Fascinating article: Do you 'turn towards' your DP's 'bids', or 'turn away' from them?

[nrv0us]

I don't normally read a lot of articles about relationships, but this one really hit home. It's a variation on that whole idea that 'contempt is the #1 relationship killer,' but it expands that to really go into what that contempt (or its opposite) looks like.

It's got a fairly Clickbait-y title, but I thought it was really insightful and just thought I'd share it here. Do you recognise your relationship anywhere in here?

www.businessinsider.com/lasting-relationships-rely-on-2-traits-2014-11?IR=T

I am glad that CaptJaneSafeway made the point about abusive relationship; constantly demanding your attention is one way to ensure you never, ever get any downtime or, if you have work to do, make that it is impossible to get done.

Yes absolutely, Romey. Let's not forget the original article was all about predicting those relationships that would last and those that wouldn't. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with a relationship ending. Sometimes, in fact, that's a hugely positive thing.

I thought this was very interesting and useful. I have been in a relationship for 20years+ and sadly we are not always very kind to each other. Some people may find this all really obvious, but the obvious can be important to remember.

What also interests me, is whether people who make a lot of bids, and need a lot of emotional connection might be attracted to the type of person who is not very responsive to bids, as adult attachment theory predicts.

it's important to be able to distinguish between a genuine bid for connection and intimacy, and someone just wanting to discuss something they find interesting

I don't agree with this, and I don't think the article said this.

I think the point is that a bid is any attempt at communicating, and that it should be greeted with kindness.

You don't have to parse the bid for deeper meaning, you just have to respond in a way that shows that you value the person.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with a relationship ending. Sometimes, in fact, that's a hugely positive thing.

Yes!

A thousand times yes to this.

That's my problem with the article, that it's in the mould of "this is how to make your relationship last forever".

Whereas it might more usefully be "here's something to consider when you decide if your relationship is worth stayed my in".

I didn't read the article as a how-to guide in that sense though, Everything. Although obviously it does offer things to bear in mind to improve communication, it isn't going to work unless both parties really want to. I thought it was as least as useful to help people to put their finger on why a relationship wasn't really working for them.

Liara I tend to do that- just ask for attention if I am tired, exhausted, or want a hug. Sometimes I even say very needy things like 'do you love me?' and my lovely husband says 'yes, I do'. I am extremely self-sufficient most of the time and both of us are very busy in our careers, so if we want to spend time together, or make/respond to bids, then sometimes directness can really work!

I would also say we have had phases of really not responding well to bids and getting in a very negative interaction cycle, so it's not all hearts and flowers but in a good phase, I agree that being interested and kind helps.

You know, BOFster, I might have been unconsciously adding in the comments from all the people who shared it on my Facebook feed

I came to it expecting a marriage "how to", but probably not because of anything in the article itself.

The kindness thing is something I've always been aware of. I've sometimes posted on threads in Relationships about the lack of kindness a partner displays.

I liked the "bid" thing, though. Once I'd got used to the terminology. Like a few of you, I found it very off-putting initially.

Fair enough, E.R.A, I think I was responding more to the study mentioned in the article rather than the article itself, which tend to be rather trite packaged slants whenever science or psychology is involved. I was interested in Gottman's actual study that some partnerships by definition didn't work out, and was interested in what the common factors that distinguished them from the other group.

I think that there are forms of 'communication' which aren't bids for connection, sometimes they are simply the imparting of information, 'I left the keys on the table.' There are many people who neither seek nor require any sense of response to such things. And what I was trying to say is that it yes, it DOES still show you value the person if you say, 'I'm sorry, you know I hate arguing about politics, you should invite so and so round, he'd really get into this with you.' On those occasions, if someone is feeling guilty they are not 'turning towards' it seems a bit much to suggest their relationship is flawed or suffering as a result. Turning towards someone isn't the same as doing whatever it is they want you to do whenever they want you to do it.

Hair, I think that sounds like a hugely mature and healthy way of going about things. If only more of us could just say, 'stroke me!' when we needed stroking, things would probably be a lot simpler.

I agree with the posters saying that there can be too many bids - and my mother was another one for this. Used to drive me bats as a teenager, I'd be up in my room reading, doing homework (ok, not that often!) etc. and she'd call me - and call me and call me. She wouldn't tell me what for, even when I asked; I'd have to go downstairs to see her before she'd tell me the extremely trivial and unnecessary bit of info (sometimes it was just "there's this programme on tv"). At least 80% of the time I'd respond negatively and turn straight round and go back upstairs - which, if she'd only told me what it was in the first place, probably wouldn't have been necessary.

I don't think it is about the bids so much as the attitude/emotions people had when they responded to the bids.

I think the couples who divorced had spouses who when asked to interrupt what they were doing to respond thought "for god's sake why can't she leave me alone when she knows I'm doing something else - how inconsiderate"

Whereas those who responded probably thought and said anything from
"how lovely, I love how she is interested in birds" to "jesus christ birds again, it is hilarious how into birds she is" to "unless it is a turkey we can eat for dinner I'd rather read my book"

To me the difference isn't really in the response it is more in what the spouse presumed when they heard the "bid'. I think the ones who divorce presume that the spouse is trying to irritate them/doesn't understand them etc. the ones who do well presume the other person is being interesting/nice/funny - even if they don't really want an interruption at that point.

Yeah that's really interesting, thumb. It's almost as if the subterfuge involved in someone's bids, or how numberous but buried they are can make turning towards much harder, because it feels confusing or even deceptive for the other person. It's kind of infuriating to have something demanded of you under the guise of something else. And even as children we can sense this happening with our parents and resent them for it.

One thing we haven't talked about is when you're with a partner who makes too FEW bids. My DH is incredibly 'low maintenance' this way. But actually it's taken me a really really long time to work out that some men (people) who are 'not needy' are actually afraid of being vulnerable and like to be in control. Making a bid or asking for affection/connection is a vulnerable thing to do (hence your mum hiding it under something else).

Men who have been raised not to make themselves vulnerable deliberately limit their 'bids'. This led me to stop asking for attention/affection too because I felt faintly humiliated being the only one reaching out like that. And so we drifted apart. That's how relationships go wrong in a cold way.

Fascinating article and thread too. It was a bit of a revelation for me reading the article, and not in a good way. I realised that although DP and I respond to each others' bids, I often don't respond positively to DD's very frequent bids. It's often when I'm reading or thinking about other things, and she'll ask something that she could easily work out the answer to herself/has already asked me, or tell me some random thing. I'm short, grumpy or uncommunicative with her much too often, and I'd just never thought of it as her seeking a connection with me. I feel dreadful now.

Yes, Canyou, that's still about generosity and kindness isn't it? It's choosing to believe your partner has spoken with good intentions, which can be a generous act all of its own. It means expending the energy to empathise with why they might have reached out, rather than just focusing on what it does to YOU.

If you start believing your partner is trying to hurt/annoy you, you will turn away from their bids, they will turn away from yours and then your partner WILL actually be trying to hurt you, and the cycle continues.

You can start a positive cycle sometimes by trying to think the best of your partner's intentions even when it's hard. I've seen a lot of women in my family react to their partners with contempt and impatience immediately they say anything and as a child I always found that baffling. But I now understand that was resentment about their lives coming out in another way. Context was driving these symptoms, and then the symptoms built the context. The relationships were terrible models of 'turning away' and withered into depression and loathing.

This is fascinating - the discussion here even more so than the article.

Bloodonthetracks, in what way were they resentful about their lives? Do you mean because of their partners, or because of something unrelated? Because it's hard to "turn towards" in either case, I think.

Anyone have any experience thinking about this stuff or putting it into practice last night?

I think we could expand from this premise and say that some people also do this to their children - look at how some parents and kids chat and engage and some kids and parents inhabit the same house but have lost or never formed emotional interaction.

My brother's marriage has no interaction at all - his relationship model is: the woman stays at home and keeps the house so tidy it looks hermetically sealed and the man works long hours to earn loads of money. That's it. He is baffled by me and DH who don't earn so much and have a messy house and actually have a laugh with each other.

"How to talk so kids will listen and listen so kids will talk" is full of strategies for doing this stuff, works with adults and children!

The fancy term is "supportive listening".

Poofus, I'm thinking of my mother and grandmother, both of whom would ignore, imagine slights, or speak with contempt to their partners at every bid opportunity.

My grandfather had a big affair which I only found out about later and decided to 'stay'. But they never dealt with it properly and I think my grandmother felt she had to indicate her rage at any opportunity when he was vulnerable (asking for affection) to hurt him as he had hurt her. If they had just dealt with it rather than shoving things under the carpet, I doubt it would have leaked out in this way. They were married 65 years, mind. 65 snipey, awkward years.

My mother had that marriage as a model, and married someone quite socially inept with a lot of repressed anger. Eventually, my mother resented having to goad my father through life. He was pretty useless socially and practically and not naturally warm, though he tried, she came to clearly resent being married to him. Instead of reconsidering the marriage (not something at that time or with her opportunities/background she would have felt able to do) she responded to even the most basic of his connecting questions with an irritated, 'what?!' as if he'd said something incredibly stupid or annoying. This sometimes made him angry and cold which made her hate him even more. Etc.

Crabby I'm with you, when you see it in the context of how you interact with the DCs it is even more enlightening isn't it.

DP and I spoke about it last night and he said that he very rarely interacted with his ex in this way because he just wasn't interested in what she had to say and she made so many 'bids' that he just switched off.

I hadn't realised quite how important all of that was, but when I look back to my ex and remember pointing things out on TV and he was on his laptop so hadn't seen and just grunted and dismissed it, that was a rejection of a bid to connect, not consciously I know.

Even just sitting watching TV with DP feels like a different thing, because not only are we physically close, we are both watching & listening to the same thing, can comment and connect, have 'in-jokes' based on things we have seen etc. It's just a level of closeness that you can't have with someone who is looking elsewhere all the time and isn't paying attention to the same little things as you. It seemed like such a small thing that was missing with the ex, but now I see that it impacted on everything else.

When we decided to split up he sat down with the DCs and watched their favourite film with them for the first time ever. I was livid that he'd suddenly shown this 'solidarity' after not really engaging with them for years. Just being together, facing the same way and showing an appreciation for something that was important to them was such a small thing, but even he could see that it mattered when it was slipping away.

This is very interesting, and the discussion even more so.

One of the usual topics that comes up in relationships is how a partner is always head down in technology. There are those of us who don't see this as an issue and those that do.

I suspect that those that do are the victims of unsuccessful bids. DH and I don't tend to watch much telly but spend time on the internet and then discuss things that amuse or interest us. It isn't a non-interactive process.

We also have very different interests the other finds boring! We get around that by discussing the the thoughts and feelings around those interests, rather than the detail of the interest itself.

There's ways to communicate but I guess the channels needs to be open.

Showed the article to DH. He couldn't help making a wisecrack. "Yes, I agree it would be better if you were a bit kinder." But at least he read it, so that's a start. I noticed myself being generally quite responsive to him all evening, but I don't know if that was because I had just read the article, and so I had it in my mind to "turn towards". I suspect I am generally like that because I am a bit of a pleaser.

But I totally recognise the scenario that you describe with your grandfather BloodontheTracks, in my marriage, because I think resentment about big things leaks out into small things. So affairs, long working hours, money problems, selfish hobbies and all those big resentments don't get discussed too much, but the angry feelings get played out in all those little "bids" and day to day discussions about what film shall we watch, or can you pick me up from the station, or whatever.

Ha, yeah, it's quite useful sometimes to ask, 'what am i actually angry about?!' It's why therapists quite often suggest restricting conversations about traumatic, big problems to certain defined hours, so it doesn't bleed into everything.

And I'd suggest everyone remember to be kind to themselves too! Particularly regarding the kids thing. Children are by nature demanding and consuming and don't have the empathy/emotional maturity adults (are supposed to) have. They're voracious for attention and affection. Being responsive to EVERY bid by a small child would be madness and wouldn't adequately prepare the child accurately for the world's level of attention and interest towards them.

I think this article is very good.

I know that dh often makes these bids to me. It will be anything from 'look there's a fox in the garden' to a comment about something he has been thinking about since last week.

A while ago, he complained to me that he felt rejected by me, because I was too engaged in what I am doing to stop and engage.

He is right, but to be honest, there are times when I am eg reading, and for the first time in 24 hours I have an hour uninterrupted and really want just to read. At those times it does feel like a choice between his needs and mine. Or perhaps, a choice between our marriage needs and my needs?

I wonder how often in relationships the man feels his bids are rejected, when actually he isn't taking into account the shear exhaustion of having 3 kids make bids for your attention non stop all day long. 'Having' to respond to a partners bids, when you have been responding to other peoples bids, is another example of it being the woman's fault isn't it?

The kindness when having a row thing is something we hit very early on. In 2 ways.

1. I would assume that an action or comment had a implication. So - what time are we eating? becomes - why isn't dinner ready? When actually it was more likely to be - What time are we eating because I want to sort the recycling and want to know if I have time to do it now? I would often assume the worst. This is a direct inheritance from watching how other people work their relationship in a less healthy way.

1. dh once said to me that he would never, ever say anything in an argument that wasn't true. For him it is about self control. If you love someone, you don't hurl abuse, you keep the argument to the issue at hand. He was really hurt that when arguing I would just hurl mean things because I was cross. I really had to go away and think about that. Kindness when fighting sounds counter-intuitive, but it is really important.

I think we have learned to be kind in the way the article suggests, but some of those have required us to change behaviour, and choose to act in a certain way.

It's wrong, but this made me laugh today, thinking of this thread

just wanted to say how much I've enjoyed the discussion on this thread. BloodontheTracks, I've particularly enjoyed your comments.

It's choosing to believe your partner has spoken with good intentions, which can be a generous act all of its own.

When our children were very small (and we were very busy and quite stressed), I had a moment of insight when I realised I could presume the worst or presume the best of him. he is a decent good person so I consciously decided to presume the best. It was the best thing I could have done for our relationship.