As explained before, most human beings are scripted to be comfortable in relationships where they are either one-up or one-down to another human being. They are taught from birth that it is expected and appropriate to be one-up to certain people and to be one-down to others. All children are taught that one must obey certain persons of authority and relate to them from a one-down position. Children are also taught that human beings of the female sex are appropriately, naturally one-down to human beings of the male sex, that workers are one-down to bosses, blacks are one-down to whites, and so on. The effect of such intense scripting into acceptance of unequal distribution of power between human beings is that people continue to seek and expect inequality in their relationships. When relationships are such that a man and a woman are equal in power, it is unlikely that equality will remain, for that state of affairs is an unstable equilibrium which tends to be easily disrupted into the more stable equilibrium of a one-up/one-down situation.
Just as in other scripted situations, human beings tend to be comfortable when they are following the dictates of the script. By the same token, human beings have the tendency to feel good in situations in which they are either one-up or one-down to others, and not only to enjoy them but to seek them, as well as rejecting those in which power is equal.
It is easy to understand why people who are in a one-up position of power feel comfortable in it; the advantages of privilege are many. But why do people who are clearly one-down feel comfortable in their situation? When asked if they would trade places with their rich bosses, struggling workers often say that they would prefer not to: “They don’t know how to live”; “They have too many headaches being in charge”; “They are half dead.” People who are one-down and powerless often tend to see themselves as being better off than those who have more power than they. This tendency to disregard the inequalities in power between people and therefore not to seek equality is part of the banal scripting for Powerlessness which keeps one-down people one-down.
Only after a person has been one-down to another for a relatively extended time does the original gut enjoyment of the scripted one-down relationship give way to discontent and anger. At this point the person who is one-down will ordinarily begin to engage in guerrilla tactics designed to undermine the power of the person who is one-up. In the example given by Hogie Wyckoff (see Chapter 14), “Plastic Woman,” after being one-down to her husband for many years, begins to undermine his power by attacking him where it counts most, in his pocket-book and in his genitals, by “beating him to death with a credit card” and refusing to enjoy sex. Both of these techniques are power plays from the one-down position designed to undermine and take away the power of the person who is one-up.
Marriages very often follow a typical sequence in which for the first seven years the man oppresses the woman, with her as a willing participant. After seven years she becomes rebellious and he may retaliate by terminating the marriage, or the marriage will go on for another seven years with her engaged in active guerrilla warfare to undermine his power. If the marriage lasts another seven years, it may arrive at an uneasy truce where both of the people live a separate and uncommunicative life in which they maintain their power separately and without interaction.
Power Plays
Power plays are techniques used to get people to do something they don’t want to do.
When power playing, a person assumes that he can’t get what he wants by simply asking. Thus power playing assumes scarcity whether it exists or not. A good relationship is based on the assumption that both of the people in it are interested in doing things for each other. When that is the case it would appear that one person need simply ask for what she wants and it would follow that the other person would do everything within his power to make it happen. This is the case when the relationships operate smoothly and both partners are getting what they want. However, when this smooth cooperative process breaks down and scarcity sets in, it is likely that people will begin to use power plays to satisfy themselves.
Typical relationships very often begin as a “turn on” between the Childs of the two people involved. This relationship, Child to Child, is often one which involves an awareness of the other’s wishes and needs and a strong wish to satisfy them. As long as the relationship maintains that Child to Child quality in which feelings are openly expressed and responded to, it is likely the people will get what they want from each other. In time, however, the other vectors of the relationship are likely to emerge, and as these vectors develop (i.e., the Adult to Adult vector, the Parent to Child vector, and the Parent to Parent vector) difficulties may begin. Men and women are scripted so as to have great difficulty in giving each other the two things that they want most: strokes from a good mutual working situation, and strokes from intimacy. Strokes from a working situation are scripted out of relationships because women tend to be enjoined against using their Adults. As a consequence, men and women find it very difficult to work together. On the other hand, intimacy, which is heavily based on the capacity to be intuitive and nurturing simultaneously, is strongly scripted out of men. This scripted, mutual impossibility for achieving the two most rewarding forms of strokes, work and intimacy, causes people to start using power plays to get the strokes they want from each other. Bernian games are power plays to obtain strokes. Because strokes are in short supply and much in demand, people play many games. But there are other items for which people power play each other (money, privileges, getting what they want how they want it when they want it).
There are two major kinds of power play situations: between unequals and between equals. In the first kind, two people agree that they are unequal. This situation can be called a master-slave relationship. The acceptance of inequality can be total or less than total. When people accept their inequality they may cooperate and not power play each other. Examples of total acceptance are rare; except in the most totalitarian situations (perhaps best exemplified by a concentration camp or an insane asylum) power struggles occur. In such situations, the master simply expresses what he wants and the slave goes along with it. However, most one-up/one-down relationships are less than perfect and involve power plays to a greater or lesser degree.
Both parties, the master and the slave, have to use power plays to get what they want, and they are different. Let us call them: one-up power plays (the master’s) such as “Hold the Line” or “Wipe Them Out”; and one-down power plays (the slave’s) such as “Guerrilla Warfare.”
Power plays between equals are a third kind and they can be called “Pitched Battles.”
ONE-UP POWER PLAYS
One-up power plays are used in successions of increasing power; they cascade. They start at a low intensity and if not successful they are followed up with another power play of higher intensity; that is to say, power plays are played in succession with the aim of winning.
Let us briefly examine a situation in which Mr. and Ms. White are deciding where to take their annual two-week vacation. Mr. White would like to go to the lake and Ms. White would like to go to the mountains. The issue is met when, coming back from work, Mr. White, knowing that Ms. White would probably prefer to go to the mountains, declares that he has arranged for his vacation time with his boss and that he has made reservations at the Lake Inn. This is the first one-up power play in a long series which, as described in this example, will get Mr. White what he wants.
Ms. White may give in on the first round. Making the decision without consulting her may be a sufficient display of power to cause her to abdicate. Let us, however, assume that Ms. White does not give up easily. Instead, she says: “But I want to go to the mountains.”
In this example I will portray Ms. White as a “cool head” who does not get hooked into any power plays of her own. I do this to simplify the account which could become dizzying were I to portray a series of one-down power plays of her own simultaneous with his. Instead, Ms. White will be shown to simply ask for what she wants in a powerful, convincing way (po
wer maneuver).
Mr. White will now try “If You Can’t Prove It You Can’t Do It.” This power play is a demand for a logical reason justifying her choice. “Why do you want to go to the mountains rather than the lake?”
If Ms. White is hooked into this power play she will attempt to justify herself. She may say something like “Because the air is cleaner,” or, “Because it will cost less money,” or less rationally, “Because the kids might drown,” or, “Because I’ll be nicer.”
At this point Mr. White will use his very strongly developed Adult reasoning capacities to his best advantage. He will logically defeat every one of the arguments, whether logical or illogical. For instance, he may argue as follows: “Who needs clean air? Clean air isn’t that important; after all, we both smoke, anyway.” Or he may say: “Yes, going to the mountains is cheaper, but look at all the money we save by not having to drive so far,” or, “Don’t be ridiculous, the children are excellent swimmers.”
This power play may succeed; but if it doesn’t and Ms. White still insists that she does not have to logically explain why she wants to go to the mountains, she just wants to go, Mr. White may attempt round three of the power play. This one is called “Man of the House,” which is a revision of “It Says in the Bible.”
“I’m the worker in this family, and it is me who needs a vacation. You are going to ruin my vacation by insisting that we go to the mountains. I wear the pants here and we are going to the lake.”
Again, Ms. White may abdicate or she may go on and insist that she wants to go to the mountains. The fourth power play may be a heavy round of “Sulk (for Now).” Mr. White now says, “O.K., we’ll go to the mountains.” For the next month, whenever he comes home, he sinks into his chair, opens up a beer, sighs, and watches television a lot. He may get drunk too. He will make occasional comments about how his heart is in bad shape. He may point to a Sunday supplement article about how thin air is bad for a heart condition. He isn’t really planning to go to the mountains, just biding his time until later, and seeing if he can change her mind meanwhile through guilt. While nothing is being said about it, it will be clear to Ms. White that Mr. White is very upset about not going to the lake, and she may be hooked into abdicating her position in the service of taking care of him. It is likely that in a series of power plays Mr. White will win over Ms. White since she has any number of tendencies which work against her, such as not having a strong Adult, and having a tendency to Rescue and Nurture him.
Let us suppose, however, that Ms. White continues to assume that they are going to go to the mountains. On the night before they leave Mr. White reopens the conversation. He may say, “Well, I have thought it over, and as far as I am concerned we are going to go to the lake and not to the mountains. There’s no two ways about it. If you don’t want to go to the lake with me I am not going on a vacation.” This is a power play called “Ain’t Budging.”
It will be observed that as Mr. White does not get his way in this finely graded series of power plays, the power plays will become more and more crude, that is, more and more approaching the seizure of power through brute force. He is not at the point yet where he is using force offensively, but he is using it passively. At this point he is saying that he will not move physically until there is a change of plans. Again, Ms. White may give in. If she doesn’t, Mr. White may begin to use physical power offensively, to make menacing, clenching gestures with his jaw and fist; and if Ms. White does not give in at this point he may actually settle the argument by hitting her or even giving her a beating. Situations that go to the point of the man beating the woman almost always result in the man getting his way. This last power play is called “Knock Some Sense into ’Em,” a form of “Wipe ’Em Out.”
ONE-DOWN POWER PLAYS
Unlike one-up power plays, one-down power plays do not tend to be played in sequence of increasing intensity. One-up power plays are played from an “I’m O.K., you’re not O.K.” position which includes an expectation of being right and winning in the end. One-down power plays are played from the one-down position of “I’m not O.K.” and they are basically defensive. They are still trying to accomplish something that the other player doesn’t want, but all they accomplish for the one-down player is to interfere with the one-up person’s privileges. It is because of this that they are called Guerrilla Warfare power plays. Just as in guerrilla warfare, one-down power plays are engaged in by the weaker, oppressed of the two warring parties which has on its side the element of surprise and knowledge of the territory.
The one-down power player will use his power selectively where it is most useful and then withdraw, succeeding only in interfering with the one-up person’s drive for power, and without any immediate expectation of turning the tide or winning. Thus, one-down power plays do not cascade and do not necessarily follow each other in a graded series of increasing crude power.
As an example let us take again Mr. and Ms. White. This time Mr. White comes home and informs Ms. White that he has set the vacation time with his boss and has purchased tickets for the Lake Inn. Instead of protesting, Ms. White goes along because she is accustomed to being one-down to Mr. White who usually makes all the decisions.
However, Ms. White is not necessarily happy and, while she has overtly gone along with the decision, she covertly intends to interfere with Mr. White’s purpose. Periodically she will power play him from a one-down position, in order to diminish his control and well being.
One-down power plays come in three categories:
1. Techniques to arouse guilt, which is always present in the one-up person whose Little Professor knows the situation is unfair, and whose Pig usually tells her that she is selfish and mean. Crying, sulking, feigning illnesses such as headaches, insomnia, backaches, are this kind of power play.
Mr. White hears the muffled sobs of Ms. White beyond the locked bedroom door. He asks to be let in and when she finally does finds she has been looking at picture postcards of the Western Sierras. He asks (knowing full well what the answer is), “What is wrong?”; she answers, “Nothing.” He is furious but can’t do anything about the situation except feel guilty or become even more callous in his dominance. He exits, slamming the door; she smiles to herself.
2. Techniques which are designed to hurt in retaliation. These are most like Guerrilla Warfare.
Mr. and Ms. White are making love. He is very sexually aroused, she is angry. Because she is unresponsive he comes soon after they start intercourse. She turns her back to him and says, “I didn’t come, you know!” He is deeply hurt and she is glad.
Or Ms. White notices that Mr. White has left his keys behind. When she goes out she makes sure that all the doors and windows are shut tight. When Mr. White comes home, he has to wait in the car for an hour when he had planned to use the time to pack.
Or Ms. White buys herself an expensive summer wardrobe, thus adding a substantial amount to their already large debt, which he is holding down two jobs to pay.
3. Techniques which waste the oppressor’s time and energy, causing tensions such as being late, making messes or costly mistakes, losing control, starting a fight, and so on.
Ms. White is supposed to go to the bank and get cash for the trip. He comes home and asks: “Did you get the money?”
“No, I couldn’t because the car broke down.”
“Good God! Why didn’t you take a cab or borrow a car?”
“I thought we could do it tomorrow on our way out.”
“Tomorrow is a bank holiday!”
“Oh, I am sorry. What will we do?”
“Well, I can call Fred, he usually keeps cash around.” (Fred lives on the other side of town and, anyway, he left for his vacation two hours ago. Eventually, he cashes a check at the market but doesn’t get enough money, so he spends the whole trip agonizing over his dwindling cash supply.)
Or she may get severely depressed and maybe even ill so that the vacation has to be canceled.
With every one of these p
ower plays she interferes with his pleasure. At the same time she ineffectively hopes that he will catch on to the fact that she is unhappy and change his mind about the vacation. Needless to say, the only outcome of her power plays is that he gets angry, becomes even more oppressive and domineering, and that she gets even less of what she really wants.
She may, however, effectively interfere with his one-up stance and prevent him from getting what he wants, even though she does not get what she wants.
Pitched Battle
The other form of power play occurs between people who have approximately equal power and feel equal to each other. Both people want something which they are not capable of expressing. Instead of asking for what they want, they attempt to maneuver the other person into giving it to them. In a situation like this an agreement is never reached; every discussion escalates as each person scores a point in his favor and throws the “hot potato” to the other. A similar series of transactions, a game, has been identified by Berne under the name of a game called “Uproar.” But Uproar is a series of power plays for strokes. In the case of Mr. and Ms. White a “Pitched Battle” might proceed as follows:
“Honey, I just found out when our vacation is going to be and made reservations at the Lake Inn.”
“Well, you may be going to the lake, but I am going to the mountains.”
“That’s very interesting. How do you think you are going to go to the mountains? You certainly aren’t going to take my car.”
“So it’s your car, is it? Go ahead, take the car! I’ll just take along the credit card.”
“If you spend one dollar on our credit card, I am going to cut you off completely.”
“O.K. You go ahead and try it. We’ll see how you do. I think I’ll take some money out of our savings account as well,” etc.
Scripts People Live Page 25