1. Which pattern (rigid complementarity, competitive symmetry, or submissive symmetry) do you think would be the most difficult to change? Why? Which would be the most damaging to a relationship? Which would be the most potentially damaging to the self-esteem of the individuals involved?
In these rigid role relationships, I think submissive symmetry would be the most difficult to change because when two parties struggle to relinquish control they make statements or propositions that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth. Each partner doesn’t want o make decisions or be in control, but is trying to force the other partner to make a decision and be in control.
However, I think competitive symmetry would be the most damaging to a relationship because partners are always struggling to out do and have a one-up position on the other partner. This is not healthy because it does create room to be you, but creates an environment of constant competition. Eventually, one partner, or both, could begin to resent the other partner for feeling pushed to perfection.
I also think that competitive symmetry would be the most potentially damaging to self- esteem of the individuals involved because thoughts may begin to enter a partners mind that they are never good enough. More importantly, one may begin to think that they will never be loved, respected, or accepted for not wanting to compete to be the top dog.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hello COMM
I posted that rigid complementarity is the most difficult to change in my blog, but your post made me realize that submissive symmetry is also difficult to change. As you said, each partner doesn't want to make decisions, but in reality that is how they control the situation. It looks like they are offering the best situation for the other, so both of them might be trapped in a situation where they cannot move to solve this problem.
I personally don’t like the person who is submissive and forces me to decide everything, but I also don’t like the person who decides everything and doesn’t concern my feelings.
I think balance is very important for intrapersonal communication.
-Yuko
I thought the competitive symmetry would be the most difficult to change, but I definitely also see where you are coming from also. They are complete opposites of each other so it makes sense that both of these patterns would be the most difficult to change. For me personally I have experienced a relationship where both parties being competitive were difficult to overcome. The reason why is because both sides are set on what they believe and won’t back down which can cause arguments to escalate and resentfulness to arise. Again we put the opposites for the most damaging to a relationship between competitive symmetry and submissive symmetry. I thought submissive symmetry would be the most damaging because I imagined that the communication would be lacking in the relationship because neither party would really say what they were feeling. It is interesting to see how we see differently on these patterns but all of the differences make sense.
I agree that competitive symmetry is the most damaging to a persons self-esteem. Your post actually sparked an idea in me. You had mentioned that competitive symmetry is the most damaging to a relationship because each person would be trying to out do the other. It would be interesting to see if competitive symmetry in an outside relationship could cause self-esteem issues that would effect other relationships. I know that when I have experienced competitive symmetry, and am let down in the situation, it really does hurt my self-esteem. I have also started to notice that it does not only effect the relationship between me and the person who I was in competition with, but also my friends and family. The idea of competitive symmetry has really changed my opinion about competition being a positive thing!
Post a Comment