This is a study in human nature, and both sides of this “argument” can learn something. There’s a psychology term for this which I forget, but it involves someone sharing a story, in the face of a terrible one, that simply does not show empathy because it’s not even close to being the same.
I don’t mean the same story. I mean, it’s not even the same sort of emotion, whether that’s loss, or disappointment, or being terrified, which means there’s not any empathy. And that just makes the person feel worse. “My horse broke his leg and has to be put down” being met with “my horse also broke a bone and she’s fine!” is not empathy, and certainly doesn’t make the person feel better.
And yes, people do this allllll the time, which has normalized it. But it doesn’t help, and it usually makes the person feel unheard because there’s zero connection to what’s really going on.
People need to learn to recognize when they’re about to do this, and just…not. If you don’t actually know what that sort of emotion feels like, then trying to pretend you do, or offering up a scenario that ends better (or worse) is not helpful. It’s just not. Yes, the intent might have been good (as I’m sure it was here), but it fails to see this from the other person’s perspective.
Showing empathy for a difficult situation can be really hard, because it means you have to have been there, and you have to go back into that dark hole with the person, and most people don’t want to do that, sub-consciously or not. Brene Brown explains the differences really, really well.
I’ve had to make the decision to put a horse down. Maybe that’s why I took this like I did - not just unhelpful, but hurtful. Emotions do that.
People in an emotional state can’t be told "don’t feel worse, they didn’t mean it’. But people doing the sharing can learn to see the different situations and either not say anything, or go down into that hole with them and connect on the emotional level.