Primary communication dynamics involve 2 entities understanding one another. In that at any moment, one operates the role of speaker and the other, listener. The resultant conversation and output is two-fold and is affected by both entities. Such that one may speak and what the other hears (or more understands) is entirely different to that of which the speaker had conveyed. Or such that the speaker fails to convey it properly (cue common communication issues blaming the speaker). As communication is the act of making known intentions and/or information between two entities, the sender and receiver both apply contextual clues and standards that will shift across the population. What is understood in one collaboration, could be construed poorly in another. Such then, that it is the listener who has the responsibility of asking questions and prompting further explanation/elaboration. Certain words or phrases can be twisted by the colloquial stance in the listener’s mind and as such would pose to warp the initial intention of the speaker. In this instance, asking the speaker to clearly state their intention with what they had said would aide in clearing the contusion. This naturally relies on a trust-bond between the entities. In the most probable event that both take responsibility for the communication, falsely perceived intentions with a statement can then be made known and further discussion can occur to adjust those context and positions in order to adapt the future communication between the two in respect to the colloquial standards that apply.

This process normally happens naturally and outside the notice of most, becoming aware of this can save many long-winded discussions that barrel in a direction that serves only to cause confusion. Cut to the chase, state the intentions, and if needed, discuss what would convey that better for this specific listener.

Your feelings are your own responsibility.

Use discernment.

‍