------------
Myths and Truths about "Happy Couples"
by Judy Lightstone © January 2001
This article is partially based on extensive
laboratory and longitudinal scientific research about couple satisfaction
in long term relationships as presented in the book The Marriage Clinic,
by John M. Gottman, published by WW Norton & Company in 1999.
Please see this book for more resources.
Most of us know by now that the fairy tale happily
ever after stories are full of holes. Dashing men on horses don't usually
rescue helpless women and live happily ever after in real life. As
a matter of fact, most feminist authors have long debunked this as a set
up for potentially
abusive relationships*. But
most of us don't know how inaccurate our current popular expectations and
beliefs are about what makes "marriage" (and by this I mean any long term
committed romantic relationship) work. Mostly we look around at such
things as divorce statistics and see that a lot of them don't work
This assessment is also unfair, given that relationships may last several
decades and still be included in divorce statistics - and the numbers don't
tell us what allowed some relationships to last and others to break up,
and they don't tell us how much overall satisfaction existed in those relationships
that stayed together or broke up.
MYTHS
1.
Arguing = trouble.
2. Distance = trouble.
3. Opposites attract.
4. Flattery will get you nowhere.
5. You have to agree on the
BIG issues (like children, sex and money).
6. People divorce because
they “grow apart”.
7. Couples divorce because
they get older and change physically.
8. The more sex the better.
9. A fat woman will
lose her man.
10. Men and women have to
be equal in a good marriage.
TRUTHS
1. Fighting per se is not necessarily
a problem. If there is basic mutual respect, the ability for partners
to cool down and soothe each other afterward, and lots of good stuff "in
the bank", the tendency to fight is more a result of personality style
than trouble in the relationship. John Gottman talks about "The emotional
bank account" and the "fondness and admiration system" in which he
describes the ability of a couple to draw on "stores" of good feelings
that have been deposited there by each partner. It is the ratio
of negative interactions and positive interactions -he advises the ratio
should be at least 5 (positive) to 1 (negative) -that is more of a predictor
of a satisfying relationship. Some couples like to handle problems
directly, and if each of the two people are this way, then they may resolve
their problems more quickly and with less bitterness if they approach them
head on.
2. Other couples are more avoidant
and have a similar level of tolerance for putting off confrontations.
It is the compatibility of problem solving style between
the two people rather than the style itself that is more predictive of
failure. When two people prefer to avoid conflict together they don't necessarily
get into trouble unless this escalates to avoidance of positive regard
for one another. If they can accept each other's differences and
remain loving toward one another they may be able to avoid conflict for
a long time. It is more a problem if one is a conflict avoider and
the other is a conflict confronter. This difference can be worked
out (although sometimes
help from a therapist
is required) if there's a lot of overall positive regard.
3. Differences may make
the courtship stage of a relationship more exciting, but they can make
a lasting relationship more difficult. Not all differences are alike,
however. The most important differences that can cause trouble are:
difference in conflict style (see above), differences in mutual respect
for each other's life dreams (note I did not say the dreams had to be alike,
only the amount of respect accorded the other person for his/her dreams),
differences in libido (sexual drive), differences in lifestyle (degree
of accumulation vs simplicity), etc. All of these differences can
be worked out in a healthy relationship and don't necessarily signal danger
- they just make things harder rather than easier.
4. Some would say the solution
to all marital difficulties is honesty - always saying what is on your
mind because that is the Truth. But in my practice I have seen this
become an excuse for disrespect and contempt, and these are the things
that will cause ruptures rather than healing. True, people need to
be able to express themselves freely to their partners, but this doesn't
mean there is no room for tact. And what may feel "honest" at one
moment, may feel irrelevant at another. Flattery, if that means complimenting
your partner frequently, showing your affection regularly in symbolic or
romantic ways, and bragging about her or him to others - will get you everywhere.
I don't mean saying things that aren't ever true, but focussing on the
positive and building up credit in that emotional bank account makes a
huge difference in how well your relationship will weather rockier times.
5. There isn't a couple
around today that doesn't have some "BIG" issue that it can't resolve.
There are too many choices and options available today to assume they must
all be agreed upon in each romantic partnership. Gottman estimates
that 60% of all problems couples encounter are ultimately unresolvable.
Once again, the issue isn't the problem itself, it's how couples
learn to manage perpetual problems over the long haul. This point
is critical to understand. As in other areas of life, many problems
stay with us a long time- some throughout the life span - what matters
is how we cope with this fact. Do we comfort each others' experiences
of frustration? Do we accept that there are some things that may never
be perfect but know that we can keep trying anyway? Do we have enough good
stuff in the bank to get us through? Gottman calls this the ability to
"dialogue with perpetual problems". Ultimately, it's the quality
of the dialogue, not the seeming seriousness of the problem itself, that
will predict the success of the relationship.
6. Although this may be
somewhat true when couples meet at a young age, because the younger they
start, the more quickly they will change and might simply become so different
they are no longer compatible, for most couples who claim they just "grew
apart", this is an excuse that tends to gloss over the deeper issues that
can cause serious trouble in a love relationship. So if fighting,
avoidance, differences, growing apart, and "honesty" aren't the real problems,
and huge differences like children, sex and money don't necessarily predict
disaster - why is there so much divorce? And what is the solution?
Gottman refers to the "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse"; criticism, defensiveness,
contempt and stonewalling; as being the most reliable predictors of divorce
or of a long but miserable marriage. When these four horsemen take over
a marriage, the end is near. But with help (professional help is
usually necessary for this) you can learn to consistently "build in the
antidotes."1 I paraphrase Gottman (page 193) as follows:
*for
Criticism:
try complaining without suggesting that your partner is
somehow defective
*for
Defensiveness:
try accepting responsibility for a part of the problem
*for
Contempt:
learn to create a marital culture of praise and pride to replace the contempt,
and
*for
Stonewalling: provide self soothing, stay emotionally connected
and give the listener nonverbal cues of your attention.
7. Attraction is more related
to what's in the emotional bank account than to physical appearance.
When loss of attraction or change in physical appearance is used as an
excuse for divorce or constant criticisms, it is more indicative
that the person doing the criticizing is having self esteem or identity
issues. These emotional problem may require individual or couples
treatment, but it is not physical changes that are at the heart of the
deterioration of a marriage.
8. Sexual compatibility, not
frequency, is the key to couple sexual satisfaction. Difficulties
(again, not unresolvable) arise when there is a difference in the amount
of sex desired by each member of the couple. Many satisfied couples
have little or even no sex because this is all each of them desires.
Gottman found that it is the nature of the marital friendship, more than
the frequency of sexual relations, that gets people through in the long
run. When frequent sex is desired by both partners, and sex is part of
the overall fondness and affectional system, it can be a wonderful asset
in a marriage. When one is wanting more sex than the other, it is
likely to cause stress in both partners. However, more often than
not, the development of sexual problems is a symptom rather than a cause
of relationship difficulties. Because sexual intimacy requires each partner
to be vulnerable to the other, when the relationship is experienced as
emotionally unsafe by one or both partners, sexual disturbances will likely
arise.
9. As a specialist in
eating
and
body image issues
I have worked with many couples who were dealing with changes in one partner's
body size - I have seen couples break up when there was no perceptible
physical change and other couples thrive through considerable physical
changes. When there is a wealth of positive regard in the relationship,
physical attraction tends to follow that regard. It is unfortunately common
(and culturally endorsed) for men with eating problems to project their
body image insecurities onto their female partners. This can be true
for certain same sex couples too- one partner "absorbs" the bad body feelings
and the other projects them. When this is the case it is important
for each member of the
couple
or family to work separately on his or her eating problem and put a
special effort into being loving and respectful of the partner's food and
body boundaries. It is not easy to go against the cultural dictate
of thinness for everyone, but a family can work together to develop a culture
of love and respect for differences that will ultimately solve way more
problems than the temporary (for usually it is no more than that) weight
loss of one or more of its members.
10. There are many ways for
couples to share power and responsibility that do not necessarily correspond
to absolute equality in all areas. What is more important is that
each partner have equal influence on the other. Gottman uses Weiss'2
term to describe this ability: "positive sentiment override" (PSO).
What he means by this is that partners feel trusting enough of one another
to allow each other's suggestions and complaints to be heard non-defensively.
There doesn't have to be agreement on the issue, just willingness to talk
about the differences. This can even be done lovingly, as Gottman1
shows
in this quote from his book of a couple in his laboratory on page 99:
"W:....And when we're coming home from
the hospital or something like that, I don't mind you talking about the
bills, but like I said, we're not going to worry about the bills. We'll
pay what we can pay. Don't worry about it.
H: Yeah, but you don't seem to understand.
Every time I tell you, this is how much we owe, that's when the trouble
starts. (There is irritation in his voice)....
W: What? We don't worry about the bills? (laughter)
H: Yeah. This is what I'm steadily trying to
impound upon you.
W: Yeah, but we can only pay what we can pay,
so why worry about...
H: Cause that's how I am. (smiles)
W: You shouldn't do that. (smiles)
H: Well I can't help it. I'm always trying
to be preventive.
W: Okay, Preventive (laughs).
"Amazing moment! On the spot she has made up
a playful nickname for him- "Preventive" - and they both laugh about it.
...This communicates acceptance in the context of wanting change."
The wife in this vignette
is allowing the husband to influence her, and the husband is communicating
his anger without any criticism or contempt. Although she hasn't
agreed with him, she has heard his complaint in a neutral way, rather than
hearing it negatively as an accusation. Gottman says PSOs are possible
if there is enough positive affection deposited in the bank during non-conflict
periods for the couple. They can then draw on this non-defensively
during conflict.
In summary, this does not mean that a couple
in trouble can just start being loving and affectionate during their arguments.
It takes work and often professional intervention to get out of negative
cycles. Repeating affirmations that have no meaningful basis is not
the solution either. Genuine positive regard, if not already deeply
embedded in the marriage, can only emerge once the relationship is made
emotionally safe for both partners.
*****************************************************************************************
* * This
article does not apply to couples struggling with physical or sexual abuse. Much
stronger interventions are required in those cases to first and foremost keep
all parties physically safe. For resources on this topic, please see:
http://www.womensrefuge.org.nz
Link to:
Couples
therapy Notes:
1. Gottman, John M. The Marriage Clinic,
NY: WW Norton & Company; 1999.
2. Weiss, R. L. (1980) Strategic behavioral
marital therapy: Toward a model for assessment and intervention. In J.P.
Vincent (Ed.), Advances in family intervention, assessment and theory (Vol.
1, pp. 229-271). Greenwich, CT; JAI Press.
|
Auckland
PSITM Institute