roadkill

I've been thinking about how come problems arise in any form of relationship. And I've also come to believe that perhaps a fundamental difference about a tiny view could cause a huge problem in any relationship.

Why? Say that person A assumes person B feel this way on subject Z192a39 Or some other obsecure though or view that person B feels is important; however because person B assumed that if A had any feelings about Z192a39 then A would express/question B about his/her view. I think that a problem could arise is that tiny view, because of it's obsecurity to anything until a key moment of insight into the relationship the assumptions of both A and B break other connections of some form causing a huge problem in the relationship.

Now I don't know what the fundamental difference are in each relationship is or how come they don't arise until a key moment. This is what I've come up so far do you think that this could in some way broaden human understandings of our relationships?

visotech

It often seems like people focus less on what they have in common and more on the diffrences when looking at compatbility. I know in my last relationship we disagreed on some things for one reason or another, but hell we agreed on 95% of everything else...just because there are a few disagreements, is it necessairly a huge problem? People often forget to look at the larger picture.

Similarly, when couples have a long term relationship, lets say 6 years - then they have one bad month and breakup, is it me or the last 6 years do not have enough bearing when they are nullified by one bad month.

Gotta look at the larger picture, then make a decision from there...

midgard

Ideaologic differences in a relationship are only a problem if A) you let them be a problem, or B) either party is expected by the other to change. You will never find another person who feels the same as you do on everything. For example, I am fairly liberal politcally and non-religious whereas my wife is fairly conservative and is very religious. We both joke about how we cancel each other's vote out at the polls!

Whenever a contentious issue comes up between us, we both try and keep the following in mind:

1. My belief structure is mine and works for me. I have a different world view than you may have, mainly because I have my own experiences and history that brought me to that point.

2. I try very hard not to assign "right" and "wrong". You feel your way and I feel my way. I find that usually, that both sides of an issue have their valid issues, and it really comes down to evaluating the pros and cons of each side. Rarely is it ever Black and White.

3. While I dislike your POSITION on a topic, that in no way means I dislike YOU.

4. It is not my job to convert you, nor is it your job to convert me. This really is about mutual respect and seeing the otherside's viewpoint.

5. Finally, what can best be described as "Your right to wave your arms wildly about ends at my face", by which I mean, when the actions that you take from your belief starts to cause me direct harm, then I will be within my rights to ask you to stop.

Having said all that though, I have found it interesting that small ideaologic differences are often blown out of proportion once the relationship starts to erode. When the relationship is strong, differences are not important. When the relationship is rocky, every little thing is a big deal. It is almost like you start making mental tallies of all the reasons why you shouldn't be together.

I hoped my ramblings made some sort of sense...

__________________
Praise not the day until the evening has come; the woman until she has been burnt; the sword until it has been tried; the maiden until she is married; the ice until it has been crossed; or the beer until it has been drunk. - Viking proverb

Radiospank

i found this very helpful

healer

They did, very much. Differences in relationships are IMO just as important as compatibility. Sure you have things in common, but how boring wouldn't it be if you had the same views on absolutely everything?

My mother told me a very long time ago that when choosing a wife, I better make sure that it's someone that I can talk to. I find that alot of the conversation between mandy and I spark from some fundamental difference in our thinking or the way we approach a topic.

As long as the differences you experience promote good, healthy discussion I see no harm in it.

__________________

abaya

Nicely put. I have heard this, too, from other long-married couples. I find it intriguing, especially because when I was an evangelical (a while ago), no one would dare date or marry someone who was fundamentally different... that would fall into the dangerous category of being "unequally yoked," or "yoked together with unbelievers," a stance that I find inexcusably judgemental and closed-minded today.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

SecretMethod70

You know what they say about assuming. Even with things that you believe to be basic ways of thinking, your partner may hold a completely different outlook. Even with things that you think are unimportant, your partner may place a great deal of importance on.

This is why communication is so necessary in relationships. Communication and willingness to compromise, because, without that willingness, "communication" isn't communication at all - it's talking at each other. Fundamental differences in ways of thinking and in opinions are impossible to avoid in relationships. The real question is how one deals with such things.*

Communication is important not simply when differences come up, but also when no differences are immediately apparent. Onodrim and I, for example, discuss pretty much everything with one another, and because of that we know where the other stands on just about every issue that is mildly important to us. It's a lot easier to talk about fundamental differences in opinion when they're not at issue than to wait until they are. Of course, it's also important to keep talking about things simply because opinions do change.

When fundamental differences are revealed in the moment as opposed to in advance, both people still have a choice as to how to deal with it: either let it remain a problem, or discuss it, try to see the other person's point of view, be open to changing your own point of view if possible, and consider the relative importance of the subject to each person.

Both members of a couple certainly don't have to agree about everything. As midgard pointed out, there are certainly many differences which do not have anything to do with the relationship itself. To use roadkill's example though, if one member thinks a subject is obscure (and, I'm going to assume, also relatively unimportant to the relationship) and the other member holds a more powerful and contrary view, that is when communication is most valuable. The first step after opening communication with one another is to try and see each other's point of view. This may not change anything, but an understanding of where the other person is coming from is absolutely necessary if progress is to be made. While learning to see things from the other person's point of view, one should also be open-minded enough to change points of view. This is often not a possibility when dealing with emotion-based opinions, but it is certainly possible when dealing with logical opinions. Finally, if one person is not swayed to the other's side (and, note, it is not about convincing the other person, but about sharing thoughts and feelings with the other person and allowing yourself to be shared to as well), then sometimes it is necessary to make concessions. When an issue is important to one person and relatively unimportant to the other, the second person needs to ask themselves what is more important to them: the relationship, or the "obscure" issue.**

Often, it seems, one of these steps is missing in a relationship. In the worst case scenario, things are not discussed for any number of reasons. Or, if the issue is discussed, either or both parties are not also willing to listen. Perhaps they listen, but are not capable or willing to make the concession or compromise necessary to save the relationship. These are only a few ways I see fundamental differences - even over relatively minor issues - causing the collapse of relationships.

The only reason I think my relationship with onodrim has lasted 6.5 years is because of a willingness to do all these things on both our parts. Few things are likely to surprise us: not only do we have a grasp on one another regarding the bigger issues, but we've also explored one another's preference in seemingly obscure subjects such as home decor, and we have done so since before it was even a remote possibility that we would live together in the near future. Perhaps it's because we've spent most of our relationship apart and, so, communicate about just about anything and everything is all we could really do with one another, but I honestly can't imagine a relationship being as healthy or relatively easy without having done so.

So, I don't think fundamental differences are actually the cause of relationship problems. What it comes down to is closed or stubborn minds. Obviously not everything can be agreed upon (nor does it need to be), and not every opinion or emotional reaction can be changed, but simply having a willingness to consider such things goes a very long way towards resolving differences. This is especially true when dealing with issues that are important to one but minor to the other.

visotech hit the nail on the head: "Gotta look at the larger picture, then make a decision from there..." Again, there is a difference between emotional responses and logical opinions. One cannot simply alter an emotional response simply by looking at the larger picture and wishing they did not have such a response. But, if both people in the relationship are willing to look at the larger picture, I think a resolution can be reached more often than not to save the relationship, and doing so is often well worth whatever concessions need to be made.

* Throughout this post I speak about fundamental differences that are not "deal-breakers" to both people involved in the relationship. I don't think it's worth discussing dual "deal-breaker" differences since the outcome of such a situation is pretty clear.

** I am also concerning myself primarily with differences that do relate to the relationship in some way throughout this post. Differences such as political ideologies need not have anything to do with the relationship other than being a source of friendly debate. Even then, though, if both people in the relationship aren't willing or interested in listening to the thoughts of the other and potentially learning from them, then what's the point?

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

abaya

Right on there... I really appreciate the way you put this, SM (though forgive me for putting in some paragraph breaks). It's interesting, though, how such a logical progression of steps to "communicate & compromise" goes by the wayside if a couple is not careful enough to think about the process when things get heated.

I think a big part of this common problem is simply ego... we all like to think we are right, even if we love and respect the other person. Sometimes, there is just no "right" answer or stance... it boils down to two individuals believing each one has the high ground. Hence the need for compromise, to surrender a piece of the ego and come to a shared understanding, agreement, workable solution...

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

savvypup

Very well said Midgard. Thanks for your input on this thread!

__________________

ciao bella!