Chemistry or Commitment

So far, chemistry has been the most important factor in whether I pursued a relationship with a woman or not. There are many contributing factors to this "chemistry" thing! However, after all these years I still am not completely clear on what all factors are, and how it works (in me, not to talk about in others!) - even though I am always trying to analyze into the very details what is going on with me, and why, and how, and what!

Lately, I have come to questioning, though, if chemistry is really that important, or that much of a good indicator.

Since it is such a fickle thing, so unpredictable, so hard to influence, it is clearly not a guarantee for a relationship to continue, to develop, to turn longer term, and to function well. 

What seems to be much better suited is commitment. It can easily be influenced, since it is not an emotional feeling, but an intellectual, rational decision. You decide to make your relationship a priority - higher than your emotional whims and temporary fancies. You make the choice to stick with each other, come hell or high water!

Once you do that, no matter what comes along, you'll be able to weather it! 

I keep pointing out that, for a relationship to work, you have to put your partner's needs and comfort higher than your own, you have to look out for them. And they for you. Once one is waning on that aspect, it is usually the beginning of the end! Because it starts a vicious cycle: one doesn't look out for the other completely anymore, which makes the other have to look out for themselves a bit more, too, for them not to get abused and drained. Which makes them look out for their partner not as much either anymore, which triggers the same response in the person who started the mess. And so on...

But, why would a person start this vicious cycle? Usually, because their commitment is waning, and/or because something comes along that plays with their emotions!

The emotion says: I don't like this! I don't want this anymore! And, not understanding that "commitment" has to be the overruling factor, they give in to their emotions, and blame "loss of chemistry", "falling out of love", and similar things for not wanting to continue.

Often the complaint is, that he other person "just isn't fulfilling my needs" anymore. Yeap. That's a problem. And, yeap. That stirs up all kinds of strong negative emotions.

However, if in a family commitment is paramount, there are no other options than really, constructively addressing the issue at hand - running away, giving up on the partnership is NOT an option. 

When you are encountering a problem, and if you are looking out for your partner, the only way to deal with the problem is to find a consensus. A compromise won't do. 

Just to clarify: A consensus is a solution that is livable for all parties. A compromise, on the other hand, might not be working for either one. 

A simple but very clear example to show the difference between compromise and consensus would be this: 

If two are fighting about an object, both claiming ownership, a compromise would be to divide the object half and half among the two. That works with a pound of flour, but clearly not with a child, obviously! Cutting the child in half so each can have half is usually not a livable solution for either one. A consensus might be to agree to maybe split the child's time in some way so each parent gets half of the child's time, or similar.

Well, if the two had not gotten divorced in the first place, this problem would not even pose itself, of course. Obviously, the problem(s) that caused the divorce are such that would need uncompromising consensus seeking...

In really tough cases, it might mean, that the partners have to stick with each other for quite a while despite not yet having found a consensus. That is a very "uncomfortable" situation, to say the least. But, the more uncomfortable, the more incentive, too, to find a solution. And, I think, as long as all are seriously trying to find a consensus, seriously trying to look out for the other, seriously working on understanding the complete problem in great depth, well, then sooner or later they definitely will find a solution that works for all!

Unfortunately, all too often, emotions are made the deciding factors - and whenever that is done, the relationship is over.


Looking at your life, or the life of somebody in your circle, can you see how chemistry vs commitment has killed or sustained a relationship through a touch crisis?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Loneliness - Connection - Closeness

 Paolo Coelho, in his book Adultery, has the main character pondering that people, deep inside, have a loneliness that each of us is trying to deal with in the best way possible. I can not relate to much at all about this character, but this one aspect really triggered my thoughts. I am used to describe my "condition" as "wanting to experience always another deeper connection". But, looked at it from a different perspective, it is nothing but an existential loneliness, which is there, even when I am among loved ones, or among many people. No matter where I go, what I do, there is always this longing for linking up with another person, turning another stranger into a familiar person, getting to know somebody else, connecting to another soul.  I am convinced that all the spiritual ideas floating around the world have resulted from an experience of discomfort, followed by pondering, maybe even actions whose consequences are evaluated.  My choice of belief around "
Read more

Family of the Future

History Originally, humans organized in tribes, where members took care of each other. They hunted together, gathered together, and looked out for each other.   Later, the tribe “shrunk” to a group. Up until and through the dark ages, for example, farms in Europe where autarkic - that means, they produced everything they needed, and they existed mostly independently from outside.   Towards the beginning of the 20th century, it was the extended family, who was living together and looking out for each other. Then, that social construct was replaced with the nuclear family. Instead of great-grandparents, grandparents and siblings, parents, uncles and aunts, siblings and cousins, it now was only the parents and their children, who formed the basic social unit. In the second half of the 20th century, as divorce rates started to rise, very often it was just the mother (sometimes the father) with the children. the other parent had left the unit as well. Today, there are more sing
Read more

Absolute tolerance and absolute firmness at the same time

 This, I think, is the most important lesson I learned from my parents!  My dad hates the catholic church - they have caused so much pain and suffering all through history, and misled people with their doctrines, he just despises them. My mom is a member of the catholic church. She doesn't focus on the failings, but on the good they have done. How can the two of them be in a loving, mutually supportive and respectful relationship? They somehow figured out how to be able to let the other person believe and do what they want to believe and do, and not allow the other to prevent them from doing what they want to do. They are (at least trying as good as they can) absolutely tolerant towards the other. Each allows the other to make their own choices, to have their own believes, to choose for themselves what to do and what not.  And, at the same time, they are totally firm about making their own choices. Absolute tolerance and absolute firmness at the same time! I'm trying to impleme
Read more