• MBM@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    14 hours ago

    This is probably a me thing, but if I were to catch on to someone doing this I might start wondering at some hidden intent behind everything they do

  • qarbone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    The biggest thing for me is that she’s eroding his emotional sovereignty. She’s taking covert actions to modulate and decide his mood for him.

    Sometimes, when I’m feeling down, I just want to feel that and get through on my own. But she’s deciding which of his moods isn’t appropriate and is changing his behaviour. If this were out in the open, he would be able to accept or refuse her attempts to cheer him up or divert him. But he (presumably) doesn’t even know it’s happening. That’s not cool.

    It sounds fine because it’s worded like she’s helping him but she’s still taking away his autonomy. Just bring it out in the open: “hey, I’ve noticed, when you’re sad or stressed, peanut M&Ms cheer you up. Would you like me to keep some on-hand?” With that, you’ve alerted them to behaviours about themself and got their consent to “help” them.

    If that’s the timbre of their interactions, I’ve got no qualms. But setting the context as “I train abused dogs” brings the mental image to one step above “hiding medicine in a dog treat.”

    • flicker@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I appreciate your comment.

      I’ve actually talked to my fiance about things like this, because I noticed that I was ‘handling’ him, and I felt like it was demeaning to him. Luckily for me, he considered what I said and informed me that he likes that.

      Consent makes the difference!

      Probably helps that I’m used to disturbed and abused humans, too…

  • rainrain@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    18 hours ago

    A man can only dream of having a girl who’s so attentive and understanding. She’d make a good mom.

    Most of us are so utterly self-consumed.

    • phx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Yeah. Positive reinforcement works across a lot of species… Just because the OP is used to using it with canines first doesn’t make it bad to use on humans We could all use a little pick-up sometimes, just doing fine the M&M’s to rover and a milk bone to the partner by mistake.

  • T156@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    The way she contextualises it is a bit odd, but the actual thing isn’t that bad. It’s just accommodating him, being aware of his particulars, and helping him over his issues. The gift of a single M&M is unusual, but giving your partner something nice isn’t strange. People do similar things all the time in relationships, it’s just not thought of as training.

    Biggest issue is her framing it that way, because people might either get the wrong idea, or give the wrong idea. Saying she’s training him like a dog gives the idea of a lead, like with an actual dog.

  • Agent641@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    That’s all fine, it’s when she gets naked on the bed with a jar of peanut butter and a spatula that things start getting weird

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Many people apparently loving this, I see it as a red flag. She’s manipulative and I’d second guess every action she’d take from the day I noticed it

    • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I personally struggle to see the difference between regular social interaction and manipulation. Do you have a sense on where that lies for you?

      For example, due to being autistic, I struggle with making eye contact, but I recognise that most neurotypical people find that important for feeling connected to their conversation partner, so I often try to make eye contact during conversation. If I see someone has styled their hair in a way that shows they’ve put a lot of effort into it, I will often compliment them, even if I only feel neutral about it. I baked a cake for a friend when she finished her exams, because I know that physical gestures like this mean a lot to her (especially if it’s a surprise); I wanted to make her happy, but it wasn’t purely altruistic — ultimately, making the cake was an indirect way of making myself happier.

      Another example is how, when speaking to someone struggling with something, my instinct is to go into problem solving mode and try to help. However, I’ve learned that some people much prefer space to be sad, and so saying things like “that sounds so frustrating” or “I can see why you’re so angry, it’s an unfair situation” lands better. It always feels weird and manipulative to do this, because the things I say feel so trite and meaningless. But it seems to really help, and I’ve had to just embrace the fact that people use different things to cope than I do. It does feel weird though, and if these aren’t examples of bad manipulation, then I don’t know where that line would be

  • cynar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    1 day ago

    People forget that humans are just animals (that can sometimes reason and talk). I still stand that dog training guides make better parenting books than many parenting books. At least up till around 3 years old.

    The extension of this to adults is more challenging. Intent matters. This could be used abusively VERY easily. That is not happening here, however. With great power, comes great responsibility.

    It’s also worth noting that, if you use this, plan out how you will explain it later. A panicked, “oh shit, (s)he caught on!” will look bad, no matter what. A calm, thoughtful, positive explanation, delivered with confidence will likely get a lot more acceptance.

    A: “Ok, what’s with the M&Ms?”

    B: “You’ve noticed then. :)”

    A: “…”

    B: “I noticed chocolate made you happy. I also noticed you were trying to overcome some negative habits. I decided to help. Whenever you put effort in, I rewarded it with a bit of chocolate. It makes you happy, and helps you lock a good habit in better.”

    A: “… You’ve been conditioning me?!?”

    B: “Yes, don’t you like the improvement?”

    A “… yes, but I’m not sure I should…”

    B: “M&M?”

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Negative reinforcement should be HIGHLY limited. It can cause unforeseen knock on effects. Any negative reinforcement should be highly targeted, without triggering a fight or flight response. It should also be accompanied by clear instructions for how to correct it. This applies to both humans and pets.

        It’s quite likely that most of the negative traits in the OP were caused by an attempt at negative reinforcement.

    • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 day ago

      You could also be even more cautious: “I noticed that they cheer you up, so I try to have them on hand for when you’re feeling down.” No mention of conditioning, wholesome, hard to argue against.

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        23 hours ago

        We constantly condition each other all the time. It’s a part of human interaction. We don’t usually do it consciously, but it’s conditioning nonetheless. Couples will subtly condition their behavior to be more in tune with each other.

        Consider a simple example. Imagine a you’re in a couple, and you just moved in together. You’re both used to living alone. You’re used to flicking on the bedroom light as you walk into the bedroom before bed to prepare for bed. Unfortunately your partner tends to go to sleep before you. You wake them up a few times by accident, and they understandably grumble. You feel bad about it, as you care about them and don’t want to wake them up. You wince the next day when you see how tired they seem. In time, you stop flicking the light on before you enter the room. Your partner’s actions have conditioned you to not turn the light on. Your partner conditioned you without even intending to. We condition each other constantly. We observe what effect our behavior has on others, and we adjust our own behavior accordingly. We usually just don’t refer to it as “conditioning,” as that tends to have a nefarious connotation.

        • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          23 hours ago

          All true, but it isn’t always best to lead with that. It can provoke an emotional response that might not be productive.

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        21 hours ago

        It also hides the conditioning aspect. We hide things when we consider them negative. If they are asking, they have potentially noticed a lot more. If you hide it, you believe it was a bad thing you were doing, and they will react VERY strongly to you doing it.

        By being upfront it will derail their train of thought on the matter. I personally used this a few times in my youth. It pulls the teeth of an argument quickly.

        Here it is basically acknowledging what you have been doing, while defusing the various “ah ha!” reveals and got-yas they had mentally planned. At that point they have to actually think, rather than just react according to the script they built in their head. Once they are thinking, it’s a lot easier to communicate properly.

        • Soup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          I’m very much a “direct communication” kinda person but even I know that timing is important. True it took learning it and that was certainly an experience but it happened.

          If the person is feeling vulnerable and a little worried you’re manipulating them and you dive straight in with a scientific, emotionless reduction of “choco make boyo happy” then you’ll probably scare them. You’re excited about this thing and have had a lot of time to explore it but they haven’t had such time to be more comfortable with that kind of wording. You don’t want to derail their argument, that really only protects you and actually puts you back in hiding a negative aspect and that person now feels possibly even more confused and angry. They were probably hoping that it was just a mistake or that you were being nice, which you probably were, and now you’ve taken their “best case scenario” and told them straight-faced that you were consciously manipulating them.

          After they feel better, after they’ve had some time to sit with it, sure maybe, but in the moment it’s good to soften it a little.

  • Derpenheim@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    287
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    -Listens to what he means when he is speaking -Pays attention to his nonverbal cues about his emotional state -Respects his boundaries and only assists him in expanding them, not demanding he do so -Rewards him for engaging in new healthy behaviours that he finds uncomfortable

    Fellas, is it being an asshole for checks notes engaging with your partner?

    • Signtist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      116
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, this person isn’t disrespectfully treating a human as they would a dog, they’re just respectfully treating dogs as they would a human.

      • kofe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        We can’t get a dog’s consent to engage in experiments. Continuing with this method after realizing and not talking with him about it would be intentionally ignoring consent.

        • Signtist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          20 hours ago

          It’s not an experiment to react to someone’s fear and trauma with kindness, even if you learned those skills through helping rehabilitate dogs. She’s not doing this to try to figure out how he reacts to the stimulus of M&Ms under certain conditions, she’s giving him candy when he’s stressed because she knows it helps him calm down. That’s just being a caring and attentive girlfriend.

          • kofe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            17 hours ago

            Being caring also involves including their consent in the process. Idk, I’d be really upset by my partner knowingly doing this without talking to me about it. But then again I guess it could depend how they react if I found out before they just admit to it. Like if they got defensive and didn’t understand why I’m upset. I’m not saying the whole thing is horrible, just hiding it.

            Also depends on the person and their values, I guess. If you value someone doing that kind of emotional labor for you without you having to think about it. I’m very much used to doing the emotional labor in relationships.

            Damn. I just realized maybe I’m displacing here though cuz I’m a bit jealous they’re using a method that works, whereas I’m single for a plethora of reasons.

            • Signtist@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 hours ago

              That’s fair. If you’re used to not receiving emotional attention, then suddenly receiving it might be something so novel that you need to give it your blessing before accepting it. The relationships I’ve been in have generally defaulted for both parties to a sense of “I’m going to do what I think is best for you, so let me know if I’m ever wrong,” rather than “Can I do this thing for you? Ok, good. How about this one?” But I’ve been lucky to have mutually caring relationships.

              If this person has gotten used to people not having their best interests in mind, then maybe even their partner’s good intentions need to be given consent just to show them that people can have good intentions. I do worry that, by being told what’s happening, he’d associate candy with being stressed and get defensive whenever offered candy, but hopefully she’s been doing it long enough to at least show him that it’s an effective de-stressor coming from a place of love rather than manipulation.

              I hope you find someone who cares for you as well. It took me a lot of time and effort to put myself out there before I found my wife, but I’m really glad I did.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I think the concern would be generating a Pavlovian response to her presence instead of genuine desire to be with her, but I don’t even know what that really means because our animal brains aren’t rational. There isn’t a such thing as “genuine” in this context because it’s all based on emotions. Should you not have sex with your partner because it can make them feel attached, for example?

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 day ago

    Some people take great offense when you don’t pretend humans have somehow evolved beyond the animal kingdom. Yes, we are still animals, and much of what works for them still works on us.