The concept of intromission has its etymological origin in the Latin word intromissus , which can be translated as “introduced” . This is what the act and result of interfering or meddling is called.
The verb entremeter , also mentioned as intrude , refers to being in the middle , placing something between various things or interfering . Generally, an intrusion is seen as a misplaced, uncomfortable or annoying action.
For example: “The American president denounced Russian interference in the last elections,” “The interference of the Executive Branch in the Judiciary is unacceptable since it threatens democratic life ,” “Your mother's interference in issues has always bothered me .” about our partner, but you have never said anything to him.”
Let's take the case of a national soccer team, led by a young coach . Another more experienced technical director , in a television interview, takes it upon himself to give him advice regarding which players to call and what strategies to use, and even criticizes various measures. In this framework, the coach of the selected team is upset with the interference , since he is responsible for the team and the one who must make all the decisions.
A man , meanwhile, may be upset with his brother-in-law (his wife's brother) because, in his opinion, he usually interferes in his relationship. The husband tells his wife that this guy is always telling them how they should raise their children, what to invest their money in, and what they should do in their free time: these intrusions , in short, are irritating to him.
In short, it is clear that interference always generates annoyance in those who receive it. The Royal Spanish Academy's own dictionary defines the verb entremerse (the pronominal form of entremeter ) as the action that a person commits when they participate in a situation to which they have not been invited. Therefore, we must understand that interference is negative, that it is not interpreted as help offered disinterestedly, even if this is the subject's intention.
And here we enter subjective territory, because the intention of the person performing an action may be opposite to the interpretation made by the recipient, and we cannot say that only one of the parties is right. Let's look at an example situation below: two people who were in a relationship have decided to separate because the arguments had become too frequent, and they had already begun to hurt each other's feelings uncontrollably; A friend, believing he can help them, sets them up on a blind date so they can meet again and talk, but it only makes things worse. Although the friend wanted them to make up, they probably considered it an intrusion that led them to argue even more.
This ambiguity occurs with almost any abstract concept, even the most direct ones, such as help ; The particularity of interference is that it is "born" from the perspective of the person receiving the action: it is not common for someone to say "I am going to make things difficult with my interference." For this reason it is so important to put yourself in the other person's shoes not only to try to understand them, but also to anticipate their reaction before offering them something that they have not expressly asked for.
Human beings have a lot to learn before considering ourselves experts in communication. We think we have the most complex languages on the planet, but how many people can say they master at least one? Misunderstandings occur in all social strata, regardless of the level of academic studies, and this shows that the secret to success in communication is not in linguistic knowledge, but in empathy . The more we observe others, the less likely we will be to engage in intrusion.