Tag: communication

  • Sorry Seems to Be the Easiest Word!

    Sorry Seems to Be the Easiest Word!

    British musician Elton John once sang the words “Sorry Seems to Be the Hardest Word” in his 1976 hit of the same name.

    But, y’know, I’ve never had this problem.

    If anything, I find the word “sorry” easy.

    TOO EASY!

    I’m forever saying sorry. Sorry for things that are my fault, sorry for things I THINK are my fault, sorry for things that aren’t remotely my fault, and even sorry for things that couldn’t possibly ever be my fault.

    Put it this way, later in Elton’s song he asks what he should do when lightning strikes him.

    Me? I’d probably apologise to the cloud for causing it to strike me just because I happened to exist within its sphere of awareness.

    Know how I’ve mentioned my lack of ego and self-effacing tendencies before? Well, it also seems I have a nigh-on pathological urge to accept blame for the woes of the world.

    I’ve apologised when somebody else bumped into me.

    When someone asked me a question I didn’t know the answer to? “Sorry.”

    When I’ve needed to squeeze past somebody who has positioned their trolley sideways across an entire supermarket aisle? Somehow, some way, I apologise.

    Someone misunderstands something I thought I’d said perfectly clearly?

    “Sorry, what I meant was…”

    If the weather is disappointing while somebody is visiting me, a small part of me feels I should probably apologise for that too.

    Perhaps the ultimate British achievement is saying sorry to an inanimate object after I’ve walked into it.

    I’m beginning to suspect that “sorry” isn’t an admission of guilt for me.

    It’s punctuation.

    The evidence against me

    It’s 1989. I’m in my “gap year” before university, except my gap involved going to a local technical college to pick up a plethora of assorted qualifications while I decided what I actually wanted to study at uni.

    I did a ScotVec certificate in computer science because it interested me, and I thought it might prove useful when I went on to study mathematics. Probably.

    I lived in the halls of residence directly across from the college. Literally less than a five-minute stroll from my room to class.

    I was a goody two-shoes student. Always on time, usually early, and always near the top of the class. Teacher’s pet, some would say.

    My friend?

    He had real issues getting out of bed.

    At weekends he’d emerge at around 4pm. Not ideal when classes started at 8:30 in the morning.

    Anyway, his attendance had become so bad that he was at risk of being dropped from the course. As he was my friend, I said I’d help get him up and into class.

    So I went to his room, knocked him awake, got him ready, and ushered him along. It was like waiting for ice-cold honey to pour. I eventually managed to get him out of his room and across to college.

    We walked into class, ooh, ten minutes late?

    Which, for him, was early.

    The teacher exclaimed that he was “almost on time for once!”, basically acknowledging my role in getting him there at all.

    Then he added that if my friend fell back into his bad ways, he’d be out on his ear.

    And, totally unbidden, I responded:

    “Yes, sorry sir. It won’t happen again!”

    Both the teacher AND my friend looked at me with bemused puzzlement.

    Hang on.

    What exactly was I sorry for?

    Sorry for getting him there almost on time? Sorry for making an effort to help a friend?

    Why exactly did I feel I had to apologise?

    Sorry, but WHY am I sorry?

    I am naturally subservient. I’ll walk at the rear of a group or let others pass through a doorway before me. If I join a queue at the same time as someone else, or sometimes even slightly before them, I’ll often let them go ahead.

    I’m also very conscious of people entering my personal space, so I think I’ve unconsciously concluded that everyone else must feel the same way. I therefore spend an unreasonable amount of time trying not to inconvenience people who have shown absolutely no sign of being inconvenienced.

    This frequently involves moving out of somebody’s way when I wasn’t actually in their way, thereby moving directly into their way.

    “Sorry.”

    I’m constantly apologising.

    Sometimes “sorry” seems to mean:

    I don’t want you to think I’m rude.

    I’m about to inconvenience you by approximately four seconds.

    I disagree, but I’d quite like us still to be friends afterwards.

    I need something from you.

    I have an opinion.

    I’m sorry I exist where you can see or hear me.

    Actually, I’m sorry I exist.

    Full stop!

    I do wonder how much of my constant apologising is actually about guilt, and how much is simply social lubrication.

    But it’s got out of hand.

    My wife will yell at me:

    “PETE! For goodness’ sake! Stop saying sorry all the time!”

    To which I naturally respond:

    “Yeah… sorry about that!”

    And the worst thing is, I’m not even trying to be funny. The apology has already left my mouth before the part of my brain responsible for quality control has arrived at work.

    I have created the infinite apology loop.

    I just need to find a way to extract energy from it and I’ll make my fortune in power generation.

    The tiny negotiation hidden inside “sorry”

    I think an apology can be less about admitting I did something wrong and more about signalling intent.

    “What I’m about to say isn’t intended to make your life more difficult.”

    Or:

    “I realise we’re at odds with our expectations here, but I’m not deliberately trying to annoy you.”

    It’s an attempt to defuse a situation before anyone has actually planted the explosive device.

    One small word has ended up doing an awful lot of jobs.

    It covers remorse, politeness, embarrassment, sympathy, interruption, disagreement, and the complex diplomatic negotiations involved in passing someone on a narrow pavement.

    Frankly, “sorry” is overworked.

    Sorry for taking up space

    If I constantly apologise before speaking, asking, disagreeing, or needing something, I do wonder if that affects how I think about my right to do those things.

    Not in some grand, life-changing way.

    Just in the accumulation of tiny moments.

    There is a difference between being considerate and acting as though my very existence requires an apology. I’m not always entirely sure where I cross that line.

    Sometimes “sorry” is kindness. Sometimes it’s habit. Sometimes I simply want to avoid friction.

    Sometimes I probably just need to get out of the bloody doorway.

    Retiring a few unnecessary sorries

    Perhaps I need an intervention of sorts.

    Not to stop saying sorry altogether, but at least to notice some of the unnecessary ones before they escape.

    Maybe “Sorry to bother you” becomes “Have you got a minute?”

    Maybe “Sorry, can I just say…” becomes me simply saying it.

    And maybe “Sorry I’m late!” becomes…

    No, actually, I’ll keep that one for when I’m late.

    I’m not an utter barbarian.

    I wonder which of my many apologies I’d actually want to keep?

    Sorry, I seem to have written an entire post about apologising

    I don’t think I want to stop saying sorry.

    I’d just like to become slightly better at distinguishing between I did something wrong and two people arrived at the same door at roughly the same time.

    There must be some room between never apologising and accepting personal responsibility for the entire human experience.

    I’ll try to find it.

    Sorry if that takes a while.

  • Small Talk Is TCP Handshaking for Humans

    Small Talk Is TCP Handshaking for Humans

    I have long suspected that small talk is not really about talking at all. I mean, obviously it’s about talking, but it’s not about imparting information or saying anything of actual interest.

    It is, I think, more accurately described as a kind of human protocol negotiation. A lightweight exchange whose purpose is not to transfer meaningful information, but to confirm that both parties are present, functional, and broadly willing to proceed without causing a scene.

    In computer networking terms, it feels rather a lot like a TCP three-way handshake.

    That may sound like an over-complicated way to describe “Morning” and “Busy day?” but I maintain it is exactly the right amount of over-complication.

    The analogy works on several levels at once.

    TCP handshakeHuman small talk
    SYN“Morning.”
    SYN/ACK“Morning. Busy today?”
    ACK“Yeah, not too bad.”
    Connection establishedActual conversation may now proceed

    The actual content is almost irrelevant.

    The handshake exists to establish availability, willingness, compatibility, safety, and communication parameters. Small talk does much the same thing. It is not there to win prizes for insight. It is there to say, in the safest possible way:

    I see you. You seem non-threatening. We may now continue.

    That is quite a useful invention, really.

    It is also, for some of us, faintly bewildering.

    Because my brain has a tendency to assume conversations should do one of three things:

    1. exchange useful information.
    2. explore an interesting idea.
    3. contain at least one genuinely terrible joke.

    Small talk often does none of these things.

    Which is not to say it is pointless. Far from it. It is just that its point is not always the same as the point my brain is looking for.

    That can make it feel a bit like packet loss.

    Some of the signal gets through. Some of it doesn’t. A few words arrive intact, but the important meaning seems to have been dropped somewhere between the intention and the execution.

    The weather is discussed.

    The weekend is mentioned.

    A vague inquiry is made about one’s wellbeing.

    And yet the actual data being transmitted is something like:

    I am safe. You are safe. We may continue this interaction without immediate risk of social collapse.

    That is a rather elegant system when it works properly.

    It is also a system with some spectacular failure modes.

    Failed Handshake

    Sometimes the handshake fails immediately.

    You offer the smallest possible opening.

    “Morning.”

    And the other person replies:

    “Is it? I mean the way the world’s going it might as well be the end of days. The planet’s going to hell in a hand basket and we’re all doomed.”

    At that point the connection has not merely failed. It has been forcibly terminated, the cable has been unplugged, and the router has probably started smoking.

    Connection reset by peer.

    Timeout

    Then there is the timeout problem.

    Someone asks:

    “How are you?”

    and the answer requires a socially acceptable level of detail, emotional calibration, and acceptable honesty.

    My brain, meanwhile, is attempting to calculate whether “fine” is technically accurate, whether “surviving” sounds too bleak, whether “not bad” is too British to be believable (see below!), and whether any response longer than six words will prompt a follow-up I do not have the energy to sustain.

    By the time I have finished this internal analysis, the moment has passed.

    Connection timed out.

    Packet Flooding

    Some people go in the opposite direction.

    You offer:

    “Morning.”

    And they respond:

    “Morning! Did you see that interesting show on TV last night about medieval bridge taxation? Made me think about my current view on plug in solar panels, my advancing years, my neighbour’s cat, and the collapse of the world’s democratic politics systems..”

    That is not a handshake.

    That is packet flooding.

    ADHD can do this rather beautifully. One tiny conversational spark and suddenly a completely unrelated archive of information is bursting out of the firewall at speed.

    Which, to be fair, can sometimes be entertaining.

    It just isn’t small talk anymore. There’s nothing small about it.

    Encrypted Traffic

    Us British people add another layer of complexity, because many of us speak in what is essentially encrypted traffic.

    “Not bad.”

    Not only is this British understatement at its very best, this can mean:

    • life is actually pretty good actually!
    • life is acceptable.
    • life is mildly annoying and could be better.
    • life is a bit of a struggle but let us not make a fuss.
    • a bottomless abyss has opened beneath me, but the kettle still works, so we are continuing cup in hand and trying our best to avoid the hordes of demons spewing forth from this hellish portal.

    That is an extraordinary amount of information to pack into two words.

    It is also one of the reasons small talk can be so difficult to decode. The literal words are only half the message. Tone, timing, context, and cultural expectation carry the rest.

    The protocol is not just words.

    It is inference, and unfortunately, not something I’m particularly good at.

    UDP People

    Then there are people who skip the handshake entirely.

    They are the conversational equivalent of UDP.

    “HELLO STRANGER HERE IS MY INFODUMP OF TRAUMAS, PROBLEMS AND CONCERNS!!.”

    No connection setup.

    No reliability guarantees.

    No orderly exchange of packets.

    Just pure, immediate data transfer with absolutely no regard for conventional protocol.

    This can be alarming, but occasionally refreshing.

    Stateful Firewall

    Autistic masking probably deserves its own category here.

    It can feel a bit like trying to pass through a stateful firewall while manually monitoring every tiny aspect of your own behaviour.

    Eye contact? Adjusted.

    Tone? Checked.

    Facial expression? Calibrated.

    Volume? Sensible.

    Response time? Natural enough to avoid suspicion.

    Internal panic? Well hidden, hopefully.

    The result is not always elegant, but it is functional.. barely.

    NAT Traversal

    Trying to socialise at parties is also very much like NAT traversal.

    You know there is a connection somewhere in there.

    You know the other person is a perfectly ordinary human being.

    You know you are supposed to be able to reach them.

    And yet the routing is somehow wrong, the ports are blocked, and everyone is standing in awkward little clusters pretending not to notice that all communication has become mysteriously more difficult than it should be.

    And when you do get into a cluster, the least said about the actual handshaking the better. (Especially Dave with the sweaty palms!)

    So Why Does Small Talk Exist At All?

    Because it is doing a job.

    A very human job.

    Small talk reduces uncertainty.

    It establishes connection.

    It signals intent.

    It gives both parties a safe place to stand before deciding whether to move into more meaningful territory.

    It is a social compatibility check.

    A “yes, we can talk” exchange.

    A way of saying:

    I am friendly.

    You are safe.

    We may proceed.

    That is actually rather beautiful, when you think about it.

    Even if the words themselves are often about absolutely nothing of consequence.

    Why It Feels So Hard

    For many neurodivergent people, the difficulty is not that small talk is meaningless.

    The difficulty is that its meaning is often indirect.

    It is a social ritual disguised as conversation.

    A lot of the work is happening in the subtext.

    And subtext is a slippery little creature.

    If your brain prefers clarity, precision, and explicit information, small talk can feel like being asked to decode a message written in invisible ink.

    Which, admittedly, is not very helpful.

    The Human Side of the Protocol

    And yet…

    And yet, for all my cantankerous grumbling, I do think there is something lovely about it.

    We are, after all, social animals operating a remarkably fragile but surprisingly effective communication system. Small talk is one of the tiny pieces of software that keeps the whole thing from crashing immediately.

    It is how we ease into each other’s company.

    It is how we test for warmth.

    It is how we say, with minimal risk and maximum politeness, that we are willing to share a moment. You’re lowering your shields and allowing the Klingons to beam aboard.

    That is not nothing.

    In Closing

    So yes, perhaps small talk is the human equivalent of a TCP handshake.

    A few neat little exchanges whose real purpose is not the content, but the connection.

    Sometimes it works perfectly.

    Sometimes it fails immediately.

    Sometimes the packets arrive out of order.

    Sometimes somebody starts talking about medieval bridge taxation or python programming before the connection is even established.

    But when it does work, it lets two strangers become, very briefly, not strangers at all.

    And really, that is quite a clever trick for a few essentially meaningless words and a friendly look over a cup of coffee.

  • My Life as a Stammerer

    My Life as a Stammerer

    Most people are surprised when I tell them I have a stammer.

    That’s because they don’t hear it.

    Or rather, they don’t hear the amount of work that goes into making sure they don’t hear it.

    The Early Years

    I am a stammerer and have been all my speaking life.

    At school I was picked on for it and tried to minimise it by speaking more slowly and using smaller, simpler words. This, in turn, made people assume I wasn’t intelligent. Everyone talked down to me and treated me as if I was less capable than I really was.

    People didn’t just hear my speech difficulty.

    They assumed I had a thinking difficulty.

    I quickly learned that if people struggle to understand how you speak, many of them begin making assumptions about how you think.

    If eyes are the windows to the soul, then perhaps the mouth is the WiFi enabled smart speaker to the mind?

    (Hmm, you’re stretching the analogy a little thin there. – Ed.)

    It wasn’t until later, when I was in secondary school, that I got a speech therapist who actually made a difference.

    Although, at the time, I was less than pleased with her approach.

    She wrote me a letter, sealed it, and told me to deliver it to my headmaster at school the next day.

    Now, in the early 1980s, at my school you only went to the headmaster’s office for one thing.

    Namely, corporal punishment.

    So there I was, standing outside the headmaster’s office, listening to the sound of leather on palms and hearing the wails of the student inside, getting more nervous by the second.

    The door opened, a crying boy emerged, and the headmaster , a veritable mountain of a man feared by all , stepped out, took one look at me and exclaimed:

    Little? What are you doing here? Come in, boy.”

    Long story short, I nervously handed him the letter and he did something I’d never seen before, nor since.

    He laughed.

    He promptly marched me down to the “forbidden zone” ( namely the teachers’ common room, which in those days was a haze of cigarette smoke ) addressed my English teacher by her first name and told her, in no uncertain terms, that I was joining her after-school acting club.

    I couldn’t argue.

    I mean, I wanted to, but you never answered back to the headmaster.

    Press-ganged against my will into the acting club?

    I swear there must be something in that which violates the Geneva Convention.

    Oddly, on stage I noticed something.

    I rarely stammered over my lines.

    I never stammered when singing.

    (I mean, I couldn’t hold a tune if you gave it to me in a bucket, but at least I didn’t stammer tunelessly.)

    And I could recite whole Shakespearean monologues like…

    Well, I was going to say like an RSC professional, but no…

    Like a sixteen-year-old Scottish schoolboy.

    The difference?

    The speech became:

    • structured
    • rhythmic
    • intentional

    I wasn’t speaking spontaneously.

    I was performing.

    The Post-Education Years

    Over the years, through university and into work, I kept the performance up.

    I developed:

    • a comfortable speech rhythm
    • pacing and pauses
    • a fallback repertoire of repeated phrases
    • verbal scaffolding
    • and, eventually, my “stage voice”

    Many decades (and one very late autism diagnosis) later I realised something else.

    In researching autism and trying to understand its impact on my life , and ways to mitigate it , I discovered the concept of autistic masking.

    Once I understood masking, I recognised I’d been doing exactly the same thing with my speech. My repertoire of repeated phrases and stock responses? Echolalia!

    Long before I knew the word “masking”, I was already an expert at it.

    Today people often look at me with genuine confusion when I tell them I stammer.

    Invariably someone replies:

    “But… you don’t stammer!”

    That means I’m doing what I’m doing well.

    But what they don’t see is:

    • the intense concentration
    • the constant monitoring and adaptation of what I’m saying
    • the fatigue from the continual mental effort
    • the stress of trying to do all of that and get my point across at the same time

    I’ve become remarkably good ( you might even say circus-level good ) at spinning plates on sticks.

    What people don’t realise is this:

    Fluency is not the absence of effort.

    When the Mask Slips

    Of course, it doesn’t mean I can get away with this all the time.

    Maintaining the performance takes a tremendous amount of mental energy.

    Running my ship with shields up all day eventually depletes the dilithium crystals and I need time to recharge.

    When I’m tired, my stammer returns.

    When I’m overwhelmed, my stammer returns.

    When I’m under pressure or stressed, my stammer returns.

    This isn’t failure.

    It’s simply the consequence of running out of the resources required to maintain a very energy-intensive system.

    The Stigma of the Stammer

    Despite it being 2026 as I write this, and despite the enormous strides made in neurodiversity awareness and acceptance, I still encounter stigma.

    Sometimes it is unintentional and well-meaning.

    Sometimes it is neither.

    People:

    • become impatient and try to rush me
    • make assumptions about my intelligence (or perceived lack thereof)
    • take pleasure in mocking or joking about my stammer
    • simply talk down to me

    And the thing that really grinds my gears is when people, under the guise of being helpful, decide to finish my…

    (Sandwiches? – Ed.)

    No.

    My sentences.

    Like so many neurodiversity-related challenges, the actual problem isn’t usually the stammer itself.

    The problem is often society’s reaction to it.

    Summing Up

    When I was young, the goal was often to hide differences.

    Today we’re increasingly learning to understand them.

    I still have a stammer.

    The difference is that now I understand it.

    I understand the techniques I’ve developed, the effort they require, and the role they’ve played in shaping who I am.

    I also understand that communication is about far more than flawless delivery.

    A person’s worth isn’t measured by the smoothness of their speech.

    And perhaps that’s one of the more encouraging things about the growing neurodiversity movement.

    We’re slowly learning that different doesn’t mean broken.

    Sometimes it simply means different.

    That seems like a conversation worth having.

    …. Even if it occasionally takes me a little longer to say it.