Instead, I was not clear at all about the decision.

In my culture of origin, confusion was not acceptable; it would show weakness. The prevailing norm was that you had to be clear, concise, on point, and tracking, and if you weren’t then you were “lesser than,” you were weak. Of course it was dangerous to be weak in every way possible—physically, psychologically, and emotionally.

Thus, as I unpacked all of this in anticipation of the conference call, I realized that I was ashamed that I was “weak” in not being clear about what I wanted to do, and I was ashamed that I was ashamed.

Up until about six months ago, I had not ever, to my memory, acknowledged that I felt ashamed. In my family of origin, you did not acknowledge that feeling—it was shameful to feel ashamed. This came to my awareness in reading a number of things, including Brene Brown’s book, The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You’re Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are. I was talking about it in workshops a lot and realized that instead of acknowledging shame, I had always said I was embarrassed. Most of my life I had conflated shame and embarrassment.

As I walked, then, I imagined a whole dialogue of letting the others on the conference call in on my realization during my check in. Thinking through the script of that dialogue brought me a lot of relief, and then I realized I was now anxious about revealing this to people. After all, everything I was planning to reveal was taboo—being confused (and therefore “weak”) and being ashamed.

Nonetheless, after everyone else checked in, I told them my story.

It was scary to do so—my heart rate was up and my palms were clammy as I related the above to them. I then asked for feedback, and I was very moved by their feedback and really liked how the conversation went after that. I was so relieved to have shared what I said, especially because the contrast between how I had felt before and after was clear.

I was no longer affected by this huge issue of my lack of clarity about the decision; it was like this big burden was relieved from me. All of my tormented thinking about my confusion was removed and I could just be in the meeting and say, “I’m not clear and I would like to get clarity.” I could break it down into specific things I was not clear about and talk them through, getting collaboration from people on the call. We ended up making a decision that all five of us seemed pleased with.

As I reflected on this later, it made me think about how hiding our shame—being ashamed of being ashamed—is exactly what gives it more power. Revealing it and including others in our experience dissipates that power; the shame fades under the light of revelation. This is exactly the opposite of what the shame is telling us to do. Our shame instructs us to hide it, both whatever we are ashamed of and the fact that we are ashamed, and when we listen to it, we stay imprisoned under it. As soon as I revealed it, difficult though that was, all the anxiety and stress I had experienced faded away.

Liberation lies just beyond revealing the truth of our experience.

I encourage you to inquire into those areas where you feel shame, and see what you find. How, in a safe way, might you share these feelings with someone close to you, just as an experiment to see what happens as a result?

Post by Ike Lasater with Julie Stiles

“As a result of our telecircle, I am beginning to see and accept that conflict pops up everywhere and looks like it’s an unavoidable part of individuation…. Conflict even happens, ongoingly, inside of each of us.  Rather than seeking to prevent or avoid conflict, I’m now beginning to see conflict as a delicious opportunity for connection, for getting in touch with what really matters to me and to the other person.  Like, bring it on!!!

“…What stimulated my consciousness about this is that I just received an email from a dear friend who was saying how much he longs to stay out of conflict and how determined he is to never fight with anyone.  I noticed how sad I felt about this, worried about the price he is paying by the various strategies he’s using to prevent disagreements…and then I began to laugh.  How I have changed!!  How glad I am that conflict no longer scares me, and that I am starting to feel joy and happy anticipation when someone begins to express their pain…welcoming the aliveness…. And, our weekly practice is the stimulus for the transformation.”

I really like what Jan has to say about how conflict pops up everywhere in our lives; it’s why we have begun using the phrase “Mediate Your Life” for our trainings. She speaks eloquently to the change that is possible in how we hold conflict, from avoiding it or finding it frightening to “joy and happy anticipation” and seeing it as an opportunity to connect with ourselves and others. This shift is available to everyone, and Jan also points to the key to creating the shift: practice.

If you have already been introduced to NVC mediation and would like another practice opportunity, I encourage you to contact Jan to find out more about her telecircle and other offerings. Her email address is LearningGiraffe@yahoo.com.

Thus, I felt enormous pressure to be able to solve the conflict. I was the one who had to fix it.

Only after years of experiencing NVC did that view finally begin to shift. Initially, I didn’t get the whole “connection” thing; for years I heard Marshall Rosenberg saying that the focus with NVC was on connection without grokking at all what that meant. It seemed to me that he was focusing on the wrong thing: to solve a conflict, you have to focus on the solution, not on some vague concept like connection.

Even as I continued to hold onto my beliefs, however, I simultaneously began to experience what he was talking about, both in my own life and in witnessing mediations. I began to see that when people were connected, they naturally began to collaborate to resolve their dispute; they didn’t need the mediator to come up with an answer.

As my thinking continued to shift, I realized a couple of things. First, the people in the dispute clearly had the resolutions, or the means to get to the resolution, within themselves. All they needed was a little help to connect deeply with themselves and their own motivations, as well as the underlying motivations of the other party. Second, since the parties in the dispute were the ones who had to live with the results of the mediation, it only made sense for them to be the ones to arrive at a resolution. A solution imposed by a mediator, or sometimes even suggested by a mediator, would be much less likely to be satisfying to everyone and therefore to last.

Now, I trust completely in other people’s ability to resolve their own conflicts. What I offer is no longer an attempt to be omnipotent and find the solution that will fix everything; I simply offer a few skills that are likely to increase the quality of connection between the parties, which can then flow into a collaborative resolution. Not only is this a much more enjoyable (and sane) way for me to be in the mediator’s chair, I think it also contributes far more to solutions that work.

This post was written by Ike Lasater with Julie Stiles