Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Remind me why I do not need to reply to this

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    "Feelings" people tend to consider how their actions will affect others. It isn't right or wrong Tayken. Just a different way of looking at problems.

    Will "maths" people be more successful in court? Probably. Will "feelings" people be more successful in relationships? I don't know. Who cares?

    There are many ways of looking at personality than just these two labels. You tend to gravitate to this one as the most important in court.

    Since less than 5% of us will ever, ever make it to court, I submit that it is rather irrelevant to be labelled as one or the other on this board.

    Edited to add: I am unclear how this particular post of yours Tayken helps the OP.
    Last edited by SadAndTired; 05-31-2013, 12:58 PM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Hello, I'm the OP!

      I find this discussion interesting. I think the distinction between "feelings" and "math" people creates too stark a contrast. It's more of a continuum - some people are way out on the "feelings" extreme and become what Tayken calls "overly emotionally charged". They don't rely on reason to figure things out, at times they lose track of the difference between their emotions/imagination and the real world out there. On the other extreme, "math" people can be so fixed on facts and proof that they lack the empathy that is sometimes necessary to create solutions to problems or to maintain build relationships. Problems arise when people at very different points on the spectrum need to interact with each other, and the stakes are high. This is why we need more skilled mediators or third parties, I think.

      Comment


      • #63
        With all due respect to all parties involved...

        Labelling people as math people or feelings people is at best simplistic.

        If you look at my job title and history, you probably think I was a math person. If you look at my hobbies, you would conclude I'm a feelings person. Truth be told, I am a bit of both, and I suspect most people are not one or the other.

        Whether or not you go to court, it is important to do the math, work through the logic, and understand how it would play out if it did go to court. Because it can go there, even if you have a perfect agreement. Times change, circumstances change and people change.

        The laws are imperfect. The guidelines make assumptions that don't always apply. But they were written with the intention of fairness, so fighting for things way outside the guidelines should be the exception, and requires proof of exceptional circumstances.

        Tayken is correct in that people who are driven by feelings will have a more challenging time in court, but I suggest they will also be open to being manipulated during negotiations outside of court. I was both financially and emotionally blackmailled during the sale of the house and the resolution of the separation agreement. We see this every day on the forum where someone's ex is trying to manipulate them emotionally for their gain.

        I am able to be more logical looking at other people's issues than I was at my own, and I suspect that is also not uncommon.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by SadAndTired View Post
          "Feelings" people tend to consider how their actions will affect others. It isn't right or wrong Tayken. Just a different way of looking at problems.
          Don't disagree. But, in the context of a legal dispute one has to contain their feelings quite often:

          When Math People and Feelings People Negotiate

          The feelings person expects that the court will come down hard on the math person, and will award the feelings person a fantastic amount, because of the bad actions of the math person. Since the law allows compensation for bad acts in rare cases, the feelings person feels that this will be such a case.
          As well... this is an example of what happens when emotions run too high before the court...

          This seemed like an extreme position to the boyfriend, so he refused any settlement different from their original deal. She eventually took him to court, seeking to be relieved from paying him anything. She was so focused on feeling taken advantage of, that she overlooked two important facts, one financial and one legal: 1) The housing market had actually increased the value of her house since their original deal was made, so that she was getting a windfall in value even if the physical problems of the house were all taken into account. 2) There was a clause in their original agreement that said she had only 90 days to pay him, after which he could get the house and pay her the same equalizing payment.
          Originally posted by SadAndTired View Post
          Will "maths" people be more successful in court? Probably. Will "feelings" people be more successful in relationships? I don't know. Who cares?
          I do agree who really cares if a feeling person will be more successful in a relationship. Not sure why you injected this statement in your response?

          Originally posted by SadAndTired View Post
          There are many ways of looking at personality than just these two labels. You tend to gravitate to this one as the most important in court.
          I don't gravitate to it... I try to help the "math" people and the "feelings" people balance their arguments. There are ample examples where I identify the "math-like" conduct of other posters on this forum... As well as the "feelings-like" people.

          I may appear to "gravitate" to this one as the most important in court because the court makes custody and access decisions on evidence, case law and legislation. Not how someone "feels". If you need there is a common quoted statement in case law to this effect. I haven't posted it here because it is just that common.

          Originally posted by SadAndTired View Post
          Since less than 5% of us will ever, ever make it to court, I submit that it is rather irrelevant to be labelled as one or the other on this board.
          I respectifully disagree with your position. For example, Janus has disclosed that he didn't go to court and it took two (2) years to reach settlement. (As an example.) Furthermore, if you read the article I cited (actually read it) you will note that the author, who is a social worker and lawyer, applies the theory to achieving settlement and concludes with:

          When parties in a dispute have distinctly different styles, it’s easy to get stuck arguing over who is using the “right” approach. Even when one party is a math person and the other party is a feelings person, settlement is almost always possible – especially when both parties fully understand the legal and financial realities, and ALSO each other’s point of view.
          So, although you are in disagreement and state that only 5% of people go to court, 100% of divorces have to eventually be settled to get a proper divorce order issued.

          Understanding these patterns of behaviour are important in any settlement to a dispute and can be applied to not just conduct before the court but, in settlement, work environments and many situations where there is a dispute.

          Originally posted by SadAndTired View Post
          Edited to add: I am unclear how this particular post of yours Tayken helps the OP.
          I agree. I am not sure how your response helped the OP. The "help" that was provided to the OP that I provided in this thread can be found here:

          http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...57/#post137932

          I note that this is your first contribution to this thread. Puzzling that you would come so late in the game with this comment when the OP concluded in this thread and thanked the people who provided advice:

          http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...57/#post137943

          Originally posted by stripes
          Thanks Tayken, Blink and NBDad. The urge to fire off the irate email has now officially passed.
          But, thank-you for your observations at this point and after the OP got the advice and confirmed they did, whom provided it and that the problem has passed.

          Good Luck!
          Tayken

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by stripes View Post
            Hello, I'm the OP!

            I find this discussion interesting. I think the distinction between "feelings" and "math" people creates too stark a contrast. It's more of a continuum - some people are way out on the "feelings" extreme and become what Tayken calls "overly emotionally charged". They don't rely on reason to figure things out, at times they lose track of the difference between their emotions/imagination and the real world out there. On the other extreme, "math" people can be so fixed on facts and proof that they lack the empathy that is sometimes necessary to create solutions to problems or to maintain build relationships. Problems arise when people at very different points on the spectrum need to interact with each other, and the stakes are high. This is why we need more skilled mediators or third parties, I think.
            Exactly. It is a stark contrast and a simplistic way of viewing the problem domain. But, it is a valid way of looking at it none the less.

            Glad to see that the information provided, that some often (or try to argue) isn't valuable is... Especially to the OP of the thread.

            Good Luck!
            Tayken

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by DowntroddenDad View Post
              With all due respect to all parties involved...

              Labelling people as math people or feelings people is at best simplistic.

              If you look at my job title and history, you probably think I was a math person. If you look at my hobbies, you would conclude I'm a feelings person. Truth be told, I am a bit of both, and I suspect most people are not one or the other.

              Whether or not you go to court, it is important to do the math, work through the logic, and understand how it would play out if it did go to court. Because it can go there, even if you have a perfect agreement. Times change, circumstances change and people change.

              The laws are imperfect. The guidelines make assumptions that don't always apply. But they were written with the intention of fairness, so fighting for things way outside the guidelines should be the exception, and requires proof of exceptional circumstances.

              Tayken is correct in that people who are driven by feelings will have a more challenging time in court, but I suggest they will also be open to being manipulated during negotiations outside of court. I was both financially and emotionally blackmailled during the sale of the house and the resolution of the separation agreement. We see this every day on the forum where someone's ex is trying to manipulate them emotionally for their gain.

              I am able to be more logical looking at other people's issues than I was at my own, and I suspect that is also not uncommon.
              Excellent observations but, I do have one counter to your point which is tied to possibly your final statement.

              Feelings people can be very aggressive. They feel they are being wronged and then they will go on the aggressive front. Either passive or full frontal aggression. They will bombard the courts with affidavits, allegations and try to "throw as much stuff to see how much sticks". This is where the "overly emotional litigant's" lawyer should have advised them better.

              Emotionally charged people can be problematic before the courts... As demonstrated in the case law I already linked in this thread... Which by now I am sure most learned posters to this site has read... And possibly interacted directly with the person who brought it forward even.

              What you may have experienced was someone who throws as much mud to create fear, uncertanty and doubt. Most rational people would rather be out of the situation and away from the allegations...

              As noted by Mr. Eddy in the article...

              By the end of the year, the husband told his attorney that he would have gladly paid the higher spousal support if he had realized what it would put him through – financially and emotionally.
              "I am able to be more logical looking at other people's issues than I was at my own, and I suspect that is also not uncommon."

              Actually that is the norm I would say. The litigant (and poster to this site) in the case law I provided is a very rare entity before the family courts... Might be why the justice who authored the case law noted it.

              So, don't fret... It happens a lot. This is why having unrepresented parties is not a great thing for the courts to deal with. Also why improvements are needed in family law.

              The better way to look at your situation, instead of it being "emotional blackmail" is that it was a learning experience. Emotional blackmail is a very strong statement. Sure, you are upset that to get out of the mess and to settle things you had to make compromises that were not aligned to what they should have been. But, you are no longer having to deal with it and I am sure things have gotten better since. They will continue to get better. No one wants to be stuck for years negotiating settlement or before the courts. Both are just as equally stressful.

              Good Luck!
              Tayken
              Last edited by Tayken; 05-31-2013, 01:42 PM.

              Comment


              • #67
                My post to you was in response to your reply to Frustrated with Ex, Tayken. Not the thread as a whole. I saw Stripes thanks to everyone. I wasn't commenting on any of that. Your post was far too long to quote so I thought you would understand when I said "this particular post" as it was directly after your reply to Frustrated.

                And I agree that ways of dealing with conflict permeates all aspects of separation and divorce, I was specifically talking about when you said this\

                The risk that "feelings" people run in court and why I tend to take the "math" approach in my responses generally is because the courts do not operate on "feelings". They operate on facts.
                You are quite specific in identifying the courts in this particular post.

                Downtrodden Dad said what I was thinking in a much more eloquent way than I did so I will leave it at that.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by SadAndTired View Post
                  My post to you was in response to your reply to Frustrated with Ex, Tayken. Not the thread as a whole. I saw Stripes thanks to everyone. I wasn't commenting on any of that. Your post was far too long to quote so I thought you would understand when I said "this particular post" as it was directly after your reply to Frustrated.
                  But, you stated in your own message (and only message until this response I note) the following:

                  Originally posted by SadAndTired
                  Edited to add: I am unclear how this particular post of yours Tayken helps the OP.
                  So could you please explain your motivation for inserting this edit? It does make your original post hard to respond to.

                  Originally posted by SadAndTired View Post
                  You are quite specific in identifying the courts in this particular post.
                  My apologies for using terminology you do not approve of. Please feel free to read "legal matter" instead of "court" when I provide advice on this forum. The position I hold is equal to negotiated settlement, mediation, arbitration, custody and access assessments, and any other element of separation and divorce that may be an extension of the Family Law Rules, Family Law Act, and the Children's Law Reform Act of Ontario.

                  I hope this clarifies my position on where the concept of "math" versus "feelings" people lies. It is with any dispute between two parties really and shouldn't have to be defined to just "court" or "family law". The information I cited from the article can be equally applied to personal disputes in a workplace too.

                  I am not miopic to the fact that the information provided can be applied to multiple levels of settling a disputed issue. I do thank-you for your personal concern ("feelings") that I am... Just to clarify for you and others who may think that my advice only applies to a matter for which an Application is before the court... It does not... It can be leveraged to better understand the factors causing the dispute and used to assist both or one of the parties and settle matters without the need to attend court.

                  Good Luck!
                  Tayken

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Janus View Post
                    (Note: Male recipients are just as pathetic, a prostitute is a prostitute, regardless of gender)
                    It makes me sad that you even have to make that note.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by CSAngel View Post
                      It makes me sad that you even have to make that note.
                      Well, that is just because the vast majority of recipients are female, and the vast majority of payors are male.

                      I am sometimes accused of misogyny, which is not the case at all. I have lots of respect for both genders, I just think that "support" is a fundamental wrong in most cases, at least in terms of how it is determined under the current environment.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Janus View Post
                        Well, that is just because the vast majority of recipients are female, and the vast majority of payors are male.

                        I am sometimes accused of misogyny, which is not the case at all. I have lots of respect for both genders, I just think that "support" is a fundamental wrong in most cases, at least in terms of how it is determined under the current environment.
                        Well, if it any consolidation Janus, I have been accused of being a "misandrist" (hatred of men) on this site in the past. There was a time prior to your joining that there was a contingent of "rights" activists who frequented this site.

                        For the longest time, it was assumed I was even a fish... Well as "smelly fish" to be exact. This was from the poster Who-Must-Not-Be-Named...

                        I have also been accused of being an Natzi sympathizer too on this site.

                        Good Luck!
                        Tayken

                        Comment

                        Our Divorce Forums
                        Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                        Working...
                        X