Just Sit With Me vs. Solutions: Why Clarity Matters

You might have scrolled past an image verse posted on social media by someone you know, and the gist of it is this: “Just sit with me in my unhappiness. Listen to me as long as I need you to. And don’t provide solutions.”

This message isn’t published casually. It’s meant as a statement to friends. It’s a cry to be heard and sympathized with, with one important condition attached: there can be no expectation of the poster taking any sort of immediate or foreseeable action to alleviate their melancholy. And the “sitting with them” will not be brief.

Some people are OK with this and are happy to oblige. Others want to run in the opposite direction.

I’m not talking about the loss of a loved one at the time it happens (or very immediately thereafter), or that the dog is old and sick, or that the promotion didn’t materialize. Most people understand that a little bit of TLC at times like these is both decent and required. This is very specifically about rehashed, ongoing issues, or general feelings of discontent.

So why is this so polarizing? Theoretically, all the readers of this post at the very least like, if not love, the poster. Why, then, is this request, masked in a pre-made image verse, received so differently?

The answer lies in how the reader of this little verse looks at problems, and at the changes required to neutralize them and move past them.

If the reader is someone who’s highly emotional and enjoys listening to others without interruption or judgment, they’ll likely find the “just sit with me” verse reasonable, even poignant. They might also feel fairly confident that the poster is like-minded. They may believe that this person will “sit with them,” metaphorically if not physically, when it’s their turn to expound for long periods of time about their own woes.

(This may not always be the case. The poster might be someone who has little regard for the pain of others and can only feel their own angst. But that’s a different story.)

What about the readers who want to run far away at the mere thought of being an emotional sounding board for someone with no interest in active improvement? They experience the ask contained in this image verse very differently. To them, it’s a downright painful position to be put in.

Because they like or love the poster, they want to help them stop stewing in their cauldron of misery and climb out as quickly as possible. They have no desire to join them in it. They’ll usually listen until they understand the issue, and then their brain goes straight to solutions: let’s get this fixed and get you back to your happy self as fast as possible.

Men are notorious for this and are therefore often labeled “poor listeners.” It’s not just men, as many women are naturally solution-forward as well. For these people, the idea that the poster simply wants to keep talking, without desiring immediate or decisive action to change anything, is draining beyond their tolerance. So they’d rather not engage at all.

The clarity in all this is straightforward: give people the empathetic jobs they’re best suited for.

Don’t ask a friend who wants to hold you (lovingly) accountable, and who generates multiple action tasks to fix your problem, to listen to you or commiserate with you for hours on end. Leave that role to your friend who loves a little tea and sympathy (as my mother used to say) herself.

And when you’re ready to take action, lucky you. You have solution-oriented friends who are raring to get going on brainstorming and action-planning the fix with you.

Accepting who wants to listen for long periods of time and who does not is key to understanding the different kinds of empathy within your friendship network. Becoming crystal clear on who is best aligned with your needs, and when, allows you to leverage the very best supportive qualities in your circle.