Speak Their Language: 4 Proven Ways to Connect with Opposing Views
I was in a comments rabbit hole recently and came across this comment on a post that was, obviously, quite heated:
“Hey xxxxx, Jesus would definitely hate you.”
😱
Maybe it was a bot, maybe it wasn’t.
Regardless, it made me cringe and sigh and feel like garbage. Even though I was technically “sided” with the commentor (not on their comment to be clear, but on the issue overall).
This kind of public commentary is never going to lead to collaboration and, honestly, I’m sick of seeing it E V E R Y W H E R E.
And it’s not even the outright rude comments like this, but the larger angry fighting that I see. It’s not helping and will never help to repair divides and move us forward.
Today, more than ever, we are able to make contact with others who may be very different than ourselves. This is a bit of a double-edged sword – on one hand, it opens up our ability to learn and experience things we may never have been able to otherwise, and on the other, it may cause deep tension and division.
What I’ve noticed online is that people often end up feeding the tension and division more than they are able to find the middle ground. I think learning strategies for doing the latter is extremely important right now and something we haven’t really been taught.
We need more collaboration and less competition in almost every aspect of our society. The internet has created giant echo chambers and screaming at those on the other side is never going to lead to understanding or change.
But there is some good news – believe it or not, social sciences give us lots of tools and strategies we can use in our everyday experiences to help bridge that divide.
So, if you’re tired of feeling like whatever you say makes no difference and there’s no hope of communicating with people who think completely differently than you do, let’s dive into strategies that work!
A Quick Back Story
I have done focus groups for wildlife-related projects where there has been considerable tension within the community. I remember very distinctly the crossed arms and angry looks and confrontational posture at one focus group in particular.
We started the conversation as usual where we set the stage for how the discussion unfolds, which is very different than most public forums.
Instead of saying “we’re going to tell you why X and Y are problems and what we plan to do about it, then open this up for comments,” we say, “today, we’re going to talk about X & Y. We are not the experts and only want to hear from you. We will guide the discussion with some questions, but ultimately we want to know what you think about this topic and how we might address it.”
There was an INSTANT shift in the room. They realized we weren’t the “enemy,” but someone who wanted to know what THEY thought.
We didn’t want to convince them of anything, just present a topic and its potential conflicts or issues and see what the community wanted to see as a solution.
Instead of hostile commentary and circular arguments, we had a wonderful discussion about real needs, real challenges, and feasible, viable solutions.
What. An. Experience.
So, if you are really looking for solutions to problems and want to create bridges across these mega-divides, I encourage you to use the strategies outlined in this blog when you are compelled to comment on online posts to get similar results.
(And if you want to conduct focus groups that get you these results for wildlife conservation projects or sustainability initiatives – let’s chat!)
Potentially Unhinged?
Before we really dive in, I just want to say:
I know this might all sound slightly unhinged because the outrage for things right now is very real. I am not here to discount that because I do think outrage can be a compass.
And, I want to try to add to how we are talking about things so we can get to resolution faster. Outrage has a place, for sure. I’m outraged a lot actually lol 😊
But when I’m outraged, I also not usually interested in listening to opposing viewpoints. So, you may want to take a minute to decide if you’re really in a place to discuss.
If you’re not, you can either pause and come back later when you’re ready or try taking some deep breaths to see if you can bring the outrage down to a 5 out of 10. Breathe in for a count of 4 and exhale to a count of 6 until you can sense the outrage dropping to just regular rage 😉
It might sound silly to do that, but there’s actually quite a bit of research on how simple breathing strategies can help to regulate your nervous system. In reality, it’s science and not just woo-woo 😂
The Strategies
I know it’s challenging and confusing and frustrating to try to have discussions online with people that are on vastly different opinion spectrums. I find myself falling into the same traps of wanting to convince people they are wrong and that my perspective is right, especially when it’s a topic I think has moral implications.
We’re not simply arguing whether blue or purple is the best color, but if certain values are more or less harmful to others.
Yikes. What a minefield.
What I see a lot is that we often resort to name-calling or spouting facts or questioning people’s sanity. While I get that it can feel justified or righteous in that moment, it usually doesn’t have any impact on changing someone’s mind.
And I think ultimately, we all know that.
This isn’t to say we shouldn’t try to have some sort of discourse with people we don’t agree with, but a reflection that often these attempts at “discussion” aren’t really based in understanding each other better or seeing if there is a middle ground on which we could converge.
I do not want to minimize that some of these circumstances are literally becoming life or death. And I am not speaking to those situations specifically.
I am speaking to comments on social posts or blogs or YouTube or wherever people have the opportunity to discuss sensitive topics with others online.
What we know about people is that they rarely change their minds because someone “made a good point” in contrast to something they believe very deeply.
I mean, I think you know this innately, don’t you?
When was the last time someone changed your political affiliation, religious belief, or other deeply held personal value because they said something online?
🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗crickets🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗
Right. So, it doesn’t work for other people either.
This actually gets at a big issue that occurs in the conservation field (and many others) all the time. It’s this idea that if people only knew better, they would do something different.
There is tons of research on why this isn’t true and if you haven’t yet, check out my blog about behavior here and my super awesome Social Science and Behavior Change workbook. Both of these get into a lot more detail on this specific topic.
Assuming you trust that what I’m saying is accurate, and perhaps based off your own experience trying to “convince” others of something to no avail, you may be left wondering – then what does work?
Below, I outline some real-life approaches to having productive conversations with people you do not agree with. These are not miracles, but should get you much closer to an actual discussion than most online “conversations” do now.
Strategy 1:
❌ Instead of: “How could you believe something so obviously false? Data shows that X and Y are really happening, but you still believe they aren’t??”
✅ Try this: “It sounds like you believe that what is happening is justified/important/supportable because of A and B. Did I get that right? If so, do you think there is any middle ground here and that there is a way we could improve on what is happening so that all things (A, B, X, and Y) are being addressed in a way that feels better for all sides?”
🪄Why it works: There is a tendency for outrage when things feel so 100% obvious or true from our perspectives. The kind of language posed first, in any form, only serves to insult people and makes them feel unheard.
When someone feels unheard, many people get LOUDER, not more introspective. You probably already know that this kind of insulting language might feel “good,” but doesn’t work to change anything.
Instead, if you try to summarize what they’re saying underneath their own outrage, it helps to neutralize the conversation AND gives you a chance to see what is really important to them.
Once you give people a chance to express how they feel and reflect that to them, they can either correct anything that’s wrong about your understanding or agree with you.
And just like that, you’ve agreed to something! A step in a better direction!
It’s important not to reflect the “A and B” points (or however many there are) based on your opinion that they’re false. Just simply reflect what you think the underlying truth is for them.
As a follow up, assuming you summarized appropriately, asking if they see a middle ground can help open up the dialogue. Some people may say “no,” which is ok and good information for you to decide if it’s worth engaging with someone who may have no interest in an open dialogue.
If they say “yes,” allow them to provide ideas for ways both “sides” could be addressed. Sometimes we forget that multiple things can be true at once, and this provides a pathway to consider that again.
As much as I would like to believe that I can come up with all solutions for all problems (lol), I know realistically that I don’t have answers to everything.
Sometimes people really surprise me with solutions I would have never thought of!
Maybe there are missing pieces you never considered or more common ground than you thought.
Strategy 2:
❌ Instead of: “You’re clearly uninformed and just want to stir the pot. Go back to the rock you crawled out from!”
✅ Try this: “That’s an interesting point. I’m curious, are you saying that X happened to you or are you referring to another source? Would you mind sharing more about your experience or linking to that source so I can understand better?”
🪄Why it works: When we hear stories or claims from people that appear to be highly misinformed or potentially outright lies, it’s easy to want to call it out without investigating further. There is a lot of this right now and so it can be exhausting to try to combat every piece of misinformed or purposely false information out there.
But, if you feel compelled to comment, hurling things like this at the other person serves to entrench those viewpoints, not soften them.
It’s possible that they have a legitimate experience they are drawing from or legitimate sources that support their statements. And undermining that undermines your perspectives more than it discredits theirs.
So, instead, ask some honest questions about where they’re coming from to better understand their point of view.
If the experience and sources are legitimate, it’s easier to understand why they might have that particular perspective. It also helps to consider how we might protect that concern/issue AND the one you’re advocating for too.
It’s important to understand that this could create some initial friction internally. Cognitive dissonance is a real thing (and another blog that needs writing) and sometimes it can be really uncomfortable to learn that what you believe to be 100% true is maybe not 100% true.
Knowing that this might feel a bit tough when you do it makes it easier to accept that it’s working and not just wrong.
If you find that the experience and/or sources they reference are not legitimate (and I mean this objectively, not your opinion but verifiable), it could open the conversation up to alternative experiences/sources if you’re careful with delivery (more on that later). Or, it might be a time to bow out of the conversation if it’s going to be difficult to discuss rationally.
Again, these strategies should help you to have more productive dialogue, including providing insights into when it’s likely time to cut bait.
Strategy 3:
❌ Instead of: “Are you serious?? You’re an actual idiot and there’s no hope for people like you to understand how important this is!”
✅ Try this: “I think we might have very different experiences with this topic and I’d really like to understand how that might be true. Would you be open to discussing those differences with me if we both agree to listen to one another? We don’t need to agree on the topic in the end, just to allowing both perspectives to be shared respectfully.”
🪄Why it works: There is often a massive disconnect between opposing perspectives or opinions and we rarely have discussions with people that are completely different than ourselves. This strategy works to really understand why someone might have the opinion they do.
“Understand” is very different than “agree,” though. And understanding does not necessarily mean tolerance. I struggle a lot with not even understanding where people are coming from and it’s because I don’t have open, respectful conversations with those people.
Until I do, it’s a lot easier to chalk it up to them being an “idiot,” right? This strategy combats that on both sides.
The intent here is to really understand where someone is coming from on a deeper level to better identify underlying needs or fears. This might not always be fruitful because sometimes people don’t understand their own deeper fear or needs, so sharing that isn’t really an option.
This type of conversation is probably best with someone you know at least somewhat, but the offer can always be made to anyone to see what comes of it.
Strategy 4:
❌ Instead of:“You’re full of s#*! Clearly what you’re reading is garbage, just like you!!”
✅ Try this: “I’ve seen this come up before and know it’s a popular article/source/response based on X idea/topic/stat. I can see why the conclusion is Y based on this; are you open to discussing alternative interpretations based on data/sources/stats we both agree are reliable?”
🪄Why it works:Telling people they’re just wrong doesn’t make them question themselves. People generally have some way of supporting their own beliefs (confirmation bias) and don’t often consider other sources that may challenge that.
It’s helpful to at least understand why the conclusion is the way it is based on the information they provide. If they believe that something is true because of information they have that they find reliable, it’s going to be tough to argue.
Look, there is A LOT of confirmation bias happening, especially online. And it’s true for everyone, not just the people you disagree with 😅 (yes, this means you are guilty of this too!)
The tricky part here is agreeing on what is considered “reliable information.” This is another judgement call – if someone will refuse to consider anything reliable other than their own sources and those sources are objectively unreliable, then it’s probably not worth the conversation.
But, if someone is at least a little bit open to discussing a topic and considering other sources, this could be very fruitful. It does require you to also be open to other sources which is kinda the point 😉
Part of the comment rabbit hole I was in had people discrediting certain statistics that were being used to support a claim. One person thought the data was cherrypicked and not trustworthy, but no one asked what information/statistics the person would consider accurate.
So instead of a discussion, it was just an insult fight. Both sides were idiots or sheep or fill-in-the-blank term, and each side became more entrenched in their viewpoints with evidence of the “lunacy” of the other side.
Le sigh.
Sometimes asking this question will not be met with “hmm, let me think about that and get back to you,” but more hateful accusations of being stupid/sheep/etc. At that point, it could be useful to ask if they are interested in actually discussing the topic or if they just want to make statements without discussing. Sometimes people just want to rant 🤷♀️
A Few Final Thoughts
These redirected scripts might sound a bit too contrived IRL, so please edit them to sound like your voice.
Really, it’s more about the formula that you might be picking up on:
1) hear what others are saying (really hear them),
2) see if you can detect openness to communication,
3) discuss ways you may have some similar values/ideas/desires, and
4) start moving towards collaborative problem solving.
This is not easy.
I’ll repeat that:
This is not easy.
👉 But, it might also be one of the most powerful tools you can use right now to start repairing our incredibly fractured world.
Everyone wants to be heard. So often, as soon as you give someone the space to be heard, the walls melt away. It’s really wild!
It might seem like a pointless thing to do, but honestly, if we had more conversations like this, I think we would be in a much different situation than we are now.
I also need to point out that understanding the other side is not always important or productive or best. Please use your own discretion as to when it is and when it isn’t.
I will say something that might be highly controversial about when it’s important to understand the other side (let’s chat if so!): 😬
If you really want to change something, you have to understand all sides, even if they seem ugly.
In most cases, people aren’t as horrible as we usually assume they are and giving them a chance to talk about their experiences and perspectives provides a pathway to connect instead of furthering the disconnect.
Pick your battles wisely, my friends. And please let me know if you tried these strategies and what happened as a result!
Important Note: Please, for the love of all things holy, do not use these strategies with actually dangerous people or if the context is inappropriate to do so. You need to be the judge of that and I certainly cannot speak to all scenarios, especially those in which my white privilege has protected me from experiencing. I also fully understand that compassion fatigue is real and women often carry the burden of the emotional labor required to have conversations like this, and if you just CANNOT with people anymore and you need to let them have it – you do you 😉However, if you are looking to do something right now to speak up for what you believe in and are afraid or lost or angry with how those interactions go, try these strategies and see if it shifts.
