2. Communication Causes

The introductory post to this series began with the definition of bullying and explained the goal of bullying relative to the four thought processes: move others from self-regulation to dysregulation.

The previous post showed the easiest way to dissolve bullying is to use the three communication guidelines:

1. Make a statement on yourself (I think, I feel, I believe, etc.)

2. Ask questions of others

3. Answer questions from others

Since every bully uses the opposite of these three communication guidelines, we also have a measure for bullying!

We also covered the definition of hypocrisy.?

Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

Notice, we can all claim to have a standard that we don’t conform to. This is being a human. The proof of hypocrisy is the response to being shown that you have a standard that you don’t conform to. If a person rationalizes or justifies the fact they hold others to a higher standard than they hold themselves, then they are a hypocrite.

This post will cover another communication metric that, when used properly, is not only able to dissolve bullying, it can facilitate connection!

I call these the “communication causes”. The “cause” is how the interaction begins, so this metric focuses on how the communication began. There are four causes of communication:

Good: Open-ended question or statement of fact

“How was your day?”

“That wall is blue.”

Not Bad: Close-ended question or statement of opinion

“Did you have a good day?” (A question that has a limited way to answer it.)

“I like the color of that wall.”

?

Bad: Projection or judgment

“You never think you have a good day.”

“You always feel like it was a bad day.”

(A projection is telling someone how they think or feel.)

“You are stupid for not liking the color of that wall.

(A judgment assigns a demeaning value to the person.)

?

Worst: Negating

“What is your favorite color?”

(You: Blue)

“No, it’s yellow.”

Notice the level of control exerted by each cause. A Good cause gives up complete control. A Not Bad cause also gives up control, however, the response options are narrowed. A Bad cause exerts some control over the other person, while a Worst cause exerts complete control.

In the previous post, we saw how a mediator (lawyer) told a mother that she was trying to control her ex–husband when she suggested he use the communication guidelines when interacting with his preteen and teenage son. Now we see that not only was she trying to help him not be controlling, we see why the mediator had this flipped: lawyers are masters of bullying! Lawyers regularly project, judge, and negate! When lawyers justify this approach, they are hypocrites.

Worse, Bad and Worst causes are not just bullying; they are abuse! That is why women tend to shut down when they are given Bad and Worst causes, while men tend to ramp up. I have stated the following to prison guards: Ask every guy how he ended up in prison and I guarantee you he responded to a Bad or Worst cause with a Bad or Worst cause. Notice, using Good and Not Bad causes creates connection!

When I coached eighth-grade football, I would ask the players, “Do you know how to speak to women?” When they immediately said they did, I would ask them, “How? Teach me!” If they tried to answer they would stutter. None of them would be able to answer.

While we were stretching, I would ask them if they wanted to know and then teach them the communication causes. Then I would ask them, “Who is the best woman for you to practice on?” Everyone would groan when they heard the answer, “Your mom!”

I would ask who is willing to give their mom two Good causes today and tell us about it tomorrow. Every year, only one player would be willing to do this. The next day, when it came time to stretch, the other players would tell everyone to be quiet so they could hear what happened…

The player asked his mom, “How was your day?” and his mom would share. Then the player asked his mom, “How did that make you feel?” and his mom would share…and then the mom asked her son what he wanted for dinner because she would make anything he wanted.

Years later, I told that story to a class of sixth-graders. The next time we met, one male wanted to share that he asked the same two questions to his mom in order to prove me wrong. What did his mom say after she finished sharing? She told him he could play an extra hour of video games that night!

This shows how males ought to speak to females! Every time I teach that females share in response to Good and Not Bad causes, while shutting down in response to Bad and Worst causes, the adult male always says, “I wish I knew this ten years ago!” It’s not the male’s fault because NO ONE teaches this to males!

Notice, this explains why a female is sometimes attracted to a specific male and sometimes not. When he speaks Good and Not Bad causes, he is attractive. When speaks Bad and Worst causes, he is unattractive, unless the female has wired her brain to be attracted to abusive males (but we will cover that in a later post).

When students are taught these communication causes, it helps them dissolve bullying! Remember, bullying occurs when the student is in regulation and hears a Bad or Worst cause putting them in dysregulation. However, if they keep the communication causes in mind, they categorize the bullying as a Bad or Worst cause and their ability to recognize this only occurs because they are in self-regulation, which means they can’t be bullied! They can’t go from self-regulation to dysregulation.

Do you REALLY want to dissolve bullying or do you want to appear like you are against bullying?

Next week, we will look at the effects of combining the communication guidelines and the communication causes!

Next Chapter: Two Powerful Applications