I'm watching a very long workshop with Marshall Rosenberg on youtube about nonviolent communication right now, and my feeling is pretty much Confused Whiplash. One second he's making a really good point and the next he's making claims that are completely incomprehensible to me, and I'm basically just yelling at the computer screen. (Which is not a thing I recommend that you do at the office btw.) So, is anyone familliar with this concept? What do you think about it? What is his basis for claims like that there are a set of universal needs that every person experiences, and everything you feel and want stems from those needs? And that conflicts can always be solved in a way that fulfils both parties' needs? And does he actually claim that there have been societies without the idea of dominance and that those societies have been completely nonviolent? (Show me a source plz!!!! I yell, shaking my fist at the screen.) Also: what do you think about the idea that you should never make value judgements about other people's behaviors? (Is he really even saying that?) Because the consequences to that seem pretty awful to me, at least when applied to situations where there is a clear power imbalance or one party actually intends to harm the other. And also: jfc I hate the idea that if you just have the right attitude you will never hear a slur again (you'll just feel sorry for the person who fails to express their needs so badly). Basically I have no idea what to think (and as mr Rosenberg would put it, I have a Need to understand stuff).
Upon your write-up I am already seeing flaws in the thing. So if you are questioning it, I think you are perfectly correct to do so. Let me rebut some of the questions: And that conflicts can always be solved in a way that fulfils both parties' needs? Nope. Case in point: me and my boyfriends, me and stepdad, me and my married narcissist None of these conflicts were solved in a way that fulfilled our needs. Nope. what do you think about the idea that you should never make value judgements about other people's behaviors? Bullshit. You're free to make as many value judgements as you want. Just keep in mind it means other people get to judge you too. And even if you don't make those judgements, other people will make them about you. The question is whether other people need to hear your judgements. I prefer to do most of my judging alone or to people who will not question me incessantly about my motivations. jfc I hate the idea that if you just have the right attitude you will never hear a slur again I know, right? If I refuse to fuck a guy and he calls me a slut, there is no way he'll not call me a slut when I keep refusing to fuck him. Jeez. *** I know some people think this thing is good, but not really? Like, nonviolent communication is not always an option. Sometimes you need to be violent. Sometimes it's what saves you. Also if anyone says "always", you're perfectly welcome to stop taking them seriously. The only thing always the same is death. Anything else? Probably an exception is to be found, or several.
Plus, there are ways of using the rules of NVC to attack or bait people. It doesn't force a good outcome even if everyone follows the rules. And it assumes that everyone's goals are fairly logical, reasonable things that aren't "I want to hurt this other person".
Yeah! That's always the thing I've found with NVC - it can work okay if you're using it in communication between people who all wish each other well and have the same ideologies and morals and so on, but as soon as you have the smallest amount of malice or misunderstanding or bigotry (etc etc etc) it completely breaks apart.
