3 Ways we humans struggle with Relational Ambivalence
Monday, July 24, 2023.
What is Relational Ambivalence?
Relational Ambivalence is the experience of contrary thoughts and feelings—attraction vs. repulsion, fondness vs. contempt, relational safety vs. fear of oppression, toward our partner in a committed relationship.
Relational Ambivalence is as common as the contrary emotions it seeks to reconcile. We experience it in our family of origin, at first with our parents and sibs.
Perel describes this ambivalence as a tug of war between the parts of us that are firmly attached and entwined with the more differentiated aspects of ourselves that seek to separate and grow away from the nest.
Relational Ambivalence and Estrangement
Human relationships are intricate webs of emotions, experiences, and expectations.
Two thought leaders, Esther Perel and Kylie Agllias, have provided insightful perspectives on understanding complex family relationships.
Esther Perel, a well-respected marriage and family therapist and author, has extensively explored the concept of Relational Ambivalence, while Kylie Agllias, a leading researcher in family dynamics, delves into the intricate phenomenon of family estrangement.
I’d like to explore and compare their ideas, shedding light on the nuances of failing human connections.
What is Relational Ambivalence?
We experience it with our friends, the ones we don’t really want to see but end up feeling obligated to invite to our wedding.
We experience it in the early stages of dating, when commitment feels as if it might extinguish our sense of self. We may enjoy grooving on mutual love, sex-on-demand, support, and security, but not if it impinges too heavily on our freedom.
We experience it in a relationship that has not been growing, that feels emotionally gridlocked, when we engage in that treacherous cost-benefit analysis that Gottman calls “negative comparisons”… wondering if we could be happier if we found a more suitable life-partner.
We experience it in long-term relationships in which—faced with a range of ordinary experiences from rage to boredom—we can become tormented by the question “should I stay or should I go?”
We feel trapped in the morass of the relationship’s toxicity when it’s the elephant in the room… but we also don’t want to lose what we’ve built together—a home, a family, perhaps a thriving family business… a little universe that sometimes feels like heaven… and, other times, feels like sh*t.
“Till death do us part” isn’t just a vow, it’s a plan
Ambivalence exists in every conceivable human relational configuration. It’s baked in the fu*king cake. But we indulge in fantasies that somehow, against all odds, romantic love will seduce Relational Ambivalence.
We are taught a cultural lie that true love is unconditional, passion is absolute, and that finding “the one” should relieve us of any and all doubt.
But intimate relationships are never that black and white.
Our cultural belief is that romantic love is supposed to flood us with certainty and thus there is no room for ambivalence. But ambivalence is as intrinsic and vital to intimate relationships as love and passion itself.
When it comes to romantic relationships, “till death do us part” isn’t just a vow, it’s a plan.
But what happens when plans change?
What happens when we’re not meeting each others’ needs?
What happens when we make mistakes or when the person we love behaves in a way we can no longer abide?
How about when the relationship gets tainted, over the years, with a series of seemingly inconsequential lies, betrayals, or duplicities, that became a 100 lb. weight 20 years on?
It’s then that we suddenly remember that love can hurt, and hurt deeply. And one of the most challenging experiences of Relational Ambivalence is when we find ourselves still loving the person who stole our water and left us to die among the cactus and cattle skulls… ok, maybe it only feels that way sometimes…
Esther Perel normalizes Relational Ambivalence
Esther Perel's work centers around the intricacies of romantic relationships and the ever-evolving nature of desire, intimacy, and Commitment, which I think she could get away with calling the “Big C”
Relational ambivalence, a concept she richly explores, refers to the coexistence of contradictory feelings within a relationship. As I mentioned earlier, these contradictory emotions can range from love and hate, desire and resentment, or proximity and distance.
Perel argues that relational ambivalence is a natural part of long-term partnerships. In her book "Mating in Captivity," she suggests that the very qualities that attract partners to each other in the beginning can become sources of tension and ambivalence over time.
Research supports Perel's views, indicating that ambivalence is common in relationships and can be associated with both positive and negative outcomes (Tornstam, 2015).
Kylie Agllias's ideas on family estrangement
Kylie Agllias is a leading researcher in the field of family studies, particularly known for her work on family estrangement. Family estrangement refers to the intentional distancing and disconnection between family members, often resulting in prolonged periods of little to no contact.
Dr. Agllias and her research team have highlighted that family estrangement is a multifaceted phenomenon and can stem from a range of reasons, including unresolved conflicts, abuse, boundary violations, or a desire for differentiation and autonomy.
She stresses that estrangement should not be solely viewed as negative, as some individuals perceive it as a necessary step for their well-being and personal growth.
Agllias's research suggests that family estrangement is more prevalent than commonly assumed, with significant implications for individuals' mental health and well-being (Agllias, 2017). She emphasizes the need for societal understanding and support for those navigating estrangement.
Ambivalence is an uncomfortable feeling. Heavy with contradictions, it makes us feel a sense of nagging doubt concerning our feelings and choices.
Relational Ambivalence can cause us to think we’ve failed, or that, no matter what decision we make, we will reliably fail. This needless suffering makes us crave a definitive answer. So we force ourselves one way or the other.
According to Esther…It Usually Falls Along 3 Lines of Approach:
We leave. We cut and run. We become estranged…
We end the relationship because it’s comprised of far too many ups and downs.
So We tell our narcissistic parent that because of their insufferable criticism…they won’t be invited for the holidays.
We tell our neurotic, struggling sibling… we won’t provide them emotional support as they narrate their bad habits to us anymore.
We initiate a “friend breakup,” or starve a friendship of our nurturing attention. (a heartbreak, frankly, I’m seeing a great deal of, clinically. Complicated grief over moribund friendships doesn’t get nearly enough attention from post COVID researchers).
As we power forward with intentional steps toward an opposite future, contradicting our current reality, we leave a human wake of estrangement and ambiguous loss. But both Perel and Agllias remind us that a cut-off can be a source of meaningful suffering in the service of personal and relational growth, or it could just be garden-variety, solipsistic cruelty.
We stay, and lie to ourselves that it is “good enough” even though we know it isn’t…
We can stay in a sh*tty marriage for decades. I know. I did.
Deep down, It’s sad to admit that I didn’t think I deserved better. I was also afraid to be alone. The idea that I could either stay or leave did not feel like a choice at the time..
It took me years to realize that when we embrace the notion that “if you loved me, you would accept me as I am,” we’re actually experiencing a commitment to relational laziness and Popeye Logic ( I yam what I yam)…
We learn to hold it. To sit with it. Is just sitting with Relational Ambivalence, as Esther suggests, worth the lack of effort?
Esther reminds us to stop trying to justify, stop negotiating, and just sit with it.
Can we accept that we can wholly love a person without having to love every part of them? This is a much more realistic expectation of romantic love and relationships. Maybe it’s healthy to allow ourselves to really, really not like the person we love sometimes.
Maybe it’s a necessity.
Consider this: perhaps the highest form of love isn’t unconditional. Maybe it’s closer to Terry Real’s description of self-esteem: our ability to see ourselves as flawed and still hold ourselves in high regard. Can we do that for our relationships, too? Esther Perel
If we can do better than merely “holding” the Relational Ambivalence…We might notice, explore, and come to perhaps embrace the power of the ambivalence instead…
We have the option of re-assessing the value of emotional real estate in our intimate relationship. Our brains eschew insecurity. We prize certainty. Ambivalence feels like slacking sometimes.
Our nervous system may insist that we resolve the tension and make a relational decision.
In relationships characterized by emotional or physical abuse, this is not a difficult decision. For others, it’s like an onion with layers of ambivalence.
But what if “holding” invites us to notice more deeply? Then, as long as we’re open and curious, holding the ambivalence is, in itself, a form of radical honesty.
Because in heartily confronting our relational discontents, we’ll run smack dab into our own growing edge.
I like to take it a bit further…
If we can explore the utility of imperfection, and then pivot back toward Gottman’s more modest goal of a “good enough” relationship.
What does our Relational Ambivalence remind us of? What kind of RA were we marinated in as helpless little kiddos? What if embracing the suck of the Relational Ambivalence itself, the surest pathway to deeper intimacy?
A relationship which embraces and accepts human frailty as long as it ambitiously aspires toward relational satisfaction seems worth the effort to me. But accepting and embracing and are a step beyond mere holding and sitting with… so that’s where Esther and I might digress in our ambition.
Be well, and Godspeed.
REFERENCES:
Perel, E. (2006). Mating in Captivity: Unlocking Erotic Intelligence. HarperCollins.
Tornstam, L. (2015). Ambivalence in close relationships. In M. Hojjat & A. Moyer (Eds.), The Psychology of Friendship and Enmity (pp. 215-226). Oxford University Press.
Agllias, K. (2017). Family estrangement: A matter of perspective. Journal of Family Studies, 23(3), 243-256. doi:10.1080/13229400.2017.1285751.
