Hi Class,
In chapter 6, it discusses three different relational roles. Rigid complementarity is when the submissive partner begins to resent always giving in or when the dominant partner begins to tire of being in charge. Then there is the competitive symmetry. That is when both partners fight for the dominant role. Last but not least is the submissive symmetry. This is when both partners struggle to give up control. For example, "i don't care, you decide".
I believe the competitive symmetry would be the most difficult to change because neither one of them will want to settle for less than being the one thats dominant. They will continue to compete. With that being said, competitive symmetry would also be the most damaging to a relationship. The partners are continuously fighting and bumping heads for that dominant position, with no room for love and compassion for each other and that can lead them to drift apart from each other. I also believe that the rigid complementarity would be the most damaging to someones self esteem. I believe this only for the person who is always submissive, they probably do not have the confidence to stand up for themselves, voice their own opinions, or make decisions.
Hey man,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you say "the partners are continuously fighting and bumping heads for that dominant position, with no room for love and compassion for each other and that can lead them to drift apart from each other". In a relationship each partner is supposed to support and bring out the best on one another. If they are constantly battling to see who is better who who makes the decision, it is not healthy. I feel partners should encourage each other and be a good supportive system. I do not see this happening if they are trying to out due each other or just trying to be more dominant.
I can understand why some couples like this competitive symmetry relationship. If they are both athletes then they can push each other to be greater. Sometimes a little healthy competition is good for a relationship. But I can not see a relationship only being about competition. Thank you for sharing! great thoughts!
Hello Bacon,
ReplyDeleteI think the one relational role that I can completely relate to is competitive symmetry. Not only in my own personal relationships with family members but on the football field. I’ve always been very competitive when it comes to anything in life since I was very little. Due to my competitive nature I found that it has either helped or hurt personal relationships. For example you said that in competitive symmetry people are, “are continuously fighting and bumping heads for that dominant position, with no room for love and compassion for each other and that can lead them to drift apart from each other.” I totally agree because I have seen friendships come ago in my life because some of my friends would be in competition with me based off of what choices I was making with my life such as coming to San Jose to play football. Although it can be a hindrance, it can also be a good for personal relationships. When it comes to having a girlfriend, I would want someone who can be competitive with me so we can both push each other to be better people in life but you would have to remind each that there is some sort of limit when it comes to being competitive with one another.
Hi Sean Bacon,
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with your thoughts on the competitive symmetry pattern. In a sense, this pattern may be the most potentially difficult and damaging on all three points -simply depending on how driven both parties are. Without cooperation, both parties are likely to burn-out, left with a relational gap based on pressures and competition. Similarly, you noted: "neither one of them will want to settle for less than being the one thats dominant". Considering this, cooperation and submission seem like the only way to achieve change...which by definition would be the opposite of "competition".
All in all, great post.
-Tyrone Q