but what does it *look* like?
relationship expectations are funny things.
it has come up a couple of times in recent conversations with matthew_g - once courtesy corbet, and recently again courtesy me - that when we identify needs and wants, we have an expectation of what the *meeting* of those needs looks like.
and sometimes we suck royally at being able to answer the question, "well, OK - what does the meeting of that need actually *look* like to you?"
the recurring theme of our discussions at home recently has been being able to meet needs within relationships - specifically, me meeting the needs of my primary at a time when we're changing definitions (again) and labels (again), and generally destabilizing things because i've got a bug in my bonnet. or up my skirt. or something.
it becomes apparent that there are needs that have been identified, like the need to confirm matthew's place in my life, to settle his concerns of replacement, to mitigate his fears that there is no difference between him and anyone else in my life. it's good that i know these needs; it's fabulous that he's willing to identify and tell me these needs. but it also becomes apparent in discussion (or worse, somewhere down the road in time, via his *actions*) that while we've identified his needs, his and my understanding of them differ, because i'm not meeting his needs *in the manner in which he expected me to meet them*.
huhn... *oops*. there's a big explosive disconnect, looking for a place to happen.
this is a relatively new thing for us - it's another layer of complexity when peeling back the onion skin layers of the relationship processes. because now we have identified needs & wants, we've probably been able to express their relative priority in any current situation; we may even have been able to identify the fears or other forms of sub-subtext informing our actions towards or away from meeting those needs.
NOW we have to accept the fact that we've got some kind of subconscious expectation for the manner in which those needs are met.
"i need you to be there for me." "I need you to not rock the boat." "i need you to show me how much you value this relationship, and my place in it with you."
these are all excellent statements of need; those of us who hear them nod our heads and agree or disagree to try meeting those needs... and generally go away assuming we know what has to be done to meet those stated needs. but really, when was the last time any of us explicitly sought to identify *how* the need-meeting is supposed to take place? what form it takes? what specific actions are expected, or even *required*? we assume we know our partners and lovers, can identify the right-and-proper path of behaviour when an unmet or newly-identified need is shared with us. for myself, i think i'm savvy enough to know how to placate someone's fears of being replaced or upheaved... but what would meet that need in my head is (perhaps unsurprisingly for those of you reading along at home) going to be different for what meets that need in matthew's head, or another lover's head, or a friend's.
no, we don't have an immediate answer for this, not yet, at any rate. but we do know (now) that the explicit question needs to be asked, that the extra layer of onion skin has to be processed, otherwise there's a whole layer of information - of *expectation* - that remains uncommunicated, and likely to be a cause for surprise or even resentment when the need is not met as expected, or not perceived to be met at all.
self-awareness, the ongoing process. now, when someone voices a need to me (or i perceive a need as being expressed), it behooves me to ask, "OK - what do you expect from me in order to achieve that need?". at the very best, the expression may require no explicit involvement at all. maybe someone just needs to know they're being heard, and your response is a part of that. maybe someone wants you to do something specific to meet an expressed need; maybe they don't know what they want from you, and are soliciting input for a collaborative solution.
the point is, you never know till you ask. most of the time, i'd be surprised if the person professing the need actually *knows*, explicitly, what he or she wants the meeting of the need to look like. the point is, *someone* has to start the investigation, otherwise you risk assumptions and expectations that look a lot like you're NOT meeting the need (because you're not doing it like you're expected to), and that kind of misconception just plays havoc on everyone's vulnerabilities.
no great solution light bulbs here - just an awareness of a whole other area of data processing to identify and implement in the relationship. if it's useful to us, it's likely useful to *someone* else out there.
it has come up a couple of times in recent conversations with matthew_g - once courtesy corbet, and recently again courtesy me - that when we identify needs and wants, we have an expectation of what the *meeting* of those needs looks like.
and sometimes we suck royally at being able to answer the question, "well, OK - what does the meeting of that need actually *look* like to you?"
the recurring theme of our discussions at home recently has been being able to meet needs within relationships - specifically, me meeting the needs of my primary at a time when we're changing definitions (again) and labels (again), and generally destabilizing things because i've got a bug in my bonnet. or up my skirt. or something.
it becomes apparent that there are needs that have been identified, like the need to confirm matthew's place in my life, to settle his concerns of replacement, to mitigate his fears that there is no difference between him and anyone else in my life. it's good that i know these needs; it's fabulous that he's willing to identify and tell me these needs. but it also becomes apparent in discussion (or worse, somewhere down the road in time, via his *actions*) that while we've identified his needs, his and my understanding of them differ, because i'm not meeting his needs *in the manner in which he expected me to meet them*.
huhn... *oops*. there's a big explosive disconnect, looking for a place to happen.
this is a relatively new thing for us - it's another layer of complexity when peeling back the onion skin layers of the relationship processes. because now we have identified needs & wants, we've probably been able to express their relative priority in any current situation; we may even have been able to identify the fears or other forms of sub-subtext informing our actions towards or away from meeting those needs.
NOW we have to accept the fact that we've got some kind of subconscious expectation for the manner in which those needs are met.
"i need you to be there for me." "I need you to not rock the boat." "i need you to show me how much you value this relationship, and my place in it with you."
these are all excellent statements of need; those of us who hear them nod our heads and agree or disagree to try meeting those needs... and generally go away assuming we know what has to be done to meet those stated needs. but really, when was the last time any of us explicitly sought to identify *how* the need-meeting is supposed to take place? what form it takes? what specific actions are expected, or even *required*? we assume we know our partners and lovers, can identify the right-and-proper path of behaviour when an unmet or newly-identified need is shared with us. for myself, i think i'm savvy enough to know how to placate someone's fears of being replaced or upheaved... but what would meet that need in my head is (perhaps unsurprisingly for those of you reading along at home) going to be different for what meets that need in matthew's head, or another lover's head, or a friend's.
no, we don't have an immediate answer for this, not yet, at any rate. but we do know (now) that the explicit question needs to be asked, that the extra layer of onion skin has to be processed, otherwise there's a whole layer of information - of *expectation* - that remains uncommunicated, and likely to be a cause for surprise or even resentment when the need is not met as expected, or not perceived to be met at all.
self-awareness, the ongoing process. now, when someone voices a need to me (or i perceive a need as being expressed), it behooves me to ask, "OK - what do you expect from me in order to achieve that need?". at the very best, the expression may require no explicit involvement at all. maybe someone just needs to know they're being heard, and your response is a part of that. maybe someone wants you to do something specific to meet an expressed need; maybe they don't know what they want from you, and are soliciting input for a collaborative solution.
the point is, you never know till you ask. most of the time, i'd be surprised if the person professing the need actually *knows*, explicitly, what he or she wants the meeting of the need to look like. the point is, *someone* has to start the investigation, otherwise you risk assumptions and expectations that look a lot like you're NOT meeting the need (because you're not doing it like you're expected to), and that kind of misconception just plays havoc on everyone's vulnerabilities.
no great solution light bulbs here - just an awareness of a whole other area of data processing to identify and implement in the relationship. if it's useful to us, it's likely useful to *someone* else out there.