Soapbox: "You have such potential" Isn't a Compliment

As my students and I begin another academic year, I think about the words we hear when we are feeling fresh, renewed, and motivated. Words like: excited, pride, optimism, and potential.

This word, “potential”, is the subject of this brief Soapbox post today.

My professorial colleagues and I often talk about students who “have potential”. When people who are young (like pre-pubescent young) are described as having potential, it is a compliment. It means that we see in a person raw material – talent, skill, intellect, whatever – that can be honed, cultivated, and harnessed into something possibly spectacular. To be sure, to be seen as inherently talented or gifted, is a compliment.

Unfortunately, we never reevaluate what it means to be told that we have potential as we move out of childhood, through adolescence, and into adulthood. I would contend that for a 20-something year old person to be identified as having potential is not quite the compliment that it might have been a decade earlier.

Here’s the thing about potential in adulthood: by the time we’re 20 or 30ish, should have met or harnessed it by now. That we still have potential in our adulthood means we aren’t working, executing, or getting the job done.

Don’t believe me? Think about the way language changes when we talk about people of varying ages who have potential. In reference to children, we often use a big adjective to describe potential, like “enormous” or “unlimited”. As we refer to people in late adolescence or early adulthood, the modifiers associated with having potential become less big, as in, “he has such potential”. Once a person gets past their early thirties and that person still has yet to meet or unleash their potential, we start talking about potential in the past tense – “he had so much potential. If only he had [insert action never taken to meet said potential here]”.

My point: as we come to the beginning of a new academic year (or wherever you are in your own life) consider whether you’re meeting your potential. Are you actively engaged in tapping every bit of raw material you possess, or are you letting it drift increasingly far away from your grasp? Potential isn’t limitless. We do have a window in which to begin to harness it. If we wait indefinitely for exactly the right impetus or circumstance to present itself before we begin our work, the window begins to close. As more time passes, the open space in the window shrinks, and the window becomes increasingly difficult to hurl open.
 
Don’t waste whatever raw material you were gifted. Seize it. Wield it. Use it to become more excellent than you are. It seems to me that if you do, you’ll end your life with no potential whatsoever, and I do believe that’s a good thing.

Lesson 7, Part II: Orgasm, the Human Brain, and Why People Cheat

This is Part II of a two-part post on infidelity in romantic relationships. Part I was a discussion of what constitutes cheating and you can read it here.

The object of this post is to try to address the question of why people commit infidelity. It's a long one, so I've inserted headings to let you find the parts of the post you are most interested in. I hope that you find it informative and interesting in spite of its length.

Introduction

If you've ever been cheated on, you know that the first question that comes to mind upon the discovery that your partner committed an unfaithful act is "why?". We want to understand or justify an act that is widely considered to be one of the most offensive relational betrayals a person can commit. Unfortunately, receiving an explanation for their behavior from an unfaithful partner is rarely satisfying, and often it hurts more than it helps. So, allow me to provide one (of many possible) explanations for infidelity.

Before I get to the part where I explain why I think people cheat, we need to have a conversation about sex and the human brain.

The Human Brain

The human brain is awesome. It's astounding what the human brain has allowed us to innovate. We have imagined, engineered, and created everything from the pyramids to a means by which we can travel to space.  The complexity of the human brain is, of course, what differentiates us from other mammals. Not only do we possess superior intellect than our mammalian cousins, but we also have a highly developed prefrontal cortex. The prefrontal cortex is a part of the brain that is dedicated to uniquely human activities such impulse control and decision making. Where most animals do what they do out of instinct, human beings can reason their way into (or out of) any behavior. The prefrontal cortext, my friends, is the thing that keeps us from slapping people who have 30 items in the 20 items or less line, or from stealing an expensive but utterly spectacular pair of shoes. The prefrontal cortex is largely responsible for an orderly and organized human civilization.

Now, as excellent as the prefrontal cortex is for motivating sound judgment and self-control in human beings, sometimes it talks us out of engaging in some basic biological activities. Sometimes this is good - like when you actively decide not to pass gas in an elevator. Sometimes, this benefit is arguable - like when your brain talks you out of having sex with someone whom your body is sure will provide the genetic material for healthy and robust offspring. After all, without engaging in sexual intercourse with viable members of the opposite sex, human beings have no natural means by which to reproduce.

So here's the trouble: sometimes our animalness will tell us we ought to be getting it on with someone, but our humanness talks us out of it because doing so would violate social rules that tell us that we should control our sexual impulses. In other words, our brains are sometimes at war with our bodies.

The Amazing Orgasm

We might expect that the sophistication of the human brain would allow it to win any war it waged against the basic impulses of the body. That might be true if our bodies weren't engineered specifically to promote sexual desire and activity. Don't believe me? Well, then, it's time to talk about the Big O. Orgasms (especially males' orgasms) are essential for human reproduction. Their primary function is to release sperm in order to make them available to fertilize an egg. There is absolutely no reason that an orgasm needs to be particularly pleasurable in order to achieve this objective. Yet, it is; and extremely so. Were it not for the difficult-to-otherwise-achieve pleasure of an orgasm, people would be largely indifferent to engaging in sexual intercourse. If we take a lesson from the world's dwindling population of pandas, we know that indifference to engaging in sexual intercourse can endanger the survival of a species. That sex is delightful motivates human beings to do it, which ensures the continuation of humans on this planet. The particular pleasure associated with sex makes it sometimes difficult for the brain's prefrontal cortex to make the choice not to indulge in a sexual interaction with an available, attractive partner in spite of our commitment to exclusivity with someone else.

Okay, so we understand that biology is motivating. We also know that the human brain is designed to allow people to think about the consequences of their actions and choose to engage in an action or not depending on how we evaluate the consequences. We also know that in spite of knowing the consequences and rules, people sometimes choose to engage in rule-violating sexual contact.

Reported Explanations for Unfaithful Behavior 

So, the question is - why do some people let their bodies win out over their brains and end up cheating on their partners?

People who study infidelity have identified a number of explanations for this. I'll run down a few:
1. Sexual dissatisfaction with the primary partner (i.e, partner doesn't offer the kind of sex that you want with the frequency that you want)
2. Emotional dissatisfaction with the primary partner (i.e., the relationship isn't adequately intimate or fails to meet other non-sexual needs)
3. Boredom with the partner and the relationship (more likely the longer the relationship is)
4. Stronger orientation to rule-breaking, sensation-seeking, or other behaviors that are considered risky
5. Attitudes toward sex that promote more sexually promiscuous behavior, or negative attitudes toward monogamy

The list could go on.

At the end of the day, though, a person who cheats is confronted with the the following situation: I have made a commitment to be in an exclusive relationship with my partner, which means I cannot pursue or accept sexual contact from anyone else. BUT, I want to have sexual contact with other people. Either I honor my commitment and deal with my sexual or relational dissatisfaction OR I achieve satisfaction outside my relationship and I violate relational rules and deal with whatever consequences follow from that choice.

Basic Motivation for Infidelity: Selfishenss

After all of that, the question that motivated this post remains: why do some people make the choice to violate relational rules to meet their needs?

There is no one-size-fits-all answer to this question. The particular explanations for any individual's choice to cheat are nuanced and specific to particular persons. Having said that, however, I would contend that regardless of the particulars of a person's reason to cheat, I think that the broad, overarching explanation for cheating is selfishness.

Cheating is the result of a person's refusal to relinquish the benefits of being in the primary relationship while receiving the benefits of another relationship. Often, the primary relationship provides us with a range of benefits we are unwilling to give up to pursue an extramarital fling, such as material or financial security or a partner to assist in the caring for children. Trying to maximize benefits while minimizing costs is a very normal method of decision making, but people who make the choice to cheat do so knowing that although they are receiving maximum benefits, their primary partners have enormous potential to receive negative consequences, and therein lies the selfishness.

I have also had people say that they choose to be unfaithful not to retain the benefits of the primary relationship (as there are very few), but rather they cheat to avoid the negative consequences of terminating the primary relationship. Such costly outcomes of relationship termination include a costly divorce, conflict over dividing shared possessions, potential loss of parts of a shared social network, and feelings of guilt for hurting the partner and destroying the relationship. In this case, the selfishness is rooted more in the refusal to accept the negative consequences of a more responsible and relationship-focused choice.

In either case, the unfaithful partner prioritizes his or her own positive outcomes over the rules of the relationship. Said differently: the unfaithful partner prioritizes his or her own happiness over being a respectful person who honors relational rules and commitment to a relationship. This, in my estimation, is the definition of selfishness.

Now, I realize that one might argue that selfishness and maximizing one's own positive outcomes is nothing more than a wise practice that ensures an individual's survival and high quality of life. That may well be true, but, as true as that statement may be, the fact is that happy, functioning relationships cannot survive when either partner values him or herself more than the relationship. If your aim is to be focused entirely on your self and your own positive outcomes, then close interpersonal connections are probably not for you. If, however, your aim is to participate meaningfully in the growth of close relationships with others, you must understand that a certain amount of sacrificing your own impulsive desires is necessary to make that happen.

The Take-Home Point and Some Parting Thoughts

So, at the end of the day, if you want to know why you were cheated on, the simple answer is: your partner is selfish and cares more about him or herself than about you or your relationship. Save yourself an uncomfortable interaction by accepting the reality of that statement.

If you are a person who has ever been unfaithful and you've convinced yourself that you cheated for some arguably justifiable reason, I'm sorry to have to tell you that the reality is that you were too selfish to honor the rules of your relationship. Yes, it is that simple.

I hope that this post has been illuminating for you. More than that, I hope you never have to refer to this post to understand an event in your own relationship.

Class dismissed.

Lesson 7, Part I: Is Flirting Cheating? - Defining Infidelity

When we discuss infidelity in my interpersonal communication class, there are usually three things that my students find most interesting:

1. What counts as cheating,
2. Why people cheat, and
3. Whether a relationship can survive the commission of an infidelity.

I've already talked about whether a relationship can survive an infidelity in my post about Trust, so if you're dealing with this issue, revisit that post. The other two questions are equally important, and I'd like to handle them in separate posts. So, the purpose of this Part I post on infidelity is to answer the question: what is infidelity?

Clearly defining infidelity is important because it allows us to accurately evaluate our own and our partners' behavior to determine whether or not an infidelity has been committed. Often, my students want my permission to be hurt or upset with a partner either for cheating or for unjustly accusing them of cheating. As much as my students want a clear and decisive answer to the question, "is it cheating if _______________?", I can never provide one.

This is because there isn't an exhaustive or universally agreed-upon list of what constitutes infidelity. Whether an act is considered unfaithful depends entirely on what behaviors a couple defines as cheating in their relationship. This variation in what people consider cheating is why some couples believe that flirting with the hottie at the cafe for a discount on coffee is cheating, while other couples have elaborate rules surrounding the management of an open relationship in which the act of having sex with another person is not, unto itself, an act of infidelity.

Though we can't identify a list of behaviors that are always considered unfaithful, understanding the definition of infidelity can provide us with some insight. So, infidelity can best be defined as the violation of one or more rules regarding exclusivity in the relationship. It's fairly common for couples of formally or explicitly declare that they are in an exclusive relationship, but far less frequently do couples explicate what resources they agree to get only from each other and no one else (which, after all, is the definition of "exclusive"). Generally, the declaration of exclusivity means that partners will not engage in sexual contact with people other than each other, but is often the case that a range of other behaviors may also be considered violations of exclusivity.

One of the difficulties of determining whether an act is unfaithful according to the rules of a relationship is that we often fail to discuss the rules until someone breaks a rule that they didn't know existed. Sometimes, our partners will engage in an arguably inappropriate interaction with someone we might consider a rival to our relationship, and we get upset. Our partners may not have known they were doing anything wrong. In some cases, even we didn't realize the behavior was problematic until it upset us. In highly functioning relationships, such a scenario will provide an opportunity for partners to talk to each other to clarify what behaviors are consistent with an agreement to be exclusive, and what behaviors are not. When couples respect each other, they both agree to honor the new boundary and the troublesome incident never has to repeat itself.

In couples that are less functional, however, a violation of implicit rules of exclusivity are acknowledged with some form of negative communication such as being in a bad mood or criticizing the partner, but no discussion about why the behavior was problematic. The perpetrating partner knows that his or her mate is upset, but may not realize why. This creates negativity in the relationship, but it doesn't clarify what behavior resulted in the relational distress. Because the perpetrating partner may not realize what he or she did wrong, there is a high probability that the behavior will be repeated. The repetition of the troublesome act results in an increase of hurt, anger, and resentment for the other partner. Ongoing negativity and harboring of resentment is one of the most efficient ways to affect a rapid decline in relational quality. Talking, then, about what is or isn't cheating becomes important to the maintenance of trust, and thus, satisfaction in the relationship.

So, if you're confronted with a situation in your relationship in which your partner has committed what you perceive to be unfaithful behavior, don't let it poison your relationship by refusing to openly discuss it. Yes, this can be uncomfortable. Yes, it may be construed as accusatory which may initially exacerbate the problem. But, if you are calm, reasonable, clear in communicating your thoughts, and willing to listen to your partner, you can create an opportunity for a fruitful and potentially relationship-saving conversation.

Of course, clarification of boundaries doesn't necessarily prevent unfaithful behavior, but that's a post for a different day.

Class dismissed.

Lesson 6: Trust

This is as much a lesson on relationship management as it is a Soapbox Session. It's a little longer than my average post, but trust is a big relational deal so it's worth the words (and the read).

The big idea: A relationship cannot function without trust. If you do not trust your partner, or your partner does not trust you, the possibility for the relationship to grow or bear the nurturing fruit of closeness is limited at best. A realistic view of the level of trust in your relationship must underlie your decision to escalate or persist in a relationship. If you do not realistically trust your partner, there is no point at all to being in the relationship. Period. Seriously. Read on.

To begin, we should probably define trust.

Trust is the confident expectation that your partner will not harm you. In close relationships, harm usually comes in the form of the commission of a relational betrayal. Betrayals are acts, large or small, that violate the implicit or explicit rules for conduct in a relationship. When a betrayal is committed, our confidence in the expectation that our partners will not harm us wanes. If enough betrayals of significant importance are committed, our expectation shifts away from believing our relationships are safe and moves toward a confident expectation that our partners will do us harm. This results in a relationship being characterized by a lack of trust.

Under normal relationship circumstances, occasional violations of relational rules of minor or moderate importance will happen. Usually, these relatively minor betrayals are a by-product of selfishness or thoughtlessness. Though these may be annoying, generally, these relatively minor betrayals are neither a sign of, nor do they lead to, relational disintegration. Rather, we are able to rely on the bank of relational credit that we have accrued in the relationship to draw against to cover the negative effects of a betrayal. In other words, if the betrayal is small enough, and the relationship is good enough, even after the betrayal, the overall value of the relationship is still positive. We are able to return to a confident expectation that our relationship is a safe place to be.

There are circumstances, however, during which we find it difficult or impossible to recover trust in a relationship. If a betrayal is the violation of a major relational rule (such as the commission of a sexual infidelity) or if the landscape of the relationship is generally negative, then there may not be enough positive relational credit to cover the negative effects of a betrayal. If the relationship cannot recover from the negative effects of a relational betrayal, then we end up trying to carry on a relationship with someone whom we expect will metaphorically take a hammer to our hearts every time we hand it to him or her. This, my dear friends, does not make for a happy relationship. This isn't good. It isn't productive. It serves no purpose. It has no point.

So what we know so far is that:

1. Trust is the confident expectation that our partners will not harm us.
   
   
2. Minor betrayals that happen in the context of a generally positive relationship do not typically have lasting negative effects on the trust in a relationship.
3. Major betrayals or frequent betrayals that happen in the context of an already-negative relationship undermine and can ultimately destroy trust in a relationship.
4. Relationships that lack trust are ultimately pointless to pursue.

A common question that I get from my students is whether and how trust can be recovered after a major betrayal (or a lot of smaller betrayals that have ruined the overall landscape of the relationship). 

The answer to that question is dependent on many things. Arguably, though, one of the most important factors that determines whether trust can be restored is whether we are able to forgive our partners. Forgiveness is complicated and deserves its own post. Suffice it to say, that being able to move past the betrayal and believe truly that our partners will never commit a betrayal of the same magnitude is essential to post-betrayal relational functioning. While I'm not prepared to talk about both trust and forgiveness in this post, what I do want to say regarding post-betrayal trust is this:

If you cannot forgive your partner, then terminate the relationship.

I'm going to remind everyone here that I am not a marriage therapist. I'm a scholar and teacher and relationships are my area of expertise. While my aim is generally to help my readers navigate as successfully as possible through the muddy waters of relationship stress, it is also the case that sometimes I want my readers to figure out when a relationship is past its expiration date. If you feel like you're handing your heart to your partner with the expectation of it being smashed to smithereens, it's time to cut and run. And here's why:

1. You will behave badly. Bad behavior comes in a variety of forms. You may be suspicious, snoop, engage in surveillance or following behaviors, you may perform repeated tests of your partner's devotion, you may stop being mindful of your own obligation to be kind, courteous, or respectful because you feel your partner owes you something . . . you get the idea.
2. Your bad behaviors, how ever justified you (or your partner) initially perceive them to be, will be equivalent to ongoing relational punishment.
3. While the punishment may be warranted, your partner will eventually come to feel like they have paid their relational debt to you by taking whatever punishment you see fit to dish out. The point at which your partner feels that he or she has paid their debt, your punishment will be seen as a justification for your partner's further bad behavior. After all, if we are already being punished, then why bother behaving?
4. The point: your bad behavior begets negativity, which will beget further negative behavior, and so on in a vicious cycle.

And as I said above, a lousy relationship characterized by negativity and that drains your resources and your joy is a colossal waste of emotional energy and other resources. Stop it. If you can't let go of the betrayal, then let go of the relationship. 

Class dismissed.

Soapbox: Adulthood = Acting Right

Okay, this isn't about relationships, but since I have an audience I'm going to take this opportunity to hop on my metaphorical soapbox (which, if you ask my students, is something I'm highly prone to doing) and give a screaming lesson about life.

Today's soapbox: Being an adult means acting right.

Listen, life is tough. My mom started teaching me that lesson when I was about 8 years old. Sometimes we have to do things we don't want to do - like going to work instead of posting up on our couches for three days and watching marathons of Golden Girls and the Walking Dead. Sometimes we have to put up with people whom we don't like and find it difficult to deal with, but they are our bosses or co-workers or in-laws and they aren't going anywhere. Sometimes we'd really love to drop a couple hundred bucks on a shiny new whatever-the-heck instead of making a car payment. Sometimes, we are bored with our romantic partner and entertain the idea of a tryst with a hot stranger.

Get of over it. Seriously.

Being a grown up - a full-fledged adult means taking responsibility for ourselves. I will grant you, getting old and bearing the responsibility that comes with movement through life as we age isn't always awesome. And it doesn't always come with benefits and rewards commensurate with increased responsibility. But you know what? That's life. Handle your business, pay your bills, contribute to society, and treat people well. Do these things even when you can't see a good reason for it because the success of larger social structures relies on individuals' willingness to make responsible choices.

Or you know what? Don't.

Here's the catch, though. If you want to choose to shirk the responsibility of adulthood and act like an irresponsible child, that's fine. BUT, that means you have to bear the consequences of those choices. If you lose your job, get your car repossessed, or have your spouse leave you because you were self-indulgent and utterly lacking in conscience, empathy, integrity, or foresight, then so be it. But shut up because I don't want to hear you gripe about your lousy lot in life. If your bad life circumstances are directly tied to silly, stupid choices, then revel in the mess you've made for yourself. Don't ask me for a ride, don't ask me for relationship advice, and don't ask me for a loan. You did that to yourself, so figure out how to work it out.

Quit sucking and act right, for crying out loud.

*hops off soapbox*

Lesson 4: "I'm Sorry" is Not a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free Card

The topic of our last lesson was the fact that a fight and a conflict are not the same thing. We haven't talked yet about effective, collaborative conflict management strategies, and we will come to that. Before we approach some conflict management strategies, though, I think it is important to talk about apologies. Regardless of whether you work hard at managing your conflicts well, and regardless of whether you can separate a conflict from a fight, it is reasonable to expect that occasionally we will need to give or accept an apology in a relationship.

If you're a fan of the drama show NCIS, you'll know that the quiet-but-effective protagonist, Special Agent Leroy Jethro Gibbs, has a set of rules. Among them (number 6, I think it is) is that a person should never apologize as it is a sign of weakness. In general, I think Gibbs' rules are a good idea - always carry a knife (Rule 9), never date a co-worker (Rule 12), never screw over your partner (Rule 1). These are bits of wisdom and good advice for life. The business of never apologizing, on the other hand. Well that's a whole bunch of nonsense and I'll tell you why.

An apology is not a sign of weakness. Rather, when it is sincerely given, it is an acknowledgement of responsibility for some betrayal or other wrong-doing for which another person had to bear negative consequences. Without going into a whole lot of research, we do know that the acceptance of responsibility for wrong-doing serves important relationship functions including restoring equity after a transgression has been committed, and enabling forgiveness. So, Gibbs is way wrong when he says that apology is a sign of weakness. Rather, an apology  is an overt recognition and ownership of actions that we have taken that have harmed people we care about.

Now, here's the tricky part: an apology isn't a cure-all. An apology is not just a couple of little words that can smooth over the negative consequences of a wrong relational turn. An apology really only has any hope of moving two people past a betrayal if it is a legitimate sign that we are willing to accept responsibility for our negative actions and committed to trying to avoid the same wrong-doing in the future. We often make the mistake of translating our own apologies to other people as "I'm sorry that I did something that upset you and that we got into a fight over it." Rather, the more appropriate translation of our apologies should be "I'm sorry that I made a choice that caused you hurt. I accept responsibility for my actions and I commit to us both to try my best to avoid repeating the hurtful act."

If you find yourself (or your partner) repeatedly apologizing for the same hurtful action we must confront at least one of three likely realities:

1. You (or your partner) fail to realize that there was really, truly hurt on the other end of an action.

2. You (or your partner) fail to realize that the apology is a sign of ownership and acceptance of personal responsibility. You also probably fail to realize that accepting responsibility for a wrong-doing necessitates an attempt to modify the problematic behavior.

3. You (or your partner) realize that you did something to cause hurt and that you should change hurtful actions, but you just don't care. This can be the consequence of laziness, selfishness, or relational disinvestment. The particulars of why you don't care about the consequences of your actions are less important than the fact that this attitude has almost no hope of resulting in anything except the continuation of a pattern of wrong-doing.

If your situation is either 1 or 2 above, you have some hope for remedying repeated hurt. You can talk to your partner about what an apology really means. You can talk about why the action is hurtful or otherwise negative. You can talk about possible alternatives to the problematic action that can meet your needs without hurting your partner. There is talking to be done, but there is a lot of potential here to move past a repeated conflict.

On the other hand, if scenario 3 above is more what you're looking at, it might be time to revisit whether or not the relationship is something that you should be bound to. I do believe in talking, productive conflict and relational work, but if you need to be convinced to do right by a partner, you probably have some work to do for yourself first before you try to bind yourself to someone else. (If your partner is the transgressor, you might want to revisit an earlier post here at Relationship School about knowing when to toss in the towel).

Here's the long story short: It is important to exchange apologies in a relationship. Being able and willing to honestly say to a partner that you have committed a wrong-doing can help us move past the hurtful action and into a place where we have learned and grown together as people and as partners. Apologies are not cure-alls, they aren't instant fixes, and they don't take the place of working to be better for the people we love. Don't apologize if you don't mean it - that action cheapens an apology and causes it to lose their tremendous relational value that we often take for granted. 

Class dismissed.

Lesson 3: Conflict Part I - A Fight and A Conflict Are NOT the Same Thing

One of  my favorite lessons to teach in my Interpersonal Communication class is the unit on conflict. To this day, it astounds me that a simple reframing of what a conflict is vs. what it isn't can change people's minds about how they approach a conflict interaction with their partners.

There are several academic definitions for what constitutes a conflict. For our purposes, though, I'm going to identify a conflict like this:

A conflict is a conversation in which two people who share a relationship together each speak their needs, find that their needs are incompatible with their partner's needs, and they work collaboratively to find a way to meet both their needs.

I'd like to emphasize a few important parts of this definition.

First, a conflict is a conversation. You have these all the time. You have them about the weather, and TV shows, and cosmetic products, and what's in the news and whatnot. There is no reason that a conflict has to be anymore daunting or terrifying than a conversation about anything else. (Okay, your relational investment and how important the issue is can change the tone of a conflict, but that's a lesson for a different day).

Second, a conflict allows two people to speak their needs to one another. A good relationship is one in which each partner recognizes that a relationship is an environment in which people exchange resources, and that exchange of resources is supposed to provide for each person's needs. If you read back to Lesson 2: Glowworm Theory, you'll remember that we form relationships specifically to have our needs met. A relationship cannot function well when you have needs, be they emotional, logistical, or whatever else, that are going unmet. However, you and your partner cannot expect that you will each provide for each other's needs unless you communicate them to one another.

Finally, a conflict requires collaboration. It is often the case that your needs are incompatible with those of your partner. This may be as simple a situation as your wanting to eat Chinese and your partner wanting to eat Mexican, or as serious as you want to get married where your partner is content never to be married. Regardless of the importance of the issue, the fact is, there can be no satisfactory resolution if partners are not willing to cooperate and work toward a solution that is best for both parties. We'll talk in another lesson about strategies for achieving collaborative solutions to conflict, but for the time being it's important to spend some time understanding what a conflict is, and what it isn't.

A conflict is NOT a fight. Think about any fight you've ever seen: a bar fight, a boxing match, whatever. The objective is that someone wins by way of beating the daylights out of the loser to the point that the loser is rendered incapable of further participation (or standing upright). Imagine applying that model to your relationship. If you approach a conflict as a competition in which you intend to win (i.e., achieve your needs) at your partner's expense (i.e., your partner's hurt and emotional and verbal inability to speak his or her needs to you), nothing good, beautiful or productive will come. Rather, we breed hurt, animosity and resentment. And, if you ask me, resentment is like relational Round-Up - the stuff kills relationships right down to the roots.

Here's the long story short: a conflict is a conversation. It is NOT an opportunity for you to emotionally lay your partner out. If you stop thinking about conflict as a war to be fought and won, and start thinking of it as an opportunity to collaboratively address both your needs and those of your partner, this can change the way you approach conflict episodes. The simple readjustment in your thinking can be the first step to promoting a more positive and open attitude as you communicate your needs to your partner.

Next time, we'll talk about communicative strategies for improving conflict interactions as well as a few things to avoid.

Until next time, class dismissed.