I think that's more or less what happened, I don't blame them. Just demonstrating that understanding yourself and expressing yourself clearly are necessary but not sufficient to be understood and to feel seen.
The point was that, though the article suggests loneliness stems from being unable to describe your feelings simply and concisely, it is more complex than that.
Now..if it was a singular sentence or text that says ‘I feel like garbage’, then I know the purpose of the communication and enquire what’s going on.
If ‘I feel like garbage’ is preceded by the reasons that explain the conclusion of ‘feeling like garbage’, then it is a conclusion of everything before it.
If it’s in the middle of the communication, then what comes after could be the explanation for ‘feeling like garbage’.
So ..at no point is it the focal subject of the communication.
One effective way is including: What, Who, Why and if they’re an ask, make it clear. Most people can’t read minds.
I am trying to be mindful about my communication and I keep changing how I communicate based on feedback. How my family reacts is diff from how it is at work.. so we need to have different groups..like concentric circles: closest circle, family..friends, colleagues..neighbors etc. it’s always equal give and take. Don’t expect more than you can give. Sometimes, certain relationships aren’t worth it and it’s better to walk away or have no expectations.
This group of commenters in this subthread are laboring under the misunderstanding that I don't understand this criticism; I accepted it in my top reply in this subthread. The statement I think you're interpreting as a rejection of this criticism (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34436762) is an expression of a boundary; I'm saying, you don't have enough context to understand this, you're overextrapolating from a single data point, and I'm not going to enlighten you with additional context - I'm deliberately limiting the amount I share in this thread.
Additionally, this isn't actually what I was arguing; if we accept the axioms presented in the article, a poor presentation of thought doesn't indicate a lack of understanding, a poor expression does. That it is possible to be lonely as a result of a poor presentation is contradictory to the article's conclusion; make of that what you will.
When you continue that line of criticism - without asking questions, without understanding the boundary I expressed, and generally without showing me that you've listened to my previous statements & just repeating the criticism - I take that as transgressing my boundaries, and I draw the inference you are more interested in nitpicking my statements and expressing your criticism than respecting my boundaries.
I'd ask that, if you want to express such direct and personal criticism, you read much, much closer, especially with an eye to when I tell you that I'm not comfortable engaging with that criticism. If you didn't understand that saying, "I would not treat you this way, please do not treat me this way" was an expression of a boundary - now you know to be on the lookout for this common script for expressing boundaries. If you understood that it was a boundary and interpreted that as a challenge, or you don't feel it's legitimate for me to express a boundary in an online space - that is something to think about.
Edited to add after reading the comment again: Having said that, by the way you have reacted to my comment..I think it would serve you well to be more introspective of your thought process.
Why are you so sensitive to criticism and if you expect others to toe the lines of the boundaries that aren’t clearly defined, you shouldn’t have shared the details.
Engaging in any kind of interaction where people lend their ears to your words is calling upon their time and attention. If you call upon our time and ask for our attention and then complain about perceived criticism that you are not comfortable with it..then perhaps you should be aware that people can’t read your mind.
It comes across as manipulative where you are instructing the public as to the kind of response you’d like to hear. You have to pay people for that. Those people are called therapists and they charge $250/hour.
I think you need take some time off and ask yourself why you react like this. It isn’t normal and it must be difficult for you to interact with the RoW. It would be in your best interest to not consider everyone as against you.
Also: I didn’t read every comment and your reply to it in the thread. This is not my homework. I only replied to the parent.
ETA: good grief!! I read some more of the thread. Perhaps you need to speak to a woman instead of chatting with other men with the same problem. Someone needs to say this. As a female, I have a dim view of this chit chat amongst what seems to be a mostly a male bubble.
If a man wants to improve their relationship with women, then they need to speak to women. Not speak to other men who are essentially enablers here.
> Also: I didn’t read every comment and your reply to it in the thread. This is not my homework. I only replied to the parent.
Do whatever you want. Understand that if you don't have the full context, you might not be received in the way you expect. If you are curious, for your own edification, you may find these comments enlightening:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34436172
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34435037
I'm sorry if I made you feel called out or defensive.
I want to say that I did feel attacked but because I chose not to get triggered by it, I was able to make a few more observations. But I respect your request and will not further this discussion as you will likely construe it as criticism and uncalled for..
There is nothing further to discuss. Thanks for engaging thus far. It gave me something to ponder over.
I think the point we're all trying to make is that a text barrage is _not_ expressing yourself simply and concisely.