Kitchen Wars

Marital warfare often manifests in the kitchen. Take the dishwasher for instance. Who fills it and how, who empties it and when...can all become the battleground fodder highlighting the larger unresolved relational issues. The refrain, “I always have to empty the dishwasher” can become code for a pervasive feeling that things are not “fair” in the marriage. Or “You said you would start the dishes last night and that didn’t happen” may be pointing to a lack of overall trust in the other person. The conflicts related to control can take the form of whether to rinse the plates first or not, whether to place the silverware up or down and which way to stack the bowls. These examples can serve to expose the power struggles lurking in the relationship.


If these types of battles are happening in the kitchen, you can be certain they are happening elsewhere too. Dishwashers and other triggers are the seemingly minor conflicts points of the tip of the much larger proverbial iceberg. Here are the more day-to-day places where the battlelines are drawn and played out. Thus, these examples are not to be minimized or trivialized in terms of what they reveal about the general unresolved dynamics in the marriage. It can feel “safer” to fight these household wars in this way, but by not drawing out the more complex issues directly these issues become harder to recognize and resolve. With this in mind, everyday examples can become an opportunity to explore more deeply into the relationship, beyond who’s on cleanup.

Weeds of One's Mind

The “weeds” of the mind require regular extraction. Distorted thoughts can have a way of seeding and re-seeding themselves not unlike the invasive quality of ivy or dandelions. This weed I refer to, by another name, can also be called projection or transference. Distorted thoughts, like weeds, are difficult to pull up by the roots and if allowed to flourish will only grow stronger and begin to cast longer and longer shadows over the truth.

How to accurately distinguish the weeds from the plants is the ongoing work: what thoughts, beliefs should be nourished and which need to be radically plucked from the soil?

In my work with couples, new clients almost, without exception, enter my office with some variation on a "weedy" distortion. One version is that they come in blaming each other for the problems in their relationship. Their stories, although diametrically opposed are inversely the same. “If only he wouldn’t…or if she wasn’t so….” The other common presentation is that they share the same distortion; both agree that one person in the couple is “the problem".

Both of these orientations are corrosive and destructive to the relationship because neither is based in the fact that the responsibility for the relationship is shared. Couples inevitably resist the reality that each person in the union plays a role and has a choice as to how they respond in every interaction. In this way, the problems that exist between them are co-created and jointly perpetuated.

The distorted thinking about relationships, like weeds, is persistent and could take the form of: “I wouldn’t be like this if I was just with a different person.” “Marriage should be easier.” “Because this relationship is so difficult it must be the wrong one.” All these ‘weeds’ are invading the truth of the matter and interfere with the possibility of real change.

Inhabiting the fullness of responsibility in a relationship involves the ongoing challenge of owning one’s part, not reacting from the past, staying cognizant of the choice each person has to act, feel and respond in every moment. It is not unlike the work of tending an extensive garden. Both require continual care, attention, watering, fertilizing and most especially, weeding....

Are you a road rager?

Does your blood pressure increase when you drive in congested traffic?  Has this feeling ever boiled over?  Specifically, have you ever honked, gestured, sworn, tailgated......or worse?  Ever felt badly afterwards that you "lost it" back there? 

 

Ask yourself, what is at the heart of this reaction on the road.  Yes, perhaps they cut you off or pulled a lame move - (and just perhaps there wasn't even a driving violation and it still elicited your over-the-top reaction).  Regardless, does this justify inflicting your own rage upon them?  Isn't your response disproportionate to the situation?

 

Ever wondered what was behind this surge of anger?  Are you aware of the underlying thoughts that contribute to these outbursts? 

 

Road rage is one indicator of how one sees the world and oneself in it.  Inherent in this angry behavior is the expectation that the world should be convenient for ME, it should serve MY desires, cater to MY needs.  Herein lies the entitlement and with it the sense of superiority.  Afterall, "I have places to be".  And besides, "no one is going to cut me off"!  Recognize any of this thinking in your own head?

 

Be assured that if the results of this thinking occur on the road, it is undoubtably happening in your personal relationships too.  You disagree?  Think it is only how you are with anonymous strangers in metal vehicles that you will never see again?  It is true that you most likely won't encounter these other drivers again, but your problem goes with you.  Ask your partner how it is for them to be in the car with you at those times.  Do they see this behavior flair up elsewhere?  Does it concern and/or intimidate them?

 

Look deeper into the road rage.  Are you really more important than the driver next to you?  Do you consider your agenda a higher priority?  Is their behavior towards you really a personal affront?  And if another driver is acting aggressively towards you, did you have a part to play in this angry exchange?

 

If you observe that you come with your rage ready and loaded, perhaps you can then become interested in making a different choice, for rage is a choice.  What do YOU get out choosing rage?

Killing a Marriage by a Thousand Paper Cuts

Marriage isn't football or a courtroom, there is no place for a good defense.  What are your typical reactions to being called on something that you have done - or failed to do?  These are some of the more common defensive bylines, but this clearly doesn't represent an exhaustive list.  It's only exhaustive for those on the receiving end.   Over time these reactive responses can kill a marriage by a thousand paper cuts. 

 

I didn't agree to that....

Is this because both parties didn't actually specify, in clear terms, the agreement or is this an attempt to abdicate responsibility now that the breach is exposed?

 

Well, you do X......

This deflects responsibility by bringing in a "tit for tat" defense.  Essentially, you want a "pass" because you have given "passes" to your partner.  There is a proposed bargain, "I have let you off the responsibility hook before and I expect you to do the same for me now". This serves to deflect the issue at hand.  It may well be a legitimate concern from the past, but it should have been addressed separately then, not as a counter argument now.

 

Next time, I will......

Promising to act differently next time before a full appreciation is understood and a heartfelt apology is given, uses the future as a way of brushing off the present.  This is the classic "empty promise".

 

You're just too sensitive...

This argument uses a personal character attack to dismiss the injured partner's experience.  The message here is 'your emotional response is wrong', 'you are the real problem here, not me'.

 

You are always critical of me.....

A variation on the above with the added twist of victimization thrown in for extra effect.  The message is, 'I am the mistreated one here, not you'.

 

I said I was sorry, what more do you want from me.....

This is aggressive placating in an attempt to shut the other person down.  It is a demand to get over it and move on without any real resolution.

 

I don't know what you are talking about......I don't remember saying that....

This is the ultimate in disrespecting the other and slamming closed the door of discussion.

 

Do you recognize your own defensive arguments in any of these statements?  Can you begin to wonder what this must feel like for the person receiving these messages?  A response that is in relationship with your partner inevitably reflects a full understanding of the situation, one's actions, and the pain caused.  Short of this thorough, genuine reflection, no resolution is possible.  The conflict will inevitably return. 

The Importance of Agreements

This is the traditional time of year for the making of New Year's resolutions - as well as the typical time of year for the breaking of them.  Rather than discuss these personal agreements we make with ourselves that we often have a difficult time keeping, I want to address the importance of agreements made between two people in a relationship. The making and keeping of clear agreements can not be over-emphasized, for this constitutes the very foundation of trust and integrity in a marriage.

 

Because of this, agreements must be treated as a sacred contract between two committed people.  Everything from chores to monogamy fall under the purview of agreements. In this way, one's actions, whether seemingly minor or major in nature, either convey a deep respect for another human being or a blatant dismissal and disregard of them.  The consequences of broken agreements result in your word carrying no value or meaning to your partner.  A breach of contract in a business situation is a sueable offense.  How is this any less serious in an intimate relationship where so much more is at stake?

 

In order to be in good faith with your agreements, be very specific and have a clear, mutual understanding as to what is being agreed to.

Agree only to that which you are fully committed to following through with. 

If a change in the agreement becomes necessary then the onus is on you to initiate a conversation about respectfully renegotiating the terms.

 

Think this is all too structured?  Then be prepared for the inevitable fallout of living in a marriage infused with mistrust and resentment.

 

 

Marital vs. Martial

I find it interesting that the difference between the words "marital" and "martial" is merely the placement of an "I".  Isn't it the case that how we insert ourselves in our relationships can become the difference between working together (marital meaning relating to) or generating conflict (martial meaning relating against).  This is a profound distinction solely determined by the positioning of "I".

 

Are you aware of how you enter into a discussion with your partner?  Do you impose your "I" into the conversation without true regard for other?  Do you insist on being attended to? heard?  Do you show up already wanting a particular outcome, attached to having it go your way?  Is your underlying tenet one of respect for the collaboration or do you come ready for a battle? 

 

Marital vs. Martial - is up to "I".

Fact or Fiction

The one hope we have regarding transformational change - that is to once and for all end conflict and suffering in our lives - is to begin to ground ourselves in reality.  In fact, aligning oneself with reality - what IS true vs. what we want to be true - is the very meaningful act of change itself.  Sound easy? 

 

The realization of how extraordinarily difficult this is for each of us to do in every moment is also a reality and a necessary starting point. 

Consider the ways in which we attempt to avoid reality, the ways we trick ourselves into believing a more palpable story.  We deny the facts, uphold an image of ourselves that we want to be true.  We create a story, then choose to believe it, so much so that we are no longer even conscious that we made it up in the first place.  And did I mention that we are very adept, well-practiced story-crafters.  We can build a case, compile the supporting arguments and then justify our actions based on this fictional story.

 

Pick an example from your life, any instance, big or small, where conflict exists.  Look into it.  What assumptions are operating?  When you truly hold these assumptions up to the light of investigation do they seamlessly match the facts? Can you truly stop and challenge the arrived at conclusions long enough to ask open questions?  Are these assumptions really the truth or are you turning assumptions into 'fact' and by doing so conveniently avoiding reality.  Look into it.