Moving Forward: The art of marital conflict

They say you never know what’s going on in other people’s marriages. Everyone has heard about a so-called loving couple headed for divorce. Then I think about my own parents — married for 55 years, but they didn’t really like each other.
There are many factors that contribute to a marriage’s survival. Hot button topics are often related to money, child rearing, sex, in-laws, and division of labor. But the underlying issue is how they handle these conflicts.
Disagreements are a normal part of relationships. So, if someone claims that they never argue, it tells me that one of two things is happening: 1) Both people are dancing around each other to always be agreeable, or 2) One person is dancing around the other to always be agreeable. Either way, this may lead to an explosion or it may indicate lack of honesty within the relationship.
Conversely, there are those relationships that are tempestuous. Do they thrive on conflict, or is it slowly damaging one or both parties? There really is no way to know, but I would speculate that it must be exhausting, constantly being on the offensive or defensive.
In an article in “Psychology Today,” couples therapist Catherine Aponte discusses the differences between a disagreement and a conflict. She believes that when two people have opposing views, and may even be angry about what one has done, it’s a disagreement. Discussing the issue and trying to reach a resolution is a constructive way of handling the difference. However, often the disagreement moves into characterizing the other person based on the disagreement. Then, according to Ms. Aponte, it becomes a conflict.
For example, let’s take money. The wife has spent what the husband considers too much money on a particular item. Rather than discuss the issue — the fact that he disagrees with what she has spent he calls her irresponsible. He then generalizes this characterization to other things she has done in the past to make his case that she’s irresponsible.
She then is forced to defend herself, or even make some character charges against him in return. At this point, the initial disagreement about an expenditure has mushroomed into a full-blown conflict. It becomes about who you are, not what you’ve done.
In that scenario, one important lesson is to stick to the original disagreement and discuss it in isolation rather than generalize it into an ugly place where dialing back to a resolution becomes difficult or impossible (because it’s no longer about the price of the dress, sofa, etc.).
John Gottman, a relational psychologist, developed his theory of marital conflict through many years of research. He’s best known for his theory of the “Four Horsemen” (after the New Testament’s prediction of the demise of humanity), which states that four specific communication styles can make or break a relationship.
What’s so interesting about his theory, is that by analyzing the existence of these four styles, he’s been able to predict with 95% accuracy whether a relationship will succeed or fail. This is true for both heterosexual and same sex couples.
The “Horsemen” are: 1. Criticism, 2. Defensiveness, 3. Stonewalling, and 4.
Contempt.
1. Criticism is similar to Ms. Aponte’s theory of disagreement vs. conflict. A complaint is normal. We all have them. When it turns into a criticism, it generalizes about the person’s character. Words like “always” and “never” are used such as, “You always …” Or, “You never….” It becomes difficult to defend oneself when there is nothing specific except vague accusations.
2. The second “horseman” is defensiveness. When this occurs, the recipient of the complaint refuses to listen to the facts, but swipes it all away with a single swat. For example, if one party expresses something they find annoying, the defensive person will not hear the concern, but will either negate it completely or retaliate with a complaint against the other. How the complaint is addressed will often determine whether it will be met with honest consideration or complete defensiveness.
3. The third “horseman” is stonewalling. This consists of nonverbal communication indicating that the recipient of the complaint is either not listening or has withdrawn from the conversation completely. (Research shows that men are famous for this!). Gottman suggests that the “stonewaller” recommends a break and return to the conversation when it is less heated.
4. The last “horseman’ is contempt. This is the most destructive to a relationship. Contempt consists of name-calling, eye-rolling, and insults. Communicating with contempt is cruel and unproductive and is the greatest predictor of a doomed relationship.
In struggling to write this column, I decided to interview some of my family members. My husband said, “It’s easy. Just write about listening.” He’s got a great point, but how to listen is key. Here are some suggestions from relational therapist Esther Perel:
• Instead of listening for the purpose of posing an immediate rebuttal, try listening to actually hear what the other person is saying.
• When the partner makes a statement, ask questions. Try to probe into what is being said by going deeper to really understand what they’re saying. This will help you both to understand better.
• Accept that feelings are not facts. However, facts do exist and both are important. When listening, it’s useful for partners to help each other differentiate between the two.
Then I asked my daughter about relationship conflict. She told me that her daughter (who happens to be my granddaughter) was taught in kindergarten to talk in “I” statements, such as in “I felt like ABC when you did XYZ.” I was intrigued by this because it’s exactly what couples’ therapists are always trying to help their clients achieve in their communications with their partners.
How great it is that children are now being taught to speak to each other in this manner. No one ever told us that in kindergarten. Instead, it was, “Johnny’s being mean to me,” or “Look what Sally did!” a concept of passivity and blame that many people bring into their adult relationships.
If we can all focus less on what Johnny is doing to me and let him know instead how he made me feel, he and I will be able to understand each other better. And our families will thank us for it.
Nancy Green is a retired social worker and a member of the Shelter Island Health and Wellness Committee.