Disvalidating other’s feelings is not exactly abuse, but…

One of the most common signs of emotional abuse in a relationship is invalidating others’ feelings. This is more than likely not intentional abuse, however, but a difference in the way we communicate. We approach emotionally important topics differently, and what seems like a shut down of communication may be an attempt to say “I’m here for you, listening.”

When the Idealists* go silent during a conversation, they mean that they are not interested in the topic discussed, or they think it’s irrelevant. “Just noise” that doesn’t require a reply. The likelihood is that they are waiting for the other party to say something important, to get to the heart of the matter, the emotional stuff. They may feel like they’re waiting for the noise wall to drop so that they can finally talk about the elephant in the room, and they interpret the other person’s talking as a way to avoid the real conversations.

When a Idealists* does this to the Survivalist*, they interpret it as “stonewalling”. They feel this silence is intended to stop them from moving forward into the true topics, as in “I am not interested in ANYTHING you have to say to me” when the Survivalist* would expect a reply, as enthusiastic as possible, about ANYTHING they say, as in: “I am interested in EVERYTHING you’re telling me. I love you.” For a Idealists*, this doesn’t happen with anyone except their True Emotion Mirrors. An the Idealists* can use it as a sign of true love; if you are interested in EVERYTHING another person tell you, their laundry routine included, that’s love. To the Survivalist*, that’s just making conversation and interesting in any situation, a way to bond.

When talking with the Survivalist*, a Idealists* would do kind to force themselves to reply and ask for further information on any topic the Survivalist* brings up. Any topic. However, be careful, this is a sign of True Love, and if you give out that signal, you may give it to the wrong person.

When the Survivalist* is silent, when a Idealists* tells them something, it means, ironically: “I’ve heard it. I’ve understood the message…” (unlikely, tho) “I am deliberating your problem for you. Please come back for an answer later.” The problem is, the Idealists* don’t expect for a reply to their problems like that, but they expect empathy. A simple voice to tell them “you can do it. I believe in you.” To a Idealists*, that’s enough.

A Survivalist* won’t understand why that’s even remotely enough. Most of the stuff the Idealists* deal with their left hand tied behind their back is massive and terrifying to the Survivalist*. The Survivalist* assumes the Idealists* is asking for help, when they are simply keeping the Survivalist* (parent) in the loop. A Survivalist* doesn’t tell anything personal to anyone unless they want their help. This is why they assume a Idealists* is dying in fear and terror when they share something personal with a friend or a family member.

When a Idealists* gets angry with a meddling the Survivalist*, the Survivalist* doesn’t understand why they’re angry: “You asked for my help!” the Idealists* wonders “WHAT? When? NO, I DIDN’T!” They were simply exchanging what’s up’s, not asking for help. So. The Survivalist* expects everyone who is somewhat coping with the demands of reality to keep their shit to themselves, and for as long as they speak of nothing of importance, they believe things are fine.

the Survivalist* also talk about “nonsense” to open the conversation flow, but a Idealists* often ignores this as, well, nonsense. They don’t see the point of it. To them, this meaningless chit chat is actually a complete waste of time, and they don’t know how to react to it. While this, to the Survivalist*, seems stupid and anti-social, to a Idealists*, this feels vacuous and shallow. What a Idealists* should do here, is to talk nonsense back to those the Survivalist* who they’re interested in, in order to get them into a conversation and further. However, the Idealists* + the Survivalist* relationship is rarely a happy one, as both need to TRY SO HARD to understand each other.

the Survivalist* also have trouble taking the Idealists* seriously. They believe the Idealists* are working hard to impress them with a usually extraordinary life story, talent, and displays of intelligence, that, to the Idealists* is quite common and the only way to get to know someone even on a superficial level. As the Idealists* are often rather intelligent, they don’t doubt other intelligent people when they’re talking… big. The Survivalist*, however, ignore most of this as friend-making bullshit, that they don’t really listen to, as to them, it means nothing. This, to a Idealists*, feels very insensitive and disrespectful, but luckily, we’re not really aware of this… Until now, sorry. 🙂

When a Idealists* talks to people, they tend to include a lot of personal, even highly detailed information to even complete strangers. They don’t have such a high threshold for “privacy” as the Survivalist* do. Therefore, they can come off needy and desperate for love, attention, and support to the Survivalist*, who will keep their troubles to themselves to the last minute… Expecting others to guess or query what’s wrong. A Survivalist* will also often argue and pick a fight to demonstrate that they are not OK, but other than that, they pretend to be alright and on top of things.

To a Idealists*, this means nothing. They believe an angry the Survivalist* is actually angry about the very thing they shout about and try to fix THAT problem, rather than ask them “what’s really going on with you?” as the Survivalist* expects. The Idealists* feels anyone can always talk to them about anything, really, and they’re always ready to help and offer an ear, so they don’t understand why someone would need to scream at them about dirty socks or unmade beds in order to get a green light to talk about stuff that bothers them.

the Survivalist* also talk about “nonsense” to open the conversation flow, but a Idealists* often ignores this as, well, nonsense. They don’t see the point of it. To them, this meaningless chit-chat is actually a complete waste of time, and they don’t know how to react to it. While this, to the Survivalist*, seems stupid and anti-social, to a Idealists*, this feels vacuous and shallow.

Subscribe to get a Daily Message