#interpersonal communication

[waspsinyouryard]

The tragic reality of Tumblr is that I am presumably supposed to actually interact with other users but I just don't feel like it ever

[glimmering-hope]

I'd like to share an assertive communication technique called DESC. here's how it goes:

D - Describe: What are the objective facts of the situation?

E - Explain: How does it make you feel, or why does it matter?

S - Specify: What changes are needed?

C - Consequences: What will be the outcome of said changes?

here's an example situation: Jelani is upset because Marleen keeps forgetting to do the laundry. The two have agreed that Marleen is responsible for getting it done while Jelani takes care of other chores.

D - Describe: "You have not been keeping up with the laundry lately."

E - Explain: "It makes me feel stressed and annoyed."

S - Specify: "I need you to make a reminder on your phone so that you remember to do the laundry."

C - Consequences: "This way, our clothes will be washed regularly and we won't have to put huge loads into the washer when the basket gets full."

[macsarcule1]

If there were suddenly no search engines, Reddit-like sources, or AI…

A. I’d be screwed

B. I know plenty of stuff and how to do plenty of stuff, I’ll be fine

C. Libraries exist, and I’m comfy asking other humans for the info they know

D. Wikipedia has lots of info and it’s well-monitored by subject-matter experts

E. Some combo of B, C, and D

F. Other (note in the tags)

Voting ended onJul 22

[darkprince-eugene]

I just wrote a paper about the TTS/RTA episode "Return of the King" for a college assignment!

In my Interpersonal Communications class, we had to do a media analysis and tie it into theories and concepts we covered in our textbook. If you have any interest in reading it, I have shared it below. It's maybe a little half-assed (I'm so done with this class y'all 😅), but if you read it, I hope you enjoy it!

For this assignment, I chose to watch an episode of Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure, a sequel series to the 2010 Disney film Tangled. The specific episode I am watching is from season three of the series, and is titled “Return of the King.” I chose this episode because it is my favorite of the entire show, and I feel that it covers some interesting themes in relation to interpersonal communication and relationships as a whole. This series is set after the events of the film Tangled, and follows Princess Rapunzel on many adventures as she learns how to be a royal, while also uncovering mysteries that threaten both her, her friends, and her kingdom. She is joined by her chameleon Pascal, a horse named Maximus, her new friend Cassandra, and her boyfriend Eugene, who was formerly a thief going by the name Flynn Rider. At the end of season two, it is revealed that Eugene is not in fact an orphan, but that his father still lives, and is the king of the Dark Kingdom, which the group have been trying to reach for the entirety of the second season. In this second episode of season three, King Edmund -- Eugene’s father -- has come to Rapunzel’s kingdom to reconnect with his long-lost son. But unfortunately, Eugene’s former partners-in-crime, the Stabbington Brothers, have returned and are out for revenge.

Anger - A big emotional theme in this episode is anger, as it is exhibited by both Eugene and the Stabbington Brothers. Anger is described as “a feeling of extreme displeasure, usually brought about by interference with our needs or desires,” (Barwick-Snell, 2024, p. 234). For Eugene, the anger he displays towards his father, Edmund, multiple times throughout the episode is heavily entwined with the hurt Eugene feels for being abandoned as a baby, leading to resentment, which is “a combination of the emotions and actions and thought patterns resulting from our unresolved anger at an injustice,” (Barwick-Snell, 2024, p. 234). The line that best represents this feeling of resentment comes early in the episode, after Edmund reappears and bestows a family heirloom on Eugene. While he contemplates this gift, Rapunzel checks in on him, and he states that “he abandoned me as a child, and he didn’t even try to stay in touch with me,” (Shipp & Pignotti, 2019, 04:41). Clearly, the resentment towards his father is evident in his words and tone, and this feeling continues throughout the episode. The Stabbington Brothers also show both anger and resentment in the episode, directed towards Eugene, for his past actions against them which are shown in the movie and earlier episodes of the series.

Loneliness - Another emotional theme that is explored in this episode is loneliness, and what a sense of extreme loneliness can lead us to do. Over the past 24 years, King Edmund has been isolated from all other people while he was protecting the Moonstone -- a powerful crystal that has now been stolen -- and as such, his social skills have degraded overall, and he feels incredibly lonely. Barwick-Snell (2024) states that the feeling of loneliness often “occurs when a person has fewer interpersonal relationships than desired,” (p. 20), and while Edmund does have a crow companion named Hamuel, he is missing that human connection. His sense of loneliness is stated outright by Rapunzel -- “He’s lonely,” (Shipp & Pignotti, 2019, 04:52), and we can see further indicators of it throughout the episode, as he tries to connect with Eugene, who is largely unreceptive to his attempts at building a relationship. He also weaponizes his loneliness often, by lying and making up a fake crime to get Eugene to spend time with him.

Erikson’s seventh stage: Generativity versus Self-Absorption - One thing that quickly stood out to me about Edmund’s actions throughout the episode, is that he is clearly in the seventh of Erik Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development. This stage is usually seen in those ages forty to sixty-five, which Edmund falls under, and has the individual either “concerned about the development and welfare of others,” or their “life loses its meaning and [they] feel bitter, dreary, unfulfilled, and stagnant… preoccupied with the self, personal needs, and interests,” (Barwick-Snell, 2024, p. 97). As I would say that Edmund fully exited the sixth stage with isolation as his main trait, he is approaching the seventh stage in a more extreme way. He tries to connect with his son Eugene by giving him a family heirloom, and by going on this adventure together to retrieve said heirloom after it is stolen, which reads to me as generativity. On the other hand, his focus on only his own needs and trying to achieve a sense of fulfillment makes his efforts to try and build a connection with Eugene feel hollow, and Eugene is uninterested in a relationship. When it is revealed that Edmund himself “stole” the heirloom, we see him try to explain his reasoning in a very self-absorbed way -- “I wanted to be part of your life, [Eugene]. And I thought a father and son trip might-” (Shipp & Pignotti, 2019, 15:24). And while it is coming from a place of wanting to build a relationship, Edmund is only thinking about how it will benefit him, without regard for Eugene’s feelings. In the end, the heirloom gets destroyed, but Edmund makes a new one with Eugene’s tastes in mind, showing a lean back towards generativity.

Selective listening - Working in tandem with Erikson’s seventh stage, we see Edmund practice a lot of selective listening, which Barwick-Snell (2024) describes as “hearing only certain parts of the conversation,” (p. 338). While going on this adventure together, Edmund will often make random comments about what they are doing or how he is feeling -- his previous isolation means he doesn’t really keep his internal thoughts to himself -- and when Eugene responds, Edmund often only keys in on one of the things Eugene has said, or responds in a way that is in opposition to what was said. One of the biggest examples of this is what is supposed to be a running joke throughout the episode; early on, it is revealed that Eugene’s birth name was actually Horace, and this is the name that Edmund consistently uses during their adventure, even when Eugene corrects him each time. Near the end of the episode, when they are in mortal danger, Edmund finally refers to him as “Eugene,” (Shipp & Pignotti, 2019, 20:08), and as the episode ends, Edmund seems to have begun the work of becoming less of a selective listener, which is further displayed in later episodes.

Personal self-image - While it is only briefly touched upon in this episode, the character of Eugene is a great example of how one can change their personal self-image, or “the part of the self that includes physical, behavioral, and psychological characteristics that establish uniqueness… [and it] includes past teachings about yourself,” (Barwick-Snell, 2019, p. 123). When we first meet Eugene in the film Tangled, he is a thief going by the name Flynn Rider who only cares about himself; then, throughout the film, we see him begin to accept what he sees as his real self, an orphan named Eugene Fitzherbert. The changes to his personal self-image continue onward in the series, and he seems to feel secure with himself when they reach the Dark Kingdom. But then he meets Edmund, his father and a king, and now everything he thought he knew about himself has changed. In this episode, we can see him trying to hold on to the previous version of his personal self-image that he had established and felt comfortable in, especially in his disinterest to build any sort of relationship with his newly-discovered father. At the end of the episode, he is able to begin building a relationship with his father while still being true to himself, and not letting the title of ‘Prince of the Dark Kingdom’ change who he is; even Edmund can see this, as he says “I guess my son believes in second chances,” (Shipp & Pignotti, 2019, 20:46).

When deciding what to watch for this assignment, this specific episode was one of the first to come to mind, as it covers communication and relationships in a really interesting way, since the dynamic between Eugene and Edmund is so new, even though they are blood-related. There were many more theories and concepts I noted as being displayed in the episode, but I believe the five I picked are the most important and well-shown in the episode, especially without all the additional context of having watched the whole series and the movie prior. I think this show did a really great job of showing all kinds of different relationships and ways of communicating throughout its sixty episode run, especially because so many of the characters come from different life circumstances, and many of them have experienced various forms of trauma, which is explored as well. It doesn’t always hit the mark in terms of messaging, but when your episodes are only twenty-two minutes long and more geared towards children, that can often happen. Regardless, I’ll always have a special place in my heart for this show, and how both it and the franchise of Tangled as a whole benefitted my own interpersonal relationships, and made me who I am today.

References

Barwick-Snell, K. (2024). Becoming aware. Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.

Shipp, J. (Writer), & Pignotti, P. (Director). (2019, October 8). Return of the king (Season 3, Episode 2) [TV series episode]. In C. Sonnenburg, & B. Balistreri (Executive Producers), Rapunzel’s tangled adventure. Disney Television Animation.

[tiny-imaginaries]

I'm reading non fiction "everybody fights" by kim and penn holderness. The excerpt below makes me think they know something.

The five circles of listening hell (I didn't like their use of pronoun, so I dotted them out for you to decide)

[traveleorzea]

Is there someone in your life who:

You've allowed to see the person behind the one you tell others you are - the person beneath the context-specific persona(s) you adopt for the sake of acceptance in certain circles, to maintain friction-free interactions within a particular social setting?

Is close enough to you to see the person you are when you don't think anyone else notices?

Knows your default settings, good and bad, and lives with them every day?

Has seen what you're like when things don't go your way?

Cares enough to voice disagreement with you if they think you're believing or doing something that isn't actually good or healthy for you?

You know truly loves you anyway - who desires the very best for you, no matter the cost - even if saying what they believe you need to hear is risky enough that it might cost them their relationship with you?

And is it someone who you love and respect enough in return, that - unlike the opinions of those who don't really know you - you'll actually listen to them, take what they say seriously and want to understand where they're coming from, because you know they genuinely love and mean well by you?

What do you think?

Yes - I have at least one person in my life like that

No - I don't have anyone in my life like that

Other - I don't want someone in my life like that

I just want to see the results

Voting ended onMar 29, 2025

Feel free to comment in the tags on: why (if you chose Other); the relationship type (spouse/partner, friend, sibling, parent, etc.), how old you are, and/or if you are this person for someone else. tysvm!

[m0ement0]

Natural Pair. August 2024

[philanthropic-insouciance]

did anyone else learn most/at least alot of their early societal rules and interactions from books? I'm not sure if this was an common experience, but I found human connection and interaction very difficult to understand and predict when I was a child. I was naturally very communal, and I instinctively reached out to form bonds with other children and adults. But I was wildly inconsistent with my ability to predict how my outreach was received or interpreted.

I think I turned to books probably as a natural desire to avoid pain, but within them I found myself learning perspective and tropes that I later employed as a predictive model for how other people were thinking/feeling. It wasn't perfect of course, but I think I still instinctively turn to media (stories) as a way to evaluate a situation. How is X like Y; how is it different; what motivations have I seen before from people based on these facts; if A is true, would that make B more or less likely? There's alike a weird Bayesian calculus always running in my mind about human interaction, but the values are all from stories I've seen before.

Maybe it's part of why surprises feel so destabilizing to me. Maybe it's why I try to read from every culture and perspective I can find; maybe I'm just perpetually building a dataset. and maybe I'm just manually doing a subconscious process instead of automatically like everyone else.