I once had a relationship in which the big conflict was the window. My girlfriend liked it open because she ran hot. I liked it closed because I ran cold.
What was challenging about this conflict was how personal it became. My girlfriend was convinced that there was something wrong with me. I didn't have enough body fat and I didn't have enough hair. Her solution was that I should bundle up and wear a hat to bed. This made me feel like a character out of Dickens. I was convinced that there was something wrong with her. She had too much body fat, and her thermostat was off. My solution was that she should lose weight and see a doctor.
Both of us, in other words, accused the other of being wrong. One of us had to be normal and the other abnormal. There was no room in our relationship for both of us to be normal. There was no room in our relationship for us both to be right.
As a result, we entered into a sustained power struggle. I fought to keep the window closed because I wanted to feel normal. My girlfriend fought to keep it open because she wanted to feel normal. If I allowed the window to be open I tacitly acknowledged that I was defective. If my girlfriend allowed the window to be closed she tacitly acknowledged that she was defective.
In this way, the conflict over the window became a fight for self-esteem. I fought to keep the window closed because I needed to protect my sense of self. Secretly I was afraid that there was something wrong with me. My girlfriend fought to keep the window open because she needed to protect her sense of self. Secretly she was afraid that there was something wrong with her.
On an even deeper level, this was a conflict over sanity. If she was right, I couldn't trust my experience of the world. Maybe I didn't have a right to feel cold. Maybe I didn't feel cold, I just thought I was cold. If I was right, my girlfriend couldn't trust her experience of the world. Maybe she didn't have a right to feel hot. Maybe she didn't feel hot, she just thought she was hot.
Without knowing it we had become players in a zero sum game. One of us had to be right, to be normal, to be sane. The other had to be wrong, to be abnormal, to be crazy. With our sanity on the line, it's no wonder we fought so hard. The consequence of capitulating meant admitting you were mad.
Needless to say, that relationship eventually failed. It's amazing how many windows you can find if you need to. Every choice can be turned into a referendum on your sanity. Every difference can be twisted into a matter of right and wrong.
Years later I had a chance to revisit this issue. I was dating a smoker who yearned for fresh air. I was all for fresh air, but I didn't like the cold. And so the old battle lines reappeared.
This girlfriend, however, refused to engage. She had been there and wasn't interested in playing the power game. For her, the window question was a matter of preference. She preferred it to be open. I preferred it to be closed. Why we had these preferences was not on the table. It was enough to acknowledge that we were different in certain ways. The challenge was to figure out a workable compromise, not to demonstrate that the other person was wrong.
As simple as this may sound, it was a revelation for me. By thinking in terms of preference rather than in terms of power I was freed from having to justify what I liked and who I was. It was as if my girlfriend were saying, I accept you as you are with all your particular tastes and desires. I may not share each of them or even understand why they're there. But there's room for both of us to be different and normal. We just have to figure out some workable solutions.
I can't stress enough what a relief this was for me. For the first time in my life I didn't have to be right, my sanity wasn't on the line, and winning wasn't an issue. I could have my own preferences, and she could have hers. I could be curious about her experience, and she could be curious about mine. I could imagine accommodating her preferences without losing my sense of self. And she could imagine accommodating my preferences without losing her sense of self. It became a practical matter of compromise instead of a personal matter of victory. Instead of thinking about winning I could think about co-existing.
It also freed me up to think about broader differences in new terms. Differences between individuals, communities, religions, and nations. I could conceive that in some way and within certain constraints most of the world is both different and normal. Allowing this to be possible at least temporarily shifts the focus. It enables us to stop asking who's right, normal, and sane, and it encourages us to start asking how we can manage to live together -- without having to destroy those whom we don't understand.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment