You/We (was Re: sugar addiction, meds)

[Guest guest]

> As for the French " we " I still dont think it's a good idea

> to use it. " People " is better. While not suggesting

> this of you, I often think that ppl use " we " when they

> actually mean other ppl but are afraid to actually make

> a direct accusation and hence sort of include themselves

> too. This particualrly applies to the person that the

> statement is addressed. Since it has a superficial

> humility, it makes it hard for the other person to

> distance themselves from the idea. Since there is not

> in fact uniformity of opinion on anything, or often even

> a majority, I think " we " is definitely to be avoided -

> especially when iundicating a view rthat the speaker

> does not themselves share.

wow, pete, thanks for putting so succintly something i've noticed

happen *so* often, especially in AA and shaming religion, but could

not quite put my finger on.

there is a style of communication (or verbal assault) i call " you-

phemism " in which the person frankly talks about YOU and what YOU do

and YOU should do and what is wrong with YOU.

there is, OTOH, a more subtle " you-phemism " in which the " you " is

masqueraded as " we " and put forth in a pointed manner. (I don't see

Mona as having put forth anything in a pointed manner, which makes

this not a " you-phemism " ... but i get your point about the

phraseology here.)

because the speaker was such a nice, humble, all-around-decent guy as

to plead guilty first to what he accuses " you " of... the " you, " of

course, being swathed in deceptive cotton... he does not appear to be

attacking someone. (otoh, it is usually clear that the speaker does

not *really* consider himself to be guilty of what he is pointing

out. it's like Mother saying " we're all so selfish " ) the

person feels attacked anyway, but can't quite put their finger on why.

in such instances the speaker is really a " you-lamb " ... a wolf in

lamb's skin.

azure