July 17, 2024 • 19 mins
Couch Talks is the special bonus epsiode of You Need Therapy where Kat answers questions that listeners send to kathryn@youneedtherapypodcast.com. This week, Kat gives feedback to a listener around how to have a healthy conversation with her fiancé about politics when they do not share the same beliefs.
Episode Mentioned: Be There in Five: Democracy in Retrograde
Book Mentioned: Democracy in Retrograde
Follow Kat on Instagram: @KatVanburen
Follow the podcast Instagram: @YouNeedTherapyPodcast
Have a question, concern, guest idea, something else? Reach Kat at: Kathryn@youneedtherapyodcast.com
Heard about Three Cords Therapy but don’t know what it is? Click here!
Produced by: @HoustonTilley
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Hi guys, and welcome to a new episode of Couch
Talks on You Need Therapy Podcast. My name is Kat.
I am the host, and if you do not know
what couch Talks is, it's the special bonus episode of
You Need Therapy Podcast where I answer questions that you
guys send to Katherine at you Need Therapy podcast dot com. Now,
(00:30):
quick reminder before we get into today's question that although
this podcast is hosted by a therapist, it does not
serve as a replacement or substitute for any actual mental
health services. However, we always hope that it can help
you in some way, and we always keep these questions
anonymous so you can feel safe sending in whatever question
you want to send in. I'm not going to read
your name, your email address, or anything like that unless
(00:52):
it's specific to the question that you're asking and you
asked me to share it. I'm not going to share
information that you wouldn't want out there on the internet.
So usually do one question a week and we're going
to stick with that. Before I read this question, I
want to give another disclaimer because there obviously has been
a lot going on in the world the past couple days,
(01:14):
and what I hope is that this podcast gets to
remain a safe space for anybody to come and learn
about themselves and learn through some of the conversations we're
having despite some of the political differences people may have
in this question does touch on well. It is literally
(01:36):
asking about how to have conversations with people you disagree
on in that realm, and so I wanted to go
ahead and say before I get into the question, I
hope and if we've done so in the past, I
hope that my goal forward would be to keep some
of those personal beliefs around, especially as we get closer
(01:56):
to the upcoming election, keep those kind of separate from
this space. So despite or rather whatever political stance you have,
you still can feel safe coming here and learning about
yourself and learning about how to have healthier and happier
relationships with yourself and the people around you. Basically, we
(02:16):
won't be talking about politics on here or the nitty
gritty of politics, but rather how to have conversations with
people that you may not totally agree with. So I'm
going to go ahead and read our question and then
we will get into some of my thoughts here. It
is Hello, my fiance and I have different political thoughts
and feelings. With the election approaching, I'm finding it a
(02:38):
little more challenging to voice my feelings around it. We
typically just avoid speaking about it altogether. After what happened
this weekend, I feel like we're not talking about anything
because it just feels so big and heavy. How do
we speak of trivial things when something like this happens?
Is there a way we can safely navigate conversations about
(02:59):
the big thing without causing a fight or a debate?
How can we talk about it without infusing our personal
theories or opinions? Are there ground rules we can set
up so we can talk about the elephant in the room?
No pun intended. I would appreciate your time and opinions.
I love this question because I think this is something
we all should be thinking about. Right. How do I
(03:21):
have fruitful, healthy conversations without just avoiding everything when maybe
I don't have to? Because when we do that, we
miss out on connecting, we miss out on learning. We
just miss out on also being there for each other
and allowing our self space to process things. And I
really like that you wrote in this question because you're
(03:42):
showing and sharing yourself as an example that you don't
have to agree on everything to be in relationship with somebody. Now,
depending on what you disagree on and the value that
you attach to those issues that you may disagree on,
this might not be something that anybody can do. I
(04:02):
don't think that everybody could probably have a relationship that
is as intimate as a marriage with somebody who might
disagree politically. But it is possible, and I think that
it is only fair to ourselves in our possible future
relationships that we do leave space for there to be
some differing of opinions on stuff now, depending on the
(04:26):
relevancy or the importance or the value put on the
different opinions. I think that can be different case to case,
but it's not a black or white thing. And I
really just like that you've been asking that question. Gives
us space to acknowledge and know that to be true.
Also very interesting. I just listened to a really good
podcast that spoke on literally how to have a conversation
(04:47):
about politics in a non threatening, healthy way. And the
podcast was be There in five I've talked about it before.
Kate Kennedy is the host of that and she had
the author I will put the podcast in the notes
and this book. Even though I have not read this book,
I just listened to the podcast of the authors being interviewed.
(05:07):
The book is called Democracy and Retrograde, and I think
it talks about a lot of things, but more so
what I got from that podcast is how to be
involved in politics but not have to have it take
your whole life over, and how to be involved in
your community without having to have these such extreme stances
(05:28):
and have to know everything because it can be very overwhelming.
And when we don't know everything, we either force ourselves
to know everything or we hide in corners, and those
voices then get diminished and it seems like the middle
ground voices don't exist. And so the podcast was really interesting.
I learned a lot. Was also just a good background
conversation to have on that did not feel threatening. So
(05:53):
it kind of is an example of what we're talking about.
So I'm going to add a little bit of what
they said in then and weave that in with my
own thoughts about this question. So the first thing they
said when they were talking about how to have conversations
like this is they encourage people to start with a compliment,
and that might seem really small or trivial. But I
(06:15):
love how simple that is because it kind of just
allows us to drop our defenses a little bit, and
I think can shift our mind to allow space for
positivity in these conversations, because often when we are going
into them, we automatically feel like we have to be
on this defense mode. Right no matter who you're talking about,
these are conversations that involve topics that just kind of
(06:40):
get our heart racing. And if we just start the
conversation off with something pleasant or polite, or not even
polite but kind, I think it allows the conversation to
be less threatening and gets you on an even playing
field that shows, Hey, you have some kind of shared
interest or opinion or thought about this other person that
(07:03):
you are with, and you aren't just against them totally.
I think that's what I really like about that. It's showing, hey,
we're not I'm not totally against you. I see this
thing that I really like and appreciate about you. Therefore
I might be able to hear you because I do
have that part that has pleasant, kind thoughts about the
person I'm communicating with. Now. One of the things that
(07:26):
I've talked about on here in different areas not just
in politics, but just in areas where you can have
an opinion in general. One of the problems that we
see that has become so big and at this point
it just feels like has it ever not been this way?
But it hasn't always been this way, is that we
see so much of the extreme polarization of politics right
(07:51):
we have I think a skewed idea of what people
really believe because of what we see in the media
and what we see in the media and that includes
social media, are the loudest voices, not just the most common.
There ends up being this lack of a shared reality
within this space. Because I might not feel that way.
(08:11):
It's like, well that's all I'm seeing. It's that whole
idea that if you don't have examples of other things,
it's hard for it to know that they exist or
to believe that they exist. And so I'm going to
think that everybody is like those loud voices that doesn't
have the voice that I have. And that leads into
the second piece of advice that they were giving on
this podcast. That leads into the second piece of advice
(08:40):
that they were giving on this podcast, and it was
basically to just address this problem to drown out the
extremism with louder, more normal voices. And the trouble here
is that everyone is so scared to talk about this
stuff because of the backlash partly that tends to come
from some of these convers because some of those loud
(09:01):
voices can be so harsh, and because like I said earlier,
we just have this idea that voices like maybe the
ones in our heads that aren't as extreme in every
single case. And when I say extreme, I mean extreme
on every issue. Because we don't have a lot of
examples of hearing those people talk. We just do not
(09:22):
think they exist. And so that leads into what I
was saying earlier. As we start these conversations not at
all or with our defenses really up, like we have
to be ready to fight. But if we're having conversations
with if we start these conversations at least with people
that we trust and respect, there's more space to hear
and more space to have a conversation versus a debate
(09:42):
and an attempt to persuade somebody. On the podcast and
in the book Democracy and Retrograde, they were calling the
majority of people that are not on the extreme sides
of the political spectrum the exhausted majority. And it's not
that they are moderate or something like that. It's more
that they just aren't extreme. They're the kind of people
(10:04):
that they don't know everything, and they don't have an
opinion on everything, and they don't know everything about everything
they have opinion about and maybe they don't align exactly
with one side of the spectrum or the other. And
that is the majority of people, but it seems like
they're the minority. And when you aren't on the extreme
(10:27):
of one side or the other, everything does not end
up being a moral crusade, and so the intensity of
things naturally is lower. It doesn't mean that you don't
have opinions on issues. It means maybe sometimes certain issues
are more important than others, and you know more about
certain things than other things. But not everything is a
(10:49):
moral crusade, and the intensity is going to be lower.
But I don't want not being extreme to then equal
people don't care, because you can still care. But I'm
learning is that those voices are really the majority of voices.
But the extreme voices are the ones that gain attention,
They get likes, they get follows. Those are the kinds
(11:10):
of voices that are really platformed for many reasons, and
the reason that it feels like the exhausted majority no
longer exists, or maybe for some people feels like they've
never existed, is because over time, algorithms have driven out
their voices completely because they aren't doing those things that
gain the like the attention visibility. They aren't following those
(11:35):
I want to use the word algorithms again, they aren't
following the strategies that these extreme voices have come to know.
So because we're not seeing them as much in our feeds,
we're not hearing those people. They're not platforming the person
that has a less intense opinion on an issue on
a limited spot on a news channel or on a debate.
(11:58):
You're not going to platform those voices. You're going to
platform the voices that feel the loudest and the most intense,
and so the other ones just they're not visible. Their
visibility is very low. And so I just want people
to realize that just because you're not seeing them, it
doesn't mean that they don't exist. But if we think
they don't exist, so then we do not have conversations
with those people. We're going to kind of solidify the
(12:20):
fact that they don't exist. And the call to action
here is to actually have conversations with the people that
aren't as again extreme or polarized, so you can start
to learn that you can have safe conversations with people
that can hear you and have space to understand you
and have space to like disagree and not really care
(12:43):
so much that you disagree. And if you and your
partner are not on opposite extremes, then I would imagine
that there are a space for both of you to
hear each other's sides and opinions that aren't always the
same as yours, and you can still respect them because
you respect them as humans. This doesn't mean that you're
going to agree with what they say. That is really
(13:04):
I think key here is what's the goal of these
conversations to agree or to hear and learn about the
other person. And I think if we want to walk
into these conversations in a safe way, we really want
to leave space for us to not know everything, which
I think is powerful. Oftentimes we feel like if we
want to speak about something or have a conversation about something,
(13:25):
we have to know everything, because what if we like
get God or somebody says something and we don't have
a rebuttal. That's okay. I really think there's power in
recognizing that you don't know everything. Therefore, if we want
to learn, we have to have conversations, right leaving space
for us to be curious, versus I have to figure
(13:46):
everything out before I can actually hear the voices of
the people around me. That sounds a little bit backwards,
right like that sounds like we're just going to put
ourselves in echo chambers before we allow to really allow
ourselves and the people around us to really have critical
thinking conversations. And these conversations are not debates. They are
(14:07):
a chance for you to hear and there are a
chance for you to be heard. So really looking at
and coming back to what the goal of those conversations
you want to have with the people around you might
be really important for you to come back to. I
do really like the idea that you mentioned of having
or creating some ground rules. Maybe there are certain hot
(14:27):
topics that you don't feel comfortable talking about with your
partner or just certain people. Maybe there are people that
you can talk about those things with, or maybe there's
topics that you know that you are not ready to
talk about because you just feel very protective or cautious
about those things. That's okay. You don't have to talk
about everything, right, Just to talk about some things doesn't
(14:49):
mean you have to talk about everything with everybody. Maybe
you don't talk about stuff if there's alcohol involved. And
maybe you have a word that you throw out when
you feel like you're getting overwhelmed. Or instead of saying
things like I hear you, but we say things like
I hear you and and that allows space to add
to the conversation and allows someone to continue to hold
(15:13):
their beliefs. That sends the message that I'm not trying
to debate you or persuade you that I'm right and
you're wrong. It's you have this space and I have
this space. We both can exist at the same time.
And as I'm closing this out, I'm coming back to
this idea that often these conversations are very hard to
(15:34):
be had because we view the person who doesn't agree
with us as a threat, a threat to our safety,
a threat to our security, a threat to us being
allowed to hold our own belief system. And there are
definitely times when this can be true, and maybe we
don't have these conversations with those people. But I'm going
(15:56):
to go out on a limb here and assume the
person that wrote this email that your partner and you
share some similar values at some level, and if you don't,
there would be other parts of the relationship that would
be very interesting in general that I would have some
questions about. So, how can you meet your partner around
those values in your conversations even when you don't agree
(16:17):
with your opinions? We can both have differing opinions on
an issue and come from the same value. We might
just see it differently, and that's okay. To come back
to the EYE value this and I value this could
be very helpful of like, we're coming from the same place,
we just see it in a different way. And instead
(16:39):
of wanting to attack that person or wanting to just
defend because you feel threatened, rather can you say, oh,
that person is wearing a different lens. I don't have
to wear those lenses and they don't have to wear
mine to both agree on this thing down here, And
that might be where the value is coming from. And
(17:00):
so like, it's okay if our values aren't all the same.
I think you're gonna if you're in a relationship like
a marriage with somebody, you're gonna have some common values,
but they don't all have to be the same, and
there are space for that and allowing space for that.
It's important. So if you guys have any questions or
comments or tips, or you know, if you've created some
(17:20):
boundaries or rules within your relationship to talk about these things,
I would love to hear them. I actually got a
couple emails about this topic when it comes to the
series I just started on Monday. This is for the therapists,
and a lot of the questions that in the emails
I got were talking about how to as a therapist
(17:42):
hold a neutral space when you disagree with what your
client's saying, and especially when the subject matter becomes more
common in the therapy room, right when there's big things
happening in the government in our country, that is going
to seep into you're processing and therapy as well. And
so people were asking, like, how do I maintain that
(18:05):
separation or a difference, how do I remain unbiased? And
I'm going to have some conversations about that because I
think it is not always the same answer. It can
be a little complicated, and it's our job to allow
space for all kinds of people to be welcome and
be heard. So I think it's important, and so I
think me saying that now is to share that that
(18:27):
is something that I think might add to this conversation. Right,
just because it's I'm going to talk about how to
do it as a therapist, it doesn't mean you can't
take that and apply that to life outside of the
role of a therapist, So look out for that if
you want some more on that topic. Keep in mind,
which kind of goes with what I'm saying. I'm not
going to be giving out or talking about my own
(18:48):
belief system. It's more about how to hold space for
the differences that are involved there. So again, I hope
this was helpful. You can send your feedback to Catherine
at You Need Therapy podcast. You can follow us at
You Need Therapy podcast and at kat van Buren, and
I will link that podcast that I was mentioning earlier
in our show notes. I hope you guys have the
(19:10):
day you need to have and I will be back
with you on Monday.
Hi guys, and welcome to a new episode of Couch
Talks on You Need Therapy Podcast. My name is Kat.
I am the host, and if you do not know
what couch Talks is, it's the special bonus episode of
You Need Therapy Podcast where I answer questions that you
guys send to Katherine at you Need Therapy podcast dot com. Now,
(00:30):
quick reminder before we get into today's question that although
this podcast is hosted by a therapist, it does not
serve as a replacement or substitute for any actual mental
health services. However, we always hope that it can help
you in some way, and we always keep these questions
anonymous so you can feel safe sending in whatever question
you want to send in. I'm not going to read
your name, your email address, or anything like that unless
(00:52):
it's specific to the question that you're asking and you
asked me to share it. I'm not going to share
information that you wouldn't want out there on the internet.
So usually do one question a week and we're going
to stick with that. Before I read this question, I
want to give another disclaimer because there obviously has been
a lot going on in the world the past couple days,
(01:14):
and what I hope is that this podcast gets to
remain a safe space for anybody to come and learn
about themselves and learn through some of the conversations we're
having despite some of the political differences people may have
in this question does touch on well. It is literally
(01:36):
asking about how to have conversations with people you disagree
on in that realm, and so I wanted to go
ahead and say before I get into the question, I
hope and if we've done so in the past, I
hope that my goal forward would be to keep some
of those personal beliefs around, especially as we get closer
(01:56):
to the upcoming election, keep those kind of separate from
this space. So despite or rather whatever political stance you have,
you still can feel safe coming here and learning about
yourself and learning about how to have healthier and happier
relationships with yourself and the people around you. Basically, we
(02:16):
won't be talking about politics on here or the nitty
gritty of politics, but rather how to have conversations with
people that you may not totally agree with. So I'm
going to go ahead and read our question and then
we will get into some of my thoughts here. It
is Hello, my fiance and I have different political thoughts
and feelings. With the election approaching, I'm finding it a
(02:38):
little more challenging to voice my feelings around it. We
typically just avoid speaking about it altogether. After what happened
this weekend, I feel like we're not talking about anything
because it just feels so big and heavy. How do
we speak of trivial things when something like this happens?
Is there a way we can safely navigate conversations about
(02:59):
the big thing without causing a fight or a debate?
How can we talk about it without infusing our personal
theories or opinions? Are there ground rules we can set
up so we can talk about the elephant in the room?
No pun intended. I would appreciate your time and opinions.
I love this question because I think this is something
we all should be thinking about. Right. How do I
(03:21):
have fruitful, healthy conversations without just avoiding everything when maybe
I don't have to? Because when we do that, we
miss out on connecting, we miss out on learning. We
just miss out on also being there for each other
and allowing our self space to process things. And I
really like that you wrote in this question because you're
(03:42):
showing and sharing yourself as an example that you don't
have to agree on everything to be in relationship with somebody. Now,
depending on what you disagree on and the value that
you attach to those issues that you may disagree on,
this might not be something that anybody can do. I
(04:02):
don't think that everybody could probably have a relationship that
is as intimate as a marriage with somebody who might
disagree politically. But it is possible, and I think that
it is only fair to ourselves in our possible future
relationships that we do leave space for there to be
some differing of opinions on stuff now, depending on the
(04:26):
relevancy or the importance or the value put on the
different opinions. I think that can be different case to case,
but it's not a black or white thing. And I
really just like that you've been asking that question. Gives
us space to acknowledge and know that to be true.
Also very interesting. I just listened to a really good
podcast that spoke on literally how to have a conversation
(04:47):
about politics in a non threatening, healthy way. And the
podcast was be There in five I've talked about it before.
Kate Kennedy is the host of that and she had
the author I will put the podcast in the notes
and this book. Even though I have not read this book,
I just listened to the podcast of the authors being interviewed.
(05:07):
The book is called Democracy and Retrograde, and I think
it talks about a lot of things, but more so
what I got from that podcast is how to be
involved in politics but not have to have it take
your whole life over, and how to be involved in
your community without having to have these such extreme stances
(05:28):
and have to know everything because it can be very overwhelming.
And when we don't know everything, we either force ourselves
to know everything or we hide in corners, and those
voices then get diminished and it seems like the middle
ground voices don't exist. And so the podcast was really interesting.
I learned a lot. Was also just a good background
conversation to have on that did not feel threatening. So
(05:53):
it kind of is an example of what we're talking about.
So I'm going to add a little bit of what
they said in then and weave that in with my
own thoughts about this question. So the first thing they
said when they were talking about how to have conversations
like this is they encourage people to start with a compliment,
and that might seem really small or trivial. But I
(06:15):
love how simple that is because it kind of just
allows us to drop our defenses a little bit, and
I think can shift our mind to allow space for
positivity in these conversations, because often when we are going
into them, we automatically feel like we have to be
on this defense mode. Right no matter who you're talking about,
these are conversations that involve topics that just kind of
(06:40):
get our heart racing. And if we just start the
conversation off with something pleasant or polite, or not even
polite but kind, I think it allows the conversation to
be less threatening and gets you on an even playing
field that shows, Hey, you have some kind of shared
interest or opinion or thought about this other person that
(07:03):
you are with, and you aren't just against them totally.
I think that's what I really like about that. It's showing, hey,
we're not I'm not totally against you. I see this
thing that I really like and appreciate about you. Therefore
I might be able to hear you because I do
have that part that has pleasant, kind thoughts about the
person I'm communicating with. Now. One of the things that
(07:26):
I've talked about on here in different areas not just
in politics, but just in areas where you can have
an opinion in general. One of the problems that we
see that has become so big and at this point
it just feels like has it ever not been this way?
But it hasn't always been this way, is that we
see so much of the extreme polarization of politics right
(07:51):
we have I think a skewed idea of what people
really believe because of what we see in the media
and what we see in the media and that includes
social media, are the loudest voices, not just the most common.
There ends up being this lack of a shared reality
within this space. Because I might not feel that way.
(08:11):
It's like, well that's all I'm seeing. It's that whole
idea that if you don't have examples of other things,
it's hard for it to know that they exist or
to believe that they exist. And so I'm going to
think that everybody is like those loud voices that doesn't
have the voice that I have. And that leads into
the second piece of advice that they were giving on
this podcast. That leads into the second piece of advice
(08:40):
that they were giving on this podcast, and it was
basically to just address this problem to drown out the
extremism with louder, more normal voices. And the trouble here
is that everyone is so scared to talk about this
stuff because of the backlash partly that tends to come
from some of these convers because some of those loud
(09:01):
voices can be so harsh, and because like I said earlier,
we just have this idea that voices like maybe the
ones in our heads that aren't as extreme in every
single case. And when I say extreme, I mean extreme
on every issue. Because we don't have a lot of
examples of hearing those people talk. We just do not
(09:22):
think they exist. And so that leads into what I
was saying earlier. As we start these conversations not at
all or with our defenses really up, like we have
to be ready to fight. But if we're having conversations
with if we start these conversations at least with people
that we trust and respect, there's more space to hear
and more space to have a conversation versus a debate
(09:42):
and an attempt to persuade somebody. On the podcast and
in the book Democracy and Retrograde, they were calling the
majority of people that are not on the extreme sides
of the political spectrum the exhausted majority. And it's not
that they are moderate or something like that. It's more
that they just aren't extreme. They're the kind of people
(10:04):
that they don't know everything, and they don't have an
opinion on everything, and they don't know everything about everything
they have opinion about and maybe they don't align exactly
with one side of the spectrum or the other. And
that is the majority of people, but it seems like
they're the minority. And when you aren't on the extreme
(10:27):
of one side or the other, everything does not end
up being a moral crusade, and so the intensity of
things naturally is lower. It doesn't mean that you don't
have opinions on issues. It means maybe sometimes certain issues
are more important than others, and you know more about
certain things than other things. But not everything is a
(10:49):
moral crusade, and the intensity is going to be lower.
But I don't want not being extreme to then equal
people don't care, because you can still care. But I'm
learning is that those voices are really the majority of voices.
But the extreme voices are the ones that gain attention,
They get likes, they get follows. Those are the kinds
(11:10):
of voices that are really platformed for many reasons, and
the reason that it feels like the exhausted majority no
longer exists, or maybe for some people feels like they've
never existed, is because over time, algorithms have driven out
their voices completely because they aren't doing those things that
gain the like the attention visibility. They aren't following those
(11:35):
I want to use the word algorithms again, they aren't
following the strategies that these extreme voices have come to know.
So because we're not seeing them as much in our feeds,
we're not hearing those people. They're not platforming the person
that has a less intense opinion on an issue on
a limited spot on a news channel or on a debate.
(11:58):
You're not going to platform those voices. You're going to
platform the voices that feel the loudest and the most intense,
and so the other ones just they're not visible. Their
visibility is very low. And so I just want people
to realize that just because you're not seeing them, it
doesn't mean that they don't exist. But if we think
they don't exist, so then we do not have conversations
with those people. We're going to kind of solidify the
(12:20):
fact that they don't exist. And the call to action
here is to actually have conversations with the people that
aren't as again extreme or polarized, so you can start
to learn that you can have safe conversations with people
that can hear you and have space to understand you
and have space to like disagree and not really care
(12:43):
so much that you disagree. And if you and your
partner are not on opposite extremes, then I would imagine
that there are a space for both of you to
hear each other's sides and opinions that aren't always the
same as yours, and you can still respect them because
you respect them as humans. This doesn't mean that you're
going to agree with what they say. That is really
(13:04):
I think key here is what's the goal of these
conversations to agree or to hear and learn about the
other person. And I think if we want to walk
into these conversations in a safe way, we really want
to leave space for us to not know everything, which
I think is powerful. Oftentimes we feel like if we
want to speak about something or have a conversation about something,
(13:25):
we have to know everything, because what if we like
get God or somebody says something and we don't have
a rebuttal. That's okay. I really think there's power in
recognizing that you don't know everything. Therefore, if we want
to learn, we have to have conversations, right leaving space
for us to be curious, versus I have to figure
(13:46):
everything out before I can actually hear the voices of
the people around me. That sounds a little bit backwards,
right like that sounds like we're just going to put
ourselves in echo chambers before we allow to really allow
ourselves and the people around us to really have critical
thinking conversations. And these conversations are not debates. They are
(14:07):
a chance for you to hear and there are a
chance for you to be heard. So really looking at
and coming back to what the goal of those conversations
you want to have with the people around you might
be really important for you to come back to. I
do really like the idea that you mentioned of having
or creating some ground rules. Maybe there are certain hot
(14:27):
topics that you don't feel comfortable talking about with your
partner or just certain people. Maybe there are people that
you can talk about those things with, or maybe there's
topics that you know that you are not ready to
talk about because you just feel very protective or cautious
about those things. That's okay. You don't have to talk
about everything, right, Just to talk about some things doesn't
(14:49):
mean you have to talk about everything with everybody. Maybe
you don't talk about stuff if there's alcohol involved. And
maybe you have a word that you throw out when
you feel like you're getting overwhelmed. Or instead of saying
things like I hear you, but we say things like
I hear you and and that allows space to add
to the conversation and allows someone to continue to hold
(15:13):
their beliefs. That sends the message that I'm not trying
to debate you or persuade you that I'm right and
you're wrong. It's you have this space and I have
this space. We both can exist at the same time.
And as I'm closing this out, I'm coming back to
this idea that often these conversations are very hard to
(15:34):
be had because we view the person who doesn't agree
with us as a threat, a threat to our safety,
a threat to our security, a threat to us being
allowed to hold our own belief system. And there are
definitely times when this can be true, and maybe we
don't have these conversations with those people. But I'm going
(15:56):
to go out on a limb here and assume the
person that wrote this email that your partner and you
share some similar values at some level, and if you don't,
there would be other parts of the relationship that would
be very interesting in general that I would have some
questions about. So, how can you meet your partner around
those values in your conversations even when you don't agree
(16:17):
with your opinions? We can both have differing opinions on
an issue and come from the same value. We might
just see it differently, and that's okay. To come back
to the EYE value this and I value this could
be very helpful of like, we're coming from the same place,
we just see it in a different way. And instead
(16:39):
of wanting to attack that person or wanting to just
defend because you feel threatened, rather can you say, oh,
that person is wearing a different lens. I don't have
to wear those lenses and they don't have to wear
mine to both agree on this thing down here, And
that might be where the value is coming from. And
(17:00):
so like, it's okay if our values aren't all the same.
I think you're gonna if you're in a relationship like
a marriage with somebody, you're gonna have some common values,
but they don't all have to be the same, and
there are space for that and allowing space for that.
It's important. So if you guys have any questions or
comments or tips, or you know, if you've created some
(17:20):
boundaries or rules within your relationship to talk about these things,
I would love to hear them. I actually got a
couple emails about this topic when it comes to the
series I just started on Monday. This is for the therapists,
and a lot of the questions that in the emails
I got were talking about how to as a therapist
(17:42):
hold a neutral space when you disagree with what your
client's saying, and especially when the subject matter becomes more
common in the therapy room, right when there's big things
happening in the government in our country, that is going
to seep into you're processing and therapy as well. And
so people were asking, like, how do I maintain that
(18:05):
separation or a difference, how do I remain unbiased? And
I'm going to have some conversations about that because I
think it is not always the same answer. It can
be a little complicated, and it's our job to allow
space for all kinds of people to be welcome and
be heard. So I think it's important, and so I
think me saying that now is to share that that
(18:27):
is something that I think might add to this conversation. Right,
just because it's I'm going to talk about how to
do it as a therapist, it doesn't mean you can't
take that and apply that to life outside of the
role of a therapist, So look out for that if
you want some more on that topic. Keep in mind,
which kind of goes with what I'm saying. I'm not
going to be giving out or talking about my own
(18:48):
belief system. It's more about how to hold space for
the differences that are involved there. So again, I hope
this was helpful. You can send your feedback to Catherine
at You Need Therapy podcast. You can follow us at
You Need Therapy podcast and at kat van Buren, and
I will link that podcast that I was mentioning earlier
in our show notes. I hope you guys have the
(19:10):
day you need to have and I will be back
with you on Monday.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.