Categories
anger Bullied child discipline comic strip conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict emotional intelligence free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum insults interpersonal conflicts negative criticism Negotiations parenting social intelligence stress threats types of criticism wisdom

DEALING WITH CRITICISM: LESSONS FROM DENNIS THE MENACE

In a recent post (Dealing with Criticism by Digging Deeper) I discussed some difficult situations that may occur when we deal with criticism.  There, I mentioned that in these types of situations, it can be helpful to do our best to describe what the criticizer’s most obvious desire is for providing the criticism and then to look to see if there are any other desires that might be involved.  To help us to dig a little deeper to find any of the other important desires in a difficult situation, I provided readers with two types of tools to dig, two types of shovels to dig, if you will.

a. look for the desire to be liked or loved.

b. look for the desire to be free to make one’s own decision.

Today, we begin to get some practice utilizing these two shovels.

PRACTICE

Consider the following Dennis the Menace comic:

dennis1

In this comic, obviously, Dennis’s mother desires that he straighten up his room. What other desires are important to consider?  It appears to me that Dennis’s mother is glaring at him.  Hmmm?  

When a boy hears his mom criticizing him in this way, there’s a chance his desire to be liked will feel threatened. Is there also a chance that there is another important desire in this challenging situation?

As criticism is being provided to us, we often begin to think something like, “I’m not going to let this person push me into doing something I don’t want to do. I’ll do whatever I want, and I don’t need anyone pushing me around.” This stance is part of what we call defensiveness.

EASING THE LIKING PROBLEM

When the desire to be liked and loved raises its mischievous head, we can let the person who has been criticized know that he is liked. This is what Dennis’s friend, Gina, does to lower the intensity of Dennis’s anger in the comic.

When Gina tells Dennis that his mom will cry if he leaves, Dennis is reminded that his mom really does love him.

dennis 2

Then Gina explains to Dennis that not only will his mom miss him, so too will his dad and dog. dennis3Dennis ends up deciding to resolve his conflict and go back home. Gina helped to resolve the conflict by focusing on easing the “liking” problem in this conflict.

Now let’s consider what we can do to help to resolve the problems in this situation by focusing on easing the “freedom” problem.

EASING THE FREEDOM PROBLEM

In the Dennis the Menace comic, while criticizing him, his mom could have offered Dennis the freedom to choose between two times to pick up his room. More specifically, she could have said something like this: “Dennis, I sure love you. It’s so much fun to have you around. It’s getting about that time to clean up your room. Do you want to do it now, or in an hour from now?” By giving a child a choice, a parent can come off as less bossy.

To male criticismhelp to come up with these types of ideas, the one thing I tend to do before providing criticism is to pause. Recognizing that I am about to provide criticism, and knowing that people tend to get defensive about not being liked and having their freedom threatened, I think about how to ease any perceived threat to these two desires.

SUMMARY

  • Many people associate criticism with not being liked.
  • Many people associate criticism with an attempt to reduce their freedom to make their own decisions.

Once we learn to be skillful at recognizing these types of conflicts, we are in a better position to come up with plans to either resolve them or to lower their intensity.  Therefore, in future posts I will be frequently providing examples that allows the reader to practice this skill.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict emotional intelligence encouraging caring free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt insults interpersonal conflicts intrapersonal conflicts negative criticism social intelligence stress wisdom

DEALING WITH CRITICISM BY DIGGING DEEPER

picture 2“I’ve been reading your blog posts, Dr. Rubin,” Judy says sounding annoyed. “You are making everything sound way too complicated.”

“I’m pleased that you’ve been checking it out,” I reply.  “I’d love to hear more about your reactions.”

“Well, yesterday I went over to pick up my friend, Sue, to go to a party.  She was wearing an outfit that was almost identical to mine. So I told Sue I didn’t like what she was going to wear.  If we went to the party in the same outfits we’d look like the Bobbsey twins. We’d look ridiculous.  Sue quickly saw that I was right and changed her clothes. Then we decided that in the future, whenever we plan to go to a party together, we’ll check with each other before we pick out what we’ll wear. So, you see, without going through all of your stupid ‘DIG,’ desire, interference, guilt, nonsense, I provided negative criticism to Sue, and we worked it out just fine.”

“I like the way you dealt with it, Judy, especially how you made plans to prevent the same problem from recurring.  Checking with each other before choosing your outfits makes a good deal of sense.  Well done!”

A glorious smile graces Judy’s face.

“Judy, I also agree with you to a large extent about using the DIG Conflict Model to deal with criticism.  In many situations, perhaps even most situations, there is no good reason to go through the steps I’ve been describing in my blog posts.  As long as the issues are simple enough to understand easily and if whatever approach you are in the habit of using leads you to a comfortable resolution, then, by all means, you don’t have to bother using the DIG Conflict Model.”

“There are times that I do get defensive or confused,” Judy allows.  “I know there are times I get defensive, and I’ve said some things even recently that I now regret.”

“I want to hear about those regrets, Judy.  At the same time, it takes a special kind of learning to handle defensive feelings.  I think it would be helpful if we first rehearsed a plan that can increase the respect you will feel for yourself.  It has to be well rehearsed because when people get defensive, they oftentimes have trouble thinking as clearly as when they calm down and have some time to think things over.  It’s also helpful to learn to get comfortable with this new way of thinking by discussing someone else’s conflicts, rather than discussing events that directly happened to you. This will allow you to look at this new approach more objectively.  Once you get the ideas down so that you can smoothly work with them, then it will be far easier to apply them to events that are occurring in your own life.  So, if it’s okay with you, Judy, let’s return to my Charlie Brown comic that I used in my last blog post.”

“Well, I do want to get you back on my recent regret, but I love the Peanuts characters, especially Lucy.  Go ahead, Dr. Rubin, let’s hear one of your lessons.”

FIRST, LET’S REVIEW THE OLD LESSONS

“Okay!  First, please read again the Peanuts comic we looked at in our last lesson:

Charlie1

Judy, after reading it, smiles, and says, “Okay, now what?”

“Let’s review some key points, Judy.  From the ideas we have been discussing over the last few months, what do you think Charlie Brown can do in this type of situation that will be helpful?”

“He can tell himself that it is good that he has begun to criticize himself in this situation.  Criticism, if handled skillfully, is the path toward wisdom.” (see blog post titled, Is Criticism Bad?)

“Excellent!  What else might be helpful for him to do?”

“Think about how he is likely to criticize himself, and rate that style using the skills in my post Providing Negative Criticism: Five Levels of Maturity.  If Charlie Brown already started to criticize himself before he did this, it would help him to look at the style he has begun to use, and then rate that.  After rating the style, it would help him to see if he could come up with a more mature style that would match either a 4 or 5 level.  To help him do this, he might work a little on summarizing his problem using the word, “DIG.”  That will help him to dig for his desire, what is interfering with his desire, and what he feels guilty about.” (see Dig For The Conflict)

“Very impressive, Judy.  You’re a fine student.  If Charlie Brown asked you to summarize his conflict, what would you say?”

Charlie Brown, you seem to desire that you not yell at your baby sister, but the fact that you did has led you to perceive that, interfering with your desire, you are likely to continue yelling at her.  You appear to feel guilty for your actions by saying you hate yourself.”

NOW, THE NEW MATERIAL

“Well, Judy, I can see that you’re now ready to move on to some new material.  After you get skilled at summarizing the most obvious conflict in a difficult situation, it’s then helpful to use the word “DIG” to remind you to dig a little deeper to find other desires that may be important to consider.  What other desire do you think Charlie Brown might have that is important to consider in this situation?”

After some thought, Judy replies, “He desires to play with his puzzle, but his sister interfered by messing it up.”

“Yes, Judy, very good.  Do you think Charlie Brown thinks his sister is guilty of doing something wrong for messing up the puzzle?”

“Probably not.  He seems to recognize that she is only a baby, so he’s not blaming her for what she did.”

“I think you are right, Judy.  Now, when we are using the DIG Conflict Model, to have a full conflict we must have all three conditions of a conflict, the desire, the interference, and the guilt.  In the problem you just described, we only have the desire and the interference, but no guilt.  Even though this is not a full conflict, it may still be very important to consider in this situation.  We will be calling this type of problem a DESIRE-INTERFERENCE PROBLEM.  And so, when we think about all of the possible problems that might be involved in a difficult situation, we write down a summary of all of the possible conflicts and all of the possible DESIRE-INTERFERENCE PROBLEMS.

“To help us to dig a little deeper to find any of the other important problems in a difficult situation, today I am giving you two types of tools to dig, two types of shovels to dig, if you will. The first shovel is look for the desire to be liked or loved. The other tool is look for the desire to be free to make one’s own decision.  I discussed both of these tools (looking for the desire to be loved and looking for the desire to avoid interference with freedom) more thoroughly in my blog post titled, Why is Criticism So Hard To Bear?

“Oh, now I remember that one,” says Judy, as if a light suddenly went on in her head.  “You talked about how people, when criticized, might feel that people won’t like them, and why it’s important to consider this when we try to come up with a long term solution to problems.”

“Yes. I also mentioned that when we are criticized we often think that the criticizer wants us to make some change. This criticism might be provided not simply as a suggestion, but the criticizer soon begins to put pressure on us to change even against our will.  We may, therefore, become defensive as we begin to desire to make our own life decisions without outside pressure.  When we dig deeply into a difficult situation we would be wise if we look at how the “desire to be liked and loved” is involved in the situation and how the desire to “remain free to make our own decisions” is involved in the situation.  It helps to write down a summary sentence or two for each of the conflicts that you can see in the difficult situation, each of the desire-interference problems, and then dig deeper using the two shovels, that is, the liking/loving  shovel and the protecting freedom shovel.  In this way, you will get a list of the problems that all have to be addressed if you wish to create wise and lasting ways to deal with difficult situations.

“Sometimes, when we look at a difficult situation, it all seems to be so complicated, that we just get lost on how to move forward in a helpful way.  By using the approach I just described, the big difficult situation is broken down into easier-to-understand problems.  Oftentimes, working on making some improvements to deal with each of these easier-to-understand problems, one by one, the larger difficult situation begins to improve.

“In coming weeks, I’ll present examples of how this approach can be very helpful.  As we go through them, you’ll become so familiar with this approach that you will find that you can use it even in the most trying situations.”

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger comic strip conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict emotional intelligence encouraging caring free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum grieving guilt guilting Hope insults interpersonal conflicts intrapersonal conflicts Name calling negative criticism psychological maturity ruminations social intelligence stress teasing types of criticism wisdom

INTRAPERSONAL CONFLICTS AND CHARLIE BROWN: ADVANCE LESSON

A few weeks ago I published a post titled CONFLICTS WITH OURSELVES: LESSONS FROM CHARLIE BROWN.  Today, let’s quickly review the ideas presented there, and then move on to discuss a few more.

Review

When one person has a conflict with another person, we call this an interpersonal conflict.  An intrapersonal conflict occurs when a person has a conflict with himself or herself.

When we describe a conflict using the DIG Conflict Model, the letters of the word, “DIG,” helps to remind us to first dig to find the DESIRE, then something that INTERFERES with the desire, and finally, the GUILT.  Earlier, we looked at the following example of an intrapersonal conflict:

Charlie13

When we looked earlier at this example, I provided the following tentative description of Charlie Brown’s intrapersonal conflict:

Charlie Brown seems to desire that he not yell at his baby sister, but the fact that he did has led him to perceive that, interfering with his desire, he is likely to continue his yelling at his sister.  He appears to feel guilty for his actions by saying he feels terrible and hates himself.

It would be simpler to describe this conflict by saying:

Charlie Brown desired that he not yell at his baby sister, but he interfered with his desire by yelling at her.  He felt guilty about it.

In this simpler description, we still have all of the three conditions for a conflict–that is, the desire, the interfering act and the guilt.  But they all took place in the past.  To become an expert at dealing with conflicts, we must learn to describe an existing conflict as something relevant to the future.  This skill will help us to prevent similar conflicts from recurring over and over again.

Okay, so there’s our summary in what was presented the last time we discussed intrapersonal conflicts.  Let’s now move on to some more advanced ideas.

Advanced Lesson

Whenever we have a conflict with ourselves, we oftentimes present to ourselves some negative criticism.  In the above three panels of the Charlie Brown comic, Charlie Brown indicates he has evaluated how he treated his sister and he makes it clear that he doesn’t like what he did.  When we evaluate something and state we don’t like what we evaluated, we have provided negative criticism.

In an earlier blog, we looked at providing negative criticism during interpersonal conflicts.  We saw that according to the DIG Conflict Model, there are five levels of maturity when it comes to providing negative criticism (see blog post titled, PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM:  FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY).  Level 1 is viewed as the most immature level, and level 2 is viewed as a bit more mature, and so on.  Readers of this blog were encouraged to familiarize themselves with the five levels, and then to use them in the following way:

First, they learn to recognize that they are getting ready to provide somebody criticism.

male criticism

Then they pause to think about how they are likely to provide the criticism.

Jack criticism 2

Then, before they provide the negative criticism, they decide what level of maturity the criticism they are likely to give is at.  If it is below level 4, they try to change the criticism so that it matches level 4, or even level 5.

In this example, the man is the employer of the woman who wrote a report.  After looking it over, he sees he is likely to provide criticism in a style that would best match level 2, which states:

2.  This level requires displaying one or both of the following:

  • The criticizer does not explain what the offending behavior is, but instead expresses displeasure with glares, insults, shouting, silence, or threats that do not involve bodily harm.
  • Threatens bodily harm regardless of what else is said.

Now, I understand that some of you might feel that the employer deserves a higher rating because he does explain what the offending behavior is when he says the report is stupid.  But this just indicates in some vague way that he doesn’t like the report using the insulting word, “stupid.”  In my opinion, his comment is not an adequate description of what he doesn’t like about the report to warrant a more mature rating.

Seeing that this type of criticism is a bit immature, the man’s job in this example would then be to try to come up with a form of criticism that matches one of the more mature levels.  One of the more mature levels is level 4:

4.   The criticizer states the criticism without bodily attacks, damaging property, glares, insults, threats, or shouts, and with enough details so that the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance.  If the person receiving the criticism becomes defensive or angry, the criticizer empathizes without returning glares, insults, threats, or shouts.

In this example, by pausing and thinking about level 4, the man asks himself to describe his criticism in a clearer, more precise way than shouting “The report is stupid!”  To help him to clarify his thoughts, he uses the word “DIG.”  Thus, he says to himself that “I desire that in the future this woman who wrote this report will follow the directions that I give her and interfering with this desire is the fact that in this report she did not do so.  I think she is guilty of ignoring my directions.”

Having slowed down so he can think about this, the man now decides that the best way to provide the criticism to the woman is to wait until he has managed to calm himself down enough so he can speak to her using a respectful tone of voice and without any insulting words.  Then he will go over the first direction he had given to her and ask her to describe how she might have written the report so that he would have seen that the report writer is following his direction.  If she is not sure how to respond, he could then explain more thoroughly what he wants when she attempts to follow this direction.  After clarifying the first direction, he could go over in a similar way his second direction, and so forth.

Now, I don’t mean to suggest that this is the only resolution to this employer’s conflict.  For example, he could instead assign the best report writer in his company to mentor this employer.  The mentor would review each of her reports before she hands them in, show her copies of high quality reports, and so on.   The point is that this employer can improve the quality of his criticism by pausing before providing the criticism, thinking about how he is preparing to provide the criticism, comparing it to the five levels of providing negative criticism, and then seeking a way to change the criticism to something that matches a more mature level.

With intrapersonal conflicts we carry out a similar plan as we do with interpersonal conflicts.

Let’s return to our Charlie Brown example:

Charlie13

Here we see that even before first recognizing he is about to provide himself negative criticism, he has already done so.  That’s not the end of the world.  Many old habits are not easy to change quickly, and if you find yourself slipping into past styles of dealing with conflicts, you need not beat yourself up over this.  There are better ways to helpfully carry on.

In our Charlie Brown example, even after having already provided negative criticism, he can still go through the steps we discussed for dealing with interpersonal conflicts.  That is, he can first look at how he did criticize himself and then compare it to the five levels of providing criticism.  Then, he can pick out which of the five levels best matches his response.

In my judgement, Charlie Brown’s response falls somewhere between level 2 and level 3.

Level 2 states:

2.  This level requires displaying one or both of the following:

  • The criticizer does not explain what the offending behavior is, but instead expresses displeasure with glares, insults, shouting, silence, or threats that do not involve bodily harm.
  • Threatens bodily harm regardless of what else is said.

Charlie Brown, in this example does state what the offending behavior is.  That is, he says, “I shouldn’t have yelled at her, she is only a baby.”  But to match level 3 his response would have to look like this:

3.  The criticizer clearly states the criticism with enough detail so the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance, but couples it with glares, insults, shouts, or threats that are not about bodily harm.

Charlie Brown’s criticism of himself, in my opinion, is not quite clear enough to fully match level three.  The fact that he repeatedly says he hates himself seems to be an example of insulting himself so that part of his criticism matches both level 2 and 3.

Once Charlie Brown figures out about what level his response had been, he could then see if he could come up with a response that better matches a more mature response, perhaps level 4, or even level 5.

Attempting to describe interpersonal conflicts using the letters in the word “DIG” can be helpful for coming up with a more mature response.  Similarly, attempting to describe intrapersonal conflicts using the letters in the word “DIG” can be helpful for coming up with a more mature response.  What would that look like?  Here’s one way Charlie Brown can do this:

He tells himself,

I desire that I not yell at my baby sister, but the fact that I did has led me to guess that, interfering with my desire, I’m likely to continue yelling at her.  I feel guilty for my actions.

Notice that there are no insults in this statement.  This statement is an important step toward coming up with negative criticism that matches a level 4 or 5 response.  Charlie Brown still must go on from here to come up with a plan that can help him to become less likely to yell at his baby sister.  Next week we will begin to look at some plans to help him do just that.

Practice

For those of you who truly want to become a master at dealing with intrapersonal conflicts, I recommend that you now take the time to either print out the five levels of providing negative criticism (see PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM:  FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY) or if you don’t have a printer, write them out in any way you can.  Then, tape them to your refrigerator door.  This week, each time you see them, try to recall some time that you provided negative criticism to yourself.  Try to recall just what you said to yourself.  Then, try to see what level best matched what you said to yourself, and if it is less than a 4 or 5 level, try to create a response that would match a higher level response.  With this type of practice, you will soon see some real progress in your skills to deal effectively with intrapersonal conflicts.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger Bullied Bus stop ignorance conflict resolution criticism free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum insults Name calling negative criticism playful teasing types of criticism wisdom

INSULTS: LESSONS FROM THE CASE OF THE MAN SENTENCE TO JAIL FOR MOCKING DISABLED GIRL

A while back I saw a YouTube video dealing with insults that made someone cry went viral.  It is called, Bus Stop Ignorance.

In the video we see 43-year-old William Bailey taunting Hope Knight, a ten-year old girl with cerebral palsy.  Hope uses crutches and Mr. Bailey, in the video, mocks the way she walks.  He also gets his son to join him in the taunting.

According to ABC news, Mr. Bailey was caught on an iPod camera by Hope’s grandmother, Marie Prince, while she was picking up Hope at the school bus stop.

William Bailey “was dragging his leg and patting his arm across his chest to pick his son Joseph up,” said Hope’s dad. “I asked him to please stop doing this. ‘My daughter can see you.’ He then told his son to walk like the R-word.”

On Nov. 27, Judge John A. Poulos of the Canton Municipal Court sentenced Mr. Bailey to 29 days in jail.

Here, sitting in front of her mother,  we see  Hope covering her eyes to hide her tearful reaction as the taunting is discussed.

disabled2

Hope was born 29 weeks premature after the Knights were involved in a head-on auto collision. When Hope was born, she weighed only two pounds, 12 ounces, which caused several medical problems resulting in two brain surgeries. She fought for her life the first two years.  And now, to have to face this….

Here’s Mr. Bailey and his son being interviewed about this incident.

disabled3

Mr. Bailey at first denied mocking Hope.  But then he said he was reacting to name-calling directed at his son. Mr. Bailey entered a plea of ‘no contest’ to a menacing charge and to disorderly conduct.

Through his lawyer, Mr. Bailey has provided an apology.  “To Hope and her family, please accept my apology for my inappropriate behavior. I know that my actions were immature and lacked the respect you deserve. I didn’t realize the impact this incident would have upon both of our families and I truly regret it.”

So, there you have it.  According to Mr. Bailey, he insulted the girl as a reaction to someone, presumably from the Knight family, calling his son names.  He doesn’t say who started it, but most people would agree that even if someone from the Knight family started the name calling first, Mr. Bailey’s reaction was still wrong.

It is interesting that many people who responded to the video and felt Mr. Bailey’s actions were wrong included in their criticism of him, insults and advocated that someone needed to beat him up.  For example, one person wrote, “I’d be worried about this idiot and his idiotic son retaliating when he’s released. Anyone with that cruel type of mentality is not to be trusted.”  Another wrote, “Would love to beat the living crap out of this turd.”

According to the DIG Conflict Model we have been discussing on this blog, providing criticism with physical attacks is the lowest level of psychological maturity on a five-level scale (see HERE).  Calling a person names or insulting the person in other ways is a level 2 response, the second lowest level of maturity.  Both physical attacks and insults increase the probability of an escalation until someone gets killed.  The last thing that is in the best interest of ten-year old Hope is for her father to end up dead.

Rather then to think of Mr. Bailey as an idiot, the DIG Conflict Model teaches us to view him at some very specific level of psychological maturity.  It also provides us some very specific information about what he has to learn to reach a higher level.

I know that many people feel that for most situations the five levels of criticism make sense but when someone acts as Mr. Bailey did, it’s time to put the five levels aside.  Moreover, they feel that it is perfectly correct to call him every name in the book!

Well, let me see if I can encourage those individuals to change their minds without calling them any names.

First of all, one reason that I view styles of providing criticism in a developmental framework is it fits my own personal experience.

When I was very young, I remember distinctly some kids in my elementary school insulting someone that was a little different than the rest of us.  I laughed along, finding the situation genuinely funny.

As I matured, at one point, some students called a kid that was also a little different than us some names, and I laughed, but as I did, I remember feeling that it wasn’t quite right.  Later that day, as we went down the stairwell at school, I told the kid I was sorry.

Then, one day I had a party and many of my friends brought dates.  At one point during the party, a couple of my friends started teasing another friend about bringing a girl to the party who wasn’t very smart.  They teased him in front of the girl, and I noticed her face turning very red.  I found that I did not laugh at all.  I thought the girl’s reaction would be enough to get my friends to stop insulting her, but a couple of minutes later they said something about her that was even more insulting.  I asked to speak to them, and we went into another room for some privacy.

“You know I love you guys,” I began, “but the things you’re saying about that girl, I’d like you to cut it out.”

“Hey,” said one of my friends, “can I help it if that girl has the intelligence of a kumquat!”

I must admit that I did let out a little involuntary laugh at this–something about the kumquat comparison struck me funny.  But I very quickly recovered and said, “The girl is really feeling bad about this teasing.”

“Listen,” said my friend, “we all tease each other and have some fun with it.  If she can’t take a little teasing, it’s her own damn fault!”

“I don’t think continuing to humiliate her is the best way to get her to be more mature,” I replied.  “Please, give her a break.”

They waved their hands at me, complaining I was turning into a political correctness police officer, but in the end, they let her alone.

Notice that as I criticized them, I didn’t use any name calling and it was certainly not my intention to throw any insults at them.  Also notice that from my experience, I changed in a particular direction as I matured.

Now, there are a great deal of additional arguments that I can make about the value of a developmental perspective, but allow me just one more for today’s post.

The story involves the first black major league baseball player, Jackie Robinson and his team mate, Pee Wee Reese.

disabled5

Just before Mr. Robinson began to play in the majors for the Brooklyn Dodgers, the Dodgers’ general manager, Branch Rickey, made it clear to him that he would face criticism in the form of the most vile insults. If he was to play, Robinson had to show the courage to not return insults with insults or to lose his temper and jeopardize the chances of all the blacks who would follow him if he could help break down the race barriers.

Jackie Robinson and Branch Rickey
Jackie Robinson and Branch Rickey

If Mr. Robinson couldn’t return the insults, could nothing be done?  On one particular day when fans were being particularly insulting to Mr. Robinson, the smallest ballplayer on his team, Pee Wee Reese, stepped out of the dugout.  Mr. Reese was a beloved player with the fans for his hard, hustling play.  He stepped over to Mr. Robinson,  put his arm around him and stood by his side.

This gesture was discussed around the country, and even today.  And a monument honoring this moment stands tall and strong in Brooklyn.

disabled6

If you go by it some day and watch for a while, from time to time you’ll see a grandfather describing to his grandson how the statue symbolizes what can be done even by two men who responded to insults without returning insults.  I must admit that I’m no kid anymore, and yet, whenever I walk by that statue, I get all misty inside.

disabled7

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict emotional intelligence insults negative criticism wisdom

Conflicts: Lessons from Beetle Bailey

Why would someone fling insults at you?  For the past few weeks we have discussed eight different reasons and how to deal with each one (see INSULTS: A COMIC STRIP LOVER’S GUIDE).

Sometimes when people attempt to insult you, they are being clumsy at letting you know they have a conflict with you.

Here, it looks like Lt. Fuzz insults Sarge because he has a conflict with Sarge.  That is, Lt. Fuzz has a desire that sergeants under his command are physically fit. Interfering with Lt. Fuzz’s desire is the fact that Sarge appears to be fat.  Lt. Fuzz seems to think that Sarge is guilty of not keeping himself in solid fighting shape.

Notice that the first letters of the three conflict components (DESIRE, INTERFERENCE and GUILT) spell the word, “DIG.”  The word “DIG” helps us to remember to DIG for the conflict by looking for the DESIRE, INTERFERENCE and GUILT.

If you are to become a master at dealing with name calling, insults and teasing, when someone is trying to insult you, you must prepare yourself so that you will be able to DIG to find out what the conflict is all about even under the stress of being bombarded with belittling comments.  To become skillful at this takes some practice.

Last week’s post provided followers of this blog some practice for digging for the conflict by using a major conflict from the Shakespeare play, Romeo and Juliet (see post titled CONFLICTS: LESSONS FROM ROMEO AND JULIET).  Today we will have some fun using some Beetle Bailey comics to sharpen our skills and to deepen our understanding about what it means to have a conflict.

Practice

As a fun way to develop the skill of coming up with conflict descriptions, please read the Beetle Bailey comic below and then see if you can describe from Sarge’s perspective the conflict he is having with Beetle in two sentences.

In formulating your two sentences, it is important to be aware that Sarge’s look of concern on his face when he hears Beetle’s stiff muscle excuse doesn’t figure to be genuine.  Any regular reader of the Beetle Bailey comics knows that Beetle’s character, although lovable, is one of laziness and perpetual excuse- making.

Sarge, painfully aware of Beetle’s laziness, in all probability is acting concerned just to play along with the excuse, while at the same time, harassing Beetle until he gets to work.

With this in mind, there are several two-sentence conflict descriptions that people might provide here.  Here’s an example that I like: Sarge desires that Beetle gets going but interfering with his desire, hears Beetle making an excuse to stay in bed.  Because Sarge is aware that Beetle has a long history of being lazy, I’m guessing that he believes that if Beetle doesn’t get going he would be guilty of pretending to be injured to avoid his responsibilities.

Why do I like this description?  It’s brief, and it’s consistent with the model of conflict we will be learning about on this blog—The DIG Conflict Model.

The Pattern for Describing Conflicts

The conflict statement we just used to describe Sarge’s apparent conflict with Beetle is in a form that doesn’t assure that a conflict exists; rather, it provides us a standard pattern that allows us to briefly describe the situation as best we can with each of the three conditions of a conflict in a familiar place.  Once we form the statement, we can see better if a conflict does or does not exist, although we rarely can be absolutely certain.

When there are only two parties involved in a conflict, the pattern can be described as follows:

First select an individual who appears to be one of the parties to the conflict and make him or her Party A.  Then create a sentence that identifies who Party A is.

The first sentence also includes Party A’s desire,

the other party involved and the interfering act. 

Then fashion a sentence that puts forth the theory that Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.

The first two sentences are composed, as best you can, from Party A’s point of view.  In composing these two sentences, you are to imagine that you are Party A, and you are doing the best that you can to briefly explain your position.  We will be frequently using this two sentence pattern throughout this blog.

Being Specific is Good

If I was able to ask Sarge to briefly describe his conflict with Beetle, suppose he answered, “Beetle is acting like a jerk.”  The fact that Sarge’s answer is brief is good.  But Sarge’s answer just tells us that he doesn’t like some way that Beetle is behaving.  Sarge’s answer would be more precise if his answer stated what specific act he desires and the specific act that is interfering with what he desires—i.e. gets going, versus stays in bedHis answer would be even more precise if it also provided enough information so that we understood that Sarge would view Beetle as guilty if Beetle carries out the act that would interfere with Sarge’s desire.

Conflicts and Problems

Whenever we discuss conflicts, it is important to make a distinction between conflicts and problems.  To begin, every conflict contains a problem.  The problem for Party A is how to achieve what he or she desires given the likelihood of someone acting in a way that prevents achieving the goal.

Although every conflict contains a problem, every problem is not a conflict.  To illustrate this, let’s go back to the scenario involving Sarge and Beetle.

Earlier I made the case that one reason this is probably a conflict is that Sarge probably believes Beetle is just pretending to be unable to move so he can get out of work.  Knowing Sarge from observing him over the years, I’m guessing he is very likely to think Beetle is guilty of shirking his responsibility of working hard even if he is a little sore.  But let’s change this scenario a little.  A doctor confirms to Sarge that Beetle has broken both of his legs.  So you can vividly envision this, let’s say Beetle got his legs broken as a bomb went off in Afghanistan while he was trying to save several of his buddies.

Illustration by Eric Sailer

Sarge, when he first hears Beetle can’t get going today, assumes that Beetle is just making up some excuse.  Because of this assumption, Sarge believes he is about to engage Beetle in a conflict, but as soon as he sees a medic working on Beetle’s seriously mangled legs, he changes his mind.

Because Sarge no longer thinks Beetle is guilty of shirking his responsibility to get to work, he does not believe that in this situation he has a conflict with Beetle.  Does this mean that Sarge no longer has a problem?  Even if Sarge completely clears Beetle of any wrong doing, the work that he had desired Beetle to do still may need to get done.  In some situations, this is so easily handled that no problem can be identified.

Illustration by Eric Sailer

In the above two boxes, Sarge explains to his general that his outfit will be short-handed until a replacement can be assigned.  Such a familiar routine for an experienced sergeant could not be categorized as a problem.  But let us consider another example.  Suppose the work that Beetle is assigned to do on the day his legs are injured involves repairing some jeeps that the general requires for an urgent mission.  Now when Sarge realizes that Beetle is out of commission, he has to figure out how to still get the work done.  This may be a fairly small problem or a very difficult one involving a great deal of stress.

As these variations on the Beetle Bailey scenario illustrate, even if a conflict suddenly disappears, a problem may still be left in its wake.  The problem may be somewhat smaller than the one contained in the original conflict, about the same, or more serious.  A problem becomes a conflict when Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the incompatible act.

A Conflict, to Exist, Must Refer to Something that will Occur in the Future

Imagine Beetle getting a punch in his skinny nose.

For some, the act of getting punched is enough to declare that a conflict exists.  The punch, they say, is the conflict.  But if that’s so, why not just view the punch as a punch and nothing else?  What does the concept of a conflict add to the punch?  Hmmm.

Consider what would happen if you got punched by Sarge, and a fraction of a second later Sarge suddenly grasps his chest, screams in agony, falls to the floor, turns white, and dies of a heart attack?  Would you believe you have a conflict with Sarge?  Most people, under this set of circumstances, would answer, “NO.”  A proper definition of a conflict must account for this.

In the DIG Conflict Model, the cause of the conflict is not that you were hit, but rather that you perceive the existence of all three conflict conditions.

One of these conflict conditions is—Party A perceives that the other party is likely to act in a manner that is incompatible with the desire.  If you got hit by Sarge and then Sarge suddenly dies, under this set of circumstances why are you unlikely to view yourself as having a conflict with Sarge?  The DIG Conflict Model makes the reason evident.  If Sarge dies, you no longer have any reason to perceive Sarge is likely to hit you again.

Many people intuitively understand this.  That’s why you will often hear people who find themselves in a situation that appears to be developing into a conflict quickly declare that the interfering act was an accident and the behavior won’t happen again.  Such people understand that if they can convince Party A that the interfering act that has already occurred wasn’t intentional and therefore should not be perceived as a signal that it will happen again, no conflict will be perceived.

Summary

When we summarize a conflict, it helps us to think of the word, DIG.  This reminds us to dig for the  desire, the interfering act and the guilt.

All conflicts contain a problem.  But NOT all problems are conflicts.

A conflict, to exist, must refer to something that will happen in the future.

Well, that’s your lesson for today.  Have a splendid week.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger Bullied comic strip conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict emotional intelligence insults jealousy Name calling negative criticism playful teasing psychological maturity social intelligence teasing types of criticism wisdom

INSULTS: A COMIC STRIP LOVER’S GUIDE

Teasing is a game sometimes known as bantering, joshing, crackin’, rankin’, playing the dozens, trash talk, and infighting.  You are judged on the quality of your insults and also how well you keep your cool on being insulted.

Even the most mature people may like to play the teasing game, for they enjoy the duel of wits and the occasional humorous comeback.

Consider the following Calvin and Hobbes comic.

Our two friends are getting pretty silly in this exchange.  I guess being silly is part of the fun.

Mature people are distinguished from immature people in this game, not by how silly the interactions are, but by their lack of desire to hurt somebody in this game.  They realize that the smiles and the lighthearted tone they try to set throughout the game sometimes mask real tensions.  Thus, they keep their senses tuned to the subtleties of the repartee, and know when to back off when things begin to get too serious.

Immature people can come across as mean when they tease.

In the above Peanuts comic, Lucy ends up smiling even though Violet ends up feeling upset.  I would have liked Lucy to show some concern about how Violet ends up feeling.

It is certainly understandable why Violet ends up feeling upset.  We all have a strong desire to be liked.  The fact that there are other people watching while Lucy teases Violet can make dealing with the teasing even harder.  But what if Violet, instead of going away looking upset, ended up responding to Lucy in the following way?

“Good one, Lucy!” says Violet with a smile.  “I guess you won this round.  Well done!”  Then Violet gives Lucy a respectful nod of her head before going on her way.

If Violet would have acted this way, it would have shown the other kids that she can take a little teasing without getting upset.  This seems to many people a sign of maturity.  We can’t expect everyone to have this level of maturity.

Apparently, in the comic below, Calvin went a little too far in his teasing.

I think a conflict has sprung up.

When I think about a conflict I think about the word DIG.  That reminds me to dig to find in the situation the desire, what is interfering with the desire, and someone who feels someone is guilty of doing something wrong.

DIG=Desire, Interfering, and Guilt

In the above comic, Calvin desires to create a situation that would lead to some fun but perceives his actions have led to a situation that is interfering with fun.  He feels he is guilty of doing something wrong.

Troubled by how Susie has reacted, Calvin becomes sad, and then he turns a bit angry.  It seems to me that his genuine concern for Susie’s feelings is a sign of emerging maturity.

In our next comic strip, we see Susie’s reaction to Calvin’s teasing.

The sadness that Susie feels is coupled with her recognition that, without Calvin, she would feel even lonelier than she does.

How might Calvin handle this situation?

Apologizing, for Calvin, is not an easy thing to do.  I wonder why?

In the next comic, we see that Susie is still trying to deal with Calvin’s insults.

Susie realizes that although words don’t hurt your body like sticks and stones, they still can hurt quite a bit.

When Calvin goes over to Susie to make up, he finds that it’s a struggle.

Sometimes when we try to fix a problem it doesn’t work.  That doesn’t mean we have to give up.  We can try again.

Sometimes someone who enjoys teasing does so in a manner that looks to someone watching on as not fun.

At other times, people who tease don’t realize that they really have created a very uncomfortable situation.

Sometimes when people call you names or insult you in some other way, you may not be sure why they are doing this.  One thing to try is to say, “I’m not sure why you are trying to put me down.  Is everything okay?  Are you mad at me about something?”

This often leads to the insulter revealing what is actually motivating this behavior.  But if the insulter walks away, and then begins to insult you on another occasion, it’s time to go down a list of other desires that motivate insults. By becoming familiar with these other desires, confusion can oftentimes be quickly brought under control and a plan generated to address the concerns of all involved parties.

Eight Different Reasons Why People Use Name Calling, Insults and Teasing

If you follow this blog you will become familiar with eight different desires that can motivate name calling and teasing.  This will help you to spot them even when you are beginning to feel defensive.  When you learn to see the real desire motivating the criticism, you will find it much easier to act wisely.

Below is the list of the eight desires.  It might be wise to print out this list and place it in a convenient place.  Then, whenever you are called names or teased, you can get it out.  By going down the list you might more quickly figure out what is going on.

The Eight Reasons for Insults List

The desires that oftentimes motivate name calling, insults and teasing are:

1. The desire to encourage or discourage some action.

2.  The desire to release stress because the criticizer is in a bad mood.

3.  The desire to take out on you what someone else did to the insulter.

4.  The desire to be left alone for some quiet time.

5. The desire to form a bond with a group by putting down non-group members.

6. The desire to test someone to determine worthiness to be admitted into a group.

7. Jealousy.

8. Playful teasing.

Well, there you have it, the eight desires that lead to name calling, insults and teasing.  You can already find some suggestions for dealing with most of the various types of desires from checking out some earlier posts.

  1. Criticism designed to encourage you to improve (see RESPONDING TO CRITICISM: FOUR LEVELS OF MATURITY and RESPONDING TO CRITICISM: THE MOST MATURE LEVEL)
  2. Playful teasing (see MAKING THE BUS MONITOR CRY: RATING HER RESPONSE)
  3. The desire to form a bond with a group by putting down non-group members (see MAKING THE BUS MONITOR CRY: WHY THE BOYS DID IT)
  4. Jealousy (see BEING CRITICIZED BECAUSE OF JEALOUSY)
  5. The criticizer is in a bad mood (see RESPONDING TO CRITICISM WHEN IT IS BEING PROVIDED BECAUSE THE CRITICIZER IS IN A BAD MOOD)

In future blog posts we’ll explore all of these issues more thoroughly.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict stress wisdom

ANGER: A COMIC STRIP LOVER’S GUIDE

If you have been following this blog you know that I have discussed anger on several occasions (See, for example, BEING A WISE FRIEND TO YOUR ANGRY SELF, PART 1 and BEING A WISE FRIEND TO YOUR ANGRY SELF, PART 2).  During these discussions, I mentioned that how you handle anger has a big influence on how much people like and respect you.  Today we delve into the nature of anger a little more with the help of some of our favorite comic strip buddies.

Getting Familiar with Anger

 

Most of us have a pretty good idea about what it means to be angry.  In the above comic, when Charlie Brown is shouting at Lucy and wildly waving his hands above his head, we’re pretty sure he is in the midst of an angry fit.

Although you already know, in some general way, what it means to be angry, if I was to ask you to quickly create a list of the various expressions and experiences that go along with anger, you might have to pause for a few seconds and your list might end up leaving out several important ones.  Moreover, some readers might have a somewhat different idea of what anger means than I do.  This might lead them to become confused about some of my statements.  And so, because we will be discussing situations that involve anger, it will be a valuable use of our time to take a quick look at anger as revealed in comics and for me to make some comments along the way.

Shouting and Glares

Consider this Luann comic.

Here, we see blond-haired Tiffany planning to put on a beauty pageant contest that she desires to win.  Suddenly, Tiffany experiences a conflict with Crystal.  What I mean by this is, Tiffany seems to desire to enjoy her thoughts about the glory of winning her pageant.  Interfering with this, Crystal throws out statements suggesting Tiffany might not win.  Judging from Tiffany’s angry reaction, I’m guessing she thinks Crystal is guilty of doing something wrong.  I’m hoping that you notice that the first letter of “desire,”  “interfering”,  and “guilt” spell out the word DIG.  It can remind you how to summarize a conflict. (To learn more about what it means to have a conflict, see my post, DIG for the Conflict).

In a sense, Tiffany set sail on the great Sea of Conflict just about when Crystal asks, “And if they don’t pick you?”

When Tiffany begins to glare at Crystal and shout, she has probably sailed into a region of conflict known as anger.  Assuming that someone isn’t pretending to be angry, the actions of glaring and shouting are pretty clear signs that indicate someone is angry.

Quiet Anger

Even when someone is not shouting, anger may be present.

In the above exchange between Luann and Tiffany, when they are whispering it is obvious that they are angry with each other.  The glaring and insult darts that they are throwing at each other provide us adequate signs that they are angry at each other.

Other Expressions of Anger

During conflicts, besides glaring, insults, and shouting there are a few other signs that indicate we are in the region of anger.  Consider the following Blondie comic.

Here, we see not only shouting, insults and glaring as signs of anger, but also pointing while waving a finger, insults and name calling.  I notice in the last panel that Blondie is giving Dagwood a little love.  I wonder if that will ease his anger.

See if you can see some additional anger signs in the following Retail comic.

Val, the woman with black hair, begins her expression of anger by placing her hands on her hips and widening her eyes.  She then crosses her arms in front of her, lowers her eyebrows, and threatens Courtney.

Below, we see Marcie express her anger a little differently.

In addition to shouting, Marcie throws up her hands and then begins to throw objects at Peppermint Patty.

Can you describe the turtle’s expression of anger in this next one?

As I see it, in this Sherman’s Lagoon comic when the turtle yells “THAT’S THE DUMBEST THING I’VE EVER HEARD!” he expresses his anger by insulting Sherman.  He also expresses his anger by banging his fist on the table.

In the comic below, how does the woman in orange express her anger?

The woman is shouting while leaning forward in a threatening manner and baring her teeth.

Next, we have a Piranha Club comic.

Notice that the woman goes beyond threats to express her anger, using direct physical violence.

In our next example, again someone goes beyond a threat to express anger.

Lucy expresses her anger by waving her fist, and then she ends up throwing a snowball at poor ol’ Charlie Brown.

Next, Helga doesn’t display any of the signs we already mentioned, and yet we and her husband still recognize that she is angry.

As this comic illustrates, withdrawing love may be a sign of anger.

Overt and Covert Anger

Overt anger refers to anger that is expressed in ways that we can clearly see, hear, or—as in the example of the woman slugging a guy—feel.

Other overt cues that may be interpreted as anger are frowning, blushing in the face or neck, not smiling, agitated rigid movements, apparent tension in the body, heavy walking, grinding one’s teeth, and a protruding neck vein.

In addition to overt anger, sometimes people attempt to hide their anger.

When people are angry inside but don’t show us outwardly that they are angry, we may say that they are experiencing covert anger.

When we attempt to determine if someone is angry, we may only be partially successful.  Because of the subtlety and variety of the clues that may suggest someone is covertly angry, we will at times guess wrongly.

In an effort to avoid offending some of their readers, there are several overt expressions of anger that we don’t observe in newspaper comics.  Crying out, “Jesus Christ!” and “God almighty!” are examples of religious-themed anger responses.  Shouting out curses are very popular in some circles.  Sometimes people, knowing these expressions of anger will get them in trouble, find themselves saying these words silently to themselves.

Often people show some aspects of their anger overtly while experiencing a commotion of other aspects of their anger inside of themselves that they do not wish to share with others.  They may find themselves silently cursing while imagining attacking the perceived cause of their anger.  They may feel hot, nervous, a tightness in their forehead, or a pounding in their blood vessels and heart.  Covert anger refers to all of the thoughts and body reactions of anger that others can’t observe.  Both overt and covert anger go along with the entire experience of anger.

Not All Expressions of Anger are Real Anger

On occasion, people will act angry when they are not.  This may be done, for example, because they think such actions will scare someone into fulfilling their desires.  At other times, they may desire to appear manly and believe displaying anger is manly.  And sometimes their friends are acting angry about something and in an effort to support their friends they may pretend that they are also angry.

Not All Conflicts Contain Anger

When we are in a conflict with someone, we are not always angry at the person whom we believe is guilty of doing something wrong.

In this Garfield comic, Jon may very well have a conflict with Liz that can be described as follows—Jon desires that Liz develop a better sense of humor and that she not twitch her nose when she is angry, but interfering with this, her actions have been suggesting to him that she will not be changing these attributes in the foreseeable future.  If asked, Jon might admit that Liz is guilty of being less than a perfect companion.  Nevertheless, Jon appears so in love with Liz that if we were to ask him if he is angry with her it’s not hard to imagine him saying, “Are you kidding!?  I’m not angry at her, I’m crazy about her!”

When we are engaged in a conflict, instead of feeling angry, we may feel fear, hope, loving kindness, sadness, humorous, and a sense of challenge.

Sometimes a Conflict begins in Anger and then it Fades Away Into the Distance

Oftentimes, when a conflict first begins, a person initially becomes angry.  As time goes by, people often find that they can sail away from anger to other less hostile regions on the great Sea of Conflict.

Illustration by Eric Sailer

Summary

This blog post was designed to introduce you to some basic ideas about anger.  We focused on the various expressions and experiences of anger.  In future blog posts, we will go over such topics as how anger is related to other emotions, what we mean by emotions, what are the functions of the various emotions, and how we can learn to use our emotions wisely.  Although these topics can be very serious, with the help of our comic strip buddies, we can have some fun along the way.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger conflict resolution criticism emotional intelligence Joe Biden Mitt Romney negative criticism Paul Ryan playful teasing President Obama presidential debates psychological maturity types of criticism wisdom

RESPONDING TO CRITICISM: LESSONS FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

If you have been following this blog, you know that lately we have been working on becoming masters at dealing with criticism.  One important lesson that we have focused in on is that in designing our response to a particular criticism it is crucial that we figure out why the person is criticizing us.

Let’s say, for example, that John, upon entering my home and noticing the TV show I’m watching, criticizes me, saying, “Jeff, you’re an idiot for watching this stupid comedy.”  As he says this, I look at him and see from his eyes and the way he says it, that his comment is designed with the genuine hope I might make some improvement in my TV viewing habits.  In that case, a reasonable reply to John’s criticism would be to say warmly, “I appreciate your concern, John.  I think it does make some sense that I start thinking about how much time I spend watching lightweight shows.”   Such a response would show John that I respect what he has to say enough that I’m willing to give it some real thought.

Now, what if John had used the exact same words to criticize me about the comedy show that I’m watching, but I notice that he has a twinkle in his eye and that he watches the same show.  I put this together with the fact that I know John likes to playfully criticize people.  Under this set of circumstances, a reasonable reply to John’s criticism would be to look directly into John’s eye, give him a light chuckle and then a nod of my head.  This would show him that I can take a little kidding around without getting defensive, and that I appreciate his attempt at a little humor.

Just as it makes sense for us to figure out why someone is criticizing us in order to design the best way to respond to the criticism, it makes an equal amount of sense for the president and vice president, as they prepared for their debates, to try to figure out why their opponent in the debate might seek to criticize them.

President Obama versus Governor Romney

Perhaps the president, while preparing for the debate, thought, “My opponent will be criticizing me to convince other voters to vote for him.”  But actually that thought would have been too imprecise.  More likely, the president thought that his opponent was interested in convincing only a small group of voters to vote for him–those who were still undecided and lived in the “battleground states” such as Ohio and Florida.

An analysis of this group of voters indicated that they hate it when the candidates are nasty and uncivil against their opponents.  As Ben Feller of the Associated Press wrote last night, “The danger for the aggressor is that both campaigns know the remaining undecided voters at home want answers for them, not partisan bickering.”  And so, President Obama, understanding this, was friendly with his opponent, Governor Romney,  and avoided personal attacks.

After the debate, many declared that the president lost the debate.  And it is true that nationally, Governor Romney did get a clear bump from his debate performance.  But according to Gail Collins of today’s New York Times, in the election-deciding battleground states that matter, most polls suggest the first presidential debate has not had a significant impact.  The president had a lead before the debate, he wanted to avoid significantly damaging that lead, and he largely succeeded.

Vice President Biden versus
Congressman Ryan

Now, in contrast to how President Obama acted toward his opponent in his debate, Vice President Joe Biden in his debate with Congressman Paul Ryan abandoned his boss’s caution.  He called some of his opponent’s ideas “a bunch of malarkey,” repeatedly interrupted Ryan, and made smirks when he was speaking.

Furthermore, Biden derisively laughed at some of Ryan’s comments and waved his hands in disgust.

This raises the question, “Didn’t Biden want to influence the same group of voters that President Obama wanted to influence?”

Actually, it turns out that this was not an issue for Biden or his opponent.  Authoritative analyses have indicated that vice presidential debates simply never influence the outcome of presidential elections.  Given that, Biden properly should have asked himself, “Whenever Ryan criticizes me during the debate, what does he hope to achieve?”  The most probable answer is that Ryan saw this as an opportunity to gain some respect as a leader in case he wants to run for president in the future.  With that in mind, according to Gail Collins, Biden “spent the entire run-up week listening to Democrats beg him not to be passive. It’s a wonder he didn’t run onto the stage and instantly bite Ryan on the ankle.”

It’s interesting that after the vice presidential debate polls indicate that about an equal number of people felt Biden won and Ryan won.  My research indicates that when a typical person, let’s call her Mary Doe, criticizes another person, Mary would lose respect for the person she is criticizing if the person responded like Joe Biden did.  And yet about half of those viewing the debate seemed OK about how Biden had acted.   How can that be?

Keep in mind that viewers of the debate saw Biden not criticizing them, but rather, someone else.  My guess is that some people who viewed the debate said to themselves, “If Biden responds to criticism from Ryan like the way he did, that’s how he would treat me if I ever criticized him.”  These people probably ended up losing respect for Biden.  Other people who viewed the debate focused in on the fact that they didn’t like Ryan’s answers and loved the fact that Biden had made it absolutely clear that he didn’t like Ryan’s answers as well.  This group of people probably ended up respecting Biden even more.  For this group of people, perhaps it never occurred to them that if Biden treated Ryan this way he could have just as easily treated them that way as well.

So there you have it, some lessons from the presidential debates.  I hope the biggest lesson that you take from this is that to become a master at responding to criticism you would be wise to seek to figure out why someone is providing you the criticism.  That can be a crucial guide to help you to design your response.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger Bullied conflict resolution criticism emotional intelligence Jerry Seinfeld Kramer psychological maturity wisdom

JERRY SEINFELD, KRAMER, INSULTS AND THE N-WORD

Over the past couple of months on this blog in weekly posts I have been discussing criticism.  This past week on the internet I came upon an episode of Jerry Seinfeld’s internet show “Comedians in Car Getting Coffee.”  There, Jerry and his fellow comedian, Michael Richards, discuss a very unfortunate incident that dramatically illustrates some of the ideas I’ve been trying to convey to my readers.

As most of you know, one of the most popular TV comedy series in history is “Seinfeld.”

And one of the funniest characters on the show is Kramer, played by Michael Richards.

After the cast stopped making new episodes, Michael began to perform as a standup comedian.  One night, about seven years ago, a black man interrupted Michael’s  act and criticized him, saying, “You’re not funny.”  Michael, according to his own words that he expressed during a nationally televised apology, went into a rage and used the N-Word to insult the black man.

Now, in posts on this blog I have made the argument that when responding to criticism there are five levels of maturity (see RESPONDING TO CRITICISM: FOUR LEVELS OF MATURITY and RESPONDING TO CRITICISM: THE MOST MATURE LEVEL).  I am now going to describe the five levels, and as you look them over, see if you can identify which level best describes how Michael handled the criticism he received during his act.

RESPONDING TO CRITICISM: FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY

1.  This level requires displaying one or more of the following:

  • Weeps or sobs with tears or pouts
  • Physically attacks the criticizer
  • Damages property

2.  This level requires displaying one or more of the following:

  • Insults the criticizer (either with words, hand gestures, the sticking out of a tongue, the rolling of the eyes, or smirks)
  • Glares at the criticizer
  • Threatens the criticizer
  • Punches, kicks, or throws an object without physically hurting someone or damaging anything
  • Criticizes the criticizer without first fully addressing the original criticism.

3.  This level requires displaying one or both of the following:

  • Displays defensiveness without directly insulting the criticizer (raising voice’s volume or pitch)
  • Displays a lack of interest either by verbally indicating this, or with nonverbal cues, or complete silence. 

4.  Level 4 individuals listen to the criticizer in a supportive, warm, friendly style, and then make it clear that they fully understand what was said.  Moreover, they put the criticizer at ease by making statements that indicate that the wise learn from criticism.  Some time is spent on showing that they are thinking about the criticism.  If, after thinking about the criticism the criticism is deemed to be correct, they make a statement frankly indicating, “I can see your ideas have merit and I intend to use them in the future.”  If they are not sure if they agree, they make a statement indicating that they are very interested in what was said, plan to think a little more about this over the next few days and then they will be ready to discuss this further.  If, after thinking about the criticism, the criticism is deemed to be incorrect, a statement is made designed to disagree without being disagreeable.  More specifically, a sense of humor, some listening in a caring way and a few smiles help to traverse rough terrain.  As the episode winds down, the criticizer is encouraged to feel comfortable communicating suggestions in the future.

5. In addition to actions consistent with level 4, people responding to criticism in a manner consistent with level 5 seek ways to use, whenever they disagree with the criticism, a technique known as steering in the direction the criticizer would prefer to go.  That is, rather than just disagreeing without being disagreeable, the criticized person seeks to find a new choice of action that creatively utilizes some aspect suggested from the criticism.  Steering cannot be incorporated into all situations, but it is an additional goal of the most mature individuals.

YOUR ANSWER, PLEASE

After looking over the description of the five levels, which best matches the response that Michael used to respond to the criticism he received at the comedy club?  After you decide, you get to compare your answer to mine.

MY ANSWER

Level 2 strikes me as describing best Michael’s response.  Referring to a black person with the N-Word strikes me as seeking to insult the person.  His response is viewed as one of the lowest levels of maturity for a variety of reasons already discussed on this blog.  In this particular case, we readily see what kind of harm can occur when we respond in this way.  Michael, on Seinfeld’s internet show, describes how he has been unable to work for seven years after the event took place.  “I busted up after that event.  It broke me down.  It was a selfish response.  I took it too personally, and I should have said, ‘You’re absolutely right.  I’m not funny.  I think I’ll go home tonight and work on my material.'”

If Micheal had responded as he said he should have, what level would that have been?  I think level 4 is a pretty good match.  If Michael did respond at level 4, the past seven years would have been dramatically better for him.

Now, I’m not attempting to suggest that every time someone responds to criticism as Michael did such awful things occur.  In most cases that you might respond in an immature way, people just become  angry and lose a little respect for you.  But sometimes even worse things happen to someone who responds to criticism with insults, as the Michael Richards’ case illustrates.  And sometimes even worse things happen then what happened in the Michael Richards’ case.  There are cases when the insults led to an escalation of a conflict until people turned violent and were murdered.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger Bullied conflict resolution criticism encouraging caring guilt guilting negative criticism psychological maturity wisdom

GUILTING VERSUS ENCOURAGING CARING: AN ADVANCE LESSON

Last week’s post is titled, AN INTRODUCTION TO “GUILTING.”  There we compared “GUILTING” to “ENCOURAGING CARING.”  Both are different styles of making a request and reacting if someone refuses to help.

GUILTING 

People using guilting express sadness at the current state of affairs and then ask for assistance.  Upon having a request turned down, the person who employs guilting responds in anger while seeking to lower the refuser’s self-esteem and making the refuser feel deserving of punishment.  People using guilting typically shout out phrases such as, “You’re selfish,” “You don’t care about anyone but yourself,” and “How can you do this to me?” Here’s an example of guilting:

ENCOURAGING CARING

People using encouraging caring make their requests very much like those who use guilting.  As they ask others to help, they express sadness at the current state of affairs.  However, unlike those who use guilting, those who use encouraging caring seek a mutually satisfying solution.  If their request is turned down, they don’t view the refuser as evil and deserving of punishment.  To seek to humiliate those who turn down their requests is avoided, while showing empathy and support are essential. Here’s an example of someone using encouraging caring:

Defending Encouraging Caring

To those of you who simply intuit that encouraging caring is a more powerful plan when making requests than guilting, you require no additional arguments to put it to good use.  To the skeptics out there, and to those who enjoy employing principles of science to assist in verifying your belief, the following study provides some relevant information.

Data from a University Study

In the autumn of 1981, I hired four student actors at the University of Minnesota, two guys and two gals.  We met at a well-equipped film studio on campus.

First, I had one of the actors, Pete, enact a guilting scenario.  Two scenes were used.  The first shows the viewer that the character Pete is portraying typically uses guilting whenever someone turns down his request.  In that scene, upon hearing his request being turned down Pete replies angrily:

The second scene, which depicts Pete making a new request, is very similar to the “calculus test help” situation we looked at earlier. The subjects in the study who observed this first videotape saw a scene showing how Pete typically responds to someone who turns down his requests.  They then observed the second scene in which Pete makes a new request.  The subjects in the study were to imagine that Pete is a guy whom they knew typically uses guilting and is now making this new request directly to them.  The subjects’ job was to enact the role of a friend of Pete and to imagine how they would respond to this new request. After completing this two-scene guilting videotape, we got to work on a second two-scene videotape.  This one has Pete enacting an encouraging caring scenario.  It begins by showing the viewer that the character Pete is portraying typically uses encouraging caring whenever someone turns down his request.  In that scene, upon hearing his request being turned down, Pete replies sadly:

Once this scene was created, I used the exact “new request” scene as I used on the first videotape that depicts Pete requesting help for the calculus test situation.  Thus, this second videotape has a different first scene than the first videotape, but the exact same second scene that shows Pete requesting help of the viewer who was to enact the role of Pete’s friend. The third videotape that we created is designed to depict another guilting scenario, one that uses the request for a timelier car ride situation that we discussed earlier. The fourth videotape we worked on is designed to depict an encouraging caring scenario using the same request for a timelier car ride situation. Once this set of four videotapes was made, I then had the three other actors make the same set of four videotapes as Pete did, so in the end I had four actors portraying the four different scenarios. Once I had the videotapes made, I arranged for University of Minnesota students, 139 men and 109 women, to come to a viewing theater.  Each student saw just one of the sixteen videotapes, randomly chosen. Because the actor making the request in the video had pretended as if the camera is the person for whom the request is made, he or she appears to be addressing the student viewing the videotape.  As I already mentioned, the job of each student observing the videotape was to enact the role of the friend to whom the request is being made. Immediately after observing the request, students individually answered five questions.  The results of the study indicated that those students who saw the encouraging caring videotapes answered all five questions more favorably than students who saw the guilting videotapes and these differences were statistically significant. Thus, students indicated that they would be more likely to comply and less likely to become covertly and overtly angry with those who tend to use encouraging caring than those who tend to use guilting.  Moreover, guilters were less liked and were viewed as less respected for how they handle conflict than those who used encouraging caring.

Encouraging Caring: A Secret Source of Power

I’ve just provided some information about why I think encouraging caring can often be more effective than guilting.  We now take up the question of why I think encouraging caring is a secret. When teaching conflict resolution, I frequently employ the following technique:  The class is given a typical conflict and asked to generate plans that might help to resolve the conflict.  I have found that although guilting is regularly suggested, encouraging caring almost never is.  When I have suggested it as a possibility, students have often looked puzzled, and sometimes asked, “Isn’t that the same thing as guilting?” During counseling sessions, I’ve also found that the availability of encouraging caring to deal with conflicts seems to be a secret to many people.  Here’s an example:

Patricia (not her real name), a 21-year old university student, came to the counseling center expressing a concern about her relationship with her mother with whom she lived.  Patricia desired to make her own decisions, but whenever she tried to do this, her mother fervently interfered.

“Patricia,” I said, “what do you think would be the best way to respond to your mother the next time she begins to insist on pushing you in a particular direction?”

“My friends tell me to learn to be assertive.  I read a book on it, and I’ve tried some of the ideas.  In some situations it’s helped but not with me and my mom.  Lately, my friends are coaching me to practice saying in a strong voice, ‘Mom, I’m going to make up my own mind!  I don’t want any advice from you unless I ask for it!’”

“Does your friends’ advice make sense to you?”

“In a way, it does.  The thing is, there’s no way I could ever say that to my mom.”

“Hmm.  Well, what do you think is the best way to go from here?”

“I’m feeling stuck.  I’m hoping you can help me to come up with some idea.”

“Well, I suggest we try practicing a style I call ‘encouraging caring.’  You don’t have to make any commitment to me that you’ll try this with your mother, but if you try it out with me in a role play a few times, maybe it will feel more comfortable to you than your friends’ suggestion.  Would that be okay?”

“I’m willing to give it a try.”

“Good.  I’m going to play the part of your mother.  I’ll start to give you some advice, and I’d like you to consider saying, in a sad voice, ‘Mom, I’ve been feeling sad lately.  I love you very much, I don’t want to hurt your feelings, and yet I feel that it’s best for me to make my own decisions.  Every time I try, you start to feel frustrated.’ “When you say that, Patricia, I’m going to act like I’m becoming defensive.  If this makes sense to you, I’d like you to practice replying sadly, ‘I’m not putting you down, Mom.  It’s just that I’ve been feeling so sad about this.  I really do love you.’”

“That sounds a little like guilting.  I don’t want to learn to be a guilter like my mom.”

I then explained to Patricia the difference between guilting and encouraging caring.  It was like a light went on in her head as she smiled broadly.  I gently posed a few questions for her to make sure she understood the difference, and within a few minutes she convinced me that her understanding was sound.

After a few practice role plays, Patricia expressed a high degree of confidence that she could try this with her mother. The next time I saw her, Patricia reported with a smile on her face that she was able to try encouraging caring with her mom the night of our last session.  It turned out that she and her mother ended up having a good cry together, and since then, her mother had begun to encourage her to be more independent.

We practiced a few more role plays that session, trying to anticipate what might be a response that remained consistent with the encouraging caring style in the event that her mother began to again become too pushy.  We also worked on a little note that Patricia wrote to her mother thanking her for being so understanding.  During our discussion, Patricia decided to get her mother a little gift to go with the note without my suggesting such a gesture.

——————————-
ASSIGNMENT: If you will, see if you can remember a time when you requested some assistance and was turned down. Think about how you responded? See if you can imagine replying in a way that matches the encouraging caring approach.
——————————————————————
 Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.