Connecting Across Differences: Finding Common Ground with Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime

by Jane Marantz Connor, Dian Killian

Overview

In this fully revised second edition, Dr. Dian Killian and Dr. Jane Marantz Connor offer a comprehensive and accessible introductory guide to exploring the concepts, applications, and transformative power of the Nonviolent Communication process. Providing research-based insight into the psychology of communication, this reference explores the most common barriers to effective communication and provides tangible steps to address these barriers head-on. The book features an expanded selection of relevant, meaningful exercises, role-plays, and activities that give readers the chance to immediately apply the concepts to real-life experiences. With lessons including how to transform negative self-talk into self-empowerment, how to foster trust and collaboration when stakes are high, and how to defuse anger, enemy images, and other barriers to connection, Connecting Across Differences teaches effective communication skills that get to the root of conflict, pain, and violence peacefully.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9781934336120
Publisher:	Puddledancer Press
Publication date:	03/01/2012
Sold by:	Barnes & Noble
Format:	eBook
Pages:	400
File size:	3 MB

About the Author

Jane Marantz Connor, Ph.D., is a certified trainer with the international Center for Nonviolent Communication and founder of the New York Intensive Residential Training in Nonviolent Communication. She received her Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Wisconsin–Madison and is a graduate of the BayNVC North American Leadership Program. She taught psychology and human development for many years at the State University of New York at Binghamton, where she is currently associate professor emerita of human development. She taught courses in compassionate communication, multicultural psychology, and human services. The goal of her multicultural psychology course, for which Jane has had a special passion, is to help students from diverse backgrounds understand and connect with one another more effectively. Jane received the Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Teaching for teaching this course, which grew to serve more than 400 students a semester. Jane has enjoyed sharing NVC in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, South America, and Australia and now concentrates her teaching, training, and consulting in the Washington, D.C., area where she is also working as Coordinator of Restorative Practices at an inner city high school. Dian Killian, Ph.D., is a Certified Trainer with the international Center for Nonviolent Communication, founder and former director of The Center for Collaborative Communication, and a certified life coach and faculty member with the distance learning Coaching for Transformation program. She has written a book of graphic vignettes (illustrated by Mark Badger), Urban Empathy: True Life Adventures of Compassion on the Streets of New York. Through her company, WorkCollaboratively.com, she designs and leads trainings with companies and organizations in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Clients have included Merck, Inc., the UN Development Program, HCL (India), Americorp, Haver Analytics, and Instrumentation Laboratories, among others. She offers programs at Kripalu, the 92nd St Y, the NY Open Center, and the Omega Institute, and is founder and director of the annual NVC East Coast NVC Women’s Retreat. She also is a professional musician, and often integrates music in her retreats and is widely known for bringing humor, warmth, and a “down-to-earth” approach to her sharing of NVC. She can be reached at [e-mail].
 

Read an Excerpt

Connecting Across Differences

Finding Common Ground with Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime

---

By Jane Marantz Connor, Dian Killian, Sheridan McCarthy

PuddleDancer Press

Copyright © 2012 PuddleDancer Press Book
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-934336-12-0

---

CHAPTER 1

Another Way to See the World

Feeling and longing are the motive forces behind all human endeavor and human creations.

— ALBERT EINSTEIN

Sticks and stones can break my bones but names can never hurt me.

— CHILDREN'S RHYME

When people first hear the term "Nonviolent Communication," they may be surprised and confused. We are accustomed to thinking about violence as physical force, and it can be puzzling to think of communication — mere words — as aggressive. In fact, communication is usually seen as an alternative to violence. Negotiations are attempted before acts of war in order to avoid physical conflict. Police (ideally) will say, "Stop! Drop your gun!" before firing when they see an armed person committing a crime. If a parent sees her child hitting a playmate or grabbing a toy away — an act of physical force — the child might be reminded to "use your words." As the children's rhyme goes, "Sticks and stones can break my bones but names can never hurt me."

Yet we all know that words can generate much hurt and pain. While the hurt may not be physical, our thoughts and words inform the kinds of actions we take. If we have critical thoughts or images of another group or person, it becomes far more likely that physical force or a destructive act will ensue.

If you reflect on physical violence and what leads to it, you may, in each case, first blame a physical act or stimulus — "He hit me first!" or "He cut me off on the road!" But if you reflect further, you will find that before a person strikes physically, even in perceived retaliation, words or thoughts precede the act: "How dare you!" "What a jerk!" "I'll teach you a lesson." Violent actions follow from talking to ourselves in this kind of way.

Violence can be most broadly defined as a breakdown in human connection and understanding. When such fissures occur, opportunities for physical violence become more likely. In contrast, if we love and care for someone, the last thing we want is for them to suffer or experience harm. While we may not be able to love and care for everyone else with equal energy and attention, learning how to connect compassionately with others can contribute to resolving conflicts when they arise and to fostering greater understanding where connection already exists. It is this kind of "Nonviolent" or "Compassionate" Communication that we address in this book.

Beyond Boxed-Up Thinking

Communicating compassionately involves changing our thinking. It involves challenging a primary assumption that has informed our culture for thousands of years: that it is useful to classify people and things as "right" or "wrong." According to this kind of thinking, some people are good, some bad; some smart, others stupid; some caring, others insensitive. This yo-yo, right-wrong thinking can be found at every level of our society. Comic book heroes fight arch villains; in TV and films, the police are out to get "the bad guys"; President George W. Bush, when launching the Iraq war, referred repeatedly to an "axis of evil." A popular bumper sticker reads, "Mean People Suck!" This assumes that some people are mean, others are nice, and, implicitly, mean people are mean all the time. Meanness is the very definition of who they are. If this is so, why bother with them? Mean people, according to this kind of thinking, should be avoided — or even controlled or punished.

Who's right? Who's wrong? Who deserves sympathy, understanding, and support? And who should be excluded, judged, punished, fired, executed, or (in the case of countries) attacked? When I was in college, I spent hours discussing questions like this with my peers. We talked about relationships, family, and politics. We wanted to understand the world and the choices people were making. Even today, I can find such questions compelling. I want to understand the cause of a given situation and know who is responsible. I want to be informed and aware, have a sense of safety and security in the world, and be confident about there being accountability, restoration, hope, and change. I know I'm not alone in this. The popularity of "confessional" talk shows and courtroom programs such as Judge Judy attests to a continuing interest in right-wrong thinking as a means of solving problems and understanding the world, ourselves, and those around us.

This kind of thinking has a long tradition (at least in the West) and lies at the core of our dominant cultural norms and beliefs. According to the Old Testament, it accounts for the very start of human history: Adam and Eve were cast out of paradise (punished) for their wrongdoing. According to Walter Wink, this Myth of Redemptive Violence, as he calls it, dates back even earlier to a Babylonian creation story from around 1250 BCE, upon which all later myths involving punitive violence are based. This myth still informs much of our culture today, impacting almost every institution, belief, and practice in our society; it is seen as natural, obvious, and the "truth." As Wink points out, "... [A] story told often enough, and confirmed often enough in daily life, ceases to be a tale and is accepted as reality itself."

So if right-wrong thinking is so popular and prevalent and has been around for thousands of years, why change it? Clearly, it meets some needs. It can offer us a sense of safety, meaning, fairness, and order. It can seem effective in making choices and distinguishing values. And it's familiar, so it can feel comfortable and easy — even intrinsic to human nature.

Yet right-wrong thinking diminishes human connection. It separates us from one another and ourselves. It draws a line in the sand: You are either with us, or against us. Innocent or guilty. Deserving of reward or punishment. Saved or damned. It negates the complexity of life and full human experience. It implies a static view of human beings and their behavior. According to such thinking, "bad" people will always do "bad" things and "good" or "just" people must stop or control them. This view confuses a person's behavior — the particular acts a person chooses to take — with who the person is. And if someone is intrinsically evil, what hope is there for learning, connection, compassion, or change? It is this kind of thinking that leads to conflict and violence, in all its forms.

Empirical research paints a very different picture, showing that human behavior is fluid and primarily determined by what we think about the situation we find ourselves in. Given our circumstances and our cultural conditioning, we are all capable of doing "bad" things. The proportion of college students, for example, who admit to behavior that could be classified as a felony is consistently more than 90 percent (for example, damaging other's property, giving illegal substances to those under the age of eighteen, or entering a premises and taking an item that belongs to another). When asked if they would commit various illegal acts if they were 100 percent guaranteed that they wouldn't get caught, the proportion of students who said they would steal, cheat, or physically hurt someone who has hurt them in some way is very high. In effect, if you want to get someone to cheat, make the stakes high enough and the chances of getting caught low enough.

As the writer Jorge Luis Borges has observed, we human beings live by justification alone — even if only to bring a glass of water to our lips. What Borges means is that we all have reasons for doing what we do. Our given circumstances and our needs — not who we intrinsically are — determine the course of action we take. It's safe to say, for example, that most human beings would abhor eating human flesh. Yet when stranded by an accident and given the choice of starving or eating the bodies of dead companions, you might choose to eat. There are well-documented cases, involving climbing and airplane accidents, of people making this choice. If you reflect on an action you took that you now regret, you can probably find some need or important value that motivated that action — even if you're not fully happy with the choice or its impact.

Research also documents that while right-wrong thinking is the norm in our society today, early humans lived very differently, based on compassion and connection. Riane Eisler, in The Chalice and the Blade: Our History and Our Future, explores recent evidence that paints a very different picture of pre-human history from the popular cliché of a caveman with a wooden club. Historical, anthropological, and archaeological data suggest that "just as some of the most primitive existing societies, like those of the BaMbuti and !Kung, are not characterized by warlike caveman dragging women around by the hair, it now appears that the Paleolithic was a remarkably peaceful time." Indeed, popular notions of early human society as aggressive and violent can be seen more as an extension of our current way of viewing the world than an accurate representation of how early humans actually lived:

The old view was that the earliest human kinship (and later economic) relations developed from men hunting and killing. The new view is that the foundations for social organization came from mothers and children sharing. The old view was of prehistory as the story of "man the hunter-warrior." The new view is of both women and men using our unique human faculties to support and enhance life.

Biological and cognitive research confirms this view: all mammals, and especially humans (with our more developed neocortex), are "particularly hard-wired for empathy ... the empathic predisposition is embedded in our biology." Newborn infants, for example, are "able to identify the cries of other newborns and will cry in return" and toddlers "will often wince in discomfort at the sight of another child's suffering and come over to him to share a toy, or cuddle, or bring them over to their own mother for assistance."

The limitation of right-wrong thinking is that it diminishes our natural capacity for empathy and compassion for ourselves and others. It takes us out of the moment, distracting us from specific needs and circumstances and obscuring the choices we can make that are fully aligned with our values. It also curtails the possibilities for the kind of world we can collectively envision and create. In this book, we explore how a different kind of analysis, focused on feelings and needs, can enrich our understanding of human behavior and foster greater compassion and connection — for human beings and all life on the planet. It is this kind of orientation, based on empathy and compassion, that can transform how we relate to others and ourselves and bring us closer to recreating what Eisler calls a "partnership-based" culture, transforming "our world from strife to peaceful co-existence ... [with] conflict productive rather than destructive."

EXERCISE 1: Force and Feeling

A. Take a moment to reflect on an act of physical force or violence that you have considered, fantasized about, or acted upon. This could involve simply slamming your books on a table, breaking an object, or physically hurting someone. What was the stimulus for the action you took or wanted to take? What were you feeling and thinking at the time? What is the link between your thoughts and the action, real or imagined?

B. Make a list of social institutions' beliefs and practices, including, for example, how schools and learning are structured, the criminal justice system, policing, religious beliefs, health care, etc. How does right-wrong thinking inform their beliefs and practices? For example, in schools, it is common practice to give grades, which can be seen as a form of reward.

C. Consider recent and historical events, such as wars or highly publicized court cases. How do you see right-wrong thinking in the language (justification) and actions that took place? How was one side presented as the "enemy," or morally wrong, or less than the other?

The "F" Word: At the Heart of Empathy

How do we find a way to communicate that is free of judgment and blame while expressing and sharing with others our experience of their words and actions and what we see in the world? A core element in empathic connection is the awareness of our own and others' feelings. The very definition of empathy is the capacity to "understand and enter into another's feelings," with the root of the word, pathos, coming from the Greek word for "feeling." Empathic connection means to "feel with someone," extending ourselves toward understanding another's view and walking — even if only for a moment — in their shoes.

While our ability to experience feelings gives us crucial social skills, unless we've done some form of training in this area (such as Emotional Intelligence), most of us are unaccustomed to paying attention to our feelings. We're out of practice. How many times a day, for example, does someone ask you, "How are you?" When you see a neighbor, co-worker, or friend, this question most likely comes up. If you're like most people, you probably answer in passing: "Fine," "OK," "Great," "Not bad." Yet like Morse code or shorthand for what we are actually experiencing, none of these responses are feelings, and none of them gives us much information. Perhaps the only time we answer this question fully and accurately is when asked by a doctor, counselor, or loved one. Even when talking to those we are most intimate with, we may also avoid expressing what we're fully experiencing and feeling. In our culture, we're not accustomed to talking about our emotions. We're taught to be "polite": to not say "too much" or assume others are interested in us or our concerns. We learn to be guarded and unrevealing. We associate feelings with weakness and vulnerability rather than strength, inner grounding, awareness, and resourcefulness.

In part, this is because in the West, since at least the Age of Reason and the development of empirical science, feelings have been cast as subjective and untrustworthy. We are told instead to "use our heads" and not get emotional. The philosopher René Descartes summed up our very existence in our ability to think: "I think, therefore I am." And we're told that if we believe something, especially if it is subjective like an opinion or a feeling, we need to "prove it." Logical thought, like a mathematics equation, can indeed be written out and tested step by step. Yet how do we "test" human emotion and feeling? From the scientific point of view and our rational way of looking at the world, feelings have little value.

For many men especially, feelings are a largely unknown and dangerous territory. Growing up, boys are told to "Take it like a man" and that "Only sissies cry." Men are not supposed to have feelings, especially sadness, fear, or vulnerability. Perhaps the only feeling men are allowed or even expected to express is anger. One NVC trainer from Texas, Ike Lasater, says that for years the only feelings he was ever aware of experiencing were good, bad, and angry. Whenever someone asked him how he was feeling about something, his response was either "good" or "bad." "Good" and "bad" could refer to many different experiences; in fact, they are not feelings at all — they're adjectives marking approval or disapproval.

While it is more socially acceptable for women to show their feelings, their expression still is not valued. Historically, women have been discriminated against for the very qualities they are expected to exhibit. "Hysteria," "wild, uncontrolled excitement or feeling," comes from the Greek for uterus, hystera, expressing the notion that women are prone to becoming hysterical. Cast as overly emotional, irrational, and unstable — "the weaker sex" — women were told for centuries that they were unfit for many occupations, including driving, voting, and working as doctors, soldiers, or scientists. Women, of course, have now proven themselves in all these areas. Statistically, for example, women drivers have lower accident rates than men. Yet as epitomized by the "Iron Lady," the first female prime minister of Great Britain, Margaret Thatcher, women who want to be successful are still often expected to exhibit toughness, "clearheadedness," and indifference.

This way of thinking about feelings is especially true in Anglo American culture. In French, the word for feeling, "sentiment," is not pejorative. Expressing feeling is socially acceptable and even desired. In English, the same root of "sentiment" turns up in "sentimental": fake, overwrought, superficial, and cliché. We hear "Don't be too sensitive" and are told to not "overreact." Rather than being "sensitive" (aware of our feelings — and what we are experiencing), we're supposed to be thick-skinned, with a stiff upper lip. The historical heroes we emulate are pilgrims, pioneers, and cowboys — all "strong, silent" types who were resilient and tough. Our modern pop heroes are equally strong and unfeeling. Athletic stars and those on "survivor" programs are admired for their endurance and putting "mind over matter." Urban "gangsta" culture is about "coolness" and disaffection.

(Continues...)

---

Excerpted from Connecting Across Differences by Jane Marantz Connor, Dian Killian, Sheridan McCarthy. Copyright © 2012 PuddleDancer Press Book. Excerpted by permission of PuddleDancer Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---

Table of Contents

Contents

List of Illustrations and Tables,
Introduction: Living With Awareness and Choice,
1 Another Way to See the World,
2 Getting to the Root of Life,
3 Really Listening,
4 Creating Shared Reality via Observations,
5 Fostering Trust and Collaboration: The Power of Requests,
6 Empathy in the Fast Lane: Self-Empathy and Choice,
7 Stepping Into the Fire: Enjoying and Responding to Anger,
8 When Communication Isn't Possible: The Protective Use of Force,
9 Thanks, But No Thanks,
10 Integrating NVC in Your Life — and on the Streets,
Afterword: Creating a Nonviolent World,
Gratitude,
Appendix 1: Beyond Good and Evil: Creating a Nonviolent World — An Interview With Marshall Rosenberg,
Appendix 2: List of Feelings and Needs,
Notes,
Bibliography,
Resources for Learning Nonviolent Communication,
Index,
The Four-Part Nonviolent Communication Process,
About Nonviolent Communication,
About PuddleDancer Press,
About the Center for Nonviolent Communication,
Trade Books From PuddleDancer Press,
Trade Booklets From PuddleDancer Press,
About the Authors,

Editorial Reviews

“Addresses real-life concerns with candor, clarity, and compassion. The authors use a variety of engaging dialogues, exercises, and examples to show how the powerful process of nonviolent communication can enrich personal relationships. It is engaging reading for people of all ages who long for more connection and understanding in the world.”  —Sura Hart, CNVC certified trainer and coauthor, The No-Fault Classroom

From the Publisher