a grumpy wallaby
Image by whiskymac
People are social beings. In modern society I find it impossible to imagine how a person could lead an entirely separate existence – even if someone wanted to. And not many of us want to. For most of us our treasured moments are about connecting with others.
We want to connect with others, and – in many ways – others are different to us. It is also true that others are similar to us in many ways, but it is the differences that get our attention; and some of the differences cause us problems.
Being in a relationship I think means working out a way of living that accommodates these differences. If the relationship is one that isn’t terribly intense or valued then the accommodation is usually easy to make. When we are living with the person, then it can be more challenging.
This is the world that is dealt with in ‘conflict resolution’. This approach I find valuable and extremely helpful. I’d change the name to ‘conflict transformation’ to emphasise that new options are possible and resolution doesn’t mean compromise, but that is a quibble really.
I have a dilemma with the way that we normally resolve our conflicts. We tend to use a scale of “upsetness”. What I mean by this is: the person who is most upset is the one who has the most influence.
I recognise that this is correct. Unless we are just going to be crassly insensitive (hardly a world I would want to be in) then people’s feelings need to be taken into account. The point of resolving conflicts is to have everyone happy. Our feelings are at the core of our relationships, our conflicts in our relationships, and our attempts to resolve our conflicts.
Here’s my dilemma: some people are more intense than others. Some people seem to feel more strongly than others – whatever it is they feel; they feel it strongly. Using the ‘scale of upsetness’ means that the people who are most easily upset have the most influence. This means that relationships are shaped by those who are most easily, or most intensely, upset. This can lead to the situation of “Grumpy people rule OK!”
What about the reverse? Why not value those who get upset the least? – Those who are calmest and hardly get upset at all. Why not value the cruise rather than the roller-coaster, the bland over the intense, the calm over the passionate?
The dilemma is that it is impossible to choose – if we wish to maintain the relationship. Some people are more passionate than others. Unless we are only going to relate to people who are the same as us (in ways that we care about) or only relate to others on our own terms, we are going to need ways to accommodate differences in our relationships.
I don’t have any answers about whether grumpy people should rule the world or not. I don’t want to encourage people to be rewarded for being more and more touchy (I’m more upset than you so what I want should be what happens). I don’t want people’s feelings to be disregarded – I don’t want more coldness in my relationships.
Here are some thoughts about possible approaches to developing relationships that value people’s feelings but don’t just let the most emotional people rule the roost.
• When a need is met it diminishes (for a time). If a need or want is met then the desire will not be as intense. If the intensity remains, there is something else going on and it is worth finding out what this other thing is.
• Resolving difficulty, in a way that respects everyone, probably requires that everyone is committed to the relationship. If people aren’t equally committed to the relationship then some people will find it easier to just leave and not be bothered to find a resolution.
• Changing a relationship may require personal change. The calmer people may need to voice their feelings more, the emotional people may need to work with some frustration of their intensity. It is possible to make agreements where the different people involved agree to work on different aspects of themselves – so that each person is working for a better relationship.
If you have any thoughts on this dilemma I’d like to hear from you in the comments.
Sign up for my free health course: Designing a Long and Healthy Life. I also have a free weekly newsletter. To receive these leave a comment on my Newsletter page.
I have an eight week membership course, Living Authentically. The next course will begin in early 2009. You can find out more about the course on my Living Authentically page.
My free report, It’s Not About Success, is available on it’s own page.
If you have a topic you would like me to write about please let me know. Just leave a comment on this post about any topic you would like to see discussed. Looking forward to hearing from you.
No related posts.
Tags: conflict resolution, feelings, grumpy, Relationships, respect
Join my weekly newsletter focusing on topics of personality and relationships. Also get "The 10 Day Experience to Living Authentically" Learn More
A colleague told me about this site. Glad I checked it out. Looks to be very useful. Forrest M
Thanks Forrest glad you find it useful.
Evan,
I found this post fascinating. It is true that the “squeaky wheel” usually gets attention first…because it’ SO ANNOYING. I guess that’s one reason grumpy or very intense people get attention first.
I also agree that relationships require a great deal of commitment and compromise. It’s an odd fact that opposites often do attract, which means that people in relationships will need to find their way to the middle, but maybe that’s what makes it all interesting:~)
Hi Sara,
I sometimes find that people who are quite opposite have an easier time of it than those who are similar. Strange but true. Have you found this too? Working it all out is certainly interesting. Thanks for your comment.
I hadn’t thought of emotional conflicts in this way, Evan, but now that you mention the ‘scale of upsetness’ – it’s so obviously true. And it creates a vicious circle of negativity, in some cases. Two people want to win, and both intuitively know – at least at some level – that the one who is most intensely upset will ultimately ‘win’ the toss. So no one has any clear incentive to rein in, calm down, and seek a peaceable solution. Worse yet, as you mention, the ‘touchy’ one is effectively rewarded for being difficult, and so the behaviour is bound to continue. Interesting! I wonder how one would go about breaking the cycle – awareness that it might exist, I suppose, would be the first step!
Thanks rj, I’m sure awareness would need to be the first step. One possibility is for both to commit to a shared goal (eg. less fights). If you have any ideas I’d be interested to hear them.
Thanks for you comment.
Hmm, I guess I was thinking of conflict in terms of business partnerships and colleagues in committee work, rather than personal relationships…
At home, yes, I think it’s necessary for people to sit down and talk about how they plan to get along together and make an agreement to act like civilized adults – but in the workplace, where we start out with the assumption (right or wrong) of being rational grown-ups with a common purpose, that kind of conversation would be inappropriate in most cases.
Brings it down to individual responsibility for our own behaviour, doesn’t it? And back to square one… if the squeaky wheel gets the grease, where’s his motivation to squeak less loudly?
Thanks rj, I was thinking of domestic relationships. Work is interesting. There are varying incentive structures (formal and informal, financial and not) that come into play. I’d say a day in most workplaces is enough to prove false any assumption of people behaving as rational grown ups with a common purpose (perhaps that’s the workplaces I’ve experienced).
I think there are things that can be done to alter the environment – and people can adapt very rapidly to their environment. This is everything from running meetings differently to getting people together informally – a famous example is the company announcing the coffee was ready to encourage people from different departments to meet and share ideas (I think it was Hewlett-Packard, but I’m not sure). The example of the ‘person at the top’ can also be influential.
You’ve raised a fascinating question, thanks.
As babies we learn that the best way to get love, food and attention is to open our mouths and scream real loud and it’s easy to repeat that pattern since, at least on the short term, it seems to work.
I’m no expert but I think one key to a lasting relationship is finding someone who is on the same journey or path as you are. Sharing common goals or a common cause strengthens bonds between friends, family and significant others and lets us overlook the minor stuff.
Love the wallaby.
Thanks Liz. I do think screaming is a way to get attention – especially when we feel all alone and that nothing else is working. It certainly works short-term; the problem is that it isn’t much of a recipe for growing a healthy relationship. I really agree about a common journey strengthening a relationship. Another element I think is a way of talking about stuff – sometimes people talk at cross-purposes, which is frustrating for everyone involved. Welcome to the blog and thanks for your comment.
Hi Evan
I had a little different reaction to this article. I think I am a highly sensitive person. My reactions often reflective of my sensitivity. I used to think I too was grumpy, or the squeaky wheel demanding my grease. And I’m not totally ruling that out as someting I may have done. Or that it appeared outwardly to others that’s how I was getting my say.
As a sensitive person, I often am wary of people who respond too passively. I wonder how much they mean or don’t with this rather, cool and calm reaction to something I’ve seen as ‘more important’, ‘more meaningful’. It is then a matter of trust in the person I reacted to, how well I might or might not know them.
I think the combinations of this dynamic of grumpy people vs. not grumpy people is as varied as there are combinations of people interacting in a situation. So less mass ‘solutions’ to be applied here. Rather one on one focus.
I suppose if I use the example of you and I, I’ve been triggered many times by what you’ve said. Two of your recent posts, the two posts about Easter and Living with Dying, struck me at levels that even I haven’t been able to decipher yet.
It seems, you stated your case and position very calmly and I was at the other end, trying to manage triggers.
I don’t say this to diminish, but this is a blog post. And has nothing to do with either of us personally, nor in relationship to one another. Or does it? We weren’t even in proximity to one another nor having a personal discussion. Even so, it was not without effect on my thoughts/reactions half way around the world and we’ve never even formally met!
I guess what I can deduce by this is, there are calm folks like you. There are more effected folks like me. Seems if you and I interact, we have to figure that out between us, so maybe micromanaging, rather than broader choices as solution.
Hi Barbara, It may have been unfair of me to characterise sensitive people as ‘grumpy’. I have known many people more emotional than I – or people who like the strength of emotion, while I like to sail along on an even keel. It has taken the more emotional people a while to understand that I’m not hiding anything – I just don’t respond as strongly as them to most things.
I try to keep in mind that people can have differing reactions to what i write. Also that I am dealing with matters that can be quite personal. Blogging is strange – more strange than print perhaps – we have personal reactions to something that looks quite impersonal – black squiggles on white. With blogging where interaction is fairly easy this is particularly the case I think. In some ways blogging is a mass medium – the closest analogy I can think of is talk-back radio (kind of one-on-one and kind of a mass audience too).
I guess the way forward for us is that you can send me an email or we can discuss your reactions to the posts in the comments. This goes someway to being one on one.
Evan,
I didn’t think you were characterizing sensitive people as grumpy.
There are grumpy people, God knows, I believe I know that.
In fact, it goes directly to your Living with Dying post in my own life.
When I was a little girl, I lived with people much much older than me and diagnosed with terminal stuff, or stuff that had less treatment/knowledge available about the diagnosis’.
More recently in my life, I cared for three more elderly relatives. Grumpy for one of them was not even a close description and he was healthy for his age until 93. Actually he was THE most challenging of the three.
Which of course has everything to do with me comparing my excitable reactions to squeaky wheel grumpy.
It unfortunately seems to appear as a fine line issue to those who observe from the sidelines, and think “there she goes again”.
And on a last note, there are more times than not I’m having the same conversation with myself. Stop, slow down, don’t get excited, read at face value, your blood pressure matters!
I appreciate even keel, I especially appreciate when I can do it.
Thanks Barbara. It probably won’t surprise you to know that I think both sides are important. The one who wants to go quickly and the one who wants to slow down. I really appreciate your heart felt comments. Many thanks, Evan
These are all really good points!
As a relationship expert (www.ChoiceRelationships.com), I would like to add that couples need to know that conflicts are bound to happen. But here’s the good news: there are skills they can learn so that they can handle them better. When they do, their partnerships fare much better. I offer a free teleseminar, “The 7 Tools to Manage Conflict Communication in Your Relationship.” To hear it, go to: http://choicerelationships.com....._resources.
Hi Karen, learning skills can definitely help. Thanks for your comment.