Color-blind Approach

In class discussion we were asked "How do cultural and social factors affect who you form relationships with?" One of my classmates responded that they do not affect who she formed relationships with. Her response implied that individual characteristics of the person she was forming the relationship with were what determined how close she would be with that person. I liked her response. I think it is important to treat people as individuals and not act a certain way toward them because of social and cultural factors. I agreed with her color blind approach, and I decided to go back to chapter 2 in our text and see what it said about the color blind approach.

Our text says that the color-blind approach is counterproductive to the improvement of U.S. race relations--- for many reasons. The book states that no matter how hard we try, we will always notice color. Based on our text, the second reason the color-blind approach is counterproductive is because it discourages meaningful conversations about race relations. The last reason our book disagrees with the color blind approach is because it allows people to ignore, deny, disregard, and therefore continue to support the status quo--- existence of racial inequalities (Martin & Nakayama, 55).

I disagree with our text. I think that with a color blind approach, eventually there would be less racial inequality in society. I agree that we will always notice color, but with the color blind approach, a person's color will say no more than what color their skin is. A person should not be judged on the color of their skin. They should be judged as an individual. The second point our book makes is also false. A color blind world would encourage people to talk about race relations and how to make them equal and fair. Eventually race relations would be equal and fair, and there would be no more need to speak of them. I think the last point the book makes is also false. I think that living in a not color blind world, it is taboo to talk about race because of inequalities. In a color blind world everyone would be considered equal, and therefore everyone would speak freely and the "status quo of racial inequalities" would be no more. I would love to live in a world where race was nothing more than the color of your skin, and that no one would judge each other or stereotype because of race.

Intercultural and Intracultural Relationships: Interaction Styles

My fiancé and I have been together for 3 years. We have many similarities, and many differences. We both have European American backgrounds. I would consider our relationship to be intracultural. Even though we are in an intracultural relationship, we have used intercultural relationship styles of interaction at many different times throughout our relationship. The three styles are defined as submission style where one partner accepts the culture of the other partner, abandoning or denying his or her own, compromise style when each partner gives up some parts of his or her culturally bound habits and beliefs to accommodate the other, and obliteration style when both partners deal with differences by attempting to erase their individual cultures, sometimes creating a new culture (Martin & Nakayama, 257). Based on each conflict that we have dealt with in our relationship, sometimes I have submitted his style in our culture (and he has done the same for me), there have been many times that we have compromised, and sometimes we have decided to obliterate our culture and come up with a new solution. It is interesting that our text talks about these styles in regards to only intercultural marriages and relationships. I believe they are important interaction styles for all relationships.

Verbal Issues

Chapter 5 in Experiencing Intercultural Communication: An Introduction is about Verbal Issues in Intercultural Communication. It is interesting that different cultures place emphasis on either the context of the verbal communication, or the verbal message of the verbal communication. Placing emphasis on the information from the physical context or if it is internalized in the person is called high-context communication (Martin & Nakayama, 135). When communication places the majority of meaning and information in the verbal message it is called low-context communication (Martin & Nakayama, 135). Our text points out that people in long-term relationships often use the high-context communication style. I believe that my family also uses the high-context communication style. My fiancé’s family, on the other hand, uses a low-context communication style. Their message is typically clear when they are communicating verbally. For example, when my future mother-in-law is having a get together, and she needs help putting things away, she will say "Can you please put the vegetable dip in the refrigerator?" The message is clear in her verbal communication.

One Sunday, my dad and step mom had the family over for dinner. It came time for clean up, and my step mom said "Is there anything that needs to go in the refrigerator?" When what she really meant was "Someone please put the vegetable dip in the refrigerator." Well, my fiancé was not used to the high-context form of communication and when she asked the question, he responded "The vegetable dip needs to go in the refrigerator." He thought she was using low-context communication, and that what she said was what she meant. I got up off of the couch and put the vegetable dip away. On the way home from my dad's I explained that sometimes you have to read between the lines with my family. He has since gotten much better at recognizing the high-context communication style that my family uses. It is interesting how different groups of people communicate in such different ways!