That’s what I did. I imagined all the consequences that I was afraid of and played through each like a video game.
For example, if they get sad maybe I want to feel secure in myself while empathizing with them through their sadness. If they get annoying, I want to say “No” and walk away. If they get violent I want to defend myself. Etc. Playing these out in detail, completely, recursively.
You played the game on easy mode. It’s no problem to set boundaries in a situation where it’s just the two of you, the other person doesn’t have any ability to retaliate against you setting boundaries, and doing so presents no reputational costs. But what if the person you’re setting boundaries against is your boss? Or someone else influential at work, who can credibly threaten your career if you say no to them? What if the person you’re setting boundaries against is influential in a particular community that you’re part of, and you’re worried about burning bridges or ruining your reputation by refusing their increasingly insistent requests?
Just today, I went to a social gathering that I very much did not want to attend. Could I have “set boundaries” and said no? Perhaps I could have. But, that had to be set against the possibility of me being excluded or left out of the loop on other relevant matters because I build up a reputation as a no-fun wet-blanket who doesn’t like hanging out. So I went, even though, frankly, it was exhausting and unproductive and I’m not sure I gained anything from it in the near term. But saying no would have carried unclear social costs, and would possibly have led to me being out of the loop regarding future events.
It’s in situations like that where a lot of the toy anti-anxiety boundary-setting advice, like imagining the worst thing that could possibly happen, falls down. Because the worst thing that could possibly happen is actually really bad.
Idk, I feel all this new therapy-speak like “setting boundaries” leads people into wrong directions. Like, therapy assumes that you’re the customer. For example if your friend tells you come on, jump in the cold water, you can respond by setting a boundary: I don’t want to jump! And I’m right, because the customer is always right! But the real issue maybe is that you’re a coward. It’s not a pleasant thing to think about, the customer in you recoils from the thought that there’s some fault with it—that you’re being cowardly, greedy, gossipy, etc. And the right move is to stop being a customer and be a human. Don’t distract yourself with therapy speak. When your friend in good nature says jump into cold water, just take the damn jump.
I agree with all of this, until the last sentence.
When my friend tells me “come on, jump in the cold water”, I’m not going to do it. (In fact, I’m less likely to do it than if my friend weren’t trying to pressure me to do it.) Not because I’m “setting a boundary”, but because I don’t want to. Is the real issue that I’m a coward? Well, you know what, if you (the general “you”, which could be my friend, or a bystander, or whoever) want to conclude that I’m a coward, that’s fine. You conclude that. I will consider that question in my own time and in my own way. But I’m still not jumping in the water, and you can’t make me.
In short: totally, be a human, but humans definitely sometimes just don’t want to do things, and don’t do those things, because they don’t want to do them, period. And that’s their right. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
In fact, I’m less likely to do it than if my friend weren’t trying to pressure me to do it.
Interesting! Why? I mean, the friend probably has your best interest in mind, “you’ll be glad you jumped”. And empirically, when I take the jump in situations like this, I feel happy with myself afterward. Isn’t it the same for you?
(Also, to me it’s not as much about what other people will think of me. It’s more about me actually having certain qualities, doing certain things, or not.)
I mean, the friend probably has your best interest in mind, “you’l be glad you jumped”
My experience is that people feel like they’re saying it for your own good, but it’s not like they’re carefully running simulations of everything they know about you and coming to a rigorous conclusion. They’re running primarily on script-following, projection, and heuristics, and even if they weren’t, you have more information about yourself in that moment than they do.
Now it feels less like I’m “setting” boundaries and more like… I am boundaries. I am autonomous: I do things I want, because I want to, only when I want to.
Secure feels like the wrong word here. Often, I am reluctant to set a boundary because this will, in fact, lead to an outcome I don’t want, eg the other person not being helped, or being sad. I’m bad at comparing this to the harms to me, but sometimes it’s the right trade! A perfectly secure version of me would feel the same way, since they would also care about the welfare of other people.
Is your claim that security means saying yes to things if and only if it’s a good idea according to the total value between you two? Rather than making trades that are actually bad because you underweight your own welfare? I got the impression from this post that your take was more “just don’t do things if you don’t want to” but maybe you’re just skipping over the times when you think through consequences and convince yourself that they’re legit?
You played the game on easy mode. It’s no problem to set boundaries in a situation where it’s just the two of you, the other person doesn’t have any ability to retaliate against you setting boundaries, and doing so presents no reputational costs. But what if the person you’re setting boundaries against is your boss? Or someone else influential at work, who can credibly threaten your career if you say no to them? What if the person you’re setting boundaries against is influential in a particular community that you’re part of, and you’re worried about burning bridges or ruining your reputation by refusing their increasingly insistent requests?
Just today, I went to a social gathering that I very much did not want to attend. Could I have “set boundaries” and said no? Perhaps I could have. But, that had to be set against the possibility of me being excluded or left out of the loop on other relevant matters because I build up a reputation as a no-fun wet-blanket who doesn’t like hanging out. So I went, even though, frankly, it was exhausting and unproductive and I’m not sure I gained anything from it in the near term. But saying no would have carried unclear social costs, and would possibly have led to me being out of the loop regarding future events.
It’s in situations like that where a lot of the toy anti-anxiety boundary-setting advice, like imagining the worst thing that could possibly happen, falls down. Because the worst thing that could possibly happen is actually really bad.
Idk, I feel all this new therapy-speak like “setting boundaries” leads people into wrong directions. Like, therapy assumes that you’re the customer. For example if your friend tells you come on, jump in the cold water, you can respond by setting a boundary: I don’t want to jump! And I’m right, because the customer is always right! But the real issue maybe is that you’re a coward. It’s not a pleasant thing to think about, the customer in you recoils from the thought that there’s some fault with it—that you’re being cowardly, greedy, gossipy, etc. And the right move is to stop being a customer and be a human. Don’t distract yourself with therapy speak. When your friend in good nature says jump into cold water, just take the damn jump.
I agree with all of this, until the last sentence.
When my friend tells me “come on, jump in the cold water”, I’m not going to do it. (In fact, I’m less likely to do it than if my friend weren’t trying to pressure me to do it.) Not because I’m “setting a boundary”, but because I don’t want to. Is the real issue that I’m a coward? Well, you know what, if you (the general “you”, which could be my friend, or a bystander, or whoever) want to conclude that I’m a coward, that’s fine. You conclude that. I will consider that question in my own time and in my own way. But I’m still not jumping in the water, and you can’t make me.
In short: totally, be a human, but humans definitely sometimes just don’t want to do things, and don’t do those things, because they don’t want to do them, period. And that’s their right. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
Interesting! Why? I mean, the friend probably has your best interest in mind, “you’ll be glad you jumped”. And empirically, when I take the jump in situations like this, I feel happy with myself afterward. Isn’t it the same for you?
(Also, to me it’s not as much about what other people will think of me. It’s more about me actually having certain qualities, doing certain things, or not.)
My experience is that people feel like they’re saying it for your own good, but it’s not like they’re carefully running simulations of everything they know about you and coming to a rigorous conclusion. They’re running primarily on script-following, projection, and heuristics, and even if they weren’t, you have more information about yourself in that moment than they do.
Nope.
Yep, absolutely they do, but that doesn’t change anything.
It sets a bad precedent and encourages annoying and bad behavior. Far better to be known as the person who can’t be pressured into things.
Sounds like you’re disagreeing, but
?
Secure feels like the wrong word here. Often, I am reluctant to set a boundary because this will, in fact, lead to an outcome I don’t want, eg the other person not being helped, or being sad. I’m bad at comparing this to the harms to me, but sometimes it’s the right trade! A perfectly secure version of me would feel the same way, since they would also care about the welfare of other people.
Is your claim that security means saying yes to things if and only if it’s a good idea according to the total value between you two? Rather than making trades that are actually bad because you underweight your own welfare? I got the impression from this post that your take was more “just don’t do things if you don’t want to” but maybe you’re just skipping over the times when you think through consequences and convince yourself that they’re legit?
Which line(s) are you referring to? This word isn’t central in the post so I’m confused.
Reiterating the main idea:
Ah, I was anchored by it being in all caps in the tweet at the top
Makes sense, that’s why I wrote post to expand
But it’s right in the tweet? The one that your post opens with? It’s in there twice in the space of two sentences.