Hedge Words

[mrissa]

Tip #17 for Dealing With Mrissas:

If you're going to ask me an extremely personal question, just ask it. Do not hedge with "you don't have to answer this if you don't want to." I know I don't. I don't need permission to decide what comes out of my own mouth. Giving me your permission to respond as I see fit is patronizing and more likely to make me go Scandosotan and clam up on you. It's less likely to get your question answered, and it's less likely to get me to volunteer similar information later on.

(Even "I hope you don't mind my asking" is a safer hedge with me, because it indicates that you know you may have crossed a line in asking, not that I may have crossed a line in refusing to answer.)

I'm perfectly capable of saying, "I don't think that's any of your business" or "I prefer not to answer that question" or "I'm not going to talk about that right now" or "My goodness, why on earth would you ask me that?" I'm perfectly capable of carrying on a civilized conversation afterwards. I won't hold it against you if you ask a question I don't want to answer, unless you keep asking or act like I owe you the information. But I don't need your permission to speak or not to speak. EVER. That's not the world we're living in. And acting like you're handing out permission where you have no authority is not a good way to deal with me.

Comments

[roadnotes.livejournal.com]

" I won't hold it against you if you ask a question I don't want to answer, unless you keep asking or act like I owe you the information. But I don't need your permission to speak or not to speak. EVER. That's not the world we're living in. And acting like you're handing out permission where you have no authority is not a good way to deal with me."

Thank you for verbalizing the issue about that phrasing that's grated on me for a long time.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

I think the statement is not about permission, but about politeness -- or reducing awkwardness. I understand that the phrase bothers you, but I just can't imagine something thinking: "Well, this person needs my permission before she can decide whether or not to answer the question, so I'm going to make sure she knows that she has my personal permission not to answer the question."

B

[mmerriam.livejournal.com]

"I hope you don't mind my asking" is usually the opening I use when I'm worried that I might be about to cross a line. I would never, if the person didn't want to answer, press for that answer to a highly person question. If face with a question I consider too personal, or at least too personal at that point in the relationship, I have no problem saying something along the lines of "Well, I think that's more of a fourth date question," or, as you said, "I prefer not to answer that question."

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

I know it isn't conscious, but it grates on me all the same. I think it goes with an underlying mindset that not sharing exceptionally personal information with all comers should be the exception rather than the norm. I usually try to parse it as "intended politeness marker, please respond in kind," but sometimes I no longer have the patience to do that after the Nth time.

If someone is feeling awkward and impolite about asking me extremely detailed questions about my sex life out of the clear blue sky (to take the example that set off this post), maybe they should pay attention to those feelings and consider that pushing the awkwardness off on me is not their best or most polite choice. And that sometimes questions are just too personal for a friendship, regardless of whether the person "has to" answer them or not.

I probably would handle it better if I heard it more often in contexts where I didn't really mind answering the question or at least could understand why the person asking it wanted the information (other than "sheer snoopiness"). But mostly in my experience it has popped up in situations where the person is just being unreasonably nosey, and I think nosiness is generally too well-regarded already.

[cpolk.livejournal.com]

when someone says, 'you don't have to answer this if you don't want to,' that means they know that their question is rude and impertinent, but they're going to forego courtesy and respect and ask you anyway.

It's interesting to interject, 'you're right.' just as they trot out the phrase. it usually stops them dead in their tracks for just a second.

[blzblack.livejournal.com]

I agree with Minnehaha. I suspect they're trying to be polite. But I'll try to remember how I phrase such a comment in the future. If I mess up, please forgive.

The context you mention does sound problematic and may have more to do with how one may have misused what most mean to be a polite way of asking something difficult.

Agreed

[mackatlaw.livejournal.com]

That's what Robert Heinlein said. I think he was right about it. If the question begins, "It's none on my business, but..." You should turn and reply, "You're right."

Mack

[mmerriam.livejournal.com]

oh yeah, context is everything. Mostly I get these types of qualifiers because someone is curious about my visual impairment (Which by the way, I'm happy answer any questions about). I guess that they are concerned that I will somehow be offended by their curiousity. However, ask me a personal question about my sex life, and the best you can hope for is a quirked eyebrow and a facial expression conveying the question, "Why are you asking me this?" Worst case I'll tell you it's none of you business, so bugger off. Really, there's curiousity of a potentially sensitive subject (which I'm generally okay with), then there's just plain old snoopiness (which I'm not generally okay with). I think this goes with your comment of; I think it goes with an underlying mindset that not sharing exceptionally personal information with all comers should be the exception rather than the norm. it does seem as I've gotten older that more people expect you to just share any old personal information with them if they ask. I wonder where the they got that crazy idea?
In Peace
Michael

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

Thinking about this more, there's a lot going on. In conversation, when someone asks you a question there is a generally assumed social obligation to reply. If you asked me a question and I ignored you, I would be the rude one...not you. Given that, it seems reasonable for there to be some phrase that mitigates the social obligation.

Although I think the sentiment that it's the context that matters is dead on.

Interesting.

B

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

And you did open this comment with "Tip #17 for Dealing With Mrissas," and not "Tip #17 for Dealing With People."

B

[aet.livejournal.com]

I guess I see this kind of disclaimer more like leaving the door open or saving ones own face for feeling good. And from that point of view I would not mind the stranger out of blue doing that (the little mantra to feel good:"I will not feel sad, embarrassed or neglected if I do not get answer to those random questions"), but I would feel irritated if a friend would do something like that to me ...

I guess I am just too self-centered to pay attention ... or, may-be, coming from background where there were many authorities that COULD make you answer, I feel it hard to be bothered in situations when the person telling me about things I have or have not to do has no power over me in fact (I just feel all powerful once again - sure, I do not HAVE to!).

Re: Agreed

[aet.livejournal.com]

But does charing information always have to be business? Why should information (or giving advise or unwanted opinions) not be done just for the fun of it?

Re: Agreed

[mackatlaw.livejournal.com]

Interesting question. I think the context is more that of where someone is trying to inquire into a sphere or domain that really isn't there concern. If you think it is not your place to be asking someone about their sex life, then probably you shouldn't be asking. It's not a question of the fun of sharing information here; it seems more like a boundaries question instead.

Re: Agreed

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Just out of curiosity, Aet, is there a similar expression in Russian or Estonian? Does "none of your business" means "not in the group of things that concern you at all [business or pleasure]" or is there a different colloquialism for "not your concern", or no?

Re: Agreed

[aet.livejournal.com]

You lost me here.

Why do you think sex is not fun? Why would you say stories of your sex life being without fun, only about pain that is , as it should be, hidden behind boundaries and not anyone else's business? So you think I should not talk with you at all, as we do not know each other and so your opinions are not my concern?

I think asking questions not because it is necessary is fun. In fact my lack of question asking skills makes me very sad. But in curiosity moves the world, Pandora notwithstanding.

Re: Agreed

[aet.livejournal.com]

I would say Estonian "Pole sinu asi" and Russian "не твоё дело" that mean literally "it is not your thing" are the most widespread, but in both in Estonian and in Russian one can also say "this does not touch you" ... and the one asking can always retort with "does telling bite a chunk out of you?" (well, actually I use the last one about myself, as I usually feel uncomfortable when touched by another person, but if being touched does not take anything away from me, but touchy-feely people get comfort from bodily contact, then it would be just rude of me to deny them the pleasure of touching my body, would it not? )

Re: Agreed

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

I don't think anybody said sex was not fun, Aet. There's a difference between enjoying something and enjoying all possible discussions of it with all possible people.

Some things are better or more comfortable when the people participating in them have a certain level of intimacy established and a certain level of trust. What those things are, and what that level of intimacy is, will vary from culture to culture and from individual to individual. That doesn't mean that no questions are permissible, just that some should be put off until later.

Re: Agreed

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

If an American says "it is not your thing," they mean "it is not something you are usually interested in." "I saw a movie last night." "What did you think?" "Oh, it was okay, but it's not your thing. I wouldn't go see it if I were you."

"Does telling bite a chunk out of you?" has a near-analog in, "It's no skin off your nose," or, "It's no skin off your ass," depending on region and class and so on. It applies to doing favors or turning a blind eye as well as to answering questions.

In addition to "none of your business," we have "none of your beeswax," which is pretty juvenile but may be used to give a playful tone to the exchange.

I don't think it is rude to deny other people the pleasure of touching your body, no. It takes away your comfort in favor of someone else's comfort, and that's not an exchange you can always be required to make. Or why shouldn't they give up theirs for yours instead?

Re: need for body contact

[aet.livejournal.com]

Well, remember the experiments with little monkeys? Taking away someone's right of bodily contact can actually hurt, while the discomfort of being touched is only a preference, a whim that should be got over anyway.

Re: need for body contact

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Aet, no. The little monkeys were deprived of all body contact. They also need food, but that doesn't mean that you, personally, have to cook for the whole city every night. Yes, most primates need to touch other mammals some of the time, but that doesn't translate that any primate who wants to touch you has a right to it. This is like the lines from high school boys: it really, really won't kill them not to.

Touching people who find discomfort in it can be really, really harmful. Studies on actual humans show that, too.

Re: need for body contact

[aet.livejournal.com]

OK, then I would approach the same issue from other side (and I am NOT , above or here, telling about right to touch me, but why I should not refuse to be touched because being touched feels just slightly uncomfortable to me).

There are many things that feel uncomfortable to me, but what I should do anyway to not discomfort others around me. Living in society is tit for tat thing - I expect others to give up some of their comfort for me ,too. They can touch me in public transport, but sometimes they have to suffer my bad smell or coughing or a whiny baby with muddy boots, too. Giving up ones comfort is never one sided in society.

Also, I do fear that one of the reasons for many of my problems is that, recalling my own problems with being touched, I have become afraid to touch anyone else when I, myself, long for that. In fact that may be one of the reasons my marriage fell apart.

Re: need for body contact

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

There is a big, big difference to me between "need for human contact" and "accidentally brushing against someone on the bus."

Whatever problems you feel you've had with being touched, I think putting them in terms of other people's rights is not the best possible thing.

Re: need for body contact

[aet.livejournal.com]

But, Marissa, what does it have to do with accidentally brushing? Do not tell you people do not talk to you in bus, putting their hand on your knee or shoulder or hand when they do so! Especially older people, with dry papery skin like to hold into the younger people whom they talking to.

[miz-hatbox.livejournal.com]

Hey, Columbine linked this entry and I didn't know you had a LiveJournal page. Do you mind if I add you to my friends list?

Re: need for body contact

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

No, Aet, this is a cultural difference. No one would put their hand on my knee on the bus unless they were trying to pick me up. No one would hold my hand unless we were already involved. We don't do that here.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Not at all! Thanks!

Re: need for body contact

[aet.livejournal.com]

That makes me wonder - why is it OK to hug someone whom you see first time in USA, but touching hand, shoulder or knee is forbidden? At least over here a hug is considered a lot more intimate contact (only boyfriends and Americans have hugged me, ever ... and my aunt during her son's funeral, but funeral is an exception of usual rules, i think ...)

Re: need for body contact

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

In my experience, it is only people you already are supposed to know or be close with for some reason who get hugged on first meeting. So people I have talked with on the internet extensively will hug me hello, if they know me well online but just haven't met me in person. Even some of them don't.

The only other example I can think of is when you meet someone who is likely to be marrying into your family. Then the women might hug. My godfather's girlfriend hugged me when she was introduced to me, but I was not entirely thrilled with that.

My aunties hug me every time they see me, but they would not put a hand on my knee. And they might touch my hand in conversation, but they wouldn't hold my hand.

[flewellyn.livejournal.com]

This is the same attitude that I hate in the "Well, of course you have the right to your opinion"...

I wrote an LJ entry (http://flewellyn.livejournal.com/9193.html) on that subject, in fact.

Re: Agreed

[mackatlaw.livejournal.com]

Umm... I can't speak for anyone else here, so I can only say that different people have different boundaries. Personally, I need to know someone a while before I'll talk about sex. That's all I meant.

Mack