Love, et. al.

I theorized recently that our social media application of love languages was somewhat limited, despite not ever having read Dr. Gary Chapman's eponymous book The 5 Love Languages: The Secret to Love That Lasts which kicked off our current popular understanding. In a recent Forbes article, Dr. Avigail Lev further intuits that love languages are fluid - subject to change. She intimates the change mutates slowly, over time, as we grow, experience to include secondary or tertiary love languages in addition to our primary. While I don't disagree with her assessment, because that is often the case, I believe all five can also rapidly shift their priorities depending on our current need.

I have found that my primary love language is whichever one is not being currently met. Suppose for example, quality time is my thing. If I'm getting my absolute fill of quality time - at the forfeiture of say, touch, then quite suddenly my priorities may shift. I may require one over the other, but never at the expense of the other. Reiterating, never having read the book myself, who am I to say this isn't exactly what he recommends. I'm simply addressing the bite sized version I see played out time and again on social media.

All this talk of forfeiture and expense sounds exceedingly transactional, which led me to revisit the Love Bank, which gets its name from making emotional "deposits" and "withdrawals" into the relationship. Of the listed examples of withdrawals, I kept running across, "The Four Horsemen" (of apocalyptic fame) which is defined thusly:

• Criticism


• Contempt


• Defensiveness


• Stonewalling

As I couldn't quickly and easily find suggested solutions for addressing the Four Horsemen individually, I started my own list. Surely the opposite to criticism would be compliments. But compliments which aren't sincere (or without merit) are inadmissible as counters. I would even go so far as to suggest being able to articulate the underlying emotion behind the compliment for maximum effectiveness, straying as far as possible from the underwhelming, "that's just how I feel." This led me to recall a wonderful conversation I'd had earlier about opinions. We all hold opinions sure, but when you intentionally choose to express that opinion, its not the opinion itself which holds weight; the opinion is completely meaningless absent the ability to defend it; where it came from, why you hold it, and any empirical data which reinforces it. Sadly, many people I interact with online believe their conviction of the opinion gives it authority. Awkwardly, conviction is another belief subject to the same requirements of opinion. In short you believe your opinion because you have an opinion about your opinion. This is not just an inadequate justification, it's more definitively the absence of justification.

As I continued down the Four Horsemen list in an attempt to provide antonymous behaviors for the deposit side, I became aware of their similarity to the the inexorably-bound components of intimacy; transparency, vulnerability, reciprocity, and dialogue. While not an exact one-for-one opposing behavior, the presumption could be made that practicing the spectrum of intimacy would suffice in keeping the Four Horsemen at bay (for those who struggle with engaging in such behaviors).

While further studying the Love Bank, I ran across a quote I found curious (if not gender biased):

We like those with positive Love Bank balances and dislike those with negative balances. But if an account reaches a certain threshold, a very special emotional reaction is triggered — romantic love. We no longer simply like the person — we are in love. It's a feeling of incredible attraction to someone of the opposite sex. ~Willard F. Harley, Jr., Ph.D

Admittedly I've never thought of it in that way, but was recently asked, "What defines love for you?" and found myself stymied. For all my years of postulating, I'm unsure I've ever approached it from so singular a perspective. To best answer this, I'd have to first shelve my passion of intimacy, as that is reserved for those with whom we already care about. Or is it? I am often accused of incorporating others into my circle without adhering to some highly-specific, personalized vetting process which closely aligns with their own. So I wonder if it isn't, in part, that ability to be initially vulnerable that became my own vetting process of sorts. Even then, I do it across the board with like-minded folks of both sexes, so it's surely not only the love bank being filled which triggers that emotional reaction.

When I was more ignorant than I am now, I chose a therapist based on his education level - figured I would skip all the Licensed Certified Social Workers and go straight to the PhD. Who better to answer my questions than a Doctor of Philosophy? From my 2012 post on Reciprocity:

A professional psychologist once asked me to define intimacy. As I had recently published my thesis on self-actualized intimacy I very candidly replied, "dialogue, transparency, vulnerability and reciprocity." The psychologist laughed. Then told me I was wrong...He explained that "it" was none of those things and took me on a journey of beautiful descriptive modifiers in a very limited scope of application in which he never effectively stated what "it" was and when asked (because I did ask) he just shook his head in disbelief at my simplicity.

So if Willard F. Harley, Jr., Ph.D will kindly forgive me, I'll presently disregard that love comes from a filled Love Tank, though I imagine it certainly helps. I know this about myself because I have fallen in love with much less. My last therapist detailed I had a personalized "sexual template" but that's also not love. On the subject of sex however, I often repeat the words of Clonish who described sex as, "communication punctuation." Given my desire and my emotions are closely intertwined with the same communication triggers (detailed ad nauseum in the annals of this blog), ostensibly that would make defining love easier, because all I'd have to do is define how I choose my lovers. But given my Venn diagram of love and sex is closer to a circle, probably not.

Process of elimination perhaps? Disregard everything which is NOT love, and what is left might be a great place to start. With that in mind, what isn't love? First and foremost, love is not work - its not hard. It is not mean, or judgmental, or controlling, or unkind. Love is not a curse. Love is not desolate nor is it demeaning. Love is not fear. Love is never something you don't want to do and everything you do want to do, which is why it works. It's why poets and songwriters for a millennia have written about it, singers have sung about it, painters have put brush to canvas, and philosophers orate amongst themselves.

What then defines love for me? Curiosity. Critical thinking. Emotional maturity. The desire to whole-heartedly embrace the full-spectrum of true intimacy. And an unquenchable desire for knowledge. Tie that into a hot little package and I'm powerless.

Couples - First Session, Part II

My wife gave me her reactions to our first session after a day's reflection:

• During the entire session, the therapist focused primarily on me; my wife didn't feel heard at all.


• When initiating the subject of bipolar versus IUD interaction with perimenopause, the comparison the therapist used was that of her own cousin who was a "royal bitch" until she had it removed. My wife felt the comparison was not only unprofessional, but also an unfair evaluation of my wife's behavior.


• During the "report card" scenario, the therapist only questioned my responses, not hers.


• The therapist brought up private conversations she'd had with my wife during their previous solo session during our couple's session.


• She believes the therapist is already (enamored?) with my intelligence as it was obvious I was speaking over her level of understanding.

As my wife processes much more quickly than myself, I trust her conclusions. Nonetheless, prior to changing therapists I suggested she broach these infractions (at least the first four) in order to gauge how she handles the criticism and her suggestions for moving forward. If she chooses to become defensive, we can find another.