One other Friday musing.
In uni, I lived with someone who believed arguments should be loud, blunt, and fierce. She didn't "trust" people who argued differently - it seemed dishonest to her not to get into a good clean shouting match. That's how her family argued, and there was clearly enough love around it that the behaviour worked for them.
I, however, grew up in a household where cut-throat raging was the parental norm, without assurances of underlying love. Direct attacks feel awful. BUT--
My lack of direct attacks will always make me seem untrustworthy or unsafe to some - especially folks like my old roommate, who see shouting and direct, even personal attacks for a brief blow-up as "more honest".
Conversely, people shouting at me or going for the jugular with personal attacks will always be no bueno for me.
(It's been joked that I can handle pretty much anything as long as no one raises their voice in the process. My experiences with violent assault show that to be true!)
+
Don't know why my next reply lost connection to this thread, but here's the closer to this train of thought:
@MLClark
Right there with you, my friend. Sounds like we were brought up in the same family.
@MLClark π«
--the key to becoming a better adjusted adult wasn't simply avoiding heated exchanges entirely, because down that path lies relentless *fear* of others' hostility.
(And if you knew me in my late teens and early twenties, you'd know I was relentlessly afraid of making people angry. Always apologizing, and always making people angry *with* my constant apologies!)
Growth has instead required learning to hold in tension the fact that conflict and *safety in conflict* look different for us all.
+