Creative Disagreement--trying to find the underlying principle

[Poppy98]

I am trying to gather a list of joking/odd ways to communicate a need for a change in behavior in order to not sound confrontational.




"I do love the boots, but if I don't even get to keep them can we put them somewhere I don't trip over them."



I'll add more when I can think of them and you can add too!

 

[Outdated]

Aussies tend to be a bit more blunt than that. "Move them or lose them lady!"

 

[Hypnalis]

"I do love the boots, but if I don't even get to keep them can we put them somewhere I don't trip over them."

If this is a real scenario, start by splitting out the two parts:
1. Boots in the way
2. Something very strange about the status of the boots

(1) is easy, and needs no fancy packaging.

(2) is weird. If someone is playing stupid games, you interfere with the game. But that's all about the game, not about the boots. If you want useful input you need to explain the context first.

 

[Rodafina]

joking/odd ways to communicate

This sounds like a recipe for misunderstandings or sounding passive aggressive.

Another way to say what you shared above could just be, “I keep tripping on these boots. Is there a different place that we could keep them? I would appreciate that so much.”

Might be more helpful to look into basic conflict resolution techniques to be more clear. Any confrontation can be difficult, no doubt, but it might be more useful to put your energy into getting comfortable with it.

Spoiler

 

[Poppy98]

If you want useful input you need to explain the context first.

As you said, it could be a game, but with this person, it's also possible that it's them being thoughtless instead of malicious, so for the moment I'm leaving space for that possibility.

If someone is playing stupid games, you interfere with the game.

How so, if you wanted to say? (It's fine if you don't want to say more too.)

 

[Masked Man]

Aussies tend to be a bit more blunt than that. "Move them or lose them lady!"

I'm going to go along with this, but softened a bit (because this is my style of communication).

"We need to move these because they're in the way and they're a trip hazard."

 

[Hypnalis]

As you said, it could be a game, but with this person, it's also possible that it's them being thoughtless instead of malicious, so for the moment I'm leaving space for that possibility.

Assuming it's the person who made the "kiss attack", that's crossed my mind already.

If they're confused (and possibly a little crazy) but not malevolent, the moves are completely different. You initially treat it as a misunderstanding, and the strongest criticisms early on are things like "it makes me uncomfortable when you do X".
This has no effect on a narcissist OFC (they see it as weakness), but it can open a door with e.g. someone who's "non-ASD ND".

How so, if you wanted to say? (It's fine if you don't want to say more too.)

I don't mind making suggestions, but there's no simple answer for an outsider (i.e. me) because I have too little information.

The soft opening above is an example of a possible approach in the right situation. And BTW starting soft is rarely a mistake either way. It's much easier to escalate at need than to de-escalate after a mistake.

One (of many possible) different scenario:
A narc is different. You find out what they want, and deny it to them. As politely and non-confrontationally as possible, but you can't negotiate with a narc. You talk to them only to control the situation, which generally means preparing your means your responses for after you deny them something they want.

You can appeal to the better nature of people who are avoidant, have conflicting goals, and/or are mildly crazy.
But narcs don't have one, so there can be no real discussion with them.

 

[Judge]

Sometimes the best thing to do is to in a perceived stalemate is to simply cite, "We agree to disagree", and just leave it at that.

When further confrontation is both likely, and pointless.