Making an Apology: Balancing Objectivity and Subjectivity

In the last year or so, I've been learning one of those Hidden Curriculum things I'm fairly certain most neurotypical people take for granted.  That is, how to handle people, their emotions, and their subjective experiences balanced against your own subjective experience and your best understanding of what actually happened.

People seem to vary on this, but I personally believe there is one true objective reality.  The truth, so to speak.  However, humans are mostly too limited to be able to see it, blinded as we are by our cultures, prejudices, and personal experiences.

For every event that happens, there is, I feel, an objective account of what happened.  But then there's also the subjective experience of each person involved in that event.  A simple conversation between myself and my spouse has three parts, then:

• What actually happened (the exact words exchanged and the objective situation)
• My subjective experience and emotions in the conversation (my emotions and feelings during the conversation)
• His subjective experience and emotions in the conversation (his emotions and feelings during the conversation)

Dirty Dishes

An example of this might be a quick interaction between my spouse and myself regarding a kitchen sink full of dirty dishes.  It is my spouse's job to put dirty dishes into the dishwasher and run the dishwasher when it's full.  I use this particular example because it's come up more than a few times, but also because typically when it does come up, it's usually an isolated incident of "life was very busy, things were missed."

The objective facts of the situation are this: the sink is full of dirty dishes, there is room in the dishwasher for them, and this situation has been true for a couple days.  It is my spouse's chore to handle that situation, ideally without letting any build up of dirty dishes happen, ever.  Objectively, then, my spouse is at fault.

When I bring up the subject to my spouse, I may be upset or even angry that the situation has sat for that long.  This is because the sink being full is like a poke in the eye every time I walk past it, plus there's the smell, plus I can't use that side of the sink.  It is also not my job to police my spouse and remind him to do his chores all the time, and I may be frustrated that he still hasn't gotten to it.  The situation, therefore, is subjectively upsetting to me, and I may use harsher language than necessary to request that my spouse do his chore and pay better attention next time.  Objectively, it is reasonable for me to be upset in this situation; we had an agreement that he would do this chore in a timely manner, and because he didn't, I suffered those metaphorical pokes in the eye every time I went into the kitchen.

My spouse, on the other hand, does not experience those pokes in the eye.  In fact, he doesn't usually notice the buildup.  The situation, then, may have completely escaped him until I point it out.  Or he may have noticed it once or twice and said to himself, "I'll do that later today," and then simply forgotten.  Regardless, having the subject brought up in a harsh manner would be surprising and hurtful.

So the (suboptimal) interaction might start with me saying, "Dear, could you please take care of the sink already?" with an edge in my voice, and then not taking "not right now" for an answer, and his surprise, hurt, and dismay in response to that.  We might then need to work together to convey why I was I was so upset, and I might need to apologize for being harsh, demanding the situation be fixed immediately, and for making him feel attacked.  

The objective facts remain true, that it was his job to do the dishes.  And my upset at the situation is valid, because of the reasons I listed above and because the situation shouldn't have happened in the first place.  However, there are better ways to address the situation that don't hurt feelings, and his hurt feelings in response to my harsh words are valid.  

Learning to say: "I feel like this happened"

For most of my life, all I've cared about is the first part of the equation: the objective facts of the situation.  The second part (my subjective experience) was somewhat unavoidable, but I mainly tried to work with and focus on what actually happened, rather than anything squishier and harder to understand.  That included my own feelings and emotions.

The thing is, that's not really how people and interactions work.  You can't tell someone whose feelings you've hurt, "well that's not what I said," and expect their hurt feelings to just... magically go away.  It literally doesn't work like that in 99% of humanity.  To be successful, you have to acknowledge that others' feelings and viewpoints, while possibly inaccurate, are also valid.

It has been somewhat of a struggle to learn to say, "I feel like this happened," and "to me, this is how this happened," rather than, "this happened."  I've had a helping hand with that, which is to say that my memory doesn't seem to be as crystal clear as it used to be.  Regardless, though, even if it was still crystal clear, the fact would remain that I'm prone to error.  I have a subjective experience, with emotions that color my understanding of the truth.  My memory might not be perfect, and even if it was, if the other person understood the words differently, their perspective and feelings also matter.

So, in an argument with my spouse about how to handle chores (a common friction point in our relationship and in many others), I have to keep his emotions and subjective experience in mind during and after the conversation.  If he becomes upset, it's not productive to try to argue him out of being upset, even if I think he's being unreasonable.  

Instead, I need to address the upset.  Perhaps I've been unnecessarily harsh in choosing my words because I'm frustrated.  Or perhaps it's not even my fault and  he's upset because other stuff in life (like a job change or the stress of the coronavirus) is putting pressure on him and it's made him snappish or more prone to defensive (rather than constructive) behavior.  

Knowing the why of the upset is helpful to me, because it makes me feel like I can handle the situation better.  Regardless, though, I don't gain anything by ignoring his upset emotions.  Doing so simply prolongs the bad feelings.  Even if they seemingly go away over time, resentment can build up and poison the relationship.  Since I love my spouse and want our marriage to last, I try not to let this happen.

So I apologize as best I can, using what information I have, and try to ensure that if it was my fault, I don't repeat the error.  Sometimes it's difficult to apologize, because I feel perfectly justified in what I've said or don't feel I've done anything wrong.  However, even if that's true or the harm I did was unintentional, my spouse is upset, and that has to be addressed in order to move on.

With the upset handled, the actual incident can be handled, and my spouse will then prioritize handling his chore, and perhaps even apologize for letting it slide for so long and subjecting me to so many pokes in the metaphorical eye.

The Parts of a Good Apology

Apologizing isn't really a skill I was taught much, especially as an adult, so I've had to piece together how to do it well in my relationship. Your mileage may vary: some people value certain parts of an apology more than others.

First, set aside your anger, resentment, and frustration.  That can be really hard when emotions are overwhelming, so it can help to take a few minutes' break from the discussion before attempting an apology.

Before you start talking, take into account the other person's perspective.  Why are they upset? Did you cause the upset?  These need to be included in the apology. I like to ask for clarification if I'm unclear on points, but depending on who you're apologizing to, asking at the moment of apology may simply bring more anger.  Some people don't care why you did something, because they're blinded by being so upset.  In those cases you need to apologize first, and the person may elaborate on why they're upset in response.  You can then use that information to make a better apology directly afterwards, and a third or more if needed.  

Knowing the why of a situation is very important to me when I'm being apologized to, because it gives me information about whether the person was acting as they thought I'd prefer, being thoughtless, or even whether a bit of cruelty was involved.  It clues me into how genuine the apology is, and the circumstances the apologizer was in make their actions more understandable.  It helps me understand the apologizer better.  

However, there are limits.  The problem with giving context for your actions when apologizing is that it can come off as making excuses rather than a genuine apology.  If there's too much context and not enough taking responsibility and acknowledgement of the other person's hurt and upset, the apology rings false.  Finding the right balance takes practice.  When in doubt, I typically apologize with whatever context I have and explain the why afterwards.  

When you make the apology, convey your understanding of the situation and acknowledge the other person's hurt and/or upset.  Keep in mind what you're responsible for: your words and how you said them.  But also keep in mind that an apology is far easier than finding new trusted friends or a spouse. 

Something to keep in mind is that when you apologize... You are not necessarily saying that you are wrong and the other person is right.  I may be perfectly correct and reasonable in being upset about the dirty dishes situation, but I still don't want my spouse to be upset when I bring it up.  I just want him to fix the situation and make efforts to keep it from happening again.  So my apology to him would NOT be, "I'm sorry I upset you, I shouldn't have said anything." Instead, I might say, "I'm sorry I upset you with the way I brought this issue up.  I didn't mean to make you feel attacked."  

The apology does three things: it validates my spouse's feelings and his right to have them (something we both struggle with), it lessens the amount of hurt he's experiencing, and it demonstrates that I care about him.  All these things are important to keeping a relationship healthy.  

It's been a struggle to learn this skill of balancing objective fact (as best I can recall it) and subjective realities, and I'm definitely still practicing.  However, our relationship and communication has improved as a result, and conflicts happen less and are resolved far more quickly.  We used to spend hours of misery on each conflict, sometimes even on things that weren't really important.  It's now down to minutes, and the conflicts are far smaller.  

When and Whether 

As a note: The kind of people-handling I've described here works because my spouse and I don't mess around.  We don't play emotionally abusive mind games or invent problems for attention.  When either of us brings up an issue, it is in good faith, something that is genuinely an issue.  I am very fortunate in that regard, because abusive people can and absolutely do take advantage of autistic people.  It can be hard for an autistic person to sort out what's a reasonable concern and what's unreasonable or emotional manipulation, because neurotypical people don't make sense to us in the first place.  

I don't typically need to use this kind of people handling in the rest of my life.  Random passersby and business associates either don't generate conflict or don't matter enough to care about the conflict.  In the latter cases, I typically apologize because it's the right thing to do, but I don't place a whole lot of emotional investment or energy into it.  So I mainly need this skill for handling friends and family.  

I suspect it helps to practice it with a wider variety of people, but with that wider variety also comes the potential for abusive or bad faith interactions.  I also have far less information on how, when, and why to make an apology, which means less successful interactions, even when I'm doing my best.  So it pays to take care when handling conflict with less familiar people, and weigh the possibility that the other person isn't being genuine.  

This is honestly difficult, especially since I tend to automatically take people at their word.  It's exhausting to second-guess what people tell me, which is probably why I usually don't bother these days.  My life is hard enough without having to spend my limited energy on second-and-third-guessing what people meant.  I'd rather spend my energy growing food or reading autism books and research.  

So it's only if the people are important (friends and family) or if the situation is important (job interviews or advocacy) that I usually bother these days.  Everyone else can just say what they mean.  Which is how I think everyone should act anyway. 

Doing Your Best

The last thing is that sadly, even the best apologies don't always fix everything. 

The other person needs to be willing to hear your apology and try to move past the conflict.  While that's usually the case, it isn't always.  Sometimes you simply have to do the best you can for a situation, and then move on.  I've lost a few friends in my lifetime, and whether the fault was mine, theirs, or both, it's never terribly fun.

To me, doing my best for a situation means:

• Apologizing to the best of my ability, 
• making right what parts of the situation I can (like replacing an item I broke), 
• reflecting on my part in the situation so I can avoid repeating it in the future, and
• forgiving myself.

When I've done those things, I can lift my head and say, "I did my best, and if you can't forgive me, that's on you."  I can then move on without regrets about myself and how I handled the situation.  

At the end of the day, I have to live with myself.  Doing my best in as many situations as I can is one way I make that existence tolerable, or even something to be proud of.