FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Culturally Sensitive Perspectives on Communication Frequency: "Keeping in Touch" vs. "Being Desperat
Culturally Sensitive Perspectives on Communication Frequency: "Keeping in Touch" vs. "Being Desperat
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"I only read the thread title and my heads already hurting. " I like long titles. My favourite of all time is Belle and Sebastian's album: "Fold your hands child, you walk like a peasant" But on the OP, I'm afraid I've no idea as I too didn't get very far! | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I apologize if thid post was hard to understand and caused confusion. I value your feedback and will work on improving my communication. Thank you for your patience and support. " Not confused, it was just long! 
I agree with NiceCouple - I suspect this is more personal than cultural. Perhaps generational, too. | |||
"Hello Everyone, I hope this message finds you all well. I wish to open up a discussion that I feel is pertinent in our increasingly globalized and interconnected world and online meeting/dating. It's about the nuanced difference between 'keeping in touch' and being perceived as 'desperate' or 'needy,' especially in the context of cross-cultural communication among people who potentially can meet or establish a sexually encounter. It has come to my attention that cultural attitudes toward communication frequency can vary greatly. In some cultures, frequent communication is seen as a sign of care(Italy for example), concern, or simply maintaining a strong connection. However, in other cultures, particularly in UK, this same frequency might be interpreted as 'desperate' or 'needy.' The issue arises when we, perhaps unknowingly, apply our own cultural lenses to interpret actions that have a different cultural origin. An innocent "extra text," for instance, may be viewed as an overstep, leading to misunderstandings and possible strain in relationships. I believe it's crucial to address this topic. As we continue to engage with people from diverse cultural backgrounds, it's important to develop a more empathetic, understanding, and tolerant perspective on communication norms. What are your thoughts? How can we navigate these cultural nuances in communication without falling into the trap of stereotyping or misunderstanding? Is there a universal "balance" to be achieved, or should we always adapt based on the individual's cultural background? Looking forward to a fruitful discussion. " In my opinion, where there's a dialogue, it's up to the people involved to set the pace and tone of that dialogue. You've used the example of it being common in Italy to communicate more frequently, than in the UK. Don't the individuals views take precedence over any perceived cultural standards? I'm going to take a wild swing (and accept that I may be well wide of the mark!). Has someone from the UK told you you're messaging too frequently? Could the differences be between people, not cultures and no more complicated than that?  | |||
"I apologize if thid post was hard to understand and caused confusion. I value your feedback and will work on improving my communication. Thank you for your patience and support. " Not confused but you might get more debate using KISS Keep It Simple Stupid * That is not implying you are stupid btw but you could have asked this question a few ways. It's so long winded, even the title. It will put off lots of people. Look at the popular threads. Often use KISS without knowing it and will attract plenty of debate. | |||
"I think it's personal to individuals rather than cultural." I agree and thereby lies the danger. If one party wants lots of contact and the other does not it is "needy" vs "Uncommunicative". This is very similar in a way to sexual assault. The assault, unless it is bloody obvious to anyone, is usually in the eyes of the "victim". That makes it no less traumatic but often far more difficult to predict for a 3rd party. Sadly the only cure for the perception of too much or too little communication appears to be; communication; i.e. catch 22. | |||
| |||
"As someone who is not from the U.K., cross-cultural communication is something I think about often and not solely on Fab. How do I manage the differences that exist? In the past, I avoided those with different communication styles— for me that was mostly those culturally different than myself. I flatly refused to get to know any British person for any intimate reason. At some point, I realised I was excluding myself from the potential of meeting great individuals by creating this generalisation about those culturally different than me. Instead, I’ve moved on to managing the differences in a different manner. For me, I will always be myself. If someone doesn’t like that, that’s not the right person for me to spend time with. When I meet someone new and make a connection, I expect them to show equal interest in me. If their communication leaves me feeling a lack of interest, then I move on. I make my view about someone making time for me abundantly evident — we are all busy in life, but we have a choice. You can choose to be too busy to go to the gym, too busy to respond to an email, too busy to take the clothes off your Peleton you’ve not used for six months, but you’re never too busy to make time for someone you want to make time for. If you can’t make time for me, you’re telling me I’m not a priority, and if I’m only an option and not a priority, you’re simply not a part of my life. Now, how is this perceived in a cultural environment where many may see this as intense and over the top? Clearly, painting everyone with one broad brush helps no one. Sure some will see my view as over the top, intense, too much, et al — maybe I am, but I’ll be me and that’s more valuable for all. You can’t be for everyone and everyone isn’t for you. Just like any other preferences, you find some that fit your needs and some that don’t. Move on when someone doesn’t meet your needs — even with communication— rather than seeking to paint them with a broad brush as an entire culture. Perhaps allow yourself to be more broad-minded, rather than saying your Italian culture’s communication style as a whole doesn’t fit into that of the U.K., seek those that do for your style regardless of their culture. " I just love your reply. Brava | |||
"As someone who is not from the U.K., cross-cultural communication is something I think about often and not solely on Fab. How do I manage the differences that exist? In the past, I avoided those with different communication styles— for me that was mostly those culturally different than myself. I flatly refused to get to know any British person for any intimate reason. At some point, I realised I was excluding myself from the potential of meeting great individuals by creating this generalisation about those culturally different than me. Instead, I’ve moved on to managing the differences in a different manner. For me, I will always be myself. If someone doesn’t like that, that’s not the right person for me to spend time with. When I meet someone new and make a connection, I expect them to show equal interest in me. If their communication leaves me feeling a lack of interest, then I move on. I make my view about someone making time for me abundantly evident — we are all busy in life, but we have a choice. You can choose to be too busy to go to the gym, too busy to respond to an email, too busy to take the clothes off your Peleton you’ve not used for six months, but you’re never too busy to make time for someone you want to make time for. If you can’t make time for me, you’re telling me I’m not a priority, and if I’m only an option and not a priority, you’re simply not a part of my life. Now, how is this perceived in a cultural environment where many may see this as intense and over the top? Clearly, painting everyone with one broad brush helps no one. Sure some will see my view as over the top, intense, too much, et al — maybe I am, but I’ll be me and that’s more valuable for all. You can’t be for everyone and everyone isn’t for you. Just like any other preferences, you find some that fit your needs and some that don’t. Move on when someone doesn’t meet your needs — even with communication— rather than seeking to paint them with a broad brush as an entire culture. Perhaps allow yourself to be more broad-minded, rather than saying your Italian culture’s communication style as a whole doesn’t fit into that of the U.K., seek those that do for your style regardless of their culture. I just love your reply. Brava "Grazie. | |||
"Hello Everyone, I hope this message finds you all well. I wish to open up a discussion that I feel is pertinent in our increasingly globalized and interconnected world and online meeting/dating. It's about the nuanced difference between 'keeping in touch' and being perceived as 'desperate' or 'needy,' especially in the context of cross-cultural communication among people who potentially can meet or establish a sexually encounter. It has come to my attention that cultural attitudes toward communication frequency can vary greatly. In some cultures, frequent communication is seen as a sign of care(Italy for example), concern, or simply maintaining a strong connection. However, in other cultures, particularly in UK, this same frequency might be interpreted as 'desperate' or 'needy.' The issue arises when we, perhaps unknowingly, apply our own cultural lenses to interpret actions that have a different cultural origin. An innocent "extra text," for instance, may be viewed as an overstep, leading to misunderstandings and possible strain in relationships. I believe it's crucial to address this topic. As we continue to engage with people from diverse cultural backgrounds, it's important to develop a more empathetic, understanding, and tolerant perspective on communication norms. What are your thoughts? How can we navigate these cultural nuances in communication without falling into the trap of stereotyping or misunderstanding? Is there a universal "balance" to be achieved, or should we always adapt based on the individual's cultural background? Looking forward to a fruitful discussion. " It really depends on which of the stereotypes you wish to embrace or ignore - stereotypes are indeed real, and in many cases do point exactly towards an observed behavioural fact - my own cultural heritage is split between English and French, My family do indeed get deep into loud hand-gesticulated debates (particularly about Macron lol) it always takes me more than a moment to adjust my stereotyped English ways to their stereotyped French ways. They look at me just as curiously as I look at them at times. Should I wish to benefit/take advantage from a stereotyped French way, it would be very easy for me to do. and vice versa I would guess. I don't think however that being seen as 'needy' is a French. Italian. English. or any other ethnocentrically derived behaviour. The depth of your relationship to the other person receiving your attention is key here. You need to know them just as much as they need to know you. Some people are self-contained and need little input and attention from others, some need as much as they can get. You will get wildly differing results from your input into them. Here on fab, the whole idea is to 'get attention' really, isn't it? There must be sometimes, if not often times when all of us would look at messages coming in to our phones, social media etc etc. and think 'For crying out loud just give me a break for a moment!' The connected world demands that we answer and in good time, doesn't it? I have slowed my response to general random messages and essentially put many of them on hold. People need to know we all have this other life we live outside the message'sphere. How many times do you see couples out together - but - somewhere else on their phones?' Early conversations about how one communicates is always a good idea. Until you know the actual truth about how you come over, don't create the stereotype by playing to a stereotype. | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
