I can NOT tolerate people who do not have eye contact with me during a conversation.
It must trigger some primal response , but whenever I encounter someone who determinedly looks away, either at the floor, ceiling, or to the side, I am almost instantly angered.
Knowing that anger is a combination of fear, hurt, and frustration I have tried to pinpoint the exact nature of the emotion that this 'eye' issue arouses.
After some research I have discovered writings that state that the lack of eye contact can indicate a low self esteem on the part of the person averting their eyes. That may be true when one is dealing with a child who is dealing with an adult or one who has been found guilty of some misdeed.
However, this theory of lack of self esteem in an adult doesn't ring true to me because I do not feel angry with others if I sense their self-confidence is lacking. In fact, I like to think of myself as being, moderately at least, accepting and encouraging to anyone in troubled times.
Its my theory that eye aversion is perhaps an action of self-protection because if one doesn't look the other in the eye then whatever one says might not be considered correct or taken seriously by the recipient, and therefore the speaker may not be considered to be wrong or foolish. Eye aversion acts as a shield in this case...'if I lower my eyes I am saying I might be wrong , and then if I am not saying I am right then I can't be caught being wrong...and then you can't do anything bad to me."
I do consider eye aversion coupled with speaking in a slow low tone to be overtly manipulative. Not only does the listener have to filter the meaning of the words and subconsciously analyze the credibility of the speaker as a consequence of there being no eye contact, but this same listener also has to strain to even hear the words spoken.
This effort on behalf of the listener immediately places the power of the interaction squarely in the hands of the speaker. The sway and natural give and take of the communication is interfered with as the focus has been turned to understanding the non verbal parts of the conversation. The listener is at a disadvantage because besides having to try to process the verbal communication through filtering sentence structure, syntax, and emphasis which are all part of normal listening; the listener also has to analyze the lack of eye contact as well as cope with the physical part of just hearing the words. At this point the effort to concentrate on the speaker becomes, to me, annoying.
This annoyance brings me back to the anger issue triggered by eye aversion. Lack of eye contact, to me, may be triggering my own insecurities with regard to self-worth, respect, and being valued.
In spite of, or perhaps as a consequence of my own inner messages , I believe that anyone who does not look me in the eye according to cultural norms is as creepy as people who do not know personal space boundaries.
I avidly avoid both types and hope that I am never confronted with someone with both issues. Now that would be CREEPY indeed.
It must trigger some primal response , but whenever I encounter someone who determinedly looks away, either at the floor, ceiling, or to the side, I am almost instantly angered.
Knowing that anger is a combination of fear, hurt, and frustration I have tried to pinpoint the exact nature of the emotion that this 'eye' issue arouses.
After some research I have discovered writings that state that the lack of eye contact can indicate a low self esteem on the part of the person averting their eyes. That may be true when one is dealing with a child who is dealing with an adult or one who has been found guilty of some misdeed.
However, this theory of lack of self esteem in an adult doesn't ring true to me because I do not feel angry with others if I sense their self-confidence is lacking. In fact, I like to think of myself as being, moderately at least, accepting and encouraging to anyone in troubled times.
Its my theory that eye aversion is perhaps an action of self-protection because if one doesn't look the other in the eye then whatever one says might not be considered correct or taken seriously by the recipient, and therefore the speaker may not be considered to be wrong or foolish. Eye aversion acts as a shield in this case...'if I lower my eyes I am saying I might be wrong , and then if I am not saying I am right then I can't be caught being wrong...and then you can't do anything bad to me."
I do consider eye aversion coupled with speaking in a slow low tone to be overtly manipulative. Not only does the listener have to filter the meaning of the words and subconsciously analyze the credibility of the speaker as a consequence of there being no eye contact, but this same listener also has to strain to even hear the words spoken.
This effort on behalf of the listener immediately places the power of the interaction squarely in the hands of the speaker. The sway and natural give and take of the communication is interfered with as the focus has been turned to understanding the non verbal parts of the conversation. The listener is at a disadvantage because besides having to try to process the verbal communication through filtering sentence structure, syntax, and emphasis which are all part of normal listening; the listener also has to analyze the lack of eye contact as well as cope with the physical part of just hearing the words. At this point the effort to concentrate on the speaker becomes, to me, annoying.
This annoyance brings me back to the anger issue triggered by eye aversion. Lack of eye contact, to me, may be triggering my own insecurities with regard to self-worth, respect, and being valued.
In spite of, or perhaps as a consequence of my own inner messages , I believe that anyone who does not look me in the eye according to cultural norms is as creepy as people who do not know personal space boundaries.
I avidly avoid both types and hope that I am never confronted with someone with both issues. Now that would be CREEPY indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment