How much should you tell?
How much should you tell?
as told by Al Turtle
© Al Turtle 2004
Print paper in PDF
One time my partner and I were driving around. I don’t know how the subject came up. Strange subjects often came up while on the roads above our home. What I do remember was being asked whether I kept secrets from her.
I took quite a time to answer. This was in those days when honesty, openness and candour were a kind of new thing to me. And it was also a time when neither of us were giving shallow answers. And so I looked inside for my truth.
“I tell you some of my truth. Some I don’t tell you,” I said. She asked what I meant.
I told her that I divided my inner world into two pieces: those things I would tell her about – am even eager to speak of; and those things that I kept hidden from her, that I hesitated or refused to speak about. When we arrived home, I drew a picture of this. I said that all the stuff on the left I would tell, and on the right I would keep hidden.
Looking at the picture, I told her that if she asked me a question about some things, I would want to answer. If she asked a question about other things, I would lie or refuse to tell her or change the subject. And some subjects were along that dividing line. Questions about those dividing-line topics would trigger great tension in me. And multiple questions about those subjects would exhaust me.
There was a pause in our conversation, as I both she and I became used to the truth I had just spoken.
Then she said the one word, “Why?”
I pondered for a while. Why do I do this? Do all people? Why do I keep things hidden? Am I scared of sharing? Yes. But why?
I answered, “I keep the things hidden which I think will upset you.” We spoke a little more and I clarified that the subjects to the right were all subjects I thought would upset her. Those to the left were all the ones I thought “non-upsetting.” And those along the line I was uncertain about. I also added that I had come to use the word “upset” to mean angry or sad or both.
I reiterated, “I guess I am protecting you, by holding back information.” And at that point I recall her getting pretty damn upset.
This discussion picked up again, several days later.
Solving the problem
We started off with this picture of me protecting her from “subjects I thought would hurt her.” I was being noble, but was deciding for her, ahead of time, what she could or could not stand to listen to. She didn’t like me doing this. I had been doing it for years with everyone I came close to. This was the famous “I don’t want to hurt her/his feelings” subject. I hear many people saying, “I don’t want to upset so and so.”
One issue that bothered my partner a lot was my making a decision “for her” about what she could handle, without asking her. This seemed pretty patronizing to her, and a lot like what she experienced as a child. As I, personally, have lots of training in the tools of arrogance, this came pretty naturally to me. She didn’t like it. I also didn’t like it, now that it was exposed. I could still recall my parents speaking about subjects they deemed I didn’t need to hear, while at the time I was very curious. I could certainly understand her and validated her.
Not sharing is worse than sharing.
We resolved that sharing could be problematical for both of us. It was hard. But that it was not as troublesome as keeping things hidden.
And so the question arose, “Why would I protect her from what she wanted to hear?” And this was followed by the question, “Why would she get upset at hearing things she wanted to hear?” And the final questions were, “What damage are we doing to each other by ‘acting “the normal way,’ and how do we want to change what we are doing?”
From the men
I spent some time talking about this with my men friends, and found out that my behavior seemed pretty normal to them, too. Were we, men, trained to protect women from being upset? It seemed so. We were certainly all used to our partner’s upset, and to trying to prevent it.
"Upset" as training
Some felt we, men, were acting out of fear of our wives’ behavior when they were upset. And so we looked at the idea that people punish others by “getting upset.”
The men linked this to the idea of how seeing-eye dogs are trained. A trainer has the dog by its harness. In the other hand he carries a paper bag of empty pop cans. When the dog does not pause at the edge of a sidewalk, where a blind man might fall, the trainer shakes the bag of cans in the dog’s face. The dog learns to avoid the shaking bag (the upset) by pausing at the sidewalk curb. And so a man learns to withhold his sharing as his wife gets upset (shakes the bag) when he does share. That idea seemed good, but not enough.
Some men related that they were using their partner’s “upset” as an excuse to not share. They were shy or hesitant even in the group meetings. As we spoke more of this, we realized that men often acted like an over trained seeing-eye dog in retirement – scared of any noise anywhere.
Protecting Little Girls
Some of the men felt they were protecting women. Then one of the men recalled something he heard at a retreat with Robert Bly. “The difference between a 10 year-old boy(girl) and a 14 year-old boy(man) is that the former has no room in his head for ugly thoughts and the older has plenty of room.” The idea was that a kid would run away from traumatic sights, while an older kid might be curious about the same, gory stuff. This man suggested that perhaps we, men, were all treating women as being youthful – protecting them from the ugly thougths. That idea fit, too.
I checked this out with my partner. She spoke of the cultural imperative to keep women youthful. She had finished reading Reviving Ophelia: Saving the Selves of Adolescent Girls by Mary Pipher, about what our culture does to young women – conditioning them to try to look and act “nubile” forever. She finally added the word that helped me. Women are trained to appear “fragile” as part of their cultural contract with men.
Together we put the two ideas alongside each other. Perhaps men are conditioned to be protectors, to keep women as “girls;” and women are conditioned to accept protection as proof of their success at appearing nubile. The men send the message, “I’ll protect you, little fragile girl, if you let me know what upsets/threatens you.” The women send the message “I’ll keep appearing like a little fragile girl, if you protect me. When I need protection, I will dramatically appear fragile and get upset.”
The Upset Problem
The formula then had two components:
- people inappropriately use “upset” to avoid the unpleasant, (by the way, this is the Master/Slave issue.)
- people are trained to give inappropriate protection to those who use “upset” as a signal. (this is one of the problems of the Power of Passivity.)
My partner and I became more comfortable with this formula, which our culture had handed us over time. It even seemed to hold up when we found out that the gender reverse was true – “women protect men from upset also.” At this point we threw out the idea that this was gender specific – both genders do it. “I don’t want to upset him.” “I don’t want to upset her.”
Solutions
The solutions became clear to us over time.
- I had to become willing to share anything with my partner. My caution, my growth challenge, was that when I was going to tell something that I feared might upset her, I had to give her warning and to help her with any reaction she might have.
- My partner had to learn how to “get tough,” and to be ready to listen to anything without “getting upset.” Her caution, her growth challenge, was to encourage me to share, to work to make it safe for me to share, and for her to take responsibility for reducing her reactivity. And these challenges were true for me to her and for her to me.
I set about learning how to become a source of safety to my partner, while at the same time sharing everything. I found that she didn’t like surprises. I found she didn’t like feeling pushed. And so I learned to say, “I’ve got something to share that might be difficult for you. Tell me when you are ready to hear it.” I learned to use Mirroring whenever I thought sharing might be difficult. “I’ll tell you, but only if you will mirror me as I do.”
I learned that her upset was often more a trial to her than it was to me, and that it was not useful for me to take her “upset” as a punishment toward me. I think that was about the time when we stopped using the phrase “upset at so-and-so” and replaced it by “upset by such-and-such.” I believe we wanted to increase the chance that only one of us would be “upset” at a time. I think that the best friend an upset person has is one who is not upset, and who is PreValidating, curious, understanding, and supportive.
My partner read more about women’s paths in life, and she came up with the term “crone.” This became a very positive image of strong and elder-becoming femininity. She used powerful concept to contrast with “little fragile girlishness.” I think she found that some component of her “upset ness” was just drama, and some part was genuine fear. Discovering the difference and learning what to do about each became one of her projects.
She gave me another thought. Sometimes she wouldn't share because she was "trying to say it correctly or right" (whatever that was?). She didn’t know how to say something without fearing saying it “wrong.” She told me this came from being raised by people who would frequently interrupt her and correct her speaking.
She and I learned to push through that hesitancy using another phrase. "I don't know how to say this right! So let me say it wrong and then let's, you and me, clean it up afterwards."
Lessons
- It is better to share than to keep hidden, in the long run.
- It is better to share it crudely than to keep it hidden.
- Keeping secrets from each other does not make anyone safer.
- How you share is critical. Do it dialogically.
- Prepare yourself to listen to anything and remain relaxed.
- Protecting someone from distress is a way of keeping them from growing up.
Al,
Thanks for this great article! I also really enjoyed what you said elsewhere on the site about clinging, and how important it is to have a network of people you can turn to.
My question is this: If I am feeling hurt and panicked because of something emotional that my partner (the avoider) is currently unable to give me, is sharing that with him necessary? Or are there sometimes situations we should just deal with by turning to other sources of support, ie friends? Where might that line be between me communicating fully about my feelings and me not discussing with him things that may result in him feeling guilty about his limitations and withdrawing further?
I realize the connection to your statement that it's not fair to choose for people what they can and can't handle, and I agree. Just not clear on how that plays in when discussing things with an avoider. I'm thinking perhaps it has something to do with pacing, but I'm quite fuzzy on this.
Thank you!
Stacey
Dear Friend,
Thanks for the good work both in sharing and what you have learned and in linking to my material. I hope it is valuable to your friends, too. So let’s see what comes to mind.
Ok, let me share a bit about BPD. Here my beliefs. Everyone is to more less affected by BPD. Some are effected, at this point, so much that they fall into diagnosable levels. Some are incapacitated. Some are more or less mildly effected. Thus BPD is normal for all of us.
I would say that at least 80% of the causes of BPD are a matter of upbringing. A bit are genetic dispositions. I think of BPD as a normal difficulty with a perfectly normal capacity of our brains. Normal thru fairly severe BPD can be made tolerable by relearning.
When couples come into my office a majority form a BPD – Narcissistic team. The guy tends to be narcissistic and comes in solving his issues through that lens. The gal comes in BPD and is solving her issues through that other lens. They interact poorly following both patterns at the same time. I used to say that about 70% of women tend toward BPD and about 70% of men tend toward narcissism. That now seems a bit too simplistic as I believe I have moved to focusing on the specific components of those two patterns, as it is in those specific components that I find healing, learning, retraining, and resolution.
This brings up two problems. First is the “designated patient” phenomenon. The couple comes to agree that one of them is the more FU’d. That one is the “patient.” The other is presented as “healthy.” My experience is that one of the core balances in couples is that you always marry or settle down with someone “equally crazy.” If you wanna know how crazy you are, look at your partners. The error in this phenomenon is that the couple’s attention will be directed toward one “sick” person, while neglecting the other “sick” person. This is pretty dysfunctional, to my way of thinking. Better to take turns.
The second problem is that in general narcissists are more or less powerfully defended against having their failings pointed out to them, while BPD have a built in sense of “having many failings.” I used to find that if you focus on failings in both, the narcissist will get upset. If you avoid focusing on failings, the BPD gets upset. Damned if you do, damn if you don’t . Makes couples therapy fun.
I skip around all this now by ignoring the diagnostic labels and instead focus on the challenges to relating and learning. If I say “all people make sense all the time,” I am inviting people to related to their past actions, their past selves, as something/someone to be validated. I invite them to learn and to participate in that learning process for themselves and with their partner. A narcissist usually needs to learn to be at peace with the parts of them that they feel shame about and that they hide. A BPD person usually needs to learn to be at peace with the various competing voices inside to them and to create peace for themselves in managing those voices. Both learnings are made possible and facilitated by Validation and PreValidation liberally applied to self and partner.
A person (BPD) that experiences you as a threat to their Lizard, makes sense. Seek for what you are doing that contributes to their Lizard’s valid reaction and work to remedy that.
The other thing you mention is about honesty. Rarely, if ever, do I think that people start by being honest. It seems that we must all keep learning how to be honest. I think of this more as a matter of developing the habit of integrity. I also see it directly challenged by our inability to speak w/o MasterTalk. As we learn to be dialogical more and more I find that people generally appreciate expressions of integrity. So, for me, the question is not whether to be honest, the question is how to show my integrity in a way that doesn’t trigger off this or that person’s Lizard.
Generally a well protected Lizard always wants the truth. A poorly protected Lizard, one whose host has not learned good boundary skills, often has trouble with many ways of sharing the truth. Still, go ahead and give a person the great choice, “Would you rather I shared my truth, or would you rather I kept my truth hidden and secret.” The vast majority would rather have you share than hide your truth.
Good luck.
Al
Al,
I believe that I have mentioned to you in the past, either on postings here or in e-mails or phone calls that I believe that my ex-wife suffers from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). In my continuing efforts to understand her better and improve my relationship with her, I am active on a particular discussion group for non-BPs involved with a BP (you probably have a bunch of hits from that site, I think some of the believe I'm on your payroll I refer to you so much…lol).
Last week I posted a link to this essay and a second one (the “To be safe you must share” essay) as an example of what I believed was effective in a relationship. I think it takes a lot of guesswork out of things if there is honesty and openness up front. The question was raised as to whether these same guidelines would apply in a relationship with someone with BPD. The site I frequent contends that much of BPD is shame-based and I generally agree that BPs carry around tremendous amount of shame. The concern in the group was that being totally honest and open could be a shame-trigger in a BP, causing strong reactions that could put the BP's lizard in a strong unsafe mode and making progress difficult. My thought is that this is probably an issue more when the BP does not see the non as a source of safety to his/her lizard, and still thought that the question was interesting. I let the group know that I would request your feedback on the issue, so here I am.
Dear Minou,
Your question deserves a quick and thoughful answer and I have only a few minutes. So I fear this may not be full enough.
Is there hope? Yup. Safety is the first issue and most critical. Lack of it makes people say things just to make themselves safe. When feeling safe and trusting in that safety, people will tell their truth. The critical factor is “feeling safe and trusting in that safety.” Some people have been so hurt while speaking up, that it takes a long time to build that sense of safety.
I think it can and has to be done.
Good luck,
Al
Hello Al,
Just a simple question, I think. Is there any hopes at all if you find yourself in a relationship with somebody who lies so much, no matter how safe you make it for him? He won't share until the proof of his lying is right in front of his eyes, and even then, he will try to denie, to blame, to excuse, to minimize, and will admit eventually on what he thinks you only know, nothing more. He says he understands the betrayal effect of his lies, but will still find excuses for his lies that he keeps doing. He lies by concealing, by omission, by exageration, etc.
Thank you,
Minou