Comment

Working Effectively with Anger — The Solution Might Surprise You

1.jpg

Anger seems to be all the rage these days (pun intended!), with many people in full-throated celebration of it. Rage and disdain have become acceptable expressions of anger. But are they effective?
 
The words anger, rage, and outrage are often used interchangeably but they are not the same. Anger is an emotion stemming from other emotions, including anxiety, despair, or frustration. I feel angry, for example, when something does not go as I expect and have planned for. My expectations have not been met.

Rage and the “dis- words” (disregard, disrespect, disdain), on the other hand, are expressions of anger. They are choices we make, without fully considering all of the choices available to us.
 
When we express outrage, we are choosing to shame another, and shaming rarely produces the results we want. Similarly, rage is an expression of anger that fills the space but is hard to work with. Disregard and unresponsiveness are frequently an avoidance of our own discomfort with a given situation. All of these responses are laden with judgment, usually without full knowledge and understanding of the complete picture.
 
The most effective way to deal with anger is to “look under the hood.” Examine why you feel as you do; not everyone feels the same for a given circumstance, and we all connect the dots differently. Consider your assumptions and what you do not know. Explore choices thoughtfully. In other words, work with the complexity and make intentional decisions about how to respond, keeping channels of communication open. By doing so, you are much more likely to achieve your intended aim, and also more likely to benefit from unexpected opportunities.

Many who read this post will nod and say: “Yes, that makes sense.” But mindfully attending to our emotions and responses is hard to put into practice without guidance. Coaching helps us to develop healthy and fruitful practices of reflection that lead to the outcomes we want. I have benefited enormously from the guidance of coaches and counselors over the years. We are all a work in progress, and we all benefit from coaching. (See our coaching services here, and particularly the quote by Atul Gawande.)
 
Anger is a natural emotion. How we respond to that anger is a choice. We have far more agency than we realize to modify a situation and create positive outcomes. Contact us to learn more.

———

Copyright © 2019 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

Comment

Populism: Will You Join, Resist, or Help Shape It?

colorful-tulips-flower-field.jpg

Much is being said these days about populism: the championing of the common man in opposition to the established elite. Some view its growth around the world with alarm, while others see it as a necessary check on entrenched politics.
 
Populism per se is not the problem. The real threat comes from what gets wrapped up with populism, such as authoritarianism, blind confidence in one’s point of view, a weak commitment to the truth, and/or minimal reflection and engagement with other ideas.
 
Populism can completely overturn a government structure, or re-shape it at the margins. It can lead to more equitable policies, or more reckless ones. What matters is how we work with it.
 
I invite you to help shape populism. Join a growing movement of ordinary people who are committed to building bridges of understanding through Better Angels, a non-profit organization committed to depolarizing America. I have followed this non-profit’s growth since its humble beginnings in late-2016, and I’m impressed enough to donate some of my time to moderating their workshops for free. This is a populist movement I am happy to join.
 
You can also make a difference by participating in one of our Engaging with Difference® workshops to learn a set of higher-level communication and leadership skills that transform interactions into creative and effective collaborations. These skills are broadly applicable to daily interactions, not just political discussions.

Whatever you choose to do, I hope you will engage with diverse viewpoints and reflect on them in new ways. This is an essential element of a healthy democracy.

———

Copyright © 2019 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

Comment

New Year Commitments

shutterstock_1203010096.jpg

Happy New Year! I hope that 2019 is full of interesting and meaningful connections for us all.
 
As you commit to some new resolutions, may I suggest a simple one? Ask more questions this year. Ask questions of yourself and of others, with gentleness and openness. Observe how often our conversations are predominantly filled with statements. We take turns stating what we think and any questions we ask are for simple clarification. I invite you to go a little deeper; inquire and explore with heartfelt respect—including of yourself. Why do you, or others, feel so strongly about something?
 
Asking questions helps to create space between our reaction and our thoughtful response, and in that space lies a wealth of insights. How we connect with each other—and how we connect with ourselves—is the main determinant of what we bring forth in our lives.
 
May the year be good for you and full of sweet surprises!

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

Comment

The Spirit of the Season

cardinals shutterstock_173896529.jpg

At this time of year (December), some people get anxious about the proper way to greet others. “Should I say Happy Holidays or Merry Christmas or what?”
 
The best way to make it a non-issue is to speak from the heart. It’s not about what you say but how you say it. The purpose of a greeting is to say: “I see you and want to give you my best wishes.” The purpose is to make a connection.
 
This isn’t about political correctness. It’s about awareness of the other and that the other person might celebrate something different (or the same thing differently) than we do.

When we say to a friend: “Hey, you must be so happy that your sports team won the game!” we are showing that we know what the other person cares about. So, too, with holiday greetings. When we know what another person celebrates (be it a holiday or a sports team), we honor that person by acknowledging it and greeting them appropriately. When we don’t know, a more generic greeting can convey the same good wishes. What matters is that we speak from the heart.
 
Greetings are a way to engage and connect. When you keep the focus there, the path forward is clear. At the root of it all, we are sharing joy.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

Comment

The Ripple Effect of our Efforts

DropofWater.png

Who is undermining the society we so cherish? The far left? The far right? Trump? The media? The internet? George Soros? The Koch Brothers? The list is endless, and everyone reading this post has someone or some group in mind (including me).
 
We may not agree on who to blame for the current state of affairs, nor on what is the greatest threat we face. But perhaps we can agree on an essential step forward: we need to be talking with each other more.

Consider this: Research has shown that approximately 50% of communication takes place through body language, 40% through tone of voice, and 10% through words. This means that if we are trying to understand “the other” through what we read online, the field is wide open for misinterpretation.

Furthermore, many editorial or op-ed writers in reputable news sources such as the Wall Street Journal and New York Times claim to understand the motivations and mindset of opposing views; they explain authoritatively exactly how twisted the thinking is on the other side. Because my views are in the middle and I spend a lot of time talking with people on both sides, I see how wrong many of their statements are. Sadly, these skewed views of “the other” spread like wildfire and shape our understanding of the world in which we live.

As a society, we are weakened by our diminished ability to talk meaningfully about our differences. This, in my view, is a significant threat. We give away our power and agency when we buy into the “otherizing” that is practiced daily in both public and private spheres, and by assuming we understand the other better than we do.
 
We need to talk to each other about what we care about, rather than about who said what to whom on TV or the internet. We need to stop discussing their views and motivations and instead talk about our own. We need to build (or re-build) relationships, face to face.

Every drop of effort will have a ripple effect, beyond what we see. A way forward rests with each and every one of us.

Who will you reach out to?

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

2 Comments

The Onus is on the Listener

nature-plant-fruit-flower-orange-food-1034885-pxhere.com.jpg

Many people think that good communication refers to how we speak. In fact, the quality of a conversation pivots on how we listen. Listening attentively is not enough. We also need to consider how we interpret what we hear.

When I say: “I believe in the value of assimilation,” how do you interpret that? In some circles, the reaction will be: “But of course!” In other circles, my statement might elicit a more horrified reaction. Why the difference?

Contrary to popular belief, the difference is not about politics and values. It’s about interpretation. If we do not pause to consider how we hear something and the context into which we put it, and if we do not ask for clarification regarding the context of the speaker, we perpetuate polarization.

When I was growing up (a long time ago!), there were only two designations for how people adapted to new countries and cultures: either they assimilated, or they did not. Since then, academics have developed more nuanced categories: assimilation, integration, separation, and marginalization. In this framework, assimilation now has a more negative connotation: it means discarding one’s original cultural identity to adopt a new one. The more socially acceptable word to use these days is integration: an individual maintains previous cultural beliefs and traditions and engages appropriately in the new culture.

I have assimilated and/or integrated into a wide range of new cultures and environments since the age of 6 (with varying degrees of success), as did both of my parents. Before you react to my use of the word assimilate, ask me what the word means to me. Ask me about my context.

To reduce polarization, start listening differently.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

2 Comments

Comment

A Trans-Atlantic Dialogue of Note

Milan.png

Francesco Magnocavallo is the Digital Editorial Director of Hearst Magazines Italia, based in Milan, and awhile back he stumbled upon our website for People Beyond Politics.™ He and I began a conversation that resulted in an article he wrote and published in the Italian edition of Elle magazine. (Both the Italian and English versions are available in the link below.)
 
Obviously, I’m happy about the recognition for the work we are doing. But on another level, I’m really delighted to see how our dialogue expanded understanding in both of us. This is what happens when we are truly open to inquiry and dialogue: all parties gain new and valuable insights; it is not a one-way street.
 
What I found most interesting in Francesco’s article is the way he sees creativity: it is inextricably linked to openness and complexity (or openness to complexity). He writes that we become more creative when we take the time to understand complex narratives. He offers a thought-provoking perspective on plurality, empathy, and creativity, and his article is well worth reading. Click here for Francesco's article, in Italian or English.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

Comment

Engaging with Difference

elephants-1043035_1920.jpg

Seek the Truth

Seek the truth, speak the truth, and be open to hearing the truth. This is an essential pillar of democracy—and of relationships in general.

In the parable of the blind men and the elephant, each man is touching a different part of the elephant, and each tries to extrapolate from what he experiences to explain the full truth of what is before them. The man touching the tusk says the elephant is like a spear; the one holding the tail says it’s like a rope; and the one touching the side affirms that it is like a wall. All of them insist that their point of view must drive the conclusion, but each reality is only a piece of a larger truth.

A commitment to the truth requires us to consider what we do not know, and to continually seek new information to gain an understanding of the whole. It is impossible to know the truth without engaging with a range of views in a meaningful, sustainable manner.

photo.cultivate.the.space.between.us.jpg

Cultivate the Space Between Us

How we engage with others influences the degree to which we expand our understanding of the many facets that make up the whole truth. It doesn’t matter how far apart our views are from each other, and it is immaterial whether we engage in debate, discussion, or dialogue. What matters is the quality of the space we cultivate between us.

My best political conversations have been with people whose views are far apart from mine, but we engage in discussion in a way that makes space for the dignity of opposing views. We may express our strongly held opinions with passion and conviction, and challenge and debate each other, but we do not convey contempt (subtly or overtly) for other perspectives.

Conversely, some of my worst political conversations have been with people whose views are closer to mine in theory, but the discussion deteriorates when one or both of us speak about entire groups of people derisively (e.g., Republicans; Democrats; alt-right; socialist left; etc.). The underlying scorn weakens the interaction, even if it is directed at people outside the conversation.

In other words, disdain kills the discussion, not the gap in views.

Untitled.jpg

Resist the Siren Call of Silos

Engaging with other viewpoints takes effort, and sometimes it falls flat. Resist the urge to return to silos and echo chambers. Yes, being with our own tribe is more comfortable, but there is only one way to expand our understanding of the world in which we live: engage with different viewpoints. Read broadly. Find writers you like from a wide variety of publications, and not just newspapers; novels work, too. Talk with a range of people about views, experiences, hopes, and fears—yours and theirs. Have the courage to step outside of your comfort zone, over and over.

There is so much to talk about without even once touching on Trump or the left/right divide. Yes, both Trump and our divide dominate the news cycle, and people are either very happy or very unhappy about what they hear, but we are all more complex and nuanced than the binary divide.

Voting is binary; we are not. There is so much we can build upon.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

Comment

One Thing We Can All Agree On

unnamed.png

“I don’t recognize the country that I love.”

I have heard this statement many times, from people on the left and the right, and I certainly feel it myself. Granted, we all have different reasons for this sentiment, but it does lead one to ask: What are we going to do about it?

I see all kinds of responses. There is increased tribalism, where we fret and vent within our own circles. There is withdrawal from the news because it becomes too draining to follow. And there is resistance and protest, which did not start in the Trump presidency, but long before.

In the short term, all of these responses seem to make sense because they are soothing and/or energizing in some way. They give us a sense that we have control over our lives. But in the long term, they significantly weaken the bonds that make a society a cohesive, functioning unit because they separate us.

Here’s a radical thought:

How about engaging with each other with the empathy that we tend to reserve only for those who think as we do?

Take a risk. Reach out to someone who sees the world differently than you do and have a cup of coffee together. Ask what s/he is feeling and thinking, and why. Peel back the layers to find out what lies underneath; don’t assume you know. Inquire with open-ended questions. Let go of your desire to persuade, to opine, to be heard. In this moment, just inquire, listen, and keep inquiring with curiosity until you understand the other.

This is where our collective power lies. Engaging with difference® is how we can shape the world we live in to include each other. It is how we ensure that we continue to live in a country of laws and compassion. We cannot survive with just laws or just compassion; we need both. And we need each other.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

Comment

Why I Do What I Do

Some think that People Beyond Politics™ (PBP) is about politics. It’s not. It is about people and how we understand each other when we have different perspectives. Only when we know how to explore each other’s frame of reference and context can we discuss politics (or any topic) in a meaningful way.

Last week I posted a video on our Facebook page from a TEDx Talk given by Paula Stone Williams, a transgendered woman who shares her insights about living both as a man and a woman in our society. At first glance, her talk might appear to be unrelated to People Beyond Politics™ – but it is spot-on. The takeaways, as I see them, are not just the points she makes about the topic, but also the way her grace and humor draw us in and invite us to listen. It is a powerful example of engaging one’s audience effectively, even on a controversial subject.

I have spent a lifetime learning about the many dimensions of communicating across differences, and I have seen the positive impact of incorporating this learning – both on myself and on others. These leadership and communication skills have transformed my life: they have reduced friction and frustration, and created a multitude of new opportunities for connections, growth, and change. I am convinced that these skills are crucial to making teams and policies more coherent and effective. In short, they are an essential ingredient for making the world a better place. This is why I do what I do.

I hope you will consider subscribing to our newsletter and participating in this growing community of people who come from all walks of life. We are from across the political spectrum, but we share a desire to build bridges, expand understanding, and make a difference, each in our own way.

This is where I wrote this month's blog-post and newsletter. :-)

This is where I wrote this month's blog-post and newsletter. :-)

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

4 Comments

It Starts with Kindness

unnamed (5).jpg

I suspect that many will see the title here and think: “I’m a kind person; I don’t need to read more.” Wait; don’t go! Please read on. I am not talking about being kind when everything is humming along smoothly. I’m talking about the pivotal importance of being kind even when we feel angry or offended, and how to do it.

Kindness lubricates the interlocking pieces of a strong democracy or cohesive working group. Many other elements are crucial, too, but without kindness, persistent friction corrodes the mechanisms and reduces the effectiveness of the overall system. Kindness is an essential element for creating an environment in which everyone can thrive.

Equally important, we cannot understand those with whom we disagree without kindness, because understanding requires us to be open-minded and open-hearted. We hear (and are heard) when there is a generosity of spirit, even as we challenge certain ideas.

Many will be quick to say: "But I cannot be kind to someone who says something reprehensible! That would condone such behavior." Of course, there are instances when we may choose not to engage because we find a statement or action to be so egregious that it does not deserve recognition. But before we condemn, are we sure we have understood that person correctly? Does the other person agree that we have understood correctly?

There is an art to resisting, disagreeing, or standing firm while being kind, and it takes practice to develop. This is not about turning the other cheek; it is about staying in alignment with our own moral compass and leading from within, rather than living our lives in reaction to others.

Certainly, it is challenging to be our best selves in every circumstance, but we get better the more we do it. Personal Leadership (PL) is a set of defined practices that helps develop these skills. Most importantly, when it is in play it shifts the dynamic of the interaction and changes what we put out into the world.

The more we practice kindness in our everyday lives, the more easily it will come forth in times of stress or disagreement. When we think about kindness received, it puts us in a positive frame of mind. When we share affirmative stories, we inspire each other. This is not Pollyanna speaking; it actually works.

Right now we spend a lot of time sharing outrage, dismay, and grievances. We form tribal alliances based on what we agree is wrong—in Washington, in classrooms, in our communities. Let's rebalance a bit, and also share stories of unexpected kindness.

We can shift the energy of our environments, one interaction at a time, and I invite you to help make that happen.

Would you be willing to briefly share your story of receiving an unexpected kindness in the Comments section below? It will inspire others, and it deserves to be shared. And it would make my day. Thank you!  :-)

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

4 Comments

5 Comments

A Different Way of Listening

unnamed (7).jpg

When we listen, we tend to listen for something—something to respond to. We listen for an idea we like or dislike, or an experience we can relate to. We listen to provide support and affirmation. We listen for the hook that either engages us and draws us in, or repels us and pushes us back. We listen ready to react.

This kind of listening makes sense in a formal debate, in which two sides are arguing opposing points and listening for weaknesses and opportunities in the statements of the other side. But such an approach constrains real dialogue, where the intent is to create connection and expand understanding.

We naturally process what we hear through our own framing and experiences. We hear what is important to us and ignore that which does not resonate. It is like being given a picture and cropping out what is irrelevant—to us. But it might be essential to the speaker.

A perfect example is when Mary Kissel of the Wall Street Journal interviewed Robert Murray of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, a conservative think-tank based in Alberta, shortly after Justin Trudeau was elected Prime Minister of Canada in October 2015. She kept framing her questions in terms of taxes even though he repeatedly replied that this election was more about values. They were like ships passing in the night—purportedly in the same conversation, but actually not. Her questions were entirely through her frame of reference, which yielded little of value. If she had engaged in more open inquiry (“What do you mean?”) it would have offered greater insights.

Other examples are from our everyday lives, when talking with friends or colleagues. We quickly exclaim: “I know just what you mean!” when in reality we may not fully understand. Or we try to offer comfort for emotional distress by putting it in a different context (“It’s not really that bad; look at it this way…”). Instead, we can simply say: “You are sad about “x” situation; what does that mean for you?”

Jesper Juul, a Danish child-development specialist, makes this same point in reference to children’s drawings. When we say to a child: “What a beautiful/cool picture you have drawn!” we are unconsciously judging both the picture and the child’s capabilities. Instead, Juul suggests that we acknowledge the picture and ask neutral questions: “I see you have drawn a picture. Tell me about it; what is it about?” Not only is this what every child needs to hear; it is what every one of us needs to hear. We want someone to simply hold the space so we can express ourselves from the context we inhabit.

Transformative listening means having an awareness of the frame of reference we bring to the table, and the humility to set it aside temporarily. It means cultivating openness and inquiry, sitting with ambiguity, and letting clarity come slowly. While this approach may not be relevant to every situation, it is applicable to many. It transforms the meaning and trajectory of an interaction and gives rise to new understanding.

I often find it challenging to listen this way because I love to jump in with my thoughts and perspective, but it gets easier with practice. I keep at it because it gives me more interesting conversations. Try it and let me know what you think.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

5 Comments

4 Comments

The Quest for Purity

Many journalists have written about outrage being the emotion du jour – or as Hugh Hewitt puts it, our current addiction. A few months ago, he wrote:

“…like the human pulse, it is nowadays a sign of life. Not to be outraged is to be almost disqualified in the eyes of many from being a participant in politics, even though the perpetually outraged fall across the political spectrum. Not only can they not imagine anyone not being outraged, they also can’t imagine any kind of outrage save their own.”

There are certainly plenty of reasons to be outraged. But being in a constant state of elevated anger, from one issue to the next, is ultimately self-defeating. It drives us into binary thinking not only about issues, but about people. (You are with us or against us.) And once in that space, we lose our capacity to distinguish nuance, texture, and difference; we shrink the gray zone, which is where we need to be operating; and most importantly, we squander the opportunity to gather new insights, expand our understanding, and build a viable, inclusive path forward.

Outrage can be valuable, when used judiciously. But when it is always turned on, it seems to bring forth a disquieting quest for purity. There is a growing intolerance of anyone whose thoughts, actions, and statements do not meet our criteria, as evaluated through our own lens. We don’t make room for the possibility that we may have misinterpreted someone, or not fully understood the multi-layered and complex context from which that person was speaking.

On a recent radio program, the left-leaning author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie described an experience of being misinterpreted by those within her own political tribe, and being taken down publicly. She said: “The Left eat their own…” and then commented further on the intolerance of perceived variances in thinking.

Two weeks later, on a different radio program titled “Words You Can’t Say,” I heard the same statement made on the Right, by Dodie Horton, a Republican state senator. She said: “I was amazed to find that Republicans eat their own.”

In both cases, it had to do with language and a misinterpretation of a particular choice of words. In both cases, these people were hounded and intimidated for an interpretation that was imposed on them.

There is a disturbing blindness to this quest for purity. When we insist on processing what we hear through our own frame of reference, without considering and exploring the frame of the other, we miss complexity, nuance, and possibilities for creative solutions. In our well-meaning desire to elevate and improve our society, we inadvertently kill off that which will help it grow.

So, the next time someone says something that offends you, or that you find discordant in some way, ask an open-ended question before making a statement. It is harder to do than you think, because we are so used to responding with a statement (and often, a judgment).

Until and unless we develop the skill to explore someone else’s context in all its layers of complexity, we will miss one opportunity after another to broaden our understanding of the world we live in, and to expand our capacity to effect positive change for all.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

4 Comments

Comment

Inquiring Minds

Last week I gave a short presentation and then engaged in conversation with about 10 young men at the SigEp fraternity at Northwestern University. Their thoughtful and intelligent questions made the experience richly rewarding for me, because I learned from their inquiries and comments even as I shared my own knowledge.

Among other things, several of them suggested that I look up and watch Jordan Peterson being interviewed by Cathy Newman on BBC television. That interview has indeed gone viral with over 4 million views, in large part because Newman consistently—and antagonistically—misrepresented Peterson’s views.

The best analysis I have seen so far is by Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic.  I recommend reading his essay. I have also tuned in to commentary by many others, available in print and on YouTube, and found several astute assessments.

As Conor Friedersdorf says so well, and I paraphrase: The effects of the interviewer’s approach are harmful because anyone who watches and accepts the interviewer’s characterizations will believe that Peterson holds views that are simply not true. Friedersdorf adds that we need to get better at accurately characterizing the views of folks with differing opinions. Amen to that!

Although Cathy Newman spoke of wanting to understand Peterson better, she gave no evidence of it. It appeared that she entered the TV studio with fixed ideas, and that her intent was not to enlighten her audience about Peterson’s views, but rather, to inform them of her own.

To truly understand the views of others, intelligently, we must explore and understand not only the ideas themselves, but also the framing and context in which those views sit. That means being willing to unlock ourselves from our own framing. We may still disagree, but a more holistic understanding of the other expands our own worldview, and it may even make space for common ground.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

Comment

A Mind-bending Concept

unnamed (1).png

Emotions play a large role in any discussion, including political discussions. We react with excitement when someone shares our view, and outrage when a person expresses a view we find offensive. We may also feel disdain, amusement, joy, anxiety and many other emotions when in conversation with others, whether we show it or not. We feel entirely justified in our emotional reactions because we are defending our worldview, which is deeply rooted in our beliefs about right and wrong.

Several social scientists (most notably, Jonathan Haidt) have shown that emotions play an important role in our sense of morality, and that emotions and morality influence our rational arguments far more than we realize.

Now, some fascinating new research reveals that our brains create our emotions in a predictive process based on past experiences. Lisa Feldman Barrett, a social scientist and professor of psychology, recently published her research findings in a book titled How Emotions are Made. She also expounds on the topic in a TED Talk. (I have watched the Talk but not yet read the book.)

“Emotions that seem to happen to you are actually made by you.”

“Your brain does not react to the world. Using past experience, your brain predicts and constructs your experience of the world.”

These ideas are similar to the philosophical underpinnings of meditation, yoga, and some East-Asian teachings, which suggest that our thoughts and emotions are separate from us; we can observe them, view them through another lens, and perhaps come to a different conclusion.

Barrett seems to take this a step further. Where Buddhism says that we can choose how to interpret a situation and how to respond, Barrett is saying that we can also influence what emotion we create in the first place. This is a mind-bending concept, and the implications are profound. We have far more agency than we realize, and we can make intense discussions more fruitful with a new approach and a bit of practice.

I look forward to reading the book and learning more. In the meantime, I am practicing greater awareness of what I feel and how I interpret. Then again, there are some situations that are fine just as they are. Today I was moved to tears as I listened on the radio to the wistful and wishful lyrics of the Beatles’ song, Imagine. I have no idea why my brain created these emotions; it intrigues me, but I’m willing to just let it be a mystery.

———

Copyright © 2018 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment

1 Comment

What I Learned at TED Women 2017

Hosts Pat Mitchell & Kelly Stoetzel speak at TEDWomen 2017 — Bridges, November 1-3, 2017, Orpheum Theatre, New Orleans, Louisiana. Photo: Ryan Lash / TED

Hosts Pat Mitchell & Kelly Stoetzel speak at TEDWomen 2017 — Bridges, November 1-3, 2017, Orpheum Theatre, New Orleans, Louisiana. Photo: Ryan Lash / TED

Joan Blades (  Living Room Conversations  ) & John Gable (  All Sides  ) speak at TEDWomen 2017 — Bridges, November 1-3, 2017, Orpheum Theatre, New Orleans, Louisiana. Photo: Stacie McChesney / TED

Joan Blades (Living Room Conversations) & John Gable (All Sides) speak at TEDWomen 2017 — Bridges, November 1-3, 2017, Orpheum Theatre, New Orleans, Louisiana. Photo: Stacie McChesney / TED

I recently returned from the TEDWomen conference in New Orleans. TEDWomen is a three-day conference about the power of women and girls to be creators and change-makers. The stories on stage were inspiring, and the connections we made in the gathering spaces were also enriching. We were there to learn from each other as much as from those who took the stage, so we did not hesitate to strike up conversations with people we did not know. The entire three-day conference felt like a warm embrace. 

Since returning I have wondered how we can foster more of that same trust and openness in our daily lives. As I reflect on what works and what doesn’t, I realize that it doesn’t take much. We just need to ask questions that cause the other to reflect before answering.

A friend once asked me in an e-mail: “What is lighting up your life these days?” This question yields a very different response than if she had asked: “So, how are you?” With the former question, I reflect on what is meaningful to me and share it. With the latter question, I tend to offer a litany of complaints. (“This happened, and then that happened…”)

We spend so much time actively thinking about how we present ourselves to the world; and with friends and family we tend to unload. Imagine if we spent just as much time inquiring about what is vital and meaningful to another person. It doesn’t have to be a touchy-feely question. It simply needs to be an open-ended inquiry that makes space for the vitality of the other to bubble forth.

Need suggestions on open-ended questions? Consider The 36 Questions that Lead to Love and in your mind replace the word “love” with “connection.” The other person does not need to be a potential romantic partner, nor do you have to ask all 36 questions. The idea is simply to ask questions that open the door for the essence of the other to enter the space. This is where connection and possibility take place.

Teresa Njoroge (  Clean Start  ) speaks at TEDWomen 2017 — Bridges, November 1-3, 2017, Orpheum Theatre, New Orleans, Louisiana. Photo: Stacie McChesney / TED

Teresa Njoroge (Clean Start) speaks at TEDWomen 2017 — Bridges, November 1-3, 2017, Orpheum Theatre, New Orleans, Louisiana. Photo: Stacie McChesney / TED

Stephanie Speirs (  Solstice  ) speaks at TEDWomen 2017 — Bridges, November 1-3, 2017, Orpheum Theatre, New Orleans, Louisiana. Photo: Stacie McChesney / TED

Stephanie Speirs (Solstice) speaks at TEDWomen 2017 — Bridges, November 1-3, 2017, Orpheum Theatre, New Orleans, Louisiana. Photo: Stacie McChesney / TED

———

Copyright © 2017 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

1 Comment

Comment

Anger and Kindness

Dr. Arun Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, recently spoke about the value of anger to prompt us to action. He emphasized that the value is derived from being able to channel the anger without aggression, and that daily self-reflection on what we can do improve ourselves is what gives us the power to improve the world. Wise words indeed!

In our era of outrage, far too many people seem to be blinded by anger, and even to cultivate it. Their actions appear intended to draw attention to themselves rather than to effect meaningful, positive change. I am dismayed to see the pride with which so many people proudly proclaim that they “called someone out.” To what end, I ask? Is the targeted person likely to change his/her behavior in response to being publicly shamed? Unlikely, I believe.

“Be the change you want to see in the world” has been interpreted in many ways, often with concrete actions to build, create, or transform something. I think it also means finding ways to be kind, compassionate, and patient in our everyday lives, even with those who drive us crazy – such as colleagues, family members or service providers. It means seeing the dignity of the other and speaking to it, from one’s own place of dignity.

All too often, we explain away our outbursts or aggression as a response to what someone else did or said. But this means that we live our lives in reaction to others, rather than from our own core. A crucial question to ask ourselves is not “What do I want to do in the world?” but “How do I want to be in the world, regardless of what anyone else does?” I know from my own personal experience that developing this type of grounding can be challenging at times, but I also know that it is well worth the effort because of the way it transforms relationships.

Many of us want to make the world a better place, and schools try to instill this aspiration in students. It is heartening to see young people apply themselves to innovative thinking to help those in need, or who address injustice with a problem-solving mindset. We need this. But it is equally important to cultivate kindness. I believe a kind person can generate more valuable change in our society than an outraged person, even when addressing injustices. A kind person is not a push-over, but someone who has a grounded awareness of self and others.

You can read the short article about Dr. Arun Gandhi’s talk here.

———

Copyright © 2017 Sharon V. Kristjanson. All rights reserved.

Comment