'I'm not responsible for how my actions make you feel.' Carte blanche for shitty behaviour?

[RedShoppingBag]

I've been having a think about this idea. I get it to a certain point but where's the line?

I mean where's the line between that statement being true and someone actually being responsible? I've heard the statement being made to excuse behaviour that I'd call bullying.

Nobody can "make" you feel anything. Your emotions are your own.

Saying things like

"you made me feel . . ."

"that's offensive . . ."

Is not accurate for most people.

By doing so, what you're actually saying is "I am not in control of my own emotions and I am easily manipulated".

Most people would argue that they are NOT easy to manipulate and ARE in control of themselves. So saying "you made me feel . . ." Is just a contradiction.

Next time you are offended by something, change your narrative to

"I choose to be offended . . ."

Because it is your choice. You could choose to feel any emotion, fear, anger, indifference, but YOU have CHOSEN to feel whatever that emotion is. Otherwise everyone would react in exactly the same way to every situation. Obviously we don't all react the same way.

Placing responsibility for your emotive responses back on yourself, changes the dynamic of any situation.

I think of it like this . .

"Responsibility" is nothing more than "the ability to respond", and you can choose how to respond to any situation.

People need to consider why they CHOOSE a particular emotive response, BEFORE voicing any opinion or carrying out any action. Otherwise they are merely reacting, and not making a conscious action.

TAKE RESPONSIBILITY!

Without context that statement is massively open to interpretation and could be absolutely reasonable or completely unreasonable depending upon context.

I guess that means it's insufficient as a rule to live by, not that it's right or wrong.

It’s a get out of jail free card for shitty people who get a kick out hurting others. It’s also a “trendy” thing to say these days.

It isn’t about “choosing” to feel hurt and pretending that it is can can be a form of victim blaming.
No I don’t take responsibility for the way a pack of bullies behaved towards me, they and they only are responsible for what they did to me.

In a lot of contexts the person with more power should consider how their actions will impact the person with less power. This is clear cut where it's an adult and a child (child is never responsible for adult's feelings, adult should usually take child's feelings into account and avoid frightening or shaming them, but that is a million miles away from meaning the adult should always do what the child wants/ let the child do whatever they want of course, it means that the adult should explain kindly to the child why they can't do XYZ rather than yell at them...)

When it's between adults it's often true that neither is responsible for the others feelings, each are responsible for their own. Women and children are often shamed or scolded to "be kind" and put the feelings of others before their own needs. I find it very telling that is usually comparatively vulnerable people (children, women, junior members of staff) who are enjoined to "be kind" often to their own disadvantage, not the alpha males of society.

It's a shitty thing to say and a marker of that person being without empathy or care. I wouldn't want to be friends with a person who felt that way. Words and actions have the potential to do great harm to others, not giving a shit about that is awful. If you hurt someone with your actions or words then you absolutely ARE responsible for that, what you choose to do with that is up to you. A decent person would care and would work to make amends. You don't have to take back your feelings, actions and words to make amends, but you are absolutely responsible for that hurt as a direct cause of it.

Damntheman has summed it up better than I did.
And I agree, I wouldn’t want to be friends with someone who believed in this.

Damntheman what about situations where there's a conflict of needs, or a person in a fairly powerful position is put out and has their feathers ruffled by a person in a less powerful position standing up for their own needs?

What about a professional situation where a colleague or supervisor has to pull up a junior for poor or unprofessional work or dangerous or neglectful practice?

What about a houseguest who lacks self awareness or simply has a very thick skin and has massively overstayed their welcome and overstepped boundaries and ignored gentle hints about leaving?

In most of day to day life harmony is possible, but their are occasionally situations where keeping everyone happy is impossible and their is no win-win someone will have their feelings hurt or be offended, or the alternative is someone else suffering equally or more.

In all those situations it's necessary to be as empathetic and sensitive as possible, but it is not always appropriate to avoid anything that could offend or upset anyone! The consequences can in some situations be far worse than hurt feelings.

Obviously the statement in the title sounds brash, but the sentiment that sometimes things have to be said or done which could cause upset or offence is not wrong - dependent on context.

*there not their are occasionally situations

It's impossible to generalise here. Yes there are definitely some people who could use this statement to excuse themselves from shitty behaviour. But there are others who use the opposing statement ("I can't help my feelings" or similar) to avoid taking responsibility for themselves.

The ideal solution is to have a third party (eg teacher in a school, HR department in a work situation) to hear the facts and impartially judge whether the behaviour has been unreasonable.

Does such a person exist in the situation you're thinking of?

I think it's possible to stand up for yourself without hurting other people August :) But of course there will be room for exceptions. It's when statements like this become the rule that you reach a very problematic point.

While I agree that no-one can 'make' you feel anything, I also don't think we can choose our feelings as freely as we would wish. We feel what we feel; but it is our responsibility to act based on those feelings.

To answer your question, OP - I think this statement is often (though not always) used to justify abuse. However, the statement is true inasmuch as the only person who can put an end to the abuse is the person on the receiving end of it.

I used to be involved with a very dysfunctional man who was both emotionally and psychologically abusive, and he often used this phrase to me. Thing is, though, I chose to stay and subject myself to his god-awful behaviour - and that choice had nothing to do with him. He was right, even while what he was saying was reprehensible. If I had left, I wouldn't have been around to hear it.

Damntheman that's the point isn't it - it's contextual. Mandarinfish has it right I think. Normally common sense, empathy and reasonableness on both sides should prevail, but sometimes a truly neutral third party needs to be given all the facts and asked to weigh in.

There are absolutely loads of situations where causing offence is less important than standing up for yourself (I ask you out on a date - you say no kindly - I pushy demanding to know why and to be given a chance, and slightly invade your personal space, just a tiny bit but enough to cross a line- you are more direct and tell me to get out of your space and not speak to you - I claim to be offended by this, perhaps believing that you are not giving me your attention because I have a strong regional accent or am older... You're still right, even though I'm upset and perhaps offended.) These aren't things that happen daily, but there undeniably are situations where offending or upsetting someone is the lesser evil.

Dam

It's always your responsibility.

It’s an arsey thing to say- people are responsible for their words and actions and sometimes other people are NOT choosing their reaction. If someone is threatening me and my children and capable of violence and harm- I’m not able to say “I choose not to be scared” and it’s not my fault I am.

However it can be empowering for people to reflect on their emotional responses to others and question them sometimes... and take the sting out of the comments sometimes too.

Isadora2007 on the other hand someone could be causing you to be scared for your children's safety and yet claim that your firm request that they leave immediately upsets them because you're implying that they're a bad person/ someone who would hurt women and children.

That's actually a tactic some aggressive doorstep beggars and doorstop chuggers, doorstep salespeople use. Exploiting the social conditioning to be kind and not upset or offend others whilst often being very intimidating.

Making others responsible for your feelings is actually a classic abuser tactic too - "look what you made me do!" "You know what happens when you make me angry!" "He only did it because you embarrassed him in front of his mates, saying no to him in public..."

So making others responsible for your feelings can very much be a nasty, manipulative tactic just as much as disingenuous claims to believe that you're not responsible for how an action like name calling or social exclusion makes someone feel.

In the end nothings simple, and rules of social conduct can't be summed up, nor condemned, in neat little tropes, because human interaction is nuanced and contextual.

I do see your well articulated points August, but maintain that they are the exceptions to the rule. I think having room for those exceptions is very important. But if you shift so far that you leave an opening for certain types to say that it's the general rule that you're not responsible for how your actions affect others, you're headed for somewhere very unpleasant.

I'd far prefer it to be the rule that you're always responsible for how your words and actions affect others, but SOMETIMES it's necessary to upset. That way you'll be considering and thinking about it all the time instead of just bullishly insisting it's not something you ever need to think about because you're not responsible for someone else's feelings.

I have very much enjoyed your posts though August. You've given me a lot to think about, and I appreciate that you've taken the time to make your arguments so well.

isadora

What do you think soldiers do?

Or police officers?

People can be trained to control their emotions, even while being threatened. That's why some police officers and some soldiers have been convicted of assaults and even murder.

To say otherwise is just avoiding responsibility for your own actions.

Thank you Damntheman

It's fashionable these days to live life according to a string of memes and soundbites (maybe it always has been - religions are also quite keen on dumbing complex theology down to soundbites for the masses...) and this is pretty much always a mistake in the end. Human social systems and human creatures are too complex for that to work.

It's akin to "I just say it like it is"

I find people use that as a cover all excuse to say shitty hurtful things they know would otherwise be socially unacceptable. I have zero respect for them.

BeTheRabbit I think they're two very different statements personally.

The one you quote is far more specific and, yes, used by people who think they are special with special dispensation to say whatever they want because they're good old Fred/ Vera, or they're a straight talking Yorkshireman (insert other county or country if relevant) or "you know what I'm like". Those people in my experience are also the ones who will claim "banter" or "it was just a joke" if properly caught out in being cruel.

I think the statement in the title can be completely different in some contexts, but I've already wittered on about that.

I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree. It's a cover for one to behave as one likes with the blame shifted towards the recipient for experiencing perfectly normal emotional reactions towards hurtful behaviour. Anyone behaving in a way they truly believed to be acceptable wouldn't need to reach for it as a justfier.. Much like the people who say "it's just how I am".. They know what they are saying is wrong.