
Intimacy: Together We Fill Gaps
Do you remember the movie, Rocky? When he explained why he intended to marry
his girlfriend, he held his splayed fingers opposite each other and said, She’s got gaps; I got gaps. Then he interlaced his fingers and said, Together we fill gaps.
I love that metaphor
to describe the symmetry of marriage.
Ideally, our strengths augment the weaknesses of our spouse, and their strengths
in turn augment our weaknesses. We fill the gaps in each other. But sometimes, what starts out as a natural fit can slip into destructive
ways of interacting that can choke the life out of the relationship.
Transactional Analysis (TA) theory (which I have surely
thrashed here) offers a concept to describe the interaction rut we can slip into. TA describes the ego states of a Parent, a Child or an Adult. (It’s
a difficult concept for me to express without using my hands, so you’ll have to
imagine me flailing my arms about or refer to the
diagram below to help you visualize it.
The concept…not my flailing.)
Conceptually, we have within us three ego states:
·
The Parent—the
part of us that manages, corrects, guides, and tries to control our worlds, as
well as nurture and protect our loved ones.
·
The Adult—the
part of us that most effectively navigates life. The Adult is aware of the internal Parent and
Child needs and motivation, but consciously interacts more rationally,
considering values, goals, wisdom, and the needs and desires of others as well.
·
The Child—the
part of us that is playful, spontaneous, unfiltered, carefree, and endearing,
as well as irresponsible, self-centered, and dependent.
So, using marriage as an example, there are two individual
Parent, Child, and Adult ego states involved in communications. Uh
huh…you see where I’m going with this.
When both kids are playing, things
are probably fun (or terribly out of control).
When both Adults are interacting, things are getting done. And when both Parents are out, well, there’s
probably a lot of yelling going on.
Our
personalities tend to make it more comfortable to dwell in one of these ego
states. If I’m more of a dominant
personality, or feel the need to be in control, I will tend to interact from the
Parent ego state. My communications
under pressure will more likely be governing or critical. If I’m more playful, passive, timid, or have irresponsible
behaviors, I’ll be more comfortable in the Child role. Under pressure, my communication will more likely
be evasive or defensive.
So
here’s the rub: In intimate
relationships, we are typically drawn to our opposite personality type, e.g. the
intuitive childlike person marries the structured, more serious person. You can fill in the blanks with your personal experience, or imagine a
couple where one takes care of detailed plans, coordinates, and follows up
while the other is more spontaneous and thrives on creative freedom and
flexibility to let things happen along
the way. These opposites can work—the
Parent gets to lead/manage/control;
the Child gets to be reactive,
playful or passive. As Rocky tells it, Together
we fill gaps.
Taken
to extremes, however, if the interactions remain lopsided (Parent-to-Child/Child-to-Parent),
the relationship will become strained. Parent gets weary of trying to manage childish behavior; Child becomes resentful of being treated like…well…a child. You’ll hear words from Parent like YOU YOU
YOU should, ought, never… And from Child, you’ll hear, whatever, don’t be so controlling, serious... Either way is the kind of interaction that frustrates and
creates distance.
This interaction rut is fixable…and so is the
marriage. Instead of interacting primarily
from the Parent or Child ego state, which elicits a response from the lopsided other, try to connect from the Adult-to-Adult ego states. It is a simple
concept, but requires deliberate effort to change. Adult
has to give up some perceived control and allow things to happen in a different
way. Child
has to assume more responsibility with associated trade offs and taking the heat when things go wrong or
are opposed. But the shift in ego state
communication and behavior will absolutely bring respect and intimacy back into
the relationship.
So,
with apologies to Rocky and Eric
Berne’s theory of Transactional Analysis, I invite you to notice how you
communicate with your loved one. Even if
you are the only one motivated to change initially, more often than not, a
rational, respectful approach that does not demean nor rescue the other will
eventually inspire the Adult Other to
respond.
I Corinthians 13 says it best: Love is
patient and kind. Love is not
jealous. It does not brag, and it is not
proud. Love is not rude, is not selfish,
and does not get upset with others. Love
does not count up wrongs that have been done.
Love takes no pleasure in evil but rejoices over the truth. Love patiently accepts all things. It always trusts, always hopes, and always
endures.