The quest for a compatible partner, the much sought after and coveted who of arguably life's most consequential choice, is no small undertaking. Indeed, countless numbers of us go from one partner to another, often in a long series of what could be called, "experimental trials." And yet, wouldn't we expect formidable challenges given the popular presumption that the ''right partner" holds the key to unlocking intimacies' treasures? But who is the right partner? Does this who really exist? Or, are they merely a phantom, an unachievable lodestar, the self-manufactured product of our loftiest aspirations and romantic fantasies?
And, once we think we've found this exceptional person, how can we be confident—despite the exalted status we've conferred upon them—they are the right candidate for the job, and vice versa, that we are the right candidate for them?
Further, whether we are aware or not, our choice of a particular partner reveals our selection criteria, our attempt to define compatibility. Where do these selection criteria come from? And why these particular criteria? Moreover, remember, our earliest perceptions of compatibility are romanticized, strongly feeling-driven, and a hefty chunk of them lie outside our awareness—such as whatever it is that constitutes "chemistry" with someone. Remember too, our initial impressions of our romantic partners derive from a just-getting-to-know-you fraction of information, so these impressions can be as flimsy as they are ephemeral.
Parallel processes—the right person for the job
Throughout the traditional job interview, the employer/interviewer brings a preconceived idea of what skills an interviewee ought to possess for a particular job. Regardless of the candidate's qualifications, the interviewer's subjective impressions of the interviewee bias the decision-making process, thus heavily influencing who gets the job and who doesn't, according to research on the topic. This means both false positives (the wrong person gets selected) and false negatives (the right person is passed over), can, and often do, warp the interview process.
Consider as well, the interviewee, who deliberately and purposefully crafts a very self-promoting impression of themself, like a flattering, 20-year-old photo posted on a social media dating site. When in fact, the candidate's actual qualifications may not be completely revealed until they've had a lengthy stretch of time on the job. Sound familiar? Dating partners do an identical dance, don't they?
Of greatest consequence
However, far outweighing the importance of choosing the right applicant for a job is the challenge of finding and committing to our intimate partners. Isn't this the gargantuan, most far-reaching, and profoundly life-changing choice of our lives? Merely the thought of it can, and probably should, evoke weighty feelings. So, it isn't surprising that upon the very precipice of formally committing to our partners, many of us get "cold feet," a mostly temporary decisional paralysis. Did you get cold feet?
Yet, these sputtering, stalling musings upon committing, formally, or otherwise, to our partners are very understandable because, with our choice of a particular someone, we share everything of any real personal consequence. Here's a shortlist of the very recognizable biggies:
- Whether to have children, and if so, how we'll raise them.
- How we allocate our financial resources.
- When and how we are sexually intimate.
- Who we chum with.
- How we spend our discretionary time, doing which leisure activities.
And so on, ad infinitum. Not unexpectedly, even partners in decades-old relationships, on occasion, still ponder their commitments to each other.
A new, bold strategy
Given how emotionally back-breaking, Sisyphean-like, or even how impossible the task of finding the right partner might be, shouldn't we eagerly open our arms to embrace a new approach, especially one with the prospect of proving itself to be more effective? Which alternative strategy would be capable of the heavy lifting necessary to uproot the deeply embedded social expectation of trying to find the right person? Which would be capable of replacing it, or, perhaps more realistically, bolstering our customary approach to finding a compatible partner?
The how vs. the elusive who
In a condensed, introductory form, and with a smidge of pretzeled logic, here is an alternative strategy: To begin, this proposed new strategy places a strong emphasis upon how we are in relation to a potential or actual partner, as opposed to who we perceive our partners to be. The research on the how over the who already exists, though it occupies a tiny spot in the literature and arguably warrants further investigation.
Would you agree we usually have a firmer grip upon ourselves when it comes to how we think, feel, and behave vis-a-vis our partners, prospective or actual? Conversely, while it's customary to target the character traits of a prospective partner, these judgments are highly subject to change since they are perilously perched upon a wobbly pedestal of perception.
To clarify, the how is defined as the quality of our management of the personal needs we bring to our partners. Very plausibly, it is this how that more effectively and reliably creates and maintains affection for our partners (and ourselves), rather than our passive dependence upon the fluctuating perceptions of our partner's traits and what we expect of them because of these perceptions.
Intimacy intelligence
This tiny but bold body of literature introduces the novel concept of intimacy intelligence which cogently asserts that by being the "right person" we are more likely to be drawn to and attract partners of comparable emotional maturity. Succinctly, being the right person consists of a growing or heightened awareness of our individual needs, the emotions orbiting them, and, importantly, learning how to most effectively manage both.
A moment of self-reflection
In your search for a partner, what did you look for and why? Did you find what you were looking for, or, what you thought you were looking for? If you think you originally found what you searching for, have your partner's traits changed over time? Did any part of your search focus upon the who over the how? Lastly, what is your intimacy intelligence, that is, how well do you manage the needs you bring to your partner?
"relationship" - Google News
February 06, 2022 at 09:48PM
https://ift.tt/LrFW1yS
A New GPS for the Intimate Relationship - Psychology Today
"relationship" - Google News
https://ift.tt/cLewHEx
https://ift.tt/D6MNqSb
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "A New GPS for the Intimate Relationship - Psychology Today"
Post a Comment