Judy or posting on the Dope, and I’ll just say “Why don’t you put a lock on the server room door?” And then after that I have to turn the TV up real loud.
TriPolar, how would you have responded to to this vent about my job that I posted earlier?
If your wife said something like this to you, and was visibly distressed about it too, what’s the first thing that you’d think of saying?
I have a friend that apparently has a solution to people telling him their problems. He always explains to them why it is their own damn fault. It certainly cured me of ever telling him my problems.
Ok, depending on various factors I’d probably say “Well if bothers you that much, just quit” or “Let’s get you a better job!”
I suppose that’s awful somehow, but I don’t understand why.
It’s not wrong to offer a solution; you just need to make sure you’re solving the right problem first. It’s a matter of triage.
If I’m cooking, and the handle breaks off the pan and I spill boiling oil on my bare foot, it’s not wrong to offer to buy me a new pan, but that’s not my primary concern. I shouldn’t have to explain that I want you to take care of the immediate need first, and then worry about fixing what caused it later.
Likewise, if my lunch got stolen, or I got stuck in traffic, and I feel terrible, I shouldn’t have to explain that “I feel terrible” is the more pressing problem, and that’s what I want your help with first.
Now, if I’m currently stuck in traffic, and you have a way to get me unstuck, by all means, lay it on me. But if the event is in the past, and the feeling is in the present, it only makes sense to deal with the feeling first.
If I can take a stab at it, they may have actually said they feel like the only one going through the problem but based on their response, they probably perceived your attempt to relate that they’re not alone instead as a way of downplaying the problem making it seem like a common problem where it doesn’t feel like a common problem to them at all. So sure, maybe you’ve had that problem before, but what you’re failing to understand is just how screwed this person is this time. So in short, it seemed to you the conversation went: “No one else has this problem.” “Plenty of people have, myself included.” Whereas they heard it more like this: “I am SO screwed.” “You’re way over-reacting. It happens all the time. Why are you making a big deal out of it?”
One thing I’ve noticed is that it’s fairly easy to assume a good interpretation of what someone is saying when you’re in a good mood, but when it feels like the whole world is against you and you’re stressed out and irrational, it’s difficult to really articulate what you’re feeling and its very easy to read bad interpretations, even if they’re really bizarre. And for the listener, it’s that much harder to really try to pull out what they’re trying to say than take it at face value and then to respond to it in a way that helps.
I snipped the rest of it and its all good, but this is the big point. Listening isn’t just hearing the words they said, parsing the grammar, picking out the points, and responding. Listening is about understanding non-verbal communication, understanding parts about that person that you’ve learned from previous interactions. Listening means getting the whole message the person is trying to communicate, which includes context, particularly emotional. Hell, sometimes the words they’re actually saying are contradictory to the message they’re trying to communicate. The thing is, we tend to see talking as active and listening as passive but in the context of these sorts of situations, it’s an active process of seeking out those clues and connecting with that person.
There’s a scene early in the movie Fight Club where the Narrator and Marla are talking about the support groups. The narrator says something to the effect of “When people think you’re dying, they really listen to you instead…” and Marla, ironically, interrupts with “… of just waiting for their turn to speak.”
You can still solve problems, but you need to really listen. A lot of times as a problem solver, the moment you see a problem and have a solution, the switch goes off and you stop listening and just wait to give the solution. The thing is, if they’re still talking, they probably have more to say, which means you missed part of what they’re saying. You didn’t listen and you probably either got an incomplete or just flat out wrong impression of what’s really bothering them.
Really, I understand, you want to help them and the advice you have may really help them, but you have to really get at the core of what’s there and address that first. And, especially if it’s emotional or stress, there is no “solution”. Often, you can’t just say a few magic words of advice or whatever, they just need to feel that connection with another human being and know that someone respects them, or that someone cares, or whatever. That is, oddly enough, for those sorts of things, the “solution” is essentially the very process of figuring out what’s bothering them to begin with because once you’ve really listened and made that connection with them to figure it out, well, you’ve already given them what they were seeking. Then they’ll be receptive to whatever advice you may have.
Ok, in that case, I would offer sympathy, or say something like “Is there anything I can do help?” It’s a car accident, not traffic or a sandwich. I even understand that at the end of a bad day you can feel like you’ve been in a car accident, and traffic might have just been the icing on the cake. But how am I supposed to know that’s why you’re complaining?
See, that’s just it. If I started a Pit thread with a long rambling rant, everybody would know I was just ranting, and respond by ridiculing my rant, which is what I would do too. Or possibly they would be sympathetic to my plight. But I don’t see people offering serious solutions in the Pit too often, because it’s assumed you’re not there for a solution. So you seem to be equating real life with the Pit. (Frankly, I can’t really figure out what you guys do there anyway).
If you find that people react negatively when you offer them a solution to their problem, then it’s almost certainly because your “solution” would not in fact solve their problem. You may have suggested something they have already tried or something they are unwilling/unable to do, but it’s more likely that you have misunderstood the problem.
Why else would they be complaining? If a person is complaining then they are probably expecting attention/sympathy. When people want advice, they generally make that clear by explicitly asking for you to give them information or suggestions.
It’s not awful, but it’s not addressing the problem at hand, which is her stress. You’re in effect telling her “I don’t care about your stress but I care about your job.”
Here’s the beautiful thing: To offer a solution requires a certain amount of cleverness. And your solution may not be correct. It may turn out to be really bad advice. To listen requires no cleverness, it just requires you to pay attention. There’s not really a way to screw it up.
There’s a one word answer to that question, and it’s staring you right in the face.
The issue I have is that many times the venter is complaining about ongoing issues in their life. “I hate traffic… I don’t like my coworkers… I don’t have any money … I can’t lose weight … etc”. I’ll lend a supportive ear if it’s an abnormal event like getting a lunch stolen or stuck in bad traffic because of an accident. But it gets tiring when the other person seems to enjoy ranting as a hobby. When they keep ranting about the same problems over and over, either they should look for a solution or stop ranting about it. Especially if they are not making any effort to improve their situation.
Listening to other people’s problems is not enjoyable. If I feel like I can genuinely help them fix their situation, then I don’t mind. Sometimes all it takes is allowing them to talk it out. But I don’t like listening to someone rant for the sake of ranting.
My office mate complains often about how he can’t lose weight. I’ve tried offering him suggestions, but all he does is come up with excuses for why they won’t work for him. It gets frustrating because he’s just ranting to rant. Listening to him rant makes him feel better in that moment, but it doesn’t solve anything. He’ll soon be ranting about the same thing again. I feel like he’s wasting my time since the ranting is not really solving anything.
I can’t agree that sympathy should be the default. Offending me isn’t the worst thing you can do to me–boring me is. If I am complaining about something, I am fishing for ideas, and if instead you offer only sympathy you have wasted both our time and forced me to repress my urge to leave the conversation right then.
Now, it’s obvious that to get by in society, solvers and sympathizers need to compromise, and so I sympathize when I detect it’s needed, and pretend to be appreciative when it’s offered. Sympathizers need to do the same in reverse. There’s no inherent asymmetry that gives sympathy priority.
At last, someone who understands.