I've been pondering this a bit of late.

Everyone I know who isn't on drugs, or suffering under complex delusions, gets into tussles with whoever they are with.

Some people have no problems from that, and some end up hitting the dump button because of it. So I wonder why. Is is that some people LIKE to fight? A sort of masochism/sadism thing? Is it just panic and fear of loneliness that keeps some people together, despite the arguments?

I've come to think no. At least, not for the kind of mate I'm looking for.


What I've been through so far, has led me to believe that the real key, for me at least, is to find someone who loves me; who wants to be with me...

... and who thinks as I do, that fighting and arguing and pain and travails are NOT necessarily signals of incompatibility or error. I think perhaps what matters is, what is in the BACK of the person's mind as they fuss and fight.

Are they fighting to make the other person over into someone else?

Arguing and demanding that wishes they forgot to mention were what they actually signed up for, are still on their heretofore secret debit lists? Charged to the mate, who is only now finding out they were on the hook?

Or are they fighting for the sake of being with the one they do love? Angry that to get what they want, they see they will have to put up with this negative thing as well?

The people like that, seem to be the couples who remain together, and really do come closer than all others, to happily ever after. With tiffs included as a PART of the deal, not as potholes.

Just wondering if this makes sense to anyone else.

Umm. What are you trying to do pick a fight..?hmm.hmmm...lol...jk..

Here is my opinion..
It would be my hope that my chosen man is compatible enough with me, that we share similar values and moral compass... and with that said, shouldn't the fighting be minimized?
Discussion goes a long way to solving problems ... unfortunately, some people are screamers, yellers, freaker outers..fly off the handle type persons.
I could not be with someone who had that type of personality. I am a mellow, easy-going person and there is more to life than having drama in it.
It is important to NOT HOLD A GRUDGE after an argument.
Happily married 34 years..

As usual Igor there is a good deal of logic involved in your post.I tend to agree with the general thoughts expressed by you.Unfortunately many people view logic as dispassionate and unromantic.I have often stated that it is not the differences that arise between couples that cause the problem but the way in which those differences are managed.You can view differences as a threat,as a demand or as a means of getting to really understand the other persons character.Even if you don't agree with the position held by the other person there are still benefits to be gained by really trying to understand and showing respect for the other persons perspective.As always it takes two to tango.

Im with you, rustykitty and frank on this one.

I dont welcome that kind of contentious energy in my life , and proactively distance myself from it

I have met a couple of people who see such exchanges as invigorating because as Frank alluded ,they equate arguing with being passionate in their point of view and in fact condemn dignified .disagreements as being boring and lacking conviction and strength.

Some people also view their feisty disagreements as being unfiltered and unpretentious, and even perceive the polite style of arguing as being downright fake and dishonest.

The thing with the two types of bickerers i just described, is that sometimes their relationships with others on the whole are full of agression as well, so it it could very well be an issue of disposition.

And I do agree with you Igor that the reason or aim if these arguments are important in assessing if the arguing is healthy or not .

If the aim is to change a person or to.use them as a scapegoat for the inner void that they feel in their life , then such behaviour is toxic.

And what about the couples who do it from the frustration of wanting to get out of the relationship but believing that no one else will want them or afraid of starting with someine new. I think you alludedv toba similar scenarioo in your post Igor.

Its almost as if they are bound together by their refugee status . That kind of climate is conducive to arguments I think.

the outcome depends on how censer and how soon he apologizes to her.....

If I ever argued with any previous lover, it was to get my point across. I only have to shout at a man, if he gives me good reason to. And sometimes it felt like trying to teach a child right from wrong. I kept asking myself, what I'd gotten myself into. It clearly wasn't a good relationship, if I felt I had to discipline him. He was quite thoughtless. He did what he wanted regardless of consequences. I'm sure he still does. And to constantly hear him drone on, about his ex wife, made it clear to me, that he was thinking about her, more than thinking about me, the woman he kept telling he loved. I can't tolerate men who act like spoilt children. :awkward:. Though it was never really "arguing". I never raised my voice, or talked to them in a rude tone of voice. It was more like discussing things in a calm way. I don't think shouting at someone, is the best way to go about things. It would make me look stupid.

After spending far too many decades as both a lawyer, voluntary counsellor, and then more recently as a clinical hypnotherapist (now retired from all) I've seen more than my fair share of parties fighting!

Of course there are so many reasons for this, but within this thread what is being considered is fighting between men and women and so I'll simply address that issue:

Again of course there are many reasons which cause a fight to break out. But very often at the root of it is a lack of appreciation by each sex for how the other sex thinks, and equally how they express themselves.

Not surprising that ignorance prevails as very little has ever been written on the subject, and within a world of equal opportunities differences between each sex are often ignored, or worse still denied.

Expressed extremely crudely, and as no more than a sweeping generalisation, men tend to think with their conscious brains in a logical traceable pattern whilst women rely more heavily on their sub-conscious brains and emotional feel in order to deal with any given challenge.

Box sexes are however quite capable of switching thought patterns, and both types of thinking are of great value. It should be borne in mind however that those parties (female and male) who have chosen to think on a sub-conscious basis in order to deal with any particular challenge will find it immensely difficult to support their conclusions with reasoning.

That is not to say that there aren't extremely good reasons, simply that we usually don't know how our sub-conscious has reached any one decision. To label such as being 'instinct' or 'intuition' barely does such though process justice.

Let me give an example which will hopefully make things clearer. Such is one of my many 'LinkedIn' articles published as 'Ivan Sanders.'

**************

In the 1980s I was fortunate to live near to fellow writer Linda. We regularly had countless discussions and friendly arguments and, like most women, Linda considered that she always emerged triumphant.

Eventually I became tired of this, and when discussing an issue which was provable on the basis of logic I haughtily declared "Got you, I've logically proved that I'm right on this occasion!"

To which Linda instantly retorted "What's logic got to do with it I KNOW I'm right!"

At the time I laughed this off as being a joke, but with the passing of several decades and having counselled several thousands of clients (as a lawyer) and patients (as a clinical hypnotherapist) I have at last finally appreciated the different way each sex thinks and why, as a result they often behave entirely differently.

And, more importantly, why cold logic is not always the best way to think. Or perhaps better expressed - why a parallel (arguably intuitive) softer logic may sometimes be better.

Let me illustrate this with an example. Such is however no more than a brush stroke illustration and I merely suggest that, on balance, this is how a married couple might typically react to the following family situation:

Fred and Mary's fifteen year old daughter Sarah has a very intimate chat with her mum explaining that she wishes to take the birth pill. In their country doctors will readily supply such at that age notwithstanding that sex can only legally occur at the age of sixteen years.

Mary tells Sarah that she needs to discuss this with Fred, but assures her that she thinks that it will be OK.

Mary and Fred sit down and Mary raises the issue.

Fred declares that he's totally against the idea. Asked why he explains that (a) She's not legally old enough, (b) He doesn't want her 'interfered with' at such an early age, (c) Taking pills always carries a health risk, (d) If she takes the pill and has sex she may totally rely on such as the only form of contraception and consequently she may catch a S.T.D. He further states that he could think of lots of other logical reasons, and asks Mary what she thinks about what he has said so far?

Mary replies "I think it's OK for her to go on the pill."

Fred asks "Have you really thought this through? Have you considered all of the points I have made?" He then presses Mary to explain her rationale.

Mary has not however considered a check-list of rights and wrongs. She hasn't consciously thought about it much at all, but she knows that she is right. How so?

Simply because she has had many private conversations with Sarah and as a result sub-consciously she knows that Sarah is not only very mature for her years but is also emotionally ready for a full relationship. She doesn't need to think about it or rationalise in detail.

At which point there is likely to be a breakdown in communication between Fred and Mary simply because Mary is not equipped to explain her 'knowing' and makes the mistake of attempting to answer Fred by way of answers to his points. And she may well not be able to make out her case that way.

Author John Gray said 'Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus.'

I suggest that whilst men and women are different in many ways one has to be careful about declaring one sex better at problem solving. Because to do so assumes that there is a 'best' way to think whilst several thought processes (or indeed no conscious thought at all) may be equally valid, and a decision simply based on 'knowing' should never be readily dismissed as being illogical.

It may be illogical on many fronts, but nevertheless turn out to be the best decision!