For a few years it has bugged me when people call Relatefulness "Circling."
In Tuscon a few months ago I shared some of my frustrations.
I also shared my annoyance at a recent retreat and gathering in Charlotte.
Both times I was met with surprise and curiosity.
People were surprised: “aren’t they the same?”
People were curious: “why do I think they are different, and why does it annoy me?”
Deep down, it's definitely connected with wanting to feel special and be different.
And, I often see people who conflate "Circling" and "Relatefulness" miss unique aspects of each.
Many Circling practitioners preference body sensations over thoughts, exclude stories or memories, and preference raw expression over attunement.
Relatefulness includes both body sensations and thoughts, preferencing which is more alive. Stories and memories are cherished and celebrated when timed properly. Attunement and relational impact are held as essential to practicing relational presence alongside authenticity.
I’m not saying Circling is bad. I’ve seen those perspectives unlock powerful insights and shifts in being.
But I definitely am biased. For me right now, I continue to find what I see as a more inclusive, human, caring container as a better representation of what I want to be moving towards. And I’m also holding any judgements lightly, recognizing that I also just really enjoy the people who I get to practice Relatefulness with, and my judgements of "circling" are definitely missing lots of nuance.
And maybe Relatefulness is "Circling". I'm not sure exactly how definitions work.
But I do know that I really value the practice of Relatefulness.
PS: I feel party inspired by a post Joshua Zader made a few years ago where he shared "I now see “relatefulness” as the name for that wider life practice, which both transcends and includes circling and authentic relating, as skill-building exercises." https://www.relateful.com/.../what-does-it-mean-to-be...