Com101 – A “No” Between Friends

Let’s say a proven friend tells us they feel hurt, and we crossed a boundary.  Let’s walk though enforcing a boundary and receiving a “no” between trusted friends.  This is so we can see how the conversation might unfold between people who have good intentions, healthy communication, and proven trust.  This adds another step to our receiving a “no” process, specifically, “it’s now a good time to talk?”

First, if we can give them our full attention, we do so.  If we can’t, we tell them when we can.  “Wow.  Okay.  Thank you for saying something.  This is a very important conversation and I want to give you my full attention.  My hands are full and my focus is split right now.  Can we talk as soon as I’m done with this?”  Notice we already thanked them, even though now is not a good time to talk.

We make it clear that their boundaries matter to us and we want to give them our full attention as soon as possible.  We don’t drop everything because that’s not how real life usually works.  Dropping everything is a people pleaser behavior that leads to conversations when we’re not truly present or emotionally able to receive them.  To put it bluntly, dropping everything every time someone has an issue is not showing ourselves the self-respect all humans deserve.

As part of this initial engagement, we know this proven friend will take care of themselves first if our roles were reversed.  They won’t split their focus when we come to them with a serious matter.  They will not drop everything because they also priorities taking care of themselves and their responsibilities.  However, they will always arrange to give us their full attention as soon as possible.  Again, this is a proven friend and both parties are careful not to abuse the trust involved with giving each other our full attention as soon as possible while also respecting that everyone is prioritizing their independent life.

Getting back to it, our proven friend tells us they feel hurt, and we crossed a boundary.  We arranged to have a check-in about it.  Once they have our full attention, we always thank them again for letting us know.  “Thank you for your honesty.”  “Thank you for taking care of yourself.”  We listen from a place of curiosity, and we repeat what they said back to them while seeking clarity.  We step into their shoes and validate where they are coming from.  We apologized if it’s warranted; and it’s probably warranted.  “I’m sorry, I didn’t know.”  “I’m sorry, you’ve said this before, and it happened again.  I did, in fact, screw up one of our agreements.”  We consider if it’s a reasonable request, since this is a proven friend, it probably is.  We take an action that is comfortable and safe for both parties.  “What can we do differently that will get both our needs met?”  In short, we give them 100% of our attention, we are grateful to hear their words, and we decide to do something different together.  Together, we are an example of safe-ask culture, and we encourage them to make us aware of their boundaries in the future.

There is a whole other part that involves having a healthy negotiation when competing commitments or competing needs are present.  That’s later in this series.  For now, we are talking about a situation where someone we know and trust to communicate in healthy ways and with healthy intentions has let us know of a boundary and made a reasonable request.  In this case, we thank them, we hear them, we feel them, we apologize, and we do things differently.  It’s easy when both people are connected, have trust, and have a commitment to healthy communication.

Here’s an example of boundaries being easy and going right, with a friend.

Example: Drunk Vibes

Friend: “Hey, is now a good time to talk?  Can we have a check-in.”

Us: “Oh.  Yeah, sure.  Let me just finish these dishes and give you my full attention.”

We’re thinking, “oh crap, what’s wrong?”  We catch ourselves trying to guess the conversation rather just letting our friend speak for themselves.  We do a timeout & check-in to make sure we are calm and we can just receive them rather than interrupt them, push against them, or anything like that.  When the dishes are done, we sit down with them.  Our emotions are at a 1.  Their emotions appear to be at a 1 as well.

Friend: “Hey, I’m a little hurt.  You arrived at my party drunk and shortly after, people started leaving.” 

They gave us an emotion without blame.  They attempted to give us a few facts, without blame or judgement.  “Drunk,” is a judgement, but we trust them and we’re committed to just listening right now.

Us: “Oh.  Thanks for saying something.” 

We thanked them for showing us safe-ask culture and we are trying to also be an example of safe-ask culture but our pulse is a little faster.  We’re a little confused and embarrassed and want to interrupt to say, “I wasn’t drunk.”  We don’t.  We take a breath, and we stick to just actively listening. 

Us: “If I’m hearing you correctly, from your point of view, I arrived at your party drunk and then people started leaving.  Did I get that right?”

We repeated it back for clarity and we successfully did not add any of our own narrative.  We turned an opinion into a fact by saying, “from your point of view.”  That is a fact, our friend’s opinion is that we were drunk.  We are not arguing their opinion, we are listening and clarifying facts.

Friend: “Yeah.  You were loud and bitter.  Shortly after that, people started leaving.”

We recognize loud and bitter are both subjective, that’s an opinion, but we try to just receive their point of view and not argue how things appeared to them at the time.

Us: “Oh.  If I’m hearing you correctly, from your point of view, I was loud and bitter, and people started leaving as a result.  Is that close?”

We stick to just repeating it all back for clarity.  Rather than arguing their judgement of how loud we were or whether we felt bitter, we clarify that this is what they were receiving from there point of view.  Us being drunk, loud, and bitter may or may not be true.  Them having a point of view that we were drunk, loud, and bitter is a fact.  We turned a judgement into a fact by clarifying that it’s an opinion from one person’s point of view.  We also could have said, “If I’m hearing you correctly, in your opinion, I was loud and bitter, and people started leaving as a result.  Is that close?”  Either way, this type of clarification allows us to repeat it back without saying we agree with them.  They have an opinion, that’s a fact.  We’re just repeating facts and what they said.  We’re also not arguing with them about their opinion.  We’re just trying to receive their message.

Friend: “Yes, that’s what I’m saying.” 

They’ve confirmed, we heard them correctly.  Now we can take the next step by seeing it all from their point of view, seeing how that feels, and letting them know we are doing it.

Us: “Wow, thanks for your honesty.  It makes sense to me now why you wanted to talk about the party.  I’d be upset too if a drunk person showed up and ruin my fun night.

After imagining what it would feel like, it’s obvious to us that it would be a crappy situation to be in.  Now that we think about it, the party did kind of end once we got there.  Were we actually drunk?

Us:  “I’m sorry.  I didn’t realize I was out of line.  It was not intentional.  I had a hard day at work, but that’s no excuse.  Excuses aren’t apologies.”

We start to offer an apology, but our emotions and ego trip us up.  Somehow, we find ourselves saying we had a hard day.  Saying anything about why it happened while apologizing is an excuse that makes the apology mean nothing.  Also, it’s not our turn to tell our side yet.  We made a mistake.  Mistakes happen.  We don’t have to be perfect we just have to catch ourselves, call it out, an own up to it.  We called out the words that accidently fell out of us as an excuse and owned up to it so it can dissolve.  It dissolves because we show them we realize we just made an excuse and excuses aren’t apologies.  We start over.  Do-overs are allowed when they are sincere. 

Us: “Let me start over.  It would suck to have someone show up to one of my parties drunk and have everyone start leaving because of it.  I’m sorry.  I didn’t realize I was out of line.  It was not intentional.  I’m sorry it happened.  I won’t let it happen again.”

We went back a step, we stepped back into their shoes.  We offer an apology, and we offer to do something different. 

Us: “In order to arrive drunk, you must have been driving drunk.  That’s a no for me.  I keep my space safe.  I get to decide what ‘too much’ and ‘drunk’ looks like in my space.  People who I feel have drank too much or are drunk are not welcome in my space.  Anyone arriving at any of my parties already drunk, especially if they drove themselves, are not welcome.  In the future, if someone arrives drunk, I will take their keys and call them a taxi.  If they arrive sober and get drunk, I will take their keys and call them a taxi.  And I may not invite them back again.  I want you to know, if you do it again, I won’t be inviting you to parties that have alcohol.  Sober events only.”

Oh, there was more.  Our friend just defined and informed us of a whole new boundary, complete with the actions they will take if anyone crosses it.  This was a very well formed and communicated boundary.  The friend’s future actions are clear.  They didn’t tell us to do anything, they simply stated this is how someone will lose access to their space.  Then they made it clear how this boundary relates to us, specifically.  After that, our behavior will decide the future.

Next, we start over with receiving them.  We thanked them for sharing this new boundary.  We repeated back what we heard for clarity. 

Us: “Thanks for your honesty.  I hear that you get to decide what is and is not safe in your space.  I hear that drunk driving is a very strong ‘no’ for you and if it happens again, you will take my keys, call me a cab, and I won’t be invited to these types of events anymore.” 

We didn’t go straight into an apology because they haven’t confirmed we got it right yet.

Friend: “Not just you, anyone.  And I’m giving you a pass here.  If I didn’t know you so well, I wouldn’t be talking to you like this, and I wouldn’t invite you back.”

We didn’t get it right.  They clarified what we missed.

Us: “Oh.  Yeah, you did just say this is how you would act if anyone showed up drunk or got drunk.  And you did say how you’d give me extra consideration.  Thank you for that.”

That was half repeating back and half thinking out loud.  We start over.

Us: “I hear that you get to decide what is and is not safe in your space.  I hear that drunk driving is a very strong ‘no’ for you and if it happens again, you will take anyone’s keys, call them a cab, and probably won’t invite them back.  You will also take keys and call a cab for anyone who drinks too much for your comfort in your space.  I’m also hearing that I’m getting special treatment because we are friends.  If I show up drunk again, I will only be invited to sober events.” 

Friend: Yes, exactly.

Us: Thank you for your honesty.  Thank you for letting me know and thank you for caring about my safety.  I would also be very upset and sacred if a friend was driving drunk.  Thank you for watching out for me and I’m very sorry I put you in that position at the party.  I will never let this happen again.”

We encourage safe-ask culture by thanking them again.  We put ourselves in their shoes and validate them again.  We give more gratefulness.  We apologize.  I agree to their boundary and make a commitment to respect it.

Friend: Thank you for hearing me. 

Our friend also encourages safe-ask culture.

Friend: Okay.  I’m complete.  Would you like to tell me a little more about what’s going on at work that’s got you so upset?

The boundary conversation is over.  A true friend would probably want to circle back and check-in on our current emotional state and life struggles.  If our friend just offered the microphone to us and ask if we wanted a turn to share.  If they hadn’t, this would be the moment to say, “hey, can I take a turn to share how things happened from my point of view?  Is now a good time to talk?”

A couple new things to notice, we converted opinions and judgments to facts rather than argue them.  “You were drunk, loud, and bitter,” is an opinion from one person’s point of view.  We turn judgements an criticisms into facts by clarifying, “from your point of view, I was drunk, loud, and bitter.”  This way we can state the facts without having to argue the opinion or being mistaken for agreeing with the opinion.

Another new thing to notice.  It’s never perfect.  It’s messy.  No one is perfect and our goal with healthy communication is not to be perfect.  Our goal is to call a timeout if emotions are above a 2.  Our goal is to strip out our monkey brain’s desire to introduce blame.  Our goal is to hear the other person, feel where they are coming from, strive to get everyone’s needs met, and build stronger relationships.