What we believe we owe the other
Every couple runs on a contract nobody wrote or reread. Its clauses are discovered the day one of the two breaches them.
An agreement never negotiated
A relationship very quickly installs a series of reciprocal expectations: who lets the other know when they will be home late, who decides on holidays, what one can do alone, what must be announced. Almost none of these rules has been discussed.
They come from elsewhere: from the family one comes from, from previous relationships, from what one has seen around oneself. Each holds them to be obvious, which is the very definition of a norm, and therefore does not think to state them.
Discovery by breach
One learns of a clause's existence only at the moment it is breached. The feeling accompanying that discovery is disproportionate to the fact itself, which surprises both: one because they did not imagine they were breaking a rule, the other because they did not know they cared that much.
This disproportion is a good indicator. A reaction out of all proportion to the incident almost always signals that an implicit expectation has just been touched, not that the incident was serious.
The most frequent clauses
Three families recur. Rules of availability: how quickly one answers, what justifies not answering. Rules of representation: what one says about the other to third parties, what one keeps to oneself. Rules of autonomy: what is decided alone, what is decided together.
None has a natural content. Answering within the hour is obvious to some and an absurd constraint to others, and both positions are defensible. What causes the problem is not the content of the rule, it is that it was never stated.
The case of inherited rules
Part of these expectations comes from the family model, taken as a reference positively or negatively. It is probably the most powerful source, and the least examined, because it was observed from a child's position, seeing only part of what was at play.
Taking up a rule because it worked at one's parents' home, or adopting its opposite for the same reason, are two equally unconsidered ways of deciding. Naming them does not invalidate them, but it makes them available for discussion.
Writing the clauses
It is not a matter of drafting a set of rules, an exercise as absurd as it is useless. It is a matter of spotting, after a disproportionate reaction, which expectation has just been revealed, and of stating it once.
The effect of that statement is modest and real. A stated rule can be accepted, refused or adjusted. An implicit rule can only be breached.
Key points
Every couple runs on reciprocal expectations inherited from elsewhere, which nobody has stated.
A disproportionate reaction to a minor incident almost always signals that an implicit expectation has been touched.
A stated rule can be accepted, refused or adjusted; an implicit rule can only be breached.
This article describes documented mechanisms and disagreements. It recommends no position, no party and no vote, and commits to no reading other than that of the work it cites.
And you, where do you stand?
The Civix test situates your convictions on six dimensions and matches you with one of the twelve profiles, without ever telling you what to think.
Start my test