Case Integration: Communication Is Relationships

If I were to summarize what I’ve learned about communication in relationships using the least amount of words, the summary would be this: communication is relationships. In other words, any relationship is defined by its process of communication, meaning effective communication is the single most important “thing” to practice in any relationship. My case integration paper consists of two parts, the first being “Communication In Relationships, From A Specific Perspective” in which I detail a communicative episode that occurred during the first case analysis discussion thread, how I learned from it, and how the episode demonstrates my claim that communication is relationships. In the second part, “Communication In Relationships, From A General Perspective” I take what I learned from the episode, as well as several cases we analyzed, and explain how I plan to utilize it in order to create, and maintain the healthiest relationships.

Communication In Relationships, From A Specific Perspective

            Throughout the series of case analyses within this course I have learned new, healthier ways to approach communication in relationships, from both the cases themselves, and from my, as well as my peers’ responses to them. In doing so I realized not all of my communicative approaches are effective.

            When writing in the discussion thread for module two, I passionately favored Madeline’s choice to keep her maiden name when marrying her fiancé, Martín (“What’s In A Name? Negotiating Marital Name Changes”). Within this passion however exuded a bit of arrogance, and negligence for any peer who opposed my opinions. The tonality of my posts weren’t likable as a result. In several of them I attempted to use techniques similar to debate strategies, hoping to structure the posts in what I believed to be a more credible manner, ultimately desiring the agreement of more peers.

            After reviewing many posts (both mine and my peers’) from the module, and having an insightful conversation with Dr. Littlejohn regarding them, I realized two things: during the discussion thread my ego had taken control of me, and I have more improvements to make for my ability to communicate. I then decided to make a personal goal for this course: to do my best at constructively incorporating course concepts into patterns of my everyday communication, in the effort to refine my communication perspective in relationships.

            As the course continued, I acquired knowledge of several communication concepts, and understood that I applied some ineffectively while writing arrogant posts. For example, in vying for control of the discussion thread, I initiated every post I submitted with a “one up”. Specifically, instead of acknowledging everything that forms Martín’s identity (including a heritage of traditionalism) and why he’s upset (because his fiancé doesn’t want to adopt his last name), I dismissed it all, claiming that he simply needed to “get with the times”. Upon reading remarks such as this one, I cannot blame my peers (many of whom share Martín’s viewpoint) for responding with a “one up”, which inevitably fueled my ego to respond with another “one up”, creating a pattern of competitive symmetry within a course activity that is most useful when complementary.

This pattern came to define most of the interaction I had with my peers during this module discussion thread, and ultimately the relationships I had with these people. Although I had no substantial relationships with them prior to the course, I strongly believe my aggressive communication patterns came to define what was of the relationships I had with my peers up to that point. In other words, the hostile communication I approached potential relationships with defined these relationships, which reinforces the idea that communication is relationships.

Communication In Relationships, From A General Perspective

While it was never my intention to “be arrogant” toward anyone in the course beyond module two, I’ve since learned that arrogance, or an unwillingness to understand other people and their opinions should never be my intention period. And any disagreement with this statement stems from my ego, which I can control through effective use of communication. Because of my experience during module two, I’ve posited that communication is relationships, and therefore have concluded that a bitter relationship can very well be sweet, so long as the taste of the relationship’s communication changes. Communication in relationships cannot change however unless it is monitored by the participants of relationships.

Thus from here on out, in any relationship I have, when conflict arises I will first evaluate the communication occurring between myself and my relationship partner, and ask myself questions: “Is the conflict occurring because we are unclear on each other’s goals for the relationship?” “Is the conflict defensive…are we arguing, or are our egos arguing?” “How are we miscommunicating?” Likewise in times of celebration I will ask myself “What are we communicating that’s working?” “How can we continue to do this?” Whether I am asking my relationship partner questions or myself about our communication, I believe the frequency of metacommunication is most responsible for the success of a relationship.

As an interpersonal communication major it’s become a habit to ask myself questions like these about my relationships. However I understand most people are not communication majors, and therefore may not be asking themselves similar questions in the efforts to maintenance their relationships. But because I (we) naturally have relationships with non-communication majors, and because I believe the most effective way to maintenance a relationship is by understanding that communication is relationships, I feel a responsibility to create ways for how to more openly discuss the communication of my relationships, without coming off as an “arrogant communication major”. One way of tailoring arrogance would be to communicate by focusing first on the relational expectations my partner has, instead of my own…listening before speaking. By doing this I believe my approach to communication in relationships will be more about the other person, and thus more rewarding for me.

Finally, after module two and reading several of the cases in Casing Interpersonal Communication, I’ve relinquished myself of any desire to argue with other people. From now on I will disagree with others, but I will not argue with them. I didn’t decide this until reading about the direct fighting and defensive climate of Sarah and Russell from “Shallow Talk and Separate Spaces”, the rigid symmetry between Emma and Jason from “We’ll Never Be That Kind of Couple”, and the verbal aggressiveness and hostility between Mia and Layla in “The Queen and Her Bee”. I learned from each of these cases that we have the power to either engage in or refrain from arguing. I then realized I would not argue anymore because I do not have to. If ever in a situation when someone wants to argue, for the purposes of defending their ego, I will simply inform them I refuse to contribute in any such dispute, and walk away if they continue. Understanding it is up to me to argue with other people is perhaps the single most satisfying realization I made during this course. I look forward to better utilizing hundreds of hours throughout my life.

I have learned valuable ideas and information throughout the case analysis process of this course. In the most general terms, communication is the basis for everything, for how we send and receive information and emotions. And because we are sending and receiving to people with whom we have relationships, communication naturally becomes the relationship. I encourage you to evaluate both a rewarding and costly relationship in your life, by considering the communication patterns within each. Do the patterns compare, or contrast? Most likely if the relationship is unsatisfying, it is so because the communication is unsatisfying. From this course I have learned to make my relationships most satisfying by choosing to listen to others before speaking, acknowledging and respecting their opinions, even if I don’t understand them (which I will also attempt to do), and by approaching situations with the appropriate style of communication (if I’m playin’ basketball, its competitive symmetry, but if it’s a discussion thread, its all complementary). In doing all of this, I believe I am trying my best to be considerate of the fact that communication, is indeed relationships.

Enjoy your summer, and thank you for reading. 

Essay on "Who's the Parent Now?"

The following essay is broken down into two parts, the first analyzing “Who’s the Parent Now?” through the Appraisal Theory of Emotional Support, and the second evaluating the case author’s intent through gender roles and role reversal.

Appraisal Theory of Emotional Support

In "Who's the Parent Now?" Kate is a full time mother with a full time job who has just taken on full time caring responsibilities for her elderly mother. This leads to Kate suddenly changing many of her plans in order to take care of her mom, which she is not ecstatic about. Meanwhile, Kate’s brother Sandy has not taken any initiative to offer her sister any kind of assistance. For the last two months Kate has been entirely responsible for her mom. Having no desire to continue “mothering” her mother, she appraises her situation.

The appraisal theory of emotional support is based on the idea that when something goes wrong, or something unexpected and unwanted occurs in a person's life, he or she's goals are inevitably affected, which leads to an appraisal of these goals, and ultimately an emotional response. 

For Kate, her goals are raising her children, maintaining a high level of work performance, spending time with her husband (possibly), as well as participating in other social outings she enjoys. Because Kate is now faced with the huge responsibility of taking care of her sick mother full time, she must suddenly observe her goals, and appraise how this will affect them. How can she take care of her kids if her mother needs to be taken care of? How will she be able to work if her mother needs to be fed? When will she ever be able to get hammered with her friends?! The unwanted answers to these questions leads Kate to respond emotionally with both anger and guilt, anger because her brother hasn't made any offer to help her with their mother, and guilt because of her lack of desire to help her mom all the time. 

Thus, to help deal with her emotional response, Kate seeks out a therapist, who then assists Kate in reappraising her situation by providing advice through emotional support. The therapist reminds Kate that her mother needs this care no matter what, however encourages Kate to reach out to other resources for assistance, such as hiring a full time caretaker, and splitting the costs with her brother. This decision, which Kate ultimately chooses, reappraises her situation in a way that her mother is still taken care of, while her life goals as a parent, career person, and fun person are all still met.

Gender Role Reversal

I believe this case is intended to explore the communication of gender roles in western civilization. The author of the case, Julia Wood wrote “Communication Theories In Action” (the textbook for C&J 300), a book that examines several theories related to gender, among other critical studies of communication. Through the characters Kate and Sandy, it appears as though Wood is attempting to illustrate the woman’s role of caregiver, a role assumed by both men and women to be a woman’s responsibility. Further, when I read how she wrote Sandy’s character, I realized that his carelessness, and unwillingness to assist his sister with their mother is probably not atypical among men in western cultures. This leads me to believe that Wood ultimately desires a change in the cultural gender norm of care giving. That is she wants more men to take initiative in situations such as Kate’s. In a way she is advocating a role reversal for “caregiver”.

It’s easy to imagine Kate wiping her mother’s (or father’s) ass, but hard to imagine her brother, or most brothers in the west doing so. It’s also easy to imagine the “I can’t believe you would even ask me!” look on Sandy’s face if Kate were to ask him to do such a thing. I don’t think Sandy would even consider it, because it is such an extreme role reversal for him, or any man. Why is it so extreme for men, and not women? Like Wood noted, women have assumed care giving for centuries. Therefore, for Kate wiping down her mother is simply unbearable, but for Sandy it’s unfathomable; there is no way for him to understand the idea, as he, being a man has never pictured himself a “caregiver”.

To be clear, this is by no means an excuse for Sandy. On the contrary, he may not be a “caregiver”, but he is a “man”, and “men” “take care of business when there’s business to be taken care of”. In this case, Sandy’s mom is big business. Therefore he must “man up” and help his sister take care of their mother. Whether he offers his time or money, I’m convinced Kate simply wants Sandy’s help, which both his time and/or money can offer. Further, if Sandy does split the costs with Kate for hiring a caregiver (instead of giving care himself), Kate will get what she wants/deserves (resources for mom), without having to hear her brother pout about his role reversing (offering time -> wiping mom -> woman; offering money -> making money -> man).

Finally, if Sandy does throw a fit, Kate should remind him what her therapist told her, “If love is doing only what we want to do, it’s not very admirable.” 

You're Not That "Kind" Of Couple...Yet

"We'll Never Be That Kind of Couple" is a true testament for why people who are romantically involved should not live with each other...when a couple fights over what to watch on television, I would suggest the best communication improvement they could make would be to spend less time together. Then again, I don't believe this particular fight between Emma and Jason was about the actual program they were watching together, but something more implicit, the violation of relational expectations. 

Emma and Jason are increasingly fighting since they've moved in together, and are more in fear of "becoming" the violent couple next door as a result. The couple has a regular "TV night" on which they watch Grey's Autonomy. Jason however chooses to watch a live sports game instead, telling Emma she can catch the taping of the episode. On another evening, Jason ditches date night with Emma in order to catch another sporting event. Instances such as these lead Emma and Jason to feel hard emotions toward each other, which leads to worse fighting.

Perhaps the easiest conflict resolution in this situation would be for Jason to move out and find a woman who digs sports. But this is C&J 421, where we look at things from a communication perspective, so let's do that. 

Currently, the violation of relational expectations, such as not sticking with TV and date nights as planned has created anger and hurt within Emma and Jason, which has lead to increased fighting, and ultimately guilt. During each argument, Emma and Jason attempt to one-up each other, Jason refusing to take Emma out as planned, and Emma reluctant to stick to Jason's re-schedule. Because the two are engaging in competitive symmetry, they are unable to coordinate in a way that would allow them to impress the healthiest examples of The Serpentine Model. In other words, Emma and Jason are not taking turns asserting and accepting each other, and therefore are misinterpreting each other's actions, which leads each to "mis-act". 

Because Emma and Jason have just moved in together, I believe it is time to renegotiate the expectations of their relationship. The two of them must sit down, and learn how to communicate using flexible complementary control patterns. That is Emma and Jason must take turns "one upping and downing" each other in order for them to reach an agreement. "I'd like to watch Grey's Autonomy tonight, Jason." "Okay, let's do it, baby." "Hey Emma-doll, I'd like to watch the game tonight." "Okay Jason, let's do it baby!" If the communication flows, the television programs are really one in the same.

In addition to viewing their relationship from a communication perspective, Emma and Jason should simply put their situation in perspective...if only so many people around the world were lucky enough to rent an apartment in which they can sit down on a comfortable couch and fight. Instead of taking their residential privileges for granted, it would be wise for Emma and Jason to appreciate the fact that they have a climate they can make defensive.

Perhaps realizing what they do have together would encourage Emma and Jason to work for what they don’t have in a more patient manner, which means not getting defensive during times of conflict. Again, by one-upping each other Emma and Jason both behave in a defensive climate of superiority. Further, Jason is strategic in trying to hide his one-up of abandoning a planned date-night with Emma by rescheduling for a couple evenings later. Behavior such as this will doom their relationship. Therefore Emma and Jason, when renegotiating their relational expectations, should also explicitly voice the priorities each has that might affect these expectations. That way, Emma and Jason won’t bullshit each other when attempting to “get out” of a relationship situation in hopes of “getting in” their individual priorities.

Finally, regarding the violent couple next door…while I wouldn’t suggest calling the police immediately, Emma and Jason should take some kind of action, whether it be knocking on their neighbor’s door with some apples (a simple “Hey, we’re your new next door neighbors!” could potentially remind the violent couple there are in fact people living next door, who can hear through the walls), or informing the land lord about the situation. If the situation persists, Emma and Jason might have to call abuse centers, and eventually the police.

            This case appears to have intentionally coordinated the increasing violence occurring next door with Emma and Jason’s. In other words the more violent the neighbors become, the more violent Emma and Jason become. Therefore it is important Emma and Jason rid their environment of violence, as having such a close proximity to it has had a rather contagious effect.

Emma and Jason, I remain hopeful.