This type of communication has actually a name, it called non-violent communication. There are books about it. It is one of the best way to communicate when things gets tough or are in a crisis. Since it avoids finger pointing, personal attacks (even when we don’t mean to), etc... and still being able to talk about the issue and how we feel (instead of how the other should do such and such or putting words in their mouths).
But I guess it can be weird to be used all the time and maybe without explicitly talking about.
Non-violent communication is orthogonal to addressing scar tissue. You can use non-violent communication and not address scar tissue and you can use “violent communication” to address scar tissue.
Your example really doesn't illustrate the distinction that you claim. Non-violent communication is not about “being nice” and not using “aggressive” words, whatever that means.
> Notable concepts include rejecting coercive forms of discourse, gathering facts through observing without evaluating, genuinely and concretely expressing feelings and needs, and formulating effective and empathetic requests.
Other than my wife saying “it pisses me off”, which is expressing a feeling, none of it is NVC. There are no needs or requests expressed. There is no fact gathering. Crucially, there is no empathy building.
In which case the name is awful and the concept should be referred to with a different label. The point of those is to communicate meaning, if the very first thing that happens is this kind of misunderstanding that we have failed before we even started.
Ya I agree. When I bring this label I go into details into explaining it’s a method with a template etc. Or else people will get a very different idea from the name itself.
“Non-violent communication” is referring to quite a specific communication technique, it doesn’t mean that all other communication styles are ‘violent’.
I'm still confused how there can be violence (behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something) in speech, where is the physical force ?
You mean like screaming demands, insults and threats at someone that might scar them if repeated over and over?
I think that could be considered violent but it really depends on metaphors here.
It's physical in the way that the body remembers trauma I suppose. Words might not break your bones but they sure could lead to auto-immune disorders, memory disorders, hormonal imbalance, stomach conditions, blood pressure conditions, thyroid conditions, not to mention mood regulation issues and other issues etc.
If your body is conditioned to be in a tortured/stressed/powerless state it won't understand how to regulate properly later leading to further issues. So you could say it is a physical force here in this way damaging and changing your body forever.
There are a fair amount of things out there on this topic.
I started getting autoimmune disorders in middle school due to stress in my home, unfortunately my family didn't actually realize I was sick then due to stress in my home lol. But that was just how it was and life got considerably worse because the yelling further escalated in other members to eventual violence. This lead to quite a lot of other issues in my early 20's compounding so when people are like it's just words, you don't know much and how fast words can escalate. Words have a lot of power, don't dismiss them too easily. My family always liked to and it sure left damage.
But I guess it can be weird to be used all the time and maybe without explicitly talking about.