The one correct response to an insincere apology

[DaveC426913]

No this isn't pending some argument I've had; it's just a hypothetical that has come up in my life here and there.

TLDR: Looking for a proverb, adage to fit this scenario.

Some someone - a friend, family, a loved one - does one wrong and an apology is order, how does one address an insincere apology?

Gonna have to contrive a scenario here. Say, you were out with your partner at a party and they insulted you in front of others - say, revealed a really embarrasing event that's really nobody's business. It doesn't matter what the sleight was; it was hurtful. You go home and argue about it, after all, you're genuinely hurt.

They give in exasperation and says "Fine! I'm sorry!"

Now, you know they're not genuinely sorry for hurting you, they're saying it to shut you up. If you point this out as insincere, this might garner and even more facetious response, such as "No, no - I really am sorry! You can bet on that!" - by which of course, they mean they're sorry for what it brought upon them, not sorry that they hurt you.

Again the above is just a hypothetical, contrived scenario. But I am not the first person to have encountered this passive aggression and I'm sure it has been analyzed and there is a correct and succinct way to dismantle it.

Is there a term that pathologizes this particular form of flawed defense? Or an adage - something that illuminates the flaw with wisdom?

 

[Haborix]

I guess the one I'm thinking about wouldn't apply in your scenario, but if someone had said "I'm sorry, but I thought it would be funny." There is the saying: never ruin an apology with an excuse.

 

[DaveC426913]

There is the saying: never ruin an apology with an excuse.

Yeah, that's an example of a different adage.

(My version is more admonishing:
An apology that is followed by a "but" is not an apology; it's a rationalization/excuse.)

I'm looking for that, but for a facetious apology.

 

[Vanadium 50]

"Mom, he called me stupid!"
"Junior, apologize to your brother!"
"I'm sorry you're stupid."

 

[Baluncore]

"Never apologise, never explain, it is a sign of weakness".

Or turn it around early in the discussion.
"When you belittle me, in front of my friends, they laugh because they think you are a sociopath, and they fear offending you. They only talk about it when you are not there. It is them thinking that I have a sociopath as a partner, that really embarrasses me".

 

[DennisN]

Now, you know they're not genuinely sorry for hurting you, they're saying it to shut you up. If you point this out as insincere, this might garner and even more facetious response, such as "No, no - I really am sorry! You can bet on that!" - by which of course, they mean they're sorry for what it brought upon them, not sorry that they hurt you.

Again the above is just a hypothetical, contrived scenario. But I am not the first person to have encountered this passive aggression and I'm sure it has been analyzed and there is a correct and succinct way to dismantle it.

I currently don't have an answer to your particular question, but I'd like to chime in with a quite effective way I've been taught to figure out if someone who apologizes is sincere with his/her apology:

Ask the person why and what they are apologizing for.

If it's a lame get out of jail free-card type of apology, i.e. insincere, the person will have a hard time answering the question.

If it is a sincere apology, the person may find it painful to describe it, but they will be able to do it.

What I think people who look for these kinds of apologies really are after is not the apology itself,
but signs that (1) the other person cares about the feelings of others and (2) takes accountability for hurtful actions.

Is there a term that pathologizes this particular form of flawed defense?

I'm not aware of any.

 

[jack action]

As @DennisN said, the proper answer to "Fine! I'm sorry!" is "For what?"

But on a more humoristic note, you could answer to an "I'm sorry, but ..." by forgiving the person also with a "but": "I accept your apology, but it's too late to cancel the hitman now." or "I forgive you, but I already reserved a room in hell for you."

If you want to put a name on it: "I accept your fauxpology."

Look at that! Wikipedia has a page about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology

 

[DaveC426913]

"Never apologise, never explain, it is a sign of weakness".

Or turn it around early in the discussion.
"When you belittle me, in front of my friends, they laugh because they think you are a sociopath, and they fear offending you. They only talk about it when you are not there. It is them thinking that I have a sociopath as a partner, that really embarrasses me".

Sorry. My question is how to address the facetious "I said I was sorry!" response.

I'm looking for a way of saying "You don't really mean you're sorry for hurting me".

Simply saying "That apology is facetious. Try again." doesn't deliver the message effectively.

 

[DaveC426913]

fauxpology."

I like that. My only concern is that, were the injured party to actually say that, it would give the offender the opportunity to interpret it as humour, which is tantamount to forgiveness, or at least lightening the mood.

 

[DaveC426913]

I currently don't have an answer to your particular question, but I'd like to chime in with a quite effective way I've been taught to figure out if someone who apologizes is sincere with his/her apology:

Ask the person why and what they are apologizing for.

If it's a lame get out of jail free-card type of apology, i.e. insincere, the person will have a hard time answering the question.

If it is a sincere apology, the person may find it painful to describe it, but they will be able to do it.

What I think people who look for these kinds of apologies really are after is not the apology itself,
but signs that (1) the other person cares about the feelings of others and (2) takes accountability for hurtful

Yes. Very wise.

Because I suspect the forthcoming answer would be "I'm sorry I went to the party with you, if I knew it was going to end in a fight!"

Which is certainly not any kind of contrition.

 

[Mark44]

I'd like to chime in with a quite effective way I've been taught to figure out if someone who apologizes is sincere with his/her apology:

Ask the person why and what they are apologizing for.

This would effectively nuke such faux apologies as, "I'm sorry you feel that way."

 

[Vanadium 50]

Can we re-title this "How to turn a one time slight into a long-term grudge?"

Either let it go, or call the divorce lawyer.

 

[DaveC426913]

Can we re-title this "How to turn a one time slight into a long-term grudge?"

Either let it go, or call the divorce lawyer.

Har har, no.

This thread isn't about the fight; it's about mature straight-talking communication when resolving feelings.

 

[JT Smith]

I'm mostly curious about what they made fun of.

 

[Ibix]

"Welcome to the national insincerity awards and, let me just say, it is a pleasure to be here." (Hugh Dennis)

The problem here is that the other person doesn't believe an apology is necessary, so is only going through the form of an apology without the emotional content, right? You aren't going to change their mind when they're angry, so make a strategic withdrawal and decide how you want to handle it later. If you don't want to let it go, the "How To Talk So Kids Will Listen" framework of "when you did X, I felt Y" might help. In this context, you can decide whether you want to tack on a request for an apology or simply say "so please don't do that" and leave it at that.

Then if they do it again, call the divorce lawyer.

 

[Bystander]

Look at that! Wikipedia has a page about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology

Thankee, learned my "something everyday" for today.

 

[Vanadium 50]

"Welcome to the national insincerity awards and, let me just say, it is a pleasure to be here." (Hugh Dennis)

"What a strange game. The only winning move is not to play."

 

[geordief]

Great thread and Hugh Dennis' quote was worth the entrance fee.

Could you reply "Thanks for that apology" -and leave the ball in their court?

 

[DaveC426913]

I'm mostly curious about what they made fun of.

No. Again: entirely fictitious, entirely contrived.

The problem here is that the other person doesn't believe an apology is necessary, so is only going through the form of an apology without the emotional content, right?

I think, to be honest, my tone of complaint is perceived as leaning toward "argument", rather than appeal, so there is an element of "Well, you're getting your revenge by beating me up about it."

You aren't going to change their mind when they're angry, so make a strategic withdrawal and decide how you want to handle it later. If you don't want to let it go, the "How To Talk So Kids Will Listen" framework of "when you did X, I felt Y" might help. In this context, you can decide whether you want to tack on a request for an apology or simply say "so please don't do that" and leave it at that.

Then if they do it again, call the divorce lawyer.

Yeah, basically.

Also: Hey! I never said it was my wife!

 

[DaveE]

Just say "thank you" and be quiet. If they aren't ready to really apologize, they also aren't ready to argue about apologies. Address the incident later when people have calmed down. Give up on winning if that means they have to lose. Concentrate on behavior modification in the future and/or reassess your relationship if you can't talk productively and also can't live with their behavior. This is the sort of fight that no one wins in the short term. Don't make it worse.

 

[DaveC426913]

Concentrate on behavior modification in the future...

This is partly what I was trying to address. I feared there would be no modification moving forward until the passive aggressive defense behavior gets called out for what it is.

(Full disclosure: this is not a crisis. In fact, it's more historical now - upside of long-term relationships - stuff matters less. But my OCD-side doesn't like being speechless.)

 

[Ibix]

Also: Hey! I never said it was my wife!

Well, derailing an opponent's train of thought with a non sequitur is an effective tactic if something's shaping up to a fight, so call a divorce lawyer anyway. While they're trying to work out what on earth you are doing, demand an apology.

 

[JT Smith]

Be honest. Tell them that not only do you not believe in their sincerity but that once the group at physicsforums comes up with one you'll have a snappy comeback that will leave their head spinning.

 

[DennisN]

but that once the group at physicsforums comes up with one you'll have a snappy comeback that will leave their head spinning.

I have a couple of snappy ones in store...
...but the most disarming of them all, I think is this:

Faux apology example by person B:

B: I apologize you took my actions so seriously, gosh, you can be so sensitive! I say I'm sorry, ok?

A: Whatever.

(or just complete silence, that is very disarming too)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Regarding this, two sayings come to my mind:

1) "The opposite of love is not hate, but indifference."
2) "Revenge is a dish best served cold."*

* My intention of writing that saying is not to advocate for revenge in general (absolutely not), but rather point out that the most effective mindset when doing a "comeback" is to be calm and collected rather than snarky or angry.

I'll end this post with one last saying which I think is really, really good:

"The best revenge is to live well."*

* My interpretation of this saying is be kind to others (at least to those who deserve it), be patient with others, live a healthy life as possible etc.
In short: do good things for yourself and others.

 

[Baluncore]

After their apology, ask; "Do you expect me to forgive you?"
Both "yes" and "no" are an admission of guilt.
Anything else leaves them uncertain, and thinking about the situation.
So turn your back and walk away.

 

[DaveC426913]

...the most effective mindset when doing a "comeback" is to be calm and collected rather than snarky or angry.

You read my mind. This is core to my question.

 

[DaveC426913]

After their apology, ask; "Do you expect me to forgive you?"
Both "yes" and "no" are an admission of guilt.
Anything else leaves them uncertain, and thinking about the situation.
So turn your back and walk away.

This seems a little provocative. Usually, I'd want to de-escalate the tension, not make it worse, either by a verbal slap on the wrist or by walking away.

Dennis N, above, has hit the nail on the head. (altough I'm not looking for revenge; I'm looking for sincerity, which comes from de-escalation.)

Calm and collected - without hurt or accusation, would be the way to give someone the safe space to voluntarily reconsider their passive-aggressive defense.

 

[JT Smith]

Seriously, it seems to me that the fundamental issue is not the response to the non-apology, it's the fact that they don't believe they did anything wrong. They can't apologize if there is nothing to apologize for. So then it comes down to what your goal is. Do you wish to (a) somehow convince them to apologize more sincerely for something they sincerely do not believe requires an apology; (b) exact some sort of revenge for the hurt you felt; or (c) change how they view their behavior?

Both (a) and (b) are a lot easier to accomplish than (c) but also a lot less meaningful. You may have to accept that you will be not be able to convince them to see things differently.

 

[DaveC426913]

Seriously, it seems to me that the fundamental issue is not the response to the non-apology, it's the fact that they don't believe they did anything wrong.

Well, if we're going to go into the weeds here ... the fundamental issue is one of ancient emotional baggage - the offender's triggers - the need to protect themselves from any admonition at the expense of their compassion for the injured party.

It may be optimistic to expect contrition to be forthcoming from someone who has historically felt continually psychologically cuffed about the head and shoulders (even if those psychological cuffs come from ghosts, now long dead).

 

[DennisN]

Well, if we're going to go into the weeds here ... the fundamental issue is one of ancient emotional baggage - the offender's triggers - the need to protect themselves from any admonition at the expense of their compassion for the injured party.

It may be optimistic to expect contrition to be forthcoming from someone who has historically felt continually psychologically cuffed about the head and shoulders (even if those psychological cuffs come from ghosts, now long dead).

I'm of course not familiar with your particular situation, but I want to say that there are people who are psychologically incapable of complete sincerity* and/or remorse, for a variety of reasons.

(* And some of them are not even sincere with themselves. So hoping for true sincerity from those are a complete dead end. It's like looking for water in the driest of deserts. Regretfully.)

(and for the record, I've been there, done that, hopelessly looking for water in such a desert, and from that experience I learned truly that "the best revenge is a life well lived.")

Edit:

I also came to think about something else regarding "revenge"/"comeback".
I think that often when a person thinks they want revenge/doing a comeback, what they really are looking for is justice.

But, regretfully, justice may be impossible with some kinds of people/situations.
And what is left is, again: "the best revenge is a life well lived." (with little or no regard of the other person(s) and their situation)

 

[Bandersnatch]

'Well, well, well. So it has come to this.'

'In that case, I'll see you in court.'

'You leave me no choice. Tomorrow noon. Pistols.'

'Interesting. It's just like the Gypsy woman said.'

'I came here to chew bubble gum and listen to nonpologies. And I'm all out of gum.'

'I love you, and I don't doubt your love. But you hurt me, back there, and you're hurting me now. I want to stay focused on the love, but my ego really wants to take umbrage. I'm sorry.'

'Behold yon field, where I grow my fracks. Lo! It is barren.'

It doesn't matter what the sleight was;

Did it involve pointing out your propensity for malapropisms? :P

 

[DaveC426913]

Did it involve pointing out your propensity for malapropisms? :P

sunuvagun. I've got such a pet peeve about people talking about "slights-of-hand" that I've started over-correcting, and inserting "sleight" in all cases.

 

[DaveC426913]

I should point out once again, that is only one case.
I've had (adult) children offer similar facetious apologies.

(At some point, I half expect someone to say "Gee, what's the common element here? Have you considered adding a mirror to your toolkit of analytical tools?")

 

[JT Smith]

Well, if we're going to go into the weeds here ... the fundamental issue is one of ancient emotional baggage - the offender's triggers - the need to protect themselves from any admonition at the expense of their compassion for the injured party.

It may be optimistic to expect contrition to be forthcoming from someone who has historically felt continually psychologically cuffed about the head and shoulders (even if those psychological cuffs come from ghosts, now long dead).

You're right, it's a level deeper than I was suggesting. Still the question is what do you want to accomplish? If we can serve up the the ideal response will it further your goal? Or just make you feel better?

What is the source of the aggression? I don't know, maybe there's something you need to apologize for? I'm not saying that's it, just that we don't have the whole back history.

What's couples therapy cost these days, $150/hr?

 

[DaveC426913]

Still the question is what do you want to accomplish?

Let me pose a completely unrelated (and again, fictional) scenario to make a point.

A friend of mine could not bring himself to arrange an intervention for his wife's drinking.
We are pretty sure the reason he didn't try very hard is because it would shine a light on his own drug use.
So he was enabling her. Or she, him. Or they were co-dependent.

Getting into a discussion about the issue might result in him coming up with all sorts of excuses, dodges and rationalizations - trying to stay in the shadows of his motives and fears.

But invoking the words "enabling" and "co-dependency" cuts right to the source of the problem. These are well-known behaviors with well-defined circumstances. Invoking them short-circuits any dodging and weaving - say, the ploy of pretending we are imagining things, or otherwise don't know what we're talking about. He has little choice but to acknowlege that enablement and co-dependency are well-established behaviors and clearly apply here. He can't really pick a fight with decades of modern psychology.

It shines a pinpoint light on the murky behavior, making the point succinctly, clinically and without emotion, with the aim of de-eascalating an emotionally-charged issue, and clearing the way for straight talk that is more likely to lead to a positive outcome.I have been looking for such a thing for the defensive behevior described in the OP.