Of course I’m pleased that the Obama Justice Department is no longer going to defend Section 3 of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” in court. And though it doesn’t sound like a major step forward—okay folks, not to worry, we’re not going to defend this particular section of a noxious law…that’s hardly a slogan that inspires massive celebrations in the streets!—it’s gratifying to know that my government is no longer going to go along with this.

And I find one factoid in particular quite comforting: section 3 concerns itself with the definitions of two particular words: “the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.”

Back up. Let’s look at those words again. My definition of ‘marriage’ can be found here. I think it’s a good idea to look at ‘marriage’ this way, since the joys and sorrows of any marriage have much more to do with how the couple sees their union than what sort of legal document they have on file at city hall (if any).

And as for ‘spouse,’ well, don’t get me started! I should just come out and say that I love this word. It’s gender-neutral, so it avoids the problematic cultural connotations of ‘husband’ and ‘wife,’ which came from a culture in which men and women did not enjoy positions of equality in their married relationships. And it’s a much better word (in my view) than ‘partner,’ which is a word I’d use to refer to you if you and I decided to open a coffee shop together. My beloved spouse is not merely my ‘partner,’ and I hesitate to call him my ‘husband’ (if only because I am by no means anybody’s ‘wife’)…so ‘spouse’ it is. And since I live in a place and time that at least theoretically celebrates the independence and freedom of the individual (which is at least a stated value of the same folks who wrote DOMA), I’d like to reserve the right to decide for myself what I think the word ‘spouse’ means, and what word I choose to refer to the one person in my life with whom I share the greatest amount of intimacy and trust.

Finally, for some final thoughts, let’s go back to my definition of ‘marriage.’ Speaking as a therapist, it’s clear to me—and I spend most of my working life talking about relationships—that whether we desire this or not, our own assumptions, beliefs, values, and attitudes about ourselves and those we love will determine what we mean by these words. Our sex—whether we’re biologically male or female—is far less important. Even if you are a socially conservative heterosexual person in a conventional marriage, how you view your relationship is going to make much more of an impact on the quality of that relationship than what you are biologically. We are not merely physical animals. We are complicated, sentient, discerning, imaginative beings. Our relationships reflect that.

So, thanks, Attorney General Holder, and thanks, Mr. President. Thanks for getting out of the way so that we can go on defining all of this for ourselves, the way we’ve always done!

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

A few years ago I was talking to a friend of mine about relationships (and no, even though I’m a counselor who focuses on relationships, that’s not all I talk about!), and I was trying to articulate my belief that most people mistakenly view their relationships as experiences that they receive, rather than experiences that they choose.

Relationships seem to just happen to people. “I fell in love.” “I fell out of love.” “He is a blessing that came to me out of nowhere!” “I don’t know what I did to deserve this happiness (or sadness).” … All of these are common statements about relationships that reveal a belief that we are merely passive recipients of love, pain, and all the other experiences we have with those we love (or love to hate).

And my friend said something I’ll never forget. She said that an older woman she knew summed all of this up in one sentence:

“All you have to do—the one and only thing that you must do, that you can’t not do—is die.”

Think about that for a moment. Death is inevitable: we must face it. We can’t duck it. We have no choice. But everything else—who we choose to be our companions, the career(s) we choose, and so on—everything else is chosen. This is not entirely true, of course. I can’t choose the century I live in, or my race, or my sexual orientation, or my first parents. I can’t choose which country I’ll be born in, which language will be my first, and so on. And this statement—that all we have to do is die—would have made no sense to people in earlier ages when, if your father was a shoemaker, you were a shoemaker. It’s a very 20th/21st-Century notion. But there’s a lot of truth to it, a lot of wisdom in it. For example—

1) I can choose whether I will put up with a relationship that I find unsatisfying, and I can choose to learn how to assert for a better one. (Though I can’t choose at the same time to avoid the inevitable pain that that entails!)

2) I can choose whether I’ll rise and fall with the moods and behaviors of my partner, and if I don’t want to do that, choose to find a way to regulate my own emotions and set my own goals.

3) I can choose to settle for nothing less than the relationship I really, really want, even if that means I’ll lose the person I’m currently with, because s/he doesn’t want what I want. I can choose to search for someone who does!

4) I can choose to accept or surrender to my partner’s vision for our relationship, and creatively engage with my partner in his/her vision, and by doing so find happiness that I couldn’t have found alone.

5) I can choose to confront myself and my partner with my feelings, even hard ones like the feeling that I have “fallen out of love,” and actually make some progress in restoring that love, sometimes far beyond what it was in the first place!

These are just a few examples. The bottom line is this: watch out for passive language in your dialogue with yourself and others about relationships. You have more freedom of choice, and more power, than you might think. Do you feel helpless and powerless in your relationship? If so, that’s normal. It’s easy to feel that way. But it’s also (mostly) true that the only thing you really have to do is die. Before that fateful day, you have many choices before you.

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

Don’t miss my latest post on my couples blog, a reflection on how, in any situation in which you’re working on personal problems, you are probably dealing with underlying assumptions, time-honored beliefs, and unrealized dreams.

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

As I’ve said before, John Gottman has lots of great ideas for couples who want to be happy and healthy. One of his best recommendations is to practice non-defensive listening. Problem is, non-defensive listening might be the hardest thing you’ll have to do in your relationship.

I think we’re hard-wired to be defensive. I would call it a survival skill, a relic from our evolutionary past. I need to preserve and protect myself if I want to survive long enough to procreate, and that means having strong defenses. I need to protect my resources, my shelter, my offspring…and (as human evolution creates complicated social dynamics) my reputation and self-esteem. If you’re mad at me because you think I slighted you, or was being selfish, or ate your Froot Loops, well, that’s not how I see it! So, naturally, I get defensive.

But we’re not done evolving, we humans. To listen non-defensively is another step in human development. It’s a major element of emotional maturity, and emotional maturity is a highly adaptive quality in a human being. You think I slighted you, and you know what? I can see why you think that. I was certainly not at my best when I came home last night. You think I was being selfish? Well, I think it’s true that I’ve been caught up in my own things lately. Why don’t I hit the store for more Froot Loops and we can talk more about it?

You don’t have to agree with your partner 100% when you’re practicing non-defensive listening. You don’t even have to agree 5% of the time. Your partner may be way, way off, accusing you unjustly of something you didn’t do, or think, or feel. But that’s your partner’s reality right now. It’s really helpful to hear her reality as her reality, and let her know that you understand what she’s saying. You may not agree, but you are open and available. You are listening non-defensively. And that creates an opportunity—and a motive—for your partner to listen to your reality. This is very hard! But it can transform your relationship.

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

I’m not a parent, but I’ve worked for years with parents, all six of my siblings are parents, and I guess I should just say that sometimes I like to read the stories of people whose experiences are radically different than mine. Maybe that’s why I like mommybloggers (though not all of them use that term to describe themselves). I recently linked to my friend Alissa’s blog, and recommend her if you’re interested in the life and times of a family that was created through adoption. And for a good time on your lunch break, I think you’ll like this blogger. I link to her today because I like her take on psychotherapy in this post, and I believe all couples would be happier and healthier if they had this couple’s attitude! (She’s also hilarious.) Enjoy!

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

Like all of their workshops, this Gottman workshop is stuffed with great ideas, sound research, and keen insights. One of my favorites is their work on the concept of “turning toward,” that is, turning toward your partner as a way of being, a stance, a habit. For example, you see that your partner is upset, and rather than “giving her space” (which often enough is a way to avoid her, dressed up as being respectful of her), you lean in and simply say, “You look upset, babe. What’s the matter?” If you’re cultivating the habit of “turning toward,” you’ll begin to recognize thousands of opportunities to do this in your daily life with your partner. If you miss too many of them—or simply don’t recognize them—your relationship begins to erode.

For more on this from my own perspective, see what I said recently about curiosity.

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

One of my goals in the next year (or two) is to write an abecedary. An abecedary can take many forms, but for my purposes it would be a small book with 26 chapters. Each chapter would be an essay on concepts I use with clients in therapy, one for each letter of the alphabet. A is for attitude, perhaps: how does your attitude determine your mood, the quality of your relationship, etc.? L is for listening (I’m in favor of listening, and it’s more than you might think it is). You get the idea.

I don’t have all the chapters worked out, but I’m pretty sure I’ll have a good time with chapter three. C is for courage. I’ve written about this before. It takes courage to pursue the relationship you really want, to take your career in a new direction, to confront yourself—and then your partner—about a problem, or about your deepest wish. It certainly takes courage to draw close emotionally to someone who really matters to you, and who (by virtue of being human) is capable of harming or grieving you.

But I also want C to stand for curiosity. Curiosity may have killed the cat, but the lack of curiosity has killed many relationships. If you have the foresight—and the humility—to try to look at the world through your partner’s eyes, you might be less upset by what’s going on with your partner, and feel more free to take action. I like to say that when a couple is shouting at the top of their lungs, they are expressing zero curiosity about the other. No wonder they’re at each other’s throats. I’ve noticed that in any of the hundreds of friendships, working relationships, and other relationships I’ve had over the years, my own curiosity has opened up a lot of opportunities for growth and intimacy.

And yet, I also want C to stand for creativity! I want to talk about the importance of play in relationships, and playfulness in your thinking and behaving throughout your life. Can you recognize your own absurdity and laugh at yourself? If not, I don’t like your chances for happiness. And the happiest couples I’ve worked with have been the ones who allow for delightful creativity, spontaneity, and playfulness in their relationship…even if there’s also been a lot of hurt feelings and hard times.

Lots of people assume that in Therapyland, C stands for communication. Maybe. But I think the three words above are more of a challenge for most people than communication skills. In any case, chapter three is going to be a snap!

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

Every year or so I repost this technique. Here’s the last posting, from 2008. It’s a simple way to communicate with your partner (or friend, or colleague, or parent, or pretty much anyone) and work through a tough emotional situation. In the 2008 post I listed three steps, but actually there are four, as follows:

1. Describe the situation you’re concerned about. This is the “Just-the-facts-Ma’am” step. You simply describe what happened, what you observed. For example, you tell your partner, “You came in the door, walked past me, and went into the kitchen without saying anything to me.” Be careful to stick to the facts: all of the information in this step is the kind of information that a video camera would pick up.

2. Describe your feelings, and stick to feeling words like ‘frustrated,’ ‘worried,’ ‘sad,’ or ‘upset.’ If you catch yourself saying sentences that begin with “I feel like…” or “I feel that…” you’re not expressing feelings. You’re expressing thoughts. “I feel like you don’t respect me” is a thought—a belief—but not a feeling.

3. Now it’s okay to describe your thoughts, your judgments, your story about what happened. Continuing with the above example, you would say, “When you walked past me without saying anything, I thought it meant that you were mad at me.” Your belief that your partner was mad at you led to the feeling you described in #2.

4. Finally, state your request. “I’d like to check this out with you, and if you are mad at me, I’d like to work through it with you.”

The value of this technique is that it keeps you in full ownership of your thoughts and feelings, which allows your partner to respond less defensively. It’s not your partner’s fault that you thought he was mad at you. Right or wrong, that’s your story. Using this technique, you’re letting your partner know that you’re open to the possibility that he’s not mad at you, and you’re inviting him into a conversation with you about your story. This is much more effective than simply accusing your partner of being mad at you without taking the time to take ownership of your own reactions and conclusions.

Often, when people say they have communication problems, this is the kind of thing they’re not doing. Give it a try, use your own language and turns of phrase, and be patient with yourself as you work on improving your ability to relate effectively to others.

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

Every once in a while I notice themes cropping up in my work with several clients. Lately one of those themes has been the ordinary and lovable absurdity of human beings. So often we suffer and struggle because we fail to laugh at ourselves, and miss out on the opportunity to look at ourselves with a humorous awareness of our own absurdity.

One of my favorite films is the wicked (in all the good ways) Dogma, a film that spoofs the Catholic church and organized religion in general. In one scene, a human is talking to an angel, and she’s commenting on how ridiculous the angel’s concerns are. The angel (played by Alan Rickman) responds, “There’s nothing funnier than the ridiculous faces you people make mid-coitus.” It’s one of my favorite comments on human sexuality, and supports my belief that if you can laugh (kindly) at your sexual self, you will be much more likely to enjoy great sex.

Most of my clients come to counseling with problems that are dead serious. It’s a big mistake to just minimize those problems and laugh them away. At the same time, it’s also healthy to be aware of your own silliness, your own fallibility, your own absurdity. To illustrate, I’ll present a photo of a creature (in my care) who has no problem looking ridiculous!

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!

I found a lot to like in Lee Siegel’s recent thoughts on the trouble and strife of John and Elizabeth Edwards. (I posted about their crisis last year.) As a therapist, I sat up in my chair when I read this:

“A friend of mine once said that the only two people who know what’s going on between a man and a woman are the man and the woman themselves. He was half right. The man and the woman—or man and man, woman and woman; it’s all the same—are the last to know. The idea that we can precisely fathom people’s emotions and motives is absurd. We can barely comprehend our own.”

I’m nodding my head up and down right now. Siegel is right about this. As a therapist, I’m paid to know a lot about relationships, learn a lot about my own clients, and use that knowledge to help them work through their most difficult relationship problems. And I know that to do my job well, I have to have a high degree of self-awareness and self-confrontation. And yet, there’s always something going on that will escape my awareness, and that of my clients. No human being can be fully understood or known by another human being (or themselves, for that matter). I expect that even if I live to be ninety years old, I’ll still not have taken the full measure of my own character, let alone those of others.

But if that’s the case, why do people make judgments about the Edwardses? Or—here’s a more difficult question for me—why do people go to therapy? My answer: as right as Siegel is about the need for humility in these matters, there’s a lot we can know about ourselves and each other. I will die not knowing everything there is to know about myself, but that doesn’t mean I plan to live an incurious life. The fact that we will never know everything about the universe didn’t stop us from launching the Hubble telescope.

So I’ll draw a lesson on humility from Lee Siegel’s reflections, but I won’t be paralyzed by that humility. I’ll keep wrestling with myself and engaging with other people in the adventure of self-discovery because I have faith that our exploration of the human universe will take us far. We’ll never reach the end, but our effort is part of what makes us human in the first place.

Meanwhile, I wish both John and Elizabeth Edwards well. As with all couples who are going through a hellish time, I hope they can find their way to a peaceful resolution of their crisis, and learn a lot about themselves along the way.

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It!