Relationship Dialetics Free Essay Example

Love is not always about you feelings. Sometimes real love is about what you do no matter how you feel. Webster defines a relationship as, “an emotional or other connection between people. ” My definition of a relationship is an agreement of sacrifice, trust, and friendship between two people. Relational Dialectics Theory explains the tensions in the personal relationship I have with my boyfriend, Claude Jackson. In this paper I will discuss the theory of Relational Dialectics, Case Analysis, Recommendations, and Reflection.

Theory Relational dialectics is the competing psychological tensions in a relationship,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2010, p. 86). The theory of relational dialectics explains how different aspects of a relationship to attract opposites to complement one another. According to the theory, people involved in relationships experience internal, conflicting attractions causing relationships to be in a constant state of instability, known as dialectical tension. The pressures of these tensions occur in a wavelike fashion over time.

Relational Dialectics introduces the concept that the closer individuals become to one another, the more conflict will arise to pull them apart.

Relational dialectics theory includes four aspects of relationships which are: novelty vs. predictability, openness vs. closedness, autonomy vs. connection, and management techniques. “Novelty is defined as the originality, freshness, and uniqueness in your own or partner’s behavior or in the relationship,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2010, p. 87). “Predictability is the consistency, reliability, and dependability,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2010, p. 7). In my relationship with Claude, we both display these aspects- predictability more than novelty. Most of the time I get angered because he is so set in his ways which is routine living where I am more into new and different things.

Sometimes I feel bored with our relationship because he is so predictable, besides holidays, at times I feel the want to be surprised with flowers or maybe a visit. I believe this is what balances us much like an equilibrium so that we will not drive one another away. The second aspect of this theory is openness vs. losedness, known to me as the tug-a-war game. “Openness is defined as the desire to share intimate ideas and feelings with your partner,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2010, p. 87). “Closedness is the desire to maintain privacy,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2010, p. 87). Openness is a huge conflict within our relationship because he is a person that often holds everything in and believes every aspect of a relationship should be private. We both display disclosure but he only displays disclosure when he is in an explosive state.

He often displays closedness as a way of coping with different problems we may be having in our relationship. I display closedness mainly to get his attention, and it often happens when I am extremely angry about a situation. The third aspect is known as autonomy vs. connection. “Autonomy is defined as the desire to do things independent of your partner,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2010, p. 86). “Connection is the desire to link your actions and decisions with your partners,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2010, p. 86).

Claude displays autonomy in most cases especially since he has been in college. He never calls and clears any activities with me now he just goes to the party and has more female friends and that discomforts me. I feel that he should clear things with me at times for satisfaction, as well as trust and assurance. I feel a need to connect mostly because it builds a stronger bridge of communication and a clear understanding of what I expect within our relationship. The satisfaction of connection eliminates underlined problems that we have in our relationship.

The fourth aspect is management techniques also known as the problem solving. “Neutralization is the strategy of compromising between the desires of one person and the desires of the other,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2010, p. 88). Neutralization comes with maturity because sometimes people can be so stubborn that they are not able to step back and look at the situation as a whole to see how they can agree to disagree or even hold back their pride to please the other. Neutralization is like a border; it is a meeting line to please one another. Reframing is the most difficult and sophisticated response to dialectics, it is a perceptual transformation… such that the two contrasts are no longer regarded as opposites,” (Wood, 2004, p. 179). Reframing is opening up and confronting your partner with the tensions you may have in your relationship.

It is known as the hardest part because you have to build up enough confidence in order to tell a person how you honestly feel. What good does it do to spare feelings when that person will never know unless you tell them, and be able to accept constructive criticism as well. Selection is the satisfying one need and ignoring or denying the contradictory one,” (Wood, 2004, p. 178). Selection is the act of connecting after a long period of separation. It is often good to give one another time to miss the other when in a relationship because then they think about you the most and realize the change you make in their life. “Segmentation is the act of satisfying each need in separate situations or spheres of relational life,” (Wood, 2004, p. 178). It is exercising openness and closedness at the same time so that you may satisfy your privacy and your need to vent.

Background Claude and I met in the ninth grade and talked briefly before moving on to a relationship. We have now been in a relationship for four years and four months on and off. I have honestly enjoyed every moment of our relationship, good as well as bad. I know now what it means to love whole heartedly. I never thought I would know what it felt like to miss a person so much or even to care about a person as much as I have grown to care for him. Claude is like my best friend that I can trust when I trust no one else.

He is the guy that tells me the truth whether I want to hear it or not. Claude is the guy that accepts me for the person I am. He cherishes me when I do not feel he does, but shows it in the most mysterious but loving ways. Claude and I share many memories and have many things in common. We both share the same spiritual views and through him my walk has become stronger with Christ. In many ways we are compatible but we are also very different. With him I feel like I have met my match because he never backs down from an argument or from explaining his point of view.

Claude and I have had our many shares of ups and downs especially with the separation for college. We are currently working through our differences and with our time conflicting schedule we are trying to figure out how to balance and maintain a healthy lasting relationship. This relationship is important to me because I have found a guy that would go to the end of the world for me and that cares enough to uplift me as well as better himself in order to remain compatible. This relationship is also important because we share a sacred bond and friendship.

Our relationship is classified as personal because it is monogamous and intimate. Analysis Openness vs. closedness is the hardest part of my relationship with my boyfriend. Most of the time, this is displayed in my relationship on the daily basis. This has gotten progressively worst over the last few months and it has done nothing but stress me. At times I get really emotional and express to him that I no longer feel we know how to communicate effectively. This is because he does not express himself as much as he should so that I may know what is going on.

I often miss his company and having him here to relieve my stress or to feel that source of protection. This semester has been hard because he has not been around as much which has made things worst. At times I feel he has used his new female friends and teammates as a replacement of my company. This hurts because I see him target his energy elsewhere. I want that energy but I will not give up. This issue exemplifies tension because it causes unnecessary conflict that can be avoided and leads to insecurities in our relationship. Trustworthy and honesty is defined as refraining from lying, cheating, stealing or deception,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2008- 2009, p. 11). I believe trustworthiness and honesty play a great role in a relationship because it is hard to separate from a person when they have failed to show themselves trustworthy because you always think “what if” and continuously feel insecure.

“Fairness is defined as achieving the right balance of interests without regard to one’s own feelings and without showing favor in one side of a conflict,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2008- 2009, p. 2). Fairness should be a leading factor in a relationship because no one person should be so selfish that they are not able to balance the wants and needs of their partner in order to satisfy themselves because that is selfish and inconsiderate. The lack of fairness is the lack of being open- minded, honest and passionate about the one you love. Recommendations The first strategy is reframing. Reframing is the stage on confronting your partner with concerns that you may have about the relationship and doing it with all honesty.

Reframing could better my relationship if I would quit sparing feelings and express to my partner how he should live up to my standards. I should not have to compromise with him about common courtesy issues. Reframing could improve or ruin a relationship because the whole purpose is to get my partner to view a situation from my point of view. The second strategy is segmentation. Segmentation is the satisfaction of both closedness and openness without them conflicting. This helps maintain balance in our relationship by not disclosing some issues to maintain privacy as well as reduce conflict.

It is not always good for me to tell Claude everything. For example, I do not tell Claude about my personal issues with myself but speaking to him about my day is fine. The strategy is respect which is defined as, “showing regard or consideration for others and their ideas, even if we don’t agree with them,” (Verderber, Verderber, and Sellnow 2008- 2009, p. 12). Respect falls back on me because in order to receive respect I have to distribute it as well. That has not always been the case, which was not fair; I am at fault as well. Respect is the honor gained from actions.

Completing this project has given me a different outlook on my relationship and how I feel about him. It has pointed out my faults and given me a perspective from my partner’s point of view. I know now that there are many aspects that I need to improve rather than always judging him on his downfalls. Relational dialectics theory has explained the tensions in the personal relationship I have with my boyfriend, Claude Johnson. In this paper I have discussed the theory of Relational Dialectics, Case Analysis, Recommendations, and Reflection. “ There is only one happiness in life, to love and be loved. ”