In this article I’m going over the linguistic techniques we use to be honest without being hurtful. I’m also going to cover what it means to judge whether we should tell the truth or not based on how hurtful we think it could be. The overall question is: do we ever have to lie to protect someone’s feelings?
But first, a little context…
I remember sitting on the floor at 9-years-old with my classmates and listening to our teacher talk to us all about honesty. The details that follow are approximate but here is the essence of what happened:
Teacher: Now, imagine a friend is a wearing a T-shirt that you don’t like, and they ask you if you like it. What should you say to them?
Me: (raises hand)
Teacher: Yes, Richard.
Me: You should tell them that you don’t like it.
Teacher: Ah, but wouldn’t that hurt their feelings?
Me: Well…you should still tell them the truth.
Teacher: But it would be nicer if you said you liked the T-shirt, wouldn’t it? (She turns to address us all) It is okay to lie in some situations. It is okay to lie so that you don’t hurt other people’s feelings.
Me: (wants to protest but can’t).
It was such BS and I was too young to tell her so. This lesson stayed on my mind for a good while that day and over the years I would return to it and try to sound out my argument eloquently to myself, but I had plenty of doubt. Maybe the teacher had been right.
Later, at 15-years-old in a citizenship lesson of about five people including myself, the subject of honesty was brought up again in class with another teacher:
Teacher: [...] so it’s always best to be honest with people.
Me: Ah, but what if you’re wearing a tie that I don’t like and you ask me if I like it?
Teacher: You could just tell me that the tie isn’t to your taste personally, but that there are others who might like it.
Me: (pauses) YES! Yes! Bloody hell, I knew it wasn’t just me…ugh, I had this lesson when I was nine-years-old…
Tact
There is an assumption with some that to any question, or most questions, there is the truth, which only has one emotional value and there is the lie, which only has one emotional value. We know it’s not that simple though, even with direct questions.
The emotional value of the truth changes based on our presentation of it.
Here is a list of presentational techniques we use. We use any of them instinctively in various situations, but, with the exception of linguists, we tend to never really list them or give them a second thought.
Synonyms:
In English we have many synonyms so that we can call fat people obese, large, portly, stout or full-figured – all depending on which is most suitable for the context and, of course, the power and nature of the emotional charge we want our statement to have.
Active and Passive Voice:
We can use active and passive voice to cover the truth in metaphorical safety padding. When we don’t want to imply blame we switch to the passive voice:
‘The window got broken’ versus ‘someone broke the window’.
Indirectness:
Q. Do these jeans make me look fat?
There’s the indirect answer: ‘they’re a bad cut’ versus the direct one: ‘yeah, you look fat in them’.
My flatmate Bryony suggested this indirect response above, saying it’s one of the safest truthful things to tell a girl who asks this dreaded question. I’ve taken a mental note.
Sometimes being direct can also show respect, however, and can be combined with other tact techniques, such as supplementation, to take any sting out:
Q. Was I being out of line with him earlier?
A. A bit, yeah.
Length:
We can soften the truth by presenting it in a long, full way – though this can be pretty irritating:
‘I’m afraid to say I can’t facilitate that request at the present time’ versus ‘I can’t do it right now’.
I once asked a politician a question and he spent perhaps 10 minutes answering it. When he finished I couldn’t remember what I’d asked – it was a boring combination of indirectness and excessive length.
Supplementation:
Q. Did I do the right thing?
A. No, but given the circumstances who can blame you?
All that was required was ‘no’, but the respondent offers the mitigating phrase to take the sting off.
Omission:
Q. Sorry I’m so late. You’re not angry with me, are you?
A. Was the traffic bad?
Q. Yeah, it was.
A. Thought so. Well, let’s find a table, shall we?
Here the person isn’t answering the question but is still acknowledging the questioner’s communication. It can be easy to confuse omission with ignorance, but done right it can make both people feel more comfortable without a lie having to be uttered.
Choice of Truths
To some questions there are a number of truths, none of which being any more correct than the next, and here you can choose which one to use. In the example below each of the answers is true. Each is likely to have a different effect on the questioner’s feelings.
Q. What do you think of this dress?
A1. I think it’s ugly.
A2. It’s not one of your best ones.
A3. It’s not really you.
A4. It fits your figure well.
A5. It has a tear in it.
Refusal to Engage with the Topic
On more than one occasion I’ve laughed, raised my hands and said something along the lines of:
‘Whoa, we’re not going into that subject. Four girls asking about whether they’re putting on weight and you’re all inviting a guy to participate in this discussion? Hell, no. Not gonna happen. No matter what I say I’ll be in trouble and I don’t want the next discussion to be about where you’ll hide my corpse.’
There are some subjects which are minefields when it comes to telling even the best presented truths (or lies). You don’t have to resort to dishonesty to avoid hurting people’s feelings though, just make sure you get out of the topic early.
Oh, and if any of those four girls are reading this: no, I didn’t think any of you were putting on weight.
If you’re dealing with an emotionally mature person they can handle the truth they ask for
There’s no need to tell people what’s on your mind if there’s no call for it. Not hurting people’s feelings can be as much about what you don’t say as what you do say and how.
But when someone asks you directly for the truth on some matter you’re even more obligated to tell them it.
Lying to protect someone’s feelings when he or she is asking you to tell him or her the truth is actually pretty patronising. Who are you to assume that they won’t be able to deal with it? And how likely is it that they’re going to swallow your lie? Will it really help them in the long-run, and, even if you think it will, is it really your place to decide that for them?
But aren’t lies still kinder if they’re done right?
In the long run, no.
Small lies, when found out, cumulatively damage people’s trust in you (as they should – lies, no matter how well intentioned, are still lies). Also, in the long run, being lied to slows, even stops, other people’s growth. Much of personal development is related to personality, health and appearance – subjects which require outsider observations and advice.
The one area that’s hard to be sure on.
Sometimes people really just want to hear a certain answer from you: they want assurance rather than the truth.
And this is the crunch when it comes down to ‘do you have to lie to avoid hurting someone’s feelings?’
The rule of thumb with people who are just seeking validation is still to do what you think is best (especially when it comes to children – who, despite being often told not to lie, get lied to a lot). Before you lie to any person, an act which at times can feel so natural and easy, you might want to consider if you’re helping them overall.
The truth can hurt, but then so can immunisation injections – would you want to go without those?
Ultimately what I’m saying is: why lie when the truth is such a versatile science?
You almost need never upset anyone unless he or she is really sensitive as long as you’re good at truth presentation.
I think this socially prevalent idea that we have to lie to each other to be nice is an unrealistically grim statement to make of human beings. Yes, pretty much everyone lies every now and again and, yes, we sometimes do it more out of concern for our own feelings than those of others. But lying as a necessary means to provide and receive respect, love, admiration, affection, acceptance, trust, hope, forgiveness and more? No way.
I don’t want to lose control and understanding of my life – ultimately lose some of my capacity to improve my life – because of inaccurate feedback from others.
Sex and the City
Okay, it’s fictional, but this scene from a ‘Sex and the City’ episode called ‘Pick-A-Little, Talk-A-Little’ (Season 6, episode 78 – thanks Wiki) captures exactly what I’m talking about. As Miranda’s well-meaning friends attempt to protect her, one person, rather riskily, does the best thing by her. I like to think the following scene of gutsy honesty has happened somewhere in the world to the same effect.
In this scene the girls are meeting Carrie’s (Sarah Jessica Parker) latest boyfriend, Berger, at a restaurant. Miranda is just finishing talking about a guy she’s been on a date with. (This script I found, and modified for clarity, seems 100% accurate to what I saw in the episode, but I apologise to any hardcore S&C fans if there’s any small error in it).
Miranda: So he kissed me goodnight at the door, I invited him up. He couldn’t because he had an early meeting. We kissed again. Then he said he’d call.
Charlotte: Two kisses. Very promising.
Miranda: You think, even though he didn’t come up?
Charlotte: Definitely. It means he likes you, but he wants to take it slow. That’s nice.
Miranda: Berger, what do you think?
Berger: You really want to know?
Miranda: Please, I would love to have a man’s opinion for a change.
Berger: All right. I’m not gonna sugarcoat it for you. He’s just not that into you.
Carrie: That’s not true! (to Miranda) Don’t listen to him.
Miranda: No, I’m intrigued. (to Berger) Elaborate.
Berger: Look, I’m sorry, but when a guy’s really into you…he’s coming upstairs, meeting or no meeting.
Carrie: That is ludicrous! What about extenuating circumstances? What about you’re stressed out, you’re on deadline, you have a migraine?
Charlotte: Or a lot of guys are afraid of getting their feelings hurt…and they don’t want to ruin a friendship.
Carrie: Or they’re freaked out by their own feelings. There’s a lot of push – pull out there. A lot of mixed messages.
Berger: Yeah, I have to say that’s all code for, “he’s just not that into you.” I’m sorry, but with guys it’s very simple. If we’re into you, we’re coming upstairs. We’re booking the next date. There are no mixed messages.
Carrie: No mixed messages? But I’ve spent my whole life deciphering mixed messages. I’ve made a whole career of it.
Miranda: Wow. (Mostly saying this to herself) He’s just not that into me.
Carrie: Honey, ignore this person. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about. (to Berger) You’re fired.
Berger: Look, if he’s not into you, the guy’s obviously a weenie, so –
Miranda: No, I love it. It is the most liberating thing I have ever heard! Think how much time and therapy I could have saved over the last 20 years…if I had known this!
If you liked this article and would like to make a donation to Reaching A Better Place please click below.
Related Articles:
Leave a Comment