Jump to content

User:Saraxo143/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Intimacy" redirects here. For other uses, see Intimacy (disambiguation).
"Paramour" redirects here. For the band, see Paramore. For the ship, see HMS Paramour (1694).

Relationships
(Outline)
Types
Genetic or adoptive
By marriage
Partner(s)
Intimate and sexual
Activities
Endings
Emotions and feelings
Practices
Abuse

An intimate relationship is a particularly close interpersonal relationship that involves physical or emotional intimacy. Physical intimacy is characterized by romantic or passionate love and attachment, or sexual activity. The term is also sometimes used euphemistically for a sexual relationship. Intimate relationships play a central role in the overall human experience.[1] Humans have a general desire to belong and to love which is usually satisfied within an intimate relationship.[2] Intimate relationships involve the physical and sexual attraction by one person to another, liking and loving, romantic feelings and sexual relationships, as well as the seeking of a mate and emotional and personal support from.[1] Intimate relationships provide people with a social network of people that provide strong emotional attachments and fulfill our universal need of belonging and the need to be cared for.[1]

Intimacy

[edit]

Intimacy generally refers to the feeling of being in a close personal association and belonging together. It is a familiar and very close affective connection with another as a result of a bond that is formed through knowledge and experience of the other. Genuine intimacy in human relationships requires dialogue, transparency, vulnerability and reciprocity. As a verb "intimate" means "to state or make known". The activity of intimating (making known) underpins the meanings of "intimate" when used as a noun and adjective. As a noun, an "intimate" is a person with whom one has a particularly close relationship. This was clarified by Dalton (1959) who discusses how anthropologists and ethnographic researchers access "inside information" from within a particular cultural setting by establishing networks of intimates capable (and willing) to provide information unobtainable through formal channels.[3] As an adjective, "intimate" indicates detailed knowledge of a thing or person (e.g. "an intimate knowledge of engineering" and "an intimate relationship between two people").[4]

In human relationships, the meaning and level of intimacy varies within and between relationships. In anthropological research, intimacy is considered the product of a successful seduction, a process of rapport building that enables parties to confidently disclose previously hidden thoughts and feelings. Intimate conversations become the basis for "confidences" (secret knowledge) that bind people together.[5][6]

When there is a couple who is committed in an intimate relationship they know they are going to have many different things to deal with. Such things can include financial issues, children, and extended family. There is no particular secret any couple has that helps them stay together for a long period of time. A relationship can last awhile if the couple is committed to each other, there is respect, good communication, mutual support, mutual friendship, physical and emotional intimacy, romance, a healthy sex life, and independent identities and interests as individuals. It has been found that people who are in long-term relationships are happier than most people and experience better health, fewer medical problems, more satisfaction and meaning in life, a better relationship with their children, lower rates of suicide, and a longer life span. Also, the children of a couple that has this kind of relationship can have better mental health, fewer issues with behavior, lower rates of substance abuse, more success in school, and more successful intimate relationships in their adulthood.[7]

Cohabiting, Civil Unions, and Marriage Fact: In 2011, about 5 million people lived together in intimate relationships outside of marriage, up from 500,000 in the 1970s. Studies show that a couple that lives together before marriage can have a down side. There are couples that decide to live together before marriage to see how things go and there are others that live together without ever marrying. Another option is civil unions or domestic partners that both same-sex and heterosexual couples choose over marriage. There are other studies that show couples who live together before marriage have up to two times the odds of getting divorced and may have a poor marriage as opposed to those who moved in together after getting married. Also, whether you are gay, lesbian, or straight it does not affect or determine the stability of the relationship. Same-sex couples have reported the same levels of commitment and satisfaction with their relationship as heterosexual couples have.[8]

To sustain intimacy for any length of time requires well-developed emotional and interpersonal awareness. Intimacy requires an ability to be both separate and together participants in an intimate relationship. Murray Bowen called this "self-differentiation". It results in a connection in which there is an emotional range involving both robust conflict, and intense loyalty.[9] Lacking the ability to differentiate oneself from the other is a form of symbiosis, a state that is different from intimacy, even if feelings of closeness are similar.

From a center of self knowledge and self differentiation intimate behavior joins family, close friends as well as those in love. It evolves through reciprocal self-disclosure and candor. Poor skills in developing intimacy can lead to getting too close too quickly; struggling to find the boundary and to sustain connection; being poorly skilled as a friend, rejecting self-disclosure or even rejecting friendships and those who have them.[10]Psychological consequences of intimacy problems are found in adults who have difficultly in forming and maintaining intimate relationships. Individuals often experience the human limitations of their partners, and develop a fear of adverse consequences of disrupted intimate relationships. Studies show that fear of intimacy is negatively related to comfort with emotional closeness and with relationship satisfaction, and positively related to loneliness and trait anxiety.[11]

Scholars distinguish between four different forms of intimacy,[12] principally: emotional intimacy and physical intimacy. Emotional intimacy, particularly in sexual relationships, typically develops after physical bonds have been established. "Falling in love", however, has both a biochemical dimension, driven through reactions in the body stimulated by sexual attraction (PEA),[13] and a social dimension driven by "talk" that follows from regular physical closeness or sexual union.[14] The two other forms of intimacy include cognitive and experiential intimacy. Cognitive or intellectual intimacy takes place when two people exchange thoughts, share ideas and enjoy similarities and differences between their opinions. If they can do this in an open and comfortable way, then can become quite intimate in an intellectual area. Experiential intimacy or intimacy activity is when two people get together to actively involve themselves with each other, probably saying very little to each other, not sharing any thoughts or many feelings, but being involved in mutual activities with one another. Imagine observing two house painters whose brushstrokes seemed to be playing out a duet on the side of the house. They may be shocked to think that they were engaged in an intimate activity with each other, however from an experiential point of view, they would be very intimately involved.[15]

It is worth distinguishing intimate (communal) relationships from strategic (exchange) relationships. Physical intimacy occurs in the latter but it is governed by a higher-order strategy, of which the other person may not be aware. One example is getting close to someone in order to get something from them or give them something. That "something" might not be offered so freely if it did not appear to be an intimate exchange and if the ultimate strategy had been visible at the outset.[16] Mills and Clark (1982) found that strategic (exchange) relationships are fragile and easily break down when there is any level of disagreement. Emotionally intimate (communal) relationships are much more robust and can survive considerable (and even ongoing) disagreements.

Different Terms and Types of Intimate Relationships: Celibacy Involuntary: for physical or emotional reasons Voluntary: for positive and personal reasons Sublimation: redirection of sexual energy into life Spiritual: for spiritual beliefs Ascetic: no pleasures, neither sexual nor worldly Clerical: priests, monks, and nuns Chastity: no sex before marriage To God: sacred view of devotion to God Non-Monogamy Polyamory: consensual non-monogamy Promiscuity: casual sex with anyone (a lot) Cheating: non-consensual, non-monogamy Multiple: free to have other intimate relationships Open: free to have other casual relationships Open: tied the knot but free to have others Swinging: casual sex with other couples Don’t ask, don’t tell: fine but don’t fall in love Soft Swing: public sex but only with each other Polygamy: marriage to more than one person Group: more than two people simultaneously Group: more than two people in a relationship Poyfidelity: anyone in the group Foursome Threesome Unicorn: dating a couple Monogamy Exclusive: consensual monogamy Intimate Friendship: no “touching” Co-dependent: together, faithful but no romance and sex only on birthdays Serial Monogamy: series of faithful relationships one after the other Marriage Divorce Empty: one partner for bitter life Common: one partner for life[17]

Physical and emotional intimacy

[edit]

Love is an important factor in physical and emotional intimate relationships. Love is qualitatively and quantitatively different to liking, and the difference is not merely in the presence or absence of sexual attraction. There are two types of love in a relationship; passionate love and companionate love. Companionate love involves diminished potent feelings of attachment, an authentic and enduring bond, a sense of mutual commitment, the profound feeling of mutual caring, feeling proud of a mate's accomplishment, and the satisfaction that comes from sharing goals and perspective. In contrast, passionate love is marked by infatuation, intense preoccupation with the partner, throes of ecstasy, and feelings of exhilaration that come from being reunited with the partner.[18]

People who are in an intimate relationship with one another are often called a couple, especially if the members of that couple have ascribed some degree of permanency to their relationship. Such couples often provide the emotional security that is necessary for them to accomplish other tasks, particularly forms of labor or work.

In order to have emotional intimacy, both individuals in the relationship must have emotional security and confidence, and the ability to communicate their feelings with their partner. We must understand the kind of intimacy we want emotionally, physically, and sexually to be able to achieve it. Many individuals who have gone through large or small traumas in their life can affect their ability to be intimate. A lot of marital problems stem from problems of physical intimacy/sexual problems. These problems may include performance, inhibited sexual drive, or infidelity. Sometimes intimacy can be replaced with something else. This replacement can be infidelity, pornography, phone sex, internet blogging, chronic masturbation, etc. It can also be something non-sexual like psychological dependencies on the children, work, food, gambling, sports, shopping, pets, community activities, etc.[19]

Love-Building Exercises that can help create emotional intimacy with your partner . Two as One: Embracing each other gently, begin to sense your partner's breathing and gradually try to synchronize your breathing with his or hers. After a few minutes, you might feel that the two of you have merged. . Soul Gazing: Standing or sitting about two feet away from each other, look deeply into each other's eyes, trying to look into the very core of your beings. Do this for about two minutes and then talk about what you saw. . Monkey Love: Standing or sitting fairly near each other, start moving your hands, arms and legs any way you like — but in a fashion that perfectly imitates your partner. This is fun but also challenging. You will both feel as if you are moving voluntarily, but your actions are also linked to those of your partner. . Falling in Love: This is a trust exercise, one of many that increase mutual feelings of vulnerability. From a standing position, simply let yourself fall backward into the arms of your partner. Then trade places. Repeat several times and then talk about your feelings. Strangers who do this exercise sometimes feel connected to each other for years. . Secret Swap: Write down a deep secret and have your partner do the same. Then trade papers and talk about what you read. You can continue this process until you have run out of secrets. Better yet, save some of your secrets for another day. . Mind-Reading Game: Write down a thought that you want to convey to your partner. Then spend a few minutes wordlessly trying to broadcast that thought to him or her, as he or she tries to guess what it is. If he or she cannot guess, reveal what you were thinking. Then switch roles. . Let Me Inside: Stand about four feet away from each other and focus on each other. every 10 seconds or so move a bit closer until, after several shifts, you are well inside each other's personal space (the boundary is about 18 inches). Get as close as you can without touching. . Love Aura: Place the palm of your hand as close as possible to your partner's palm without actually touching. Do this for several minutes, during which you will feel not only heat but also, sometimes, eerie kinds of sparks.[20]

History of intimate relationships

[edit]

Ancient philosophers: Aristotle

[edit]

Ancient philosophers mused over ideas of marital satisfaction, faithfulness, beauty and jealousy although their concepts and understandings were often inaccurate or misleading.[1]

Over 2,300 years ago, interpersonal relationships were being contemplated by Aristotle. He wrote: "One person is a friend to another if he is friendly to the other and the other is friendly to him in return" (Aristotle, 330 BC, trans. 1991, pp. 72–73). Aristotle believed that by nature humans are social beings.[2] Aristotle also suggested that there were three different types of relationships. People are attracted to relationships that provide utility because of the assistance and sense of belonging that they provide. In relationships based on pleasure, people are attracted to the feelings of pleasantness and that they are engaging. However, relationships based on utility and pleasure were said to be short-lived if the benefits provided by one of the partners was not reciprocated. In relationships based on virtue are built on attraction to others' virtuous character. Aristotle also suggested that relationships based on virtue would be the longest lasting and that virtue-based relationships were the only type of relationship in which each partner was liked for themselves. Although Aristotle put forth much consideration about relationships, as like many other ancient philosophers, he did not use systematic methods and therefore could not conclude that his thoughts and ideas were correct.[1] The philosophical analysis used by Aristotle dominated the analysis of intimate relationships until the late 1880s.[21]

1880s to early 1900s

[edit]

Modern psychology and sociology began to emerge in the late 19th century. During this time theorists often included relationships into their current areas of research and began to develop new foundations which had implications in regards to the analysis of intimate relationships.[21] Freud wrote about parent–child relationships and their effect on personality development.[2] Freud's analysis proposed that people's childhood experiences are transferred or passed on into adult relationships by means of feelings and expectations.[21] Freud also founded the idea that individuals usually seek out marital partners who are similar to that of their opposite-sex parent.[21]

In 1891, James wrote that a person's self concept is defined by the relationships endured with others.[2] In 1897, Durkheim's interest in social organization led to the examination of social isolation and alienation.[2] This was an influential discovery of intimate relationships in that Durkheim argued that being socially isolated was a key antecedent of suicide.[2] This focus on the darker side of relationships and the negative consequences associated to social isolation were what Durkheim labeled as anomie.[21] Simmel wrote about dyads, or partnerships with two people, and examined their unique properties in the 1950s.[1] Simmel suggested that dyads require consent and engagement of both partners to maintain the relationship but noted that the relationship can be ended by the initiation of only one partner.[21] Although the theorists mentioned above sought support for their theories, their primary contributions to the study of intimate relationships were conceptual and not empirically grounded.[1]

Rise of empiricism

[edit]

The use of empirical investigations in 1898 was a major revolution in social analysis.[21] A study conducted by Monroe,[22] examined the traits and habits of children in selecting a friend. Some of the attributes included in the study were kindness, cheerfulness and honesty.[1] Monroe asked 2336 children aged 7 to 16 to identify "what kind of chum do you like best?" The results of the study indicate that children preferred a friend that was their own age, of the same sex, same in size physically, a friend with light features (hair and eyes), friends that did not engage in conflict, someone that was kind to animals and humans and finally that they were honest. The two characteristics that children reported as least important included wealth and religion.[22]

The study by Monroe was the first to mark the significant shift in the study of intimate relationships from analysis that was primarily philosophical to those with empirical validity.[1] This study is said to have finally marked the beginning of relationship science.[1] However, in the years following Monroe's influential study, very few similar studies were done. There were limited studies done on children's friendships, courtship and marriages and families in the 1930s but few relationship studies were conducted before or during World War II.[21] Intimate relationships did not become a broad focus of research again until the 1960s and 1970s when there was a vast amount of relationship studies being published.[1]

1960s and 1970s

[edit]

An important shift was taking place in the field of social psychology that influenced the research of intimate relationships. Up until the late 1950s, the majority of studies were non-experimental.[21] By the end of the 1960s more than half of the articles published involved some sort of experimental manipulation.[21] The '60s was also a time when there was a shift in methodology within the psychological discipline itself. Participants consisted mostly of college students, experimental methods and research was being conducted in laboratories and the experimental method was the dominant methodology in social psychology.[21] Experimental manipulation within the research of intimate relationships demonstrated that relationships could be studied scientifically.[1] This shift brought relationship science to the attention of scholars in other disciplines and has resulted in the study of intimate relationships being an international multidiscipline.[1]

1980s to 2000s

[edit]

In the early 1980s the first conference of the International Network of Personal Relationships (INPR) was held. Approximately 300 researchers from all parts of the world attended the conference.[21] In March 1984, the first journal of Social and Personal Relationships was published.[21] In the early 1990s the INPR split off into two groups, however in April 2004 the two organizations rejoined and became the International Association for Relationship Research (IARR).[1]

2010s

[edit]

Today, the study of intimate relationships (relationship science) uses participants from diverse samples and examines a wide variety of topics that include family relations, friendships, and romantic relationships, usually over a long period.[1] Current study includes both positive and negative or unpleasant aspects of relationships.

Research being conducted by John Gottman and his colleagues involves inviting married couples into a pleasant setting, in which they revisit the disagreement that caused their last argument. Although the participants are aware that they are being videotaped, they soon become so absorbed in their own interaction that they forget they are being recorded.[1] With the second-by-second analysis of observable reactions as well as emotional ones, Gottman is able to predict with 93% accuracy the fate of the couples' relationship.[1]

Another current area of research into intimate relationships is conducted by Terri Orbuch and Joseph Veroff (2002). They monitor newlywed couples using self-reports over a long period (a longitudinal study). Participants are required to provide extensive reports about the natures and the statusses of their relationships.[1] Although many of the marriages have ended since the beginning of the study, this type of relationship study allows researchers to track marriages from start to finish by conducting follow-up interviews with the participants in order to determine which factors are associated with marriages that last and which with those that do not.[1] Though the field of relationship science is still relatively young, research conducted by researchers from many different disciplines continues to broaden the field.[1]

One study suggests that married straight couples and cohabiting gay and lesbian couples in long-term intimate relationships may pick up each others' unhealthy habits. The study reports three distinct findings showing how unhealthy habits are promoted in long-term, intimate relationships: through the direct bad influence of one partner, through synchronicity of health habits, and through the notion of personal responsibility.[23][24]

Universal themes

[edit]
bonding

This section lists the universal themes from relationship books, all of the themes in this list appear in all of the books. These universal themes are: love, kindness, bonding, intimacy, communication, attachment, cheerfulness, reflectiveness and parenting.

The intimate partners

[edit]

Terms for partners in intimate relationships include:

See also

[edit]
Main article: Outline of relationships

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t Miller, Rowland & Perlman, Daniel (2008). Intimate Relationships (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-337018-7
  2. ^ a b c d e f Perlman, D. (2007). The best of times, the worst of times: The place of close relationships in psychology and our daily lives. Canadian Psychology, 48, 7–18.
  3. ^ Dalton, M. (1959) Men Who Manage, New York: Wiley.
  4. ^ Ridley-Duff, R.J. (2010) Emotion, Seduction and Intimacy: Alternative Perspectives on Human Behaviour (Third Edition), Seattle: Libertary Editions, ISBN 978-1-935961-00-0
  5. ^ Moore, M. (1985) "Nonverbal Courtship Patterns in Women: Contact and Consequences", Ethnology and Sociobiology, 6: 237–247.
  6. ^ Ridley-Duff, R.J. (2005) "Interpersonal Dynamics: A Communitarian Perspective", paper to the 1st ENROAC-MCA Conference 7th–9th April, Antwerp.
  7. ^ This Emotional Life. (2011). Intimate Relationships. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/thisemotionallife/topic/relationships/intimate-relationships
  8. ^ This Emotional Life. (2011). Intimate Relationships. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/thisemotionallife/topic/relationships/intimate-relationships
  9. ^ Aronson, E. (2003) The Social Animal, Ninth Edition, New York: Worth Publishers.
  10. ^ Vitalio, D. (2005) Be Your Woman's Hero, not Wuss: Part 1, internet newsletter 21st April 2005.
  11. ^ Khaleque, A. (2004). Intimate Adult Relationships, Quality of Life and Psychological Adjustment. Social Indicators Research, 69, 351-360.
  12. ^ Kakabadse, A., Kakabadse, N. (2004) Intimacy: International Survey of the Sex Lives of People at Work, Basingstoke: Palgrave
  13. ^ Lowndes, L. (1996) How to Make Anyone Fall in Love with You, London: Element.
  14. ^ Giddens, A. (1990) The Consequences of Modernity, Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
  15. ^ Healthy Place (2008). How to Develop Intimate Relationships? – HealthyPlace. HealthyPlace.com - Trusted Mental Health Information and Support - HealthyPlace.
  16. ^ Mills, J., Clark, K. (1982) "Exchange and communal relationships" in L. Wheeler (ed) Review of personality and social psychology (Vol III), Beverly Hills: Sage.
  17. ^ McCandless, D., Sullivan, L. (2010, October). The Varieties of Intimate Relationship. Retrieved from http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/the-varieties-of-intimate-relationship/
  18. ^ Hatfield, E., & Rapson, R.L. (1993). Historical and cross-cultural perspectives on passionate love and sexual desire. Annual Review of Sex Research, 4, 67–97
  19. ^ Marriage Quest. (2011). Emotional and Physical Intimacy. Retrieved from http://www.marriagequest.org/intimacy.shtml
  20. ^ R. E. (2010, January/February). Love-Building Exercises. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.helin.uri.edu/ehost/detail?sid=d191c4dc-9ba9-4221- a523- 76b642f8e7dd%40sessionmgr15&vid=10&hid=127&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=47241283
  21. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Vangelisti, A.L., & Perlman, D. (2006). The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  22. ^ a b Monroe, W.S. (1898). Discussion and reports. Social consciousness in children. Psychological Review, 15, 68–70.
  23. ^ Fuller, Dawn. "Long-Term, Intimate Partnerships Can Promote Unhealthy Habits". UC News online Aug, 18, 2011. Retrieved Aug, 26, 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  24. ^ Reczek, Corinne, Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Cincinnati. "The Promotion of Unhealthy Habits in Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Intimate Partnerships". Tue, Aug 23, 2011 - 12:30pm - 2:10pm. 106th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association. Retrieved Aug 26, 2011.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Couples.


Category:Interpersonal relationships

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Saraxo143/sandbox&oldid=1019648264"