People who say 'that should be ok' and 'I'll try'

[AnotherBeautifulDayToBeRogelio]

An ex boss of mine used to do this. Say for example I asked him if I could go to the dentist and make the time up, or that I wanted to book certain dates for a holiday, he'd always reply 'that should be ok'. He would never ever just give me a straight yes or no, so I was always on the back foot not knowing if I could go ahead and book the dentist appointment (or book the holiday or whatever). He was the sort of awful person who had a massively inflated sense of his own importance though (he once said he wished flights were more expensive so that poor people couldn't go on planes and spoil the experience for him) so I always thought the 'it should be ok' was his way of making himself feel in charge of me.

Now I've noticed my husband does the same thing. If for example I tell him I have to work late on a certain day and can he start tea, he'll say 'it should be ok'. Or if I ask him to pick something up in his lunch break (he works in a town centre and always wanders round the shops every lunch break, so it's not like I'm putting him out) he'll say 'I'll try'. Same as my ex boss - it's never a straight yes or no.

I don't know if I'm sensitive because of my ex boss, so this is a particular 'thing' with me. For full disclosure, my husband comes from a family of emotional abusers and he has a history of gaslighting and stonewalling me. He's worked on this through therapy and has actually stopped gaslighting/stonewalling now. But I can't help feel this is ingrained into his character and the 'I'll try' and 'it should be ok' are small ways of still having the upper hand without overtly gaslighting me. Or am I over sensitive?

Can't you just talk to him and ask him what he means by it?

I have and he doesn't understand my problem. He says he can't say for definite that he can do whatever it is, hence the vague answers he gives.

The problem with this is that this is what he always did:- denied whatever it was I brought up with him, even though his actions told another story. So I struggle to trust anything he tells me.

I have a friend who gives these sort of non-committal replies. I realised it was because she was keeping her options open. I no longer make plans with just her, and only invite her to group events. And I never ask her for favours, nor do I go out of my way for her. Which is a bit shit really isn't it? I don't think I'd cope well being married to someone like this!

swingofthings can you not see how irritating and unfair that is to the other person. You might not want to? Then what are they supposed to do to plan their time? Wait and see how you feel?
I disagree and see it the other way around. There is a difference between arranging something official in advance at a convenient time for both and asking for something quite late on the assumption that person will be OK with it. My default will be to say no systematically even though I might be OK with it.

I also found some people constantly asking for favours and expecting them to be delivered. There are some favours I don't mind doing if it is no or little inconvenience to me however, if I have to go out of my way to avoid the person being inconvenienced themselves when it might more less so for them, then I consider that they are the unreasonable ones.

I accept anything less than an absolute commitment (with date and time) as a “it’s just not going to happen” in my head now too

/bitter
/very bitter today

If someone does that to me, I treat it differently depending on what it is - if it's important I press for a firm answer. If it's something that doesn't matter too much, I chase up for a firm answer closer to.

I wouldn't take it as a yes though, I'd always take it as a probably yes.

I agree with blackteasplease, what an appallingly selfish attitude you have swingofthings. It would be better if you just said no in the first place.

You do need to exercise caution - the problem with emotional abuse is that every single facet of it when taken in isolation tends to be explainable away as normal.

It's not so much the action itself but the motivation or general pattern.

If he's saying it's because he doesn't know for definite then it might be more disorganisation than control, but OTOH it might be control that he's using that as an excuse? It either comes from a place of not knowing whether he'll be able to, or not wanting to commit 100%. Not wanting to commit 100% can come from anxiety, or it can come from believing his time is more important than yours.

I get a lot of ‘if you like’

Do you want to go out tonight?’ If you like
Do you want to eat sushi later? If you want to
Do you want to go roller blading? We can if you like.

It’s the opposite of controlling really but nonetheless does my head. In.

Hmm, I think I am a 'should be ok' type of person at times.

I am fairly pedantic so I am loathe to give an outright Yes if there is still some doubt or if I need to check something first to be sure. I would normally caveat my 'should be ok' with what it is I need to check on before I agree fully e.g. 'should be ok, I just need to check DH isn't going out that evening first'.

Then once I say yes, I mean yes.

What drives me mad is people agreeing to things, then checking afterwards and they can't and never could when I thought we had a firm plan.

Likewise I might say 'I'll try' to pick something up at lunchtime if I do aim to but sometimes I just can't leave the office for that long at lunchtime, last minute requests etc. So yes, if I am able to get out, I will and I will get the item, but there is a chance I may not be able to. Some days I know I will be able to get to the place as I have to move offices during the day and can go on the way, then I would say yes and explain why!

I think I am being clear with my lack of commitment or my firm commitment!

Sometimes it fine to do (for example the parcel one) where its clear you are asking for a favour dependent on something else (the person going somewhere/doing something etc). So in your husbands case the lunch break is one where it is ok to say I'll try. At the point you ask he doesnt know what might come up whether he will get out at lunch time etc. This is ok IF its an actual I will get it if the circumstances allow for me to do my wandering around.

and sometimes its not. You are back late and dinner needs to be done - something you always do I suspect. This is when he is saying that his time is more important and to be honest he doesnt see why he has to

Sometimes I say this because I don't know if I will be able to do the thing or not. I work ad-hoc/zero-contract hours and often get a booking at short notice: I am very poor, so have to prioritize stuff that earns money over socialising or doing favours. Most people who know me understand this - especially as there are times when I will prioritize a really important non-earning commitment over a paid one (someone's wedding/funeral for example).

BertieBotts thanks and yes I think you're right. His actions always showed me that he considered his time much more important than mine (which of course he denied because he was a gaslighter). So now this, although on the face of it is such a minor insignificant thing for me to get worked up over, makes me think again he's asserting that his time trumps mine. That's it in a nutshell.

It's ok to say should be ok or I'll try. It means maybe, only if it's it not too much trouble.
It's ok to say let me think about it/I'll check, and get back to you later. Then you have yes or no.

Chewbecca I think that is fair enough! I do the same when there is a chance I can’t do something ... like needing to check work diary first or running out of time in town, shops not having stock of whatever it was needed (out of my control!). Outside of that, I like to give definite answers where I can, I hate flakiness.

OP, he may be doing it without realising.

BertieBotts, this made me laugh

I'll try to be more definite in future.

Zzzzz, if the reason you often let people down is because you are parenting an individual with autism, and sometimes shit happens, any relative or friend should understand that your life and ability to commit to something is driven by different priorities.

DM does this. I no longer ask her to help with anything (this has occurred no more than once or twice a year). If I have an appointment and ask whether she can look after DD for a couple of hours, I need a definite yes or no, not ‘it should be okay’ or ‘I’ll try’.

I think it’s because she doesn’t want to do it so she keeps me hanging so I’ll ask someone else. I now ask people who won’t mess me around.

No EA with my OH, but he does this and it drives me up the wall.

“Is it ok if I do an overnight work trip on the 16th?” “Should be”
“How about we take a trip out this weekend” “Could do”

The first is usually followed by “check your diary and let me know”
The second is “we could, I’ll leave the final decision up to you”

I am also bad for responding with “oh probably” to similar questions.

Like all things, it’s not about this kind of response in a vacuum and more about overall behaviour. I know nothing of your history so I’d say it’s fine. But if there is a history of abuse, it may be part of that.

It would be better if you just said no in the first place
I'd be happy to say no all the time then, but this means that the person asking might miss out when I could have done what they've asked in the first place.

I agree that it really depends on the situation. As said, there is a difference between a text saying 'he you, would be lovely to get together, when would be a godd time for you? OK, that suits me too, let's put the date in the diary' and getting a text saying 'he, I've got to plan tomorrow afternoon, want to meet up at 2pm'. The latter might truly be a case of waiting to see in the morning if I have to take my DS to football or not so my response would be 'not sure, might need to text X to football, won't know until 12pm'. Its then up to them to say 'nevermind, another time' or 'OK, let me know at 10am with the chance I say' sorry can't do'.

Same with a favour. If I say to a colleague 'I plan on popping to the shop at lunchtime' and they say 'oh great, can you pick up a pint of milk for me', I'll respond 'I'm happy to if I do go but I might de ide not to go after all if I haven't finished my work or it stsrt pouring down with rain'. It's the up to them whether they decide to go themselves to be sure they have some milk or they're happy to take the chance that I might not go. What I will not do is say 'yes of course' and then have to go even though I don't need to any longer or have something more important to do just to get them the pi t of milk I promised them.

Are you English, OP?

I am not and when I first moved to England, phrases like "should be okay", "could do" etc drove me insane and struck me as non-committal. Then I realised they were saying yes, but not super enthusiastic about it. I know take it as YES and it works.

(Apologies to the 64 million English people who don't do this.. But in my experience, it is a Southern England verbal mannerism).

If he's otherwise a good sort, I wouldn't stress too much about this.

I think you're right OP, both phrases are about people keeping their options open.

But there is good and bad 'keeping options open'. Good is genuine uncertainty. Bad is flakiness or control.

'That should be ok' followed by checking and confirming, or being able to give a yes or no when you check, a few days later, is fine. It reflects real uncertainty. Being deliberately vague, so as to be able to trick you, or deny responsibility is obviously not ok. In that case no definite yes or no would ever be given.

So, if you really need something, on that date, you have to press for a yes / no answer and, if you don't get one, say 'I clearly can't rely on you, so forget I asked, I'll make alternative arrangements'.

In your boss's case though, I'd have taken 'that should be ok' as a yes, as I'd hear the emphasis on the 'ok' not on the 'should'. Unless it was firmly on the should, in which case I'd press for a yes / no, then or later.

Likewise 'I'll try' can mean they really will but cannot commit, or maybe if it suits them, or that they're giving themselves a get-out for not delivering. Whether you accept an 'I'll try' depends on the importance and urgency of the issue.

If you really needed say a prescription to be collected in your DH's 'lunchbreak town' and stressed the importance and urgency, would he commit to it? Would he do it? Willingness to prioritise others' needs over his own wants is the issue there.

Ok thanks everyone. I think my whole perception is completely skewed. I'm happy to be told this is a normal trait rather than coming from a place of gaining power.

I think it does come from either a power trip or from a lack of commitment type attitude where they see their time as being more important.
My ex used to do this and he would leave it right up to the 11th Minute to commit to something. So I’d ask can you look after the children I want to go out next week on x day, and he’d say ‘that should be ok’ I’d say can you or can’t you yes or no and he’d just not answer with a yes or no but he’d say ‘I’ve said it should be ok’ and then sometimes he’d say no beforehand because something better can along and he’d say when questioned ‘I didn’t say yes’
So I think it was his way of being in control and it always gave him an ‘out’ of absolutely everything.
I do think in our case it was part of EA

My boss sometimes says "should be ok" whereas I'd prefer a "yes" or "no" before making firm plans. When he does this I simply say "I'll take that as a yes and make firm plans/book the appointment then, thanks".

@lottiegarbanzo I think your spot on.

I never ask for favours unless I am really in a pickle in which case I try to so as much in dladvance as possible. Or if I ask in the off chance that it would be an inconvenience to me but not to the person I ask, I accept the uncertain response and am just grateful if they can.

My OH has an expectancy at times that I will go out of my way to do him a favour when doing so will be as much an inconvenience for me as it is for him and then gets annoyed if I say no, when I might be able to do it anyway, or maybe, depending on whether it does turn out to be an inconvenience to me or not.

Another example: DD asking me if I can drop her at the train station later as it would save her 20 mns walk. The response is that I don't mind doing if I'm at home doing nothing. I do mind doing if I need to leave work when I still have something to do, or I'd planned on going to gym or shopping at that time, so the response is 'it should be OK, but don't count on it, I'll let you know 1 hour before'.

I always take it to mean, well I could do it but I'm not going to put myself out in anyway, if it inconveniences me I may not do it and you can't say anything, because I didn't give a definate answer.

I think it does come from either a power trip or from a lack of commitment type attitude where they see their time as being more important
But that goes the other way. I would never say to my OH 'I'll be working late Tuesday so can you cook dinner', if its something I would normally do on that day. What I would say is 'I might work late that day, if so, do you think you'll be OK to cook. If not, don't worry, I'll get a take away on the way he'. I just wouldn't assume that because it suits me that he would cook he has to say yes the moment I bring it up.

It is really a matter of perception as to me, it's the person expecting an immediate yes from a favour they are asking who is selfish.