I want some unbiased opinions so I will try to write this from a third person perspective.
There are two friends and they have the kind of relationship where they are open about everything and talk about everything. You could say that it’s similar in its depth to a familial relationship or a partnership. We will cal them friend X and friend S.
X is going through a lot and therefore is emotionally overwhelmed at times. S is also going through a lot, but not nearly to the same degree. Both friends are neurodivergent (adhd) but friend S is neurodivergent in a way that is probably more problematic for social interactions.
Both friends mostly interact over text, which S claims is a medium that lacks the nuance of other conversational mediums such as voice, video or real life. Friend X is prone to outbursts of rage over text and Friend S believes that this is because the medium lacks the nuance that could indicate for Friend S that Friend X is about to burst and therefore change their behavior.
I’m sorry that this is kind of dry and robotic, but I really want to get an unbiased perspective, which is very hard when you write things in your own words.
Now here is the issue. When X bursts, S usually would apologize but try to indicate that the conversation lacked the nuance that was needed to understand that this is an explosive topic. And friend x has in the past said that they will try to be clear about how they feel before reaching the point of an outburst.
X doesn’t accept this argument and ends up blaming S for lacking emotional intelligence. S on the other hand feels that accusing them of being emotionally unintelligent is insulting and unproductive, while X claims that saying that is just defensive and avoiding responsibility.
You don’t have to say who is right or wrong in this situation, but I would like to understand if calling someone emotionally unintelligent can be productive or is it just straight up like calling them dumb as they might claim.
X is going through a lot and therefore is emotionally overwhelmed at times. S is also going through a lot, but not nearly to the same degree.
If X and S are friends, it shouldn’t be a contest who is going through more at any given time. I have never once done that calculation when dealing with friends to try to justify my actions. If you’re friends, you want the best for each other. Friends have a level of patience and forgiveness with each other.
but friend S is neurodivergent in a way that is probably more problematic for social interactions.
If X knows this, then X needs to be extra patient with S on this point and work to their level of interaction compatibility.
Now here is the issue. When X bursts,
Bursts as in burst taking it out on S? Or bursts as in yelling/crying/scream at the world and looking to S for support?
If its the first, X shouldn’t be bursting on X. If I was S and it was such a regular thing that X gets angry and takes it out on me, I’d consider that a huge boundary stomp and reduce or eliminate X from my life for my own health and well being. It isn’t normal to take things out on someone else.
S usually would apologize but try to indicate that the conversation lacked the nuance that was needed to understand that this is an explosive topic.
S sounds like they are trying to act as a peacekeeper because of X’s behavior. If X has a regular habit of having explosive topic discussions with S, and they know S’s limitations in communications, and X’s own short temper, then X is setting themselves up for this each time.
X doesn’t accept this argument and ends up blaming S for lacking emotional intelligence.
Holy crap that is a dick move! X is expecting way too much from S (either because of the nature of their relationship or S’s capacity to engage), and them is them placing the blame on S for not being what X wants.
S on the other hand feels that accusing them of being emotionally unintelligent is insulting and unproductive, while X claims that saying that is just defensive and avoiding responsibility.
Avoiding responsibility for what? For not being what X demands they be even if they aren’t that person?
If I were S, I’d likely reduce contact with X for S’s one health and self worth. X isn’t acting like a good friend.
If I were X, I would do some massive introspection on not only who I am, but what I think other people are. Do expect them to have every capability and capacity that X does? That is crazy unrealistic. Using that some logic, does X believe they themselves have every capability and capacity that every other single person on the planet may have? That would be unbelievable arrogant. As X, I’d also explore why I’m so quick to anger. Its an important answer to have before it becomes a life problem.
Thank you for the thoughtful response.
I would like to throw a hypothetical here because I would like to here more about your opinion on the matter.
If X were going through medical issues that caused intense pain and stress, do you still think S should consider reducing contact?
And if S was the kind of person who can be pushy, out of care but can push to get a response, never if they are directly told no or that X would rather not talk about it but be pushy in a way that can cause S to miss responses that could otherwise be interpreted as discomfort around the subject. Would you consider X more justified in thier actions?
If X were going through medical issues that caused intense pain and stress, do you still think S should consider reducing contact?
Going through pain and stress doesn’t give X a license to blow up on people. If that is X’s thought process, it will quickly lead to X being isolated because of how they treat S and other people around them. Thats not what healthy relationship friends do to each other.
And if S was the kind of person who can be pushy, out of care but can push to get a response, never if they are directly told no or that X would rather not talk about it but be pushy in a way that can cause S to miss responses that could otherwise be interpreted as discomfort around the subject. Would you consider X more justified in their actions?
No X would not be justified in blowing up a S. However, X has options that don’t include blowing up to protect themselves long before a blow up point.
If S is pushing for responses on any subject that X isn’t willing to discuss, then X can make that unambiguously clear. “I’d rather not talk about it” should be understood by most people, in the event S doesn’t get it, X can say “I am not going to talk about that. S, do you understand what I’m communicating? This is an off-limits topic. If I ever change my mind at some point in the future, I will let you know. However, from now until the end of eternity that is off limits.” There’s zero ambiguity in there. X has closed every loophole of doubt or misinterpretation. Some people have difficulty with social cues and ‘hints’. Remove the ambiguity. Lay it out clear (but X doesn’t need to be a jerk in the language used). If S is one of these, they won’t be offend and likely appreciate the clarity.
If S asks about the topic again, a single gentle reminder is needed. “I’ve discussed this with you already. That is discussion is off-limits. This causes me discomfort to have to remind you again on this as I’m concerned you’re not respectful of my feelings on this matter.”
If S asks about the topic again in the future “This is the third time I’ve had to let you know this topic is off-limits. I’m going to leave/stop talking/hang up/block you for now.”
When X decides decide to re-engage with S again, if this S continues to bring it up, then I would recommend X distance themselves from S. Its entirely possible S just never gets it. That could be who S is. X may not be able to change that and S may be unwilling to change. If S’s behavior to is too incompatible with X, they should go their separate ways. Some people just shouldn’t interact with one another.
Part of life is dealing with other people and their personalities, while also managing our own. The above is an an example of both of those things.
Now, with ALL OF THAT SAID…
Is it possible that S is saying words that X is misinterpreting? S may be physically saying “How are you doing?” and X is interpreting that as a literal interrogation of their physical health status which X is sensitive to. It is X in this case that is blowing it out of proportion because “How are you doing?” is a common greeting in most cultures. It isn’t unreasonable for S to ask this in most cultures. If its this, then X can choose other words as a greeting and ask S to use those instead. “S, I understand its a regular greeting but I’m getting irrationally triggered by the greeting ‘How are you doing?’. If you’re trying to greet me, which I appreciate, can I ask that you use a different phrase that has nothing to do with my health or how I’m feeling? I’m happy to hear your suggestion for one, I can come up with one, or I’d love if we could work on together. You are my friend and I’m letting you know this is something I need that will greatly help me. I believe as my friend you want the best for me too. I am telling you this is one of the things that will help me. Are you open to doing this with me?”
I know I have greetings with specific friends that don’t even sound like greetings because they are inside jokes from our shared history. It makes us closer that I can say something otherwise nonsensical as a greeting and they understand it too as a greeting. Thats an example of a deep friendship.
Thank you, this is a lot to think about and I appreciate it.
Its well known text conversation does not convey emotion well. I mean its the whole reason the internet is filled with rage and hurt.
Once it’s already progressed to a blame game, the answer is usually: it’s not constructive or productive (any more). You need to find another way to escape the dynamics. Once people are set on an opinion, repeating the same stuff doesn’t add anything. It just makes everyone feel worse. Usually for both parties.
I agree, it has hard though to escape, especially when one side feels overwhelmed by life
If you can’t find a way to say it that isn’t insulting, wouldn’t that also mean you have low emotional intelligence?
And wouldn’t that call into question you’re evaluation of others’ emotional intelligence?
And it’s pretty clear you’re “X”, and yeah…
You’re not the one that should be calling people emotionally unintelligent. It has zero to do with ADHD as well.
Also, why do you say that ADHD has no effect here? As I do have ADHD I think that in life it possibly did cause me some social issues or misunderstandings. Is that not possible?
Thank you for the input 🙏
It is always better to describe the impact something has had on you than to accuse someone of a behaviour.
“When you said that it made me feel irritated/anxious/sad/loved/gassy.”
Instead of “You’re being disrespectful.” (An accusation of behaviour that can be argued against)
You can point a conversation at what really matters; the feelings generated by it.
As someone with Asperger’s I’m likely to tell you to go fuck yourself if you do.
Thank you
I think focusing on specific behaviours, highlighting their impact, and trying to reach a mutually beneficial compromise is more productive than offering a blanket diagnosis, especially in a casual context. It is very easy to interpret this as an insult, yes, all the more so when offering it via the same means which have been demonstrated as unreliable for the purpose of accurately relaying information.
Most importantly, these are the kinds of discussions which should be carried out after everyone involved has calmed down.
Thank you
You’re very welcome!
Impossible to say without reading the interaction(s), since social interaction is all squishy and nuanced. A lot depends on how both parties actually interact. I can imagine scenarios (NB: TOTALLY HYPOTHETICAL) in which S is just a dick hiding behind neurodivergience as an excuse, all the way to X being a dick taking advantage of S’s neurodivergience to escape responsibility.
What I can say is that seeking to assign blame is an understandable impulse in the moment of anger at the blowout, but the emotionally intelligent thing to do long-term is to seek a way to resolve the problem rather than keep score of who’s right and who’s wrong. Both X and S should work on figuring out how to avoid the blowups.
I agree, thank you
Reading this X sounds like the one with massively underdeveloped EQ. Like legitimately questionably low EQ.
Thank you for the input
