There are lots of interesting research materials on quarrelling, especially in the perspective of conflict management. In the theoretical framework, quarrels are linked with attempts by individuals to break away from a rigid mould, confinement or box in which society tends to keep everybody. Such attempts to go against popular and often narrow-thinking methods create conflicts and misunderstanding among people. Attempts to hold on to the status quo, while some people strive to expand the scope of social confinement, bring quarrels.
Unfortunately, there are conserver-holders in society who, out of conceit, vanity and fear of losing their hold on power, give the impression that they alone have all the answers to every human problem. If such people in every leadership position have all the answers to every problem, then why are we in such a state of confusion and helplessness? Those who offer false hopes and resist innovative changes often see those who suggest alternative ideas as enemies.
There is pleasure in quarrelling because it is a means of venting anger and grievances arising from the dynamics of social perception of issues. Quarrels are verbal conflict and combat between conservatism and the desire to move out of the box, so that the parties involved can arrive at some mutual understanding. One has to be angry enough to be able to speak truth to conceited, arrogant and stubborn authorities, without holding back decorum and protocols. The obtuse nature of the system we operate demands courageous confrontations through verbal quarrels.
Injustice and corruption include suppression or keeping the masses in boxes, sedating them either with violent threats or sanctimonious sermons. Those who oppose or confront injustices through quarrels without violence do the society some good. From the home to the government, quarrelling does much good to tame tyrants and narrow-minded despots, thus sending a strong message that peoples’ intelligence and abilities should not be under-rated or undermined. Docility encourages tyranny.
In a quarrel between an Assistant Lecturer and a Professor, there was the following outburst: “being my former lecturer, supervisor and mentor does not give you the audacity to take me for an idiot or a coward!” The old Professor later confessed that the aggrieved lecturer taught him a most lasting lesson that changed his attitude towards the younger generations.
There is always a need to deflate the pride, arrogance, conceit and self-righteousness of those in authority who wield power as if they are all-knowing. The pleasure of an ideal democracy is that it encourages sharing of ideas, with no one suppressing the possibility of every brain giving the best it has. Some benefits derivable from quarrels include the opportunity to break away from the boxes of orthodoxy and docility. As social and physiological medicines quarrels can prevent the weak from being pushed to the wall as well as stimulate blood circulation, releasing tensions.
There are rules of engagement in quarrelling, one of which is that those with cardiac problems should avoid going into quarrels, to avoid cardiac arrest. It is wrong to issue threats to opponents before or during quarrels, there can be a possibility of “self-fulfilling prophecy” whereby what was threatened in a quarrel happens soon after. It is also necessary to guard against actionable statements such as libelous and slanderous ones. The use of vulgar and obscene words also should be avoided, despite temptations to do so during serious quarrels. Quarrel is not malice.
The habit of some people removing their shirts at the beginning of a quarrel is wrong, so also running inside to fetch some weapons, including machete. As a verbal combat which should not involve violence, the rule is to throw appropriate invective and jibes at the opponent, to make him recognize his shortcomings. For this reason, it is necessary to have a personal dossier of the opponent, which may include such secrets or weaknesses which would shock him to know that other people are aware of. Talk, but stay distant.
It is usually during quarrels that people can be told some bitter truths and secrets which the parties believed that no one else knew about. For women, it is advisable that they wear tight-fitting underwear before engaging in a quarrel. It is unwise to extend the verbal jibes beyond the persons involved in the quarrel, such as casting aspersions on the opponent’s spouse. Similarly, God’s name should not be introduced in a quarrel – should He be commanded to send “thunder and pestilence to punish and destroy anyone?”
Quarrel is not samething as keeping malice, rather the rule is to speak up and vent anger and displeasure in a way to raise issues of contention, rather than bottle up tension. One can feel good after a stimulating quarrel!
Dr. Amirize is a retired lecturer at the Rivers State University, PH.

Bright Amirize