When They're Listening for Errors, Not Understanding

Have you ever tried to tell someone how something made you feel, only to find yourself suddenly defending the accuracy of your own experience? That's not what happened. That's not what I said. That's not what I meant. You're taking it the wrong way. I guess I just can't do anything right. And suddenly, you're no longer talking about what hurt you. You're litigating whether they did anything wrong. In this episode of the Advancing Women Podcast, Dr. Kimberly DeSimone explores what happens when someone listens to our feelings for errors instead of understanding, and why defensiveness can turn an attempt at connection into a battle over whose version of reality gets to count. Because feelings aren't courtroom testimony. Understanding someone's experience doesn't require agreeing with every interpretation of what happened. Empathy is not a verdict. It isn't a confession, compliance, or an admission of guilt. It's the willingness to stop defending your own perspective long enough to become curious about someone else's. But this episode goes beyond communication. We examine the gender socialization that shapes how women and men learn to receive criticism, research on masculine norms and manipulation in conflict, and the psychological function of defensiveness as protection against shame, vulnerability, and threats to self-image. Dr. DeSimone explores the important distinction between ordinary defensiveness and persistent invalidation, including gaslighting, DARVO, and the concept of epistemic testimonial injustice: what happens when someone's credibility as the narrator of their own experience is repeatedly diminished. Because after enough conversations in which your reality is disputed, the greatest cost may not simply be unresolved conflict. It may be that you begin to stop trusting yourself. This episode is ultimately about something bigger than getting another person to understand you. It's about recognizing that you cannot force someone into self-awareness, but you also don't have to surrender your understanding of your own experience simply because someone refuses to validate it. Sometimes clarity means recognizing that someone you love gets defensive but genuinely wants to do better. Sometimes it means recognizing your own contribution to a dynamic. And sometimes it means confronting the harder possibility: You may be trying to explain yourself to someone who benefits from not understanding you. The goal isn't to have relationships without disagreement. It's to have relationships where disagreement doesn't require one person's experience to disappear. Referenced: Scott Austin Martin: Are you listening for errors? Or listening to understand? Let’s Connect: Instagram: @AdvancingWomenPodcast Facebook: Advancing Women Podcast LinkedIn: Dr. Kimberly DeSimone