People would rarely intend to patronise - if they were aware they were doing it they would generally stop or attempt to stop.
I know I can be patronising - my son tells me so . Mind you I had to ask him first - am I patronising in any way with you? - so I was delighted when he layed it out to me - it was a very easy correction, thankfully. Now he is very quick to tell me
So if anyone here every experiences me as patronising - I want to be told - ok
I know Iâm still prone to patronisation because somethimes I react to people who take the âteacherâ or âsuperiorâ role - if it bugs me then of course its a projection and means I have self-inquiry to do.
This happens sometimes on the forum here, so we have the opportunity to grow with this.
But is it fair to always, only introject this kind of thing - would it be more fair to also inform the other person of their patronisation so they will be more aware of it ( in a nice way of course)
As I said above, I would appreciate people informing me, so maybe others feel the same way?
Of course this begs the question can one take the teacher role without being patronising and of course the answer is yes.
So how is this done? any clues?
Hi, Sparkle,
I think Yogani is a good example of a teacher who does not come across as patronising. Perhaps this comes from teaching from a place of love, as oppposed to an ego trip.
namaste,
Joe
Iâve done this too, and have recently made a correction. I think what you said makes sense - to be straightforward, but nice, âIâm not sure youâre aware that youâre being patronising or condescending, but I understand your perspectiveâŚâ
Thanks for the topic, Sparkle:
VIL
Sparkle said:
But is it fair to always, only introject this kind of thing - would it be more fair to also inform the other person of their patronisation so they will be more aware of it ( in a nice way of course)
Some people, for sure, do make the faux pas of pre-emptively assuming the teaching role. It seems to be more common among people who are new to the forum and have little clue about how much experience people here have, or have little clue how strong some yogis here are, even those who donât have so much experience (yet).
I agree with what youâve said between the lines Louis, that if weâre actually upset about this, itâs largely our own problem.
At the same time, I do think itâs fine and good to call people on it, for their sake and that of the community. But we should be careful, as we are in any socially corrective action. Iâd be less inclined to actually call âpatronizationâ, more likely to just ask some pointed questions or point some related things out. They might best be about actual behavior, not âpatronizationâ itself.
An effective thing to say might be âYou seem to be assuming I have very little experience on this matter. Why?â. Or, a little more pointedly, âThankyou for that teaching, though it wasnât one I required right now, since I went through that 24 years ago.â
Or even simpler still, âThanks, but I donât need instructions on that right nowâ.
I hope youâre all writing this down.
Sparkle said:
Of course this begs the question can one take the teacher role without being patronising and of course the answer is yes. So how is this done? any clues?
Hi Sparkle,
As we know, patronizing can be a way of displaying supremacy in some way or another. Sometimes I think it can be taken that way by a recipient, even with no specific intent from the other person. But I also think that patronizing behavior can be an expression of intent to show off oneself in some way, even if this intent is not quite conscious. And, patronizing can also be conscious and deliberate, and serve as a milder and more subtle form of put-down than being obviously rude. So, itâs important that others remind a person if this happens, like VIL and David suggest.
When it comes to acting as teacher, I think itâs legitimate when dealing with specific subjects that a person knows a lot about, or has a lot of experience in. So, in the forum, many have stepped in regularly as teachers on a temporary basis. And, in life in general, people are teachers for each other in many areas. The problem comes in if someone sees themselves as teacher in general for other people, and is not open to the reality that they also have things to learn from others, that there are areas of life where they also need to be students. So, the teacher-student roles have to switch back and forth, depending on situation and what is being dealt with. Even a school teacher must be open to learn from the students.
I think one way teaching without patronizing can be done is if the emphasis of the interaction deals with the knowledge itself to be conveyed, rather than focusing on the fact that the recipient needs to know or understand it. That in itself will keep the attention more on the subject matter, and the recipient will usually be more open to it if they feel that they have the option to consider it, rather than feeling that somebody is trying to impose it on them.
In general, I think if there is genuine desire to help another person, teaching will usually not come across as patronizing. The desire to help must of course be balanced with discernment to let the other person learn by their own experience as well, so the teaching doesnât become excessive.
Iâve been getting patronised alot lately. And I deserve it because I have done it myself before. The sad fact is I never knew it was so annoying until I was on the receiving end.
Weaver said:
I think one way teaching without patronizing can be done is if the emphasis of the interaction deals with the knowledge itself to be conveyed, rather than focusing on the fact that the recipient needs to know or understand it.
I agree that this is one of the central keys. When the âpatronizationâ occurs, the patronizer is often operating from a hidden (and unconscious) agenda of striking a pose, which demonstrates a âsuperiorâ position. That by its nature is a straying from the subject matter.
(Again, I hope you are all writing this down, although [cough] I canât say Iâm hearing the clatter of pencils and flutter of copy-books that I want to hear. )
The focus on the fact that the recipient needs to understand it, or is the learner, is often arising from the hidden agenda weâre speaking of, rather than a simple helpulness. Whenever someone asks us directions on the street, we donât typically make some sort of hay out of ourselves being in the teaching role, and the other person a learner. Weâre simply helpul.
Hi John,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on patronizing. I just want to assure you that I did not have you or any other person in the forum in mind with what I said, and I doubt that is the reason Sparkle or anyone else has written about the subject, except for some people referring to themselves. I think it can be good to discuss subjects like this anyway, to get a broader view of what others think, and possibly to learn something for better interaction in the forum.
Thanks for all the great posts.
VIL said: [quote]
âIâm not sure youâre aware that youâre being patronising or condescending, but I understand your perspectiveâŚâ
[/quote]Did you mean by this, that you experienced my post as being patronising and condescending or was it a general statement??
David said [quote]
Thankyou for that teaching, though it wasnât one I required right now, since I went through that 24 years ago.â
[/quote]I like that one too but maybe prefer:
Thanks for the teaching ^(&^%$&@~}{+><?^&$^&^%&^%)(*&^%$ÂŁ%$ÂŁ
(yes, writing it all down David bow bow )
Weaver said: [quote]
I think one way teaching without patronizing can be done is if the emphasis of the interaction deals with the knowledge itself to be conveyed, rather than focusing on the fact that the recipient needs to know or understand it.
[/quote]
I agree with what David said about this and would suggest the other way is to speak only out of oneâs direct experience.
We can do this in two ways:
One way is to make it personal and portray ones actual experience relating to the subject matter.
The other is to draw from oneâs personal experience and relate it, as matter of fact knowledge, in the way Weaver explains above.
John, no I didnât have you in mind when posting this
It has more come from my own working with it over the past while and finding it very useful in my communications in general.
What Chiron said "Iâve been getting patronised alot lately. And I deserve it because I have done it myself before. The sad fact is I never knew it was so annoying until I was on the receiving end.
Rings a bell for me, this is how I discovered it in myself. Iâm sure Chiron would agree, when we discover it like this it shows the great benefit of recognising and working with our projections.
I suppose little inclusions such as: in my opinion, in my view, for what its worth etc etc, can help normalise a potentially patronising post.
Sparkle, itâs exactly as weaver said, and was a personal observation that I recognize, although my intention was always wanting to be helpful.
I just recently read this one interaction that I had with Jim and His Karma, yogani and Shanti, where I really talked down to Jim like he was a child and didnât even know it! Itâs kind of humorous, since he was SO patient and understanding, as was yogani and Shanti, and overlooked my shortcoming, regardless. I kind of look at it now as them seeing me as a beautiful budding little petunia working itself out from between a rocky crag (blink blink
LOL). Anyway, Iâll take the negative and make it positive. It helps me get through the day. Since I usually beat myself up for not being perfect too).
Anyway, I meant nothing toward you or John, although I have recognized a few others doing exactly as I have done. So what I also get from this is to do exactly what was done with me and be patient and understanding and compassionate.
Also, I loved davidâs humor. (LOL) A good lesson not to make a big deal out of it either.
Namaste:
VIL
Wanting to help is in itself actually very patronising. You have already categorized the person as being somehow lower or in lack or lesser than you - thatâs why you feel you have the power to help in the first place.
Of course that is the case in many situations, and helping by itself is not wrong when itâs being asked for. The problem is when itâs not being asked for, but the need is defined by the âhelperâ. Thatâs patronising. Byron Katie is totally against âhelpingâ!
Being overly kind and soft can be very patronising and diminish the person in a subtle way. Being overly motherly can be a way to put somebody down.
Whenever someone acts in a patronizing way toward me (not necessarily here on the forum), I recognize their need to feel important, and try not to judge it. Itâs not such a big deal - theyâre just insecure, thatâs all. So am I. When we react to another personâs superior posturing, then itâs just 2 egos clashing, and it becomes a ridiculous exchange. But if we can see the patronizing in a compassionate light and not get hung up in it - essentially just dismiss it - then the superior/inferior positions disappear. Usually. Ironically, by having compassion for the patronizing person, we are ourselves become silently patronizing. If only they knew.
Hi all,
I find it really patronizing when people say they are really against helping, and then spend their whole life helping people. I find that kind of thing so unnecessary.
Christi
Christi, she is only trying to make us aware of how subtle the ego works. Even helping - seen as something unselfish - can actually be very selfish.
But I agree - all the sages says âI donât do anythingâ and then they do A LOT! You can stay exactly as you are - but Iâm here to help you alter your ways!
Christi said:
I find it really patronizing when people say they are really against helping, and then spend their whole life helping people. I find that kind of thing so unnecessary.
Yeah. What we have here (if EMC is right) is that BK has quietly defined âhelpingâ to mean âhelping, with the need defined by the helperâ. I donât know much about BK, so I donât know if EMC is right about this. It doesnât really matter whether BK herself is doing it or not there is a pattern here which is common.
Letâs say that X defines âhelpingâ in such a way. That would be an unfortunate misuse of language â that connotation has essentially been imposed by the spiritual teacher in question. Itâs a meaning they may impose on other people. You could label that practice, semantic imposition.
Unfortunately, I have to say, when Advaitans meet yogis and there is some friction and disagreement, when you unpack it, there is often semantic imposition going on on the part of the Advaitans. The semantic impositions may be around words like âenligthenmentâ or âpracticeâ. Semantic imposition is not necessarily patronization itself, but itâs in the same spectrum â youâll observe that the semantic imposition is always done in a way that seems to give the Advaitan an apparent position of greater knowledge â they have attached specialized meanings to things that make them seem to have access to some amazing AHA insights that make everyone else (the yogis) wrong.
But when you unpack it all, you may find that the position of âgreater knowledgeâ is only apparent. Unfortunately, it takes a certain amount of familiarity with enlightenment to see through such stuff, and beginners are at the mercy these sort of language-games.
I donât mean that as a slur against Advaitans â only against the playing of such games, whether conscious or unconscious.
John C said:
but I would rather be considered just obnoxious rather than condescending or presumptuous or especially patronizing.
I donât think anyone was thinking of you either. Obnoxious and condescending are not the same thing (though it is possible to be both of course).
I may be off track here, but I feel that anyone who writes contrary to or takes issue with AYP/Yogani teachings is probably dead on arrival on these forums as far as public opinion and comment.
I donât think itâs as bad as âdead on arrivalâ at all. The reception you get will probably be varied, because the people here are themselves varied.
When one goes against popular sentiment, or ârains on a paradeâ one is apt to get a cool reception, but I wouldnât let that dissuade you. Thatâs just human nature at play. Who wants their parade rained on?
You can see me getting a pretty cool reception for challenging popular cultural presumptions
here.
Lotâs of people donât like rain on that particular parade, but there was no sense that anyone would try to stop me saying it.
[quote=âmegâ]
Whenever someone acts in a patronizing way toward me (not necessarily here on the forum), I recognize their need to feel important, and try not to judge it. Itâs not such a big deal - theyâre just insecure, thatâs all. So am I. When we react to another personâs superior posturing, then itâs just 2 egos clashing, and it becomes a ridiculous exchange. But if we can see the patronizing in a compassionate light and not get hung up in it - essentially just dismiss it - then the superior/inferior positions disappear. Usually. Ironically, by having compassion for the patronizing person, we are ourselves become silently patronizing. If only they knew.
[/quote]Hi Meg
I wonder how you are defining âcompassionâ in your use of it here.
To me it seems like you might be âfeeling sorry for themâ or âpityingâ them, but maybe Iâm not seeing it.
My understanding of compassion, which might not be everyoneâs, is to do with no-self, that is, you connect with the person as you, and you as the person. Or as the term Namaste infers - the divine in me sees the divine in you and we meet in that place.
So having compassion for someone is no different than having compassion for yourself - they are one and the same thing.
In this place of compassion, patronisation is a non-issue. The words of the person are taken and appreciated and the other âstuffâ is hardly noticed.
I get it sometimes, but not always, still working on it.
Just my view fwiw
Namaste
PS. I guess that even out of that place of compassion a person can still have the habit of patronisation - so the work never stops - damn!!
VIL said [quote]
I kind of look at it now as them seeing me as a beautiful budding little petunia working itself out from between a rocky crag (blink blink LOL)
[/quote]
I think thatâs where weâre all at VIL - little budding petunias (although I havenât a clue what they look like )
David said: [quote]
Some people, for sure, do make the faux pas of pre-emptively assuming the teaching role. It seems to be more common among people who are new to the forum and have little clue about how much experience people here have, or have little clue how strong some yogis here are, even those who donât have so much experience (yet).
[/quote] I wouldnât like to point a finger particularly at the less experienced and new people here.
I think it is just as likely to happen with the experienced people, as stated above, it is usually unconscious and can go un-noticed by a person for a long time - hence the value in pointing these things out to people - in a skillful and compassionate way.
I wouldnât like to point a finger particularly at the less experienced and new people here.
I didnât say it was exclusive to new people, or point a finger at them. I was more making excuses for them than pointing a finger at them.