Psychological Intimacy in the Lasting Relationships of Heterosexual and Same-Gender Couples
continued from
To clarify whether the differences between lesbians and the other two
groups was a matter of sexual orientation or gender, a second model was
constructed and tested with logistic regression. Gender was substituted for
sexual orientation of couples in that model. The results are shown in.
HealthyPlace.com Video
Power of Choice – Sex
Sex educator Mike Pritchard gets serious messages across to kids through
comedy. He "learned" about sex from his older brother. Discussion of
making right choices about sex for you.
View with
Real Player. |
|
|
Factors that contributed to understanding
psychological intimacy in the first regression analysis continued to have a
similar effect in this modified model. The gender of participants had a
moderate effect on the reported psychological intimacy in recent years (B =
.81, p [less than] .08).
Sexual Orientation, Gender, and Psychological Intimacy
To examine the interacting effects of gender and sexual orientation on
psychological intimacy, we returned to the original qualitative data. The
four elements in the theoretical model for this study discussed earlier in
this paper (proximity, openness, reciprocity and interdependence) were
useful in this task. Subtle differences were found in how these elements
were weighed by participants, as they talked about the meaning of
psychological intimacy in their relationships.
Themes of proximity and interdependence were evident among males, as
illustrated in the responses of a gay male:
Emotionally, things are really good now ... it feels good knowing I'm
growing old with [his partner], even though we're very different people ...
I'm very social and I have a lot of friends, and he's not as social and he
doesn't have as many friends . . . We both place a really great importance
on togetherness. We make sure that we have dinner together every night and
we have our weekend activities that we make sure we do together. . . I think
that both of us understand it's also important to be an individual and have
your own life, . . I think you become really uninteresting to each other if
you don't have another life you can come back and share . . . You need to
bring things into the relationship . . . [things] that keep it growing and
changing.
The importance of proximity in the connection to his partner became
evident as this individual responded to our inquiry about psychological
intimacy. At the same time, he noted the value that he placed on
separateness from his partner. By implication, he was also talking about the
element of interdependence as he expressed the joy of "growing old" with his
partner in spite of the differences in their individual psychological
makeups. He emphasized proximity along with interpersonal differentiation as
he discussed the relationship in recent years.
The responses of many women tended to reflect themes of openness and
mutuality, along with differentiation in the psychologically intimate
connection with their partners. A lesbian participant spoke of those
elements in her relationship:
What has been good is the ongoing caring and respect and the sense that
there is somebody there who really cares, who has your best interest, who
loves you, who knows you better than anybody, and still likes you. . . and
just that knowing, that familiarity, the depth of that knowing, the depth of
that connection [that makes it] so incredibly meaningful. There is something
spiritual after awhile. It has a life of its own. This is what is really so
comfortable.
Variations by gender may have reflected how individuals perceived and
valued different elements of psychological intimacy within themselves and in
their partners. Because of the gender differences between partners in
heterosexual relationships, these variations on the theme of psychological
intimacy were manifested in a different way. The following observations of a
heterosexual male illustrated those variations; he viewed his wife as
very unselfish, and she would sacrifice so that I could go out and do my
thing. One thing that we have always done, always, is talk constantly to
each other. I don't know what we talk about, and I don't know what we've had
to talk about all these years, but we still communicate with each other. . .
We've had fights . . . when she gets mad at me I stop talking to her. And
then she feels very bad, and this may last a day or two, and then it passes
and everything is fine again . . . She's more open than I am. I keep a lot
inside and I don't let it out, and that's probably not good. But, that's the
way I am.
HealthyPlace.com Video
Sex
Education for Teens
Radical sex education program for teens in Australia in light of
increase in teen pregnancy and their lack of information about sex.
View with
Real Player. |
|
|
Many heterosexual males viewed observable qualities in their wives, such
as support and their style of managing conflict, as important in developing
and maintaining a sense of psychological intimacy in their marriages.
Females, on the other hand, often commented on the observable and then went
on to identify their understanding of the underlying dynamics that shaped
behavior. More than men, women talked about the interplay of relational
dynamics. The spouse in this marriage reported that she filled certain needs in him, and I know he filled certain needs in me . .
. he didn't have very high self-esteem. I may have boosted his confidence a
lot . . . He tells me I go ballistic over stupid things, and he is outwardly
very calming . . . I don't always agree with him, and he does not always
agree with me . . . but we're good friends through it all, and I think that
if you have a good friend, you should be able to disagree or agree, or get
angry or be happy, or any number of emotions, if that's your friend, that's
your friend ... I don't even know how to describe it, you just have that
closeness . . . there has to be enough there so that when all these little
outside things are finally gone, it's not "Who are you? I don't know you,
and we don't have anything." You have to really work at keeping that level
of a relationship active . . . not just a physical spark, but just the whole
picture.
Themes of connectedness and separateness in these four interview passages
were important dynamics in understanding the meaning of psychological
intimacy to participants. The elements of proximity, closeness, mutuality,
and interdependence may have been shaped most significantly by the
interaction of males and females in same- and opposite-gender relationships.
That is, it may not be gender alone that accounts for the differences
between males and females. If women value attachment in relationships in a
way different from men, then the data may suggest a mutually reinforcing
process toward strengthening connectedness in lesbian relationships. In
heterosexual and gay male relationships, the value that males place on
separateness in relationships may temper the quality of attachment that
develops over the years, and therefore results in different forms of
psychological intimacy.
Psychological intimacy between lesbian partners had a different
relational history from that of heterosexual and gay male partners. From the
early years to recent years, our data suggest a progressive shift toward
psychological intimacy between lesbian partners. Lesbians were as evasive of
face-to-face discussions of conflict as heterosexual and gay male males,
during the early years of their relationships. For lesbians, the avoidance
appeared to be a consequence of fearing abandonment by their partners if
they openly confronted differences. Only as lesbian couples became
increasingly disenchanted with their relationships did modification in
conflict management styles occur. Usually, one partner took the risk of
expressing her unhappiness. That encounter resulted in 85% of lesbians
applying for couple therapy. Based on the reports of lesbian respondents
about the meaning of therapy to their relationships, being involved in
treatment may have supported the development of psychologically intimate
communication between partners.
LIMITATIONS
Qualitative modes of data collection based on in-depth interviews
conducted are an effective tool for studying elusive phenomena, such as
psychological intimacy. The richness of data elicited through the method
used in this study is quite different from data collected through other
means, although there are concerns about validity and reliability, as well
as the nature of the sample.
continue
top ~
pages 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8 ~
send page to
friend
|