In brief

Why do we keep hurting each other when we love each other?

Partners often fall into a demand/withdraw pattern in which one presses for resolution and the other retreats to reduce intensity. Each response makes sense from the inside while landing painfully on the other, and emotional flooding makes it harder for either person to think clearly. Recognizing the loop, rather than deciding who started it, is usually the more useful move.

Have you ever wondered why two people can love each other so deeply, and still feel incredibly hurt and wounded in their relationship?

I call it porcupine energy. Your guard goes up. Tiptoeing around each other. Walking on eggshells. Always reacting. Maybe with silence, maybe with anger, maybe with tears.

Maybe you think you are the problem, or maybe you are certain your partner doesn't love you any more. Maybe you judge their behaviour, accuse them of acting irrationally, or criticize the way they were raised. It can feel like a moral injury: unfair, unjust and like you don't deserve it.

I'd like to think I coined the porcupine metaphor, but it was actually introduced 175 years ago. Schopenhauer, Parerga and Paralipomena (1851): porcupines huddle together against the cold, are pricked by each other's quills, move apart, get cold, move back - until they find the distance at which they can bear one another. What an apt description of so many of our intimate relationships.

If you recognize porcupine energy in your own relationship, I would like to suggest it is possible to:

  • recognize when quills start to go up and interrupt the pattern before it becomes hurtful
  • understand why you or your partner are feeling hurt without excusing hurtful behaviour but also without necessarily allocating blame

In this article, we will look at the research that explains porcupine energy and help you develop the insight needed to nimbly navigate it.

Why do we keep hurting each other when we both love each other?

Even when people love each other deeply, partners can struggle with a pattern of demand/withdraw. One partner pressures the other with emotional demands, criticism and complaints, and the other withdraws, becomes passive, or responds defensively. And the pattern can run both directions for different issues. One partner wants more intimacy, the other more practical help. One partner wants more social interaction, the other wants more alone time.

And these patterns are not without consequence. Schrodt, Witt & Shimkowski (2014) note that the demand/withdraw pattern predicts relational dissatisfaction, correlates with verbal and psychological abuse, and has a small association with physical symptoms such as elevated cortisol levels during conflict.

Sometimes the demand/withdraw pattern has to do with individual differences such as personality types, attachment styles or even neurodivergence. A demand that feels natural for one person may feel overwhelming for another. And withdrawing may feel appropriate and value neutral for one person, and offensive to the other.

The best move in these situations is to become more aware of what is happening within yourself. "Wow, I'm really experiencing my partner's demand (request) as an attack right now" or "I'm surprised at how abandoned I feel in response to my partner's withdrawal". It may be difficult, but the key is to take ownership of your own reaction however justified it might feel, and look for ways to meet your own need, independent of your partner's response.

"I feel an intense need to withdraw right now, but my partner really needs me. I'll ask for a 5 minute break, go to the bathroom and breathe deeply and then come back as calm as I can be."

"I desperately need my partner to be here for me emotionally right now but they are at work. Rather than call and interrupt their work day, I'll take a bath and try and calm my emotional state. Then I'll text and ask if we could take 30 minutes this evening to discuss why I am feeling so upset."

Notice how both scenarios are about regulating emotion, even when the first appears to be avoiding it. Our partners can be incredibly helpful to us as we navigate life's journey and wanting their comfort is not weakness. In the moment however, our own state is the only thing we can take ownership for. Tending to our own needs is often the best move we can make towards the connection we ultimately desire.

Why does every conversation turn into an argument?

It may seem obvious, but research by Gottman and Levenson showed that dissatisfied couples are more likely to express negative emotions like anger, sadness and contempt. When this is frequent, we can fall into rigid, almost automatic reciprocal responses. Say one negative thing and your partner erupts in response. You become trapped in an escalating loop. The pattern leaves you both distressed, hurt and defensive. The quills are up.

When conflict escalates, partners experience "flooding" (Gottman, 1993). It's easy to be incredibly overwhelmed by what feels like sudden and intense unpredictable attacks. Your body is flooded with adrenaline and other stress hormones. Your heart rate may go up, and you find yourself in fight or flight mode. In this state, it's really hard to think straight, so you rely on automatic defensive routines: bringing up old wounds and attacking rather than listening for new insights and creative solutions.

Here are some ways to interrupt the pattern. First, take notice of negative statements (your own and your partner's) before reacting. Instead of reacting right away to the content, you might gently observe "wow that felt really negative and hurtful, did you mean it that way or am I just making things up"?

Second, attend to your internal state. Take a deep breath. Notice the tension in your body and take responsibility for it. It may seem that what you are feeling is entirely the other person's fault. In reality, they may have evoked this feeling in you, but ultimately your inner experience is yours and only you can appropriately care for it.

Third, notice how arguments become more intense when one or both of you is tired, hungry or otherwise worn down. "Can we talk about this in the morning after I've had some rest" can be a helpful move. Some couples find that stocking the glove box with granola bars is the best way to avoid fights during long car trips.

Finally, consider trying humour. Some couples find that wearing funny hats or speaking in a cartoon voice during arguments interrupts the automatic loops and allows them to process substantive disagreements with less emotional load.

Why does my partner get defensive when I express my feelings?

Believe it or not, defensiveness is a predictable link in a behavioural and physiological chain of events.

  • Criticism: Attacking a partner's character or personality rather than discussing a specific behaviour.
  • Contempt: Expressing disrespect, mockery, ridicule, or moral superiority.
  • Defensiveness: Responding to perceived criticism with counterattacks or playing the innocent victim to ward off responsibility.
  • Stonewalling: Emotionally or physically withdrawing from interaction due to physiological overload (flooding).

This chain is often reinforced by physiological and psychological vulnerability and the impact of flooding in which the partner's internal state becomes overwhelmed by criticism or emotion. In a flooded state, a person can become hypervigilant, perceiving even neutral statements as an attack.

You may have been told to use "I statements" such as "I feel frustrated" rather than "you don't care". That's good and genuinely helpful advice. But "I statements" can't reach a partner whose internal state is already overloaded.

Face to face with an angry partner, it may be hard to understand that they are actually feeling deeply hurt and overwhelmed. Their defensive behaviour can feel deliberate and intentional, and it may be hard to imagine that they are responding to feeling hurt, abandoned or overwhelmed.

It's very common for these patterns to obscure deep inner pain. We get so angry because we feel so abandoned. We run from demands that feel like they will overwhelm us. And commonly, the other's behaviour upsets us so much because it reminds us of something we have denied in ourselves. Their anger upsets us because part of us wants to be angry and we won't allow it. Their tears inflame us because part of us needs to cry and that might make us look weak. "Don't remind me of the thing that I desperately want to but can't" is often the subtext beneath relational distress.

The first step to interrupting a pattern is to notice it for what it is. We talked about noticing negativity, but you can also notice defensiveness in yourself and your partner. "Oooh, that got a big reaction" is a very useful insight and if you are watching you can stop any negative implications in their tracks before they make a bigger mess.

Contempt is a much bigger pattern to unwind, and it's best to watch for it in yourself. Notice if you roll your eyes (or want to), if normal banter and silliness starts to lean towards mockery or have a hard edge to it. A strong clue is when you absolutely are sure you are right, and the other is wrong. Then you know the distress has hardened a pattern that makes it very difficult to be curious and to learn in the situation. Again the key is to attend to your own emotional state. Though it may appear to be the opposite, we typically lock into these interpretations when we feel perpetually depleted and under attack. Your sense of moral superiority may be energized by overwhelm at work or at home, or by physiological discomfort.

Finally, take stonewalling as the clue that it is. When your partner shuts down, recognize that they've reached their limit. It's time to withdraw your demands and take care of yourself.

Shutting down during conflict: why do I go blank when my partner gets emotional?

If you wonder why you stop reacting, don't answer your partner's questions and block out their emotion, it is likely because your own system is overwhelmed. You might be trying desperately to manage high levels of adrenaline and cortisol running through your system, and protect yourself from further injury.

You might find yourself tuning out, unable to follow or understand your partner's words. Or you might hear them, but go blank, reaching for something to say and finding nothing there.

It's called stonewalling, but that makes it sound like a decision. Instead, it's often about your system being overloaded and your system going into protection mode.

And afterwards you may feel shame and guilt because you know you appeared cold and that your partner probably felt unseen, unheard and potentially abandoned.

Some couples identify the problem as one partner being "logical" and the other being "emotional". While it is true that our brains are wired differently and some people lean one way or the other, there is more to the story. The statement "I am very logical" can be an accurate observation, but it might instead mean "I'm so angry that my partner won't see my point of view".

Contrast this version of "logical" with the behaviour of Commander Data on Star Trek. Instead of responding to unusual behaviour by harshly judging it as "illogical", he might simply say "curious" and encounter the emotion as a fascinating puzzle to solve.

So why is it not the same for you? As mentioned above, our reaction to another's emotion is often a sign of disavowed emotion within ourselves. Noticing those inner emotions can reduce the charge behind our thoughts and give us more flexibility in response.

Why can't I let it go until we've resolved it?

Emotional distance can feel very overwhelming, particularly in moments when it feels like it strikes at the core of your very identity. If your partner needs space to cool down, to think things through or just to restore their own sense of balance, it can feel as though you are being abandoned and evoke feelings of loneliness or low self worth that may be familiar yet intolerable parts of your identity.

Paradoxically pursuing relational closeness in that moment may be exactly what is causing your partner to withdraw further. Your request to continue the conversation could be felt as a threat, especially if it is evoking big feelings that your partner is either not familiar or not comfortable with.

In those moments, it is best to validate how your partner might be feeling and instead of demanding them to attend to your discomfort, take the time to be gentle with yourself, engage in self-soothing activities and nurture yourself in ways that prepare you to show up for your partner in the way you want to when they are ready to re-engage.

What if it were true that your partner's urge to withdraw and your urge to resolve it now are both the best move either one of you can think of to preserve the relationship? Stating the intention behind your move is the best context you can give your partner. "I really value our relationship, that's why I feel so strongly that we should try and solve it now" and "I really value our relationship, and the only way I can have this conversation at my best is to take a bit of time to reset".

Notice that delaying a conversation is not the same as giving up on it. Sometimes it can be much easier to tolerate if you can put a timeline on returning to it. "I understand you really need some time to regroup right now. This topic is really important to me. Can we agree to talk about this again at 11am tomorrow?"

Why do we both feel like the other one started it?

Paul Watzlawick first described our tendency to see our communication patterns as a punctuated sequence of events: "cause" (in your partner) and "reaction" (in yourself), rather than the continuous interdependent loop that best describes them. "I only nag you because you withdraw and don't do your chores". "I only withdraw and avoid chores because you always nag me". Rather than seeing this for the self-reinforcing cycle that it is, we experience it as independent processes of blame and "wholly justified" response. Since both partners see themselves as appropriately reacting to provocation, neither takes responsibility for how their behaviour might be evoking the other's response.

One reason this pattern can become so ingrained is that distress causes us to operate with a biased filter. Rather than be curious about why our partner feels or behaves the way they do, we begin to see them as having permanent character flaws ("they're just a selfish person") and filter out or dismiss any evidence to the contrary ("they're only being nice because they want something"). Our internal sense of hurt and pain can become so intense that nothing will dissuade us from our judgement. We warp every interaction to support our view, making it feel absolutely certain.

If you can recognize that every move in your interactions is also a response, "who started it" is no longer the most important issue, and instead you can focus on what is the best (most effective) move I can make from here.

Another move you can make is to notice when your position starts to feel really firm and unarguable. It likely means you are filtering evidence. A lesson from hiring: most hiring managers make their decision within the first 5 minutes of an interview. Rather than spend the rest of the hour affirming that decision, strong hiring managers spend the rest of the hour trying to prove themselves wrong. If you have decided your partner is a jerk, try and allocate at least an hour to looking for evidence that they aren't.

When this is more than a pattern

In all relationships, both partners need enough safety and freedom to speak, pause, disagree and make choices. Responsibility is not always equal, and some patterns are not mutual. Coercive control, intimidation, threats and physical or sexual violence require a safety-focused response. Joint therapy can be unsafe or inappropriate in those circumstances.

If you are afraid of your partner or changing your behaviour to prevent retaliation, consider individual support and safety planning. If there is immediate danger, call 911. Ontario's services for people experiencing violence can also provide confidential support and referrals.

Finding the distance

Porcupines don't stop being prickly and neither do humans. The goal is not to remove anyone's quills. Instead, it's possible to get more familiar with the natural human patterns of advance, retreat, provoke, react and see them for what they are. Over time our quills will stand up less often as we come to understand and have compassion for the vulnerable parts in our partners and ourselves.

Related reading

Sources and further reading

Site convention (see the-gift-of-conflict-in-intimate-relationships.md): numbered list, [Author (year): Title](url), no parenthetical citations in the body.

  1. Levenson & Gottman (1983): Marital interaction: physiological linkage and affective exchange
  2. Gottman & Levenson (1988): The social psychophysiology of marriage
  3. Gottman (1993): A theory of marital dissolution and stability. Journal of Family Psychology, 7(1), 57-75
  4. Schrodt, Witt & Shimkowski (2014): A meta-analytical review of the demand/withdraw pattern of interaction
  5. Griffin, Ledbetter & Sparks (2015): The Interactional View of Paul Watzlawick. For Watzlawick, Beavin & Jackson (1967)
  6. Government of Ontario: Connect with supports for survivors of violence
  7. Bradbury & Fincham (1990): Attributions in marriage: review and critique. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1), 3-33