Hmm. I think I've primarily experienced the really dark side of guess culture, so I appreciate your framing of it as a desire for understanding when it's in a healthy context.
I've experienced it in the contexts of narcissism and borderline personality, where the underlying thought is, "I am so obviously the center of the world that anyone with half a brain who's paying a whit of attention should to intuit my needs without my having to speak a word. If I have to speak, you have already failed." And anyone who failed was punished, sometimes intensely.
Ask culture, for me in that context, became about being able to exist as a separate person and express a boundary. I'd much rather put the cards on the table, find out we want completely different, even opposed things, and work from there, than deal with the power imbalance of one person's assumption that anyone who isn't reading their mind is an idiot.
It seems the virtue, as most of the time, is in the mean.
You can also be more empathetic with ask culture and soften or make the request more obvious to say no to.
Instead of saying "can you do x" you can say "i know you're busy so no pressure whatsoever but if you're available can you do me out with x? feel free to say no my feelings won't be hurt"
Yea it's a lot more words but the general gist is you ask with an additional explicit "out" for the other person so they can say no using your pre-provided excuse instead of them having to come up with one. I've found this over communication can be useful for bridging the gap sometimes
As a (suffering) guesser myself, when I have to ask something I always phrase it like 'would you be interested in doing this?' so that they can say 'no' without stress.
Instead of asking 'Would you do this for me? etc.' which I know would cause a mild-natured guesser stress.
It is also true that for some (many?) people it is very hard to say 'No'. I don't know any psychological/technical name for this but it is simply true and it is in their nature.
When asked directly, they will give in even if they don't like doing what is being asked.
'Asking' in these cases is actually exploitation (if done with prior knowledge).
I think what you describe in the flip side of this. If I assume guess culture, then you asking me something implies that you reasoned out that I should give it to you. That puts a lot of expectations on me and I feel like I am going to really upset you if I say no.
Meanwhile you may have just asked me on a long shot.
I think, "It can't hurt to ask," is the leading mindset of ask culture.
If the other person is also an asker, it's probably accurate. As an asker myself, I have no trouble saying no when the answer is no. I will generally offer some explanation of the no, and I'll probably also suggest some other way the other person can accomplish what they were asking me about, but saying no just feels like "being honest" to me.
I'm also comfortable with the prospect that I might disappoint people this way. I consider my own disappointment to be my responsibility, and thus also consider other people's disappointment to be theirs, not mine.
That is accurate even if it sounds mildly derogatory. Any kind of confrontation is very difficult for some people while it means nothing to others.
Simple example, when somebody cuts into a line in a super market, how many people actually speak up? Most of the time I see eye-rolls, angry shrugs but people just move on.
I have no problem with confrontation, but I also don't seek it out, and there's definitely a tradeoff.
Is checking out one person later going to be better or worse than what will probably be the very mild confrontation of prompting someone to move back in line? Usually, one person's inconvenient action has no meaningful impact on me at all and is quickly forgotten, but I don't know how it might impact the other person, so I wouldn't normally choose that confrontation even though it also wouldn't bother me if it happened. I'm weighing "no impact on either of us" with "no impact on me, but possible negative impact on the other."
> can only be healthy if there is not a power imbalance
I don't know if that's any less true of "guess" culture. In guess culture the one with less power gets punished for guessing wrong instead of asking wrong.
In this case, the unreasonable person does not understand the culture he is embedded in, and would not understand an 'ask' culture either, where refusal to accede to his wants is regarded as reasonable.
The difference between normal and pathological behavior in either culture lies in whether people treat others in the same way they would like to be treated themselves.
It can be more moderate than that. "what is wrong honey?". "Nothing, I'm fine". Which can either mean, no really I'm fine, or if you don't know, you obviously don't care about me, or you know exactly what is wrong and don't pretend otherwise. I've been both parties in that conversation, and over time I have learned that ask culture works better between close friends and family. That doesn't mean I'd consider it abusive though, just a non optimal communication strategy.
If there is one thing I learned, it is that when it comes to life partners and family where the stakes are conmingled, for the really important stuff, it is better to be open and direct.
So I think one of the hidden dimensions here are — are you guessing because you are trying to consider the other person, or are you guessing because there is vulnerability to exposing what you really feel?
As a product of Southern American culture, I would note that "guess" culture as described here - specifically, the preference for indirectness and inference - is always something that exists primarily in and near interaction among strangers. It doesn't always disappear entirely in familiar relationships, but does abate significantly in favor of being more direct. (Of course, this in itself increases the chance of cultural mismatches causing conflict, as what's ordinary for someone from an "ask" culture can easily read as an insulting assumption of excess familiarity for someone raised with "guess".)
That said, it is important to keep in mind that what's here under discussion is a broad and fairly imprecise description of how varying acculturation can affect interpersonal relationships mostly among people who don't know one another all that well. In that context it's useful; to try to generalize it to every human interaction is not.
This also reminds me of the distinction drawn between "honor" and "dignity" cultures, as eg in [1]; I'd be interested to see how the "ask" vs. "guess" distinction maps, especially as antebellum Southern and prewar Japanese cultures both fall as strongly on the "honor" side as their modern successors fall on the "guess" side.
Why is that? Don't you think that abuse can become a cultural norm?
I don't think we'd have ever come up with money if abuse weren't a common cultural norm. It's pretty much a proxy for "or I'll have my thugs hurt you".
Better put, I'd say that I would hesitate to characterize a cultural preference for either directness or indirectness as akin to the kind of abuse a narcissist deals out to everyone around them.
The argument is easy to construct in either direction, but in no case adds anything of value to the conversation.
Too, claiming that abuse is "just a cultural thing" offers both abusers a convenient excuse for their actions, and everyone who isn't abusive but does share traits of whichever culture an undue indictment.
I guarantee you that abusive cultural norms exist and many poor individuals stuck in cultures with abusive norms wish they were living in a different culture.
The list of things I grew up thinking were normal that I later found out were pathological or abusive is as long as my arm, so I'd have to agree with you.
That's why I'm grateful that the commenter I replied to helped me see the healthier side of this trait!
I don't think I understand your example, but that may come from having had more than my share of polyamorous friends.
By default, I would take your request at face value and have no trouble saying, "No, we're monogamous, but I can't very well blame you for wanting to!"
very well, but what percentage of the population do you think would consider that rude.
Of course, the nut of the question is whether its ever possible to be rude with a question. If it's possible to be rude with a statement, I don't really see the difference between questions and statements, at the higest level, though
Thinking about it, it seems questions generally allow for some flexibility of interpretation reducing potential cause for offense, where statements allow far less latitude. The problem is that some questions require foundational understandings that may be offensive, or can really only be understood with malintent. "When did you stop beating your wife?" comes to mind. The question doesn't even allow for the possibility that you don't beat your wife.
Similarly, "Can I sleep with your wife" implies that the asker thinks it's a possibility worth inquiring about. So I basically agree with you on a practical level -- most people would not respond well to the underlying assumption. The question is a veiled statement ("I think you might be open to letting me sleep with your wife, so here I am asking"). In that sense, the question and the statement aren't very different, as you noted.
Unless I have other context to assume ill will, I've fought for years to train myself not to assume it. Whenever I can, I try to interpret something in a light where the other person means no offense.
Certainly sometimes I'm wrong. Most people are assholes sometimes (myself included), and some people are assholes most of the time. But I've found my conversations go best when I try not to assume assholery about someone for as long as I possibly can.
In this case, assuming someone's worldview doesn't take monogamy for granted, and that they've also noticed how sexy my partner is, is how I avoid being offended, even if they frame the request in a somewhat crass way.
I've experienced it in the contexts of narcissism and borderline personality, where the underlying thought is, "I am so obviously the center of the world that anyone with half a brain who's paying a whit of attention should to intuit my needs without my having to speak a word. If I have to speak, you have already failed." And anyone who failed was punished, sometimes intensely.
Ask culture, for me in that context, became about being able to exist as a separate person and express a boundary. I'd much rather put the cards on the table, find out we want completely different, even opposed things, and work from there, than deal with the power imbalance of one person's assumption that anyone who isn't reading their mind is an idiot.
It seems the virtue, as most of the time, is in the mean.