communication skills

AMA with Hannah Aline Taylor. Wednesday 2/4 at 4:00 PM CT

love, boundaries, and mistakes in relating, community, and peopling together (+ thank god love doesn’t look like you expect it to)

AMA with Hannah Aline Taylor. Wednesday 2/4 at 4:00 PM CT

love, boundaries, and mistakes in relating, community, and peopling together (+ thank god love doesn’t look like you expect it to)

Engage or Enrage. It is likely that we have family members or friends that we differ with greatly when it comes to politics, healthcare, etc.  I am no different.  When the inevitable hot topic arises, do you recommend flight or fight, engage or enrage?  How do you respond when this occurs?

How to make skills of depth/presence/development legible to others? I've had this fantasy for the past year of creating a YT live stream show that features different teachers, facilitators, healers of different modalities and somehow make legible what they're doing to a larger audience.

Often, my experience is people enter the spiritual/healing/relational arts world from a really intellectual place and work down.

For example, 
- Read a book about the topic (NVC, IFS, meditation, etc)
- Practice it mainly from their head (sentence stems)
- Do a milllion reps and somewhere realize, this is also an embodied awareness practice
- Start getting into the weird woo territories of energy, spirits, intuition, etc

But to a beginner, there's a pre-/post- issue where you can't really tell the difference between a really deep facilitator and a really confident charlatan.

Furthermore, you aren't really that interested in the really deep people. A lot of my friends have been practicing for 15+ years and won't seem impressive on a podcast or a stage like the big head intellectuals and academia folk (Brene Brown, Lex Friedman, Huberman, etc) but they are geniuses in their own craft.

So, how to illustrate these skills that don't translate as well into written or spoken existing mediums?

hope that's legible what the q here even is

What is Relateful - it's not JUST being vulnerable> right? . What is Relateful? 

This is something i think about almost all day long. Ok that's extreme over stating, but it's a big part of my life.  It's not what is it, but more like, HOW DO I EXPLAIN IT?

What is it though.  So for me, it's been a life changing practice.  For me, after trying what felt like every healing modality in the universe (obviously impossible task), circling 2018 on circle anywhere was the tool that truly created the - changes.  

What's most alive for me at the moment, is the memories of the people who tried circling/relateful and did not like it.  WHAT no, some people don't like it? That can't be (wish i could change font color for my sarcasm). 

These imprinted memories of witnessing sessions where a person seemed to have a need and that need wasn't met.  For instance, someone (person A) reaches out to another participant (person B) with some love and care - the receiver (B) - goes into their system truth at the moment - and communicates - they cannot receive and or reciprocate this love and care.  The person A offering their care becomes upset obviously trigger.  The "giver" person A, is not able to see that they weren't actually giving love/care, but asking for love care.  Maybe this is a big assumption on my part - but if we give someone a compliment or reach out for connection and we are not received the way we wanted to be received... then it's not giving - it's almost demanding, or cloaked need. 

This person A was (probably still is) a therapist in the real world.  We connected outside of the platform and listened to their side and how upsetting this experience was for them. That person then made claims that this practice isn't safe.  Person A did not continue.  Person B  is someone i trust and wasn't at the time, but is now a Relateful facilitator.  Stating this, i want to side with participant B doing this practice, being themselves, expressing in a way, their inability to allow love in, who was not available for a connection, but was available for being with that inability to connect. That is how i witnessed it.  It felt to me like a beautiful experience, but it's hard for person A to be with how it feels to reach out and not be received. 

I'm guessing (assuming) you have all witnessed this in a session in some way.  Then there are rumors from these types that Relateful is - not just an unsafe practice, but they seem to claim it's harmful or damaging. 

The example given was the most obvious in my witnessing. The therapist unaware of what this practice and the seasoned practitioner doing the practice - with their most truth in the moment, can't receive their love and care.  There was not an attack of any kind, the receiver was in my opinion doing a beautiful practice with attunement and didn't speak until prodded to respond and when doing, did their best to be kind in their moment of not wanting to love bomb out of a social norm. 

Not saying we can't get better at attuning. Not saying it was a perfect example.  

What i'm wondering is if there is a way to explain this practice in advance- where they are prepared???   Like how powerful and life changing this could have been for the therapist and my actress friend and many others.

This sweet well mannered soft actress friend of mine practiced for a few months and felt similar in times... she said "i was being my most vulnerable and it's harmful for me to continue this practice".  This friend of mine - 5 years ago - i felt responsible, that i some how oversold the practice as a place to be your most authentic self.  She internalized it - "a safe place to be vulnerable".    But i never said that, even back then, i would describe this practice as a "safe place to practice being with unsafe".   

Now very recently with a human who will remain nameless... heard similar things:
paraphrasing:

"i was being my most vulnerable self..." 

This invisible rule, if someone is being vulnerable, then the whole group has to be gentle and say "awe" or something like that.  

Or that if one is being vulnerable, the group needs to navigate as to not cause any harm to that person.  It's so sublte and submersive comes to mind, but they participant is UNAWARE that there vulnerability is cloaked in need and manipulation.  

How to communicate what this practice is???!!!

AMA - I recently served as a juror on a murder trial. The crime happened within the last five years, and the trial happened within the last six months. I'm happy to discuss anything about my experience except:

• The exact time and location of the crime
• The names of the people involved

Those restrictions are to protect the family members involved in the case, and to protect me in case a family member doesn't like the jurors :|

Any other question is fair game.

And I'll answer the most salient question here first: we did find the defendant guilty of murder.

What are some of your uncertainties? Experiences of failure (that maybe you still haven't turned into learnings yet?) Obvious realizations? (eg: things that were maybe super obvious to others, or even obvious to you about others, but you just realized deeply apply to you?) 

Will you share some here in the comments?

#quicktakes 

Sharing controversial take can actually lead to a better world. Most of social media today rewards bold claims—but not the process of refining them. The more you double down, the more attention you get.

But I want a world where people can share strong opinions  in order to refine them, not just defend them. Relationships—online or in person—should shape our beliefs, not just reinforce them.

Dialogue shouldn't be just about making a point but instead being open to updating our views.

Updating can look many ways, including being even more sure about our perspective. 

So, for some of you, my "hot take" is that you should risk sharing the scary thing. For others, my "hot take" is that you should risk having your views updated after you've shared them. 

Which camp are you in?

#DeepTakes

UpTrust is both destroying my interest in other social media platforms and improving the way I interact with them.

It became blatant to me this week when I realized my screen time limits had long since stopped popping up for social media. I would open an app, look at up to 5 things, feel an "ugh," and go do something else.

More and more in conversations I've been saying, "I just wrote a post about that on UpTrust!" an more and more the reply is, "How can I get on it??"

I've never much been tempted to share and/or elaborate on my opinions anywhere on the internet. But I have been interested in posting them here, and my reason keeps being that it feels like the algorithm has my back. After I post an opinion here, the likelihood that something generative and worthwhile will happen feels way higher here. Even when I imagine a bunch of buttholes joining.

Earlier today, something happened that I totally had not forseen. I replied to a Facebook post I was tagged in that I've been annoyed by and avoiding for months. And I replied the way I'd reply here- thoroughly, thoughtfully, with a belief that it could be worth my time and energy. I think UpTrust is giving me a lot of practice at typing what matters to me in this kind of format, and my increased skill is getting paid forward to other parts of life.

PS- I keep wanting to type "algorhythm" because of my music background, but anyway it's an amazing name for a math rock band.

Politics self-assessment quiz from an integral perspective. I’m obsessively working on a course I’ve been trying to build for 4 years and have recently made big breakthroughs with. I’ve just completed the first draft of questions in the topic of politics.

Ideally, the way this would be scored is that people could rank all of the statements that are true for them, put as many responses as they want in a no way bucket, and put as many responses as they want in a I don’t get it bucket. I haven’t found a quiz builder tool that will let me build it that way yet, so in the meantime I’m using one that lets me randomize the order the responses are shown in and lets them rank the answers.

Here’s the first draft of the prompts, would love any and all feedback, support, and nit-picking!

What are your opinions and feelings about politics?

 M I personally don’t care, that’s just not where my focus is in my life.

 R I’ll stand firm until I die to defend my country.

 A I worry that things could be heading in the wrong direction.

 O The people with the best strategies will always win.

 G The efforts of good intentions are persistently threatened by corruption and greed.

 T The current political landscape shows me a mirror of my inner world, and the most impactful solutions start by looking within.

What are your priorities in how you interact with politics?

 M I’m not going to do anything that might make my people reject me.

  R As long as I can live my life the way I want to, we’re good, but as soon as someone tries to get in the way I’m going to fight for my rights.

 A I perform my civic duty, like voting, writing to my senator and staying aware of local politics, because that’s what a conscientious citizen does to maintain what matters.

 O I leverage connections and resources to move the cogs of the political machine in directions that support my endeavors.

 G I volunteer for causes that work to fix systemic flaws and care for those in need.

 T I trust the overarching trend that life has always had toward greater good, and I take action when needed.

What do you want or expect from politicians?

 M As long as me and my family’s lives stay the same, whatever they do is ok by me.

 R Take charge, get shit done, and don’t get in the way of what I want.

 A Protect our valued traditions and morals.

 O Make everything as functional as possible without getting in the way of progress.

 G Undo antiquated laws that systematically oppress and harm people, and create safety nets to ensure everyone’s basic needs will always be met.

 T Stay aware of societal patterns, and look for solutions that balance holding firm limits with honoring the current views of all who live here.

What are the keystones of our political culture?

 M I’m not really sure.

 R Honoring our forefathers who fought for our independence.

 A Maintaining law and order.

 O The system of checks and balances makes sure history doesn’t get in the way of innovation.

 G Legislation that protects people and the environment.

 T Public and private entities interacting to create policies that accurately represent the beliefs of the people.

When you talk about politics, where do you tend to come from?

 UL My feelings- what makes me feel safe and protected, and what makes me feel threatened.

 LL The people I love- what matters to them and will help them feel safe and protected.

 UR Data- polls, statistics, and effectiveness.

 LR Systemic impacts- how voting functions, ways laws are implemented, etc.

When you take in information about politics, what do you want most?

 UL Personalization- ask me questions and find out what matters to me.

 LL Connection- let’s listen to each other and see what we discover.

 UR Facts- I want to study what’s happening and why it’s happening.

 LR Structures- I want to explore the methods and protocols at work.

fact checking: fentanyl situation. how are folks receiving Vance’s claim that Kamala Harris’ border policy allowed more fentanyl into the country?

i don’t know much about this topic

Noticing how I'm watching the debate. My system is naturally watching for whose answers seem more solid, confident. So far, JD Vance seems a little more stable. Tim Walz seems comfortable when attacking, but very nervous and uncertain when trying to answer the core content of a question. It’s a little funny and surprising to see his nervousness – e.g., constantly repeating and overusing the term fundamental.

Vance seeming better is kinda unfortunate for me because on values I’m way more aligned with Walz!

Also noticing that I’m initially much more focused on style than substance and who’s winning… will see if that shifts.

Surprised Vance seems personable and Walz seems worried. Just on a vibe-quotient, Vance is leading strong.

Surprised Vance seems personable and Walz seems worried. Just on a vibe-quotient, Vance is leading strong.

Monogamy v polyamory. Is monogamy better? Is poly better? Is there an overall norm for people, with exceptions? Is it totally pluralistic? Here are some points for monogamy, with some counter points, to convey some of my uncertainty but nevertheless leaning into what I’ve chosen:

• Point: I don’t know a single polyamorous couple that’s lasted more than a decade, whereas I know a ton of lifelong monogamous couples.
  • Counterpoint: many of the lifelong monogamous couples are not healthy relationships
    • Counter-counter-point: perhaps being in a lifelong commitment, even if the relationship isn’t ideal, is more healthy than being hyper-independent, especially as you get older. This runs right up against boundaries, how to know what to tolerate/love as is, when to leave, etc
• Point: The poly focus of attention tends to be the relationships themselves, often a kind of relational narcissism, rather than the relationship being a foundation for engaging the world in love (ironically). This is my version of the poly is impractical argument. Most of the people I meet practicing polyamory are constantly putting tons and tons and tons of life energy into their relational problems, and it seems like their relationships are often built around addressing these problems rather than enjoying life together. The fact that it takes so much time and energy points to something being a little off. Monogamous relating also takes energy but it usually seems less self-referential; they’re more often helping each other face and engage the world, rather than face and engage each other and their relationship.
  • potential counterpoint: You’re making a developmental point Jordan, not a mono/poly point. Most people practice poly from a Red ego-centric POV; most people practice sex from Red as well. If you practice from a genuine Green+ polyamory, this doesn’t happen.
• Point: Humans are largely monogamous; it’s instinctual
  • Counterpoint: How would we know if its cultural versus biological versus systemic versus psychological per person/family? it only takes a couple of generations of evolution to make massive physical changes, so even if it is biological, how could we know what’s possible for the future?
  • Counterpoint: people wanna fuck, especially dudes
  • Cheating, mistresses, polygamy, Sex at Dawn etc…
• Point: Many poly people avoid endings, boundaries, standards, and facing their own karma by just jumping from relationships to relationship. Sure monogamous people do too, but many of them end up getting married and that crucible forces them to face their stuff. Far fewer poly people get married, and when they do they can still use other relationships to avoid their shit
  • Counterpoint: we can use absolutely everything to avoid our shit.

there’s tons more, just want to get the convo started…

What are your sci-fi TV show recommendations? Some i loved that jump to mind:

• The Expanse
• Most of the Marvel stuff like Loki, What If?
• Rick and Morty
• Legends of Tomorrow Etc