Ellen Campbell
Professor George-Feres
SPCH110-704
9 October 2018
Resolving Conflict: The Pillow Method on Feminism
On any given day, your brain experiences thousands and thousands of conflicts and often has no strategy for how to solve them. One of the best ways to settle a conflict is by taking a step back in order to hear all sides of an argument, in other words, utilizing your cognitive complexity. In Looking in Looking out, they suggest that each argument has four sides and a middle and have named this method of cognitive complexity enhancement as “the pillow method.” In this paper, I will use the pillow method to evaluate my own stance on the topic of feminism and demonstrate how enhancing your cognitive complexity can allow you to fully understand all sides of an argument and therefore make an informed decision or opinion.
The first side of the pillow is the “I’m Right, You’re Wrong”, which is the most common stance to take when dealing with an argument (Adler and Proctor 2017.) this involves finding the flaws in the other sides argument and working under the assumption that your point of view is “correct.” I believe that the meaning term “feminism” has been greatly changed by the recent political uproars revolving around the topic. I think that many women have taken to fighting for equality between men and women where as I believe in fighting for equity. I think that women should be treated with respect and fairness, however, I also recognize men and women as genetically different species who will therefore never be the same and should not be treated as such. Looking at this from the “I’m Right You’re Wrong” standpoint. I would argue that science has not only proven that men and women are genetically different, but that their brains function completely differently. I think that this means that should not be treated the same. I think those who are fighting for equality are wrong because they are fighting for equality of two completely different species who will never be equal. Men and women have different strengths and I think that we should embrace the differences rather than criticize them.
The second standpoint is the “You’re Right I’m Wrong.” This is a much more difficult standpoint because you have to actually find the proof for the other persons argument (Adler and Proctor 2017.) For the argument of feminism, I need to defend the argument for equality. I think that fighting for equality is right because, while men and women are genetically different, it doesn’t necessarily mean that one is more qualified than the other. Just because someone is male, or female does not mean they are automatically better or worse at a specific job. Women should be given equal opportunities for jobs because they have not proven to be any less capable than men. Saying that women and men will never be equal is wrong because there are many women who do take on the roles of men and have successfully shown that equality is possible. As soon as you say equality is impossible, you limit the success of women to always being less than that of a man.
The third position is “Both Right: Both Wrong.” This stance involves finding the things each position has in common (Adler and Proctor 2017.) In this case, fighting for equality and fighting for equity are both correct because ultimately, both are fighting for women to receive what they consider to be “fair” treatment. Both positions want women to succeed and agree that they are no less capable of succeeding than men are. However, both of these positions have flaws as well. The problem with fighting for equality is that we are not all the same, so what is equal to some people may not be equal to others. The problem with fighting for equity is that it leaves a lot up to interpretation. Each situation can be presented differently and therefore have a different outcome. It is difficult to set rules for equity because every situation is not always the same.
The fourth position I find rather difficult. It suggests that the argument isn’t that important and is not worth losing friends over (Adler and Proctor 2017.) Now, while I think the concept of feminism is important, it is true that arguing over fighting equity and equality is an irrelevant argument to have because ultimately, both sides want women to succeed. Neither one of them is disagreeing with the other on the fundamental level that women deserve opportunities in the world. Both sides are in support of women succeeding, so the issue has no need for argument.
The fifth perspective is the most important in my opinion because it allows you to develop an overall perspective on the situation by looking back on all the sides and seeing the truth in each. According to a Ted talk by William Fry, “We tend to see conflict as two-sided, and we frequently fail to see there is always a third side” I think that this fifth section is the third side of looking at the argument from a neutral ground and recognizing that all stances have truth to them. In this scenario, the truth of the first side is that men and women are different beings. There is no denying this truth, but the truth of the second standpoint suggests that there is no evidence of one side being better than the other. The third standpoint recognizes that women deserve the opportunities they earn, but it is difficult to determine the boundaries when we are all so different from one another. And finally, the truth that lies in the fourth position is that ultimately both the people fighting for equality and the people fighting for equity want the same thing for women. They both want women to succeed, so if they can’t agree on the means the women utilize to succeed, it is not the biggest deal because in the end they both are fighting for women’s success.
Throughout this paper, I have discussed five sides of conflict in order to view the concept of feminism from an objective viewpoint. The most important thing that using the pillow method helped me accomplish is understanding that women who fight for equality are not all that different from women fighting for equity. The pillow method forced me to step back and look at the facts from both sides and understand where the other viewpoint was coming from. I would recommend this strategy to anyone who is struggling with comprehending someone else’s argument because it is an effective way to put yourself in the shoes of others and dramatically decrease conflict.
References
Adler, Ronald B., and Russell F. Proctor. Looking out, Looking In. Cengage Learning, 2017.
“There Are Three Sides to Every Argument.” Ideas.ted.com, Ideas.ted.com, 7 Apr. 2017, ideas.ted.com/there-are-three-sides-to-every-argument/.