Live NVC Courses: Advanced Skill Level

Many people consider a true observation as something that all can agree on. Some people use the video camera analogy – a true observation is “what a video camera can see and hear.” This perpetuates the myth of the neutral, unbiased observer. There are three layers of observation: External, Internal, and Systemic. Understanding these layers is key to connecting with the depth of the needs, and to create greater shared understanding.

When we have privilege, we can have access to resources resulting from legal or social norms related to membership in a group -- independent of any (in)action, awareness of the disparity, the potential benefits to us, or the costs to others. Unhelpful ways of engaging with privilege are: denial/invisibility, guilt/shame, defensiveness, and entitlement. Helpful ways of engaging are: owning privilege, learning about privilege, opening to feedback, and stewarding privilege for benefit of all. To be helpful we need to engage with necessary (rather than unnecessary) discomfort.

Whether we have more or less power and privilege, anything without liberation for all is within patriarchal separation, and will continue cycles of oppression. To liberate ourselves and one another we need to increase our collective capacity through developing related knowledge, skills, research; build an understanding of patriarchal roots; confront lovingly; co-hold dilemmas about privilege; co-shape outcomes; etc.

The word "privilege" signifies the benefit to the person having it, and the relationship between that person’s benefit and others' lack of benefit. When privileged, there are incentives to not see this interdependent link. For instance, it's easier for the wealthy to think of the poverty of many and the wealth of some are unrelated. If the wealthy want to keep wealth they would need to continue with approaches rooted in this separation.

Whether privileged or not, its not easy to see the humanity of others in different social locations, especially if their actions have unwanted impacts and have left behind our humanity. Aiming for “both sides hearing each other” empathically, and to focus on effect rather than intent when we have more privilege, may theoretically lead to liberation. Yet, in practice it can reinforce rather than transcend power differences -- unless there's specific ways to focus attention and choice. Here, its important to transform expectations into working with willingness, and within our own terms and timetable.

This document is for organizations that want to integrate NVC. The intention is to use conflict as a stimulus to personal growth, more open and honest relationships, and life-affirming change. It mentions using NVC skills such as self connection, empathy, honesty, and requests (and protective use of force as last resort) to navigate the conflict with an intention of connection.

Most people want to punish perpetrators of sexual violence. Unfortunately, punishment doesn’t lead to lasting widespread change. Rather, we can identify root causes and conditions that sustain violence. That means shifting from individual to systemic lenses, and from punitive to restorative responses. It means collective learning about how such acts are nurtured and persist. This can reduce the chance of it happening again.

There's a danger in using empathy exchange to perpetually recirculate and exchange pain (often by telling and re-telling the same old stories), rather than using it as a catalyst for transformation. It can create and further pain in whatever form: anger, destructiveness, hatred, grief, emotional drama, and violence. It can also reinforce dualistic evaluations of "met" vs "unmet" needs. And it can slow down productivity.

Often, people don't help others when others are in danger, whether it is a parent who is abusing a child, a man who is battering his wife, someone sexually harassing another, a bully making fun of someone, or a person who is abusing a pet. However, intervening can save lives. And bring enrichment, peace, safety, care, and justice to the world.

Total inclusion is impossible: inclusion of all can often lead to exclusion of those who can't bear the behaviors of some. Many groups flounder and disintegrate because of too much inclusion. Limited resources and capacities may make it necessary to exclude. Keeping more coherent shared values and strategies may be another reason to place membership conditions so that what appears to be exclusion may give movements a chance to expand.