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.

Do you invite the truth in as a welcome guest or block the door as if the truth is an unwanted invader?

Are you actually interested in the truth or is the story in your head more attractive?  For most of us, we pick the story every time.  Who wants to deal with any contradictory reality about ourselves. 

 

This is why we make it so difficult to receive the truth.  When the reflection does not adhere to the precious image that we hold about ourselves, when there is a disconnect between how we want to see ourself and what is being told to us, we put all energy into resisting.  Better to dismiss the truth than have to deal with the unpleasantness of reality.

 

Think of the occasions when your spouse, friend, boss - or therapist for that matter - has told you something about your behavior that you do not want to hear.  What happens then?  Do you get defensive and debate it?  Do you advidly go on the attack to disprove what is being told to you?  Do you just plain ignore and disregard the feedback as if it was never said.

 

The lack of openness to input from others, particularly input that goes against the grain, demonstrates an attachment to seeing the world only through one's own lens.  It leads to an aggressive demand that others cater to MY story.  The message is, I get to decide what is reality.  I get to control who is allowed to give me feedback and it must happen on my terms only.

 

What if rather than seeing the truth as intruding, you opened the door to truth as an invited guest.  How you respond is your choice afterall.  If you are willing to dismantle the self-image long enough, there would be room for real learning, exploring, authentic self-questioning.  Yes, then there would be room for actual relating.  The choice is yours.  Look into what you habitually choose.

Listening is an act of love

How well do you really listen to your partner?  Would they say they feel truly heard? 

 

Listening seems like a simple, passive, everyday occurence that we give little thought to.  However, real listening requires something much more from us.  What I am talking about is the deep, intentional act of being open to hearing deeply, allowing the other's words to penetrate us, to fully absorb what is being said.  Real listening requires the absence of one's own agenda, interpretation, judgement.  Real listening is an act of love.

 

Notice how often you enter into a conversation attached to an outcome.  Are you building a case for a certain point of view while you are supposedly listening?  Is the framework with which you enter into dialogues one of winning or losing?  How oftern do you assume what the other person is going to say?  How often do you just tune him/her out entirely, pretending that you are listening when you are not?  

 

Real listening conveys the importance of the other person.  It is relational.  There is a genuine interest in creating a bridge between self and other.  Inherent in this form of connecting is the possibility for discovering something new, exploring something meaningful, having a sacred meeting between two human beings.  

 

Beginning to see that the absence of deep listening is but one manifestation of not loving one's partner is beginning to look more deeply into oneself. 

Compromise is NOT a solution.

I have an issue with "compromise" when used in the context of primary relationships.  Why, you ask, isn't it healthy to be able to find a compromise with your partner when it comes to decision-making?  Isn't this the goal?  Only if you want to have a compromised relationship.

 

Compromise implies a giving in, a giving up.  Each party settles for a partial loss that seems like the best agreed upon lesser alternative.  There is an implied dissatisfaction with the outcome.  Inherent in this process of compromise is the potential either for resentment or score-keeping.  By this I mean that it is likely to come back up in the form of, "last time I didn't really get what I wanted, now I should get x, because you got y the time before."   There is a lingering sense that the other person got a better deal and both can hold this view simitaneously!

 

Compromise can also be instituted as a way to avoid having to work through each decision as it comes up.  A common example of this is often illustrated in how couple's 'compromise' about holidays with one solution.  A couple might decide to spend every other X-mas with alternating sets of parents. This is a common form of compromise that potentially breeds not only a rigidity, but also an inherent resentment.  It doesn't allow room to make other choices in a given year that might make more sense for their circumstance, because someone feels 'owed". 

 

In contrast, a real resolution isn't about finding a compromise, it is an orientation towards discovering the best solution for the situation and the relationship.  This involves a full process of exploration, dialogue and self-discovery.   Both people are willing to look at their own attachments, their feelings, the consequences of possible decisions.  Both feel they have an equal voice.  They are committed to fully participating in the process until they reach a clear deicision, not just driven by a desire to rush to a quick solution in order to be done with it or avoid conflict.  In this way there is joint ownership of the outcome.  And the process itself elicits a relaxed closeness, a sense of teamwork and confidence in what can be understood and accomplished while working together.  The process even if difficult, when worked through, serves to strengthen the intimacy between them. 

 

Compromise leaves a deficit.  A real solution leaves a surplus.

 

 

Cloak and Dagger

I would venture to say that most marriages operate by the "cloak and dagger" method.  What I mean by this is that one's honest feelings, thoughts, motivations are more often than not "cloaked' from the partner.  There can be many justifications assigned to this withholding behavior.  Not wanting to 'hurt' the other's feelings, fearing their reaction, convincing oneself that it is no big deal, prejudging one's own feelings... are but a few of the ways to convince oneself to hide from the relationship.  And all these "reasons" are no more than elaborate justifications to not be honest, vulnerable or take responsibility for the truth. This very "cloaking" then sets up the resultant "dagger".  This may eventually come in the form of simmering resentment over time, or further withdrawal, or explosive anger, or a mutitude of other behaviors that act out whatever hasn't been said directly.

 

Thus to "cloak" one's truth from ones partner makes one accountable for setting up the "dagger".  The stab back is just waiting to happen.  There is inherent and inevitable violence in the withholding.  And the payoff for this?  to maintain control, uphold an image of oneself held dear, to bolster a superior position, to avoid vulnerability...   Remember that the "cloak" serves a selfish purpose.  Best to delve into this before the "dagger" is already in hand.  

 

How do you "cloak"?  How do you then use the "dagger" against your loved ones?

We are the violence in the world

The violence that we condemn in the external world exists within us.  We, each of us, are the violence in the world.  If we deny this, if we push away the truth of this, then we are invariably perpetuating it.  We must be actively struggling towards this realization for this is the necessary start and the only opportunity to exact real change. Herein lies the crucial importance of reflecting deeply on every thought and action.  Anything less than a dedicated committment to this is not taking full responsibility for contributing to the violence upon others.

 

You say you are not violent, look again.  Wherever there is a lack of honesty, a withholding, a refusal to give, a relunctance to set a clear boundary, an attachment to having it your way, a wanting something from someone that is based on past needs...These are the conscious or unconscious acts of violence in relationship.

 

If we want real peace in our lives and in the world at large, then we have to be committed to ending the violence within ourselves that we otherwise inevitably act out onto others.  This difficult process begins with deep, unremittting self-reflection.  It is motivated by seeing the harm caused.  It is our calling as human beings.

 

 

Rights and responsibilities

Many of us growing up were not given the message that we had a right to feel our feelings - especially those emotions that caused discomfort in the caregivers around us.  As a result, the message that becomes internalized is that feelings are unsafe, not acceptable, to be denied in order to feel lovable.  As human beings, we have a right to our full human experience much of which includes the complexity of our emotional landscape.  It is tragic when anything less than this truth is conveyed.

 

What is simitaneously true is that what we do with our feelings now, as adults, is our responsibility.  Just because we have strong emotions - perhaps a notable proportion of which are accumulated from the past - does not justify acting out from them in hurtful ways towards others.  This tendency to throw them  onto others so as to stave off ones own discomfort is nothing less than aggressive.  This can take the form of criticising, blaming, demanding, withdrawing, manipulating, expecting, punishing...Taking repsonsibility to not act out in this manner requires acknowledging ones emotions directly - and without conditions. Irregardless of the anticipated fallout, the fear of conflict, the discomfort of vulnerability, it is our responsibility to own our feelings outloud in relationship. 

 

We have a right to our feelings and a responsibility for our actions.

Following Through With Agreements

No matter how seemingly small or trivial, the lack of follow through is one of the more destructive dynamics in an on-ongoing relationship.  Whether you agreed to pick up the kids at 4:00, walk the dog before work, pick up a cluttered area in the house, return a phone call or show up at a designated time, these are sacred agreements and deserve to be treated as such. 

 

Sacred?, you say, is it really that important in the scope of things?  In actuality, it constitutes the very fabric of relationship for it is all about trust and reliability.  By not following through, one becomes untrustworthy in the eyes of the partner.  There are many dire consequences for the relationship when this becomes a pattern over time. 

 

One of the ways agreements break down often happens early in the process.  For instance when one person does not know or fully understand what they are agreeing to.  Sometimes a "yes" is given just to placate, or to not have to think about the logistics involved, or to prevent potential conflict.  The other person can also be equally complicit in this lack of clarity perhaps by accepting a half-hearted "yes" or not clearly expressing their expectations or even by setting up the partner for already anticipated failure.

 

Spend whatever the upfront time it takes to get clear.  Assess accurately the time required and your motivation to fulfill this request.  Be willing to say "no" if you are not able to commit to the follow through.  If you agree, make sure that the timeframe for completion is part of the understanding.  Once agreed upon, consider this sacred between you. 

 

If you find that you need to change this agreement, then you must bring it up accordingly.  Remember, you are changing a sacred agreement that now needs to be thoroughly readdressed.  If you break the agreement, then take full responsibility for your lack of follow through.  This is your partner afterall and the message you gave by not following through is that he/she does not matter to you, is not worthy of your respect, and that you are not interested in working as a team.

 

Do you still think that it is only about not walking the dog?

 

 

 

What is true compassion?

Compassion is usually associated with making someone feel better, helping them to stop hurting, empathizing with their feelings in a gentle way.   I would argue that this is not true compassion if it comes at the cost of the truth.  In fact, people can use this familiar definition as a reason to withhold the truth.  "I didn't want to tell him that because he'd had a bad day."  "I didn't want to hurt her feelings."  "I didn't want to bring it up then because it felt like I was being mean, like I was 'kicking the puppy'."

 

True compassion always points towards the truth rather than being motivated by not "hurting" someone's feelings. 

 

As a new therapist, now nearly thirty years ago, I was taught to "reframe" and "support" clients in whatever ways they presented and wherever they were in their lives.  Much of this early training was, in retrospect, about enabling the client to feel better about their situation rather than directly challenge the ways that they were stuck.  More often than not, this conveys the message that the client is a victim of circumstances rather than an active creator of their problems.

 

Now when I call out a client's behavior as, for example, manipulative, I do so from the most compassionate place. There are strong attachments to how we want to be perceived by the world and how we want to see ourselves in it.  This makes it enormously difficult to be open to seeing the aspects of ourselves that we don't want to admit exist.  However, it is this very reflection of truth that creates the opportunity for growth.  If I am not bringing these discrepancies to light, I am not being committed to their transformative process. 

 

There is no compassion in allowing people to hold to their own distortions or 'protecting' them from reality.  The real compassion lies in offering the truth, for the truth is the only place from which real change can occur. 

 

What is a true apology?

The willingness to genuinely apologize is a key ingredient in any relationship, for we are all fallible, all human, all a work in progress.  To recognize the pain one has caused in another - even unintentionally - is at the heart of a thoughtful apology. 

 

But what does it mean to offer a full apology and why can this be so hard to do?  First, let's consider what doesn't constitute an apology.  A real apology isn't just a generic, "I'm sorry", for this doesn't convey a clear understanding of the particular hurt caused in that situation.  And a genuine apology is not motivated out of just wanting to have it be over with.  "I said I am sorry already, can't we just move on from this."  Being tired of talking about it, wanting your partner to be OK with you again, desiring a change in subject or home climate are not good enough reasons.  This kind of placating doesn't lend itself to real resolution and it will feel unsatisfying to your partner.   

 

A true apology demonstates an awareness of the pain that your actions have caused.  There is a stated understanding as to why it happened or at least a committment to getting to the bottom of it within yourself.  Expanding out of this comes reassurance that you will attempt to prevent it from reoccurring.  Being able to offer this to your partner not only can help them feel heard, but also communicates to them that you are serious about taking steps to minimize future negative impact on your relationship. 

 

Why are such apologies hard to give?  Because it requires that you own your own part of the argument or conflict.  It requires a letting go of being "right" or justifying your actions because of how you yourself might have felt 'wronged'.  Inherently it is a vulnerable position and as such is uncomfortable.  But all this resistance gets in the way of more meaningful relating.  By apologizing, you are taking responsibility for your own actions - independent of your partner's - which contributes to the deepening level of trust in your relationship.

 

Apologies are important whether for 'small' issues or more complicated, hurtful ones.  However, they are only as effective as the receiver experiences them.  If the apology doesn't come across to your partner as complete and genuine, then be willing to stay with the ongoing dialogue, learn from your partner and in this respect, learn also about yourself.

Why relationships?

This week, a client asked point blank, "why be in a relationship at all?"

 

It's an excellent question given that relationships, at times, bring out the very worst in us.  It isn't the storytale 'happily ever after' our culture seems to promise.  The reality is that it requires persistent effort - to resolve inevitable differences, to attempt to communicate clearly, to make life decisions with another, to process through one's back baggage....  So why bother?

 

Because relationships offer the opportunity to heal - ourselves and the world.  To grow as a human being, to transform old hurts, to free up one's innate capacity to love fully, to be present in each moment - this is our human destiny.  All that bubbles up in relationships becomes the very catalyst for our growth.  Even more expansively, if one is truly interested in creating peace in the world, then we have to understand our own inner anger, hurts, aggression and violence.  Committment to this exploration, to developing this consciousness, begins in one's own intimate relationship.  Our transformative process then contributes to the changes we so desperately need in humanity at large.  It all begins at home. 

Death and Intimacy

This past week I had a profoundly intense experience involving the death of a dear friend.  Amidst a whole myriad of emotions, I am struck by the similarities between what death and intimate relationships ask of us. In both situations we are called to step forward in the face of terrifying uncertainty.  Embedded in both circumstances is the opportunity to move more fully into relationship - or choose to hold back.

 

How we meet death, our own or someone close to us, illuminates something about how we tend to meet close relationships.  How we live our lives informs how we relate to death.  Love is about meeting these threshold relationships - whether death or an intimate partner - with our full self, our presence, our honesty, our vulnerability, our entire range of emotions, our authentic response.  This requires nothing less than a fierce courageousness that we may not even be aware exists within us until these catalyst moments elicit it. 

 

This week I found that paradoxically, as I mustered up the courage to move towards death, to be open to learning from it, to literally be hands-on, I found that I felt more alive, more affirming of life, less fearful of the inevitability of loss. 

 

The real question becomes, are we moving towards this experience or away from it?  Are we opening or closing to what is being offered?

 

 

Holiday Obligation vs. Choice

A client made an apt alteration to Thoreau's infamous quote this week by reflecting on how many people seem to"lead lives of quiet obligation".

Holidays with their traditions, "shoulds", and "suppose tos" can be particularly laden with this form of 'duty'. 

 

Give yourself permission to ask, "What do I really want to do?"  "And who do I want to spend it with?"  And importantly, "What is the cost of - (fill in the blank) - that visit, that interaction, that have-to?" 

 

Ask yourself, if the holidays were going to be a real reflection of "celebration" as defined by you, what would this look like?  How closely does this match up with how you will be actually spending your time?  It is your vacation, your holiday afterall.

 

If there are incongruencies, what is getting in the way of creating the very situation that you want?  Guilt? Fear of the repercussions for 'breaking rank' with family members?  Relunctance to say 'no' ?  Again, what is the cost of not clearly choosing?

 

This heightened holiday time, often seeped in extended family and expectations, might be enjoyable, stressful or both.  The question is, are you making choices or are you just following a well-paved path of obligation.

 

Relationship as a spiritual practice

The work of relationship is the work towards being in the present moment.  This is in sharp contrast to reactions that we bring from the past that then contaminate the now.   When we haven't done the work to clean up past hurts, unresolved arguments, old traumas and wounds from our original families, negative associations with intimacy... then these pains and rages inevitably show up and get triggered by current circumstances.  All of this removes us from the present.  Instead we find ourselves reacting to the past and attempting to avoid or alter an imagined future.

 

The renowned Buddhist master, Thich Nhat Hanh, states:  "Our true home is in the present moment.  To live in the present moment is a miracle."

 

Working on the very stuff that relationships evoke, can clear away the detritus and allow us to genuinely be in the now.  This is where true compassion resides. 

 

Therefore treat your relationship as nothing less than a spiritual practice.