Navigating Conflict With Close Friends: Addressing Racism, Misunderstandings, and Repair After 25 Years

In this episode of the Conflict Skills Podcast, Simon Goode is joined by Helen Jarvis to explore a real-life conflict between long-term friends that erupted over accusations of racism sparked by a controversial book. 

They discuss the emotional complexity of values-based disputes, the challenge of balancing honesty with relationship preservation, and practical steps for navigating these tense situations, whether as a participant or an "accidental mediator." 

Throughout their conversation, they emphasize the importance of slowing down, seeking to understand different perspectives, and using thoughtful, non-defensive communication to help repair and rebuild relationships.

---------------------------

Helen's details:

Helen Jarvis 

ripplelearning.com.au 

Ripple Learning facilitates customised, dynamic, safe, and highly effective learning experiences that support workplaces to build the skills needed to navigate conflict, manage stress and maximise performance. 

We are a social enterprise, creating a ripple effect by directing 100% of profits to youth mental health charities.

---------------------------

My details:

Simon Goode 

simongoode.com 

podcast@simongoode.com

---------------------------

TIMESTAMPS: 

00:00 Conflict Skills & Resolution Insights

05:25 "Friendship Fallout Case Study"

08:27 "Bystander or Upstander?"

12:15 The Power of Choosing to Speak

15:25 "Choosing How to Engage"

19:41 Assumptions, Values, and Understanding

21:33 "Determining Goals and Relationships"

26:07 "Effective Conflict Resolution Approach"

28:27 "Listening to Understand Gemma"

30:48 Mediating While Maintaining Friendships

35:46 "Managing Stressful Conversations"

37:33 "Finding Voice and Impactful Language"

41:56 "Embracing Conflict with Self-Talk"

43:29 "Finding the Right Words"

Transcript

0:00

Hello and welcome back to the Conflict Skills Podcast. I'm your host, professional mediator Simon Goode. I set up this podcast to provide free resources and tools for dealing with conflict. So if that sounds like the kind of thing that's useful to you, please consider pressing subscribe in the episode. Today I'm going to be having a conversation with a good friend of mine and fellow mediator, Helen Jarvis. Helen is involved with Ripple Learning, who does sort of professional development workshops, coaching programs, that kind of thing for professionals across all different sectors in topics like dealing with conflict, for example, conflict resolution skills, managing difficult conversations, but also other areas like accidental counsellor skills, what you can say or do when you're dealing with someone who's very upset and distressed, like a staff member, for example, whose parent might have passed away. What do you say and do in the moment to find the balance between holding onto the boundaries, but also showing empathy and support? All of those kind of nuanced perspectives around the challenges of doing performance management or leadership or owning a small business, or even just working in a professional context these days with all of the conflict and difficult situations that we need to manage. So if you like Helen and you're interested in learning more about her services, you can check out her website, ripplelearning.com au Now, I really like talking with Helen, first of all, because she's a very skilled mediator, so she brings a lot of almost what you would think of as technical knowledge. Like, here's a good example of a. Question that I can use in this situation type of thing. And so I'm very eagerly adding those to my own toolkit every time that we talk about whatever the thing is that we're discussing. But she also approaches conflict and communication in a very different way than I do. We come from very different backgrounds and so it makes sense why we would have different perspectives. But one of the things that I'm sure that we're both proud of is that we're still able to communicate and have a civil, robust kind of conversation about it, to introduce different ideas, to manage it when the other person might disagree with us or whatever else it might be. So there's a few moments in the conversation today, even that Helen talks about something that I wouldn't necessarily agree with, it wouldn't necessarily be the way that I'd frame it. But hearing that different perspective is very useful for me, developing additional layers of nuance or, or maybe even just thinking about the same situation, but from a different perspective. So I really like all of that and I think the conversation in itself is a good representation of how we can have a discussion with someone who's not the same as us, who doesn't agree with us, where our expectations don't align on every level. And so that's also true for the actual scenario that we're going to be looking at here. It's conflict that has erupted between friends because there's been accusations of racism that goes back and forth one way or the other. And two friends in the friends group have effectively cut each other off. And this is after being best friends since they were five years old and they're now 30. So 25 years of friendship. And at least in the short term, it looks to be on quite shaky ground. They are not speaking and there's obviously some level of animosity that still exists between them. Unfortunately, they're doing something that I think is even worse than not speaking. They're posting about each other in a passive aggressive kind of way on social media. And that passive aggressive kind of poking each other dynamic tends not to result. In the best outcomes, at least if. Our goal is to restore the friendship, to restore trust, to rebuild a sense of connection, whatever is that we're hoping for, that we can actually achieve here. The passive aggressive social media posts are. Probably not going to be the best pathway forward to achieve that end, I don't think. And so Helen and I talk about what might be going on here, what drivers could be influencing this situation where the friends are in conflict, how the different people involved might be feeling, and then just thinking about some options of what they could consider. As always, we're not necessarily saying this is the answer. This is the single thing that you should do. We don't know your situation. Even if you're not in exactly the same situation as this, you might have a friend who is, for example, and we try to just keep that open perspective that this is one option that you could consider. But ultimately it's up to you. There might be something else that you decide to do which would work better because of some unique perspective that you're dealing with, or a unique personality that you're dealing with, or whatever else it might be. So please don't think that this is criticism of anything that you might have done if you didn't exactly follow the options that we've suggested here. And we're not saying that this is necessarily the best prescribed path. Our hope really is that as we present the options that we would consider, and then also some of our thinking that led up to there, that you might be able to take a similarly strategic approach when it comes to dealing with your own conflict situations. If you like this kind of episode, please let me know. You can shoot me an email podcastimongood.com leave a positive review or make a comment down below. And if you've got a conflict situation that you would like me to talk about in a future episode of the podcast, you can send that through as well. Thank you very much for listening. I hope that the conversation is useful. Well, Helen, thank you very much for joining me. We were just talking off microphone before we pressed record about the topic that we're going to be discussing today and so of the challenges even in talking about it, even in a context like recording a podcast episode, for example, let alone when you're dealing with conflict between friends groups. So we're going to look at a particular case study today of fallout between long term friends, the person who wrote the scenario, the author so to speak, and then two friends, Sally and Gemma. And they've been friends since they were five. And all of a sudden there's been this rift that has come up due to something that happened recently and probably the fallout as a result too. So if it's all right, Helen, I might read the case study and then we could just share our initial thoughts and maybe go through a couple of different things that stand out to us from a mediation perspective and then also thinking about some of the different options that we could consider for responding. So here's the case study. I'm 30 with two best friends, Sally and Gemma, since we were five. Everyone has now grown up. Sally has two kids and Gemma is also married and busy, so we don't connect frequently. Recently we had the chance to meet for coffee at Gemma's house. As we were leaving, Sally noticed a book on the shelf called 10 Little N Words written as the actual word. She immediately zeroed in on Gemma, demanding to know why she had this book. Gemma explained that she's a literary aficionado and interested as it's a first edition of quite a rare book. But Sally's face immediately darkened and a brief argument followed with both people accusing the other of being racist. It has been two weeks and the only thing that's changed is that they have unfriended each other on social media and made repeated posts about the importance of fighting anti racism. Well Helen, there's so much in there. That we could discuss and pull apart. And probably it's not necessary to think about the solution and what the right answer might be. But what's that like for you even reading through these scenarios, like what do you make at this from a first reaction kind of perspective? Yeah, the, the thing that comes to mind straight away is the stakes feel really high for everybody. The, the vulnerability of Gemma and Sally is apparent straight away. For the person who's the third friend in this group, the stakes are high for them too. This is a really long term. They're talking about a topic that typically attracts strongly held views, perspectives and value systems. And it's really easy to stumble into a zone where the impact is really significant. And most humans find these conversations very, very, very tricky to navigate. Topics like this have always risen as challenging, but I think even more at. The moment because of that emotional charged nature of things or how come. I think, and we'll probably talk about this a little as we go through this conversation. There's opportunity in so many contexts for us as humans to consider whether we're going to be a bystander to behavior or use of language that is impactful on others, or whether we're going to choose to engage as an upstander in the moment and to speak out. And I, I think we're watching in so many different contexts. In the global context that we're living in at the moment we're watching people wrestle with is now the moment in this particular conversation with. Keep it at the micro level. Any given conversation is now the moment that I choose to be a bystander and be a silent observer to what I witness? Or is this a moment that I want to choose to be an upstander? And then if we have chosen to be an upstander, how we do that is going to be significantly impactful. It's sort of like I should do this. There's something that I should fight against, advocate for, resist that, that type of thing. Do we. Do we. And it's. Do we be a bystander who is a silent, passive witness? And I. This is not me expressing a view on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of General Sally's engagement. I'm just acknowledging that both of them are making choices and that third friend is making a ch. About whether to engage with a particular topic that is emotionally charged and is. Has. Is either being experienced as impactful or has the potential to be experienced as impactful. It's really interesting, isn't it? Because it feels like the stakes are high. And yet when we think about is it important that two friends agree on every particular thing about racism or the war in Ukraine or Gaza or trans. Or there's just so Many unlimited issues. That seem to be incredibly contentious at the moment. And I don't know any friends that I agree with on 100% everything. So the stakes are high in terms of, like, it certainly is stressful and distressing to talk about, and people can take offense. And you might risk being tarnished by someone else as you're for this or you're not resisting this or whatever. Like, we need more upstanders. How can you just be a bystander type of thing? But then on the other hand, it's like, we're just mates. Right. And so it's. And sometimes it's not an either or choice you're making. It's not about, am I an upstander or am I a bystander, or am I trying to value this relationship, but what choice am I? Again, it's about conscious choice here. And sometimes we're trying to do both. Sometimes it's actually, I have a view, and I might feel that if I stay silent on expressing that view that I'm condoning or sanctioning other views or perspectives that really concern me. And at the same time, I also might value these relationships. And so if I. If I want to do both, if I want to value the relationship and engage as an upstander, how do I. How do I do that? Yeah. Or do I. So much like, social media is trickling down and pushing us to these. Like, what's your position on this? Yeah. Are you saying that you're against this? Are you saying that you're for this? It's like, what do you mean? Like, yeah. Do you denounce this? I had a workplace mediation that. Where that was said in last year. I want them to denounce this or something. It's like, what are you talking about? Like, I'm not a statesman acting for a country that makes, like, press announcements or whatever. Like, yeah, it's just really interesting. And yet that person really felt like they were entitled to it and the other person should do it and let go of it. I think that's true. And, you know, even as you and I talk about this, Simon, you know, it's that wrestling with at what point in time do we each individually have a view around whether I'm reluctant to use the word should I prefer to say, at what point in time do I want to speak up? And I think there's thinking about the literary aficionado in here, Sally. And those who are history aficionados will think back through history over the times where silence and people not speaking up had consequences too. Right. So actually there's a useful parallel here, I think, you know, between the notion of a literary aficionado or a history aficionado saying, well, if I, if, if we miss the opportunity to speak up in a moment, what impact does that have? So the choice to speak or the choice to not speak also has an impact. And in every single scenario, I think humans, unfortunately so many of us aren't making conscious choices about that. Where you talked about that trickle down effect of social media, where stumbling through, you know, that sense of following the crowd in the moment, is there enough energy activation to make it safe enough for a person to feel they can speak up or are they speaking up because they feel they want to? Unfortunately, there's not a lot of conscious choice about whether people are choosing to and in particular how the how really matters here. Right, yeah. And so they just react and jump in and then before you know it, something said, it's blotted out or. That's right. And, and, and I'm under no illusions that this can be done perfectly. You know, I think you and I both acknowledged of, of microphone before we started the sensitivity of topics like this, and even for you and I navigating these conversations all the time, the nervous energy that arises when you worry about handling topics like this with the care that they deserve to be looked after. Right. When I started to do the intro, I couldn't even put a sentence together. You know what I mean? Like, it really does manifest in unlikely kind of ways. It's not like there's someone sitting in. The room with me. That's right, you know, giving me a. Furrowed brow because they disagree with what I'm saying. It's right. And record it can. Yeah, look, but I think all values based disputes tend to do that because as you observed, people have the right to have different views and they will forever in a day hold different views and value systems and there is always the opportunity to express them. If that's not done with care, the impact on the strength of those relationships we have with other humans can be really significant. And our capacity to influence is significantly impactful and so significantly impacted by the way we engage. Yeah. The other thing about how we decide to engage, or if we decide to engage, so to speak, or be bystander, opt out of engaging, etc. The other choice that sometimes we need to make is at what level do we engage or what level do we think about these issues? I don't know if you've ever used that old story of all of the blind people holding onto different parts of the elephant. And one person says, it's a rope because he's holding the tail. One person says it's a big sheet. I don't know what you're talking about. Because she's holding the earth. Another person's touching the side of it. Saying, this thing is massive. How can you even figure out what this is? You know, they're blind. So in that case, it makes sense why they're having that challenge, communicating. But even for people who can see, I think the analogy is still true. But they're just standing so close to it. All I can see is one bit of the elephant, so to speak. And then as mediators, I'm often saying, guys, come up here and look at the overall perspective. Like, can't you see this is part of a dynamic, like back and forth that's going on between the two of you, or the influence of this other person, or the chaos of the environment that you're in, what's causing the issue? But, you know, people still hold on. To this simpler understanding and it's confronting almost to let go of that sense. That you're right, that you've got the facts, because it's secure and it makes. Us to feel confident and so that. You know, psychology talks about cognitive dissonance, wanting to resist, taking on board a new idea. It's. It's why it's stressful, challenging, it's exhausting. It takes more energy. You have to maybe admit when you've been wrong or retread over old ground and all that kind of stuff. So we're inherently resistant to new ideas, aren't we? We are. And, you know, that elephant metaphor. I think we're also seeing through things through the lens of our own life experience. And, you know, I look at. In that scenario, look at Sally's reaction. I don't know anything about Sally. Her cultural background, her ethnicity, how her family may or may not have been impacted by racist or discriminatory behaviours in the past. That's likely to be a lens that affects. The way she engages. Emma's lens around the way she values literature means that she's going to see the issue through a particular lens as well. They might actually have a whole heap of significantly overlapping values. Values. But the lens of their experience, as you're saying, is limiting. Yeah, the way they're seeing the issue. And they're not going to know what the other person's experience really is like. We. We actually can't understand the other person's perspective. And all of the ways they're thinking about that. Right. They probably don't even know of their own perspectives and understand why they're having. The gut reaction or whatever's going on for them as well. Like, you know, we're not very transparent even to ourselves at times. So you mean that sense of being taking offense or something, it might have been stirred up from personal background or whatever. So of course, if you're coming in saying you're wrong to feel that way, I'm just a history, you know, enthusiast or literature enthusiast or whatever. Like the person who's had that experience of their parents being discriminated against or something. It doesn't matter. You're not going to change their mind giving them more facts or more information. Actually, I think as a mediator, what I often do is slow down and. Acknowledge both perspectives first. Oh, fair enough. I can understand how you might feel like that given that you've been through this. Or, okay, I hadn't realized that this was important to you. That makes sense why when that happened, you would have found it to be particularly challenging. And then on the other side, I. Can see where you're coming from, given your perspective and what's. You're a literature aficionado. I get what you're saying about we need to talk about contentious topics and just silencing things isn't going to work to resolve them long term. And then we can talk about this. So it sounds like you're both on the same page then in terms of whatever it is. Like you don't agree that people should be discriminated against. You don't agree that you should use this type of language in everyday cadence. You're still really probably quite distressed about the fact that you've lost a long term friend. That sounds like underneath it all, you both would like to find some options to repair. If only there was some way that that might be possible. Have I got that right? You know, it really is like you're seeing this. You're seeing this. Right? Right. I think that's spot on, Simon. It's first of all, us really leaning in to understand their experience of that moment and to offer that acknowledgement. You know, I'm watching scenarios like this play up, play out very often and you've named the same. I think both of you are. You and I are doing a lot of mediations with this type of subject matter at the moment. And quite often the person in Gemma's shoes expresses the view of feeling really hurt, that assumptions have been made about their values or whether they're engaging in a racist way, a considerate way, or not a considerate way. And the assumptions being made that their value systems are no longer aligned when perhaps they potentially are not just about what appears to be the presenting issue on the surface, but in this case also about the history of their relationship potentially and what assumptions they might each have made about each other. Historically true these days. Assumptions that cause the offense, isn't it the misunderstanding. You don't care what I actually think. You're going to paint me as this. That's it, I suppose then you either. Engage and continue or you do exactly the same. Well, you're just a. Whatever. You're just this lefty, righty, whatever. Like it's literally the same thing happening on both sides of all of these. Issues very frequently, isn't it? That's right. And then that third person, we don't know a lot about her. I wonder what role she's played in the history of their. Their friendship. And has that person always been an accidental mediator? Has she always been a bystander observer? There's a historical dynamic that they could consider shifting. What advice would you give that person, Helen? Well, I think first of all, I think I always come back to what's her goal. So she obviously didn't engage in the moment, but to step away and then to think about what's the most important thing for her now. Is it the relationship she has with each person separately? Is it the relationship she wants the three of them to have together? Is it the issue itself? Does she have a view on whether historical books, either fiction or non fiction? I think this one actually probably is a fiction book from a little googling to try and title I recognized but I Went hunting and so is her goal to focus on the issue? Is it about what's the goal here? And it could be that actually she wants to achieve all three. She wants to maintain. Maintain a good relationship with each. She wants to have. Enable them to all be together and for that joint relationship to occur. And she also wants to find her voice and speak up potentially. But there's. Given that she's not currently in the conversation, there's an opportunity to step back first and think, well, what's my goal here? Yeah. Or multiple goals and maybe even what's the priority? That's. That's right. The way that often works then is that you're not prioritizing like this is important and this isn't. They're all important. But you do need to prioritize which one you're going to deal with first. Are we going to talk through this issue or this issue like longer term? Let's hope we can reconcile. Shorter term can ask them to put those posts off social media or whatever it might be. So I think the relationship repair, you talked about those different goals that they might have, the relationship repair one's not going to be a quick fix. I think often it's breaking the ice and having that initial conversation, especially if they haven't spoken. And that might not go well, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you're not going in the right direction. Like that wasn't a helpful step. Breaking the ice can be helpful even if they both yell. It sort of depends how it's used and what happens next, so to speak. So I'll tell the person who's dealing. With the two friends not to catastrophize or panic when you see the ups and downs or the ebbs and flows of the relationship improving. And it very often is two steps forward, one step back. These topics, like you think that I'm a racist and you didn't listen to my perspective. It would be so likely that you might make a little comment. And I take offense to it. Again, those wounds are still quite raw. At least in the short term. So it's probably like a long term. Let's just think about getting things moving in the right direction. We want to maintain communication, maintain a sense of goodwill or some element of trust or whatever else it might be. Even if we're not meeting as frequently as we used to, or we're doing things a bit differently, or we're inviting. Our partners instead of just the three of us meeting or whatever, or just. Going and doing an activity where we. Don'T need to have a lot of conversation and dialogue. Like we'll go skiing together, you know what I mean? Just do an active thing, bushwalking or something like that. Instead, whatever they decide to do, it's probably going to be a process over time, isn't it? I think so. Because there's a trust impact for the two of them and the safety of their relationship at the moment. And also for that third person. You know, it's possible from. From her lens, she's feeling well, they've both acted and engaged and their actions have had an impact on. On that third person as well, without them thinking through the impact for her too. That's true. Sometimes her just saying. I'm finding this very distressing. I want my friends back. That's it. And I know we haven't spent a lot of time together lately, but there's significant grieving happening for me right now. Loss of what we. What I hoped would be a friendship that would continue throughout our lives. Yeah. And sometimes that person can still stoke. The coals, even when they're the last bit of heat going. That's right. Let's not let go of this. You know, what. What can we do to get things repaired? What would help? Is there some way that we could reconnect even if it's not the same as it was before? Is there some way we can rebuild a friendship even if it's not the same as it was? Like, you're not saying move on, but. It'S like, let's move forward. Let's figure out something that might help. Something that would fit better or work. Better or feel better or whatever. Yeah. Give them advice. That person, like, would you go and talk to each friend separately or try and organize a coffee all together in the first instance, or those kinds of things. I'd be inclined to meet with each of them, have a coffee with each of them separately first because their capacity to hear each other is going to be significantly impacted until they feel really heard, you know, in the way that you shared before. They need to have their experience of that interaction heard acknowledged. And that third person probably also needs to. If, you know, if that's me, I need to speak up and express my view and what I'd value as. Because in this dynamic, that third person has the potential to be an accidental mediator. They also are a player in that relationship and that conflict between everybody. How could they help Sally and Gemma to feel heard? What kind of questions could they ask? Or what would they say? I. I think if it was me, I'd probably start by saying I'm wondering if we can talk a little bit about what's happened. I. I'm making some assumptions about how you might be feeling, but I'd really like to check if I'm getting that right. Can I ask you to share with me what that conversation was like for you? How have you been feeling in the days and weeks since. Give them space to talk. And then lots of playing back what I've heard them say. Yeah. You know, if it's. If it's Gemma that I'm talking to, for example, it might be I can hear you were really feeling. I'm guessing, right, that I can hear you were really feeling. Taken by surprise, Gemma, listening to you talk, you didn't have any. Under any awareness that the presence of that book could impact others, and particularly Sally, in the way that it did. And I can hear you felt really misunderstood by Sally in the moment. It might be that Gemma adds, you know, views around her disappointment for me as that third person not having spoken up in the moment, she might bring me into that as well and I might find myself feeling defensive but also needing to acknowledge you would have liked me to lean in at that moment. And I want to acknowledge your disappointment that I didn't. And whatever it is, I need to help her to feel heard by playing back what I've heard her say and ask more questions to understand a bit further. Once I've acknowledged her reactions in the moment, I might ask Gemma, I'm wondering in the days and weeks since what you found yourself reflecting on and how you're feeling about the book at the moment and how you're feeling about the impact of the book on Sally, so that she has space to talk through that and process that out loud and again after she's taught for a while, acknowledging what I've heard her say, checking that I've understood correctly. It sounds like you're feeling really hurt, you're feeling really confused. Gemma, you're feeling really puzzled. Am I getting that right? You know, whatever the emotion might be, checking in to make sure that I've understood so that she feels really hurt. I think it's always going to be the starting point and keep asking those questions until I really feel like I understand Gemma's experience. Would you give advice or sort of explain when she's got something wrong or misinterpreted your motives? If my motives have been misinterpreted, yes. In that situation, as an accidental mediator, I'm not going to speak for Sally. I want to be really careful not to leap in and become an accidental representative for Sally. She's not part of this conversation. But I might say to Gemma, I've found, you know, in the same way I've been wondering about your experience of that conversation, I found myself wondering about Sally's experience. And I'm going to have a coffee with her too because I really want to make sure I understand how she is feeling. I'm wondering what you're thinking she might have been feeling in the days and weeks since. And so to support her, to begin to contemplate some other sided thinking, knowing that might be hard at the start, but also role modeling that genuine desire to hear and understand use and resisting. That urge to correct or get defensive or write the ledger, especially when it might be seen as taking the other person's side. That's right. But this is where I'm not only an accidental mediator, if I'm that third person, that third person is also a player, a participant in that friendship circle who's able to have their own views and perspectives and so on the particular issue itself of that book, that third person needs to, I think, decide whether they want to have a view on that particular issue and if they're going to. To work out how to express it and to be able to express it in a way that others could hear. Now, as soon as they do, it's possible that they find themselves aligning with Gemma or aligning with Sally. Right. And so working out how to do that in a way that also holds the friendship. If the, if the desire is to retain the friendship. That's the challenge, I think. It's so hard, isn't it? And you might even just need to hold the friendship together over this next. 12 months, then, then things might be much easier. Or until, you know, the election happens or until you move back closer or. Whatever the thing is. Yeah, yeah, it's like just persevere one day at a time. That's. That's right. Like short, medium, longer term goals as well, I guess. Yeah. And. And if the goal is to maintain the relationship and speak up, it might be to say that actually there are going to be many. This is one of many times because we have different views of this. This is one of many times where we're likely to come to this conversation with a different perspective if our shared goal is to retain this relationship. I wonder, I might be saying to Sally or Gemma, I wonder whether we need to almost put in place a few ground rules with each other to keep this conversation, these conversations, safe and constructive. Let's not talk about international politics or let's not talk about this issue. Let's not talk about whatever. And this is where that first question of what's the goal? Becomes really important. I know listening to people within community and within mediations, I'm serving people who choose at the moment, in many contexts, choosing to step away from friendships where there is insufficient values alignment because the disconnect and the impact is being felt so really strongly and that is a valid choice as well. We've got to honour their right to say, look, even though we might have been friends since we were five, values disconnect is actually too strong. We may not have really chosen to be friends with five. Perhaps it was broader family structures that created that relationship and stayed that way. But maybe There is no longer enough common ground and connection for us to maintain that closeness. I mean, I totally agree. It's not just friendships. It's family break apart family disconnections, adult kids that don't connect with the grandparents and all of that kind of stuff. Like, it's probably that same question of. Do we actually need to agree on all of these different things to be in a family and share a meal. Together or something similar. It probably depends on your definition of friendship. What does it mean to be friends? And it doesn't have to be binary. You're in a friendship, you're in family or you're out of it. There are levels. Yeah, it doesn't need to be. That's it. I cut you off Now. It could be, but it could also be, actually, this is. We kind of need to reshape what relationship feels safe and constructive for both of us at the moment. Yeah, I totally agree. I really like all of those examples that you gave of phrasings and the questions and the way that you would even acknowledge. Of course, you and I are very. Verbal kind of people. So we use a lot of words when we speak. So I can imagine a lot of my friends, I'd be like, fire out, man, that sucks. Let's just come out of left field. Like, oh, Jesus. Sounds like it really. You know what I mean? Like you'd use much more occur colloquial language or swear a lot more or whatever. But it'd be the same principles of. This is just really shit, man. Surely there's something that we can do. I don't, you know, we're mates. Surely that has to count for something or whatever. Yeah, yeah, absolutely, I think. But those. I was going to say, Helen, I guess the overarching things that stood out to me of what you said though was slow down. Like, just slow down and listen and acknowledge and don't defend, don't jump in, don't make the assumptions. Slow down and open up. It's like, tell me a bit more about that. So I didn't know that. Oh, did they say it like that? I thought they said it more like this. Like, I might have heard that wrong though. Like, you know what I mean? It's just. I'm not sure. I'm curious. I'm looking at the situation as a higher level, as we need to. Maybe this elephant is part of a herd. So maybe we should focus on the herd and the overall dynamics. Or maybe it's the specific microcosm that's living on the skin that we should be focused on. And tonight at the bar it's who's buying the beers. Maybe that's the issue that we should be dealing with. But that slowdown and open up and it's so stressful. Whatever the person decides to do. If they meet with Sally and Gemma walking in there, their heart's probably racing and they'll have a lump in their throat and they'll be shaking a little bit. It's very distressing, I think, talking about these topics in a lot of situations. So that's normal. You can kind of anticipate feeling like that and there might be things that they need to do to calm themselves down, going in or look after themselves afterwards so they don't go in and. You know, dump everything on their husband or wife at the end of the. Conversation kind of thing. I sometimes think about it like a high voltage wire, like it's very charged. So it makes sense why we're wearing our protective gloves and going a little bit carefully because you can very easily. Get zapped and stirs everything up. And here we go, round and round, the old merry go round kind of thing. Yeah, it's very stressful, isn't it? And I'd say prepare for self regulation to look after yourself and then prepare to de escalate if they're talking with Gemma or Sally, if they say tell me a bit more about that, Sally's. Face might go red and she'll say. What do you mean? Don't you agree with what I'm saying? So then you might need to just. Step back, slow down again and do a bit more. I'm sorry, we don't even have to talk about this. If you don't want what you get up to on the weekend and then maybe we'll circle back to it later kind of thing, but we have to prepare for that escalation and us to come themselves down as well as probably the other person as well. It's so ironic, isn't it? Like people just want you to acknowledge where they're coming from and understand their perspective and then they might be willing to consider other options or, you know, the nuance in amongst it all. But if you just come in and. Say you're wrong because of this, you're just a this. That's the end, isn't it? Like that, labels, full stop. Absolutely. And you know, as he named it there, Simon, the, the, you're wrong about this language, which is not your language but language we see people often do when people find their voice to express their view, the way they phrase it is going to be so very important as well. When you sent me through the scenario, I found myself leaning in particularly to that issue around that book and the title of the book and the impact of either intentional or accidental racism, discrimination and how that's experienced by others. And thinking about people through history who have found their voice and have chosen to be upstanders and have chosen to speak out and express views and to advocate and looking at who's been able to do that successfully in a way that has brought people with them on the journey and people who have done that in a way that has has been harmful. And what struck me is that some of the most powerful orators in history have tended to use I statements. So if we use particularly referencing this topics books topic I did a little googling on quotes from Martin Luther King straight away at the top were I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where. So he started with I. I have a dream and you should, you must. It was I. This is what change, right? And another one from him I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear. And again, that's that I statement of I've chosen the way I'm going to engage. This is the set of behaviors I'll use, the value systems I'm going to bring into the interaction. And it is a safe style that people can hear. Right. If that third person in that dynamic between Sally and Jenna, if she comes in with I don't think you should or I think the two of you. Should, you need to do this, then. It goes straight to defensive. Whereas if she comes in with that mindset of I'm going to share with you my view and I'm okay with the two of you not agreeing with me if you don't. But I want you both to know I've given this a lot of thought and or I'm going to this opportunity has made me reflect on how I might store literature or how I might engage when I see historical literature on other people's bookshelves. And here's what I've decided I'm going to do. That's so true. It's like that's going to be more. Palatable than giving them advice. You should do this or especially you need to understand this that you need to understand. As soon as people say that I think the other person's ears almost close over immediately. It's like, do I really? Do I need to understand that? Like, well, you need to Understand this. And then back and forth we go. Whereas that I've. The thing that stood out to me was this. Or what I've been wondering was this. So yeah, my take on it was more like this. But it sounds like we really took different things away from that conversation there. It's kind of a sign of maturity, isn't it? Being able to hold different ideas but still have a relationship. Like my son who's nine, he can't. Tolerate me thinking differently to him sometimes. We were playing a ball game last. Night and he was saying, no dad, it's nine, eight. And I was saying, I'm pretty sure it's seven, nine. You know what I mean? Like no, dad, no. Don't you remember that I got a goal before. I'm like, it doesn't matter, dude. But of course to him in a nine year old little brain, it really does matter. Like this is, this is how he's learning about life, etc. So. But I think when he's 15, he won't get too worked up about it. It'll be like dad's forgetful dad was watching tv, dad, whatever. You know what I mean? Right. And then that's the irony that if we can let people hold their own. Opinions and beliefs and perspectives, then we might actually be able to engage and find some options for middle ground or changing them or at least understanding where they're coming from, that kind of thing. Thank you so much, Helen. I think that's probably a really nice. Note to finish on, but did you. Have any other thoughts or any other ideas that you wanted to share before we wrap it up? Maybe only just to acknowledge what your comment before about the emotional regulation we bring to that conversation being really important as well. In addition to those I statements and sometimes I have a little. Now even as a mediator, I'm used to holding other people's conflicts. Sometimes finding my voice to come into a conversation, express my view. I will sometimes find myself holding back a little longer than I would intend to. Right. And so I find it helps the self talk in my head to be saying to myself, it's okay for there to be conflict, it's okay for there to be a difference of opinion. I get to bring a view to this conversation in the same way as everybody gets to bring a view to this conversation. I don't need to fear the conflict, the disagreement. Are you reminding yourself about that in yourself? I think it's important for listeners to know that, you know, even experienced mediators, everybody is human when you care about others you care about that relationship and you don't want to strain it. We all have that anxiety and stress around how to hold safety. But when we build the fear around conflict, we activate our own emotional dysregulation. We activate our own stress response further. So applying the mindset of conflict's not bad. Difference of opinion is not the issue. It's actually how we communicate that difference of opinion that is the part that we need to consider and engage. And if we can find the right words and the right way to do it, we'll. We can talk about anything. Yeah. Something is good enough or the good enough words. Right. Because there is no perfect finding. The right amount of assertiveness for an interaction with one individual might be at a different point with another person. Well, Helen, thank you so much. I've personally benefited a lot from hearing all of your thoughts, and I'm sure that the listeners have gleaned a great. Deal of insights as well. Thank you very much for your time and your generosity in providing all of that. I enjoyed it too. Thanks, Simon. Thanks, Helen.