Happy Relationships Blog

Archive for the ‘books on relationships’ Category

Book reviewer Jacqueline Jung says the disintegration of a love affair sent relationship author Tim Kellis on a quest to figure out why-as well as how he could ultimately experience a blissful relationship.

According to Jung’s review published in NightsAndWeekends.com, Kellis found some answers and proceeded to write EQUALITY: The Quest for the Happy Marriage.

And why not? Jung writes in her book review. According to Kellis, today’s psychologists just don’t get it. They don’t address the reasons behind feelings and behavior, nor do relationship books written by ‘experts.’ They aren’t logical. In the court case of the United States vs. Microsoft, the discussion always stayed logical. Accordingly, successful resolution of disagreements doesn’t come from arguing but from coming up with a common sense solution. You see, the key to a successful relationship is common sense. It’s that simple… at least to Kellis, she writes.

In his 400-plus-page book, readers learn history lessons about everything from Adam and Eve to Thomas Paine’s Common Sense to Hitler and even Matthew Perry, said Jung. Kellis covers religion, prejudice, Freud, the evolution of today’s education, and Carl Jung.

In EQUALITY: The Quest for the Happy Marriage, author Kellis talks about his own quest to discover the root causes of rocky relationships for which the fault is not be in our stars, but in ourselves.

–NightsandWeekends.com

Advertisements

Another media inquiry regarding handling conflicts:

I’m not a yeller. I never have been. When my sister and I had knock-down fights as kids, she screamed and I talked or cried (or both). Actually, that’s how our fights play out these days. I also never yelled when arguing with my parents, and the one and only time I got in a bit of a “tiff” with a colleague, she yelled and I, well, spoke. I’m the same way with dates. Recently, I had my first-ever argument with a non-yeller. It was weird — very weird. And I almost laughed in the middle because it didn’t feel like a fight. So was it? Does emotional release occur if you don’t yell? Is the fight as effective or productive? Do two people who are non-yellers accomplish anything while fighting? What about two screamers? The Times Union is a 150,000-circulation daily paper in the capital of New York state. We are Hearst-owned, and our stories run on the NY Times and Hearst wires after they appear in our paper. This is for my Sunday Life 3.0 column. 

Your question really gets to the heart of the difference between positive and negative relationships.  Again, the real question here is how to handle the inevitable conflicts that are certainly a part of every relationship when you bring 2 different people together with 2 completely different backgrounds. 

The problem with our understanding of arguments is we have yet to elaborate on the emotional toll and psychological reaction to them.  The objective, on the other hand, is to handle these conflicts through disagreements, not arguments.  One of the most significant sections of my book is my section on Dr. Martin Luther King because he taught us the proper way to handle conflicts, what he called civil disobedience, a term he learned from a French philosopher by the name of Thoreau.  In other words, when faced with conflicts that you disagree with it is okay to be disobedient, to disagree, just be civil about it. 

The problem with arguments is the emotional toll on the 2 involved and the unfortunate break down in communications which is the result of disagreements that turn into arguments.  The key difference between disagreements and arguments is disagreements take place on a logical plane while arguments take place on an emotional plane, which is not logical and solutions to these conflicts becomes extremely difficult if not impossible.  

Unfortunately, modern psychology tries to convince us that if you don’t release your emotional anxieties that underlie all conflicts then you suppress them, where in time the suppressed anxieties eventually explode.  What is missing here is the concept of not suppressing the underlying emotional anxieties but instead discussing them with your partner in life, who should provide an outside, objective perspective, barring your partner’s personal insecurities causing a subjective perspective in his or her response.  The goal is to talk through the insecurities so that the fear underlying the emotional anxieties can be released in a positive manner. 

And the reality is that as soon as you cross the plane of disagreements and enter the plane of arguments communications break down.  With disagreements the logic, which is understood and could be either the logic of the thoughts or the logic of the feelings, is eventually comprehended by both parties where a solution then becomes possible.  Unfortunately there are no real solutions behind emotional arguments. Not only are they not logical but in reality are the result of the effort by one party to enforce his or her subjective perspective, at the cost of a better objective solution for both within a relationship.  

Hello

I am just now getting back to my blog.  I wanted to begin by posting a media inquiry that I responded to recently on the challenges when your spouse makes a drastic life change.  See below:
For an article I’m writing for CNN.com, I’m seeking both nationally known relationship experts as well as “real” people to talk about this topic: when the person you married or fell in love with makes a drastic life change. Perhaps she used to love burgers, but then became a strict vegan and now pushes tofu down your throat. Or maybe he was an anything-goes kind of guy, but five years into the marriage became a Scientologist. Or maybe your wife used to be carefree about the environment, and now she’s militant about recycling *everything*. I’m looking for both the light and serious side of what happens when you wake up and realize the person you love has changed in significant ways.

In positive relationships, as individuals within a marriage grow and develop new interests, hobbies, outlooks on life, religion, etc both get to live through this change in a positive manner where the change is understood and most importantly, appreciated.  Obviously, the change is within one of the two and it is important that this change not be enforced onto the other, because the change is intended for one, not both. 

Problems, though, occur within the negative relationship when this change is used as a further wedge between the two, a wedge that had already been developed with the other unresolved issues within the marriage.  Then it becomes another brick in the path of the destruction of the marriage. 

Then it becomes a, or quite possibly the, issue that finally pushes the couple apart to the point of the thud of complacency within negative marriages, or divorce.  Then it becomes a problem. 

What is needed in this situation is to understand and appreciate the changes within the individual. 

For example, if one of the two within a marriage decides to become much more religious, then the other partner needs to understand this as part of the maturing process, and accept and appreciate this change.  The one who has found religion cannot enforce this change onto the other.  Then it becomes a wedge in the relationship.  

In his new relationship book, Equality: The Quest for the Happy Marriage, author and co-host of the new “Men on Marriage” radio show, Tim Kellis presents radically new but remarkably simple solutions to end the cycle of divorce and achieve long lasting happiness and personal fulfillment in marriage.

Read the full press release:

http://www.happyrelationships.com/press_relationship_book_save_your_marriage.asp


Pages

December 2017
M T W T F S S
« Dec    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Blog Stats

  • 173 hits

Top Clicks

  • None