wCHAP.8

(9/13/98)

CHAPTER VIII

FINDING A PARTNER TO LOVE

One vital element relative to affiliative love that I want to tackle is to develop at least the outlines of a model for what a given person should be looking for in a life partner. "Should" in the foregoing means if a person is to have a relationship that is compatible with a SFLIHM (Sustainable Feeling that their LIfe Has Meaning) and which becomes a force helping them to move in the direction of becoming their best self. The foregoing seems like a vital element that is still missing from the material in Chapter V, VII, IX, or anywhere else in A NEW FOUNDATION FOR CIVILIZATION. What should a given person be looking for in a life partner? What does one need in order to form a satisfying, nurturing relationship? What must one believe, feel, want, desire in order to be able to form a stable marriage with their partner? Part of this is educational/therapeutic/medical -- affording the person the information, experience, and good mental and physical health necessary to have a relationship compatible with a SFLIHM. Another part consists of the innate characteristics that make up an individual. I believe research comparable to Dr. John Gottman's (Chapter IX) needs to be focused on this issue. One way to proceed would be to look at those couples whose marriages/relationships break-up even though they understand and have worked to apply Gottman's model.

This compatibility model would be concerned with some kind of basic rapport. What are the core things each person needs -- not what they think they need? Can two given persons fulfill these real needs for each other? In the process of becoming such a person will each individual also be moving along their path toward achieving a SFLIHM?

One part of this effort must be to help individuals find love. To do this it might be helpful for them to understanding what a successful relationship consists of and how they can achieve what is necessary. The second is to put them in contact with individuals with whom they have the potential to develop a nurturing, satisfying, growing relationship. See Chapter XIX, "The Knowledge Bank and a Wise Community."

In order to find, develop, and sustain a loving, nurturing relationship and marriage it is necessary, or at least helpful to know what such a relationship requires. If we are looking for one thing and what is needed is the opposite our success is doomed. My guess is that most persons in modern society have all kinds of erroneous ideas about what they actually need in order to have a fulfilling relationship and marriage.

It is critical then to provide the person desiring to become a Wise Person the right answers to help them on their journey.

In order to help persons find their ideal mate and maintain a loving relationship what is actually needed is data from individuals about themselves in the greatest detail possible. Also, the individual needs clearer ideas than are now available of what one really should be looking for in a partner. What kind of person would fill the needs we don't even realize are most important for us? Second, how can each person work with the other to get what they really need and at the same time give the other person what they really need?

Frequently, individuals are focused so completely on what they think they want and the realization that they can't get this from their partner, that they are cut off from exploring the true needs both persons have.

Models must be developed to help discover what persons truly need from each other. This will help individuals know the likelihood of success when establishing a relationship with any given person. When two people have selected each other they then need help in working to deeper, more satisfying levels of love relationships. When problem areas are encountered there needs to be guidance to clarify what exactly is going on with each person and how the issue can be resolved so that each gets what they need from the relationship.

Through this back and forth, give and take each person will be able to move in the direction of their own best self. This process will reveal mistaken ideas, misunderstandings, deficiencies in self understanding, needed growth, skills to develop, etc. It must be done in such a way that one person's ignorance does not produce behaviors that keep either person from becoming their best self.

A computer expert system needs to be developed to help the person look at their absurd ideas and how these are getting in the way of their true interests. This would help both persons see how they can provide the other person with what they want and fill their true needs at the same time.

Obviously, the foregoing will not be possible all the time. But this process will provide a way to move exploration and efforts in the most productive way. It will help avoid negative actions that now frequently guide disagreements. Self-defeating behavior and statements often produce a feeling of incompatibility even though the two persons may have all the characteristics necessary for a successful relationship.

Unreasonable expectations are common among lovers. Without some objective way to confront such issues the individual has no way to learn what is unreasonable and therefore unnecessary and what things are in fact absolutely essential. Although experience is helpful, without guidance it may easily be misinterpreted. For example, one person may place unreasonable demands on the other. Initially, the other may work to fill these demands. However, at the same time resentment, alienation, etc. may be developing that eventually destroy the marriage.

Most persons need guidance if they are to have a relationship compatible with a SFLIHM. We normally have little idea what attributes and characteristics are really necessary to our well being. Without a great deal of experience or help from others we cannot know what will actually allow us to share our life with someone else in a deep and intimate way. Obviously, we lack this kind of data and experience when we are beginning our life. And even after we have had a great deal of experience it often isn't obvious how to apply that experience. What it actually means, or what we have learned may not be clear.

This kind of information can only come from the accumulated wisdom of a Wise Community because the theoretical structure and environment are essential. Until we have a Wise Community the necessary support structure and data will not exist. Without the foregoing it will frequently be unclear how we can in fact fulfill our true needs in many situations. Also, a couple may or may not have the basic characteristics that permit them to establish and maintain a satisfying marriage. In these situations anything one does may lead to failure in the relationship.

One procedure that might be helpful to individuals in their growth and development is an interactive game based on the movie "Groundhog Day." In that movie the hero lives one day of his life over and over and over, until he gets it right. Each day starts from the beginning. He maintains all the memories and experiences of past days, but no one else does. Everything else remains the same except for how he impacts any given event. He can see in excruciating detail the effects of his behavior. He gets sufficient feed-back so he learns better ways to behave. Ways that provide what he actually needs. He has numerous opportunities to get things he thought he wanted and find out they really weren't satisfying at a deeper, more fulfilling level.

Although this game could be useful in helping one explore every area of their life, it seems particularly suited for an affiliative love relationship. It could help one learn how their behavior effects another person and the long-term consequences of this. Obviously, this game would have to be based on real world data and not somebody's theory about what people might do in this or that situation. To design such a game would be a formidable challenge, but the payoff would be such that it might be worth the effort.

p. 186[3]: "Considering all the complications of mixing and matching types of love, it is little wonder that many lovers hesitate to believe in the possibility of enduring mutuality....the problems of balancing two lovers in orbit around a common nuclei of intimate experiences still defy us."

RESPONSE: It seems clear to me that to achieve enduring mutuality must be difficult. However, coming to the problem from the proper perspective and with the best tools available would seem to vastly increase the odds.

p. 188[3]: "Loving and making love are products of human civilization."

RESPONSE: And as civilization advances our methods of affiliative love must change in accordance with this advance. It seems to me that the ideas on styles of love Lee explores (see Chapter VII, also) could best be seen as a teaching, learning tool. They help to assess areas of one's personality and understanding that need development and assistance to recognize the path toward affiliative love that is compatible with a SFLIHM state.

Since Lee makes clear that the style of love that exists in a given relationship depends very much on the other person, it appears obvious that there is a great deal of flexibility. Therefore, with the proper kind of coaching and effort as well as therapy and counseling -- plus help in finding the proper partner -- one might establish affiliative relationships of the highest quality and value.

It looks to me like Professor Lee has done a useful project, studying the ways persons can experience affiliative love. However, based on his experience it appears that the most significant effects of his research remain to be developed. His respondents seem to suggest that their styles are adopted out of ignorance. Take for example mania. Once a person has pursued this course, they work hard not to do it again (even though they may consider it an important experience in their life that they are better for having had.)

Ludus also strikes me as a kind of love that comes out of immaturity and lack of experience. To repeat over and over and over relationships that are inherently limited in their depth and development seems singularly self defeating. I must believe that as one matures as a person they would move to a different style of affiliative love.

Eros also has significant limitations. One is drawn to a person for reasons of which they are totally ignorant. They have a wild, fulfilling experience. They end the relationship when the passionate attraction that started the affair burns out. And burn out it must with such a superficial approach to love as is embodied in this approach. Then they repeat the cycle over and over and over.

Lee indicates that childhood experiences may be a factor in style of affiliative love. (Whether the person had a loving, nurturing childhood or an unhappy childhood.) To me childhood is something one can work through and get to a place where negative, hurtful experiences do not set the agenda for one's entire life. If this is the case, as one works through their childhood experiences they should be able to move toward the more mature, satisfying styles of love.

Once we understand our own needs, short comings, possibilities, etc. then it would be useful to have a way to tap into the massive resources of our community and find the ideal mate. For this only the computer with an adequate support network will do the job. The power and potential of computers could, if properly utilized, guide anyone to an enduring and wonderful love. This data can be analyzed by computers to help persons meet others who share the attributes, interests, life-styles, etc. necessary to build a loving, supportive relationship. This whole process must continuously be studied, expanded, and changed as experience accumulates and errors and deficiencies are found.(See Chapter XIX.)

There may be idiosyncratic issues for each person that require additional study. But surely some general guidelines can be developed that could guide anyone in the right direction. Whether a given person will be able to accomplish all the things necessary to understand, believe, experience in order to become mentally healthy is problematical. But that is the process of self growth and becoming one's best self. Different people may need very different things. But these needs should fall into a limited number of particular groupings consisting of different personality styles. Or, there may be other factors that establish a small number of groupings everyone falls into. Knowing this information would then provide general guidance to help individuals work through the barriers preventing them from achieving a mutually satisfying relationship. Also related information would provide guidance to help individuals develop in the direction of their true needs and avoid blind alleys, and wrong paths.

On the matter of personality issues some material that might be useful at least as a starting place is presented below. This material is from TYPE TALK [1] which is utilized in Chapter XXVI to explore the bigger issue of the relationship of personality type to becoming a WISE Person.

In their Chapter 7, "Friends, Lovers, and Type," they begin by cautioning the reader that, "nothing -- not even Typewatching -- will eliminate the hard work involved in any intimate relationship. But with a little bit of effort, and some basic Typewatching skills, you can greatly enhance your understanding and appreciation of each other...."

They go on to say, "We've already mentioned the phenomenal attraction of opposites. There isn't a more powerful source of love and hate in relationships than that attraction. You've seen it all the time, probably experienced it yourself: two people attracted to each other because each has what the other lacks, 'Ah,' says the spontaneous, disorganized Perceiver [P] individual when meeting a potential life partner who appears to be organized and scheduled, 'someone who will help me get my life in order.' 'Great,' says the organized, scheduled Judger [J]about the same encounter, 'someone who will help me loosen up and be spontaneous.'"

"You know the inevitable result: Several years (or months or weeks) down the road, the J is admonishing the P to 'please get organized!' while the P is begging the J to 'try and loosen up.' What was once a major source of attraction is now a major source of heartache."

"The goal, then, is for both members of a relationship to ask themselves, 'What can I do to keep (or regain) that which was originally so attractive, so as to keep (or regain) excitement in the relationship?' That's a primary role of Typewatching in relationships."

"...let's examine some of the types to see the roles they typically play in relationships."

"HOW EXTRAVERTS AND INTROVERTS PLAY THE DATING GAME":(p. 124)

"For openers, let's start with Extraverts because they are easy and fun to get along with -- for a while, at least. They are easy in that you can count on them to do the talking, make the date, instigate the come-on, be the aggressor. They're fun in that they'll fill the time and provide the entertainment, whether it's a night on the town or an evening of talk. Extraverts can converse with amazing facility. In fact, when 'conversing' with an Introvert, they can spend the evening answering their own questions and at the conclusion, thank, the Introvert for a wonderful time."

"But for them, one party or event in an evening is not enough. Extraverts aren't above trying to be everywhere at once."

"The fact is, Introverts are generally attracted to Extraverts. They find Extraverts easy to be with simply because of their social gregariousness; if necessary, Extraverts can carry on entire conversations seemingly by themselves."

"You can see how easy in some ways it is to be with an Extravert, as well as the obvious drawbacks. If we were to sum it all up -- particularly in the early-stage game of getting to Know You -- you could say that 'Extraverts are nice to have around when there is a conversation going on in which nothing needs to be said.' That's a typical Introvert view of Extraverts ....From the Extravert's point of view, of course, it could be said that 'Introverts are nice to have around when you want to be alone.' That's a perfect arrangement for many Extraverts: to be alone and still have company." (p. 125)

"HOW SENSORS AND INTUITIVES PLAY THE DATING GAME":

"Now on to the information-gathering function -- Sensors and Intuitives. In the dating game, these two preferences are at once a source of attraction and excitement and a cause for confusion."

"Sensors, as a rule, are very realistic about dates. They see the other person for what he or she is....For Intuitives, on the other hand, most of the date takes place in the mind. Their imaginations are rich; indeed, their perceptions of the date often are more exciting than what actually transpires. Sensors fantasize, too, but after the fact. After an initial encounter, for example, they'll imagine what the next encounter will be like -- they can imagine all sorts of exciting things, but it is all grounded in reality, in extrapolations from what did in fact transpire on the preceding date. For Intuitives, facts only ruin their fantasies."

"For Sensors, who are by definition tuned into their senses, an exciting date is one that involves all those senses -- the two people, ideally look good, smell nice, taste good food, hear nice music, feel cozy, and so on. It's through the five senses that the dating experience happens. For iNtuitives, it is their sense of potentiality rather than reality through which they experience a date; in some ways, the date is far more fantasy than fact." (p. 126)

"Sensors and iNtuitives approach dates very differently. While for a Sensor, the date doesn't begin until the two parties get together, for an iNtuitive, the 'date' may begin as soon as the arrangements are made, however many weeks in advance that may be. The resulting fantasies of what could happen may reach the point of obsession. Even second dates are revealing. The Sensor's expectations depend on the actual experiences of the first date. If the Sensor had a good time, he or she will be excited about the next encounter. For an iNtuitive, the real experience once again plays second fiddle to the imagination....In reality, the iNtuitive's rich imagination may be becoming confused with reality."

"One problem is that on a date, Sensors may have trouble following the iNtuitive's many trains of thought."

"One big conversational problem is details: Sensors and iNtuitives have very different styles." (p. 127)

"For the Sensor, it was important that the facts be correct before the story continued. For the iNtuitive, the details weren't as important as the flow of the story, and the interruptions were distracting and annoying."

"Time is always a potential Sensing-iNtuitive problem. If a movie starts at eight o'clock, the theater is twenty minutes away, and it's seven-fifty, the Sensor will become frustrated at the prospect of being at least ten minutes late. For the iNtuitive, time is much more flexible." (p. 128)

"HOW THINKERS AND FEELERS PLAY THE DATING GAME":

"In the course of the dating process, the decision-making function -- Thinking and Feeling -- provides the impetus for moving forward in -- or perhaps out of -- a relationship. In fact, we believe the decision-making preference to be the most significant one when it comes to intimacy."

"That can be a problem because, as we mentioned earlier, this is the gender-related preference: there are more Thinking [T]males than females and more Feeling [F]females than males. So in just the luck of the draw, there will be more T men attracted to F females. As a 'date' evolves into a more intimate experience, this preference will be the one that can prove most divisive. The irony is that while the T-male/F-female configuration is the most 'normal' and predictable for heterosexual relations, it has the largest potential for causing difficulties in a relationship. Thinking types want to understand intimacy; for them, it is a state of being analyzed, mastered, and fine-tuned. Feeling types simply want to be intimate -- hold the analysis, please. The result is that Ts may seem rather cold and aloof at times, as they 'process' and 'analyze' their feelings. And they may dislike being pushed to experience the intimacy their F partners are enjoying. Make no mistake: Ts can clearly feel emotions swirling inside them; it's just that they must intellectually come to grips with those emotions before they can share and express them."

"Thinkers' need for understanding begins with the first date and continues throughout a relationship." (p. 129)

"For Feelers, all this definition and clarification merely defeats the whole purpose....A Feeler is likely to respond to the Thinker's quest for definition with something like 'You'll know it when it happens' or 'Your heart will tell you.' Both responses are entirely too mushy and vague for a Thinker."

"For a Feeler, 'I love you' speaks for itself. It needs no further discussion."

"A completely different set of problems arises in those anomalous situations when you have a Thinking-type female or a Feeling-type male. Both violate stereotypical gender roles in the dating and relationship process ....On the opposite side of the coin, of course, is the Feeling-type (p. 130) male, whose Feeling subjectivity calls for him to experience the moment and to be soft and caring in violation of all his masculine scripting, which demands that he be objective and 'above it all,'"

"It's important to interject here something that's been said before but is worth repeating: Feeling types do think, and Thinking types do feel. Typewatching labels merely describe what each type prefers. We can't emphasize this enough."

"HOW JUDGERS AND PERCEIVERS PLAY THE DATING GAME":

"Ultimately, the Judging-Perceiving differential is the one that best allows Typewatching skills to pay off early in a relationship. It's considerably more difficult to disguise one's preference for Judging or Perceiving than for any other preferences. You can usually detect this preference even on the phone. Js want to 'schedule' dates, for example, to plan the experience, keep things in order, be on time, and perform all those other 'organizational' duties of a relationship. They like to take charge of a date -- deciding where to go, what to do, when to do it -- and, ultimately, a relationship. They're generally not comfortable making 'rough' plans, figuring things out 'at the appropriate time.' ...Js are more goal-oriented during the (p. 131) dating part of a relationship. They like to know where things are going -- not just on the date, but in the relationship in general. The problem, as we pointed out earlier, is that this can be very appealing to a P -- for a while, at least. But some Ps feel trapped by this J scheduling, even in the early stages of a relationship."

"The J-P differential can play a big role in how a date (or any other social event) unfolds. In conversation, for example, Ps are capable of discussing many subjects in a single breath, but not feeling strongly on any of them. Js are more likely to stay focused on a single topic, and to have a strong opinion about it. Problems can come when Ps feel attacked or otherwise offended by Js' strong opinions. The Ps, put on the defensive, can (p 132) end up digging their heels in on a subject they had merely wanted to open up for discussion. Often to their own surprise, Ps in such situations hear themselves expressing a forceful opinion on a subject they'd never before had strong feelings about."

"The world of dating and relationships is unlike any other. It is a case of 'Typewatcher beware.' To make just the right impression during these crucial first encounters, it is not uncommon for individuals to overemphasize the nonpreferences, often to counteract insecurities about their natural behavior."

"The important thing to remember about the dating process is that this is the one time people are least likely to show their true stripes. The irony, of course, is that it may be the one time they would most benefit from doing so. Ultimately, of course, the game can only last a while. Then both parties slip back into their respective preferences, both wondering what happened to the exciting relationship they once had." (p. 133)

"To look at how the eight preferences operate within a marriage, let's take a look at some dynamics leading up to a wedding -- and the first year thereafter." (p 134)

"EXTRAVERTS AND INTROVERTS: ....As we've pointed out earlier, E-I differences don't end after the honeymoon. They can plague marriages for decades....The attraction of Extraverts is that they are very affirming and stroking. The bad news is that they overdo it...." (p. 135)

"SENSORS AND INTUITIVES:" (p. 137) ...."The S-N differences, while very attractive, can be the source of serious communication problems."

"THINKERS AND FEELERS:....Picture the first wedding anniversary...Let's imagine a 'traditional' configuration: a Thinking male and a Feeling female." (p. 138)

"The anniversary, for the Feeler, must be significant, experiential, schmaltzy, warm, expressive, and, above all, meaningful. If the Thinker fails to appreciate these dynamics, or, worse, puts something of less importance ahead of this event, it will be interpreted as 'You don't love me.'" (p. 139)

"JUDGERS AND PERCEIVERS:...Anniversaries, and many other gift-giving occasions, can be ripe for Judging-Perceiving misunderstandings. Remember the J phrase 'I don't like surprises'? Of course, the P would counter, 'All the world's a surprise, and isn't it exciting!'" (p. 141)

"The beauty of Typewatching in relationships is that it enables you to see your differences as typological, not personal. It may also remind you of what you once found attractive in a mate, and now find merely annoying."

"If you can see past the relationship's frustrations and recognize that they are grounded in typological differences, the potential for optimizing those differences is very exciting."

"The goal, then, is to accentuate the positive -- to focus on the attractive nature of the differences instead of their irritating qualities. Using whatever appropriate means -- given the individuals' types, there are at least sixteen possible approaches -- Typewatching skills can unfreeze a frozen relationship, maintain a working one, make a good one even better, and bring calm to even the most turbulent interpersonal waters." (p. 143)

"TWO SIMPLE RULES: Toward the elusive goal of raising fighting to a higher plane, here are two simple rules that can be helpful when fighting: (p. 148)

"1. Let Feelers Think and Thinkers Feel....make two people who [are] struggling and fighting with each other take the other person's point of view. You'd be amazed at how quickly things get sorted out...when two people try to get into each other's moccasins."

"Another helpful exercise for both parties is to 'step outside' a situation as much as possible."

"2. Don't Focus on 'Winning.' One problem is that Js and Ps (p. 149) have very different perceptions on 'winning' and 'losing' a fight. Invariably, in a P-J fight, Js, besides 'knowing' they are right, tend to define the battle lines -- the issues -- early on. For their part, Ps tend to be angry about a number of things, unsure of what's really wrong. The result is that when the J begins to focus, the P often becomes focused too -- on the fact that 'the issue' (as defined by the J) is not the real issue (although the P still may not know what the real issue is). To overcome this dilemma it is necessary for the J to listen. One time-tested technique is to do what behavior trainers call 'active listening': the J would be required to repeat, to the P's satisfaction, what the P has just said before the J would be allowed to respond. That forces the J really to listen to what's being said instead of judging the first words out of the P's mouth and forming a response without listening to the rest of the concern. (For Js, you see, life is actually an exercise in sentence completion: you need only begin a sentence with a few words -- the J will immediately 'know' the rest of the sentence." The 'active listening' exercise is good for the P, too, forcing the P to focus on a single thought and express it succinctly."

"Ultimately, it's a matter of working with our strengths, dealing with out weaknesses, then dealing with each other's preferences, strengths, and weaknesses."

"The goal of Typewatching in fighting is not to avoid a fight. Tension and disagreement are a part of the human condition. It is out of the tension and disagreements of our relationships that we move to more intense levels of love, to increased understanding and forgiveness, and to higher levels of sharing and growth. Believe it or not, the ultimate flowering of a relationship is not possible without the struggle. Typewatching, then, provides an exercise that can help you fight constructively and lovingly." (p. 150)

"LOVE, SEX, AND TYPE: TURN-ONS AND TURN-OFFS:

"Extraverts: Extraverts bring up the same two things as strong indicators that they are loved: noise and action. The 'noise' can be in almost any form, but preferably in the form of words that provided feedback: verbal lovemaking during sex, words exchanged in the midst of laughter or tears, listening to their words when they speak...Extraverts demand attention and responsiveness from mates -- a trait that others can find very tiring."

"Introverts: They know they are loved when they are allowed quiet time and space. To express 'I love you' to the Introvert is to give them space and a place to be alone -- to reflect, to sort out their lives, or simply to be quiet. Moreover, say the Introverts, not only is talk cheap, but the constant verbalizing of what should be obvious makes them distrustful. ('If our relationship's so good, why do you keep saying it?') Whereas Extraverts (p. 151) describe their constant need for affirmation through word and deed, Introverts declare that if a relationship demands too much, they soon grow tired of it and are unable to give their best."

"To no one's surprise, the very thing each type needs, even demands, of their mates is the very thing that mates of the (p 154) opposite type are least likely to deliver. Introverts want space; Extraverts invade space. Extraverts want verbal feedback; Introverts want to keep their thoughts to themselves. Failure to deliver on any of these expectations sets the stage for each to feel depressed, self-critical, and unloved.

"Sensors: True to their name, Sensors are turned on by things that excite their tactile and sensory awareness. Touch is important, as is cleanliness. Smells, tastes, and the visual are very important too. Likewise, turn-offs include noises that interrupt, or touches, smells, tastes, or visuals that are too extreme. Sensors, especially sensing-Judgers, seem to have less patience with turn-offs, and once turned off, are slower to get excited again.

"iNtuitives: They are stimulated partly by the unknown. A little stimulation coupled with a lot of imagination is far more exciting than the reality itself. Another interesting observation, though iNtuitives can certainly be turned off, is that iNtuitive-Perceivers, given any chance at all, can usually transform a turn-off into a turn-on. ('I've never been crazy about redheads, but this redhead is attractive and funny; that's exciting.' Remember that the iNtuitive's imagination is always richer than reality.)

"Thinkers: They are quite clear about their turn-ons and turn-offs. The turn-ons include clearheadedness, objectivity, and the hunger to understand and improve the relationship, while any form of emotionality, schmaltz, or fluffiness turns them off, even, some Ts report, frightens them, if the emotionality reaches a pitch.

Feelers: Turn-ons include any opportunity to please their lovers or occasional epiphanic, deeply felt moments in which love, joy, or pleasure are experienced. Affirmation is also a turn-on to Feelers, even Introverted-Feelers. The absence of any of the conditions necessary for a turn-on is not only a turn-off but, in the long run, is a setup for self-punishment and feelings of failure as a lover. Of the eight preferences, Feelers, more than any others, can be turned off by a partner or an event, but can talk themselves into being turned on if they feel their mates are satisfied.

"Judgers: They have the sharpest definitions of turn-ons and turn-offs. The best turn-ons are things that happen according to (p. 155) schedule -- a schedule often more implicit than explicit. They report liking certain behaviors or words that set the event in motion and are than followed to the letter, yielding satisfaction for all. Interruption of a scheduled event is not only annoying but can ruin the moment altogether. Having set an agenda, the Judgers want no interruptions and no surprises. And though a Judger does like variations, they should be planned variations.

"Perceivers: In dramatic contrast to Judgers, Perceivers note that their biggest turn-ons are the unplanned, the unusual, or perhaps even the risky -- and certainly the surprising. The bigger the surprise, say Ps, the greater the turn-on. Turn-offs, predictably, are routines, schedules (overt or covert), or anything else that limits the room for surprise, exception, or variation."

"It is too simple to say that one's turn-ons are the other's turn-offs. In fact, at least initially, preferences opposite to one's preference are intriguing, exciting, and powerfully attractive. In the long run, however, once the initial excitement has subsided, people tend to revert to their own preferences."

"So, as a relationship grows over time, there is almost a yearning for the security that one's own preference affords. Generally speaking, the biggest turn-ons in a long-term relationship are probably those that affirm and honor the desires of each of the partners, allowing both to feel entirely free to be themselves with each other. Probably the biggest turn-off is being make to feel ridiculous or inadequate for one's preferences, or, worst of all, being told to 'shape up' and get turned on 'the right way' -- the way the other person prefers." (p. 156)

RESPONSE: Obviously, research is necessary to properly understand this whole area. Related to the foregoing in some way not clear to me now are tests to determine this compatibility. One tool that might be helpful as a starting point is a test developed by David H. Olson, professor of family social science at the University of Minnesota, to measure compatibility. "He has developed a pre-marital test called PREPARE that detects differences between prospective husbands and wives. Administered by clergy during premarital counseling, this 125-item questionnaire covers eleven areas of the couple's life including personality issues, finances, sexual matters, children, and religious orientation. The goal is to predict areas of conflict in a marriage, supposedly to avoid disharmony and eventual divorce. Olson's questionnaire does a fairly good job of identifying potential hot spots and predicting marital satisfaction. Checking in on couples three years after they were married, Olson reported that those who were currently satisfied had indeed scored higher on the PREPARE test before their wedding than those who were dissatisfied or divorced." [2]

Probably the best use of such a test as Olson's would be to include it as part of the computer matching process discussed in Chapter XIX to provide finer and finer matching. As more and more persons are involved in the system its ability to predict and therefore its usefulness should be improved. Also this increased information should allow the system to work for a broader range of individuals.

2. WHY MARRIAGES SUCCEED OR FAIL, John Gottman, p. 23, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1994.