This persuasion technique doesn’t work

More effective communication techniques

This is just another addition to my scratchpad of tricks that I’m learning that work well in creating good conversations with people who are used to conflict as a means of discourse.

1. Replace the word “you” with “one” or “we” or even “I.”

2. Speak to the idea, not the person. Replace “You are” with “this idea.”

3. Speak to a person’s behaviour, or speech, not to their intentions or motivations and especially not their sense of self. Do not say “You think,” use “you said.” Better yet, use “Your previous comment read…”

4. Assume that even if we are arguing diametrically opposite ideas, that we are are colleagues striving to find a workable solution to our mutual problem.

If we are to challenge ideas, and we want our ideas to be listened to, we must first disconnect them from the promoter of the idea, so that our interlocutor can see the idea at a distance, and not as a part of themselves, and then include them in our group.

5. Understand that any insult that comes your way, is an sign that your interlocutor does not have the tools to express their aims, needs or fundamental ideas. It is merely a clumsy attempt to accomplish something, to meet a need, even if they don’t know what they are trying to accomplish.

6. I find that taking someone’s idea, role-reversing it, or presenting the same argument, but in a slightly different context and asking them “Do you accept this idea?” is far more effective at getting the person to see their own argument in a new light.

7. When someone makes a good, true or even slightly useful distinction, acknowledge it, and build on that acknowledgement, rather than merely slapping down bad arguments. “OK, your point about this is true, now, how do you reconcile it with X?”

I wish, wish, wish, that I had known this as a young man. This is all new to me, and I’m still working on it.

I’m still trying to figure out how to deal with the hard-core liars. My way of dealing with it is to presume that the lie serves to protect their sense of self.

My experience of Non-Violent Communication as an effective technique

(Short version with hand-puppets :) )

(Longer, more detailed version, audio only)

My latest influence is Marshall Rosenberg’s non-violent communication. He places an emphasis on seeking to meet people’s needs, as a primary goal.

I’ve been playing around with the techniques, I find them valuable. These are my insights-of-the-moment.

Many people who debate subjects approach their interlocutor as a fencing opponent, with the goal of essentially beating people into submission. I find it more practical to spend 80% of my time, accepting and agreeing to less relevant items, or looking for things that I can agree with rather than confronting people. Confrontation triggers fight-or-flight. I find that state a hindrance to my goal of a sincere, honest and productive conversation.

Regardless of how a conversation started, I set the tone to prove to the person that I respect their dignity, I go first and lead by example. People respond well to being treated with dignity. When people can expect consistent good treatment from you, they tend to soften up, and relax enough to get into a flow.

I strive to create a sense of security and safety for my interlocutor. If they know that I’m not going to belittle them by smashing my ideas, thoughts or beliefs into them, they have the space to breath, think, and know that they are safe to incrementally modify their position.

When conversing with people, I spend as much time checking in with their emotional state as I do their logic. Nothing will block logical thinking more quickly and steadfastly than an unacknowledged and unaddressed fear. In order to help someone to consider and possibly accept an idea, we must first make sure that they are emotionally comfortable enough to do so.

When someone has been encouraged to slowly move forward, and they know it’s safe, they are more likely to continue moving in that direction on their own, rather than balking out of fear, shame or discomfort. If we connect our ideas with stress, the person will not want to consider the ideas, because they also invoke the original stress.

This, so far, seems to work well for me with family, business relationships, and new people.

Bathing in male tears

You bathe in male tears? Most simply shower.

By the way, the Japanese imagination will never cease to wonder me with ideas I would never have conceived of.

Man released after 4 years, false rape accusation

And yet another for the “collection.” :/

After 4 years of prison, Jonathan Montgomery is finally free.

In a bench trial, Montgomery was convicted of forcible sodomy, aggravated sexual battery and object sexual penetration.

He was sentenced to forty-five years with all but seven and a half years suspended.

17 year old Elisabeth Coast, in 2007 accused Jonathan Montgomery of taking advantage of her seven years earlier in 2000 when she was just 10 years old and Montgomery was 14.

http://wtkr.com/2012/11/09/attorney-generals-office-blocks-release-of-wrongfully-convicted-man/

 

On conversing with the ideologically inclined

I find it very useful to frequently ask the following questions: “What are this person/position’s base values and core beliefs? What are they trying to achieve?”

We know that beliefs are empirically testable, and that values are the expression of physical and psychological needs. Once we address them directly, on a case-per-case basis we can come to solutions, rather than -isms. Ideologies are merely tools to try to understand the world, and meet our needs. You’ll never find one that is “true” or “right” or “perfect” in anything other than the most specific context.

Social Justice in the media, and in the world

Huffington post endorses sexual violence against men

The Huffington Post has decided that sexual violence against men is “comedy”.

Shame on the Huffington Post. I recommend that anyone having a subscription to the magazine cancel it immediately.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/reductress/8-sex-positions-that-will_b_3381552.html

8 Sex Positions That Will Blow His Mind and Destroy His Penis, regendered.

8 Sex Positions That Will Blow Her Mind and Destroy Her Vagina.

Sometimes you want to make love. And sometimes, you just want to destroy your woman’s vagina. Check out the eight sex positions below that’ll be sure to rock her cunt off.

2013-06-04-sexpositions_1.jpg

1. The Flip-it-and-reverse-it Corkscrew
Have your woman lie on her back and mount her reverse-cowboy style, facing her feet. Then go into a mini-backbend with the back of your head towards her face. Now grind into her like your trying to free a cork out of wine bottle with a broken corkscrew. The painful grip is sure to destroy her vagina.

2013-06-04-ScreenShot20130604at6.33.21PM.png

2. The One-Two Punch
This one’s not so much a sex position as it is an intimate way to relieve stress. After a long day of work, come home, light some candles, put on your favorite tunes, then punch your woman in the twat. This will definitely take her by surprise, and you will most certainly destroy her vagina.

2013-06-04-ScreenShot20130604at6.36.36PM.png

3. Under the Bleachers
Not ready for home base? There are plenty of ways to satisfy your woman without going all the way. Consider giving her a hand-job and never stopping ever. Her vagina will be ruined.

To read more of this article and more exciting men’s media, visit Reductress today.

Revolting.

Men’s Rights. We’ve got a long way to go, Baby

On perfect security and freedom

When I was younger, I thought that if I did not have
perfect freedom
that I was oppressed.

I am now told that
if one does not have
perfect security
that they are oppressed.

One needs only as much
freedom and security
as is necessary
to accomplish one’s goals.