The Reflection on Matrimony

Weddings are such a delight to see. Just seeing a couple who are madly and deeply in love with each other and the commitment they are willing to give to spend the rest of their lives forever is magical. I find it glorious and simply wonderful. When I get married, I don’t want the ceremony to be simple and plain. A wedding happens only once in a lifetime. I want it to be grand, extravagant, and elegant (G.E.E.). I want it either in a garden or a 5-star hotel reception room. Since I am a perfectionist, I want everything to be absolutely perfect. This includes the man I will bring to the altar of God. I wouldn’t settle for just anyone. At my age (17), I already have in mind what kind of a man I want to have for life. I want him to be God-earing and to have faith STRONGER than mine. I want him to be respectful of me and to correct me when I’m wrong, someone who would be there for me when nobody else is, a family man, someone who lowers his pride for me and who loves me for me and not lust for me. He should be that someone who is content with me and won’t look for anyone else. Above all, he should love God more than he loves me.

My parents got married at a church on December 30, 1993. According to them, it was the happiest day of their lives next to me and my brother being conceived. Until now they are still together -- soon to be 18 years in marriage and still strong. I am proud of my parents. Basically, it’s from their marriage I get the ideal one I want. If there’s one type of marriage I admire most, I would have to say it is the marriage that lasts a lifetime. There are marriages that only last for a year or so but the sweetest type is the one where the couple remains a couple deeply inlove through the years as but act as if they dated for the very first time. I can say I’m ready for the REAL commitment when I am financially stable. The commitments teenagers as I experience are what I call the fake commitments. Basically, the money we get to go on dates, to buy presents for the one we admire are from our parents. Commitment doesn’t only take guts but also costs you. When it comes to courting, it really depends. I believe God would just tell me when the right time would be to say “yes” to that guy.

Currently, I do have that one person I consider special and very dear to my heart. He is what fits the “job description” for the man I want to bring to the altar of God. Before him, I have experienced having a boyfriend which is my ex now. I’ve learned life-long lessons through the mistakes I’ve encountered in my previous relationship. These mistakes I make sure not to do with the guy I have right now. I show I love him through understanding him and praying for him. I also consistently hug him and kiss him. I put in my little nuggets of thought every day by saying “I love you” just to make him feel I do love him. We go out on dates and honestly, I can feel that he loves me more than I love him which is something I want to balance out. But God knows I do love him and he is someone I want to spend the rest of my life with. 

Coordinated Management of Meaning

The Conflict:

I'd give the example of me and my close friend, (anonymous). In the first days of the school year, we didn't know each other. We came from different schools. I'd use the concept of Mystery. According to colorado.edu, This concept describes anything in a communication interaction that is altogether unexplainable. We "clicked" in the first few days of school. We became the best of friends. But we, too had conflicts. We kept butting into each other's relationship and we gave what seemed rude but real "true that" advice. It came to the point of her spilling secrets to her man which I did not like. We had grudges against each other and it lead to temporary departing. I got really offended, plus other people got involved as well.

The Resolution:

We solved the conflict just by talking. I demanded for explanations, she did the same. After venting out what needed to be, we reconciled and acted like nothing had ever happened. BUT , unlike before, I now double think when telling her my secrets because she has the tendency to spill everything to her man. I could say my trust level with her has decreased and she would have to earn my trust to gain what ouyr relationship once was.

Cultivation Theory

For this assignment, we were asked to reflect on our current dispositions, beliefs, behavior, attitudes, and values and how any of these naturalized us.

Okay, so when I was a kid I watched "Mean Girls"

The movie shows how these girls 

maintain a social standing by being "bitchy" and mean all the time. They have a burn book to prove it. 

As I watched the movie, I remember realizing that I have to be mean, maarte and purposely pissing someone off to gain respect, friends, and to have a high social position -- so I did. I started saying "ewwww" in the smallest of details (even if there was nothing to be disgusted about), instead of gaining friends, I pushed them away. I had to act like this even if I wasn't. Eventually, the attitude became natural to me. I tend to be like a mean girl at times. Especially when I am not in the mood. I'll be frank and overly offensive but compared to when I was younger, I could control myself much more than before. :) *yeah \m/*

Face Negotiation Theory

The face negotiation theory is a very complex yet understandable theory. I find the theory interesting and fascinating. Let’s define the concepts of terms, shall we?

1. Face – The self-image others see in you. It is your dignity, status in life, and the like values.
2. Face Negotiation – How people would adjust to the “faces” of different cultures.

Question: Do you agree or disagree with the theory's proposition that different cultures, because of the differences in perception and attitudes toward "face", use varying strategies for conflict management. Why or why not?

• Yes, I do agree. Because there are different cultures in different nations. As what the group had shown us, there are different greetings in different countries. The culture is a factor in the resolution in conflict. Obviously.

Question: Based on experience, what do you think is your conflict-management style? (Refer to the group's report). Tell us of an instance that proves this.

• Based on my own experience, I would have to say I’m the “Dominating” kind of person. I stand on the ideas I conclude but then I listen to others’ points as well. I’m open to resolve the problem unlike the “Avoiding” people. An experience I had was when Regie Hizon, Andre Puruggann, and I were fighting over certain biblical beliefs (yes, I know. It’s too religious). Background! Regie, Andre, and I are Christians so when we don’t coincide in beliefs, we argue and go on about it because it’s unlikely that we don’t agree on something – especially something that is of the Bible. In this experience, Regie and I were tag teaming while Andre was left to stand on his belief. No matter what he told us, I still didn’t shift beliefs. We were literally debating… in front of 7-11. It was embarrassing, I admit but none of us actually seemed to care. We went on and on until we realized that it was 11pm already. The point was no matter what he told us, I still stood firm in what I believed in.

Question: Based on your analysis of this experience and of your conflict management style, what kind of face negotiating strategy do you use more often? Face-giving, face restoration or preventive facework? Define your understanding of the term and explain why you think so.

• Face Giving – In my own understanding, I could define this as me saving someone else from public humiliation, either by humiliating myself with him/her or tag teaming with the “humiliated”.
• I will explain how I am this kind of person by giving an example. I had this friend and he was “strutting his stuff” on the hallway. There were a lot of people so he got more motivated to “strut his stuff”. As he was walking, he slipped on the floor – butt first. People were secretly laughing at him, but you know, the usual, they won’t do it in front of him so that he won’t get offended. (But obviously, he did). I was with my other friends when I saw him. They were laughing… really hard. I saw that he was turning red and that he was doing a fake smile to hide it. So I just said “Uuuuy! Ang sama niyo. Kapag ‘yun ba nangyari sa inyo, magugustuhan niyo bang pagtatawanan kayo?” (Yes, it’s dramatic.) Eventually, my other friends stopped laughing and they said sorry to him, thus saving him from further humiliation. End of story.

Uncertainty Reduction Theory

For this assignment, I decided to do the Uncertainty Reduction Theory which according to (http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Interpersonal%20Communication%20and%20Relations/Uncertainty_Reduction_Theory.doc/) defines it as "Uncertainty reduction theory (URT) was initially presented as a series of axioms (universal truths which do not require proof and theorems (propositions assumed to be true) which describe the relationships between uncertainty and several communication factors. URT was developed to describe the interrelationships between seven important factors in any dyadic exchange: verbal communication, nonverbal expressiveness, information-seeking behavior, intimacy, reciprocity, similarity, and liking. This theoretical perspective was originated by C.R. Berger and Calabrese in 1975; they drew on the work of Heider (1952).". We’re asked to retell the plot of a movie in which we see the application or relevance of the axioms inscribed in the theory.

Task #1: The movie

I chose the movie “Beastly” (2011) which starred Vanessa Hudgens and Alex Petyffer. The story was based on the Disney animated movie “Beauty and the Beast”. Going back… Beastly starts off with Kyle Kingson campaigning for his spot in the Green committee – a committee which cares about the environment but then as he goes on with his speech, the audience sees that he’s too conceited with himself and just talks about his looks, riches, and capabilities. They don’t mind though because as he said it “beautiful people get it better.” Kendra (played by Mary Kate Olsen) comes along and just vandalizes his posters and campaign materials which pisses off Kyle. Kyle thinks Lindy (played by Vanessa Hudgens) asked Kendra to do it but she defends herself otherwise. It was the first time Kyle talked to Lindy in 3 years after the vandalism occurrence.

Eventually, Kyle won as president in the elections and Lindy won as Treasurer. Kendra on the other hand did not like the outcome of the votes (pertaining to Kyle). He comes up to her and offers tickets to the Green committee dance. Blah blah blah then the date of the dance comes up and Kyle talked to Lindy for the 2^nd time – congratulating her and talks about some field trip. After a few minutes, Kendra shows up but then Kyle humiliates her. She whispers a spell to him then Kyle began getting dizzy and was hallucinating all over the place. Eventually, the new Green committee president had to leave his party and went straight to a balcony somewhere. Kendra shows up and reveals to him the hard core truth. She turned him into something ugly which was equivalent to how ugly he was inside. He had scars, cuts, and weird tattoos all over him. The deal was he had a year to find someone who’d love him and could see right through him though his face was as ugly as hell.

Kyle starts falling for Lindy and he possibly thought that she could break the spell bestowed upon him. He starts stalking her and following her everywhere. This incident happens where someone gets killed. Kyle witnessed what happened and Lindy’s dad (who too, was in the scene) asked him what he wanted for him to shut his mouth up about what happened. Kyle asks for Lindy. He asked for her so he could take care of her and just because he knew that she could cut the spell. Lindy was brought to Kyle’s apartment. At first, Lindy didn’t like the idea and just hated her life in there. She termed “Lindy is in hell” at her social networking site. So Kyle thought that for Lindy to like her, he’d give her gifts – extravagant, expensive ones. He started giving her Bvlgari jewellery, an over the top bag, etc. He was trying to buy her but then Zola (Kyle’s “helper” in the apartment) gives him tips and when he did the tips, he wins her over. As they spent time together, they get to know each other more and more each day and just became intimate and really close. To make the long story short, he wins her over and Lindy finally loves him and says it just in time before the spell “expires”.

Task # 2: Axioms

Taken from: (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Communication_Theory/Uncertainty_Reduction#Axioms_of_Uncertainty_Reduction_Theory)

Axioms of Uncertainty Reduction Theory

1. Given the high level of uncertainty present at the onset of the entry phase, as the amount of verbal communication between strangers increases, the level of uncertainty for each interactant in the relationship will decrease. As uncertainty is further reduced, the amount of verbal communication will increase.
2. As nonverbal affiliative expressiveness increases, uncertainty levels will decrease in an initial interaction situation. In addition, decreases in uncertainty level will cause increases in nonverbal affiliative expressiveness.
3. High levels of uncertainty cause increases in information seeking behavior. As uncertainty levels decline, information seeking behavior decreases.
4. High levels of uncertainty in a relationship cause decreases in the intimacy level of communication content. Low levels of uncertainty produce high levels of intimacy.
5. High levels of uncertainty produce high rates of reciprocity. Low levels of uncertainty produce low reciprocity rates.
6. Similarities between persons reduce uncertainty, while dissimilarities produce increases in uncertainty.
7. Increases in uncertainty level produce decreases in liking; decreases in uncertainty level produce increases in liking.

---

Explanation:

Kyle and Lindy were complete strangers before, and as the elections came up, they had to talk about things. For their uncertainty to decrease, Kyle started congratulating Lindy on winning for treasurer. Therefore, the uncertainty decreased.

 Because they were complete strangers, Kyle wanted to get to know Lindy more. Even when e became a beast, he went the extra mile to know more about her. As they got to know each other better, they became more intimate with each other until their feelings for each other developed. (Application: Axioms 1, 2, 3, & 4)

(Movie cannot be applied to Axioms 5-7)

Altercasting Theory

There are two types of Altercasting Theories. Manded Altercasting & Tact Altercasting.

Manded Altercasting refers to how we tell people who they are and how they are supposed to be by making their existing role salient/obvious by placing others in a particular role, by attributing a new identity or role to someone, or by asking people to play a role. An example would be a teacher-student relationship.

When a teacher steps into the room, you automatically know that your place in the classroom is a student. You're there to listen and to hear the teacher out because he/she knows a lot more than you do. You cannot just change roles. 

Another example would be the family relationship.

Your mother is more superior than you and you cannot just answer her back. Your role is to respect and honor her because you are her daughter/son.

Tact Altercasting on the other hand refers to how we put ourselves as senders in a role that "evokes" a natural counter-role for the other. Examples would be people's standing in society.

A teacher is known to teach students and being role models to others.

If you see them drink alcohol even outside of school, it would just ruin their image to students.

Another example would be priests and pastors.

They are known for being religious and Christ-like people. If people would see them do something wrong or out of the ordinary, people could judge them and stop listening to them.

These are roles that society has implied unto us. Going beyond them would mean people either judging us or accepting that fact.

(Definition Source: http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Media,%20Culture%20and%20Society/Altercasting.doc/)

Listen Up

There was one time wherein my two friends who were a couple, were making out at a mall. There were so many people and I felt embarrassed but then I didn't want to interfere their "make-out" scene so I stayed out of it. I noticed people were looking and staring at them, but then again, I didn't want to interfere so I was distracting myself with other things. Out of the blue, Unconsciously, I said "Ang dami ng tao oh!" They took it as something else. They thought what I meant was for them to stop because there were too many people. They said that if I wanted to say something, I should have said it directly to them in the first place. I quote "Hindi yung magpaparinig ka pa." I didn't mean it that way though. I explained myself and fortunately, it got resolved.


Knowing the Speech Act Theory can help us ABCA students learn more on how a person talks and expresses himself/herself. A person can say a phrase (locutionary) and you may know what it meant, but there may be a hidden meaning to it (illocutionary). How a person would take effect on it is the perlocutionary act of the whole thing. Perlocutionary acts are external to the performance.