mdlbear | River: The language of love

The day after flower_cat and I have another of our perennial arguments about the meaning of some word that we each use differently, or my interpretation of her tone of voice, or some such minor semantic quibble, along comes theferrett with this post about the language of love:

Everyone hears "love" in their own, unique language. What makes your partner feel safe and cared for can often be a bunch of phrases and habits that make absolutely no sense to you.

We've all heard the story of the wife who left her husband because he didn't pick up his socks. It sounds dumb -- but for that wife, part of the phrase "I love you" meant "I'll keep the floor clean for you." Likewise, sometimes, speaking love involves nonsensical phrases like, "I'm sorry I hurt you" when it should be perfectly apparent that nobody means to hurt anybody.

Learning what things tell your partner "I love you" is what often makes the difference between a long-term marriage and an early divorce.

It's mostly about nonverbal "language" like cleaning the kitchen; one that I learned early in our household was putting the forks into the dishwasher with the tines down. But it also applies to common phrases that we understand in different ways.

I've learned, for example, that when I introduce an offer to help with the phrase "Would you like me to...", the invariable answer is "no", sometimes followed by "I'll do that," which is always implied whether it's stated or not. Whether it's convenient or physically possible for her doesn't matter, my asking the question that way implies that it's something she should be doing, and she feels bad for not being able to. These days, if I have any damned sense, I'll just say "I'm going to..." and do it. Or, if there really is some uncertainty, "Is there any reason why I shouldn't...", in which case the expected "no" frees me to get the chore done, whatever it was.

One that I've learned quite recently is that it's very important to my Cat that we spend some time within touching distance in the evening when I get home. It doesn't have to be right next to one another; as long as she can reach out her hand for me to hold, she's happy. More about that one downstream a little.

Old bears are sometimes capable of learning new tricks.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I read this and grinned, at a meta-level it sounds so much like the kind of interpersonal breakthroughs that N and I are making lately, both in terms of what things it smooths out things in the relationship and in how that's achieved. I'm so delighted for both you and the Cat!

For you, this stuff is tagged 'River'. We just coined a new tag today, "galaxy". I think we'll be using it for the things where my mastery of synthesis can be used to make things clear to my love, who has her own mastery of analysis but for whom synthesis is a complete mystery.

Trivial example: I enjoy sudoku. She finds them baffling and frustrating.

Yay!

Good luck on your galaxy quest! It sounds fascinating; I hope you'll post a few notes here along the riverbank as you go along.

I've noticed that, although N's powers of analysis are indeed formidable, she often doesn't have much patience with someone else's analysis, especially if she's already convinced that hers is the correct one.

Possibly the difference between literary and scientific analysis. As a scientist (and a programmer) I'm always keenly aware of the fact that I'm probably wrong.

As for sudoku, once I convinced myself that there was a simple algorithm for solving it I lost interest.

I never thought of sudoku in terms of being synthesis or analysis...care to elaborate?

Also, you might like a book called Tridoku (similar to sudoku, but in triangles instead of squares).

Likewise, sometimes, speaking love involves nonsensical phrases like, "I'm sorry I hurt you" when it should be perfectly apparent that nobody means to hurt anybody.

I'm going to respectfully disagree with theferret here. It is not always perfectly apparent that nobody means to hurt anybody because sometimes it is not true.

I have been enjoying your "River" posts.

Probably depends on where you put the parentheses -- I think the implication is that, even in situations where it's clear that no hurt was intended, the pro forma apology is still required between these people. (I have a different problem -- I tend to apologize too often or too profusely, and it drives Colleen nuts.)

Glad you're enjoying my River journey. It's good to have you along.

This kind of stuff can be really hard.

When A moved in with me, one of the jobs she took on was dishes, which she did daily, to my astonishment and deliriously blissful delight and relief and ... did I mention blissful delight? (Did I mention that I HATE doing dishes?) I repeatedly told her how much I liked not having to do dishes, and always having a clean kitchen, to which she repeatedly said it was no big deal.

Well, that isn't so any more. (It changed when A was really sick for a while, but hasn't changed back again.) Now if I ask for dishes to be done, no matter how I ask, she reacts as if I'm nagging and/or criticizing (which usually isn't helpful toward getting things done and is never helpful toward getting them done in a pleasant fashion) and if I start doing dishes she gets upset and feels that I'm criticizing her (which makes a task I already hate even less pleasant). (She got upset when I bought paper plates too--they're not good for the environment. "I can wash dishes, she protested.")

Sigh.

*sigh* indeed. Definitely a double bind when you can't ask and can't do it yourself. I suppose you could try something like "let's do the dishes - you wash and I'll dry" or something like that. Turn it from a chore into a joint activity.

Works with kids, too.

"Would you like me to..."

I've never known anyone who had that reaction to that phrasing and it's interesting to me.

In my teens I became conscious of my own tendency to reply with 'no' to questions in the form, "Do you want...." When I was young, our family was not poor enough to be deprived, but getting things you wanted rather than needed was for birthdays and Christmas and sometimes not then either. All these years later and with full knowledge of how it came to be, I still react sometimes rather than take the question in the informal way it's intended.

Interesting.

Around here it also depends on whether it's a task or a favor. "Do you want me to pour you a cup of coffee?" Sure. "Do you want me to do the dishes?" No.

I needed this post, right now. I was in the midst of being upset with Andrew nagging me about things he thought I should be doing tonight, when I was trying to explain I already have a full agenda,, and I'll be lucky to work through that, as it is. I think we need to talk...

Happy to help.

Other people's semantics are always fascinating. When we were first dating, I told my spouse that he had treetrunk legs. I was thinking about the apple tree in the _Song Of Solomon_, solidity, stability, security, world-deep roots. He thought I was saying he was fat. He's learned better since. ;)

Indeed: Colleen is frequently in need of a translator; fortunately I'm trainable.

I just have a very bad habit of rephrasing things until I get them across. Drives her nuts.

We're not even going to *think* about the obscurity of some of my LJ tags. They work for me...

I'm also enjoying your River posts.

With my spouse, the *bad* word was "lie". I was raised that a lie was something that wasn't true. If I said I was going to be there at 6, but there was a 5 hour traffic jam and I didn't make it, I lied. (No value judgment with that -- I may have done my best, but it just wasn't possible.) C thinks (and most dictionaries agree that) it's only a lie if the intent was to deceive. (So there is a value judgment inherent in the word.) So, even if I am constantly being told -- multiple times a day -- something-or-other (usually many multiples of somethings) MOST of which turn out to not happen (due to getting hung up playing with the computer, or forgetting or whatever) it's still not a lie, so I have no justification for anger... yeah, right!

Doesn't help that "honesty" is VERY important to me. And I feel that, especially when it's a pattern, if things being promised are not delivered, that dishonesty plays a part.

Different definitions of lying have played into some of my recent problems as well; there's guaranteed to be a lot of friction when that happens. Fortunately Colleen and I are reasonably compatible in that area, and valid excuses are generally accepted. Not always, and the definition of "valid" sometimes has to be worked on.

With other people, e.g. people who think the way you do, things can get anywhere from difficult to explosive.

River: The language of love

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject