Falling In Love: Why We Choose The Lovers We Choose Part 16

We see that at age twenty-three, both Jack and Jill, who were loved and respected as children, are in long-term, intimate, loving, and egalitarian relationships; whereas Mary and Steve, whose parents were separated and who felt rejected by their parents, have never been in intimate relationships. A coincidence? Maybe. But a more likely explanation is that the childhood experiences and observations of love, affected the internal romantic images of all four.

Jack and Jill reenact in their intimate relationships the loving childhood relationships they had with their parents. Mary and Steve reenact in their relationships with the opposite s.e.x the rejecting and hurtful childhood experiences that they had with their parents.

The fact that family relationships in childhood predict the romantic intimacy of young adults was demonstrated in other studies as well (e.g., Feldman et al., 1998). It was also true for every single FOUR STORIES 209.

one of the hundreds of people I have worked with in individual and couple therapy. But, as we will see in the next chapter, this is not a simple reenactment, a kind of repet.i.tion compulsion of childhood experiences, but an occasion to repeat the positive and overcome the negative. And there is no human relationship that is more appropriate for healing childhood wounds than an intimate romantic relationship.

SUGGESTIONS FOR THOSE SEEKING LOVE.

Like the four young people described in this chapter, most people are not aware of the effect their childhood experiences with their parents have on their love relationships. Tragically, people who were unloved or even rejected as children continue to suffer in unsatisfying love relationships as adults. People with a history of such unsatisfying relationships, who are willing to abandon the comfort of blaming their inappropriate partners, can try to break free of their familial scripts. How this difficult task can be undertaken and carried out is the subject of the next chapter.

Part Three

RO M A N T I C L O V E.

I N L O N G - T E R M R E L AT I O N S H I P S.

People use each other as a healing for their pain. They put each other on their existential wounds, on eye, on c.u.n.t, on mouth and open hand.

They hold each other hard and won't let go.

-Yehuda Amichai, "People use each other,"

Love Poems Let me under your wing and be for me mother and sister and let your bosom be a refuge for my head nest for my banished prayers.

I will confess a secret to you: My soul burned in a flame; They say there is love in the world- What is love?

-Chaim Nachman Bialik, "Let me under your wing," Songs Songs W hat, if any, is the role of falling in love in a couple's long-term relationship? While the previous two parts of the book are based on studies, theories, and a.n.a.lyses of clinical interviews, this third and last part is based primarily on clinical experience, mine and those of others. This part shifts the perspective from the individual to the couple and addresses the relationship between falling in love and the issues a couple is likely to struggle with later on. It is based on my strong belief that an intimate relationship provides us with one of the best opportunities for mastering unresolved childhood issues and achieving existential significance in our lives.

211.

2 1 2.

Most people choose a therapist because they heard about him or her from a person they trust, or because they read a book the therapist wrote, and liked the things he or she said.

Which is to say the choice is based on logical considerations.

The unconscious, however, more than anything else, dictates with whom we fall in love. Falling in love is an intense emotional and physical experience that seems quite illogical because it is not our faculties of reason that dictate it. The electrical activity in the brain of a person in love is not in the cortex, the seat of logical thinking, but in the limbic system, the seat of powerful emotions.

Although not logical, in most cases, the unconscious romantic choice is a wise one because it directs people to choose the person most appropriate to helping them master an unresolved childhood issue. This is why finding such a person ignites the romantic spark and why it causes such elation and great excitement. Even when the choice is dangerous, as it is when the unresolved issue involves physical abuse, still, in principle, it is a wise choice because it is aimed at healing the trauma, not merely repeating it.

When a couple is in love, the unconscious of both partners dictates their mutual selection. The interweaving of both their core issues creates their core issue as a couple. When, after many years of marriage, a couple comes for therapy and disentangles what seems like an endless mora.s.s of problems, conflicts, hurts, and disappointments, what emerges is the core issue at the center of most of their problems.

As we will see next, understanding the connection between unresolved childhood issues and the problems experienced in an intimate relationship is only the first step. Both partners need to take responsibility for their own contributions to the problem, express empathy for their partner's core issue, and- the hardest part-change those behaviors that are most problematic for the other. This kind of effort, even more than individual therapy, is what enables couples to change their problems into opportunities for personal and couple growth.

Such an opportunity for growth is imbued with great existential significance for modern men and women who expect to derive their existential significance, or part of it, from their intimate relationships. All of us need to express our unique ROMANTIC LOVE IN LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIPS 213.

individuality and make a significant contribution to the world in order to feel that our lives matter; this is our way of defending against the fear of death. We also need to belong, to feel cared for and loved; this is our way of defending against the fear of life (Yalom, 1980). Couples who continue growing in their intimate relationships and feel that the relationship is a safe base from which they can face all the challenges in the world, are couples who derive a sense of existential significance from their relationships. They are also the couples who are able to keep alive indefinitely the romantic spark of the falling-in-love stage (Pines, 1996).

12.T U R N I N G L OV E P RO B L E M S I N T O.

O P P O RT U N I T I E S F O R G ROW T H.

"A wrestling match." He laughs. "Yes, you could describe life that way."

So which side wins, I ask?

"Which side wins?"

He smiles at me, the crinkled eyes, the crooked teeth.

"Love wins. Love always wins."

-Mitch Albom, Tuesdays with Morrie Tuesdays with Morrie A t first she was attracted to "his sense of humor. He's really funny, always has a joke." Later his humor came to annoy her. "I have difficulty talking to him seriously about what's going on in my life."

At first he was attracted to her shyness and sensitivity: "She's a really neat person...really shy and reserved. Really sensitive to what other people think." Later these very traits became a problem. "It began to bother me just how sensitive she was to others in the sense that she was hyperaware of what others were thinking about her. It bothered me that she was so shy and reserved."

At first she was attracted to his calm and impressed by his reserve. "I had a crush on him... He was very quiet and didn't open up at all. Because he was so quiet I thought he was on a social level above me and I thought he'd never like me." Now she resents his reserve and sees in it evidence of his lack of interest in her. "He doesn't ask me about myself and about my life, he isn't interested. I don't feel it's a two-way thing."

At first he was attracted to her nuttiness. "She was very, very active, and funny and quick. She always seemed to be thinking up something nutty to do." Later, her nuttiness terminated the relationship. "She had serious emotional problems."

215.

216.

At first his lack of ambition attracted her. "He was at school but wasn't obsessive about it." Later his lack of ambition became a problem. "He talks about going back to school, but he's not sure.

We already had a few confrontations about that."

"He comes off as being very confident, almost c.o.c.ky. That's what attracted me to him, but that's also what upsets me."

What is missing in these remarks is the partner's perspective on both the attraction and the conflict. As we already know, for couples in love, the causes of attraction are most often complementary. If she was attracted to his care-free att.i.tude, he was probably attracted to her intense involvement with things. And if she later complains that "He's not as ambitious as I am," it is likely that he complains about her excessive intensity and "pushiness." The poles of carefree att.i.tude versus intense involvement exist in both of them and reflect the core issue in their characters and the relationship. We can see two such poles in the example of Susan and Robert.

SUSAN AND ROBERT.

One of Susan's most painful childhood memories was of being sent out of the house when her mother's friends would come for a visit.

Susan enjoyed partic.i.p.ating in their conversation, which drove her mother crazy. Deaf to Susan's tears and pleas, her mother would send her out and slam the door in her face. Susan can remember herself standing on the wooden balcony, banging on the locked door, sobbing and begging to be let in. One of Robert's most painful memories is escaping from the endless demands of his beautiful mother. Robert used to hide in his room and imagine that the little carpet he was sitting on was a raft in the middle of the ocean. His mother's angry, demanding voice sounded like a faraway thunder storm. It no longer intimidated him.

Susan and Robert met when they were both in their early forties, the veterans of many destructive and unsatisfying relationships. It was the holiday season, a time for new resolutions and new beginnings. Robert had just completed a year-long journey around the world on a small boat and Susan had gone back to college, determined this time to graduate no matter what. They met at a mutual friend's dinner party. There was something about Robert's quiet masculinity, his independence and adventurous spirit that sparked Susan's imagination. His admiration flattered her. He was calm and rea.s.suring and he made her feel safe. Susan's beauty and poise left Robert breathless. The strength of her personality and the TURNING LOVE PROBLEMS INTO OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH 217 sophistication of her interests dazzled him. He could not believe that a woman like her would pay attention to a primitive brute like himself. Her warm response excited him and made him happier than he ever believed possible.

Robert and Susan fell madly in love with each other. Both of them felt that this time they had chosen the right person, someone with whom they could spend the rest of their lives. Several months later, Robert bought a house, and shortly thereafter, Susan moved in with him. A year after they first met, Susan and Robert got married. Despite the wonderful beginning, Susan and Robert's relationship was full of frustrating confrontations. The hardest thing for Susan was Robert's tendency to "disappear" when she was in an emotional turmoil and needed him. When she sensed his distancing, she would create "scenes" to engage him. But nothing she said, nothing she did helped. Robert would distance himself even further, hiding "like a turtle." The hardest thing for Robert were Susan's angry, unprovoked "attacks" on him. He would distance himself from her, hoping that the angry storm would pa.s.s, but nothing he did seemed to help; his distancing only made things worse. When they came for couple therapy, both Susan and Robert felt deeply hurt by each other and very disappointed in their relationship.

In therapy Robert and Susan came to understand their core issues, and how they combined to create their core issue as a couple.

Susan understood that like the hurt, rejected girl that she had been, she is banging on Robert's door, feeling left out and begging to be let in. But on the other side of the "door" is not a rejecting parent but a scared boy who is terrified by the banging, and anxious that he will not be able to satisfy her demands. Robert, for his part, understood that like the anxious, hiding, little boy that he had been, he is escaping Susan's demands, "sailing on the little carpet in the middle of the ocean" of his room. But on the other side of the "door" is not a demanding parent who is insensitive to his feelings, but a hurt girl who needs his love. The image of the scared boy hiding away and the hurt left out girl helped Robert and Susan change their behavior. Susan understood that when she needs Robert's love and support she cannot demand it from him in a loud voice or by attack, because the louder the demand, the less Robert will be able to respond to it as a mature adult. But if she can express her need for him calmly, he will always be there for her. Robert understood that his distancing himself from Susan is not a way to prevent the storm, but a sure way to make it happen with greater force. But if he can respond to Susan's feelings and express his own, her anger will evaporate.

218.

This seemingly very simple change in behavior-in fact, a very difficult change for both of them to implement-enabled Susan and Robert to master a painful childhood experience, an experience they were both still struggling with as adults. After all, it is not by accident that Susan fell in love with a man whose primary strategy for coping with demands is withdrawal, a strategy that helped him survive as a child and thus became imbued with existential significance. And, it is not by accident that Robert fell in love with a strong and awe-inspiring woman who learned to demand forcefully what she needs, a strategy that helped her survive as a child and thus had existential significance for her.

Susan's heroic struggle to control the impulse to demand loudly, and Robert's response to her distress when she expressed it directly and quietly, helped heal her childhood wound. Robert's heroic struggle with the impulse to escape, and Susan's grat.i.tude and love when he was able to stay connected to her, helped heal his childhood wound. These changes, difficult at first but increasingly easier with time and practice, helped turn their marriage into a very rewarding relationship that enhances both their personal and couple growth.

The reason their behavioral changes had such a powerful effect has to do, once again, with the unconscious forces that directed them to fall in love with each other. As is almost always the case in intimate relationships, the thing that Susan needed most from Robert in order to heal her childhood wound was the very thing that Robert needed to give in order to grow emotionally. Instead of turning into a scared little boy, running away and hiding, he needed to learn to stay an adult and face whatever is demanded of him as an adult. In the same way, the thing that Robert needed most from Susan in order to heal his childhood wound of helplessness was the very thing that Susan needed to give in order to grow emotionally. Instead of turning into a rejected little girl that needs to pound on people's doors to be heard, she needed to learn to stay an adult and ask for what she wants in a way that will increase her likelihood of getting it. The magic of a couple's relationship is that when two people fall in love, whatever they need to do for themselves in order to grow emotionally is most often the very thing that the partner needs from them. Whatever efforts they invest in their own growth are the most valuable healing gifts to their partners.

FATAL ATTRACTION OR WISE UNCONSCIOUS CHOICES?.

Very few studies dealt with the connection between what makes couples fall in love with each other and what causes their problems, sometimes TURNING LOVE PROBLEMS INTO OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH 219 even their breakup, later on. One of the few, which included 60 married couples, showed that the most annoying trait was very often an exaggeration, implication, or the exact opposite of the trait that was first described as the main reason for attraction (Whitehouse, 1981).

In another study, Diane Felmlee (1995) examined the hypothesis that the same traits that cause dissatisfaction in the partner are a negative translation of the traits that caused the original attraction.

Felmlee termed this phenomenon "fatal attraction," fatal "in the sense that it foretells a sequence that ends in future disillusionment"

(296). She a.s.sumed that "the characteristic responsible for the initial attraction to a romantic partner and a characteristic that is later disliked, are often dimensions of the same overall attribute" (297).

Felmlee suggested three primary conditions under which such "fatal attraction" may occur. First, it is more likely in a state of infatuation or intense pa.s.sionate love, when people are blinded by love and thus likely to underestimate the importance of negative traits. Second, it is likely to occur when an initial attracting quality is a characteristic that stands out and is readily noticed. Such a quality, therefore, may be possessed to an extreme, and extreme positive attributes may be especially likely to have negative dimensions. For example, a partner who is attractive because he is very successful may soon be viewed as workaholic, since it's usually difficult to attain success without a great deal of work. Third, some qualities that may be attractive and rewarding in the short run, such as spontaneity, may prove problematic in an extended committed relationship.

In order to investigate the extent of "fatal attraction," Felmlee asked students to describe their most recent romantic relationships that had ended. Then the students were asked specific questions about the relationships and the breakups. Among the questions about the relationship, students were asked to describe the features that attracted them. Among the questions about the breakup, they were asked what they found least attractive. Key words, such as nice, nice, and phrases, such as and phrases, such as treated me well, treated me well, were put into categories. Results showed that in 29.2% of the cases, the reason for the breakup was the same quality that originally attracted. were put into categories. Results showed that in 29.2% of the cases, the reason for the breakup was the same quality that originally attracted.

My own clinical experience leads me to believe that the phenomenon is far more common than Felmlee's data suggest. In almost every case of the hundreds I have worked with in therapy and in couple groups, if the relationship was based on romantic love, it was possible to find a connection between the traits that attracted the members of a couple to each other and the traits that later became the focus of their problems (Pines, 1997).

When a couple comes to therapy for the first time, one of the questions I always ask is, "What attracted you to each other when 220 you first met?" I then show the couple the connection between their original attraction and the problem that has brought them to therapy. Similarly, one exercise I do in every couple group is to ask partic.i.p.ants what attracted them to their mates initially, and then ask what they find most stressful. There is almost always some connection between the two (Pines, 1996). But contrary to Felmlee who views this as "fatal attraction," the dark side of every human virtue, I view it as a "wise unconscious choice" (Pines, 1997).

Like other psychodynamic therapists,1 I believe that unconscious forces operate in both romantic attraction and relationship problems.

The unconscious dictates the choice of a partner who can help the individual master a "core issue" that is the manifestation of an unresolved childhood problem. If a person's core issue is fear of abandonment, this person's unconscious will direct the choice of a partner who can help him or her master this fear. And who is more appropriate for the task than a person whose core issue is a fear of engulfment? This is the why couples fall in love with each other.

Since their choice is complementary, they jointly create their core issue as a couple. Ann and Ed are an example. They would not have been included in Felmlee's "fatal attraction" category, yet there is an obvious connection between the traits that made them fall in love with each other and the traits that turned their relationship into a living h.e.l.l.

ANN AND ED.

A professional couple in their late thirties, Ann and Ed came to couple therapy as the last resort before applying for divorce. Ann's main complaint was Ed's "total lack of sensitivity and consideration"

toward her and other people. Ed's main complaint was Ann's angry outbursts that always came as a big surprise to him and were "incomprehensible and totally unjustified."

When they first met, in addition to Ann's "obvious good looks and sharp intelligence," Ed says he was attracted to her powerful and dynamic personality. "She was direct and cynical and funny," he explains with a smile. For her part, Ann liked "Ed's mind and the way he thinks," as well as his "laidback personality. He knew how to enjoy life, and was pleasant and easy-going, no complexes or complications."

Both Ann and Ed came from homes where there was no love between the parents. Ann's parents divorced when she was a young girl, and Ed's parents fought frequently. Ed's father, who was a very religious man, forced Ed to attend services with him and demanded TURNING LOVE PROBLEMS INTO OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH 221 a show of respect. But hardest for Ed as a child were his father's angry outbursts, which included screaming and, at times, even beatings. Ed's mother did not love or respect his father, but was warm, loving, and nurturing toward Ed. Ann's hardest experience as a child was the loss of her beloved father who, disregarding her love and need for him, moved to another state after the divorce. Her mother, who was "very conscientious" about her duties as a mother, was insensitive to Ann's feelings and unresponsive to her wishes.

Ed's core issue was a fear of his father's angry outbursts, and a bitter resentment of being forced to attend religious services and show respect, which Ed felt his father did not deserve. Ann's core issue was the painful feeling that people close to her were not responsive to her needs and wishes. Her eagerness to read her beloved father's feeling and her longing for him developed into her great sensitivity to people.

These same issues combined to create the core issue of Ann and Ed's problems as a couple. Ed cannot stand it when people "force him" to behave in a way they consider proper and which doesn't suit him. He responds by being "dense and inconsiderate." Ann responds to his insensitivity with anger and rage. Ed "doesn't understand" her "uncalled-for, angry attacks"; Ann sees his lack of understanding as yet another demonstration of his lack of sensitivity and consideration of her feelings. This way both of them reenact their childhood trauma in the relationship.

By a.n.a.lyzing what they found most attractive about each other when they first met and fell in love, it is possible to identify early signs that, at some level, Ann and Ed were well aware of the opportunity they presented to each other to master their unresolved childhood issues. At that time, Ed was attracted to Ann's "powerful personality," "directness," "cynicism" and "sharp intelligence." He found those traits exciting and enjoyable. Now the sharp intelligence and cynicism have turned into "unfair criticism" and the powerful direct personality has turned into threatening "outbursts." At first, Ann was attracted to Ed's easy-going, uncomplicated way of being, and to his ability to enjoy life. Now she views him as "insensitive and dense" and "totally focused on himself." Despite the clear connection between Ann and Ed's original attraction and their distress, they would not have been included in the "fatal attraction"

category because they used different words and phrases to describe their attraction and distress.

Ed and Ann are an example of the wisdom of unconscious romantic choices in directing people to choose partners with whom they have an opportunity to master psychological issues. When a man such as Ed learns to show sensitivity to his partner's needs, it will enable him 222 to grow tremendously as a person; he will get out of the dense armor he has constructed around himself as a defense against the outbursts and demands of his father. This kind of change in Ed will, of course, be a healing experience for Ann. And when a woman such as Ann learns to respond without exploding in anger, it will enable her to grow tremendously as a person; she will learn to express herself in a way that keeps others connected rather than pushing them away as a defense against her fear of abandonment.2 This kind of change in Ann will, of course, be a healing experience for Ed.

According to Felmlee, "fatal attraction" is more likely to happen during infatuation, which can lead to a situation in which "love is blind." Clinical experience with couples such as Ed and Ann suggests that like the "blind" in Greek mythology that see better than sighted people, and like "winged Cupid painted blind" in Shakespeare's Midsummer Night's Dream, Midsummer Night's Dream, love is very wise in its choice (see Figure 12). love is very wise in its choice (see Figure 12).

Since one example is hardly enough, see the box "Initial Attraction and Subsequent Stress." Ten brief examples represent couples chosen randomly from 100 with whom I have worked in recent years. In each case I describe the main attractions that made the couple fall in love with each other, and what later became their major sources of stress.3 In every one of the cases presented, there is an obvious connection between the cause of the couple's attraction to each other and the cause of their later distress. In addition there is an Image rights not available FIGURE 12. Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind, And therefore is winged Cupid painted blind -William Shakespeare, A Midsummer Night's Dream A Midsummer Night's Dream TURNING LOVE PROBLEMS INTO OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH 223 TURNING LOVE PROBLEMS INTO OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH 223 INITIAL ATTRACTION AND SUBSEQUENT STRESS.

Attraction Wife: He was a very persistent pursuer, made me feel desirable and adored.

Husband: She seemed like a dream come true, unapproachable.

Stress Wife: He doesn't let me breathe; he is always in my face.

Husband: She never lets me feel like she wants me.

Attraction Wife: He gave me a sense of security, was always there, always reliable.

Husband: There was something mysterious about her.

Stress Wife: He is boring.

Husband: She is never completely there, there's no true intimacy.

Attraction Wife: He seemed like the kind of a man who would reach high, be a success.

Husband: She seemed like someone who could build a home for me.

Stress Wife: He travels a lot, meets all kinds of people, is never home.

Husband: She is too homely, not exciting.

Attraction Wife: He seemed very easy-going.

Husband: I liked her energy. She was very active, things were always happening around her.

Stress Wife: He doesn't stand up for his own rights, is not a.s.sertive.

Husband: She explodes at the slightest provocation, has tantrums.

Attraction Wife: He seemed very smart, very capable.

Husband: She respected me. I felt accepted and appreciated.

Stress Wife: He makes me feel stupid and incompetent.

Husband: She feels bad about herself and blames me.