Building Intimate Relationships by Loving Skillfully
Passion, love or lust may be enough for a one hit wonder, flash in the pan, one season or one-off but not sufficient for any team or system to succeed over an extended period. Likewise, that lovely feeling” may be enough for a one-nightstand, fling or affair but falls far short when attempting to sustain a marriage or any committed romantic relationship.
As a member of any team, individuals need to put the mission of the team over individual ambitions. This shift requires discipline from team members to “stay in his or her lane” utilizing the appropriate skills which will help the team mesh and ultimately win. Along with dedicating oneself to a craft, it is essential to love one another enough “to sacrifice your body” to protect a teammate from “harm’s way.” Another way to demonstrate love is to “have each other’s back” when the other “screws up.”
Flourishing or even surviving in a long-term, intimate relationship may be the hardest endeavor we tackle in life. This romantic commitment tests our intestinal fortitude for a multitude of reasons: the vast differences that exist between individuals due to both biological and environmental factors; unrealistic expectations based on idealism, Hollywood and social media; financial pressures; temptations both online and offline that undermine a union; effort to maintain sexual intimacy; tolerating/accepting each other’s shortcomings; working through childhood traumas and other personal issues; lack of teamwork or team chemistry; previous toxic/dysfunctional relationships, infidelities or rejection; managing the inevitable stressors, setbacks and losses that occur over time; and when applicable raising healthy children and coping with in-laws.
Agape love is divine, unconditional and elusive for us humans but one we ought to continually strive to support the weight of a committed intimate relationship. This self-sacrificial, service-oriented brand of love, Agape, is derived from Ancient Greek, meaning “the highest form of love, charity.” Unlike the feeling of love, Agape is a rational choice to love one’s partner regardless of one’s feelings. Along with a game plan and specific skill set, the sacrificial commitment to love unselfishly is the best antidote to the host of human foibles and hardships in a relationship.
Jesus modeled Agape love as he humbly walked this earth ministering to the most base, immoral and vulnerable population with compassion and mercy. As a man, he experienced the same emotions and temptations without sin; suffered excruciating pain on a cross for 9 hours; sacrificed himself for our sins; was killed and forgave his murderers.
Nelson Mandela, possessed a superhuman type of Agape love, serving as a freedom fighter for the black population in South Africa. Mandela’s courageous defiance resulted in a 27-year prison sentence. Even behind bars he was a relentless advocate for his fellow countrymen as he peacefully navigated a free democracy with a new constitution. When released from prison, he was able to forgive the oppressors who unjustly incarcerated him, attain the presidency of South
Africa and win the Nobel Peace Prize. Mandela’s lessons for us are immense as he epitomized the qualities of servant love, sacrifice, forgiveness, bravery and mission above all.
The perfect love of Jesus and great love of Nelson Mandela are an impossibly high mark to reach. However, if the God Man and a great man can practice such humility, we certainly ought to be as magnanimous. Such modesty would go a long way towards managing or resolving the unavoidable conflict that arises between partners.
Conflict can be destructive or constructive. Destructive conflict, particularly when it is chronic, shakes the very core of a relationship, sometimes leading to a permanent break. John Gottman, a prominent psychologist and author, has done extensive research with thousands of couples and has determined behaviors that are like wrecking balls to a relationship. Coined as the four horsemen of the apocalypse, Gottman identified 4 lethal behaviors that commonly lead to the end of a relationship. These four destructive behaviors are contempt (animosity), criticism, stonewalling (obstructing) and defensiveness. It is crucial to be aware of these behaviors and lasso them otherwise chronic, destructive conflict will sabotage a relationship.
The good news is that conflict is not always negative: a certain amount of conflict is productive, and necessary: it prevents complacency and keeps the flame alive, heads off hidden agendas, demonstrates agency and independence for both parties, allows both parties to have a stake or ownership in the relationship, displays an open-mindedness and ability to flex, fuels growth and fosters novel solutions.
The way to manage or resolve conflict is to negotiate what Stephen Covey referred to as win-win in his book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. According to Covey, a win-win is when a couple can negotiate an agreement where both parties get something out of the deal. If either party feels like he/she is losing (lose-lose, lose-win or win-lose) there is no deal and a return to the negotiation table. In a follow-up book, The Third Way, Covey wrote about the concept of synergy. According to Covey, synergy occurs when two or more people establish a new approach or solution that would not have been considered independently. The better idea or third way is only possible as a team or couple.
To help foster cooperation, couples benefit from sharing a common faith, spiritual pursuit and/or uphold common core values. A values clarification exercise is a helpful tool to identify one’s most important values in hierarchical order. Upon completing the tool separately, couples can then come together to determine where there is common ground. Couples ought to approach decisions first through the lens of a couple’s highest relevant shared value(s) and second based on either party’s higher value. These principles help inform a shared meaning and priorities. Even the discovery of different values helps prepare couples for when differences show up in a conversation.
In the book Crucial Conversations, authors Patterson, Grenny, McMillan and Switzler note that couples who have established a mutual purpose, shared vision or start with the end goal in mind are more likely to work as a team, feel safer in the negotiating process and navigate differences with less anxiety, trepidation and insecurity.
The purpose of any bid to connect with a teammate is for the attempt to be received with open arms. In the game of football, the quarterback is not able to link up with his/her receiver without throwing the ball with finesse and precision. If the quarterback throws the ball too “hot”, the ball is often uncatchable. When attempting to gain some ground especially when up against a stubborn “opponent” in a romantic relationship, gentle, direct and accurate communication is much more catchable for the receiver of the message.
A communication connection begins best with a soft touch or as Gottman has coined “a soft start-up.” A soft beginning to a conversation sets the tone for a productive dialogue and is vital to creating and maintaining healthy relationships.
Dialoguing with love and respect requires discipline, empathy and ground rules to prevent high emotions from hijacking the team’s short term and long-term initiatives. Destructive conflict is a function of pride, passion, and unchecked emotions which invariably lead to power struggling particularly around perpetual issues. Likewise, pleasing, avoiding or internalizing negative thoughts and feelings can lead to resentment and often such emotions get acted out. Based on his research, Dr. Gottman discovered that couples that avoid conflict in the first year of marriage are 95% more likely to get divorced.
Given there is no referee to a call a penalty when one party breaks a rule, the responsibility falls on both parties to hold each other accountable and course correct. Partners have an indispensable role in promoting healing or further suffering based on the words the parties choose when communicating.
Sharing the floor or time for dialogue is an important boundary. To allow for an equal opportunity to speak and prevent either party from monopolizing a conversation or monologuing, couples ought to use a timer. A good starting point is 5 minutes per turn or for an agreed upon amount of time by the parties.
Another available tactic for not running interference or talking over each other is the use of a talking stick which the speaker holds for his/her turn. This is an important tool to create a boundary between the speaker and listener. Feel free to be creative when choosing the object to signify each other’s turn to talk, e.g., football, stuffed animal.
There are 4 aspects of communication that are critical for intimate partners to accurately convey one’s intent, and that is easy for one’s audience to grasp. These 4 components are content, rate, tone of voice and body language.
Non-verbal language is the most important component of communication and in fact represents between 60 - 100% of what a listener focuses on in intimate relationships. Tone of voice, the way a person speaks or how one sounds when speaking, is one facet of non-verbal communication. In fact, tone is considered by experts to be the most important aspect of speaking (not content or the what which most folks assume is the case). For a teammate to be receptive to one’s message, it is desirable for one’s tone remain calm, warm, sincere, friendly and at times reassuring. Sarcasm, humor or the raising of one’s voice ought not be the go-to approach. To demonstrate the importance of tone, even when one professes love to a significant other, one’s tone matters. For instance, if one expresses this sentiment in an unemotional, monotone way, the message will fall flat and fail to resonate for a significant other.
Body language, which is also non-verbal, is the second most important facet of communication. This language speaks volumes because humans are so visual and so it may make or break one’s message. Receptive body language looks like the following: hands and arms open (avoid crossing of the arms) feet squared on the ground, parallel with shoulders whether the speaker is sitting or standing (avoid crossing of the legs), maintaining eye contact, nodding in agreement as a way to validate, posture ought to be straight and slightly forward leaning, displaying a smiling or serious expression depending on the content of the message and mirroring body language as a way to join.
Touch can be very effective at the right moments to show or request connection and emphasize a point. Touch also releases the chemical oxytocin often referred to as “the love hormone” or the “cuddle hormone.” Oxytocin promotes bonding and overall positive feelings.
Rate or pace, another aspect of non-verbal communication, refers to the speed by which one speaks. Conversational speech is approximately 120-150 words per minute (assess how many words per minute works for you and your partner).
Content is verbal communication, the spoken language or the what that is communicated. It is often said that speaking is the most dangerous thing humans do. Proverbs 12-18 declares “There is one whose rash words are like sword thrusts, but the tongue of the wise brings healing.” No one person has the market on the truth or in other words all perspectives are relative not absolute. Therefore, when offering a point of view, one ought to proceed tentatively and begin with the following approaches: “From my perspective …”, “From my vantage point …” “It appears that …” or “Seemingly.”
Appropriate language is respectful, polite, mindful and without cursing, name calling or bantering. In the event both parties want to debate, make it clear that is the intent. There is a difference between reacting and responding to the party speaking: the former is a knee jerk, emotional reply while the latter is a thoughtful, dispassionate answer employing logical reasoning. In addition, pausing 3 - 5 seconds before answering provides enough of a buffer to choose a rational response. Also, while pausing, ask oneself the question “What does emotional me say and what does rational me say.”
The best way to share feelings is to own these emotions by beginning with an I statement, e.g., I feel X because of Y and would appreciate Z. For instance: “I feel angry because you came home from work late yesterday. I would appreciate a heads up when you’re not going to make it for dinner.” The wrong approach is to blame, attack, threaten or make an ultimatum, e.g., “You make me feel A because of B and you need to do C or you’re D (expletive) stop E (expletive) or I will F (threat).” For those who struggle with identifying feelings (often vulnerable feelings), it is helpful to use an emotions wheel or chart picturing emojis as a reference. Becoming familiar with the range of feelings is not dissimilar to learning the vocabulary of a second language.
When providing negative feedback, the best approach is to make complaints about specific behaviors rather than criticize the person or person’s character. For instance, “I get angry when I find your clothes on the floor in the bedroom … I would appreciate you putting your clothes in the hamper” rather than “Stop leaving your clothes on the floor you slob … if it happens again, I will put it in the trash.”
For many, feeling listened to by one’s partner provides sustenance as food does for hunger. Adults are starving for acknowledgment, understanding and a listening ear. The reason for this yearning is that parents too often were absent either emotionally or physically and adults didn’t get the validation, recognition or love needed.
The term that psychologists use for listening well is active listening and it incorporates 3 different skills to stay engaged and demonstrate to the speaker that he/she heard the speaker out. The 3 skills include mirroring, validating and empathy. Mirroring is paraphrasing or reflecting as simply as possible using your own words (rather than mimicking or copying a partner). An important aspect of mirroring is for the listener to ask for confirmation that he/she heard the speaker correctly: “do I got you” “do I got it” or “did I hear you right.” For example, if the speaker says “I had the worst day at work … my boss lost it on me … I’m so shaken”, to mirror the speaker, the listener might say “so you had an awful day because the tyrant yelled at you again.” The listener ought to also encourage the speaker to elaborate to demonstrate interest and curiosity: “Tell me more”, “please continue” or “would you like to elaborate.”
Validation is when the listener conveys acceptance or understanding of how the speaker feels. It is important to note that validation is not agreeing with or identifying with the speaker’s emotion. An example of validating a speaker’s emotion follows: “I see that you are frazzled because the tyrant yelled at you again.” The listener would then show interest and concern by encouraging the speaker to elaborate: “do you understand why the tyrant lost it on you” or “what did you do after the boss lashed out at you?”
Finally, empathy, the trifecta of active listening, conveys acceptance, understanding and identification with what the speaker is feeling as well as imagining or projecting what the speaker may be feeling. Lead-in phrases to demonstrate empathy include “I get why you would feel X”, “It has got to suck to feel so X” or “I feel your X.” An interaction which demonstrates empathic listening follows: the speaker complains “I had the worst day at work … my boss lost it on me … I’m so shaken and the listener responds “I’m so sorry to hear your boss was so reactive … we all make mistakes including myself … I totally get how awful you feel and can also imagine that you may be feeling a little insecure about your job.”
Setting boundaries, limits or saying yes or no when dialoguing with a significant other serve to maintain respect, individuality and holds a partner to account. Boundaries also represent a demarcation between I, you and we. Healthy boundaries allow each member the independence to make decisions for oneself but also the support needed from a partner when requested. Also, each party has a voice or agency, feels safe expressing his/her views, needs or thoughts and the other party can listen and accept without believing he/she has the right to tell the other what he/she needs or thinks. A clear sign of unhealthy boundaries is manipulation, mistrust, control, domination and abuse.
If one party is demeaning to the other, the offended party ought to set a limit such as “I feel hurt when you call me X … please stop.” To repair, the offender ought to apologize and the offended party either accept or not. If discourteous behavior occurs a second time, the hurt party may want to ask for a 15-minute timeout with the expectation that the inconsiderate behavior will stop when he/she returns. If there is a third incident, the offended partner ought to consider taking a 30-minute timeout or ending the conversation. However, it is important to circle back and complete the conversation when both parties feel ready to do so. I would suggest waiting for no longer than 24 hours to revisit the conversation. While decompressing from a stressful conversation, some people prefer scheduling a follow up meeting via text to guard against reigniting the situation. Texting is also a reasonable alternative to a face-to-face conversation when emotions are running high, and the parties don’t feel capable of talking with a respectful tone of voice.
It is best practice for couples to make reoccurring appointments on a weekly or twice weekly basis utilizing a safe process to work through unresolved or entrenched issues. The amount of time that couples put aside for these check-ins is of course a couple’s prerogative, but a reasonable starting point is 30 minutes and gradually increasing to 60 - 90 minutes. Additionally, both partners ought to bring a couple agenda items to the meeting that have been shared beforehand so both parties know what to expect. When either partner wants an additional check-in, he/she ought to request an appointment rather than barge in on the other and assume that he/she is prepared to have a conversation because one party is impatient and has to talk immediately (of course if there is a crisis all bets are off). Having a sensitive conversation on the fly is risky because the interrupted party may be in the middle of a project, distracted, under duress, or just not have the wherewithal to utilize the process in the moment. If it’s difficult to wait for a mutually convenient time to talk, journaling may help to externalize feelings, guard against being reactionary as well as organize one’s thoughts for the next appointment.
I recommend partners develop a process that you can call your own, utilizing whichever of these suggestions are agreeable to both teammates. Moreover, co-sign the “contract” to make it “binding.” Whenever a partner deviates from the process, the other ought to respectfully point out that he/she has veered off track and hopefully he/she will cooperate with the ground rules that were co-created and co-signed.
Love is the best feeling, though like any other emotion it is fickle and unreliable. Conversely, reciprocal sacrificial love, teamwork, the utilization of the toolset necessary to fulfill one’s role and sweat equity are critical elements in the formation of a committed, intimate relationship. Both external pressures and internal deficits place relationships in peril. However, with a common mission and vision, shared values, collaborative decision making and faith, couples can persevere and for the fortunate among us thrive.