Wired for Love (22 page)

1. Find a safe place where you can both move around freely and not risk injury. An outdoor lawn can work, or a king-size bed or a soft carpet or even a large exercise mat.
   
2. Set some ground rules before you begin. For example, if either yells, “Time out!” both of you must stop instantly. If there is anything—for example, being held upside down—that doesn’t feel safe, agree at the get-go that no one will do this.
   
3. Get down on the bed (or mat or carpet or lawn) together and play. You can push and pull, roll and curl up. Make all the sounds you want, but try not to talk because that will distract you from paying close attention to your physicality. You can analyze things later, if you must.
   

Reading Your Partner

One of the key elements to fighting well is being able to read your partner, to know in any given moment what he or she is feeling, thinking, and intending. We may not be consciously aware when something is amiss, but we often can feel it in our bodies. We just don’t quite feel right somehow. Probably the most reliable way to read a partner, however, is to use our visual acuity. When we look at our partner, our eyes rapidly and continuously take in information: moistness in his or her eyes, a slight flinch, the hint of a smile, a curling of the lips. Even the most subtle cues are quickly passed along—first to the primitives and then to the ambassadors. The amygdalae, as we saw in chapter 2, play a vital role in this process.

Couples in distress often look away from one another. This is a big mistake. The loss of continuous eye contact pulls each partner out of real-time tracking of one another and shifts each into a more internal, static, and historical perspective. Averting their eyes deprives the ambassadors of vital information and allows the primitives to take over. When this happens, each partner in effect moves away from the other—even if it’s not a physical move—and into a state of high alert. At other times, the mistake is simply due to poor physical positioning. When partners aren’t face to face in relatively close proximity (no more than about three feet apart), it is more difficult to accurately read one another. A minor issue can escalate quickly into a major problem when partners talk while driving or while walking side by side. (We saw this with Leia and Franklin, who fought in the car in chapter 2.) For this reason, I recommend against couples talking about important or emotional matters unless they can maintain eye contact and read each other’s cues. Why give the amygdalae unnecessary power?

Of course, it can be tempting to pick up the phone when you want to work something out with your partner. You don’t want to have to wait until you meet again in person. I can’t stress enough: This is a bad idea! Hearing your partner’s voice without the benefit of eyesight can be very misleading. If your or your partner’s primitives go on high alert, there could be an early rush to war that could have been prevented if one of you read a more loving message on the other’s face. Voices, and especially words, can be insufficient when primitives are on the warpath.

The Perils of Digital Fighting

An even worse idea is e-mailing or text messaging. Many couples rely on these technologies, and of course they have great value when it comes to maintaining a 24/7 agreement, as we noted in chapter 6. But beware when a disagreement or potential disagreement is in the air. I have seen countless couples get into trouble texting about sensitive issues because they can’t read each other’s tone, intention, or feeling.

Consider Jill and Carol, both twenty-five, who love to use text messaging throughout the week. Both graduate students, they maintain a tether with one another through their cell phones. This is enjoyable when they both feel good as individuals and as a couple, but their texts can tear the tether and become drumbeats of war whenever either feels insecure. Even their emoticons can be misread as hostile and warlike.

For example, here is a text exchange that led to problems:

Jill: need ur lovin right now

Carol: can’t talk

Jill: can’t talk? not asking to *talk*

Carol: what?!

Jill: forget it

Carol: i’m in a meeting. talk later

Jill: can’t talk later. see ya when i see ya ;)

Carol: ok, this is getting me angry. what’s the ;) about?

Jill: gotta go

Because Carol thought Jill was giving her the brush-off, she ended up missing their dinner date. In her mind, she was waiting for Jill to clear up what she meant in her text. However, because it is easy to misinterpret or overlook emotions communicated in e-mails or texts, Jill didn’t realize she had upset her partner, and subsequently forgot all about the exchange. By the time they were face-to-face later that evening, both their primitives were loaded, cocked, and ready to fire.

Carol and Jill could avoid these fights if they lessened their reliance on text messaging. If they continue texting, they need to understand the importance of immediately sending a strong message of friendliness, whether through texting, calling, or making an appointment to see one another as soon as possible.

Exercise: Read Me

This exercise is similar to the Emote Me Game in chapter 4. Only this time, you take turns reading each other’s emotions.

1. Ask your partner to pick an emotion and “get into it,” but without speaking or engaging in any major physical activity. Your partner’s job is to convey the emotion through the expression on his or her face, through posture, or through hand gestures. But nothing else.
   
2. Your job is to read your partner’s emotion. See how close you can get to the specific emotion.
   
3. Then switch roles. You pick an emotion and enact it, and your partner will try to read you.
   
4. You may want to start with simple emotions: angry, happy, sad, afraid, surprised. If you want a more challenging game, try more subtle or complex emotions: for example, disappointed, rejected, relieved, disdainful, jealous, guilty, ashamed, helpless, trusting.
   

Fighting Smart

So far we’ve talked about how fighting well involves making sure our ambassadors are managing our primitives. If you can do this—really do it, regardless of whether your partner is doing it in the moment or not—the odds of your relationship enduring are high.

But you deserve more than mere endurance: you deserve a relationship that is thriving. For this reason, partners in a relationship based on mutuality also have to take responsibility for managing one another’s primitives. Remember the smart vagus and dumb vagus? The smart one keeps us socially engaged, and the dumb one doesn’t. Each partner wants to make sure the other’s smart vagus is operating properly, along with the rest of the ambassadors. Make sure you breathe, relax your muscles, and mind your tone of voice. In effect, you pool the resources of your ambassadors. If one person is having a bad day, the other steps up. And vice versa. You track each other’s moods. In a heated dispute, you pay attention to how much is too much and how long is too long. You know when to quit or when to change the subject or distract one another. Sometimes it’s best to give things a rest so you both have a chance to cool off. However, don’t just leave the room, hang up, or turn away. If you do that, your partner may interpret your actions as dismissive. Rather, make sure the time out is mutually acceptable—say, twenty to thirty minutes to cool off—and not unilateral. Taking responsibility in this way is what I call
smart fighting
.

Smart fighting is of the ambassadors, by the ambassadors, and for the ambassadors. It ensures that they will still be standing at the end. Remember, only ambassadors can be influenced, persuaded, cajoled, or seduced. Primitives aren’t concerned with maintaining relationships; all they care about is not being killed. Therefore, your and your partner’s primitives better not be the only ones left standing at the end of a fight.

Couples who fight smart seek an outcome that allows both partners to be winners. They aim for a win-win solution. They say to each other, “We both have to feel good about this,” or “I’ll be happy only if you’re happy, too,” or “We’re in this together.” At the same time, they aren’t afraid to tell each other: “
We
are okay, but what just happened is not,” or “You’re a dear, but I’m going to get my way on this one,” or “I love you, but you’re being a pain in the ass today and I think you know it.” They can say all this because their ambassadors know how to wave the flag of friendliness and how to make sure no one strays out of the play zone.

Good for Me, Good for You

So many of the couples I see in my therapy practice come with expectations that each partner should know certain things about how relationships ought to work. It’s almost as if partners expect each other to come to the table pre-trained. It doesn’t dawn on them that they must train one another to do things or continue to parent one another in ways their real parents failed. Expecting your partner to share your values at all times, and in all ways, leads to great disillusionment, disappointment, and anger.

“You should
want
to do this for me!” one partner explains to the other, trying to persuade him or her.

“But nobody does that!” another partner asserts in an attempt to dissuade the other from doing this or that.

“I didn’t marry you for
this
!” says yet another, in attempt to correct a partner’s moral compass.

In all of these instances, the partners are trying to assert their will to get the other to do what they want him or her to do. They speak as if a truly mutual agreement is in place. But if you listen closely, it isn’t hard to see that they are actually expressing self-interests under the guise of what should be good for the relationship. Often, this amounts to nothing short of bullying.

There is a better way. Instead of using fear or threat to manipulate one another into doing or not doing something, you can use positive influence. Remember, the owner’s manual to your relationship provides a wealth of information about your partner’s predilections. You can use this information in the best way—for good, not evil. In this case, good means what is good for both of you. Self-interests will still exist, but they are folded into the greater good of the relationship, such that, when a fight occurs, nobody loses and everybody wins.

Let’s examine how this could work for one couple.

Seeking a Fair Deal

Donna and Sean, a couple in their fifties, are invited to a fancy social event at the high-tech company where Donna works. Donna is always asking Sean to join her at these types of events, and he is always resisting. Sean, a landscape designer, hates going to these things and makes no bones about it. A part of Donna feels that Sean’s resistance is unloving, and that if he really cares for her, he’d understand how important these events are to her career. Sean feels that Donna’s insistence that he attend even though he feels bored among her engineer colleagues is insensitive and unloving. If she really cares about him, she’d let him off the hook.

Let’s take a look at several ways the couple can handle this situation.

SCENARIO 1

Donna becomes furious as Sean rolls his eyes at her request. “I don’t think this is fair,” she complains. “We said we’d support one another in our work, and this is my work. You’re not being very supportive.”

“Well, you’re not being supportive of me and my feelings,” replies Sean, who’s been down this road many times. “You know how much I hate these things, and being forced to go feels unfair to me. How come when I ask for things, you’re able to say no, but I don’t have the same rights?”

“What do you mean? I always do what you want,” Donna objects, pouting. “We’re always going to your stupid movies.”

“Thanks a lot! I didn’t know you considered my movies stupid. Besides, we see what you want, too. We’re always seeing your dumb chick flicks.”

“You know what? Just forget it!” says Donna, exasperated, “I’ll go by myself.” And she walks out of the room.

After a few moments pass, Sean shouts, “Okay! I’ll do it.”

From another room, Donna shouts back, “Don’t do me any favors, and I won’t do any for you, either, okay?”

At the last minute, Sean ends up going. Donna is relieved not to go alone. At the same time, she feels an underlying anxiety. She will certainly pay for this.

SCENARIO 2

Donna notices Sean’s discontent with her invitation. She’s tired of the effort it takes to get him to go with her, so this time she says, “You know, I have to be at that shindig tonight. I can go alone. You do whatever you want.”

Sean looks at her in surprise. “Really? You mean that?”

Donna replies after a short pause, “Sure.”

“Cool!” says Sean.

Later, as Donna is leaving for the event, she sees Sean ensconced on the couch, watching his favorite television show. He’s happy, but she clearly is not. “Well then, bye,” she says abruptly, without giving him a hug or kiss.

“Bye!” he calls after her, disregarding her blatant cues of unhappiness. “Have a great time! I’ll be here, waiting.” Though he is glad he’s off the hook, Sean can’t escape the feeling he will pay for this later.

SCENARIO 3

Sean states strongly, “I really, really, really don’t want to go to this thing tonight.”

“I understand, I really do,” replies Donna. “But this is very important to me.”

“It’s always important to you, Donna,” counters Sean. “What about me? Are my feelings important to you?”

“Of course they are,” says Donna. “Okay, how can I make this worth your while?”

“What do you mean?” asks Sean, surprised.