Diversity Seminar
I recently attended a Diversity Seminar at my company, and I have to say that I'm now much more diverse. I've learned not to judge people solely based on their age, race, and gender, but to look deeper and inquire about their heritage and political leanings, so that I can judge them on the things beneath the surface as well. I've learned that women enjoy being invited to golf outings, but resent being asked to attend an evening meeting. Yet, they'll go to the latter before the former. I've learned that people of color prefer to be called "people of color" and people of non-color prefer to be called "whitees." I've learned that quotas are good ... as long as you don't call them quotas. And I've learned that we can all learn something interesting from someone else -- unless that someone else shares your value system.
And I've learned that people who don't learn anything at diversity seminars have nothing to contribute to society. What is this country built on, if not diversity? That is, besides life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, justice for all, taxation without representation, universalized health care, and having nothing to fear but fear itself?
Consider It Done
I have two employees and they're both killing me. I'd like to fire them, but I need to get work done. Anyway, here's my problem:
When given a task, one of them always says, "Consider it done." Here's what I'd like to hear: "Consider it received." Then when it's done it's okay to say, "Consider it done."
The other one always says, "No problem." If it was really
no problem, then why are there
problems that I have to deal with on the back-side?
Killing me.
Count your blessings. They're not really trying to kill you. It sounds like they mean well, they've just fallen into some habits that annoy you. Consider this: Some of my employees really are trying to kill me -- I think they saw the show on Discovery Health about the wife who poisoned her husband with castor beans, and, sure enough, now they keep trying to get me to eat casseroles and cakes that they've brought to work. Meanwhile, they've given me the nickname, "Castor." Someone needs to take this to the police if I die.
Bad Cop/Good Cop
I've noticed that as my wife and I interact with the kids, we tend to complement each other in the following manner: when one of us takes an active role, the other becomes more passive ... and vice versa. And the strange thing is that when one of us reverses roles, the other one follows suit. It's like the universe requires that we polarize. Have you encountered that in your counseling?
As a world-renown psychotherapist, I have indeed encountered this. As a matter of fact, I wrote a series of articles on the subject, breaking new ground and earning my second Grawemeyer award in the process. To summarize:
The behavior you've described is referred to as the "Bad Cop/Good Cop" Phena -- the structured collection of phenomena that explains the balanced disciplinary instincts of parents and superordinates (bosses, colloquially) when executed in tandem. The signature derivative (or "Alpha") of the BC/GC Phena is of course the Bad Cop/Good Cop method, whereby one parent (for the sake of argument) takes an active role (BC) as he/she relates to the child, prompting the other parent to take a more passive role (GC). This allows the child freedom to "choose" which parent he/she can confide in, although it's really no choice at all. The child will always seek consolation with the more sympathetic parent, allowing the chastisement of the more active parent to go un-challenged, thereby allowing the child to passively process and accept the harsh ridicule. It's pure survival instinct, really. Nothing more. So that's basically the meat of the first six articles -- on to the seventh...
The second method (not counting the inverted Alpha) is known as Good Cop/No Cop, defined thusly: Parent A legitimately inverts the process by initiating with warmth and understanding (GC), but then Parent B loses his/her nerve and retreats (NC), leaving Parent A with the unsavory dilemma of whether to perform both roles (an almost impossible task), or abandon the script and chase down Parent B. Either way, the result is somewhat less functional than the Alpha, but still has some effectiveness if carried out to its conclusion. And since I'm running out of room, I'll skip to article #26...
Worse than the Bad Cop/Bad Cop method is Bad Cop/Dirty Cop. This is where the Alpha method is initiated (Parent A/Active Role) to a point, but breaks down because Parent B is taking money and/or cocaine from criminals without reporting the transaction. This is a very dysfunctional situation for the child, but not as dysfunctional as...
Bad Cop/Bad Commissioner: This is the most devastating of the Phena. This is where the Alpha is initiated, but Parent B starts criticizing Parent A for their incompetence, ignorance, or general meanness. In the process, Parent B upsets the whole dynamic by establishing himself/herself as the superordinate, Parent A as the subordinate, and the child as irrelevant. Parent A is consumed with Parent B's behavior and the child is left to define his/her own shortcomings, which now include causing discord between his/her two favorite people. This method will always resort in one cop being transferred to a different precinct, prompting 2 other cops to enter the scene and engage in relations with the first 2 cops. Not a pretty picture...
Big Words
My husband is driving me crazy. He just got back from a conference for pseudo-intellectuals and now he's acting like an idiot, using all this touchy-feely language with all these big words that don't mean what he thinks they mean. I also suspect he's making up words. How do I get him to stop?
Well, Jules, here's what you can do: Maybe try honoring your husband instead of denigrating him. Try being a little more circumspect instead of circumscript. The fact that you're so recalcitrant makes me wonder if you've ever really appreciated my obfuscation. It seems to me that you've become quite ubiquitous, and not a little bit didactic. I'll accept some of the blame, but at the risk of sounding like a sycophant, I'm not sure I can fully subscribe to your circuitous iconoclysm. Moreover, the fact that you attack my heteroingenuity in such an idiomatic and sacrosanct fashion tells me that you're calling your own heteroingenuity into question, and as anyone can tell you, that's just plain unkempt. Try looking at the logistics of your own eye before pointing out the spectacle of your partner.
LOL
I just found out something disturbing, and that is that my whole support base is actually paper-thin and in fact may be working against me. Here's why: I recently learned that in the digital realm LOL means "Laugh Out Loud", NOT "Lots Of Luck". That discovery prompted me to retrace my steps, and in the process I wandered into some unsettling territory. Like this little piece of dialog:
"I'm thinking about applying for a job with the FBI. I'm very good at covert operations, like the time I had to fill-in as the tooth fairy when Jimmy's [my brother's] kids were staying with me."
"LOL"
Or this one:
"I'm trying to track down my biological parents. Maybe they're trying to find me, too!"
"LOL"
Or:
"I'm thinking about trying out my neighbors' internet-based business. They say if I invest just 5 hours a week, I can achieve financial freedom in 2 years."
"LOL"
So all this time they've been jeering instead of cheering. What do you do when you find out that your friends are no friends at all?
I don't know -- I've never tried to get out of an internet-based business.
