The conventional wisdom is that we choose friends because of who they are. But it turns out that we actually love them because of the way they support who we are.
This makes me wonder about other aspects of ourselves, more specifically our love or romantic relationships. Do we do the same thing when looking for a partner; that is, do we tend to pick our romantic partners based on how they support our self image?I can easily see how this works with a lot of relationships. If we think of ourselves as teachers, we tend to surround ourselves with people who enjoy learning from us. If we tend to think of ourselves as not worthy of respect, we might find a partner who treats us accordingly. But... does a change in our perception of ourselves - who we believe ourselves to be - one of the causes for a loss of intimacy?
I'm thinking about the seemingly inevitable differences in libido after several years together. Do we evolve into different people such that our partners no longer support our self-perceptions (and we no longer support theirs)? I've been reading a lot of blogs by people who are in bad, deteriorating, or otherwise miserable relationships - and almost all of them show a pattern in which they feel a distinct lack of intimacy with their partners. I'm not talking specifically about sexual intimacy, although that is also a widespread complaint. And after reading the blogs and comments, I'm sure that I'm not the only one to ask why it seems that Low Libido people always seem to get matched up with the High Libidos? Underlying many of the words of support on the Comments sections of the desperate and hurting is the not-always unspoken wish: "Wanna trade?" My question is what happened along the way? What else changed besides ten years, three kids, and two cars to make people grow so far apart? And after reading this article, I started to wonder if there isn't some principle that can be applied to love relationships.
I realize that I've been thinking about this subject for most of the week, and for some reason I can't get my thoughts on this to be coherent enough to set down. I think I'm just going to let this one sit for a bit and then come back to it later.
The quote you cite reminds me of a psychologist who articulated love as an essentially self-referential feeling. That is, one loves someone for the way that person makes us feel about ourselves. Thus, love contains a substantial element of selfishness- it's not so altruistic as much romantic writing would have you believe.
ReplyDeleteI tend to agree with the concept.
I read a lot, and on a very wide range of subjects, and sometimes I happen to read things across several disciplines that synthesize, or "gel", giving me some new insights or a creative idea.
ReplyDeleteLately I've been reading the blogs about people in seemingly bad relationships. I ran across this PsyToday article (I subscribe to the magazine). I went to email the article to someone, and started surfing the site, and saw an older article on the work of noted sex & relationship therapist David Schnarch.
I picked up the book over the weekend and started reading, and I'm developing a different, i.e., new perspective on what I'm calling "edge" relationships; those in which one partner desires some sexual outlet that is not (completely) socially sanctioned.
Thanks for commenting. So far, I've just got the germ of something and cant' see where it's going yet. I hate that.
I found your blog through a comment you left at Desperate Husband's website.
ReplyDeleteI think you'll find Schnarch a rewarding read. The notion of "reflected sense of self" is a recurring theme in Passionate Marriage, and it was the inspiration for the comment I left on DH's blog.
I think you'll also appreciate his ideas on how anxiety is always present in sex and that the avoidance or minimization of this anxiety is what kills passion in the bedroom.
I've been trying to sort out how this fits into my own relationships and those of my friends.
ReplyDeleteThey all ended due to a lack of erotic passion. Both the genital act and emotional/romantic passion.
Surveying them it was one's sexual inability, another's lack of communication skills, not consciously sustaining passing while raising children and maintaining careers, etc.
I see so much variety that I can't tie them together. Some could've never been fixed, some should've never started, others might have worked given enough talk.
ST, I've read similar things elsewhere, not all of them in the scholoarly tomes of my college days. When we take into account that "romantic" love is a fairly recent cultural invention, it's actually surprising that the non-altruistic aspects of love are not mentioned more often.
ReplyDelete2am, I've been skipping around Passionate Marriage, and finally started reading the chapters in order. It's in many ways a rehash of the the very old but simple adage: know thyself. I'm having a difficult time explaining the concept of "differentiation" to my wife - rather, I'm having a difficult time paring it down to an easy, simple definition - and one that will be attractive enough so that she'll want to read the book herself. But I do see some excellent points, and intend to give them some serious thought.
Richard, I have this theory that some relationships are simply not going to work, period. I am glad, however, to see that you're in one now that'w working out well for you.
I'm having a difficult time explaining the concept of "differentiation" to my wife - rather, I'm having a difficult time paring it down to an easy, simple definition - and one that will be attractive enough so that she'll want to read the book herself.
ReplyDeleteIt's a struggle for me to apply the concept in my own day-to-day life, let alone explain it to my wife. ;-) It's much easier to see it played out between others than it is with your own life, when your brain is engaged in real-time interaction.
I, too, have tried explaining to my wife what the concept is and how it plays out in life. She just nods and says she's glad I've found a book that helps me deal with my issues.
Until there is a Bowenian Therapy for Dummies, I think the best description of self validated intimacy (differentiation within the context of marriage) that can be found in Schnarch is in the middle of page 107.
Look for the two large italicized statements. The first is other validation, or fusion. The second is self validation, or differentiation.