Couples at times argue over only apparent differences, when they, in fact, agree in their basic concerns. Imagine, if you will, a couple arguing over whether the glass is half-full or half-empty. Or recall the beer commercials involving a debate over whether the beer “tastes great” or is “less filling.” Though actually a marketing ploy, this illustrates how you can have a disagreement between two mutually compatible positions.” Edward Albee took this theme of apparent conflict to the absurd in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?. Here, the spouses George and Martha clashing in heated arguments over the son whom they never had.
Misunderstandings
What we often are dealing with in such situations is not an actual conflict, but rather a misunderstanding. This misunderstanding can arise either from a miscommunication or from a misinterpretation, or from a combination of the two. In the case of miscommunication, what one says is not what one actually means. With misinterpretation, what one hears is not what was actually said. Of course, both processes may occur together, adding to the chaos. Wiley Miller has dramatized such misunderstandings in his comic strip, Non Sequitur. In the series entitled “Why We’ll Never Understand Each Other.” Here, he illustrated misinterpretation by contrasting what one spouse heard with what the other actually said. In still other strips, he addressed miscommunication, showing the discrepancy between what one says and what one means.
Whatever the case, miscommunication or misinterpretation, the solution can be quite simply a matter of inquiry and clarification. The listener might inquire with a paraphrase, such as, “If I understand you, you saying that . . ?” In turn, the speaker might respond, “No, what I really mean to say is . . .” As simple as this solution is, it is amazing how infrequently it gets used. Instead, partners often operate on the misguided assumption that they know exactly what each other means.
Style versus Content
Frequently, the impasse is not over the content of the communication, but over its style. Often, the manner of expression leaves the other feeling disregarded, dismissed, disrespected, judged, blamed, belittled, etc. When this pattern of communication goes back and forth, it becomes a vicious cycle. as I described in Vicious Cycle Patterns in Relationships 2.0. These interactions convey a deeper erosion of the bond that holds the partners together. This is a serious concern that requires attention, even when there is no “actual” conflict over a significant issue. Such is an example of style trumping substance.
The Broader Implication
We should note that this discussion also applies to those situations when the couple has honest differences of opinions. Then, the partners may need to resolve communication styles before they are ready to address the “actual” conflict.