Conflict vs. Dissonance
As I speak about ending conflict, about conflict NEVER being part of relationship, I want to clarify a distinction, the difference between conflict (optional) and dissonance (guaranteed).
Dissonance is a guaranteed part of connection. As we harmonize, we come in and out of resonance. Dynamic, alive connection requires practices of resolving dissonance through expression—vocal, embodied, written, spoken. Living relationships in integrity means having practices of addressing systemic components from collaboration and ways back to harmony with the external governing authority.
Conflict, however, is a result of the practice of enmity.
Conflict is a matter of war.
Dissonance says "something is off our target here." Enmity says "you are being unfair to me, something has gone wrong." Dissonance adjusts collaboratively, enmity must blame, enmity seeks to assign the correction to the other party.
Enmity is not part of my close relationships.
When someone reveals they have practices of enmity, including practices of resolving enmity and false ideas of enmity, it signals me to take space from the connection.
If there is enmity, that is NOT a close connection, by my standard.
There's SO much beautiful work out there which teaches us to manage distant connections, obligatory connections, compromised connections. It teaches us to manage and resolve conflict, and it's work I have learned and used and still use outside of my closest circle.
But my writing is about how I conduct myself with what is very closest in, me to me, me to the ones I have chosen to DO THIS THING with.
My work is about how we relate with that which we have opted-in to have very nearest to our actual bodies, nearest to our hearts, most present in our mind. This is a space where enmity is a threat, and protection from enmity is also a threat.
