I've read a lot of Alison Armstrong who wrote the queen's code and a few other books (see the other threads in this forum) anyway she has this theory on relationship models that speaks to this topic. See below, but bottom line not everyone is looking for the same thing in marriage, and marriages that are based on different theories can be equally successful.
This is the first in a series of Celebrating Men Morsels about Relationship Models.
Each of us has a clear idea of what the main purpose of a long-term relationship should be. In other words, what the priority of the relationship should be, which becomes the organizing principle. Usually this core purpose, which is clear to us, is unexamined and unarticulated. This is why it can cause a lot of misunderstandings, hurt feelings and persistent, unresolved conflicts.
We call these core purposes “Relationship Models.” The mischief they cause stems from how invisible they are – they just seem like the “right way” to be related. Our model seems so correct to us that we, even, don’t understand how or why a couple stays together when they don’t conform to our model. The most conflict will occur when our chosen partner has a different model.
Here are examples of Relationship Models:
- The Legacy Model. This is the one we inherited from our ancestors. The focus is usually on the children; making sure they succeed even more than their parents. In the absence of children, there may be another type of legacy that becomes the priority, such as wealth, power, contribution, etc.
- The Companionship Model. For this model, being together and “doing life together,” is the main priority. In selecting a mate, getting along easily and many common interests are firsts on the list. Variations on the Companionship Model would include “Share Adventure” and “Share Hobbies.”
- The Support Model. This type of relationship is organized around providing what each other needs to accomplish personal goals or dreams. They don’t expect to “work on” the relationship much; they expect the relationship to support them in what they are working on in life outside the relationship.
- The Karma Model. The purpose of this relationship is to cause maximum personal growth. Partners will be chosen by how much they challenge each other to expand their physical, emotional, conceptual or spiritual worlds.
Since our Relationship Model just seems like the correct way to be related, we are often baffled by couples that don’t conform to our model. For example:
- Companionship Model folks can’t understand why a Legacy couple stays together when they don’t seem to share a lot of common interests or spend much time together. They also wonder why Support Model couples, who clearly like each other, keep choosing to be apart. To them, no goal is worth being apart for long.
- Legacy Model folks can’t understand why other people bother to get married if they aren’t going to have children.
- Support Model folks wonder why Karma Model couples would choose such difficult people to partner with. To them, the relationship requiring minimal attention is a priority to have it support them individually.
- To Karma Model folks, other easy-going relationships seem unbearably boring.
In each case, our model seems so right, that we can’t really relate to or understand men and women with different priorities. And when asked for advice, we can only provide it from the priorities which seem obvious to us. This is another good reason to only ask for advice from people who actually have what you want!
“Easy” relationships occur when both partners have the same model and are working toward the same kind of relationship. This is usually accidental, since most people aren’t aware they have a model and often don’t articulate their relationship priorities well.
When our partner does not have the same relationship model, we are often frustrated because our choices will be made according to our core value – and their choices will be made according to theirs. For example:
- If a Legacy Model (LM) or a Support Model (SM) marries a Companionship Model (CM), the CM will feel hurt every time the LM or SM chooses to work on what they are building or pursuing, rather than spend time with the CM. And the LM or SM won’t understand why they are hurt, since to them, the Legacy or dream is clearly the priority and why can’t the CM see that?
- Even when two people share the Support Model, conflict can happen because both expect to be the one supported by the other. So they agree in principle – partners should empower their mates in fulfilling their dreams – but they didn’t state which end they intended to be on. Support models work best when one person’s desire is to provide the support the other needs and fully appreciates.
- If a Karma Model (KM) gets together with a Companion Model (CM), let’s say of the Share Adventure variety, then here is a predictable argument...KM: “We have an issue here. We need to talk about it.” CM/SA: “Why do we have to talk about everything? Why can’t we just enjoy each other’s company and have fun?”
As you can see, the problem is the unarticulated expectations. Because our models seem correct and are obvious truths to us, we don’t take the time to really spell out what we need and desire in our relationship. By understanding what your Relationship Model is, you can avoid heartache and frustration in choosing a mate. If you’re already committed, use the Models to understand each other, and realize the choices you’ve each made were not meant to thwart or hurt the other. Search for middle ground and ways to give you both more of what you need.
Since publishing this series on Relationship Models, we have received a few frantic inquiries: “We don’t have the same model. Are we doomed?” Not necessarily! The key is understanding that a person’s Relationship Model is a reflection of their core values, an expression of what is most important to them in life. It could be what they leave behind (Legacy Model), “doing life” with someone (Companion Model), fulfilling a dream or a mission (Support Model), or being challenged to grow and expand (Karma Model).
Unfortunately, our core values are the only ones that immediately appear completely valid. When others’ differ, they seem everything from interesting to annoying. The real challenge is to grant as much weight to what is important to others, even when we don’t agree. This is a skill that improves all relationships!
If you’re attacking the validity of what is important to another, they have no choice but to defend themselves. Not a good environment for creative compromise. But if you’re not attacking, if instead, you’re protecting their interests too, then miracles can happen. This kind of conversation between a Support Model and a Companion Model might look like, “I see that what’s most important to you is us being together. I like that. What’s most important to me is having the support I need to fulfill my dream. Even though I love being with you, that sacrifice for my goal is one I have to make. Maybe we could meet in the middle – there might be an amount of time together that would be enough for you; not ideal, but enough. And an amount of freedom to pursue my goals that would be enough for me too. Wanna try?”
The key word here is “enough.” If you pay attention to “enough” instead of the “ideal amount,” it’s possible to meet in the middle. Of course, “enough” may be unreachable for you or your partner, in which case the loving thing to do might be to release yourselves to find what you really need and cannot provide each other
http://www.understandmen.com/morsels/morsels4.html
. I am not built for having a dh with a best female friend. I also do not think he is built for a wife with a best male friend. We are on the same page with regard to that thank goodness.
To answer your question, DH and I do have a friendship. Even though we each have hobbies/interests that the other doesn't share, there is a common ground and we enjoy spending time together.
