Lately, I've been paying closer attention to people's reactions when I share vulnerable information or feelings. That's because I've really started to notice when people will either minimize or validate what I share. In my life, minimization has largely been the norm.

Let's go through a quick example of minimizing and validating. Let’s say you have to do a group project in school. You’re supposed to be brainstorming, and one person has taken charge and hasn’t acknowledged any of your ideas—they’re just breezing right on by them. When your group concludes its session, you say to your classmate whom you trust, "I'm feeling really frustrated and a bit worthless that so-and-so disregarded the ideas that I offered." (What a formally speaking and emotionally in-touch student!)

Here are two possible responses your classmate might provide:

A) "You don't have worthless ideas. You have great ideas!" B) "I noticed that. That sounds really frustrating and upsetting. I'm sorry that happened."

If it’s not obvious, A = minimization, and B = validation. This is a reductive example, but it serves. If minimization has been the norm, I'm becoming optimistic that, culturally, our collective emotional intelligence is moving toward validation.

But, I am bewildered by how long I’ve been on this earth without being able to term these sorts of experiences as well as a general knowledge of both respective concepts.

I started thinking about this when I read a book called How to Talk So Kids Will Listen. I read it long before my kid was born because I was just interested in what it offered. I was surprised to find that the book was from the '80s. Apparently, it was quite popular. Despite that book having existed before I came onto this mortal plane, I get the sense that my generation and previous generations struggle more than today's generation with validating over minimization. Feelings are not always easy to receive and validate if you came from a space where you were unable to have that support yourself.

Here’s an example from, How To Talk So Kids Will Listen that stuck with me:

• Your kid comes home from school and says, “Jamie bothered me so much, I wanted to hit him."
• Parent responds: "No, you don't, that's bad. Hitting is wrong."

The book then advocates that a better response might be, "Oh, I see you are really angry."

Is that it? Empathetic listening seems pretty simple. And yet, I'm surprised to find I don't come across it in a named form so often. In my personal circles, there are some fairly obvious divides between getting one type of listening response and the other. Some people in my life, I find, will frequently try to rationalize away an uncomfortable feeling that I've shared. I have other friends who, instead, might say, "Oh, that sucks. I'm sorry." Some validate and some minimize.

I don’t mean to drop the hammer of judgement on minimization and those who proffer it; I don’t think those that minimize do it to be meaningfully hurtful. I’ve minimized plenty to both myself and others. I didn’t understand what I was doing. I thought rationalizing away someone’s bad feelings or trying to solve someone’s problems (instead of validate) was what good listening was. Somewhere (actually, over many somewheres) along the way, I've managed to stumble toward validating instead of minimizing. I’ve had to fake it 'till I spake it. And it turns out others in my life have too. Let’s talk about scripted empathy.

Sometimes, while sharing something hard, I sense that the other party, although validating me, is using a canned response. I hear "that sucks, I'm sorry," and that is the end of that moment. I could be overthinking it and oversensitive to not getting the kind of validating response I'm looking for, but I end up backing away from the fountain of validation, suspicious of its source and my thirst remains unquenched.

I started to notice this canned responding from someone in my life. Over time, I felt increasingly at odds with it. I never brought it up, because I didn't want to be hurtful. But then, the topic came up naturally. This person shared with me that they had had to learn scripted responses to act out empathetic listening and validating. It had been difficult for them to validate instead of minimize, and they had needed to rewire their brain with a script.

Sure, you can get hollow empathetic listening, just like any other kind of listening, but it’s worth remembering that these are skills we might be learning later in life, and even re-learning in special contexts. It is something I try to remind myself.

I’m glad I didn’t say anything about my suspicions with the above person because, in truth, I’ve been following this script too. When I validate, I hope I appear sincere, but there will be, for years to come yet, I think, a spider of doubt, still living in an old neural network of my brain, casting aspersions:

You’re just saying the thing.

I’d like to believe we can decide to be meaningfully present in moments of validating the struggles of others. But we don’t have control over how it is received. And at this point in my thinking about this topic, I'm hard-pressed to believe that anything other than validating is a good way to respond to someone sharing hard feelings. Sure, after validation has happened, you (the listener) can ask if it's alright to share advice or do some rationalizing. But in my experience, most times, people just want to express what's happening inside them.

A parting anecdote: some time ago, I was at a work retreat and this topic came up naturally. My one coworker said that in these kinds of situations where someone is sharing a hard thing with them, they might ask, "do you want a hug or do you want help?" Call it a script if you like, but maybe scripts are effective for a reason. This little question has stuck with me. It embedded its way past that old spider in my brain, the one dug-in to its old ways. And the next time I see the spider? I think I’ll give it a little hug.