04/04/2024
“You only hurt the ones you love.”
This phrase is believed to originate from psychological theories. One of the earliest references to this concept can be traced back to Sigmund Freud's psychoanalysis theory, specifically his concept of "projection." Projection is a defense mechanism where someone projects their feelings onto others, particularly feelings of anger, resentment, or disappointment. This is more likely to occur with those close to you, such as your family, friends or co-workers.
The phrase itself, "you only hurt the ones you love," seems to have become popular in the mid-20th century, possibly due to its use in popular culture and music. For example, a song titled "You Always Hurt The One You Love" was released in 1944 by The Mills Brothers.
Yet another variation of the same theme is in, On the Jellicoe Road by Melina Marchetta. She posited the idea that the reverse is true; that you only love the ones you hurt. Her point was that love travels with vulnerability, which in turn means that there is scope for hurt.
Or, perhaps the idea is that you can most comfortably be yourself with people you love, which means that they see your reactive parts because you are at your most unfiltered.
I see the truth in all these ideas, but what about the notion of stopping hurting the people you love?
According to research by psychologist Robert Keagan, around 70% of people identify as victims, and victimhood is at the root of drama triangle dynamics. 70% is a high number, but I think the number is much higher because a question like that asks people to connect with their judgments about themselves and not with an overarching analysis of character. The problem is that when something sh*tty happens to you and, in an instant and without consciousness, you see someone else as the source of your disturbance and then work with that.
Barry and Janae Weinhold offer up this version of a typical family dynamic that, in my experience, way more than 70% of people can identify with, even if this wasn’t their actual experience.
Act 1: Mum comes home from work to find her children watching TV and eating snacks in the living room. Dad is drinking coffee and reading his iPad. This domestic scene does not match the expectations that Mum had on her drive home. She fantasised that the house would be quiet, the children would be in their rooms doing homework, and Dad would have dinner prepared and maybe a cold drink waiting for him.
When Mum opens the front door, she finds things are not as she imagined.
She assumes the Persecutor role when she vents her pent up frustrations from work at the children. "You're supposed to be in your rooms doing your home-work! You know the rules!"
The children look up from the television, stunned by Mum's sharp tone.
Feeling Persecuted by Mother, they respond as Victims. "Well, Dad said it was okay for us to watch TV. Dad comes to the living room after hearing the raised voices, and the children look to their Father for help. He assumes the Rescuer role when he says to Mum, "The kids were just relaxing after being at school all day!" This is the end of Act One.
Act Two. The second act opens at the point where Father moves from the Rescuer to the Persecutor role and attacks Mum, "Why do you have to come home every night and yell at the kids?" Mother then rotates into the Victim role, and the children quickly pick up the Rescuer role. They turn off the television and say, "We're going to our rooms to do our homework." End of Act Two.
Act Three: Mum shifts to the Persecutor role and attacks Father, "Why in the hell did you let the kids watch TV? And why don't you have dinner ready? What have you been doing since you got home from work? You knew I'd be hungry!" Father now rotates into the Victim role. Daughter hears her parents arguing and rotates in to Rescue, “I’ll help you get dinner ready, Dad.” End of Act Three.
Act Four: Mum, sensing she looks like a bad parent, tries to Rescue by saying, “Why don’t we just order pizza or something and not worry about cooking?”
Act Five: Dad, who hasn't yet been the Victim, overrides Mum's Victim effort by claiming the Super Victim or Martyr role. He says, "I'm perfectly capable of getting dinner. Besides, It's too late for pizza. I already defrosted the meat for dinner and we can't afford to let it go to waste." End of Act Five.
Act Six. Dad switches into the Persecutor role and Mum to the Victim when she says to him, "All you can think of is something that is going to cost us more money. You don't ever pitch in and help get dinner ready. You just complain about its not being ready." End of Act Six.
Act Seven. At this point Mum can shift to either Victim or Super Persecutor. She decides to rage and explodes into the Persecutor so she can vent even more of her feelings from her frustrating day. "I'm tired of always being the bitch. I'm going to go and watch TV. I don't even want any dinner." She then withdraws to the family room as the Angry Victim.
You can see in this domestic version of the Drama Triangle game how the three roles switched and players were able to get the payoffs associated with each. With the rotating roles and merry-go-round nature of the Drama Triangle, you see that the game could go on forever. In some families, it does, which turns into sagas. Of course, this is a domestic example, but the same communication dynamics play out in teams, schools, groups of friends and workplaces.
If you would like to learn how to stop these kinds of dynamics once and for all and stop hurting the ones you love, we kick off on April 17th.
