Heathen communication style compared to neo-pagan.

[JuniperBerry]

I've had some run-ins with a few people on this board. Though it's never my intention, I have hurt their feelings and offended them on a personal level.

I think, in some way, we're all drawn to a path that reflects the nature of our personality, and in a sense, we give our religion a personality. There are communication differences between heathens and neo-pagans that have been addressed by others for quite some time. (The article below uses the term 'wicca', but I find that neo-pagan is heavily influenced by wicca and has a very similar style and thus, I address the larger group.) I attribute this to different religious personality.

I hope that some of you will read this and understand where I'm coming from in my posting style, realize that it's not personal, and try to understand me as I work to find better ways to communicate with you.

Communication and Language Use

One of the most significant social differences between Wicca and Ásatrú is their use of language and
the way they communicate. More conflict between the two communities can be traced to this than
any other factor. Wiccans tend to speak in a very conditional manner, often using the passive voice.
The general mode of communication is quiet, cooperative, and seeks consensus, which parallels the
Wiccan worldview of an orderly and harmonic universe. Most statements are usually accompanied
by a conversational hook, with which the other person can help his conversational partner to save
face in the event of disagreement by affirming the validity of the opposite argument. Conversations
tend to be in quiet and reasoned tones.
Ásatrúar tend to speak in a very direct method using declarative sentences, tending to cite things in
a black and white and often simplistic manner. The general method of communication is to state
ones position with the expectation that ones opposite will state theirs and either agreement or
argument will ensue. Consensus and compromise is rarely the object. This verbal sparring mirrors
the general focus on conflict in the religion. A standoff between strong but disagreeing positions
(i.e., agreeing to disagree) is generally seen as preferable to compromise. Face saving is seen to be
the individuals own responsibility, to be obtained by demonstrating not only the validity of ones
beliefs, but how strongly one holds them. Conversations tend to be fast paced and often in
emotional tones. Any conflict and anger brought forth in debate is generally dismissed as necessary
to the process and quickly forgotten; although when it is not, it tends to create long term grudges.
These differing methods of communication naturally set up an easy to follow pattern of
communication, or rather miscommunication, between Wiccans and Ásatrúar. The Wiccan begins
with a statement of where he or she stands on an issue. The statement is conditioned with one or
two phrases such as "in my opinion" meant to allow their opposite room for compromise in the
event of disagreement. The Ásatrúar, upon hearing this, assumes that because the Wiccan has
conditioned his statement, that it is loosely held and subject to revision or correction. He or she
replies very directly that he feels the Wiccan's position is incorrect and supports evidence as to
why. Up to this point, each party has acted exactly as their community standards lead them to
react. The Ásatrúar expects the Wiccan to either accept the reasoning or to refute it. The Wiccan is
simply stunned. He or she feels they have made a polite statement and had it answered in a rude
and disrespectful manner. At this point, he has already decided the conversation is without purpose
and attempts to end it by agreeing to the validity of the Ásatrúar's opinion, but restating his own,
this time even more conditionally. This is a common way to end such a conversation in the Wiccan
community, but the Ásatrúar sees it in an entirely different light. Smelling rhetorical blood, he or
she strongly dismisses the Wiccan's opinion and even more strongly restates his own. The Wiccan
now feels insulted beyond tolerance. He replies angrily, not concerning the original subject of the
conversation, but chastising the Ásatrúar's behavior. The Ásatrúar is shocked by this reaction and
asks what the problem is. Assuming the problem is obvious to everyone involved, the Wiccan turns
and leaves. The two part, the Wiccan convinced the Ásatrúar is a rude and insensitive jerk trying to
force his opinions on others, the Ásatrúar convinced he is the victim of yet another attempt at
politically correct censorship by someone who can't defend his own beliefs.

...There are things that we can learn from one another, but in order for
successful interfaith interaction to take place we must first understand each other.


http://www.heathengods.com/library/wicc ... hammer.pdf

[Ravencry]

I moved this topic.

[Traumwandlerin]

I'm neither, but I think the Wiccan-Style is what is called "good communcation" by communication therapists and I really think everyone on a board should try this approach despite their religion. It's a discussion board, not a fighting board. The Asatru-way has it's own realm, but in communication with other over the internet on board with mixed people, this is just to agressive.

[JuniperBerry]

Ah! Perfect move, Ravencry. I couldn't think of where to put this at all, and now I feel like Homer "d'oh!"



Traumwanderlin:

I'm neither, but I think the Wiccan-Style is what is called "good communcation" by communication therapists and I really think everyone on a board should try this approach despite their religion. It's a discussion board, not a fighting board. The Asatru-way has it's own realm, but in communication with other over the internet on board with mixed people, this is just to agressive.

Gee, Traum, sure you're not heathen. Don't hold back on how you feel, now.

I think both styles (and various others) are good ways of communicating, as long as they aren't taken to an extreme. Wicca/neo-paganism runs the risk of being too passive with everyone agreeing with one another to avoid conflict, while heathenry can run the risk of being too aggressive and less accommadating.

The point I'm trying to make with this post, is that I am not attacking anyone. I'm an assertive person, but I'm not an aggressive person. I have strong beliefs and I expect, and respect, that others have strong beliefs. When the two beliefs disagree, I don't take it personally and I don't mind discussing the differences because it helps me to learn more. When someone disagrees with me I don't think "what a mean person!" Why would they be mean? Because they disagree with me? People are allowed to have their own beliefs. No, I think "well, here's what backs up what I say, what can you bring to the table that refutes that?" After awhile of sharing, we still may not agree, but I can respect the other person and their beliefs because they obviously have put alot of thought, time and effort into developing them, even if they are different than my own. When someone tells me they believe something "just because", why should I think that is valid? Just because? How much respect does that even show in a belief when you don't care to know about it, or understand it's facts and lore, when you're just ready to believe in whatever 'just because'. There's no value in anything if there isn't any judgement. If my husband loved me 'just because', then he can love anyone 'just because'. There would be nothing special or unique about me, nothing that makes me better than others in his eyes. I don't want 'just because'. I want a good reason why I should think something is valid or respectable.

So when I say I disagree with someone, and I show the points made that I disagree with, I'm not attacking them. I am showing respect for the belief, and am willing to understand it nature and value, so that I can find it's validity amongst other beliefs. That is the nature of dicussion, not fighting. I could just say "sure, whatever, you're right", just because, but does that really feel good to anyone?

[Traumwandlerin]

So why not accept the "just because"? Maybe some people don't like discussing their believes (maybe sounds weird on a discussion baord, but yeah, some people are like that). Maybe some people don't want to reason. I'm sure I don't want to reason about everything. Some things are just fine the way they are and I don't want people to question any detail.

And I strongly disagree with "There's no value in anything if there isn't any judgement". Why? Because that is just the way it is for me and actually I don't feel the need to discuss this Also, I think it's violating my personal space, if I don't want to discuss my believes in one point and other try to force me. I can really get mad then ^^

And on your example, if my boyfriend had any more reason then "just because" for loving me, that would hurting me. He can express the points he like and love at me, but that is not the reason why he is loving me, since there are hundreds of people with thes attributes out there (probably are even better) and I don't want to be loved for a list of positive attributes.

[JuniperBerry]

So why not accept the "just because"?

Because, As I've been expressing on here, that is not my personality. It's not true to who I am and what's important to me.

Maybe some people don't like discussing their believes (maybe sounds weird on a discussion baord, but yeah, some people are like that). Maybe some people don't want to reason. I'm sure I don't want to reason about everything. Some things are just fine the way they are and I don't want people to question any detail.

And it's fine for those people to say that they are uncomfortable discussing it further. I'll understand that. When someone tells me through passive-aggressiveness ("You're rude!"), I don't understand that. I'm not making anything personal, and will understand and respect the position of someone who doesn't want to discuss it further. Just talk to me maturely, and I'll treat you the same. Just because I have a different personality, doesn't mean I'm out to get anyone, make them look stupid, or trying to be rude. There is a level of self-consciousness about spiritual experiences, there is a passion and a protectiveness. I understand that. I just can't know what someone's level of comfort is without them telling me.

And I strongly disagree with "There's no value in anything if there isn't any judgement". Why? Because that is just the way it is for me and actually I don't feel the need to discuss this Also, I think it's violating my personal space, if I don't want to discuss my believes in one point and other try to force me. I can really get mad then ^^

I don't own your feelings. I can't know either way whether you feel comfortable or not until you tell me. And, whenever you have said you were uncomfortable, I have stopped discussing whatever issue it was and left the matter alone. But this discussion board is for everyone, and not with the caveat that we all must first consider if we are violating you're personal boundary issue. You should now what you are and aren't comfortable with and either avoid a thread that bothers you or explain to others you're feelings. I'm not going to chnage my personality for one person. And I'm not askign YOU to change for me. But I'm not going to walk on eggshells for you, when you have no problem saying exactly what you feel and what you want from others.

And on your example, if my boyfriend had any more reason then "just because" for loving me, that would hurting me. He can express the points he like and love at me, but that is not the reason why he is loving me, since there are hundreds of people with thes attributes out there (probably are even better) and I don't want to be loved for a list of positive attributes.

And that's your take on it. I'm not going to argue about what love means to both of us, when that's not what this thread is about. This thread is about different communication methods, how one is no better than the other, and how I understand my tone can come across in a certain way but that I do have respect for everyone here and am not attacking them. I am definitely making an effort to have a softer tone, but I won't change who I am or what's important to me. I just want people to have an understanding of me, and me of them, so that we can communicate more effectively and in a healthy manner.

[Traumwandlerin]

I can live with that. When people accept a "I really don't want to talk about this in more detail" and even a "no, I have never thought about this and actually I dont want to" then everything is fine for me. Just haven't met a lot of people in real life who aren't able to accept that. of course you have those to in discussion boards, but there I can protect myself and just ignore those people. I'm not ignoring you, so you haven't acted this way against me But I guess we have never been at this point anyway where I needed to say directly that you are violating my personal space ^^

[WhiteOne]

Just for the record, Juniperberry, I haven't ever read you as being rude.
Some people aren't good at rhetoric, so they may avoid verbal disagreements. Also, some people might not feel like going into deeper debate about things.
However, another part of "good communication" is to not be overly defensive when listening to someone. Some people take things more personally than others. Sometimes it is because what you said would normally (by the majority of people) be considered truly offensive. Sometimes the person who you are talking to prefers to be defensive to many things that aren't really directed offensively at them.
I think it is nice that you want to consider both of these communication styles. I think some people are more driven to avoid conflict, while others are less in tune with people's feelings. I think it is important to be sensitive to these differences in communication. Some people will be offended, and so I can try not to offend them. Some people will be offensive, but perhaps I should consider that they aren't purposefully being offensive to me personally--and if they are, who cares. Attacking someone's character is very uncalled for, but that is different than just being direct with your beliefs and opinions.

Traum:

if my boyfriend had any more reason then "just because" for loving me, that would hurting me. He can express the points he like and love at me, but that is not the reason why he is loving me, since there are hundreds of people with thes attributes out there (probably are even better) and I don't want to be loved for a list of positive attributes.

You have my full encouragement to brainwash my partner! I wish he understood that!
Maybe I can apply this discussion about communication style to my relationship---- I wish it were so simple.

[JuniperBerry]

When I first joined here and had problems with two people specifically that didn't seem to understand where I was coming from.


Heathen boards are alot different then pagan boards, though. You can't be sensitive if you post on one. (Unless it's Wicca-tru *shudder*) Example.

[WhiteOne]

Thanks for the example link, Juniperberry. Now I see where you were coming from. I wasn't absolutely clear about the sources for your argument until you provided the link. Of course their could be other factors, like education level, ethnicity, or gender, that effect the disparity between the communication styles. But you did a good job analyzing the differences and I think you are on to something. I also hope people will stop taking offense (or defense), when none is needed.

[JuniperBerry]

Heh. I wish I could take credit for the article, but it's from a pamphlet "The Pentacle and the Hammer." I provided a link to the full text in my original post.

[pelias3]

If you think that all neo-pagan and particularly wiccan people tried to keep the arguements to a minimum and reach a consensus then you certainly didn't go to the moots we held in the southwest of england! true there were a couple of astru stirring things after a few beers! but to be just a tiny bit serious i'd have to say that seeking a consensus has in my view tended to impede the cause of pagans! mostly because we're trying to be all things to all people and so the rest of the religious community thinks we're nothing specifically to anyone! no written texts, no structure or hierarchy! at the moment i'm a member of druidnetwork and everything they post is certainly well thought out and thoughful but the level of scolarship makes replying to things hard work sometimes, to the point of taking me days of thinking about it before i (perhaps i'm thinking too hard?)

[JuniperBerry]

No, I get what you're saying.

Reconstruction boards can be really intimidating because there is a right and wrong method...and UPG isn't really encouraged. I don't have the time to go over all the MSS with a fine-tooth comb, so I generally only use those boards more as a resource or to ask a question once in awhile (tho I am doing a book group soon). It's more like reading an encyclopedia than a recon forum isn't it?

Don't be afraid to post, just don't get defensive if they tell you you're wrong, or that you're aeking an irrelevant question. Be open to accepting the knowledge they're sharing with you and appreciative of all the work they put in. If you're more concerned about being told your way is right or acceptable based on feelings then you are in actually learning some recon groups will tear you to shreds.

Recon people (ime) generally don't attack those who are sincere and respectful and accepting of their own (current) lack of knowledge.

[pelias3]

hmmm trouble is whilst i'm not scolarly in the sense of steeped in the lore of paganism in all its multitudinous forms i'm a damned good naturalist (and i don't have to say so myself!) and some things people say! eek! bite my tongue and try not to slap them round the back of the head! can't i drag them off to a nice piece of coutryside and teach them some biology?

[JuniperBerry]

Heh. As someone who has a problem biting their own tongue, you'll probably feel that way about me at some point. (If you haven't already.) Feel free to whack me one. When I'm wrong, I'm wrong.


What problem do you have specifically with recons? Should we take that to a different thread? (I'm sort of embarassed by the fact that this one was stickied already. )