Six Behavioral Choices in Human Interactions and Relationships
We only have six options for behavioral interaction with others. Yes, there are only six choices for interaction in our human relationships.
Human interaction is universally normative with six basic behavioral choices. Although different cultures may favor different ones, we only have these choices when we interact with or respond to any person.
The six basic action response types are aggressive, passive, caretaker (co-dependence), passive-aggressive, assertive, and silent nonresponse.[1]
1. First the good stuff — self-assertion.
Assertiveness is direct, honest, flowing, leveling communication, which is usually best in the West as it enables and empowers one to be true to self as well as considerate and respectful of others. Virginia Satir taught that with assertive, leveling interaction, one is able to live life as a whole person — experiencing the full range of human emotions — and being holistically healthy in a functional community.[2]
How can it be accomplished? Claudia Black has long recommended using H.O.W. — honesty, openness, and willingness.[3] To those, this writer adds two “V’s”: “vulnerability (risks)” and “values (morals)” that include respect for self, others, and the divine (universal life force often called God, Yahweh [the great, “I am”], Allah, The Buddha Way, or Brahma). More on this later, now let’s examine the other options that we have.
2. Silent pause is another option. It may be the last one that comes to mind because we tend to react impulsively.
The silent non-response is for contemplation, to open your awareness to hearing — empathetic listening. It is a retreat from the material focus on social power dynamics. It is not avoiding caring about yourself or the other. A pause for silence is giving yourself space to be aware, to refocus on ultimate concerns, and to re-prioritize as needed.
Granted, the silent non-response can be choosing to ignore the other and perhaps intentional snubbing. That would be expressing uncaring disrespect, a passive-aggressive action — see more on passive-aggression below.
A silent nonresponse can provide a time and space to invite a higher power or higher self into the scene. It can calm our senses, our emotional arousal, our pride, our greed, our pettiness, and our competitive desires for advancement. From that heightened awareness we can better choose our behavior.
Silence is an opportunity to ask yourself, “Is this about me or you or something outside of, perhaps bigger than both of us? How can I be a healthier, more well, whole, and mature person in dealing with this?” Then silently you listen, finding wholeness in rest. You may realize that you don’t have to take sides, which frees you to act compassionately on behalf of love for all concerned for a healthier community (context).
Silence provides meditative moments for the benefit of self and others. It can be very wise to hold onto the assumption — the other person is doing the best they can with what they have to work with at that moment. Remaining silent need not be a failure to act in our best interest as it often is a prerequisite for assertive action.
It must also be noted that there are situations in which someone with authority is expecting an immediate verbal or action response. In such a situation it may be wisest to comply if demanded, or one could ask for more time to think it over before responding.
Silent contemplation, meditation, or prayer is excellent preparation for healthy, positive interaction. It can also subvert or prevent the next four less desirable behavioral choices.
3. Aggression is another behavioral choice — BIG ME, little you
However, the aggressive response is self-centered and inconsiderate of the other’s needs, let alone their point of view. It is the domineering, take-charge, fight-for-control approach that is always founded on inner fear and insecurity. It is attempting to gain recognition by taking control and imposing self, one’s inconsiderate will, onto others.
Aggression is often empowered by an intense emotional charge — anger in particular — that may be perceived by others as frightening and uncaring if not hostile. It can be from insecure, immature emotional reactivity that can lead to damaged relationships. This unkind, low-road morality is not in the best interest of all concerned and can deteriorate community spirit.
Aggression is an I-win-you-lose mentality. The only time this is a wholesome or healthy response is when it is essential for self-defense and self-preservation. That is rare and it may not be easy to know when that is truly the situation. Thus, it is challenging to discern when our fear is a response to a genuine lethal threat or if it is from our own insecurity or immaturity.
4. The next option is the passive response. It is the opposite of acting aggressively. It is Satir’s placating — another form of the better-than/worse-than game — BIG YOU, little me.
The passive responder submits to the control of the other and lets others decide for him or her. This can be giving up or giving in without even thinking of fighting. The motivation is to comply and satisfy the other by giving them what they want: "Their intentions and desires matter, mine don’t.”
Being passive lets the other take over one’s personal space and do with it what they wish. In doing so the passive person is indulging the dominant person’s preferences at the sacrifice of their own. Some call this, “people pleasing.” It is not healthy because it devalues one’s self (I’m not as good as …) and focuses too much on gaining the approval of others.
5. Things are complicated with the next two options and they are only covered here briefly (see more in subsequent articles). The first we will call “caretaker,” which is where there is a lack of boundaries and one person over-functions and takes over the responsibilities of others.
Caretaker is different than the passive person in that the caretaker is very much in control but is overstepping responsibilities in their relationship with others, which often contributes to resentments whether spoken or unspoken.
Melody Beattie called it codependence.[4] Codependence is when the caretaker person takes over things that the dysfunctional person should be doing and thus enables them to continue their dysfunction. It may be highly functional from the perspective of the system or context it is in. And it may even be seen as being generous, kind, or loving. However, it is unfair and can lead to burnout and/or illness in the caretaker, which has been called the Sacrifice Syndrome.[5]
Beatty has advocated for everyone to have three non-negotiable boundaries: 1. Don’t hurt yourself; 2. Don’t hurt others; 3. Don’t let others hurt you.[6] That is being mature, well-differentiated, and true to self while fair to others.
6. The next complicated behavioral response is the passive-aggressive action.
Passive-aggression is aggression, although it does not immediately appear as such. Although the response does not look aggressive on the surface, its intention is not good and thus it is functionally unhealthy. The problem is the underlying motive is strictly self-centered and self-serving. Examples of this are someone being “two-faced” and smiling at the other to their face, but talking or working against them when they are not present.
Another example is called being a “wet blanket.” That is where someone agrees to an activity without complaint and then complains or acts negatively throughout the activity, thus keeping it from being fully functional or pleasant for others. It is the underhanded approach that silently communicates, “You think you call the shots but I will make you look bad (bring you down, prevent you from being happy, etc.).”
Passive-aggressive actions are not the healthy, mature, true self as it is always sneaky and thus dishonest. It is immature, self-centered, and undifferentiated. It is not spiritual because it is being out of touch with one’s soul. It is — dirty pool — caught up in playing the material power-and-control games. The outcome is negative, lose-lose, with no clear “winners.”
The last four ways of responding have been predominantly negative, immature, and not healthy. Thus they indicate lower levels of differentiation of self, self-care, and moral or prosocial functioning.
Now, we return to the healthy response of choosing to be assertive, which is being mature and acting healthily — in the best interest of self and others.
One cannot go wrong with the assertive response as one uses their whole mind/wise mind to be considerate of all involved while being aware and mindful of feelings/emotions of self and others. It uses direct, honest dialogue that is considerate and polite to determine the best course of action that is just, fair, and affirming to all concerned.
Assertiveness is the win-win-win approach that uses the big-me and just-as-big-you perspective that says, “I’m OK. You’re OK. We’re all OK.” It is inclusive and respectful of the equal worth and equal rights of all for the greater good of the community.
Assertive communication takes place when we are in Satir’s “leveling stance” with the posture of equality among all present.[7] We interact assertively when we are open to hearing others first without judging or criticizing them. That is, not trying to “win” a debate. Instead, we listen to understand the other’s viewpoint so that our response is empathetic.
Generative listening is hearing with sensitive empathy and caring compassion. Otto Scharmer wrote that “generative listening” not only opens the heart, mind, and will of the listener but also enables “the capacity to let go and let come … to engage an emerging future,” which can break old habits.[8] That is what it takes to be a healthy, fully functioning community.
Through a higher values perspective of non-defensive (vulnerable), nonjudgmental, non-aggressive, open-to-new-ideas/compromise, and negotiation with “honesty, openness, and willingness,” we can find and agree to the solution for the conflict that is respectful and considerate of each person’s needs and rights to attain the win-win outcome.
This empathetic, compassionate, and assertive approach is definitely the most mature, healthiest, and just way to interact. It creates a foundation for the healthy, differentiated, mature self in friendly, kind, and equal relationships within a peaceful community.
For more on how to accomplish healthy communication and functioning, see my article, Synergistic Conflict Transformation at https://medium.com/@timothybonner9/synergistic-conflict-transformation-22be16c2568f.
References:
[1] Timothy J. Bonner, adapted from “Holistic Healing for Anxiety, Depression and Co-dependence,” unpublished presentation handouts for continuing education workshop, (Topeka: Valeo Behavioral Health Care, 2015), 1.
[2] Virginia Satir, The New Peoplemaking. Mountain View, CA: Science and Behavior Books, 1988, Chapter 5.
[3] Claudia Black, Changing Course: Healing from Loss, Abandonment and Fear. (San Francisco: Mac, 1993), Chapter 1.
[4] Melody Beattie, The New Codependency: Help and Guidance for Today’s Generation. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2009), 17.
[5] Annie McKee, Richard Boyatzis and Frances Johnston, Becoming a Resonant Leader: Develop Your Emotional Intelligence, Renew Your Relationships, Sustain Your Effectiveness. (Boston: Harvard Business, 2008), 37.
[6] Melody Beattie, The New Co-Dependence, Chap. 2.
[7] Satir, The New Peoplemaking, 93–8.
[8] Otto Scharmer, Levels of Listening, Jan. 15, 2017, online: https://vimeo.com/199593914, accessed June 1, 2018.
Follow The Orange Journal so you don’t miss a post. Do you love to write about self-improvement and personal development? Learn how to be added as a writer here. 🍊
