Conflict is part and parcel of most interpersonal relationships. When people interact and form relationships, disagreements inevitably emerge, with both negative and positive consequences. Misunderstandings can arise because of different personal communication styles, particularly between men and women. Linguist Deborah Tannen notes that, for women, “talk creates intimacy, but men live in a hierarchical world, where talk maintains independence and status.”
A common problem that exists in a couple relationship is the failure to understand communication between opposite sexes. Imagine this scenario: Blair just had a rough day at work where she was reprimanded by her employer for not meeting up to his expectations in terms of work performance. She goes off to rant to her boyfriend Chuck hoping that he would lend her a listening ear, and express agreement and sympathy with her problems. However Chuck did not express any sympathy, instead dismissed her problem and claimed that she was taking her employer’s comments as a personal attack and that she should not make a mountain out of a molehill. As a result, Blair misunderstood Chuck and interprets what he said as an insult and retaliates in words or action. Chuck having meant no harm in the first place, now sees Blair’s reaction as an unprovoked attack and the situation quickly escalated into a full blown fight even though there was no real reason for a fight to begin in the first place.
How then should Blair and Chuck have reacted in this situation to avoid a conflict? What can they do to resolve the issue?
Perhaps, the reason why men and women misunderstand each other is that they see and hear things through different filters, and if we begin to realise it, we can begin to share with one other the distortions we experience, and thereby find our way to clarity. However, is mutual understanding the only key to bridging the gap between the sexes?
6 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Hey Tammy,
I think that mutual understanding is the key to bridging the gap between anyone and not just between the sexes. I feel the only way that conflict can be resolved is by trying to understand the other person’s point of view. Sadly this proves to be hardest to do. It seems to be an Asian culture to not lose “face” in a conflict hence not many are willing to come to a compromise.
Nevertheless Chuck and Blair showed that men and women expect different things in communication. I would suggest helping Chuck and Blair understand the differences in sexes. I think it would greatly help them meet each other’s needs and thus reduce unnecessary conflict.
This is a very interesting post because of the way you relate it to gender identity and stereotypical communication styles/responses. (Do you think the stereotypes mentioned by Tannen always hold true?)
But where are your blogging group members and their feedback?
Thanks, Tammy!
Hey Tammy!
[Off topic comment]Hope you didn’t get overwhelmed by lab work!
Just to share my experience with you, I do experience such problems in a romantic relationship, and me and my partner actually read this book by John Gray called “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus”. It explores the communication between different sexes and how they handle the same issues differently. But that’s slightly going off the topic of Professional Communication.
Well to answer your last question, mutual understanding is important but it encompasses so much, like respect, good communication, and a general trust among other things. It really boils down to your definition of mutual understanding. Integrity is also important, and I would say explicitly that communication is what bridges the gap, understanding is the outcome.
Hi Tammy!
Something I realized which is quite ironic: However girls react, it is always(99%) consider as over-reacting and however guys react, it is always consider as not enough=insensitive.
I agree that mutual understanding, great communication, respect and trust are vital to lasting sweet relationships. For myself, the art of understanding is one thing and the art of feeling is another. For example, I may understand what you are going through but I may not feel for the situation unless I am really in your shoes. It is so easy to say ‘I understand, don’t worry, you should take it with a pinch of salt etc’ but if we really feel for the situation, will we be taking the extra mile to do something more?
I guess, we really need to feel for why our counterpart needs to react that way, demanding that way and if both think for each other, it should not be difficult for them to come to a consensus and live a happy life together!
Wow! Lots of comments! Thanks, Tammy, for making this more interactive!
1st unrelated thought: Does Blair and Chuck have anything to do with Gossip Girl? Just wondering if you watch it.
Anyway, the conflict situation could be easily understood by some of Tannen’s propositions about male and female communication styles. For males, who were brought up play with toy cars and machines, have the innate ability to dissect any problem and give a solution. Chuck in this case, was giving his viewpoint and the “solution” to the problem. For females, who were brought up playing “dollhouse” and socialised to express their feelings and emotions, the sharing of problems is thought to be where she can get solace from the troubles that she was facing. Blair, I would expect, was hoping for this.
While I would argue that this is true on a statistical and stereotypical level, I believe that being effective communicators, there is a need to identify the right situation and meet it with the appropriate response. Not only would that help gain friends, but allow one to have a closer relationship with family as well.