![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
andrewduckerI have spent inumerable hours arguing with a variety of girlfriends because I cannot, and will not follow this simple principle (stolen gleefully from Scott Adams' blog:
It's a shame really. But what can I do - I just got to be me.
The biggest relationship mistake you can make is to assume that because you have some special training or knowledge on a topic, that your opinion should be extra important. You could be the world’s most respected expert on insects, for example, but if your mate insists that caterpillars grow into chipmunks, there will be no talking him or her out of it. You could try saying, "I have a doctorate in bugs, I know what I’m talking about" but your mate will hear "I am an overbearing ass pimple who doesn’t know a fly from a suspicious mole."
So forget about how much you know, or how smart you think you are, or how much extra information you might have recently collected. That will not help you. Instead, I offer you the only solution: The WCM Method.
WCM stands for Who Cares Most. If you want your relationship to have a chance, defer all decisions and interpretations of fact to the person who cares the most.
In practice, this will mean that women will make 98% of all the decisions and be "right" 98% of the time. Compared to men, women care more passionately about just about everything. Men mostly scratch what itches and call it good. BOCTAOE.
Many women and some men who read this blog will sharply disagree with my gross generalization. To you I say with all sincerity, "You’re right. I don’t know what I was thinking."
See how easy that is?
It's a shame really. But what can I do - I just got to be me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 11:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 11:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 11:37 am (UTC)"I'm sure you're right" (meaning "You are wrong")
"Mmm. You're probably right" (meaning "You are so wrong. But life is too short.")
"No, no, you may very well be right" (meaning "You are so totally fuck-headed that I'm not even prepared to pretend I agree with you")
The key point is that as long as you use these forms every time it doesn't matter, then on the one occasion when you could be seriously inconvenienced by the wrong assumption, you've got the space to say
"I really did think it was y. How about we check first?"
You might also profitably watch out for the times that other people use the first three forms when talking to you. Because they're pretty much forms of words that are only used when the other person is dogmatically arguing the wrong thing. I've learnt a ton of stuff by listening out for that, moving on, and then checking and reflecting later.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 04:14 pm (UTC)I get involved in conversations either for fun, or in order to reach a conclusion about something. If I'm trying to reach a conclusion then pretending that the other person is right just causes you to reach the wrong conclusion. If I'm doing it for fun, and it's not about something black/white, then I'm very willing to agree to disagree, or to not reach anything like a conclusion.
But telling the other person I think they're right when I don't? That's not going to lead anywhere useful, fun or interesting. And if they're the kind of person who has to 'win' every discussion, even when they're wrong, I have no interest in spending much time with them anyway.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 04:39 pm (UTC)But aren't you just saying that that's exactly the person You are?? :-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 04:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 04:58 pm (UTC)Right. So. Thinking about all the arguments you've ever had, was the proportion of them in which you were 'shown to be wrong' about the same as the ones where you were 'shown to be right'? More? Less? Bet it's less, right? Do you think that this is
a) because you are a naturally superior being who tends to be right?
or
b) something else?
One of my all time favourite lines from a movie is from _Broadcast News_, where someone says to Holly Hunter "It must be nice to always believe you know better, to always think you're the smartest person in the room", and she replies "No, it's awful."
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 05:05 pm (UTC)I _am_ smart.
I was hired for my smartness, after getting in the 98th percentile on the math scores and the 94th on the English scores at the graduate intake for the company I work for. I'm not boasting, I'm just pointing out that I'm not an idiot, and I do well in comparison to many people.
But that only helps in certain areas. I've learnt a lot from arguments with Lilian, with Erin, with Ed, with people at work, with people on the internet, all over the place. I wouldn't do anywhere as well as I do do if I wasn't taking what I've learned and testing it in discussions with people, and then learning when they point out the bits where I'm being an idiot.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 04:49 pm (UTC)The point being that *first* he needs to realise that there's no point arguing past the point where it's damaging the relationship. Once he gets that, perhaps he can be broken in gently to the idea that sometimes it's possible to be wrong even when one believes categorically to be right. After that, it might even be possible to work through the idea that there might not even be a right or a wrong.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 04:53 pm (UTC)Course it is. But then it's just a matter of demonstrating my wrongness to me. Been done countless times, by many people. I'm always glad of that - I get a huge kick out of learning something knew and realising that things now make more sense because I was all twisted up before.
That would be the conversations for fun :-> Or even conversations where one person is merely trying to get across their feelings. Both of which I'm fine with. What I'm _not_ fine with, is one person trying to get their feelings across, and telling me that this is "right" and I am "wrong."
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 08:51 pm (UTC)If I was to pretend to be wrong about something just for the sake of placating someone, then I might as well not exist.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 09:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 07:24 pm (UTC)I'd be somewhat suspicious of anyone suddenly switching from "No, it's like this" to "Oh, okay, you're right after all" suddenly as well. If I noticed it happening I'd probably be pretty annoyed at the person for lying to me. If what they mean is "I'm bored of this now, let's stop" then I'd rather they said so.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 01:46 pm (UTC)LOL ROFL
Date: 2006-02-04 03:05 pm (UTC)The underlying problem is - you have to think, as I've said before, if you want to be right more than you want to be happy/to make the other person happy/to not hurt the other person.. (with an element in the formula for how abstractly important what you're arguing about actually IS.)
Re: LOL ROFL
Date: 2006-02-04 04:15 pm (UTC)conversation after reading this
Date: 2006-02-04 03:46 pm (UTC)F: Well, overwhelmingly, really.
P: But that's because, I am, right? I mean, you've said so yourself.........Oh.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 08:10 pm (UTC)Example: if I learn about an area where Tim is an expert, I expect to be able to converse and to have things explained relatively gently if I'm wrong, just as I would hope to do the same if the area was one where I had the expertise. (Thankfully he does this.)
It's a delicate balance. On the one hand I feel it's important to acknowledge expertise, but on the other hand, it's also important to allow your partner to express their views and encourage their learning. It's too easy to simply tell someone their wrong in such a way as to put them off learning / expressing views and I think that's a shame.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-04 08:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-06 02:57 pm (UTC)Just as well Scot Adams is, as always, joking.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-06 03:03 pm (UTC)