Sam: “You didn’t do the dishes.”
Taylor: “Well, you didn’t take out the trash.”
Sam: “You’re such a stupid jerk.”
Taylor“You think I’m a jerk? Even the dog won’t sit with you.”
Sound familiar?
In earlier posts like “The Coffee Table of Dialogue,” I’ve explored conscientious communication. We’ve talked about how to speak in ways that build understanding instead of tearing it down. Today, let’s talk about the opposite: thoughtless communication, and specifically tit-for-tat.
It’s a Logical Fallacy
The technical name for tit-for-tat is “tu quoque” or “you also.” It’s the fallacy where we dodge accountability for our own mistake or behaviour by pointing out someone else’s.
As children we were taught two simple truths:
1. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
2. Taking turns is how we get things done together.
And yet we engage in tit-for-tat arguments in which we say the other person’s behaviour makes our own behaviour a moot point. Which is weird, right? After all, if I say I’m going to do the dishes, I still need to do the dishes even if you forgot to take out the trash. If you point out I didn’t do the dishes, well, I’d best get on it, hadn’t I?
Not doing the dishes and yelling at you for not taking out the trash pretends that two wrongs make a right, doesn’t it? And instead of hearing and responding to your comment/criticism in the first place I’ve piled on my own criticism. Thus, I’m not taking turns. Not in a meaningful way, anyhow. We’d never do that in sports. If we’re playing slow-pitch and you’re standing at the plate and I don’t let you swing, I’ve interrupted your turn. Doesn’t sound like softball to me.
Tit-for-tat doesn’t just avoid responsibility, it makes real conversation impossible. It generally leads to escalation and guarantees nobody feels heard.
A Typical Tu Quoque Death Spiral
Here’s how it usually plays out:
Mark: “You just dumped your purse on the floor when you got home today.”
Claire: “Yeah, well you never hang up your coat.”
Mark: “I do not. The one time I hung it on the back of a chair… You’re always exaggerating!”
Claire: “I’m not exaggerating! You never take off your shoes. And when was the last time you washed a dish? Huh?”
Notice what’s happening:
a) They’re no longer talking about coats, bags, or floors.
b) They’re no longer even in reality—they’re in the past, in generalizations (“always,” “never”), and in character attacks.
c) The original issue (and whatever deeper need it represented) gets completely buried under new grievances.
All Claire needs to do is say, “Sure, I’ll put my purse away next time.” Or Mark can say, “Yeah, I’ll hang up my coat when I get home.” If you’re already doing it most of the time, there’s nothing wrong with agreeing that it’s a useful thing to do. Way better than sniping back and creating a lose-lose. Tit-for-tat means the mess stays on the floor, the resentment grows, and both people walk away feeling attacked and defensive.
How to Break the Cycle
The good news? At any moment in the conversation, one person can choose to step out of the boxing ring.
Better version:
Mark: “Hon, can you hang up your coat and purse when you get home?”
Claire: “Sure. I was heading out right away, so I didn’t see the point, but okay. I’m normally happy to hang them up.”
Mark: “Thanks, I appreciate it.”
That’s it. No politics. No egg shells. No pandering. No fighting. Certainly no tit-for-tat. Just two people agreeing to simple things.
Mark started off kind rather than accusatory. And that helped Claire avoid getting defensive. She still pointed out that she had a reason for leaving her purse there. No down side to that. And Mark didn’t have to agree or disagree that her reason was “good enough.” They simply acknowledged the shared value and the request about the purse. Mark didn’t turn it into an attack on her character. They stayed in reality for thirty seconds. That’s all.
If Claire actually hates hanging up her things, that becomes a separate conversation that they can choose to have maturely. No accusations required.
A Few Practical Rules to Keep in Your Back Pocket
- Address one thing at a time
- Stay in the present (“today when you got home”) instead of “always/never.”
- Own your own behaviour before pointing at theirs.
- When someone criticizes you, ask yourself: Is there any truth here I can acknowledge? Even a small “You’re right, I did leave my stuff out” can disarm the whole cycle.
Proving someone wrong is overrated. Understanding the situation not.
But, hey, no biggie. Most people slip into tit-for-tat sometimes. It’s as forgivable as it is avoidable. The moment you notice yourself gearing up to counter-attack, you have the power to pause and choose a better response.
Your partner (or roommate, or coworker; child or friend) isn’t the enemy. The pattern is the enemy. Break the pattern, and you’ll be amazed how quickly the real conversation can begin.
Have you caught yourself in a tit-for-tat spiral lately? How did you (or the other person) finally stop it?
—
*Next time: We’ll look at the difference between “validating feelings” and “agreeing with every thought.” Spoiler: they’re not the same thing.*