Family Relationships and Interaction: Friction
Friction is inevitable. Much like the friction of physics, the world would be in trouble if it didn't have friction. Conflict helps us grow, become more than we otherwise would have been. A large number of people of the world believe this (the former) to be the cause of trouble.
That is not so.
The cause of trouble is not because of friction in relationships but that we as families, societies and the world do not deal, or cope, with friction in the proper manner. Oftentimes, we choose one of two "outs": being extremely passive or being excessively aggressive. THAT is the factor in relationships which creates tumults.
I will readily admit that the "out" I typically choose is being extremely passive. In doing so, I am essentially burying my head in the sand and hoping that the problem will just go away. One of my parents is the complete opposite (keep in mind that this is through my own perspective, so any judgements are going to have my biases clouding them somewhat). I allow myself to be hurt emotionally in order that I will not hurt the other emotionally. That one parent does care to some extent about not hurting another, but the anger usually overrides any such inhibitions.
Really, it is the clashing of different, miniscule idiosyncracies that get us in trouble with another family member. Example: I like having an item shown in a certain manner, a sibling likes it to be shown in a different manner. Or idiosyncracies that are much larger. Example: I am neat and organized, a sibling or parent is more... carefree about neatness and organization.
It boils down to patience and, yes, perception. We perceive a person in our family to be going out of his/her way to annoy or upset us; in truth, that person has no idea s/he is causing an internal ruckus (so to speak). Thus, when we at last blow up in righteous fury at said individual, we make matters worse. Why? Because we hurt aforementioned family member's feelings, forcing him/her to defend the idiosyncracy which so upsets us and forcing him/her to continue with the thing annoying us. Simply put, the person is too angered to even rationally consider changing the idiosyncracy. After all, s/he reasons, why should I rationally consider changing when s/he (that is you and me) did not rationally talk with me about it?
------------------------to be continued
That is not so.
The cause of trouble is not because of friction in relationships but that we as families, societies and the world do not deal, or cope, with friction in the proper manner. Oftentimes, we choose one of two "outs": being extremely passive or being excessively aggressive. THAT is the factor in relationships which creates tumults.
I will readily admit that the "out" I typically choose is being extremely passive. In doing so, I am essentially burying my head in the sand and hoping that the problem will just go away. One of my parents is the complete opposite (keep in mind that this is through my own perspective, so any judgements are going to have my biases clouding them somewhat). I allow myself to be hurt emotionally in order that I will not hurt the other emotionally. That one parent does care to some extent about not hurting another, but the anger usually overrides any such inhibitions.
Really, it is the clashing of different, miniscule idiosyncracies that get us in trouble with another family member. Example: I like having an item shown in a certain manner, a sibling likes it to be shown in a different manner. Or idiosyncracies that are much larger. Example: I am neat and organized, a sibling or parent is more... carefree about neatness and organization.
It boils down to patience and, yes, perception. We perceive a person in our family to be going out of his/her way to annoy or upset us; in truth, that person has no idea s/he is causing an internal ruckus (so to speak). Thus, when we at last blow up in righteous fury at said individual, we make matters worse. Why? Because we hurt aforementioned family member's feelings, forcing him/her to defend the idiosyncracy which so upsets us and forcing him/her to continue with the thing annoying us. Simply put, the person is too angered to even rationally consider changing the idiosyncracy. After all, s/he reasons, why should I rationally consider changing when s/he (that is you and me) did not rationally talk with me about it?
------------------------to be continued
posted by Morncreek at 8/26/2004 12:43:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home