In our quest to be more real and expose more people to the fullness of our stories, this push can go too far.

Self-disqualifying language undermines the makeup of who you are and what you know, and I’d love to see more of us own our experiences, perspectives, and expertise.

It is important to point out just how much of a conversational crutch this saying (and others like it) becomes when things start to get uncomfortable.

You get to choose whether to be on guard and on the defensive, or, to be willing and open to taking in new information that might...just maybe...shift your thinking and how you show up in the world.

8 takeaways from books I read in 2023 from authors I had the privilege of interviewing on my show, The Follow-Up Question.

Just as you feel every bit of nuance and detail and complexity of the emotions you experience, you need more intricate and accurate ways to describe those emotions to others to give them a greater picture of exactly what you are feeling.

We often conflate being a good communicator with being a good speaker. There’s a limiting belief that to effectively communicate with others, we must be good speakers, especially when conflict or disagreement is present.

Arguments aren’t necessarily bad, and trying to prevent them is a futile exercise in trying to change the makeup of what makes us human. What is most important is not ending all disagreements but ensuring that we have accurate disagreements with each other.

When this happens, the conversation stops being about the issue at hand and instead becomes a defense of our emotions. And that is a messy, murky place to be.

Out of 7 billion+ people on this planet, there is only one person who knows for sure whether or not you’re actually listening, and that person is who you see in the mirror.

Rapport-building — getting to know someone’s story even when you disagree with a particular opinion or belief they might hold — is an organic process that requires being present in the moment and taking risks by sharing personal experiences and by asking questions.

In the case of atrophying curiosity, it means you always have to have ALL the answers ALL the time.

Far too often, we trap people into the box of who they once were despite their best efforts to actually change. We may not even like or agree with who they are, but it is important to recognize people for who they currently are and not a past version of themselves.

You have to be honest about labeling things uncomfortable versus dangerous. Is something truly dangerous, or is it simply uncomfortable and you want to run away from it?

The more we don’t feel seen as humans and the more our choices are attacked without first understanding the makeup of who we are — no matter how wrong it may seem — the more we hold on to those choices because they become the identity we present to the world.

When the other side gets curious about our emotions — and more importantly, the true source of those emotions — it can lead to a clearer understanding of the issue, and perhaps even reveal ways to resolve the disagreement or dispute.

As 2022 comes to a close, I want to share another group of amazing authors and thinkers who inspired me with their writing this past year.

We see example after example in popular media of people who make their living off of reducing complicated issues into black-and-white binaries, removing nuance from conversation in favor of parroted talking points, and stereotyping the many based off the actions of the few.

This total victory fallacy of conversation, where your goal is to achieve total victory by changing someone’s mind in an instant by speaking with such certainty that they can’t help but change, crushes the chance you have of having any measurable effect.

Good communication — communication that inspires action — requires us to first understand ourselves and the outcomes we aim to gain.