Do people actually want empathy?

[eyeseeyou]

From what I have observed, I might be wrong, it seems that people don't necessarily.

If an expression of empathy is attempted accusations of 'minimising' can ensue. Because it is not the same, exactly the same but what ever is? If you empathise emotionally, then again, not wanted because you are trying to shift the attention onto yourself.

Even worse if you have overcome the particular problem and talk about how.

There must be a balance in this because people will accuse others of not having any empathy. But what do they want? A hug - no, not necessarily, some people hate that. Join in complaining? No, makes them feel worse. To listen? (Do you really need to be there and not respond at all?,) - well it doesn't help.

So, I do feel empathy. But should I express it? How?

I've also read a book about active listening based on the Samaritans, and one on validation, though my kindle was left at work and I can't remember the titles or authors offhand. They are all thought provoking and useful reads, I think.

I'd be interested to know how all these ideas marry up. Pretty much my aim in this thread really. I have found it useful too. The differences in the speed and way different people process was very pertinent for me. It clarifies, I think, how and why the differences occur.

Yes, that's rather how I feel.
I do sometime get the impression that people call themselves empaths just to get attention for themselves. I'm sure compassion is more useful in a crisis.

Do people think our different emotional responses regarding events help us or hinder processing? Or both / neither?

So from my perspective, I feel more listened to if questioned and challenged. So that's my experience. Because anyone can not and put an appropriate expression on their face. I want engagement and what I am saying to be considered and thought about, tested.

If someone has come to you with a tale of woe, is this how you would respond to them? If somebody needs you to sympathise with their predicament, they don't want a debate, they just want you to say: "I'm so sorry" or "Oh, that's awful, you must feel dreadful about it" or "What a horrible situation, I'm sure everything is going to be all right" or similar. They don't want to be questioned, have their feelings tested or challenged, or engage in any kind of debate. They just want their emotions to be acknowledged.

@eagerlywaitingfor, no I wouldn't. But if it goes on for a long time...I might not be able to help myself. Especially if it is something I have experienced and overcome. I do check myself, though. I 'think bland' (ref upthread) and let them have their rant. Thinking about it I have done this more in recent years and have had success with it.

It's just not what I, personally, like for myself. I'm often silent in difficulties, want time to process alone and then if I'm dithering over solutions then want an engaged discussion.

the tone, facial expression, and general attitude to the 'listening' matters hugely too.

I have one friend who is good at it - she can listen, and even offer solutions occasionally, but makes me feel heard and cared for. She just naturally has an ability to get people to worry less about things by making them feel understood. She doesn't particularly enjoy this role I don't think; she is an academic and doesn't want to end up pigeon-holed into a pastoral tutor role because she's one of a small number of females, but she is actually very good at it!

Another will always end up saying things like 'don't worry about it' or 'there's nothing you can do', and she will always sound dismissive, even though I don't think she means to. She cares a lot about people, but just doesn't really understand what they need and doesn't know how to express that empathy very well with them. Even if she ended up saying the same words at some point as the first friend, her manner of doing it just makes it sound dismissive and unhelpful, and I leave frustrated.

A lot of it involves taking the cues from the person, as people do want different things, and never assuming that you know what they need better than they do. Another person I know (not exactly a friend but someone who I have to talk to frequently for various reasons) always assumes that he knows what would make someone better and what they should do, and he can't really accept that it is often not what they need. He dismissed people (behind their back) as being attention-seeking, or over-thinking, or worrying too much, or needing to be pushed into doing something, and assumes that his way of not pandering to them is what will help. Even when I can see how irritating some of the people he is talking about might be, his solution of not pandering is actually making things any better. One person who complains a lot about things ends up complaining more, I think, because she doesn't feel heard or believed - so she ends up making things sound worse, just to get some sympathy.

So it's such an individual thing, and depends very much on the listener adapting their behaviour differently, or pulling out of the situation if they don't think they can offer what is needed. I'm much more of a person who just wants to be heard and for someone to show that I'm cared for, as I'm not very good at getting those needs met in other ways (which I am aware of, and am trying to work on). But for me, I don't want to be challenged, dismissed, told not to worry, told it's nothing, told what to do, etc. I want sympathy and a demonstration that I matter to the person.

I think because I find emotional empathy to be a bit vampiric. Some people do seem to feed off negative emotions and use it to switch the focus to themselves. I pick up on it (too readily perhaps).

So it's such an individual thing, and depends very much on the listener adapting their behaviour differently, or pulling out of the situation if they don't think they can offer what is needed.

I think this is such a strong message and one which is very much evident in the responses to this thread.

I suppose it all depends on whether the person has come to you for advice, or whether they just need to get things off their chest.

@eagerlywaitingfor

I suppose it all depends on whether the person has come to you for advice, or whether they just need to get things off their chest.

Do people always know this themselves?

It took me some untangling at why I feel not properly listened to or engaged with when on the receiving end of 'active listening' because to me that involves being challenged and questioned occasionally. It seems like an act if all I get is nods and facial expressions. I can end up saying something controversial just to test them if feeling very combative.

Sometimes I think people just react emotionally. They haven't fully processed the why yet.

[quote eyeseeyou]**@Subulter

What is it that you feel you should be doing in these scenarios, though? What would make you feel 'engaged' or not 'going through the motions'

My earlier post covered this where I said,

"The active listening is interesting. I don't think I always like being in the receiving end of this. It feels too passive. Sometimes I want to be challenged!  Because I want what I am saying to be tested in terms of its validity.

I do, do active listening and have seen some people respond with pleasure to it. I'm not sure it's always a good thing - I worry sometimes that it seems to be a bit all 'surface pleasantries'. It's not really an honest exchange, just nods and smiles. Easy but too easy."

So from my perspective, I feel more listened to if questioned and challenged. So that's my experience. Because anyone can nod and put an appropriate expression on their face. I want engagement and what I am saying to be considered and thought about, tested.

But then I can be overly analytical! Funnily my DH really isn't and we balance each other out well! He jokes sometimes when I have to deal with someone ranting and tells me to just 'Think bland!', that is don't challenge or say something interesting!

But I get it, my own biases are not definitively correct and I have to keep reminding myself not everyone likes to analyse as much as me. [/quote]
No, you’re misunderstanding me. I’m asking about what you would prefer to do when someone is complaining about their problem or upset about something, and you’re the listener/addressee.

Are you saying that you would prefer to challenge their thinking, because that’s what you prefer when you’re the one with the issue? You just see to be being weirdly programmatic about your response in these situations, as though speed of ‘processing’ can be regarded in terms of a spectrum of success and failure.

Are you saying that you would prefer to challenge their thinking, because that’s what you prefer when you’re the one with the issue? You just see to be being weirdly programmatic about your response in these situations, as though speed of ‘processing’ can be regarded in terms of a spectrum of success and failure.

I have no preference. My reference points are my own experiences, that is all. So my own feelings of empathy are framed that way. However, ultimately, I want to do what is best and correct for the person who needs empathy and compassion. Hence this thread.

as though speed of ‘processing’ can be regarded in terms of a spectrum of success and failure.

Wasn't thinking in terms of success and failure really.

More that if someone wants to analyse a situation in greater detail and question their own actions, for example, they might spend longer processing their experience. If they want to do that verbally that processing might be aided by someone else engaging with that. If they want to do that alone but are a bit she'll shocked they might just want reassurance. Conversely if someone processed in less detail rather quickly but they are dissatisfied with their conclusion they might want someone just to sympathise. If someone had not being able to process easily and just wanted a quick fix solution they might just want someone else to solve the problem for them. There are lots of ways processing speed and focus could affect the type of empathy which is most appropriate.

And in terms of success criteria immediate and long term success could look different.