Applied Romance

Miscommunication is frame-control manipulation by one party assuming the right to dictate arbitrary and changing terms of communication at the expense of another party.

This can also called “he said, she said” where the “he” and “she” are absolutely independent of the actual gender of the participants.

The way miscommunication often plays out is that one party (the “obtuse” person) makes an emotionally-based assumption about the intentions of the other party (the “didactic” party), then uses this assumption to seize and maintain frame control. Efforts at clarifying communication are pointless while the obtuse party is suffering from the emotional compulsion to dominate frame.

Characteristics of the Miscommunication Game

Between two people, miscommunication takes the form of an “obtuse” party and a “didactic” party. The obtuse person attempts to control the conversation, the didactic person gets emotionally sucker-punched. Often, the didact person does not see this manipulation for what it is, and becomes ensnared.

Miscommunication is often characterized by either overly literally interpretation of all communication, or outright mis-interpretation. No subtext or subcommunication can be used on the part of the didactic party, it will be deliberately misconstrued by the obtuse party to maintain frame control and dominate the communication.

Other characteristics may include:
* The obtuse party often requires:
** Having the last word
** Being “proven” right
** Putting the game ahead of any mutual material benefit.
** Scapegoating the other person: “It’s all their fault.”

* The obtuse party may be suffering from low self-esteem or insecurity.

* May take the form of denial: “I never said that” or “What I said was X, not Y” (when they clearly said Y).

* Mis-communication is not really lying, but it is an incredibly effective form of rapport breaking activity.

* As with all other forms of emotional manipulation, once engaged in this behavior with someone, you must forever be on guard against it’s future appearance. People tend to “go with what they know” when under unusual or novel emotional stress, and this is true for both the obtuse party and the didactic party.

* Miscommunication has nothing whatsoever to do with information exchange. The insidousness results when the didactic party is honestly attempting to impart or exchange logical or factual information, which is misconstrued by the obtuse party.

Miscommunication is very often a result of the “boyfriend” (or husband) factor in a relationship. For example, I took my girlfriend on a hike that I considered relatively mild (as these things go). It could have been a disaster, and would have been years ago. She felt pressure to “perform,” to please me — which isn’t necessarily bad — pressure that would not have existed had she gone on this hike with any of her girlfriends or with her brother or another male she is not emotionally involved with. So there was some mild drama, including a small amount of miscommunication in the sense I am explaining here. No big deal. The key is that I was expecting this to happen, I was aware of the “boyfriend factor” and proactively allowed her to let her emotions to flow freely.

Defining the Conversation

In many respects, miscommunication is good business for evolution. The frame-dominant (”obtuse”) person may be able whip the other person into emotional subjugation, allowing that person to be chosen as a scapegoat and acquiring the resources. Totaliterian governments are especially good at this in the large scale, but the principle works just as well at the small scale.

Radical feminists are very good at using miscommunication to further their agenda. By assuming the right to control the all aspects of the communication, from emotional frame to content, they position themselves as invincible. Dissenting opinions are simply outside the parameters of the conversation, thus ignored or shouted down.

Breaking the Cycle

As usual with all forms of emotional manipulation, the only real behavior that can be changed is one’s own. Focus on determining the emotional trigger than results in you getting sucked into a didactic role in miscommunication exchanges. Focus on your mission, and emotionally pull back from future interactions. When you feel the trigger start to fire, use “transference” behavior to channel the emotional energy into productive work, increasing your material benefit with no regard to the other person’s opinion of you personally or the work you are accomplishing.

[sniplet PFP1]