The pattern rigid complementary would be the most difficult to change because it implies one partner showing dominance, while the other partner is submissive. Rigid complementary is very common, and used in most types of relationships (from personal experience and based on where I was raised) because it serves a negative/positive balance in the relationship. The common phrase "who wears the pants in the relationship" directly showcases what rigid complementary is and how it does take affect. Changing this pattern would be the most difficult because the partner in dominance usually is a natural leader, and wants to show off authority. Like the book entails, a parent-child relationship is complementary, thus changing it would ruin the empowerment of the parent. Also, the submissive partner, usually chooses to be submissive because they wish not to argue, participate, or make the decisions due to easiness.
The competitive symmetrical pattern would be the most damaging to a relationship because it would constantly be a battle between two people. Although gym partners are competitive symmetrical, relationships between lovers, parents, and even coworkers can cause harm when competing becomes a priority. If I was constantly fighting with my boyfriend/girlfriend on day to day issues, it would become emotionally and physically exhausting to eradicate decisions. Parents arguing how they should raise a child can ultimately destroy a family. Coworkers competing does give motivation to be the best, but can also harm the environment in allocating intense relationships.
The most damaging to individuals involved is a close tie to both the rigid complementary and competitive symmetrical. I would dislike not being in control ever or always being in control. Sharing a mutual standpoint and allowing both parties to speak is needed to pursue a happy relationship. (unless playing an up or down role is okay with personal beliefs). Also, the competitive symmetrical would wear and tear on my emotional self esteem by making me feel down about myself. What if I could never win and life was a constant battle with my partner? I would be damaged and distraught of the exhausting idea of trying to constantly regain control and my stand point.
Hello Hazel Pink,
ReplyDeleteI agree with both of your points of view. I think that rigid complementary can be very demoralizing in an intimate relationship and will cause your partner to be closed off. A dominant person will always find someone that is less likely to fight back and will never go for someone that can be their equal, therefore they will never change. With competitive symmetry there will be a constant strain on the relationship because no one ever wants to give in. There will be an endless circle of bickering and fighting, I experienced this with someone that always wanted to be the decision maker so I let him and then he would end up messing everything up. I would take control and it would be endless bickering until he could find something else to win. I ended the relationship within two weeks and he wanted to tell everyone that he dumped me! I was happy to not bother with that battle as long as he was gone.
I cannot even fathom being in a competitive relationship as just being around competitive people can be damaging enough, much less if you wind up being married to someone that wants to beat you at everything.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the dominate/sub roles could be very difficult to break; one partner has no incentive to change and the other may very well lack the will. I don't think that the dominant partner in a relationship is always a natural leader though. I can tell you that when I was a kid, my old man was nothing more than a natural bully.
In a healthy (or at least healthier) relationship, there is enough give and take that both partners can take turns being dominant, depending on the task at hand.