<!-- wp:image {"id":99784} -->
<figure class="wp-block-image"><img src="https://expound.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/reasons-why-relationships-fail.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-99784"/></figure>
<!-- /wp:image -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3>Self is the invariable abattoir where many relationships are slaughtered </h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Just like the old adage goes, it takes two to tango. In any
given relationship paradigm there are at least two entities (persons) involved. The relationship is a social real estate whose ecosystem is the sum total of the net contributions of the two persons involved. The relationship stands apart as an
independent entity which feeds on a diet radically different from that of its constituent persons, for it not just to thrive but to flourish. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>There are certain things that are otherwise optional and yet compulsory for a relationship to work. You mean like really “compulsory” when it’s a relationship of two consenting adults? Indeed! Communication, intimacy, trust, respect, love, submission etc constitute the mandatory diet the relationship cannot live without. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Relationships fail because people confuse their personal
needs and preferences for the needs of the relationship. Because of this grave
mistake persons then tend to think that needs of their relationships (which in
many cases are confused for personal preferences and idiosyncrasies), are optional.
</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Here is the thing, maybe you don’t like to communicate,
perhaps you don’t feel like intimacy, it could be that you have genuine trust
issues, and maybe you struggle with respect, love, submission etc, however as
far as the survival and flourishing of your relationship is concerned these
aspects are neither optional nor negotiable.</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:separator -->
<hr class="wp-block-separator"/>
<!-- /wp:separator -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3> Many try to have the best of both worlds, pander to their whims and self-centered preferences and still expect the relationship to work </h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>It helps to understand and view the relationship as an
entity separate from its persons just like it is with a business. Most of us
understand that the moment you start running a business on personal preferences
and whims at that very moment you have killed it. You may not like sales,&nbsp; or marketing management or even financial
literacy, etc however your enterprise needs these aspects to survive. As far as
the survival and growth of your business is concerned these aspects are not
negotiable. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Many try to have the best of both worlds, pander to their
whims and self-centered preferences and still expect the relationship to work.
If you are caught up in this rigmarole, what you are seeking to do is as futile
as trying to lobby reality for custom settings. Adults caught up in this
predicament are essentially adolescents trapped in big people’s bodies. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:separator -->
<hr class="wp-block-separator"/>
<!-- /wp:separator -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3>The shallow concept of mutual consent is another problem</h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Here is the standard grade appreciation of the basis of
functional relationships: Mutual Consent!</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>However, there is a higher grade appreciation of the basis of not only functional but flourishing relationships:  Comprehensive Mutual Consent i.e. mutual consent on both the Yeses (Dos) and the Nos (Dont's)</p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>We tend to emphasize consensual Yeses (Dos) and neglect the
consensual nos (don’ts). For example, if your partner wants to spend time with
you, the default setting is to check if you are in the mood or if you would like to do that or not whereas a negotiated consensual, loving and mutual No will serve the relationship better than a self-conceived, monocratic and unilateral No. When confronted with a decision making process that has a hefty bearing on the relationship, the question to ask is not: do I want to do this or not? the appropriate question to ask is does the relationship need this or not? A balanced way forward should be negotiated in that premise. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p><strong>Many people think it is only Dos or Yeses that must be consensual while the don’ts and Nos do not have to be agreed upon. This too is a grave mistake. </strong></p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:separator -->
<hr class="wp-block-separator"/>
<!-- /wp:separator -->

<!-- wp:heading {"level":3} -->
<h3>You will surely win the argument but lose the relationship</h3>
<!-- /wp:heading -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>Remember the sharpness of your argument for, or against it is
completely irrelevant if the needs of the significant other are trivialized. You
will surely win the argument but lose the relationship. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p>A good relationship is not a social contract in which you
get what you want, it is a social contract where in you get what you want which
serves the relationship. </p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->

<!-- wp:paragraph -->
<p><strong>Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?</strong></p>
<!-- /wp:paragraph -->