Dr John Gottman identified four communication styles that can predict the end of a relationship: Criticism, Defensiveness, Stonewalling and especially Contempt. He called them, rather amusingly, The Four Horsemen. Tammy Fletcher in San Diego calls them Relationship Killers.
Here are two nice, short articles on the subject to help you avoid the apocalypse – well worth a read.
Openness and vulnerability: Did I hit forty or did it hit me?.
Loved this blog this morning from Dr Meg John Barker about how we can all help each other out by sometimes allowing others to see our vulnerable, “haven’t got my shit together” bits, instead of pretending to everyone everything is hunky dory … a common theme in my consulting room. Thanks MJ.
There’s an interesting (and by the looks of the comments, very controversial) article by Lori Gottlieb in this week’s New York Times about male-female relationships. Does a More Equal Marriage mean Less Sex?
It considers whether an egalitarian marriage (where decisions and tasks are shared equally), while good for marital harmony, might be bad for the couple’s sexual relationship. For example, are gender stereotypes so deeply entrenched that seeing a man do “feminine” tasks makes him less attractive to his mate at a sexual drive level, even while making him a more appealing person to be sharing a house with? Is it possible that women want to be married to men who are kind, considerate, thoughtful and treat them as equals … but fancy men who are quite different?
This is of course a big generalisation, but I do get the sense from my own couples therapy practice that there may be something in this idea, at least some of the time. What we want at an intellectual level may be quite different from what we want at a sexual level; or, as sex therapist Esther Perel puts it in the article, ” … the values that make for good social relationships are not necessarily the same ones that drive lust … most of us get turned on at night by the very things that we’ll demonstrate against during the day.”
Funnily enough, I was reading this article while standing up on a train home from London. I sensed that the man seated next to me was really uncomfortable about being seated for a long period while I was standing, but also torn with indecision over whether giving up his seat for me could be seen as insulting or patronising. And with some cause: male friends tell me they have been berated for such “crimes” as holding a door open for a woman, which makes me sad. Personally, I’m all for acts of kindness and good manners, and don’t see the need to turn them into an argument on gender politics.
In any case, I think it can be really hard nowadays for men to know how to be around women; indeed I think they are often in a double bind, as the case studies in the article illustrate well. I applaud the author for daring to write on such a contentious subject, because surely more reflection can only be a good thing.
I really enjoyed this talk by Dan Savage, US writer, columnist and co-founder (with his husband Terry Miller) of the It Gets Better project (created to remind teenagers in the LGBT community that they are not alone — and it WILL get better).
In this talk Dan expands on two concepts that are of particular interest to him:
1) Many more couples are monogamish than we might think (i.e. they have an agreement to be mostly but not completely sexually exclusive). Dan argues that, contrary to popular opinion, this can give relationships a much better chance of long-term survival than those where monogamy is an absolute and any sexual transgression is a deal-breaker.
2) Long term couples stand a much better chance of staying together joyfully if they commit to being “GGG” in their sexual relationship, which stands for “Good, Giving, and Game”. Listen to find out more!
It’s a long talk but he’s very entertaining to listen to, and provides much food for thought. He is very frank in his language, however, so definitely NSFW!
It’s been a busy few months one way or another and I have woefully neglected my blog. A few weeks back I read an excellent article on the importance of affectionate touch between couples, and made myself an entry on my To Do list to blog about it further. Sadly, I can no longer find the article. I’m sure there’s a lesson (even a New Year’s Resolution) for me in there somewhere.
Meanwhile, it will have to suffice for me to say that many of the couples who come through my consulting room door make the mistake of avoiding physical intimacy if they have a sexual problem of some sort. Usually they don’t want to “give their partner the wrong idea” or “lead him/her on” when they don’t know if they can “follow through”.
I cannot emphasise enough how much additional unnecessary misery this seems to cause. It’s very easy for the partner to feel, not only does s/he not want to have sex with me any more – s/he doesn’t even want to touch me. I must be really unlovable … literally, I’m untouchable.
I haven’t yet met a partner who has said, “I’m so glad s/he’s stopped showing me affection. If I was being cuddled, stroked, caressed and kissed without it leading to sex, that would just be unbearable. Much better that we just avoid all touch until we can be sure that sex will follow”. Really, I haven’t. And without the release of oxytocin (the bonding hormone) that affectionate touch brings about, the chances that sex will get back on track are only likely to decrease.
Wishing you all plenty of enjoyable touch, whether it’s from lovers, friends or family, in 2014.
Desire and long term relationships.
Click on the link above for a powerful Valentine’s Day talk by Esther Perel on reconciling the erotic and the domestic, which neatly summarises her teaching in “Mating in Captivity”. Highly recommended.
What I do in my consulting room is rarely about “teaching folks how to do things right”, although that may be what many clients anticipate when they present for sex therapy; more often, it’s about trying to unteach them things they think they know about how sex SHOULD be. So I was very pleased to see this superb quote from Meg Barker over on her “Rewriting The Rules” Blog:
” … we all have different kinds of bodies that work in different ways. Instead of this being a cause for shame and distress as we all try (or pretend) to meet up to some narrow, limiting standard of sex (or avoid sex entirely if we don’t), we could embrace this diversity and make it the starting point for each new sexual conversation. Rather than going in with assumptions about how our body, and our partner’s, ought to work, we could go in assuming that this will be a new and different body and being open to the inevitably new and different experience it will bring.
Our concerns could be not ‘will I get an erection?’, ‘will it last long enough?’, ‘will I be able to be penetrated?’, ‘will I come at the right time?’ but rather ‘how does this person’s body work?’, ‘what do they like having touched?’, ‘what other kinds of stimulation do they enjoy?’, ‘how do I respond to what they do?’, ‘what can I tell them about how I work with my words and with my body?’, ‘what new ways will I discover with them that I haven’t with other people?’. With such questions it ceases to matter whether or not we orgasm from penetration, or at all, or whether we get erections or can be penetrated. We can put down those anxieties and just open up to the conversation as it unfolds”.
Thanks, Meg, for summing it up so perfectly.