Good ideas. I prefer the third one as it allows the trusted person to tell you stories that may give you a different perspective on the incident. A reality check, so to speak. If you can refrain from naming the "offending party," the conversation gains some distance and also spares the person from backbiting. The trusted person may like or respect that other and the conversation would be like spreading poison. The second idea is great but doesn't offer the different perspective. The first could be positive or end up giving your offender the opportunity to really skewer you with more insults. Some people are sociopathic and LOVE to inflict pain. If you reveal that you're hurt by their remarks, the games will begin with you as the mark.
Thank you for your insight 🤍 True words indeed. I guess I like to believe there is good in everyone of us although some do their best to not show it. Have you ever met/spent time with anyone that “loved to inflict pain” as you said? If so how did you deal with them?
Good ideas. I prefer the third one as it allows the trusted person to tell you stories that may give you a different perspective on the incident. A reality check, so to speak. If you can refrain from naming the "offending party," the conversation gains some distance and also spares the person from backbiting. The trusted person may like or respect that other and the conversation would be like spreading poison. The second idea is great but doesn't offer the different perspective. The first could be positive or end up giving your offender the opportunity to really skewer you with more insults. Some people are sociopathic and LOVE to inflict pain. If you reveal that you're hurt by their remarks, the games will begin with you as the mark.
Thank you for your insight 🤍 True words indeed. I guess I like to believe there is good in everyone of us although some do their best to not show it. Have you ever met/spent time with anyone that “loved to inflict pain” as you said? If so how did you deal with them?