OVERTALK

 

You approached me because you wanted something from me. That is the fundamental nature of making an allegation against someone - you seek a reaction or validation.

Your accusation that I ‘overtalk’ is, in reality, a denial of the fact that you interrupted me. You expect me to listen to you and respond to what you say, yet you refuse to extend the same courtesy to me. Instead, you not only interrupted but are now attempting to discredit what I had to say.

This reveals a lack of conversational skill. Perhaps, from your perspective, this was never meant to be a conversation.

Your behavior demonstrates an attempt at dominance in two ways: first, by interrupting me, and second, by reframing my response as an act of over-talking. Both actions serve to undermine my authority while simultaneously positioning yourself as both the victim and the authority figure.

How can you be both submissive and dominant at the same time? This contradiction creates confusion - yet you accuse me of being questionable.

My response is to expose this behavior for what it is.

We are no longer discussing the original topic but rather debating conversational tactics and technique. This is a classic derailment - a smokescreen designed to shift the focus away from substance. Not only does this undermine what I had to say, but it also undermines your own position, as you have abandoned your original point in favor of making allegations against me.

By casting yourself as both the victim and the judge, you are engaging in passive-aggressive behavior. That is not a rational or constructive way to communicate.

This is precisely why I continued speaking when you interrupted me. If you feel unheard, it is not because of me - it is because your own misguided approach to social interaction is working against you.

However, if you reflect on what I have explained here, you may gain some valuable insight.