Paul Brunson Urges Mandated Premarital Vetting To Fix Marriage System

Paul Brunson呼吁实行强制婚前审查以修复婚姻制度 情感专家Paul Brunson认为，降低对伴侣的期望、通过ARC法应对长期冲突，以及拒绝“矛盾不过夜”的硬性规矩，是维持长期婚姻满意度的关键。 Paul Brunson对现代约会观念提出质疑，解释了相较于深层且持续的满意度，关系的持久度为何往往被过度高估。他深入探讨了社会期望、无限的选择、低自尊以及未妥善处理的沟通隔阂如何损害当代的伴侣关系。借助用于道歉的ARC法和“把想法送上法庭”等实用框架，Brunson就如何化解冲突、应对不忠、选择性坦白及展露情感脆弱性提供了切实可行的建议。 男性在伴侣罹患绝症时离开对方的概率比女性高出600%以上，凸显了医疗危机期间伴侣关系支持中显著的性别差异。 (35:49) 关系满意度直接影响健康；关系满意度低的心脏病患者在两年内的死亡率为45%，而处于高度满意关系中的患者死亡率仅为11%。 (35:49) 现代文化过度看重关系的持久性而非实际质量，而优先考虑日常满意度、安全感与尊重往往能带来更好的结果。 (39:24) 处于伴侣关系中仍对外界他人产生吸引力是人的天性，围绕这种感受进行坦诚沟通有助于缓解关系焦虑。 (46:16) 播客和电视节目等第三方媒体可作为一种宝贵且无威胁性的工具，帮助伴侣弥合沟通隔阂并探讨敏感议题。 (51:35)

Relationship expert Paul Brunson argues that widespread dissatisfaction in modern romance stems from expecting a single partner to replace an entire village and succumbing to the illusion of infinite options, asserting that long-term success requires prioritizing personal well-being, resilience, and intentional conflict management over superficial criteria. The Burden of the All-in-One Partner (4:33) Citing research by Eli Finkel, Brunson explains that roughly 80% of couples report lower relationship satisfaction than historical benchmarks, with only 20% achieving unprecedented fulfillment. Historically, individuals relied on an extended village for emotional, financial, and practical support. Today, modern expectations demand that a single partner concurrently serve as a best friend, intellectual equal, co-parent, life counselor, and passionate lover. This unrealistic standard ensures that falling short on even a fraction of demands results in perceived relationship failure. This dynamic is intensified by dating platforms and choice overload, reflecting Barry Schwartz's paradox of choice. Serial daters continually evaluate new prospects against an idealized mosaic of previous dates, treating partners as disposable. Furthermore, Brunson notes that attachment insecurities lead daters to discard compatible matches over trivial surface traits—such as wearing tracksuits or carrying a velcro wallet—mistaking personal anxieties for genuine incompatibility. Core Traits Over Fluid Shared Values (71:44) While survey data indicates that nine out of ten people prioritize shared values above all else, Brunson challenges the traditional mandate of being equally yoked. Because individual values evolve across decades, he advises de-emphasizing rigid checklists, hypergamous earning expectations, and arbitrary physical thresholds like height. Instead, Brunson argues that relationship success is best predicted by three core partner traits: personal well-being, open-minded curiosity, and demonstrated resilience in the face of adversity. To counteract the blinding effects of early infatuation and unexamined trauma, Brunson advocates incorporating 360-degree feedback from close friends and family when selecting a partner. He notes that arranged marriages historically yield equal or higher long-term satisfaction than love marriages precisely because extended family networks impartially evaluate prospective spouses for character and stability without the distorting influence of immediate romantic infatuation. Health Stakes and Conditional Romantic Love (33:42) Brunson dismantles the cultural narrative of unconditional romantic love, highlighting stark disparities in spousal abandonment during serious medical crises. When a wife becomes terminally ill, the male spousal separation rate reaches 21%, compared to a 2.9% separation rate when husbands fall ill—making men over 600% more likely to abandon a sick partner. Brunson attributes this gap to pre-existing deficits in relationship satisfaction and physical intimacy, which leave male partners unequipped to handle caregiving. Relationship quality also directly dictates physical longevity. Brunson cites a study by James Coyne examining 200 congenital heart disease patients: after two years, only 11% of patients with high relationship satisfaction had died, compared to a 45% mortality rate among those in low-satisfaction relationships. This more than threefold increase in mortality demonstrates that partnership quality carries profound implications for life expectancy, mattering far more than simple marital longevity. Conflict Management and Communication Frameworks (126:32) Referencing John and Julie Gottman's research, Brunson stresses that 69% of relationship conflicts are perpetual and impossible to resolve, meaning long-term health depends on managing friction rather than trying to win arguments. He rejects popular maxims like never going to bed angry, warning that forcing resolutions while sleep-deprived and flooded with cortisol leads to defensive responses and inauthentic appeasement. Similarly, he clarifies that sexual frequency does not generate relationship happiness; rather, high relationship satisfaction drives intimacy, requiring partners to understand differences between spontaneous and responsive desire. To maintain domestic stability, Brunson recommends practicing selective disclosure rather than absolute, unfiltered transparency, as research shows filtering disclosures based on timing and emotional bandwidth lowers conflict. When ruptures occur, couples must bridge differing apology thresholds using the ARC Method: acknowledging the offense, expressing genuine remorse, and committing to specific behavioral changes. When navigated through professional skill-building, even crises like infidelity can be overcome, with Gottman data showing 70% of couples who complete therapy after an affair reporting higher satisfaction than before. While Brunson outlines concrete methodologies to foster resilience and protect long-term intimacy, modern couples face persistent socioeconomic pressures, shifting gender dynamics, and digital algorithms that incentivize disposable dating. Whether broader cultural attitudes can successfully shift away from romantic perfectionism toward community-supported, realistic commitment remains an ongoing question.

资深婚介专家兼两性关系顾问 Paul Brunson 认为，当代恋爱与婚姻之所以面临大面积危机，根源在于人们对单一伴侣寄托了过度膨胀的期望，并陷入选择过载与低自尊驱动的肤浅筛选中。他主张维持长期伴侣关系的关键不在于追求完美契合的价值观，而在于降低对伴侣的角色负荷、培养心理复原力，并掌握包括选择性披露与有效道歉在内的冲突管理技巧。 现代关系的期望膨胀与全能伴侣陷阱 (4:33) Brunson 引用 Eli Finkel 的研究指出，当代亲密关系呈现出严重的二八分化：仅有 20% 的伴侣依托现代心理工具获得了前所未有的高满意度，而其余 80% 的人则处于比历史上几乎任何时期都要更沮丧、困惑的境地。这种普遍不满源于人们对单一伴侣施加了不切实际的“全能”重压。在人类历史的长河中，情感、生计与社交支持一向分散由整个群体或宗族分担；然而现代人却要求伴侣同时兼任挚友、事业助手、育儿模范、人生导师以及理想的性伴侣。一旦伴侣在十项要求中完成了九项，人们仍会因落空的那一项感到失败，这种将伴侣作为单一情感支柱的做法极大地扼杀了新鲜感与满意度。 选择悖论、肤浅筛选与三项核心特质 (7:36) 在现代约会软件与过量选择的冲击下，单身群体常陷入 Barry Schwartz 提出的“选择悖论”。许多人因坐拥海量备选而不断拉高比较基准，甚至因魔术贴钱包、运动服或留长指甲等微不足道的表象缺陷而全盘否定潜在对象。Brunson 指出，约 40% 到 50% 的人存在焦虑型或回避型依恋，这种不安全感和低自尊往往驱使他们过度依赖外貌对称性、身高差距或经济地位等外部符号来获得社会认可。他反对传统上对“三观绝对契合”的执念，认为个人的价值观随时间高度流动；相比之下，更可靠的择偶指标应落在三项底层特质上：主动呵护身心健康（Well-being）、保持开放与好奇心（Open-mindedness and curiosity），以及面对逆境时的心理复原力（Resilience）。 满意度对健康存续与契约稳定的决定性作用 Brunson 与主持人 Steven Bartlett 指出，关系的质量不仅决定了契约的持久性，更直接关联个体的健康与寿命。Brunson 援引 James Coyne 针对 200 名先天性心脏病患者的研究：高满意度关系中的患者在两年后的死亡率仅为 11%，而低满意度组别的死亡率则高达 45%。此外，在重疾冲击面前，异性恋伴侣的性别差异尤为残酷——当丈夫患晚期重疾由妻子照料时，分居或离婚率为 2.9%；而当妻子身患重疾由丈夫照料时，分居或离婚率激增至 21%，男方离弃伴侣的概率高出约 6 倍。Brunson 认为这一现象击碎了“无条件浪漫爱”的假象，证实许多成年人关系表面下的低满意度（包括被忽视的性需求与尊重匮乏）才是伴侣在遭遇危机时抽身离去的核心诱因。 选择性披露与破除沟通误区 (122:32) 针对伴侣相处的实践策略，Brunson 颠覆了若干广为流传的情感教条。他坚决反对“夫妻绝不能带着愤怒入睡”的传统观念，指出在深夜情绪高度应激、皮质醇激增的状态下强行解决争端，只会引发防御性反应和虚假敷衍；明智的做法应是暂停沟通并等待双方生理状态恢复平稳。同时，他主张践行心理学上的“选择性披露”（Selective disclosure）而非毫无保留的极端坦诚。研究表明，强行共享每一丝闪念与微小烦恼反而会加剧冲突，而考量伴侣承受力、适当时机和建设性语气的选择性披露更有助于维系满意度。在冲突修复方面，针对夫妻间平均每周需要一次有效道歉的现实，Brunson 提出了“ARC 道歉法”：承认过错且不找借口（Acknowledge）、对情感伤害表达真诚悔意（Remorseful），以及提出未来行为改善的明确承诺（Commitment）。 冲突管理认知重塑与出轨后的信任重建 (126:32) 依据 John 和 Julie Gottman 的长期研究，Brunson 强调伴侣间 69% 的矛盾具有永久性且无法彻底解决，因此关系的健康度取决于“冲突管理”而非强求“达成一致”。两人不应将对方视作争辩的对手，而应将重心转向理解差异。此外，对于被普遍视为关系死刑的出轨行为，Brunson 认为这并不必然意味着伴侣关系的终结。Gottman 的临床研究表明，在遭遇不忠后经历专业咨询修复的伴侣中，约 70% 最终报告了比出轨前更高的满意度，但前提是双方具备真诚的宽恕态度并愿意共同进行深度修复。与此同时，现代数字化互动（如隐瞒浏览成人内容或使用 OnlyFans）若脱离了双方明确沟通的底线，同样构成破坏信任的背叛行为。 本期节目提出，维系持久亲密关系的重心应由外在的寻觅筛选转向内在的技能培育；然而对于当今社会在教育和经济上逐渐占据优势的女性群体而言，如何在既有的超额期望与现实男性处境之间取得平衡，仍是一个尚待时间与社会结构演变解答的复杂议题。

## Background 本期内容由知名播客频道 The Diary Of A CEO 于 2025 年 1 月 30 日在 YouTube 平台发布。节目邀请了享誉全球的资深婚恋专家、企业家兼畅销书作者保罗·C·布朗森（Paul C. Brunson），围绕其新书《Keep Love》展开对话，深入剖析现代亲密关系中的各种迷思，探讨如何破解择偶困境并维系长久美满的伴侣关系。 ## TL;DR 保罗·布朗森结合自己 17 年的顶级红娘与婚恋咨询经验及实证心理学研究，全面拆解了现代人在寻爱与维系关系中的核心症结。他指出当下 80% 的伴侣满意度偏低，根源在于过度膨胀的角色期望、海量选择带来的决策悖论以及不健康的依恋风格；在择偶时，决定婚姻幸福的核心并非外貌与财富，而是自我心理健康管理、开放好奇心与抗挫韧性这三大关键特质。此外，针对伴侣重病背弃率、性高潮鸿沟、自发性与反应性欲望差异、吵架后带着愤怒入睡等话题，保罗击碎了大量情感毒鸡汤，并给出了诸如 ARC 道歉模型、选择性披露及情感银行储蓄等兼具科学性与落地性的长效关系经营法则。 ## Atmosphere & style 整场对话在理性质证与极具温情的袒露之间自如流转，既有严谨硬核的心理学数据与实证研究支撑，又充盈着两位成熟男性开诚布公的自我剖白。斯蒂芬·巴特利特带着对传统制度的敏锐审视与现实困惑层层发问，而保罗则以沉稳、睿智且极具共情力的方式拆解盲区；两人不时拿自己的亲身经历幽默自嘲、直面软肋，让整场访谈在真诚交锋中展现出一种直击心灵的心智疗愈感与厚重感。 ## Bulletin - [04:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=273s) 现代婚姻正经历“二八分化”危机：当今约80%的伴侣满意度处于历史最低水平，根源在于人们把过去由整个社群分担的多重需求全部强加给唯一的伴侣。 - [33:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=2022s) 医学研究显示，当女性身患绝症时，丈夫离开或分居的概率高达20.8%，是女性在丈夫患病时离开率（2.9%）的6倍以上，证明伴侣之爱本质上有条件，且危机往往暴露出此前早已跌入谷底的关系满意度。 - [01:42:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6122s) 戈特曼研究所的数据表明，亲密关系中有69%的问题是永远无法彻底解决的，幸福伴侣的核心能力不在于消除分歧或争论对错，而在于掌握长期的冲突管理与增进理解的能力。 - [02:02:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7328s) 过度追求“完全坦诚”反而有害，心理学实验证实采取“选择性披露”（Selective Disclosure）的伴侣比追求绝对透明的伴侣冲突更少、自主权更高且关系满意度更强。 ## Key takeaways - [07:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=456s) 现代约会的核心障碍不是曝光不足，而是转化受阻：焦虑型与回避型依恋机制往往驱使人们因气味、配饰等无关痛痒的微小瑕疵一票否决潜在伴侣。 - [11:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=694s) 选择悖论在约会中尤为致命：约会对象越多，对比参照库就越膨胀，人们越倾向于将候选人视为随时可抛弃的消耗品，从而大幅降低选择后的满意度。 - [20:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1217s) 包办婚姻的长期满意度往往不逊于自由恋爱，核心在于其排除当事人被多巴胺与创伤蒙蔽的非理性偏见，由亲友多维度客观评估候选人的品行、韧性与家庭契合度。 - [26:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1614s) 降低期望是维系长期关系的关键法则，伴侣不应承担所有的情感、经济与社交角色，剩余的成长与爱好需求应分散到社群网络中去满足。 - [37:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=2247s) 关系满意度直接关乎生理健康与寿命：在心力衰竭患者中，低满意度关系群体的两年死亡率高达45%，是高满意度群体（11%）的3倍以上。 - [45:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=2754s) 对伴侣之外的人产生吸引力属于正常的普遍生理与心理反应，否认只会加剧羞耻感，关键在于通过“把念头送上法庭”进行认知校准并实现脱敏沟通。 - [58:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=3514s) 现行婚姻法律制度存在倒置漏洞：步入婚姻门槛过低且轻率，而退出机制却过于漫长痛苦；理想的机制应是“准入极难，退出极易”。 - [01:09:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=4148s) 决定成功婚姻的核心不是随时间容易改变的“共同价值观”，而是个体的心理幸福感、开放包容的好奇心以及面对危机时的心理韧性。 - [01:28:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=5289s) 自尊水平决定伴侣选择：低自尊者往往将伴侣作为向外界证明自我价值的“社交配件”，并极易招致暗黑人格掠夺者的情感操控。 - [01:49:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6550s) 频繁的性爱是高质量关系的副产品而非原因；女性欲望多依赖反应性欲望（Responsive Desire），需要通过日常非性目的的情感储蓄来激发。 - [01:56:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7017s) 焦虑型与回避型依恋容易形成追逃互吸的病态平衡，唯有通过高强度的“元认知”自我觉察与刻意练习，才能走向后天获得的安全型依恋。 - [02:10:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7818s) 践行真诚道歉的“ARC”模型（承认事实、共情情绪冲击、给出改进承诺），哪怕自认行为没错，也应为对方受到的情感伤害表达悔意。 - [02:18:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8331s) “绝不带着愤怒入睡”是常见误区：睡眠能有效平复急性压力反应并调节激素，带着情绪强迫和解往往只会产生最虚伪、最低质量的沟通。 - [02:22:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8537s) 经历出轨并不必然意味着关系终结：戈特曼研究显示，接受专业干预与修复疗程后，70%经历过不忠的夫妻最终获得了比以往更高的关系满意度。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=0s) 亲密关系的真相预告与神话破除 在访谈开篇的快节奏对话中，保罗·布朗森（Paul C. Brunson）抛出了一系列颠覆直觉的观点。当被问及“是否应该对伴侣保守秘密”时，他直截了当地给出了肯定的回答，并指出数据表明，适度保留秘密反而有助于提高亲密关系的满意度并减少冲突。他甚至打趣道，有些话“即使我大声说出来，自己心里也清楚后果”。随后，主持人史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）提及一项令人震惊的研究数据：当女性身患绝症时，男性选择分居或离开的可能性比平时高出约 624%（即 6 倍以上）。保罗解释称，这背后的核心根源往往是关系中长期的低满意度，例如缺乏足够的性生活。 保罗强调，当今有 80% 的伴侣关系满意度处于历史最低水平，而造成这种困境的一大原因，在于人们对如何“寻找爱”与“维系爱”所接收的认知充斥着谎言与迷思。面对史蒂文的连环追问，保罗逐一击破了常见误区： - 更多的性生活并不意味着更高的关系幸福感。 - 对关系产生怀疑并不代表感情亮起红灯，相反，“对伴侣关系产生怀疑其实是非常健康的”。 - 出轨并不必然意味着一段关系的彻底终结。 - 在寻找伴侣时，决定关系能否长期美满的并非外貌或财富，而是三种颠覆认知的核心特质。 在正片正式开始前，史蒂文插入了一段简短的呼吁：后台数据显示，经常收听节目的观众中有 53% 尚未点击订阅。他真诚地请求大家点击订阅，以换取团队全力以赴倾听反馈、邀请观众想见的嘉宾，将节目做得更好。 --- ### [02:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=124s) 谁是保罗·C·布朗森：从顶级红娘到情感专家的蜕变 史蒂文以一个看似简单却直击核心的问题拉开对话序幕：“如果你假设我不认识你，你究竟是谁？你有什么资格写下眼前的这两本书——《寻找爱》（Find Love）与《维系爱》（Keep Love）？”面对这个问题，保罗首先给出了极具温度的身份排序：在所有头衔之前，他首先是一名丈夫、一名父亲、一个儿子、兄弟、表亲、叔叔，以及导师与受导者。 保罗回顾了自己的职业生涯。他在 2008 年与妻子共同创办了一家相亲婚姻介绍机构（matchmaking agency），并逐步将其发展为全美规模最大的婚介机构之一。保罗解释说，很多人并未意识到全职红娘是一项严谨而稀有的职业，全球范围内真正的全职专业红娘大约仅有 1000 人。他们的工作是精准撮合两个人在长期承诺的关系中走到一起。然而，这项工作自然衍生出新的阶段： - 当红娘成功撮合两名客户步入长期稳定的承诺关系后，客户因建立起了深厚的信任，往往会带着新问题回到保罗面前——“我们该如何长久维系这份爱？” - 因此，保罗与妻子顺理成章地转型为已婚夫妇和长期伴侣的咨询师与关系教练，这项工作他持续深耕了十余年。 - 此后，保罗兼任了全球知名约会软件 Tinder 的全球研究顾问，获得了接触庞大数据集并预测亲密关系发展趋势的机会。 - 他还主持了多档关于恋爱婚姻的电视真人秀，通过荧幕引发公众对亲密关系的深度讨论；同时写作并录制播客，整整 17 年的从业经历让他全方位沉浸在关于“爱”的研究与实践中。 --- ### [04:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=273s) 现代亲密关系的“二八定律”与超负荷期望 谈及这 17 年间约会与情感格局的剧烈变化，史蒂文请保罗分析当今处于单身寻找期或在关系中苦苦挣扎的普通人，在宏观层面上究竟处于怎样的精神状态。保罗引用了著名心理学家伊莱·芬克尔（Eli Finkel）在其经典著作《全有或全无的婚姻》（The All-or-Nothing Marriage）中的核心发现：当今的亲密关系正呈现出极端的两极分化。 保罗指出，现代亲密关系中存在鲜明的“二八分化”： - **处于顶端的 20%**：这部分伴侣的满意度达到了人类历史上的巅峰。他们充分利用前所未有的丰富资源——心理治疗、情感播客、畅销书籍以及关系研究工具，掌握了积极倾听与情绪沟通的技巧。在单身群体中，同样有 20% 的人保持乐观，积极打磨自我、提升社交与沟通技能，坚信自己能建立稳固的关系。 - **处于下层的 80%**：绝大多数人比以往任何时代都感到更沮丧、困惑和幻灭，单身者感到无望与倦怠，身处关系者则满腹怨言与不适。 保罗剖析了造成这 80% 人群低满意度的根本动因：人类在亲密关系中对单一伴侣的要求发生了史无前例的剧增。在过去几百年甚至人类演化的数十万年间，人们依靠整个宗族与村落（village）来分担不同的社会功能；然而在今天，人们把所有维度的需求都压在了唯一的一个伴侣身上： - 伴侣必须是无话不谈的“最好的朋友”（best friend）； - 伴侣必须是事业上的合伙人，甚至像企业的联合 CEO 或首席运营官（COO）； - 伴侣必须是无可挑剔的优秀父母； - 伴侣晚上回到家脱下衣服后，还必须能在卧室里“后空翻”（do backflips in the bedroom），提供完美的激情体验。 正因为人们对单一对象的索求远超以往任何时代，伴侣关系一旦无法全方位满足这些超负荷的期待，巨大的挫败感和低满意度便不可避免地随之爆发。 --- ### [07:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=456s) 约会倦怠、依恋风格与微小瑕疵的“一票否决” 史蒂文将话题拉回到现代单身群体的困境上。他提到许多人对约会软件产生了强烈的被剥夺感与倦怠感，身边的朋友甚至每年参加多达 100 次约会，俨然成了“专业约会人”，却依然找不到合适的伴侣。史蒂文提出，这显然不是流量漏斗顶层（Exposure / Top of the funnel）曝光不足或选择太少的问题，而是漏斗深处的“转化率”（Conversion）出现了致命短板。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 现代约会漏斗困境 accDescr: 展示了从顶层海量约会到深层因依恋风格与琐碎挑剔导致无法转化的机制 subgraph TopFunnel["漏斗顶层：曝光充足"] A["高频约会活动<br/>每年多达上百次约会 / 约会软件海量匹配"] end subgraph DeepBlock["漏斗深层：转化受阻"] B["不安全依恋触发<br/>焦虑型推开伴侣 / 回避型逃避亲密"] C["微小瑕疵一票否决<br/>因气味、配饰或无关特质直接放弃"] end subgraph Outcome["最终结果"] D["无法建立长期承诺关系<br/>陷入约会倦怠与情感幻灭"] end A --> B A --> C B --> D C --> D ``` 保罗对此深表赞同，并指出问题的根源在于更深层的心理机制——依恋风格（Attachment Styles）： - 在人群中，大约 50% 到 60% 的人属于安全型依恋（Secure），而剩余的人群则表现为焦虑型（Anxious）、回避型（Avoidant）或两者的混合状态。 - 如果一个拥有不安全依恋风格的人在约会中遇到了各方面条件都完美匹配的潜在伴侣，他/她内心的焦虑或回避机制往往会自动触发，导致其主动将对方推开；或者，他们会无意识地抓住对方身上某个与婚姻长期质量毫无关系的微小特质进行放大，并以此为由彻底将对方全盘否定。 保罗分享了一个既荒谬又令人心酸的婚介行业内幕：在早年的相亲匹配反馈中，客户拒绝给对方第二次约会机会的一个奇葩高频理由，居然是对方拿出了一个“魔术贴钱包”（velcro wallet）。史蒂文忍不住打趣替魔术贴钱包辩护，保罗则笑着驳斥。 保罗进一步指出，抛开这些表面借口，真正导致约会迅速告吹的第一大杀手其实是与吸引力相关的感官细节，尤其是“气味”问题——包括严重的口臭（halitosis）或体味。保罗指出，正如神经科学家塔拉·斯瓦特博士（Dr. Tara Swart）所阐述的，气味在进化生物学和伴侣选择中扮演着极强的潜意识筛选机制；但在现代约会中，人们往往仅凭第一眼或极小的情境瑕疵，就草率地关上了了解一个优秀伴侣的大门。 ### [10:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=630s) 挑剔的约会者与向内审视 在约会过程中，很多人常常会因为一些看似微不足道的细节而彻底否定对方，例如口臭、指甲太长，或者穿了一套运动服（tracksuit）来赴约。面对这些细节，许多人觉得“因为这些毛病就拒绝第二次约会”十分合情合理，但对另一部分人来说，这种做法荒谬透顶。保罗·布朗森（Paul Brunson）指出，关键在于你为什么会走到这一步——如果你认为一个人穿了运动服或指甲稍长就代表他不可能成为优秀的伴侣，这恰恰反映了你自身的问题。这与你的依恋风格、你所受的社会化教育息息相关。对于那些不断约会却始终觉得“找不到合适伴侣”的人，保罗给出的首要建议就是先审视自己。 ### [11:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=694s) 比较的陷阱与选择悖论 史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）顺着这个逻辑提出了一个深刻的疑问：约会次数越多，人脑海中积累的参照点是不是也越多？如果你已经见过 100 个人，那么第 101 个约会对象就必须同时面对前 100 个人各自的闪光点。例如，第 49 号对象幽默风趣，第 53 号对象腰缠万贯，第 67 号对象容貌出众。到了第 101 号约会对象身上，只要他在某一个维度上稍逊于以往任何一人，就会被挑出毛病。人们在不断增加约会数量的同时，无意中极度膨胀了自己的“对比参照库”（comparison set）。 保罗完全赞同这一观察，并引入了心理学家巴里·施瓦茨（Barry Schwartz）在其经典著作《选择的悖论》（*The Paradox of Choice*）中的核心理论。当摆在面前的选项过多时，人们做出选择后的满意度反而会大幅下降，因为头脑中总觉得放弃了另外 99 个可能更好的可能性；相反，如果只有 3 个选项，做出选择后的满意度与珍惜程度会高得多。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 选项数量对约会满意度的影响机制 accDescr: 对比少量选项与海量选项在选择后满意度和沉没投入上的差异 subgraph FewOptions ["少量选项模式（传统环境）"] A1["有限候选人（如 3-5 人）"] --> B1["深入了解品质与内在"] B1 --> C1["做出承诺与深度投入"] C1 --> D1["满意度高且不易放弃"] end subgraph ManyOptions ["海量选项模式（现代约会）"] A2["海量候选人（如 100+ 人）"] --> B2["拼接对比（幽默、财富、外貌）"] B2 --> C2["轻易发现瑕疵并淘汰"] C2 --> D2["满意度低且伴侣易被视作消耗品"] end ``` 保罗以自己在牙买加乡村长大的祖母为例生动地阐释了这一点：祖母在极其偏僻的小地方长大，一辈子在择偶时大概只有五六个候选人。正因如此，当她最终选定一人时，她会倾注极大的心血和价值，根据投资理论（Investment Theory），她对这段关系的投入程度极高。但如果一个人手里有 100 个选项，任何一个伴侣都会被轻易当成可以随时替换的“消耗品”（disposable）。 ### [13:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=826s) 突破同温层与“溢价效应” 在现代约会中，人们往往陷入重复约会“同一种类型”的死循环，无论性格还是外在特质都千篇一律。保罗提出，在婚恋市场上获取巨大价值的一种策略是走出自己原有的圈子，去往一个全新的环境，他称之为“溢价效应”（Premium Effect）。 他分享了一个具体案例：他有一位住在北伦敦的 35 岁白人女性朋友，抱怨自己约会了无数人却始终找不到合适的人。保罗得知她热爱艺术，便建议她前往位于布里克斯顿（Brixton）的黑人文化档案馆（Black Cultural Archives）参观展览。朋友起初感到困惑，但保罗坚持让她去。原因在于，走进那个主要是年轻黑人群体的空间后，她在外貌上显得与众不同，而在共同的热爱——艺术与创造力上却有着高度共鸣。正如卡罗尔·德韦克（Carol Dweck）在《终身成长》（*Mindset*）中所描述的思维模式： - **封闭型思维者（Closed-minded）**：会带着戒备与异样的眼光看她，心里嘀咕“她怎么会在这里？” - **成长型/开放型思维者（Open-minded）**：会产生强烈的好奇心主动上前搭话，探寻她的故事。 通过这种方式，这位朋友瞬间打破了固有的交际盲区，结识了大量兼具浪漫潜力与深厚友谊的全新人脉。保罗强调，尤其是约会过上百人的“连环约会者”（serial daters），极度需要主动跨出自己的既定舒适圈。 ### [16:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=974s) 约会市场中的种族偏见与认知壁垒 史蒂芬对“溢价效应”中提及的跨文化空间提出了更深层的审视：在英国与美国的婚恋数据中，少数族裔——尤其是亚裔男性与黑人女性，在约会平台和现实择偶中长期面临着极其严峻的系统性挑战，这背后充斥着社会刻板印象、文化偏见与平台算法的筛选倾向。 保罗直言不讳地指出，我们身处一个种族主义根深蒂固的社会，许多人回避谈论，但这些偏见在约会数据中暴露无遗。以一个从未与黑人深入交往过的白人男性为例，如果他对黑人群体的认知仅局限于电视刻板报道或周遭环境灌输的负面偏见，当他在约会软件上看到一位黑人女性时，大概率会直接划掉。这种行为的本质是**无知**——他根本没有机会意识到眼前的女性有多么聪明、出众和美丽。保罗强调，打破这种死结的核心途径就是主动扩大社交圈，与多元背景的人群深度接触，亲身体验差异背后的魅力。 ### [18:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1126s) 算法时代的快餐筛选与传统包容度的退化 史蒂芬进一步对比了牙买加乡村传统与当下数字约会的机制差异： - **传统熟人社区**：保罗的祖母在村子里生活，有充裕的时间与对街的男士接触，亲眼观察对方的为人处世。即便那个男人指甲长、甚至拿着带有魔术贴的土气钱包（velcro wallet），祖母也能在朝夕相处中看到他的善良、慷慨和幽默感，从而包容那些表面的小缺点。 - **现代数字约会系统**：绝大多数人通过社交媒体和约会应用相识，人们在几秒钟的滑动屏幕间，仅凭几张照片或指甲、衣着等外在特征就对一个人的相容性下定论。 这种系统设计导致了现代人在寻爱过程中普遍滋生出巨大的**不满、沮丧与绝望感**（dissatisfaction, frustration, and desperation）。屏幕与滑动交互不但没有解决孤独，反而加剧了现代人的焦虑。 ### [20:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1217s) 包办婚姻的成功反思 面对现代约会机制带来的普遍挫败感，史蒂芬向保罗抛出了一个极具冲击力的对比议题：那些依靠家庭撮合或经济考量结成的“包办婚姻”（arranged marriages），真的不如今天通过社交软件自由恋爱的现代婚姻吗？ 保罗明确表示，很多人不愿意承认一个事实：**无论在过去还是现在，包办婚姻实际上都非常成功，甚至在多项研究中，其婚姻满意度普遍高于自由恋爱婚姻。** 针对大众常有的质疑（认为包办婚姻充斥着虐待与不满），保罗澄清指出，不幸和虐待在非包办婚姻中同样高频发生。包办婚姻之所以能展现出极高的稳定性与满意度，关键在于它不是两个人在荷尔蒙驱动下的草率冲动，而是双方家族共同介入、深思熟虑、理性协商评估后的结合。保罗正准备深入剖析家族协商背后的决定性机制。 ### [21:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1290s) 包办婚姻的科学性与“360度背调”相亲法 保罗·布朗森（Paul Brunson）指出，传统包办婚姻之所以往往能走向长久稳定，核心在于评估候选人是否适合整个家庭结构的机制。在这种模式下，父母、祖父母以及兄弟姐妹会聚在一起，严肃辩论候选人的品格：此人是否品行端正、是否开明包容、遇到危机时是否具备抗挫力（resilience）与解决问题的变通能力（resourcefulness）。这种机制最大的优势在于：**即将结婚的当事人完全被排除在决策之外**。因为当事人一旦介入，必然会被主观情感彻底蒙蔽。 相比之下，现代人的择偶方式极其危险。人们在结识对象时，通常完全屏蔽亲友的意见；在荷尔蒙与痴迷（infatuation）的冲动下，大脑根本无法客观判断对方是否具备真正重要的品质。更有甚者，许多人背负着童年创伤被动地被对方挑选，不知不觉“滑入”（sliding into）一段从一开始就注定错误的亲密关系中。 为了打破这种盲目性，保罗与妻子在创办相亲机构时开创了一种前所未有的服务模式。面对事业极为成功、渴望寻找真爱的男性客户（例如斯蒂芬·巴特利特这样的精英），保罗绝不会任由客户列出一份包含150项苛刻要求的梦中情人清单，而是让客户“去旁边坐着”。团队转而去深度访谈该客户的亲兄弟、同事，甚至是前任伴侣，从最亲近的身边人眼中获取一份“360度全方位个人画像”，以此为共识基准来为其匹配伴侣。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 择偶决策模式对比 accDescr: 对比现代盲目恋爱与360度全方位评估包办模式的决策差异 subgraph Modern["现代盲目模式"] M1["个体深陷迷恋 / 创伤驱动"] --> M2["主观列出苛刻愿望单"] M2 --> M3["被动滑入错误关系"] end subgraph Objective["360度客观评估模式"] O1["排除当事人情感偏见"] --> O2["访谈家人、同事与前任"] O2 --> O3["综合评估韧性与品行共识"] O3 --> O4["匹配契合度极高的伴侣"] end ``` ### [24:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1455s) 旁观者清：朋友往往比你更清楚谁适合你 斯蒂芬深有感触地分享了身边的真实案例：他的一位挚友在过去15年里饱受感情挫败之苦。每一次这位好友开启新恋情，斯蒂芬作为旁观者一眼就能看出“绝不是这个人”；但每次分手后，好友依然固执地走向歧途。斯蒂芬甚至能精准画出这位朋友真正需要的伴侣画像，连对方的年龄、职业、性格特质都一清二楚，可朋友却总是飞蛾扑火般选择完全相反的类型。 反过来亦是如此：斯蒂芬坦言，当自己遇到现任伴侣时，这位挚友同样一眼就认准了对方就是斯蒂芬的真命天女；好友甚至开玩笑说，如果斯蒂芬敢甩掉现任，他会像签署“总统行政令”一样强行推翻斯蒂芬的决定。保罗对此表示完全认同，如果现代社会能让真正关爱自己的核心亲友圈参与伴侣抉择，婚姻和伴侣关系的满意度必定会大幅飙升。 - 《跨文化家庭研究杂志》（*Journal of Comparative Family Studies*）2012年发表的一项研究显示，在集体主义文化中，包办婚姻伴侣在长期的婚姻满意度上，与自由恋爱结合的伴侣持平甚至更高。 - 现代婚姻正面临前所未有的满意度危机：当今约80%的婚姻满意度低于历史任何时期。 ### [26:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1614s) 降低期望：伴侣不应承担你生活的全部角色 现代人对伴侣的期望已经膨胀到了不切实际的地步。当一个人要求伴侣在生活中扮演所有角色——既要是情人，又得是心理治疗师、财务支柱、挚友、周末一起打匹克球的球友和人生导师时，伴侣的门槛被无限拔高。如果你的期望值是满分10项，即便对方完美做到了9项，你依然会因为缺失的那1项而感到深深的不满，因为“满意度本质上是由期望决定的”。 保罗给出的解决策略直截了当却极具颠覆性：“我们必须降低对伴侣的期望值。”回顾祖父母那一辈的生活，没有人指望从伴侣身上获得全套的情感与生活满足；他们只要能从伴侣身上获得其中的3项核心需求就会感到满足。至于其余的智力激发、自信建立、运动爱好等，全部分散在庞大的社群网络中——由朋友、同事或跑步俱乐部的伙伴来填补。 - 维系健康关系的第一步是厘清自己究竟想从婚姻中得到什么核心价值。 - 明确核心需求后，必须审视自己是否真正准备好为维系这段关系付出长期的实质努力。 ### [28:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1714s) 戈特曼夫妇的洞见与荒岛法则：我们与所有人都是兼容的 全球顶尖的伴侣治疗专家约翰·戈特曼与茱莉·戈特曼夫妇（John & Julie Gottman）曾向保罗透露过一个震撼的观点：“我们与任何人都是高度兼容的（We're all compatible with each other）。”其背后的底层逻辑可以用“荒岛法则”来解释：如果把两个人扔到一座孤岛上，告知他们余生只能面对彼此且别无选择，这两人几乎必然会建立起极强的情感联结，甚至形成稳固的身体与性吸引力。因为在没有退路的情况下，人类会竭尽全力去适应并解决问题。 现代社会的症结恰恰在于“选择过剩”。稍微遇到摩擦，人们便觉得换一个更容易，根本不愿投入心力去经营磨合。斯蒂芬对此深表共鸣，并分享了自己年轻时的亲身经历：当年他在曼彻斯特奇塔姆山（Cheetham Hill）的Late Rooms呼叫中心当客服，穷困潦倒且倍感孤独，结果无可救药地爱上了坐在旁边的女同事罗茜（Rosie）。以斯蒂芬当时的择偶标准来看，对方完全不符合预设的“理想型”，但仅仅因为长时间的高密度共处，强烈的吸引力便自然而然地生长出来。 ### [31:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1876s) 破解无限选择难题：从依恋类型与自我觉察起步 现代城市中许多人深陷困境——斯蒂芬提到自己的一位女性好友，本职工作就是不断拓展人脉与各种人打交道，却始终无法确定恋爱对象。针对这种在泛滥选择中迷失的现代人，保罗指出切入点永远是自我觉察（self-awareness），而最立竿见影的抓手就是审视自己的**依恋类型**（attachment styles）： - **识别逃避型依恋特征**：如果觉察到自己属于回避型（avoidant），就能瞬间顿悟为何自己在亲密关系中总是情感疏离、习惯标榜“我不需要任何人”，或者为何总是给追求者设置高不可攀的严苛门槛。 - **走向获得性安全型**：无论是焦虑型还是回避型依恋，个体都可以通过刻意练习修通创伤，获得“获得性安全型依恋”（earned secure attachment）。 - **专业治疗之外的自救路径**：虽然心理咨询师能提供极佳的帮助，但考虑到昂贵的咨询费用与漫长的预约排队周期，个体完全可以通过阅读、反思和自主训练开启心理重建。 ### [32:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1929s) 确立个人边界与现代亲密关系的多样性 Paul Brunson 指出，现代人寻找伴侣的首要前提是回归自我，尤其是如今人均心理咨询师数量正在减少，专业支持并不像大众想象中那样容易获取。在明确自我之后，第二步是必须清晰界定自己到底想要什么样的关系，并建立明确的个人边界。如果一个人无法坚定地表明自己的底线，甚至会将心怀善意的人在不知不觉中变成步步紧逼的“霸凌者”。要维护边界，首先得清楚自己的需求与承受极限。 与祖辈时代“从一而终、至死不渝”的单一婚姻范式不同，当今社会的亲密关系已经衍生出数百种变体： - 双方可以不领结婚证，只维持长期同居或恋爱状态； - 可以选择“各住各家、周末相聚”的分居伴侣模式（LAT, Living Apart Together）； - 可以明确达成丁克协议，选择完全不生育子女。 正因关系形态拥有海量可能性，开诚布公地确立意图与边界变得至关重要，从交往一开始就应当清晰表达彼此的期望。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 建立健康亲密关系的逻辑链条 accDescr: 展示从了解自我、设立边界到探索多元关系的推导过程 subgraph SelfFoundation ["自我基石"] A["回归自我认知"] --> B["明晰个人边界与真实诉求"] end subgraph BoundaryAction ["边界实践"] B --> C["从一开始清晰表达意图"] C --> D["防止善意伴侣演变成侵犯者"] end subgraph RelationshipVariety ["现代多元形态"] C --> E["选择适配的关系范式<br>(同居/分居/丁克等)"] end ``` --- ### [33:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=2022s) 伴侣重病时的离开率差异：揭开“无条件之爱”的假象 Steven Bartlett 引用了 Paul Brunson 新书《Keep Love》第 48 页记录的一项针对异性恋伴侣的震撼癌症医学研究： - 当男性身患绝症、由妻子担任照护者时，夫妻的分居/离婚率仅为 **2.9%**； - 当女性身患绝症、由丈夫担任照护者时，男性的离开率骤增至 **20.8%（约 21%）**。 这意味着，一旦妻子身患重病，男性抛弃伴侣的概率比女性高出 **600% 以上**（超过 6 倍）。面对 Steven “这到底是怎么回事”的震惊质问，Paul 坦言该数据令人极度不适，但必须写入书中，因为这一章旨在打破“爱是无条件的”这一巨大神话。 Paul 强调，除了父母对子女或许存在即使孩子铸成大错依然不灭的爱，伴侣之间的爱本质上是**有条件的**（Conditional Love）。许多人在进入婚姻时对此毫无防备。调查那些在伴侣病危甚至临终前选择离开的人（包括那 2.9% 的女性），他们的核心理由惊人一致：因为他们无法再从这段关系中获得所需——无论那是情感亲密度、性生活与身体亲密，还是其他价值回报。“条件”一旦消失，关系便宣告破裂。 至于男性离开率高出六倍的现象，Paul 指出，这反映了男性在亲密关系中将过多比重押在生理与性层面。更深层次的原因是，许多关系在遭遇大病之前，其**满意度（Satisfaction）早已跌入谷底**。无论是因为性生活不合、缺乏尊重，还是感到权利与付出不对等，低满意度让关系早已千疮百孔，大病只是一记让早有离意的伴侣顺理成章逃离的催化剂。 --- ### [37:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=2247s) 关系满意度：决定生死与长寿的终极指标 亲密关系的好坏不仅决定了关系的存续，更能决定个体的生理生死。Paul 引用了学者詹姆斯·科因（James Coyne）针对 200 名充血性心力衰竭（Congenital Heart Disease / Congestive Heart Failure）患者展开的里程碑式研究： - 该研究将患者按照其亲密关系的满意度高低分组，并追踪两年后的生存状况； - 在**关系满意度高**的患者群体中，两年后的死亡率约为 **11%**； - 在**关系满意度低**的患者群体中，两年后的死亡率高达 **45%**。 低满意度关系的致死率几乎是高满意度关系的 **3 倍以上**。Paul 直言，全社会普遍陷入了一种对“婚姻年限（Longevity）”的盲目崇拜。每次接受采访，媒体最爱问的总是“你结婚多少年了”，仿佛结婚 23 年以上就天然等同于婚姻成功。这种评价标准极为荒谬，真正关键的核心问题应当是：“你在婚姻或伴侣关系中，到底有多高的满意度？” --- ### [39:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=2364s) 枕边论道与高满意度婚姻的四个自检维度 面对 Steven 突如其来的反问“你自己的婚姻满意度有多高”，Paul 开玩笑抱怨这是个“坑人的问题”，因为说出实话往往会被公众贴上虚伪的标签。但 Paul 郑重保证，自己如今与妻子兼挚友 Jill 的关系满意度达到了有生以来的最高点。这份高满意度并非天上掉馅饼，而是源于双方持续投入的巨大心力： - 比如就在前一天晚上，夫妻俩还躺在床上讨论婚姻的历史，深度辩论法兰克国王克洛维一世（Clovis I）对后世人际关系演变的影响； - 这种对关系话题的常态化探讨，培养了彼此坦诚对话、表达怀疑、建立信任与保留个人自主权的能力； - 精神与情感上的高度连接，反哺了包括性生活、育儿分工以及日常事业在内的方方面面。 Paul 提出了衡量关系是否具有高满意度的关键自检清单： 1. **安全感与脆弱暴露**：你是否觉得伴侣能给你绝对的安全感？你敢不敢在对方面前暴露自己最脆弱、最真实的一面？ 2. **免于轻蔑与互相尊重**：你是否感受到被尊重？（约翰·戈特曼的研究表明，通过伴侣间是否存在“轻蔑”与“不尊重”，预测离婚的准确率高达 90% 以上）。 3. **对未来的乐观预期**：你是否对关系的未来走向抱有希望？这种乐观取决于双方是否都在积极投入心力建设关系，绝望往往源于看到伴侣在关系中彻底躺平、无所作为。 4. **对关系的独立滋养**：如今大众高度聚焦于“自爱”（Self-love）和自我滋养，但关键在于，你是否将“亲密关系”视为一个独立于两个个体之外的生命体，并持续为它倾注养分？ 听到 Paul 与 Jill 的“枕边长谈”，Steven 深有感触地指出，许多情侣的最大通病是将关系问题视作“房间里的大象”（The elephant in the room）。彼此缺乏一个安全的沟通机制去谈论未被满足的需求或内心是否快乐，从而让关系在沉默中逐渐走向冰点。 ### [43:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=2613s) 关系中被忽视的对话与“性高潮鸿沟” 在亲密关系中，许多人常以“生活太忙”为借口，逃避抽出专门时间讨论关系本身。Paul Brunson 指出，既然我们打算与眼前这个人共度余生，却声称抽不出时间给对方，这完全是一种自欺欺人的托词。伴侣之间必须将关系本身置于优先位置，安排专门的时间沟通真正核心且敏感的议题。 以异性恋关系中的性生活为例，绝大多数男性甚至根本没有意识到自己的伴侣在性生活中很少或从未获得高潮。数据呈现出惊人的“性高潮鸿沟”：在长期承诺关系中，男性的高潮率高达约 95%，而女性的高潮率仅在 65% 左右，这意味着有相当比例的女性从未体会过高潮。然而，男方通常对此毫无察觉，因为双方从未就此展开过坦诚交流。 这种沟通断层是双向的：男方缺乏觉察和发起讨论的意识，而女方由于顾虑男方的自尊心、担心破坏关系或者感到难堪，选择默默隐忍。如果一位女性已经假装或隐瞒了十年，如今再坦白就会承受巨大的心理负担。最终，两人的性生活退化为一种刻板的“既定脚本”——重复两三个动作，男方达到高潮，女方没有，随后草草收场。如果伴侣能打破沉默开展对话，关系将获得巨大的改善动力。 - 异性恋承诺关系中，男性的高潮率约为 95%，女性约为 65%，存在极为显著的性高潮鸿沟。 - 许多伴侣的性生活沦为缺乏交流的“机械脚本”（scripted moves），女方常因保护伴侣自尊或尴尬而隐瞒未获高潮的事实。 --- ### [45:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=2754s) 承认对他人产生吸引力，并将念头“送上法庭” 对于很多在关系沟通上处于“白带级别”（新手阶段）、多年来习惯对敏感问题避而不谈的伴侣，Steven Bartlett 询问该如何迈出第一步。Paul 建议从“小步慢跑”（baby steps）开始，首要任务就是将“对伴侣之外的人产生吸引力”这一现象正常化。很多人不敢承认这一点，但事实上，无论是外貌吸引、性吸引还是情感吸引，对伴侣之外的人产生感觉是完全正常的普遍人性体验，否认这一点的人不过是在撒谎。 Paul 分享了他与妻子 Jill 的切身经历。由于自身属于焦虑型依恋风格（anxious attachment style），他过去一想到妻子可能觉得别人有吸引力，就会陷入强烈的嫉妒、不安与恐惧之中，深怕妻子离他而去。为了破冰，他们先从距离生活很遥远的“名人”聊起。Jill 非常迷恋演员伊德里斯·艾尔巴（Idris Elba），Paul 当时甚至半开玩笑地担心她会真的为了艾尔巴离开自己。但随着双方不断公开探讨这个话题，这逐渐变成了一个轻松的内部玩笑，甚至在每年的结婚纪念日，Paul 都会特意订一束巨大的花送给 Jill，并附上署名“爱你的伊德里斯·艾尔巴”；而 Jill 也同样清楚 Paul 对碧昂丝（Beyoncé）的仰慕。 在这个过程中，Paul 运用了一种名为“把念头送上法庭”（take your thoughts to court）的认知调节方法：首先识别内心恐惧（“她会离开我”），然后寻找客观证据来验证或推翻这种情绪——事实是两人已相伴二十余年，关系满意度极高，欣赏他人纯属正常生理与心理反应。此外，Paul 强调在关系中产生疑虑是完全健康的，“真正相爱就绝不会产生怀疑”是一个巨大的神话谎言。关键在于区分“健康的怀疑”（关乎两人共同成长的建设性反思）与“不健康的怀疑”（源自个人不安全感、创伤与非理性恐惧）。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 把念头送上法庭的认知调节流程 accDescr: 展示从识别内心恐惧到搜集客观事实，最终校准认知并实现幽默脱敏的心理调节路径。 subgraph Emotion["第一阶段：情绪觉察"] A["产生伴侣被他人吸引的焦虑"] --> B["识别核心情绪：害怕被抛弃的恐惧"] end subgraph Court["第二阶段：理性审视（送上法庭）"] B --> C["质证：搜集客观事实与依据"] C --> D["验证事实：相伴20年/满意度极高/人性正常反应"] end subgraph Outcome["第三阶段：认知校准与脱敏"] D --> E["化解非理性恐惧"] E --> F["将敏感议题转化为日常幽默（如艾尔巴纪念花束）"] end ``` --- ### [51:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=3095s) 跨越沟通鸿沟：借助第三方内容作为破冰桥梁 Steven 观察到一个普遍现象：在关系中渴望学习、成长并深化情感联结的往往更多是女性，购买情感书籍或收听此类播客的核心受众也多为女性。现实中很多女性（例如假设的“莉亚”）希望和伴侣（“戴夫”）坦诚沟通性高潮缺失或关系瓶颈，但又担心伴侣会翻白眼、觉得尴尬，转头就把注意力重新放回足球比赛上，导致女性在“默默忍受”与“愤而离开”的两难间痛苦挣扎。 面对这种僵局，第一步并不需要直接掀起对抗或关掉电视大吵大闹，而是巧妙利用第三方媒介作为情感沟通的“桥梁”。女方可以挑选一期深入探讨亲密关系的播客、一本书或一档电视节目，以“约会之夜”为契机向伴侣提议：“我们今晚一起听听/看看这个，随便聊聊里面的观点。” Paul 提到他参与主持的英国相亲与情感真人秀节目《一见钟情英国版》（Married at First Sight UK），经常有男性观众在街头拦住他表示，他们会和伴侣、孩子一起观看节目，并就节目中的观点展开热烈争论。这种由外部内容引发的讨论能够有效卸下伴侣的防备心，推动两人从最初的“产生觉察”，迈向“习得沟通技能”，最终实现心理与情感上的“治愈”。借助一部作品或一期对话作为开端，正是打破多年沟通坚冰最有效的第一步。 ### [54:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=3299s) 现代婚姻制度的衰退与政府未来的介入 Steven Bartlett 引出关于两性关系历史的深刻反思。他质疑当代社会中许多由宗教与历史沿袭下来的规则——例如一夫一妻制、异性恋框架以及婚姻制度本身——究竟是已经失效，还是从一开始就存在逻辑漏洞。数据显示，英国在 2019 年的异性婚姻率降至自 1862 年有记录以来的历史最低点，而美国的结婚率自 1970 年代初以来也一直在持续下滑。 Steven 分享了自己的亲身经历：他尚未结婚，但一直在权衡结婚的利弊。最近他曾问伴侣是否想结婚，对方明确表示渴望步入婚姻；但当追问为什么时，伴侣想要的似乎只是一场盛大的“婚礼仪式”，而不是与政府签署具有法律效力的契约。对此，Paul Brunson 直截了当地指出，如果仅仅因为伴侣想要，那就是一个值得考虑的理由。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 核心家庭瓦解与政府介入逻辑 accDescr: 展示核心家庭瓦解如何影响经济基石并促使政府出台激励政策 subgraph SocietalShift["社会结构演变"] A["传统核心家庭<br/>（双亲 + 子女）"] --> B["社会驱动的基本经济单元"] B --> C["结婚率与生育率双双下滑"] end subgraph PolicyResponse["政策应对路径"] C --> D["社会基石动摇"] D --> E["国家强力干预<br/>（如新加坡、中国、日本）"] E --> F["加码激励措施<br/>（税收减免、资产继承等）"] end ``` Paul 进一步分析了婚姻制度在宏观层面的演变。他指出，传统上由伴侣与子女构成的“核心家庭”（Nuclear Family）不仅是一个情感单位，更是推动整个社会运转的基础经济单元。随着这种模式的瓦解以及全球出生率的骤降，新加坡、中国和日本等国政府已经开始强力干预以鼓励婚育。Paul 预测，未来各国政府为了挽救经济底盘，必将推出更多前所未有的激励红利（如更优厚的税收减免、资产继承特权等），婚姻将成为受到官方强力补贴的制度。 - 英国 2019 年异性结婚率跌至 1862 年以来的最低水平。 - 美国结婚率自 1970 年代初便步入长期下降通道。 - 价值观层面的对话至关重要，关于“是否想要结婚”的议题应在亲密关系初期尽早明确。 --- ### [58:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=3514s) 婚礼的沉重代价与“容易结婚、极难离婚”的制度荒谬 对于 Steven 对婚姻所持的不可知论态度（Agnostic），他坦言自己收到了许多已婚听众的反对私信，但他依然无法从底层逻辑理解，为什么与伴侣签署一份受政府或宗教约束的契约，就能提高爱情修成正果的概率。尽管他并不担心伴侣之间会出现恶劣的财产争夺或婚前协议纠纷，但他指出了现实中婚姻带来的巨大弊端： 为了办一场耗资巨大的婚礼，许多情侣不得不牺牲长达两年的日常快乐，取消平时的约会之夜去攒钱，最终背负极大的精神压力走入礼堂。更糟糕的是，婚姻的解除流程极其繁琐痛苦，必须通过律师打官司、对簿公堂。Steven 借用曼联足球俱乐部的困境打了个生动的比方：俱乐部给球员签下长达五年的巨额合约，日后一旦发现不合适，球员走不了、球队甩不掉，只能将彼此打入冷宫，陷入双输的煎熬。 针对 Steven 的质疑，Paul 提出了一个重构婚姻规则的核心观点：**婚姻应当是“准入极难，退出极易”**。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 理想与现实婚姻制度的准入与退出对比 accDescr: 对比当前倒置的婚姻机制与Paul Brunson倡导的健康机制 subgraph CurrentSystem["现行荒谬模式"] direction TB A1["极低门槛：<br/>拉斯维加斯 25 美元闪婚"] --> B1["漫长痛苦：<br/>法律纠纷、法庭拉锯数月/数年"] end subgraph IdealSystem["Paul Brunson 倡导模式"] direction TB A2["严苛准入：<br/>强制背景审查、婚前咨询与冲突管理培训"] --> B2["极简退出：<br/>一小时内办结、免费或象征性收费无痛解约"] end ``` Paul 指出，世俗婚姻完全可以摆脱宗教束缚，婚礼本质上只是一种对爱的公开宣言，规模可大可小，甚至可以在 50 年内举办 50 次聚会来表达。然而，当前婚姻法律制度最大的弊病在于本末倒置：在拉斯维加斯花 25 美元找个模仿猫王（Elvis Presley）的司仪，开车经过得来速通道就能草率成婚；反而在想要结束时，即便引入了无过错离婚（No-fault divorce），依旧需要经历长达数月的拉扯和高昂的诉讼成本。真正的健康机制应该在婚前设置严苛的筛选门槛、婚前辅导以及冲突处理技能评估，确保双方清楚知晓承诺的分量；而一旦想分开，应该允许人们在 1 小时内免费、轻松地解除合约。 - 婚礼的形式不应受社会绑架，它可以根据双方意愿被定义为私密聚会或贯穿一生的多次阶段性庆祝。 - 现行制度让进入婚姻过于轻率，而退出机制却过于惩罚性。 --- ### [01:03:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=3786s) 终身承诺的焦虑：打破“至死不渝”的职场式完美陷阱 在辩论深入后，Steven 剖析了自己对婚姻抗拒的根源：他发现自己可能存在承诺障碍（Commitment issues），只要一听到“向一个人承诺余生”这句话，内心就会瞬间涌起强烈的焦虑与恐惧。 Paul 敏锐地指出，这种焦虑本质上是对“尚未发生之事的恐惧”，需要去审视和拷问背后的真实思想。Steven 随后提出了一个形象的类比：如果社会要求每个人在年轻时挑选一份工作，并且规定这辈子“必须干到死、绝不能换”，那么巨大的决策成本会导致严重的拖延症和过度的完美主义，人们会陷入挑剔每一份细微瑕疵的僵局，最终彻底丧失选择工作的能力。 Steven 认为，当代人对婚姻的抗拒，很大程度上正是因为社会赋予了婚姻太沉重的终身终局性（Finality），逼迫大家必须挑选出一个“毫无瑕疵的完美伴侣”。Paul 对此深表赞同，并指出这正是现代人需要打破的重大情感神话之一——源自基督教、印度教乃至现代伊斯兰教仪式中所谓“直到死亡将我们分开”（Till death do us part）的誓言，人为地将一段原本关于当下与陪伴的契约，异化成了令人窒息的精神枷锁。 ### [01:05:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=3920s) 终身伴侣的收益：创业者的稳定后盾与沉没成本理论 当谈到与一个人共度余生的设想时，斯蒂芬（Steven Bartlett）直言，这种“绑定终身”的心态可能会让人们陷入自满与低满意度——既然对方走不掉，人们就容易放弃付出努力，甚至懒得去健身房、懒得与伴侣交流。保罗·布伦森（Paul Brunson）则指出这纯属误区，现代社会的离婚率和分居率摆在眼前，任何人随时都可以选择离开。与其被这种恐惧困扰，不如去探究拥有一位终身伴侣究竟有哪些巨大的上行收益（upside）。斯蒂芬随即给出了自己的深刻体会：对于任何准备迎接高难度挑战的人（尤其是创业者），一个稳固的家庭大后方能带来无可替代的专注与稳定性。 斯蒂芬特别提到了曼联传奇主帅亚历克斯·弗格森爵士（Sir Alex Ferguson）。弗格森在挑选球员时，总会极力探寻他们的感情状况；因为如果球员在家庭中拥有稳定的情感依托，他们在训练场上的注意力就会高度集中。相反，如果创业者处于单身状态，四处寻觅伴侣可能会成为巨大的精力分散点。此外，斯蒂芬强调，婚姻的高退出门槛并非完全是坏事——正是因为离开并不容易，当危机出现时，“逃跑”不再是阻力最小的路径，双方更倾向于寻求心理咨询或共同修复问题，而非轻易把关系丢弃进垃圾桶。 - **财富增长效应**：统计数据显示，处于健康、积极且高效婚姻中的双方，平均每年净收入能够多增长约 4%。 - **长寿与健康红利**：正如曾做客节目的哈佛大学成人发展研究主管罗伯特·瓦丁格（Robert Waldinger）所证实的那样，良好的长期关系能显著降低罹患疾病的风险，让人活得更久、更健康。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 婚姻与长期关系的稳定性飞轮 accDescr: 展现稳定的伴侣关系如何通过降低分心与增加投入转化为个人与关系的持续成长 subgraph S1["稳定基石"] A["稳固家庭后盾"] --> B["减少情感分心"] B --> C["专注于外部挑战（事业/竞技）"] end subgraph S2["投资模型"] C --> D["高退出门槛促成危机修复"] D --> E["持续投入资源与时间"] E --> F["心理满意度与幸福感提升"] end F --> A ``` --- ### [01:07:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=4064s) 质疑既定系统与投资模型理论 面对婚姻制度的诸多好处，斯蒂芬坦承自己并不是要彻底全盘否定婚姻，而是骨子里带有一种审视和反抗传统系统的叛逆本能（"a bit of a fuck-you in me to the system"）。他回顾了自己的人生历程：从退学、辍学到成为创业者，社会曾经硬塞给他的标准答案——比如“按部就班上大学、找工作、投递简历”——最终都被证明不过是陈腐的谎言。因此，当面对像婚姻这种流传千年的传统框架时，他的第一反应永远是停下来，苛刻地拷问它在当今时代是否依然合理。 保罗十分理解这种批判视角，并建议即使抛开既有的制度外壳，也应当从科学研究的本质出发来理解关系，其中最具代表性的便是“投资模型理论”（Investment Model Theory）。根据该理论，一个人在伴侣关系的准备与实际维系中投入的时间、精力和各种资源越多，他在关系中获得的满意度就会越高。因此，核心问题并不在于是否遵守某种社会仪式，而在于“我该如何倾尽所能，去深度投资这段与我所爱之人的伙伴关系”。 --- ### [01:09:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=4148s) 决定成功婚姻的核心：心理幸福感而非共同价值观 当斯蒂芬问及是什么决定了一段婚姻能否成功时，保罗将“成功”定义为“高度的满意度”，而满意度与个体的心理幸福感紧密挂钩。他特别推崇心理学界开创性的学者卡罗尔·瑞夫博士（Dr. Carol Ryff）及其提出的“心理幸福感六维度模型”（Six Dimensions of Psychological Well-being）。例如，其中一个重要维度是拥有清晰的人生愿景（vision），并坚信自己正在主动追求该愿景；若一个人缺失这种方向感，其整体幸福感就会大打折扣。个体的内心越健全充盈，其关系满意度就越高。 随后，保罗颠覆了一个被绝大多数人奉为真理的常识：社会普遍认为“价值观契合”是好伴侣的首要条件，但他认为这完全被高估了。这种对“步调一致”的执念最早源于圣经中关于“信与不信不可同负一轭（equally yoked）”的论述。这个词原本描述的是两头并排耕地的牛，必须步调一致、同向发力才能翻好土地；然而历代牧师将其狭隘化地解读为必须拥有相同的宗教、相同的价值观甚至相同的社会阶层。保罗直言不讳地指出：“街上随便抓十个人，九个都会说价值观就是一切。然而事实是，价值观是会随时间改变的！我现在的价值观就跟十年前大相径庭。”将关系完全寄托在静态的价值观匹配上，本身就是不可靠的。 - **寻找好伴侣的三大核心特质**： 1. **对自我幸福感的觉察与滋养（Well-being）**：关注并主动打理自身心理健康与生活愿景的人，才是健康关系的基石。 2. **开放包容的心态与好奇心（Open-mindedness & Curiosity）**：愿意主动倾听、深入探索彼此的世界，能够面对未来的认知演变。 3. **强大的心理韧性（Resilience）**：长久关系必然伴随艰难时刻；面对危机时能够逆风翻盘、自我复原，而不是一遇到困难就彻底摆烂躺平。 --- ### [01:13:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=4398s) 择偶市场的结构性错位：野心、学历与“向上择偶”的困境 讨论延伸到“野心（ambition）”是否是好伴侣的必备条件时，保罗认为野心本质上属于一种价值观范畴，而非绝对指标。斯蒂芬从现实数学逻辑分析指出，虽然很多人嘴上都渴望伴侣有野心、有明确的目标感，但从概率上看，不可能每个人都充满进取心，那些野心平平的人同样能找到并维系真爱。 紧接着，斯蒂芬抛出了当前婚恋市场中一个极其严峻的供需错配现象：现代女性在教育与职业成就上全面提升，大学毕业的女性人数已显著超过男性；然而在择偶心理上，绝大多数女性依然秉持着传统的“向上择偶（dating up and to the right）”倾向，希望寻找收入高于自己的男性。现实情况却是，金字塔顶端 10% 的男性垄断了绝大多数约会机会和性资源，而底层 50% 的男性则因缺乏女性关注而陷入边缘化，转而沉溺于色情内容等虚拟替代品。女性渴望的高收入、高学历优秀男性供给严重不足，择偶期望与市场客观供给之间撕开了一条巨大的鸿沟，而保罗也准备对此背后的数据与现实进行更深层次的拆解。 ### [01:14:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=4497s) 当代男性的困境与重新评估择偶叙事 保罗·布朗森（Paul Brunson）首先批判了当前社会中极其扭曲的择偶叙事——即网络舆论所鼓吹的“前 10% 或 20% 的顶级男性才是优质伴侣，剩下 80% 的普通男性全都毫无价值”。保罗指出，这种说法与事实相去甚远。他强调，尽管我们确实生活在一个父权制社会中，但与此同时，社会必须给予男性更多的宽容与体谅（Grace）。现代男性正面临着前所未有的孤独、困惑与误导： - 如今社会正陷入一场严重的“孤独流行病”（Loneliness epidemic）； - 不到 27% 的男性拥有可以倾吐心声的知心好友； - 甚至有统计显示，高达 0% 的受访男性觉得自己能在凌晨 3 点找到一个可以随时求助或倾诉的人。 保罗呼吁大家不要仅仅依据伴侣的身高或收入来定性一个人。与此同时，他也澄清了外界对女性的刻板偏见——并非所有女性都一味追求“身高六英尺（约 183 cm）以上、年入超十万英镑/美元的首席执行官”。 史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）对此提出了不同视角的考证。他引用了家庭研究所（Institute for Family Studies）的一项研究：尽管性别平等取得了长足进展，但受过高等教育的女性仍然明显偏好收入高于自己的伴侣；此外，一项针对 24 个国家在线约会行为的跨国分析也表明，女性在择偶时比男性挑剔得多，对高收入和高学历男性展现出极强的偏好。史蒂芬认为，这再次证明女性的择偶曲线呈现出“向右上角倾斜”（即追求更高经济与社会地位）的趋势，但现实中处于金字塔顶端的男性数量远远不足，从而必然导致大量女性陷入择偶不满。 保罗针对这项研究进一步剖析： - 高学历女性在平均水平上确实倾向于“向上择偶”（Hypergamy），寻找教育水平与经济资本相当或更高的伴侣； - 这种行为模式根植于过去几个世纪男权社会灌输给女性的生存脚本——“女性必须依靠男性的供给才能生存并获得安全”； - 尽管当下部分大城市中女性在收入和受教育程度上开始超越男性，但在全球宏观统计上，男性的平均收入依然高于女性； - 核心问题在于，西方现代社会中的大多数人早已不需要为了纯粹的物质生存而寻找伴侣。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 马斯洛需求层次与婚姻动机演进 accDescr: 展示婚姻选择从底层生存驱动向高层自我实现驱动的历史转变 subgraph R1["传统时代（1960年代以前）"] A["底层需求：生理与生存安全<br/>（食物、住所、物质保障）"] --> B["功利/实用型择偶<br/>（向上择偶、寻找提供者）"] end subgraph R2["现代社会转变"] C["中层需求：归属感与情感联结"] D["顶层需求：自我实现与最好自我"] C --> E["基于情感成熟度与自我实现的现代伴侣选择"] D --> E end ``` --- ### [01:19:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=4743s) 马斯洛需求演变与身高偏好的进化生物学争议 保罗借用马斯洛需求层次理论（Maslow's hierarchy of needs）将人类动机概括为三个层次：最底层是食物与住所等生理和生存安全需求；中间层是归属感与人际联结；最顶层则是自我实现与活出最好的自我。他指出，直到 1960 年代（在人类漫长历史中犹如昨天），人类的婚姻与择偶绝大部分都牢牢绑定在最底层的生存保障上。 史蒂芬随即指出，这种选择倾向具有深刻的进化生物学根源。即使在红毛猩猩等与人类基因重合度高达 98% 的灵长类动物中，择偶依然完全遵从生存驱动机制。史蒂芬提到跨文化的身体特征研究数据： - 近 50% 的女性只愿意与比自己高的男性约会，而仅有 13% 的男性坚持只与比自己矮的女性约会； - 女性在伴侣比自己高大约 8 英寸（约 20 厘米）时满意度最高； - 男性则在伴侣比自己矮大约 8 厘米时感到最满意。 史蒂芬认为，这充分证明跨文化的进化本能在持续发挥作用，女性本能上就偏好体型比自己高大强壮的男性。 保罗对此回应道，人类确实保留了生物学与进化的本能印记，但绝不能低估社会化塑造（Socialization）的巨大力量。他以赞达亚（Zendaya）和“荷兰弟”汤姆·赫兰德（Tom Holland）的恋情为例进行说明： - 如果在十年前询问年轻的赞达亚，她或许也会在童话式“迪士尼化叙事”（Disneification，即英俊高大的白马王子轻易抱起娇小公主）的影响下，认为自己只会喜欢高大男性； - 然而，当她的人格变得成熟、不再渴望外界虚幻的认可，明确知道自己珍视的核心品质时，身高的条条框框便不再重要，两人展现出了极高的幸福感。 史蒂芬辩驳称，像汤姆·赫兰德这样的案例显然属于极端特例（Exception），更何况他还是坐拥 3000 万财富的顶级巨星，无法代表普通大众。保罗表示赞同这确实是特例，但他指出其深层原因在于：**当代绝大多数成年人的心理健康水平低下，处于中低自尊（Low self-esteem）状态，严重依赖外界的眼光与社会标签来寻求自我价值确认**。 --- ### [01:23:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=5007s) 生物基因本能与择偶“黄金比例” 史蒂芬坦言，他担心社会在无意中塑造出了一种脱离现实的择偶标准，如果人们完全否定进化的底层生物学驱动，就会与现实发生剧烈冲突。 保罗明确承认，基因和进化生物学在人类的吸引力机制中占据着极其显著的比重，并列举了若干生物学层面的科学机制： - **排卵期与吸引力**：保罗引述神经科学家塔拉·斯沃特博士（Dr. Tara Swart）的研究指出，女性是否处于排卵期，会直接无意识地影响夜店等社交场合中男性对其产生的荷尔蒙吸引力； - **气味与基因互补**：人类对他人体味的偏好并非偶然。嗅觉测试（Sniff test）是机体天然的基因排斥与筛选系统——若对方与自身的基因图谱过于相似，潜意识中的反感会阻止繁衍，从而确保后代基因多样化、更健康； - **黄金比例（Golden Ratio / Golden Mean）**：跨文化研究普遍发现，在生理审美吸引力上，女性平均偏好肩宽腰细（倒三角体型）的男性，而男性平均偏好细腰丰臀（腰臀比较低）的女性。这种体态偏好背后有着深刻的进化适应与繁衍健康逻辑。 ### [01:25:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=5139s) 进化本能与社会规训的博弈：夺回择偶自主权 人类的择偶偏好往往受到两股强大力量的撕扯：一股是深层的进化本能，另一股则是后天被灌输的社会规则。在进化层面，男性往往本能地被女性体现生育力的特征所吸引，而女性则倾向于寻找体格强壮、能提供保护的伴侣。然而，现代社会又强加了许多既定剧本——比如伴侣必须门当户对、对方必须是“让你生命完整的那个人”，或者誓言中必须“至死不渝”。这两股力量大部分时间都在无意识中运作，导致现代人在择偶时普遍陷入迷茫与内耗。 真正的破局之道在于“觉知”（awareness）。只有看清这两种力量的来源，个体才能拥有择偶的自主决定权。当一个人意识到自己想要一个身高超过六英尺（约183厘米）的伴侣时，应该停下来向内心拷问：“这对我来说真的有那么重要吗？我为什么会有这种执念？”这种自我辩论能够让人超越单纯的动物本能与外界舆论。斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）补充道，认清这两点是动用理性前额叶皮层做决定的关键：一方面要警惕进化本能带来的偏见（比如容易被散发着虚张声势与魅力的“渣男”吸引，即便这类人根本不适合做长久伴侣）；另一方面要看破时尚杂志与媒体兜售的虚假审美标准。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 择偶决策的双重影响与理性觉知模型 accDescr: 展示进化本能与社会规训对择偶的无意识驱动，以及如何通过自我觉知与前额叶皮层进行理性决策。 subgraph DualForces ["无意识的驱动力"] Evo["进化本能<br/>(生育力、保护力、外表体征)"] Soc["社会规训<br/>(阶层观念、完美另一半、媒体审美)"] end subgraph AwarenessAction ["理性干预机制"] Aware["自我觉知 (Awareness)<br/>内省提问：为什么我想要这些？"] PFC["前额叶皮层理性决策<br/>(Prefrontal Cortex)"] end DualForces --> Aware Aware --> PFC PFC --> Result["建立长期满意的健康关系"] ``` --- ### [01:28:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=5289s) 吸引力的本质：自尊水平如何决定你的伴侣选择 关于对称面孔是否在不同文化中都更具吸引力，科学研究普遍给出了肯定的答案，但保罗指出，真正决定一个人会被谁吸引的核心心理机制，其实是**自尊水平**（self-esteem）。自尊越低的人，内心越渴望得到外界的认可与赞许，因而极度依赖“社会剧本”来定义自己的伴侣。如果社会环境推崇面部对称或者某种特定潮流，低自尊的人就会执意寻找符合这些标准的伴侣，借此向外界证明自己的价值。相反，在现实生活中经常能看到一些外表看起来“不相称”的伴侣——通常是因为其中一方拥有极高的自尊水平，他们完全不需要外界来评判或认可自己的伴侣。 斯蒂芬分享了一个身边的真实案例：一位在伦敦的朋友自幼自尊极低，经历坎坷。刚进入一段恋爱关系时，这位朋友在伦敦街头对斯蒂芬说了一句原话：“我真的很喜欢她，但我有点担心……如果我挽着她的手走进一家餐厅，这看起来会不会不够有面子？”斯蒂芬当时便直言不讳地警告他，这段感情注定会失败，因为他完全忽视了真正重要的内核，只在意外界的眼光。事实证明，这位朋友随后陷入了一段又一段迅速破裂的浅薄恋爱循环中，每一次都在用不安全感和低自尊来选人，而非基于长期的内在契合度。 - **低自尊者的择偶逻辑**：依赖他人与社会的认可，将伴侣视为彰显个人身价的“面子挂件”或社交配件。 - **高自尊者的择偶逻辑**：内心富足，完全摆脱外界评判体系，专注于双方深层的精神契合与长久相处。 - **表层吸引力与深层幸福**：只看外表或社交形象的结合，往往会过滤掉真正重要的情绪价值与性格兼容性。 --- ### [01:31:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=5475s) 婚介观察：“后天蜕变者”的内心短板与暗黑人格陷阱 保罗回顾自己早年的专业红娘生涯时提到，他接触过很多非常典型的“后天蜕变者”（late bloomers）。这些男性在青少年时期往往是内向、害羞、沉迷学业的“丑小鸭”，觉得自己不受欢迎、外貌平庸；步入成年后，他们通过健身塑形、事业成功积累了财富与魅力，在外人眼中已是不可多得的“优质男”，但在他们自己的潜意识里，依然困在当年自卑的躯壳中。面对这类客户，婚介机构绝不能直接安排相亲约会，而是必须先帮他们进行内心层面的重建。 之所以不能直接送他们去约会，是因为自尊水平低下的人即便面对完美的伴侣候选人，也根本无法识别出对方的好。他们的思维仍旧停留在“带她去参加公司圣诞派对时会不会让我很有面子”，而不是去考量对方的心理健康状态或双方的价值观。更危险的是，这种不安全感不仅会推开良缘，还会直接招致掠夺者。保罗引用了进化心理学家戴维·巴斯（David Buss）的观点指出，世界上存在一类擅长操纵人心的暗黑人格群体（如自恋者、施虐倾向者、心理变态以及马基雅维利主义者）。这类人最善于嗅探他人的低自尊并实施情感操控；而防御这种伤害的最佳护盾，正是个体自身的心理健康与高自尊水平。 - **后天蜕变者的认知偏差**：外在条件已经达到顶级，但内在自我认知仍停留在昔日的自卑状态。 - **健康心理状态（Well-being）的双向功能**： - **防御盾牌**：彻底阻隔带有暗黑人格倾向（自恋、变态操控）的情感掠夺者。 - **引力磁铁**：自然吸引同等拥有高自尊、心理健全的高质量伴侣。 --- ### [01:34:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=5657s) 面对40岁门槛与生育钟的焦虑：病急乱投医的代价 斯蒂芬提出了身边朋友面临的典型现实困境：两位接近40岁的朋友（一男一女）都深陷低自尊与年龄焦虑之中，总觉得没有时间去慢吞吞地做“内心修通”。女性面临着日益紧迫的“生理时钟”（biological clock）压力；男性则面临严重的同辈压力与社会比较，眼看着身边的朋友纷纷成家立业，唯独自己形单影只。他们试图通过外在包装（频繁做美发造型打扮外表）以及进行高强度的密集相亲，渴望以最快速度抓到一个伴侣。 保罗对这种心态给出了坚定的当头棒喝：“你连人生的一半都还没过完，你还有大把的时间。”斯蒂芬随即追问，当女性切实面临生育时钟的物理限制时，这种焦虑又该如何化解？保罗严肃地指出，这正是最令人心痛的地方：在现实中，有大量人仅仅因为害怕错过生育年龄，在病急乱投医的恐慌中匆忙选择“随便找个人生孩子”。这种将就与妥协往往不是解药，而是另一场家庭与情感灾难的开端。 ### [01:35:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=5747s) 盲目赶生物钟的代价与保罗的八年生育抗争 保罗深入剖析了仅仅为了“赶在生物钟敲响前生育”而仓促选择伴侣所带来的毁灭性连锁反应。如果为了生孩子而与一个自己不喜欢、缺乏安全感且毫无情感连接的人结合，日常的相处就会变成一种巨大的折磨。不良伴侣不仅无法提供情感支持，还常常缺席育儿职责，给当事人带来极大的长期心理压力，甚至可能诱发自体免疫疾病等身体重疾。在这种高压与身心俱疲的状态下，父母根本无法以最佳状态陪伴孩子成长；而孩子目睹冷漠和冲突，也会衍生出一系列严重的心理与成长问题。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 盲目结婚生育引发的恶性循环链 accDescr: 展示因赶生物钟而草率选错伴侣，最终如何一步步影响个人健康及孩子心理的因果演进过程。 subgraph Choice ["草率结合"] A["为赶生物钟急于生子"] --> B["选择无情感/无安全感伴侣"] end subgraph InternalStrain ["家庭与健康危机"] B --> C["日常严重压力与育儿缺位"] C --> D["慢性压力诱发自体免疫疾病"] D --> E["无法为孩子提供良好育儿状态"] end subgraph Impact ["后代负面影响"] E --> F["孩子目睹家庭冲突与破裂"] F --> G["孩子产生一系列心理与行为障碍"] end ``` 保罗强调自己完全理解那种渴望成为父母的迫切心情。他与妻子吉尔（Jill）在年轻时便渴望组建家庭，两人从 25 岁结婚后不久就开始备孕，整整尝试了 8 年。大约 16 年前（当时他们都在 30 岁出头至 35 岁左右，保罗如今已年近 50），他们踏上了试管婴儿（IVF）的漫长征程。在长达一年的周期中，经历过数次失败，甚至曾痛失一个孩子，那种打击用“痛彻心扉”（absolutely devastating）来形容毫不为过。最终，他们迎来了大儿子金斯顿（Kingston），随后又迎来了二儿子利亚姆（Liam）。 ### [01:37:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=5852s) 冷冻胚胎的伦理困境与男性生育焦虑 保罗谈及了辅助生殖技术背后鲜为人知且极少被公开讨论的伦理纠结：胚胎冷冻。在成功孕育两个儿子后，他们仍有 9 枚具有活力的胚胎。面对这些冷冻胚胎，许多家庭面临极其艰难的抉择——是捐赠给科学研究、直接销毁，还是继续封存？保罗和妻子将这些胚胎视作两人创造出的生命，不忍放弃，因此从做试管周期的那一天起，至今每月都在支付昂贵的冷冻储存费。虽然某些国家对胚胎储存年限有法律限制，但这份心理负担与道德抉择始终沉甸甸地压在心头。 与此同时，生育困难对亲密关系和男性自尊构成了巨大的隐形打击： - **男性气质的刻板剧本**：保罗回忆起早年在理发店理发时，常听一些男性炫耀自己有 8 个孩子、以此自诩为“最爷们的人”。彼时无法自然生育的保罗离开理发店时内心无比煎熬，深受社会传统剧本的审判——“如果你生不出孩子，你就不是个真正的男人”。 - **精子检测的恐惧与信任考验**：史蒂文深有共鸣地分享道，自己在收到带有密码保护的精液分析报告邮件时极度恐惧，害怕一旦结果异常就会被伴侣抛弃；保罗赞同地表示，双方都会因生育检测产生被抛弃的猜忌与不安。 - **投资理论（Investment Theory）的映照**：保罗感慨道，虽然生育过程漫长痛苦，但这也契合了亲密关系中的投资理论——夫妻二人为此付出的心血、代价和折磨越多，欲望就越强烈；如今他们对两个儿子的珍视与宠爱程度，正是那段刻骨磨难所赋予的。 ### [01:42:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6122s) 伴侣选择关乎生死：69% 的冲突永远无法解决 正是因为生育、买房和长期生活等挑战具有极强的破坏力，保罗郑重指出：“伴侣的选择往往是关乎生死的重大决定（life or death）”。选对伴侣是人生中最重要的一步，必须在决定同居、买房、结婚尤其是要孩子之前进行极其深入的考察与对话。 根据著名心理学家约翰·戈特曼（John Gottman）的研究，亲密关系中高达 **69% 的问题是永远无法得到彻底解决的**。这意味着夫妻不可能靠消除所有分歧来维持幸福，而是必须掌握高超的冲突管理能力（conflict management skills）。如果在要孩子前没有看清对方的冲突管理水平，一旦有了孩子，家庭矛盾和养育分歧便会呈爆炸式上升。 伴侣关系对心理健康和寿命也有着决定性作用： - **抑郁风险增加**：《自然》（Nature）期刊发表的一项研究显示，未婚个体出现抑郁症的风险比已婚人群高出 **79%**。 - **关系质量决定幸福感**：一项综合分析 43 个数据集的研究证实，恋爱与婚姻关系的满意度是衡量整个人生满意度（life satisfaction）的核心预测指标；高质量的情感羁绊还能大幅延长寿命。 ### [01:44:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6270s) 给儿子的脱单建议：置身于健康关系的人群之中 针对单身男性如何提升吸引力并维系长期关系的疑问，史蒂文向保罗抛出一个推心置腹的拷问：“如果你的大儿子金斯顿私下问你，‘爸，为了以后能找到并守住一个好伴侣，我现在需要去健身房练块儿、读书还是努力挣钱？’你会怎么回答？” 保罗透露，自己平时周末会和已经 14 岁、力气惊人的金斯顿一起健身，并早就把这个秘诀告诉了他。他的答案极其纯粹且核心： > “让自己置身于优秀的人群之中（Surround yourself with great people）——去靠近那些拥有健康伴侣关系、对自己的感情拥有极高满意度的人。” 保罗指出，这与在商业中取得成功的逻辑如出一辙：想要经商成功，就必须融入成功的商业圈子。置身于优质亲密关系的环境中，你会自然而然地观察到健康夫妻的日常习惯、沟通技巧和相处边界；你会明白什么是面对感情的“健康疑虑”，什么是“不健康的猜忌”。通过耳濡目染直接习得这些关键技能与底线认知，远比单纯去健身房或死记硬背恋爱法则更为根本。随后，史蒂文借此切入赞助商智能穿戴设备 Whoop 的无感佩戴特性。 ### [01:46:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6383s) 赞助商插播与亲密关系迷思：性爱频率等于幸福感吗？ 对话从赞助商 Whoop 的话题切入，主持人 Steven Bartlett 提到 Whoop 创始人兼首席执行官 Will Ahmed 曾在节目中指出，设备不设屏幕是为了减少干扰，让数据监测在后台静默运行。随后，话题迅速转向保罗·布伦森（Paul C. Brunson）的新书《Keep Love: 21 Truths for a Long-Lasting Relationship》。书中深入剖析了关于现代爱情的 21 个常见迷思，Steven 挑出了其中最具争议的一个发起提问：“性生活越多，真的意味着亲密关系越幸福吗？” 保罗斩钉截铁地回答：“不，完全不是。”他解释道，实证研究确实表明高满意度的伴侣通常拥有较为频繁的性生活，但这并不是因果颠倒的理由——不是性爱带来了高满意度，而是关系本身的高满意度催生了频繁的性爱。许多人常陷入“只要我们经常做爱，关系就没问题”的误区。保罗在主持《一见钟情》（Married at First Sight）节目时屡次遇到类似情况：新配对的夫妇一坐下来就自信满满地宣称“我们不需要任何帮助，我们做爱就像兔子一样疯狂”。保罗打趣说“狮子的交配频率其实比兔子高得多”，更关键的是，密集的性生活根本无法代表关系的健康程度。即便一段关系长期处于“无性”状态，双方依然可能过得极其幸福，尤其是步入八十岁高龄的伴侣，彼此的性冲动可能降至一年仅有一两次，但这完全不妨碍他们享受高质量的晚年相守。 - **因果倒置**：频繁的性生活是高质量情感关系的副产品，而非其根本原因。 - **无性关系的幸福可能**：许多伴侣在缺乏性生活的情况下依然拥有极高的情感契合度与幸福感，性频率绝非衡量感情好坏的绝对金标。 --- ### [01:49:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6550s) 自发性欲望与反应性欲望：“情感银行”的存取之道 保罗进一步拆解了性欲的生理与心理机制，指出欲望主要分为两类：“自发性欲望”（Spontaneous Desire）与“反应性欲望”（Responsive Desire）。这两者存在显著的性别与年龄特征：大多数男性即便到了六七十岁，依然以自发性欲望为主，几乎随时随地都能“按需勃起”，无须任何前置的情感铺垫；相比之下，随着年龄增长，女性往往更依赖反应性欲望——她们需要情感联结、心理安全感以及有深度的交流作为催化剂。 结合性心理学家卡伦·格尼博士（Dr. Karen Gurney）的研究，保罗提出了“情感货币”（Emotional Currency）与“情感银行”的概念。如果在日常生活中毫无情感积累，相当于伴侣账户里空空如也，此时单刀直入地提出性要求，无异于强行进行“透支取款”，必然碰壁。相反，伴侣需要通过日常的点滴“储蓄”来累积资本：比如清晨发一条“我爱你”的暖心短信、由衷感谢对方把孩子照顾得井井有条、期待晚上一起喝杯红酒看部电影，以及不带任何性暗示的拥抱与亲吻。保罗在节目中分享了他推崇的“30秒拥抱”和“6秒亲吻”，并笑谈自己曾给过 Steven 一个长达 30 秒的拥抱；Steven 也随之调侃身边的朋友 Davina McCall 同样极其擅长深情拥抱。保罗强调，必须打破“亲吻和拥抱就意味着要做爱”的条件反射，只有让身体接触摆脱目的性，情感储蓄才能真正建立，性吸引力才会水到渠成。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 情感银行储蓄与欲望反应流程 accDescr: 展示了通过日常非性接触积累情感货币，从而激发反应性欲望并促成自然性联结的良性循环。 subgraph 储蓄阶段 ["日常情感储蓄 (Deposits)"] A["真诚短信 / 赞美与感谢"] --> D["积累情感货币"] B["30秒纯粹拥抱 (无性目的)"] --> D C["6秒深情亲吻与深度对话"] --> D end subgraph 激发阶段 ["欲望转化与取款 (Withdrawals)"] D --> E["建立安全感与心理联结"] E --> F["唤起反应性欲望 (Responsive Desire)"] F --> G["水到渠成的亲密性关系"] end ``` --- ### [01:52:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6731s) 欲望管理：为何不能让伴侣成为你的一切 讨论随后延伸到“欲望管理”（Desire Management）与伴侣之间的空间边界。Steven 指出，在日益个人主义的现代社会中，人们往往把伴侣塑造成自己的“万能角色”——既是爱人，又是心理咨询师、财务顾问、创业伙伴兼挚友。然而俗话说“距离产生美”（Absence makes the heart grow fond），当一个人承载了所有社会角色时，其在两性层面的神秘感与吸引力往往会被彻底磨灭。 保罗十分赞同这一观点，并坦诚分享了自己婚姻中的一段弯路。曾经有一段时期，他和妻子吉尔（Jill）共同创立并经营一家相亲交友机构，他们既是联合创始人、父母，又是生活伴侣与商业搭档。不知不觉中，保罗斩断了自己的社交圈，退掉了喜爱的篮球季票，也不再在周末观看 NFL 橄榄球赛。他把所有的情感和精力都押注在妻子和家庭身上。其直接恶果是他失去了所有外部生活体验，无法再为家庭带回新鲜的认知与视角，自身的情感价值反而被严重稀释。后来，保罗选择在英国投资并深入参与了一支足球队，通过与背景完全不同的人群交往，重新激活了自己的生活热情。 保罗用“电池充电”做比喻：如果一个人是一块电池，依靠八个不同的外部插座充电，显然比孤注一掷地依赖唯一一个插座要稳健得多；万一那个单一插座出了故障，整个人就会陷入能量枯竭。Steven 深有共鸣地表示，这直接关联到依恋理论（Attachment Theory）：在自己的关系中，他偏向回避型依恋，渴望独立空间、自由与探索；而伴侣则偏向焦虑型依恋，倾向于紧追不舍地追求共处时间，这种需求错位往往会引发拉扯与失衡。 - **高期望的风险**：把伴侣视为“一切”构成了高风险的关系架构，哪怕对方做到了 99%，那缺失的 1% 也会带来巨大的挫败感。 - **多渠道充电模型**：保持独立的兴趣圈子（如体育运动、独立社交）能够为个体注入持续的活力，并将这种积极能量反哺给亲密关系。 - **依恋风格的拉扯**：焦虑型倾向于通过紧密的共处确认安全感，回避型则通过拉开距离寻找呼吸空间，理解这种机制是欲望管理的关键起点。 ### [01:56:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7017s) 依恋理论：为何焦虑型与回避型总会相互吸引？ 保罗·C·布伦森（Paul C. Brunson）与主持人史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）探讨了亲密关系中最常见的配对动力学——焦虑型依恋（Anxious Attachment）与回避型依恋（Avoidant Attachment）之间的致命吸引。布伦森指出，这两类人往往最终走到一起，而他们最关键的修行是一起走向“后天获得的安全型依恋”（Earned Secure），实现这一点最有效的方法之一就是多与具备安全型依恋的伴侣或夫妻交往。为了讲透背后的机理，布伦森追溯了英国心理学家约翰·鲍尔比（John Bowlby）与加拿大心理学家玛丽·安斯沃思（Mary Ainsworth）著名的“陌生情境测试”（Strange Situation Test），该测试深入考察了人类童年与第一抚养者之间的互动模式： ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 童年抚养模式与依恋风格的形成 accDescr: 展现从抚养者的不同回应方式到形成安全型、焦虑型与回避型依恋风格的演变路径 subgraph Caregiver["童年抚养者互动模式"] A["始终如一的响应与支持"] B["时有时无、不稳定的关照"] C["长期缺位、缺乏情感回应"] end subgraph Style["形成的成人依恋风格"] D["安全型依恋 (Secure)"] E["焦虑型依恋 (Anxious)"] F["回避型依恋 (Avoidant)"] end A --> D B --> E C --> F ``` - **安全型（Secure）**：当孩子有需要时，抚养者始终能提供支持与陪伴。这类人成年后自我接纳度高，在关系中情绪稳定。 - **焦虑型（Anxious）**：抚养者的关注时有时无。在移民家庭中极为常见（尤其是第二代移民），父母忙于多份工作打拼生计，虽然爱孩子却无法时刻在身边，导致孩子成年后产生强烈的不安全感，在关系中表现得粘人、渴求关注（Needy）。 - **回避型（Avoidant）**：抚养者长期缺席或冷漠，迫使孩子学会“自我安抚”（Self-soothe）。这种极度的自我依赖（Self-reliance）往往造就了大量在商业上极具成就的企业家。 这两种截然相反的风格为何会彼此纠缠？布伦森坦诚自己天生带有焦虑特质，正在努力修练成安全型。他解释道，焦虑型的人天然习惯并享受“追逐”（Pursuit），而回避型的人则在“被追逐”时感到舒适——因为被追逐既满足了建立连接的需要，又让他们保留了随时拉开距离的权力。双方在追逃机制中形成了一种病态却契合的平衡。 ### [01:59:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7175s) 元认知：回避型伴侣在关系中的每日“心智修行” 史蒂文结合自身经历深有感触地指出，改变依恋模式的第一步是“觉察”（Awareness），只有看清自己的行为模式，才能及时喊停并进行反思。作为一名典型的回避型，史蒂文分享了自己在日常生活中的真实心路历程：当伴侣向他寻求关注、发起“关注邀约”（Bids for Attention）时，他过去的第一反应往往是烦躁和抗拒（“她为什么要在这种时候烦我？”）；而现在的他则会启动三层观察与认知重构： 1. 观察伴侣正在表达什么需求； 2. 觉察自己本能涌起的抗拒情绪； 3. 用爱进行理性重构——“我深爱这个人，如果她此刻需要一点陪伴，史蒂夫，配合一下，满足她的需求就好。” 布伦森对此极为认同，并引用了朱莉·史密斯博士（Dr Julie Smith）提出的“元认知”（Metacognition，即对自身思维方式的反思）概念。他指出，许多人误以为掌握了知识就彻底“治愈”了，但童年的神经回路根深蒂固，这是一种持续一生的修行。史蒂文坦言，即便自己主持了上百期播客、听过无数次依恋理论，每天去进行这种思维转换依然让人精疲力竭，但布伦森强调：“这种耗费脑力的心智折磨，正是你为了拥有一段优质亲密关系所必须支付的代价。” 史蒂文特别澄清，尽管他在节目中常探讨婚姻制度的弊端，但这与伴侣无关。相反，正是现在的伴侣让他从反感婚姻转变为乐意配合；在朋友和他心中，对方都是不可替代、“完美契合的不完美”（Perfectly Imperfect）伴侣。 ### [02:02:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7328s) 伴侣之间应该毫无秘密吗？“选择性披露”的科学 史蒂文就布伦森新书（由 Flight Books 出版）中一个颇具争议的话题提问：“在亲密关系中，我们是否应该对伴侣保守秘密？”许多大众常识奉行“100%全盘托出、绝不说谎”的教条，但布伦森指出，心理学研究支持的是一种截然相反的沟通策略——“选择性披露”（Selective Disclosure）。 在一项经典的对照实验中，一组伴侣被要求做到绝对透明（Full Transparency），脑中冒出任何问题、顾虑或琐事都必须立即全盘告诉对方；而另一组则遵循“选择性披露”。实验结果十分戏剧化：绝对透明的一组充斥着摩擦与猜忌，而采用选择性披露的一组不仅满意度大幅提升，冲突显著减少，彼此在关系中的自主权（Autonomy）也更强。布伦森明确了选择性披露的核心筛选准则： - **关联性（Relevance）**：所分享的信息对伴侣和当下关系是否有实质意义。 - **情绪顾及（Emotions）**：对方当下的情绪负荷能否承受这条信息。 - **心理边界（Boundaries）**：尊重伴侣既定的话题防线与敏感区。 - **时机与语调（Timing and Tone）**：选在对方心态从容的适当时机，用温和建设性的口吻传达。 - **立足未来（Future-oriented）**：坦白这件事是否能促进关系的长期健康。 布伦森举了两个非常接地气的例子： 1. **牙膏盖琐事**：伴侣总是不盖牙膏盖，这让你心烦意乱。但如果你明知伴侣正背负巨大的工作项目压力，此时翻旧账显然是不明智的。 2. **前任发私信祝贺**：前任突然在社交媒体发来私信，祝贺你的新播客或新书，内容纯属客套（Platonic），而你也仅仅客气地回了一句“谢谢”并立即归档删除。如果伴侣原本就在克服嫉妒方面的心理创伤，此时若非要为了所谓的“绝不说谎”大张旗鼓地向其报备，只会平白在两人之间制造不必要的焦虑与风波。 史蒂文对此深表共鸣，坦言自己也曾经历过前任发来简短客套信息而伴侣就坐在身边的情形。盲目的全盘招供往往只是一种推卸内疚感的自私行为，而懂得为了关系的平稳适度过滤信息，才是成熟维系亲密关系的高情商智慧。两人随后自然过渡到了关系中决定生死的关键能力——冲突解决（Conflict Resolution）。 ### [02:07:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7633s) 冲突的本质不是“争输赢”，而是“寻求理解” Steven 谈到冲突对关系的塑造作用时，由衷赞叹一段好的关系能让人在冲突中变得更强大。他反思了自己当前的感情与过往关系的巨大反差：如今的关系仿佛自带一种天生的冲突化解机制，这完全植根于彼此的性格底色。他和现任伴侣都不喜欢扯着嗓子大喊大叫，双方的第一反应都是去倾听彼此；而在以往糟糕的关系中，两人吵架时就像两张卡壳的坏唱片，只会机械地把自己的观点狠狠砸向对方，拼了命想在争吵中争个输赢。 Paul 对此深表赞同，并结合著名心理学家约翰·戈特曼（John Gottman）的研究提出了一个关键修正：他现在更倾向于使用冲突“管理”而非“解决”，因为戈特曼的数据证实，亲密关系中有高达 69% 的矛盾本质上是无法彻底解决的。在面对不可避免的分歧时，人们通常会走向两条截然不同的路径： - **试图赢下争吵**：执着于争夺对错与输赢，这条路径毫无例外会导致长期的关系满意度低下； - **试图增进理解**：将目的转变为“我只是想弄明白为什么我的伴侣会这样想”，专注于理解背后的心理机制。 ### [02:08:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7715s) 道歉的门槛差异与每周一次道歉的黄金法则 在探讨是否应该向伴侣道歉时，Paul 斩钉截铁地表示“当然应该”，但男女之间对“何时该道歉”的认知存在着巨大的鸿沟。Paul 分享了自己写书时的一段趣事：当时他正在撰写关于“道歉”的章节，特意跑去问妻子 Jill：“你觉得我一个月大概会向你道几次歉？”Jill 略微思索后笑着调侃道：“唔……你大概隔一个月才道一次吧。”这意味着在妻子眼里，Paul 一年仅仅道歉大约六次。这个答案让身为主持人与关系专家的 Paul 大受震动，因为统计数据显示，在最健康、最幸福的伴侣关系中，平均每周至少会有一次道歉。 Paul 坦言自己掉入了一个许多男性都会陷入的心理陷阱——对道歉“门槛”（threshold）的认知偏差。许多琐碎事情发生后，男性的第一反应往往是“这有什么好道歉的？事实就是这样啊”。以家里的倒垃圾问题为例，作为负责倒垃圾的人，Paul 偶尔会遗忘，在他看来这纯属无心之失，根本没上升到需要正式道歉的层面；然而在妻子 Jill 眼中，忘记倒垃圾的严重程度几乎仅次于“爆发第三次世界大战”。Paul 由此领悟到，维系关系的核心智慧在于保持敏锐，精准洞察伴侣的道歉门槛所在，并在那个高度上去主动迎合对方，而不是固守自己的标准。 ### [02:10:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7818s) 有效道歉的“ARC”法则与情感愧疚 Steven 随即抛出了一个切身困惑：几周前他在关系中拒绝道歉，因为他觉得自己并没有做错任何事。他反思如果在未来遇到相同情境，自己依然会做出同样的选择，因此若违心道歉不仅显得虚伪，而且相当于在关系中确立了一个自己未来根本无法履行的虚假标准。为了息事宁人而做出的道歉究竟有没有价值？Paul 明确回应：道歉必须出自真诚，但现实中高达 50% 的道歉都是完全无效的。为了实现真正有效的沟通，Paul 提出了独创的“ARC”道歉模型： ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: ARC道歉模型 accDescr: 由Acknowledge承认事实、Remorseful表达愧疚、Commitment做出承诺三部分组成的有效道歉流程 subgraph ARC["有效道歉三部曲 (ARC Model)"] A["A - Acknowledge<br/>承认既成事实"] --> R["R - Remorseful<br/>共情情感冲击"] R --> C["C - Commitment<br/>给出未来承诺"] end ``` - **A - Acknowledge（承认事实）**：客观坦承发生了什么，例如“我很抱歉我刚才打断了你说话”。 - **R - Remorseful（表达愧疚）**：对自己的行为给对方造成的**情绪冲击**表达真诚的歉意与悔恨，例如“我知道这可能让你感到自己不受重视、没有被认真倾听，对此我非常难过”。Paul 强调，这是解决 Steven 困惑的关键盲区——哪怕客观行为没有做错，依然可以为对方受到的情感伤害表达悔意。 - **C - Commitment（做出承诺）**：清晰表明未来如何改进，例如“今后在讨论此类事情时，我会更加专注，尽全力不再打断你”。 ### [02:12:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7976s) 提前预警却仍引发争吵：焦虑型依恋与情感账户赤字 Steven 详细复盘了引发争议的具体事件背景。当时他正背负着一个极其重要且 Deadline 临近的高压项目。吸取了以往沟通的教训，Steven 明白“不能假设伴侣能读懂你的心”，于是他在前一天晚上以及当天早晨两次正式与伴侣坐下来沟通，巨细靡遗地交待了项目的重大意义、紧迫日程，甚至提前打好预防针：“接下来这段时间我整个人可能会有点反常、过度专注，请降低对我的预期。”Steven 认为自己已经把知情权和心理预期管理做到了极致。 然而在工作过程中，伴侣接连向他发出了寻求关注与连接的信号（bids for attention）。在前两次互动后，当伴侣发出第三次信号时，极度专注的 Steven 自认为只是抬头微笑了笑，但伴侣却感觉自己彻底被无视了，情绪瞬间螺旋式失控爆发：“我讨厌你无视我！”这让 Steven 感到极其委屈与困惑：自己明明已经提前报备并说明了身体和神经系统所处的高压状态，面对伴侣的需求他实在不知道未来还能做出什么不同的承诺，因此在伴侣治疗咨询中拒绝道歉。咨询师当时甚至倾向于支持 Steven，伴侣最终道了歉。但 Paul 从专业依恋理论的角度，为 Steven 拆解了隐藏在表象之下的深层动力学： - **焦虑型依恋的确认需求**：Steven 的伴侣属于焦虑型依恋（anxious attachment），目前正处于向安全型依恋（secure attachment）疗愈和转变的渐进过程中。在这个阶段，她对情感确认（reassurance）的需求门槛天然比常人更高，伴侣必须给予足够的宽容与体谅。 - **情感账户的存款赤字**：Paul 指出，之所以提前报备依然失效，极大的可能是伴侣在两人的“情感账户”（emotional bank account）中已经出现了存款不足。当安全感储备告急时，她会不由自主地通过频繁发出微小的连接信号（bid）来核实关系的稳定性。 - **高压下的情感错位**：面对处于安全感匮乏状态的焦虑型伴侣，即便男方已经打过预防针，在第三次互动中出现的忽视或冷淡微笑，在对方脆弱的神经系统中依然会被放大为一种被遗弃的危险信号。 ### [02:17:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8224s) 承认搞砸与“回应情感联结请求”的真正含义 主持人坦白了自己此前对待伴侣的一次经历：当时伴侣就在几米开外，他抬起头对她笑了笑，但紧接着站起身走过去拿起了耳机戴上，继续埋头写东西。保罗·布伦森（Paul Brunson）听后直呼“情况比我想象的还要糟糕”，甚至忍不住劝他录制结束后必须立刻去向伴侣道歉。保罗指出，约翰·戈特曼（John Gottman）夫妇在关系研究中反复强调“情感联结请求”（bid for connection）的概念。当伴侣抛出一个情感请求时，给予确认和回应至关重要。 保罗建议，借此机会应该和伴侣深入沟通：在那一瞬间，究竟做什么才能让她感到被安心接纳与认可？或许在戴上耳机前，一个拥抱或在脸颊上亲一下，就能彻底化解那种被冷落的疏离感。每个人需要的安抚与确认方式各不相同，关键在于展开探索与对话。主持人当场承诺今晚见到伴侣就去道歉，并坦言自己对这件事情有了截然不同的新视角。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 伴侣情感请求的回应与修复流程 accDescr: 展示伴侣抛出情感联结请求时，错误疏离与正确确认及事后修复的路径对比。 A["伴侣发出情感联结请求 (Bid)"] --> B{"当事人的应对"} B -->|"冷漠/错误回应 (仅微笑后戴上耳机)"| C["伴侣感到被忽视与疏离"] B -->|"肯定回应 (Affirming the Bid)"| D["给予拥抱或亲吻，解释需专注"] C --> E["事后补救：真诚道歉"] E --> F["深入探讨：了解伴侣所需的确认方式"] D --> G["关系获得安全感与情感联结"] F --> G ``` --- ### [02:18:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8331s) 情感迷思：夫妻吵架到底该不该“带着愤怒入睡”？ 两人随后探讨了一个流传极广的关系信条——“绝不要带着愤怒上床睡觉”。保罗直截了当地指出，这几乎是大众深信不疑的最大误区之一。从小到大，学校里的老师、球队里的橄榄球教练总是在发生争执时要求大家“赶紧道个歉、握手言和”，这种教育灌输了一种表面维持和谐就等于关系健康的虚假认知。真正的健康关系不在于掩盖冲突，而在于有能力觉察、承认并妥善管理矛盾。 保罗强调，刚吵完架时整个人处于极度痛苦与高度应激状态，此时强迫和解只会给出质量最差、最虚伪的回应，根本不可能解决实质问题。一项科学实验将受试者分为两组，向他们展示极其令人痛苦的画面： - 一组人员看完后保持清醒、无法睡觉； - 另一组人员则在看完后被允许睡满 8 个小时。 八小时后的测试显示，没有睡觉的一组对那些画面的痛苦与压力反应依然处于极高水平；而经过 8 小时睡眠调节的组别，情绪系统得到了平复，能够用更理性的视角看待原本令人难受的画面。正如主持人所补充的，睡眠不仅能梳理信息，还能调节激素水平，让人在次日早晨由大脑的逻辑中心而非杏仁核来做决策。保罗总结道：“休息是一种我们极少充分利用的超能力”，因此吵架后大可以带着愤怒去睡觉，等身心冷却、情绪平复后再去解决问题。 --- ### [02:22:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8537s) 出轨是否意味着关系终结？戈特曼研究与数字出轨的界限 谈及“出轨是否意味着关系必定走向终结”，保罗给出了否定的回答。戈特曼夫妇自 1970 年代起彻底革新了伴侣咨询领域，将治疗从原本面临崩溃时的濒死抢救，转变为伴侣在各个阶段均可学习维系关系的工具。戈特曼的研究表明，经历过其修复疗程的出轨夫妻中，有 70% 的人最终获得了比以往更高的关系满意度。其中的核心在于受伤害的一方能否真正宽恕。保罗建议，无论遇到情感出轨还是肉体出轨，只要双方都认为这段关系深刻且值得挽救，第一步都应当寻求专业咨询师的介入。 关于何为“数字出轨”（Digital Infidelity）以及观看色情内容、使用 OnlyFans 是否算作不忠，保罗指出其界限在于“隐瞒与坦诚”： - 如果背着伴侣偷偷浏览 OnlyFans 或色情网站而隐瞒不报，在大多数人看来就属于欺骗与不忠； - 如果坦诚相告并就此展开讨论，性质就截然不同。 主持人援引相关数据指出，约 80% 的男性和约 35% 的女性会独自观看色情内容；其中四分之一的男性承认对伴侣隐瞒了自己的色情消费，而近三分之一的女性对伴侣使用色情内容表示担忧。保罗认为，这揭示了社会对性冲动的羞耻化倾向——人们被传统观念灌输“一旦找到伴侣就不该对任何人产生性吸引”，但情感、生理与性吸引是人类生来具有的本能。唯有将对外界产生吸引力的现象正常化、去羞耻化，并在亲密关系中开展坦诚透明的沟通，彼此才不会因隐瞒而走向破裂。 ### [02:27:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8851s) 赞助商插播：Zoe 肠道健康检测与 PerfectTed 抹茶 节目在此处插播了两段赞助商介绍。首先是针对 Zoe 的健康计划推荐：加入 Zoe 会员后，用户将获得一套居家测试套件以及个性化营养方案，帮助通过更明智的食物选择来支持肠道健康。使用专属折扣码 `steven10` 即可在官网享九折优惠。 紧接着，Steven Bartlett 提到了自己投资超过 100 万英镑的抹茶品牌 Perfect Ted，该品牌也是节目的赞助商。Steven 透露自己已经将日常的主要能量来源全面切换为抹茶。在进行长时间的高强度播客录制时，Perfect Ted 的高品质抹茶粉、便携饮品和咖啡胶囊让他始终保持高度专注。该品牌坚持从日本直采仪式级（ceremonial grade）抹茶，口感顺滑、带有自然甘甜，彻底告别了劣质抹茶那种苦涩和青草腥味。目前在英国的 Tesco、Holland & Barrett，荷兰的 Albert Heijn，以及美国的亚马逊均可购买，使用折扣码 `STEVEN40` 还可在官网享受 40% 的大幅折扣。 ### [02:28:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8935s) 嫉妒心在关系中是否具有建设性？ 话题回到两性相处，Steven 抛出一个尖锐的实际问题：在亲密关系中，表现出公开、露骨的嫉妒（例如不停发信息盘问“宝贝你在哪？你什么时候回家？”）是否曾具有任何建设性意义？Paul C. Brunson 斩钉截铁地表示，这种程度的显性嫉妒是极其危险的（"dangerous"），它本质上折射出提问者内心的极度不安全感。 Paul 进一步区分了关系中“健康的疑虑”与“不健康的疑虑”： - **健康的疑虑（Healthy Doubts）**：如果疑虑围绕着双方关系的成长、未来的发展以及彼此如何变得更好，这类探讨是积极且有益的。 - **不健康的疑虑（Unhealthy Doubts）**：如果疑虑源自内在不安全感所催生的恐惧、猜忌与控制欲，那它对亲密关系将具有毁灭性的侵蚀作用。 ### [02:29:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8976s) 推荐新书《Keep Love》：找到爱之后，真正的功课才刚开始 Steven 对 Paul 的新书《Keep Love: 21 Truths for a Long-Lasting Relationship》（由 Flight Books 出版）给予了极高的赞誉。他感慨许多人曾误以为爱情的终极目标仅仅是“找到那个人”（Find them），然而真正步入长期关系后才会顿悟，相遇只是序曲，维持与经营（Keep love）才是真正考验心力、甚至更为艰难的功课。 社会大众与社交媒体上充斥着海量关于亲密关系的错误认知与毒鸡汤，而 Paul 的这本书正是直面并击碎了这些阻碍人们获得长久幸福的谎言。该书结合了 Paul 多年从业作为红娘与婚姻顾问的宝贵经验、严谨的科学研究以及大量深度访谈，行文通俗易懂且极具实操性，被 Steven 评价为当下想要维系长久关系的读者“唯一必读”的权威指南。 ### [02:30:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=9058s) 传统提问：年少时期发现自我内在力量的时刻 依照《The Diary Of A CEO》的收尾传统，上一位匿名嘉宾给 Paul 留下了一个深度问题：“在 10 到 13 岁左右，你经历过什么事情，让你在没有父母介入的情况下，第一次发现自己拥有把事情搞定、掌控局面的内在力量？” 听到“10 到 13 岁”，Paul 脑海中瞬间浮现出童年时期在纽约长岛校车上的惨痛经历。当时他们家是第一批搬进长岛全意大利裔社区的黑人家庭之一。在校车上，Paul 遭遇了严重的种族排挤与校园霸凌。车上有一个公认的恶霸男生不断挑衅、辱骂他。在孤立无援的情况下，那个男生甚至常常在下车前把 Paul 的头狠狠撞向校车的车窗玻璃，而前方的校车司机对此全程视若无睹，从未出面制止。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 从霸凌遭遇重塑坚韧心态的心智模型 accDescr: 展示 Paul 面对暴力反抗并最终提炼出坚韧内核的心智转变过程 subgraph Incident["童年校车危机"] A["社区与校车上的种族霸凌"] --> B["身体遭遇暴力，成人视而不见"] end subgraph Reaction["自主选择反抗"] B --> C["每天照常坐上校车，绝不退缩"] C --> D["遭遇挑衅坚决回击与反抗"] end subgraph Transformation["阿德勒心理学诠释"] D --> E["自我认知：我是一个极具韧性的人"] E --> F["赋能当下：被击倒后必定重新站起"] end ``` 面对身体与心理的双重摧残，年幼的 Paul 展现出非同寻常的倔强与硬气。他每天依然雷打不动地坐上那辆校车；每当霸凌者打完他准备下车，Paul 依旧会冲着对方竖起中指或出言反击，即便换来的是对方折返再次暴打。Paul 总结道，正是在没有父母庇护的那段至暗经历中，他第一次认识到了自己的韧性（Resilience）——“你可以把我打倒，但我绝不会倒下不起，我一定会再次站起来”。 ### [02:33:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=9213s) 阿德勒心理学与生活隐喻：定义你的不是创伤，而是目标 听到 Paul 的自述，Steven 敏锐地指出，Paul 在回忆这段创伤时展现了强大的心智力量。他联想到著名的心理学著作《被讨厌的勇气》（*The Courage to Be Disliked*，基于阿德勒个体心理学）。阿德勒心理学认为，过去发生的事情并不决定我们的未来，相反，我们是有意识地“选择”如何解释过去的经历，以服务于我们当前的心理目标： - **受害者剧本**：许多人会利用童年的被霸凌经历，在成年后构筑起一种“我总是被挑中受欺负的那个人”、“这就是我的宿命”的受害者心态，以此来合理化当前的软弱与逃避。 - **英雄与赋能剧本**：Paul 却在潜意识中选择了完全相反的归因——将那段遭遇解释为自身坚韧品格的锻造场，并确立了“我是那种无论如何都会重新站起来的人”的自我形象。 对话在对内在力量的赞叹与感谢中走向尾声，双方再次呼吁读者阅读《Keep Love》。在播客的最后，Steven 介绍了旨在帮助人们践行微小习惯改变的“1% Diary”90 天手账，强调 80% 的新年目标在二月破产正是因为缺乏可持续的微小积累，号召听众通过保持自律与社群督促，稳步迈向理想人生。 ## Notable quotes > [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=0s) 对伴侣关系产生怀疑其实是非常健康的 — Paul Brunson > [28:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1714s) 我们与任何人都是高度兼容的（We're all compatible with each other） — John Gottman > [26:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=1614s) 我们必须降低对伴侣的期望值 — Paul Brunson > [58:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=3514s) 婚姻应当是准入极难，退出极易 — Paul Brunson > [01:09:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=4148s) 街上随便抓十个人，九个都会说价值观就是一切。然而事实是，价值观是会随时间改变的！我现在的价值观就跟十年前大相径庭。 — Paul Brunson > [01:42:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6122s) 伴侣的选择往往是关乎生死的重大决定 — Paul Brunson > [01:44:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=6270s) 让自己置身于优秀的人群之中——去靠近那些拥有健康伴侣关系、对自己的感情拥有极高满意度的人。 — Paul Brunson > [01:59:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=7175s) 这种耗费脑力的心智折磨，正是你为了拥有一段优质亲密关系所必须支付的代价。 — Paul Brunson > [02:18:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=8331s) 休息是一种我们极少充分利用的超能力 — Paul Brunson > [02:30:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w&t=9058s) 你可以把我打倒，但我绝不会倒下不起，我一定会再次站起来 — Paul Brunson ## Mentioned Paul C. Brunson, Steven Bartlett, Eli Finkel, Barry Schwartz, Carol Dweck, Dr. Tara Swart, John Gottman, Julie Gottman, James Coyne, Clovis I, Idris Elba, Beyoncé, Married at First Sight UK, Sir Alex Ferguson, Robert Waldinger, Dr. Carol Ryff, David Buss, Zendaya, Tom Holland, Will Ahmed, WHOOP, Dr. Karen Gurney, Davina McCall, John Bowlby, Mary Ainsworth, Dr. Julie Smith, ZOE, PerfectTed, 1% Diary, Find Love: How to navigate modern love and discover the right partner for you, Keep Love: 21 Truths for a Long-Lasting Relationship, The All-or-Nothing Marriage, The Paradox of Choice, Mindset, The Courage to Be Disliked, Tinder, Flight Books ## Video description Paul Brunson is a world-renowned relationship expert, entrepreneur, and host of the number 1 dating and relationships advice show, ‘We Need To Talk’. He is the author of books such as, ‘Find Love: How to navigate modern love and discover the right partner for you’ and ‘Keep Love: 21 Truths for a Long-Lasting Relationship’. 00:00 Intro 02:14 Who Is Paul C Brunson? 04:33 How Has Love Evolved Since You Started This? 07:36 Why Are People Struggling to Find Love? 11:34 The Danger of Comparison 16:14 Racism Within Dating 20:17 Are Arranged Marriages More Successful? 24:15 Your Friends Usually Know If You're With the Right Person 26:54 We Have to Lower Our Expectations of Our Partners 29:47 We Have Countless Options in Today’s Society 33:42 The Difference Between Men & Women When the Other Gets Sick 39:24 Satisfaction in Marriage Is the Most Important Thing 42:55 Should We Be Talking About Our Relationships? 45:54 We Will Be Attracted to Other People, and That’s OK 51:35 Women Are Better at Maintaining Their Connections Than Men 55:04 Should We Be Getting Married? 58:34 Marriages Should Be Harder to Get Into 01:09:08 What Predicts a Successful Marriage? 01:10:09 What Qualities Should I Look for in a Partner? 01:13:38 The Demand Doesn’t Reflect What’s in the Dating Market 01:28:09 Are People With Symmetrical Features More Attractive? 01:29:51 How Self-Esteem Plays a Huge Role in Partner Choices 01:34:17 Advice for People With Low Self-Esteem Who Base Relationships on Superficial Traits 01:36:46 Paul Brunson’s Experience With IVF 01:41:23 Infertility Issues & Relationship Problems 01:44:30 What Can a Man Do to Find and Keep a Partner? 01:46:02 Ads 01:47:01 Relationship Myths 01:52:11 Desire Management 01:56:19 Anxious Attachment Style Going for Avoidant Partners 02:06:32 The Importance of Conflict Resolution 02:10:17 You Should Say Sorry More Often 02:18:51 Should You Go to Bed Angry at Your Partner? 02:22:17 Is Cheating the End of the Relationship? 02:26:53 Ads 02:28:56 Discipline in Relationships 02:30:58 When Did You Discover Your Own Power? The 1% Diary is back - and it won’t be around for long, so act fast! https://bit.ly/1-Diary-YT-ad-reads Follow Paul: Instagram - https://g2ul0.app.link/eurBFxKryQb Twitter - https://g2ul0.app.link/tubp7wMryQb We Need To Talk - https://g2ul0.app.link/lZTgjNOryQb You can pre-order Paul’s book ‘Keep Love: 21 Truths for a Long-Lasting Relationship (The Fundamentals of Love, 2), here: https://amzn.to/4aDyhy4 Get access to exclusive Diary of a CEO content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGq-a57w-aPwyi3pW7XLiHw/join You can purchase the The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards: Second Edition, here: https://g2ul0.app.link/f31dsUttKKb Follow me: https://g2ul0.app.link/gnGqL4IsKKb Sponsors WHOOP - http://JOIN.WHOOP.COM/CEO ZOE - http://joinzoe.com with code STEVEN10 for 10% off PerfectTed - https://www.perfectted.com with code STEVEN40 for 40% off [Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ikIGGi859w)

[0:00] Paul Brunson: 对伴侣关系产生怀疑其实是非常健康的 [28:34] John Gottman: 我们与任何人都是高度兼容的（We're all compatible with each other） [26:54] Paul Brunson: 我们必须降低对伴侣的期望值 [58:34] Paul Brunson: 婚姻应当是准入极难，退出极易 [69:08] Paul Brunson: 街上随便抓十个人，九个都会说价值观就是一切。然而事实是，价值观是会随时间改变的！我现在的价值观就跟十年前大相径庭。 [102:02] Paul Brunson: 伴侣的选择往往是关乎生死的重大决定 [104:30] Paul Brunson: 让自己置身于优秀的人群之中——去靠近那些拥有健康伴侣关系、对自己的感情拥有极高满意度的人。 [119:35] Paul Brunson: 这种耗费脑力的心智折磨，正是你为了拥有一段优质亲密关系所必须支付的代价。 [138:51] Paul Brunson: 休息是一种我们极少充分利用的超能力 [150:58] Paul Brunson: 你可以把我打倒，但我绝不会倒下不起，我一定会再次站起来

[48:00] Paul Brunson: she will definitely leave me for this man [49:40] Paul Brunson: Love, Idris Elba [63:08] Steven Bartlett: I'm getting anxiety as you say it! I'm like, '[Expletive] no, the rest of my life!' [126:32] Steven Bartlett: You can predict the long-term health of a relationship by whether each cut heals to 99% or 101%. [132:45] Paul C. Brunson: You need immediately after this to go apologize... It's worse than I thought! [144:04] Paul C. Brunson: If you're out here on OnlyFans or a full pornographic site and you do not disclose to your partner that this is something that you do, that's infidelity. That's cheating. [148:56] Steven Bartlett: I, like many people listening, once upon a time thought the game was to find them... that's actually when the work begins. [150:58] Steven Bartlett: What experience did you have around age 10 to 13 where you discovered your own power to get things done without your parents being involved? [150:58] Paul C. Brunson: You push me down, I get right back up. Maybe not immediately, but I'm definitely getting back up. And so that was what I learned—and that was without having my parents involved, that was just me.

[0:00] should you keep secrets from your [0:01] partner this is big yes and the data [0:04] shows it will help to increase [0:06] satisfaction and lower conflict in your [0:08] relationship so give me an example of [0:10] something that I shouldn't say to my [0:11] partner here's a juicy one [0:13] so what [0:15] about [0:18] oh even when I say out loud I know py [0:22] Brunson is the world's most influential [0:24] Matchmaker who Blends groundbreaking [0:25] science research and over 15 years of [0:27] expertise to prove that anyone can [0:29] create shakable foundations for [0:31] long-lasting life-changing love I read [0:33] about this study that says men are [0:34] approximately 624 more likely to [0:37] separate if the woman gets terminally [0:39] ill yes what is going on there typically [0:41] it's because there is a low level of [0:43] satisfaction in the relationship from [0:44] not having enough sex for example but [0:46] this is a major issue cuz 80% of [0:49] relationships have a lower level of [0:51] satisfaction today than any point in [0:53] history and part of that is because most [0:54] of what we know about finding and [0:56] keeping love has unfortunately been fed [0:58] to us through lies let's pause there [1:00] because I want to talk about those myths [1:02] okay so does having more sex increase [1:04] the happiness in your relationship no [1:06] what about having doubts in your [1:07] relationship is that bad that couldn't [1:09] be further from the truth really it's [1:11] actually healthy to have doubts about [1:13] your relationship and this is why what [1:15] about if someone cheats is that the end [1:17] of the relationship brilliant question [1:18] and quite honestly and then what are the [1:20] most important qualities I need in a [1:22] partner okay this BW my mind so these [1:24] are the three traits to have a [1:26] phenomenal relationship number one what [1:30] this has always blown my mind a little [1:32] bit 53% of you that listen to the show [1:35] regularly haven't yet subscribed to the [1:37] show so could I ask you for a favor [1:39] before we start if you like the show and [1:40] you like what we do here and you want to [1:41] support us the free simple way that you [1:43] can do just that is by hitting the [1:44] Subscribe button and my commitment to [1:46] you is if you do that then I'll do [1:48] everything in my power me and my team to [1:50] make sure that this show is better for [1:51] you every single week we'll listen to [1:53] your feedback we'll find the guest that [1:55] you want me to speak to and we'll [1:56] continue to do what we do thank you so [1:58] much [2:01] [Music] [2:04] good to see you again it's awesome to be [2:06] here I'm going to ask you a question [2:07] that assumes that I don't know who you [2:09] are okay which is quite hard because I [2:11] know you very well but who are you and [2:15] who are you to write these two books [2:17] that I have in front of me find love and [2:20] keep [2:21] love well who who am I I'm first and [2:24] foremost a husband I'm a father uh I'm a [2:28] son I'm a brother I'm a cousin I'm an [2:30] uncle I'm a mentor I'm a mentee you know [2:33] I'm all of those things and I feel like [2:34] those are the things I am first uh but [2:37] uh I have a longstanding history with [2:41] relationships you know I became a [2:42] Matchmaker my wife and I launched a [2:44] matchmaking agency we became one of the [2:46] largest agencies in the United States [2:49] and what's interesting about being a [2:51] matchmaker is that a lot of people don't [2:52] even realize that is a career like [2:54] there's legit matchmakers there's [2:56] probably I'd say roughly a thousand [2:59] full-time match makers around the world [3:01] and what we do is we literally match [3:04] people together for long-term committed [3:07] relationships but what ends up happening [3:09] if you're successful with that is two [3:12] people enter a long-term committed [3:14] relationship and because they've built [3:16] up a relationship with you they have [3:18] questions about how do they keep that [3:21] relationship how do they keep their love [3:23] so my wife and I then began to [3:25] transition into counselors and coaches [3:28] for married couples or couples who were [3:30] in committed relationships so that's [3:32] where that that started and that went on [3:34] for for over a decade and then on top of [3:36] that I started uh you know I had [3:38] research Global Research at Tinder which [3:40] is a great opportunity for me to look at [3:42] a very large data set and make [3:45] predictions as to what's happening with [3:47] our relationships uh I host television [3:49] shows uh reality TV shows which for good [3:52] or for bad I think help to spark [3:56] conversation about relationships that [3:58] are needed so doing research there you [4:00] know I do podcasts like this you know so [4:03] my life actually is all about [4:06] relationships and that's the reason why [4:08] I wanted to to write this book and [4:09] that's the reason why I feel qualified [4:11] to write this book so how long ago was [4:12] it that you started doing the [4:14] matchmaking oh my gosh so [4:17] 2008 is when I officially began [4:21] matchmaking yeah 17 years it was a long [4:24] time ago the reason I asked that is a [4:26] lot has changed in 17 years yes we've [4:29] been through this Evol ution of dating [4:30] apps and matchmaking services and things [4:33] like Match.com and my question is where [4:36] do you think we find ourselves today as [4:38] it relates to relationships like what is [4:39] the macro picture how are people feeling [4:42] the person that's watching this right [4:44] now that's either single and looking in [4:45] a relationship and maybe struggling can [4:48] you give me an overview a synopsis of [4:51] how they're feeling in their head sure [4:53] sure and why all right this is a great [4:55] one so we're feeling different things [4:58] there's a small percentage of us and [5:00] I'll go to Eli fle research who wrote [5:02] phenomenal books but one is called the [5:04] All or Nothing marriage that I love and [5:07] in it he states that if you look at [5:09] marriages committed relationships that [5:12] 20% of us have higher satisfaction than [5:15] we ever have in the history of [5:18] relationships and you think 20% one is [5:20] that's fairly small and do they really [5:23] have high statisfaction and and I fully [5:25] believe this and the reason why is [5:27] because we have tools you know we have [5:29] people watch podcast read books watch [5:31] television shows we have tools like [5:34] we've never had before more access to [5:37] therapy so 20% very satisfied but 80% [5:42] more [5:43] dissatisfied more upset more confused [5:46] than ever before and I would say that [5:49] those who are not in relationships the [5:52] pool reflects that as well I think [5:54] there's a 20% of singles who are hopeful [6:00] and are developing the tools and [6:02] developing the skills and learning [6:03] active listening and all these things [6:05] and they will and they believe they'll [6:07] enter strong relationships they're [6:09] they're very hopeful I think there's 80% [6:11] out there that [6:12] are perhaps hopeless disgruntled [6:17] confused dismayed uh you know and and [6:20] and I would say that that that's that's [6:22] the landscape today that being said the [6:25] reason for that is because we over the [6:30] years have placed more [6:31] emphasis on one partner versus having a [6:37] village to lean on so so we're we're [6:40] leaning more so we're we we're requiring [6:43] more from our partners so what that [6:46] means is that if we're requiring more if [6:48] we're requiring our partner to be we [6:50] want our partner to be our best friend [6:53] we all want to launch a business and be [6:55] a CEO right so we want our partner to be [6:57] co-ceo or coo we want our partner to be [7:00] a great parent we want our partner to [7:03] come home at night take their clothes [7:05] off and do backflips in the bedroom [7:08] right this is what we want this is what [7:09] we want so we want now more from that [7:13] one person versus 30 years ago 300 years [7:17] ago 3,000 years ago [7:20] 300,000 years ago when when humans [7:22] really began 300,000 years ago so you [7:24] you you look at all this and you say wow [7:27] we want more so therefore for we're [7:30] going to have lower satisfaction so this [7:32] is what I believe the the landscape is [7:34] today and if we start then with people [7:37] that are looking for love people that [7:39] are in search of Love um how are the the [7:42] current tools [7:43] because I see so much online about how [7:47] people are disenfranchised with like [7:49] things like dating apps and they've [7:50] tried like social media and I've got so [7:52] many of my friends who are struggling at [7:53] the moment they're going on 100 dates a [7:55] year and they're unable to find anybody [7:57] and I I Ponder to myself I go you're [7:59] going on 100 dates a year you're almost [8:01] a professional data and you still can't [8:04] find [8:05] somebody it's surely that's not through [8:08] lack of options or like the top of the [8:12] funnel there the sort of exposure is [8:15] fine but there's something further down [8:17] the funnel as it relates to them being [8:19] able to convert somebody that seems to [8:21] be off right right but but also I would [8:24] argue that it could even stem you you [8:27] could go deeper to the root right so you [8:30] think about attachment Styles attachment [8:31] Styles I know you've talked a lot about [8:33] attachment Styles attachment styles are [8:35] kind of the hot thing the hot Trend that [8:37] people are talking about rightfully so I [8:39] like this and if you think about that [8:41] there are primarily three right we know [8:43] we have secure there's anxious and [8:46] there's avoidant there's there are other [8:48] uh variations but in essence these are [8:50] the three now depending on who you talk [8:53] to roughly 50 60% of the population are [8:57] secure that means the balance are going [8:59] to be anxious or avoidant or or or some [9:02] combination so therefore if you are on a [9:06] date and you have an anxious attachment [9:08] style or you have an avoidant attachment [9:10] style and you have someone in front of [9:12] you who is the perfect match for you [9:15] they're they're they're taking off all [9:17] the boxes you could be so anxious or so [9:20] avoidant that you push them away or you [9:23] lay blame to a certain character a [9:25] characteristic or a trait that they have [9:27] that means nothing to the relationship [9:29] and you dismissed them you you know um [9:31] this is going to sound funny but it's [9:32] sad is do you know what we found when we [9:35] were matchmaking what the number one [9:38] reason why people did not allow someone [9:42] someone to get a second date with [9:47] them they had a velcro [9:52] wallet velcro wallet are cool though you [9:55] change no they're not you can't no no [9:58] all right so you know what was it was [10:00] around attraction so one it was you know [10:02] physical attraction but in particular it [10:04] was cuz they they smelled really they [10:08] had bad breath halosis right or there [10:10] was some odor now you can argue that [10:13] scent plays a strong role in our partner [10:17] selection Dr Tara forart talks about [10:19] this quite quite a bit right so there [10:22] there's uh there's a evolutionary [10:24] biology that comes with scent yes I [10:27] agree but to look across from someone [10:30] and say you know what you you like you [10:33] like your breath stinks right and I'm [10:35] not going to give up the the second date [10:37] and as a result of your breath stinks [10:39] you have long uh fingernails you're [10:42] you're you're in a track suit right for [10:44] to to to look at these moments and say [10:47] because of this thing I'm going to [10:50] dismiss you as a partner I think for a [10:52] lot of people sounds logical but then [10:55] for a lot of people sounds ridiculous [10:57] you know what I mean now how you got to [11:00] that point is the challenge if you think [11:02] it's ridiculous how you got to assuming [11:05] that because someone has a tracksuit on [11:07] because they have long fingernails it [11:09] dismisses [11:10] their their um their validity of being a [11:14] great partner that is about you that is [11:17] about you your attachment that is about [11:20] how you've been socialized that is about [11:22] so I would argue that people who are [11:24] going on lots and lots and lots of dates [11:26] and they still can't feel like they can [11:29] find the right partner the first place [11:31] to look at is yourself I do Wonder this [11:35] because I think the more dates you go on [11:36] the more reference points of comparison [11:38] you then have for the next person so [11:40] date 101 if you've been on 100 [11:42] previously you've now got a 100 guys who [11:45] are maybe all good at one thing and date [11:48] 101 is going to be compared to the [11:51] previous 100 on all factors so maybe [11:54] date 49 had great sense of humor date 53 [11:58] was rich date 67 was physically [12:01] beautiful now date 101 is going to be [12:04] compared to all previous dates on all of [12:07] those factors and you're always going to [12:08] find something that is less good at [12:11] least one factor that is less good than [12:13] someone you dat previously and I've [12:14] always wondered are you like [12:16] accidentally expanding your comparison [12:18] set by meeting more and more and more [12:21] and more and more people y so I think [12:24] this reads to uh Barry schwarz's work uh [12:27] with the Paradox of choice mhm where you [12:30] know what Barry Schwartz did with the [12:31] par Paradox of choice which is brilliant [12:33] is that when we're presented with more [12:35] options which is in essence all of these [12:37] dates when we choose one we have a less [12:42] level of satisfaction with the choice [12:45] because we saw that we had a 100 choices [12:48] versus if you have three choices and you [12:51] have to choose between one of those [12:53] three there's going to be a higher level [12:55] of satisfaction as a result a real life [12:58] example is my grandmother so my [13:00] grandmother grew up in I say the bush in [13:03] the bush in Jamaica okay super super [13:06] small town in Jamaica my grandmother [13:09] literally had five or six options as a [13:12] partner now as a result of my [13:15] grandmother having those options when [13:17] she chooses one person there's going to [13:19] be more value more emphasis even more if [13:22] you look at the investment Theory more [13:24] investment placed in one of those [13:26] options versus if she had a hundred [13:30] options and she makes a a choice that [13:34] choice with 100 options becomes more [13:37] disposable right so this is one issue [13:41] that we have in terms of giving [13:43] ourselves so many options the other [13:46] challenge with this is when you watch [13:48] people date they typically date the same [13:51] person you know it's typically it's [13:53] typically the S the same [13:55] characteristics even physically you know [13:57] the the the same [13:59] I argue that some of the greatest value [14:03] that we we can receive in the dating [14:05] Market if you want to look at as dating [14:06] Market is to take ourselves out of [14:10] our uh our our Market if you will and [14:14] put yourself in someplace different [14:16] right I call this the premium effect so [14:19] so so an example of this is I had a [14:21] friend who was a white woman roughly 35 [14:25] years old who lived in Northern London [14:29] and she was like Paul I'm dating all [14:30] these guys you know I can't find the [14:33] right one blah blah blah blah blah blah [14:34] I said 'l look you love art don't you [14:37] she said yeah yeah I love art I said all [14:38] right I want you to take yourself down [14:40] to the black cultural archives in [14:43] Brixton and I want you to go to this you [14:47] know this exhibit that they're having [14:49] and she was like [14:50] brixon said I said yeah brickton is [14:53] brickton is cool I go there all the time [14:55] right I want you to go there now why did [14:57] I ask you to go I asked her to go [15:00] because the moment that she goes [15:03] characteristically she's not going to [15:05] look the same these are mostly going to [15:07] be black men and women perhaps even a [15:10] little bit younger than she is different [15:14] culturally right but yet they have the [15:18] same value in art and their appreciation [15:21] for creativity Etc the moment that she [15:24] goes there what happens some people in [15:26] the room look at her like what what she [15:29] doing here like why is she here those [15:31] are the close-minded people Carol dwick [15:34] talks about this in her book mindset we [15:36] have closed-minded open-minded those are [15:39] the [15:39] closed-minded but how do the open-minded [15:42] react to to my friend they lean in what [15:47] are you doing here and they're curious [15:50] and they engage and all of a sudden she [15:53] opens her network to a whole new group [15:56] of people some of those could be [15:59] romantic interest some of those could be [16:01] platonic they could be friends so when [16:03] we're dating the serial daters [16:05] especially the hundred people is it's [16:07] important for you to step outside of [16:11] your sphere if you will I want to pick [16:15] up on something there you said that [16:17] white woman went into a black space and [16:19] in that black space you wouldd be [16:21] considered a premium because basically [16:23] her characteristics make her rare yes [16:25] right I was just doing some research [16:27] then and it says that studies and [16:28] surveys in indicate that ethnic [16:29] minorities particularly Asian men and [16:31] black women often face unique challenges [16:33] in dating in both the UK and the US and [16:36] these challenges stem from a combination [16:38] of social stereotypes cultural biases [16:40] and the preference expressed on dating [16:42] platforms and the reason I'm asking this [16:44] question is to it's not a lived [16:45] experience I have because I'm not an [16:48] Asian man although sometimes people [16:49] think I am there are a group group of [16:51] people where I don't have a shared lived [16:52] experience who are struggling in ways in [16:55] the western world that like maybe me and [16:57] you don't understand yeah it no it [17:00] definitely definitely you know we we [17:04] have to understand that we exist in a [17:09] highly racist society and a lot of [17:12] people don't like to acknowledge it [17:14] don't like to talk about it like to [17:15] sweep it under the rug but when it comes [17:17] to dating it shows up like in this in [17:21] this statistic that you're talking about [17:23] now now let's think about this if you [17:26] are someone who is not black and you are [17:29] interested in a black I'm sorry you're [17:32] interested in a partner and then you're [17:34] and you've had no experiences with black [17:37] people other than maybe watching some [17:40] black people on on television and your [17:42] parents in your community have said all [17:44] kinds of crazy things about about black [17:46] people and you have all types of [17:48] negative belief structures around black [17:51] people and then and you're a man you're [17:54] say a white man and you're presented [17:55] with a black woman on a dating app are [17:56] you going to swipe on this person no [17:59] you're you're you're not because you [18:00] don't understand how incredible she is [18:03] how smart she is how beautiful she is [18:07] like you don't you have no appreciation [18:09] so the reason why they're Swip they're [18:11] not swiping is their ignorance that's [18:14] that's that's what it is and that's this [18:16] is the reason why one of the most [18:19] important things we can do is widen our [18:23] social groups this is the most important [18:26] thing I mean it positively impacts our [18:28] romantic relationships it positively [18:31] impacts our life is that we need to have [18:33] a diverse set of people that we interact [18:37] with and truly understand how beautiful [18:41] how beautiful people who are different [18:44] than us actually are is there a bit of a [18:46] systemic issue here as well because when [18:47] I was thinking about your grandmother [18:49] growing up in that Village in Jamaica [18:50] that you referenced she [18:53] would spend a lot of time because of the [18:56] nature of how she would meet that person [18:58] in the vill that other man in the [18:59] village getting to know him Beyond his [19:02] surface level appearance yes so if he [19:05] lived across the street she would [19:06] interact with him see his behavior he [19:08] might have long fingernails you know but [19:10] she she gets to learn that he's a kind [19:12] generous person and he's got a good [19:13] sense of humor so she can look past the [19:15] velcro wallet and the long fingernails [19:17] but in the way that we've designed [19:19] dating in the modern world where most [19:21] people now I believe are meeting online [19:23] in some form whether it's social media [19:24] or other we're actually purely judging [19:27] someone in the fingernails we have we [19:29] make a decision in a couple of seconds [19:31] whether this person is comp compatible [19:33] or not and obviously that's not possible [19:36] um and I just see I just feel this real [19:38] strong sense [19:40] of [19:41] um dissatisfaction [19:44] frustration and uh desperation yes from [19:50] people at the moment as it relates to [19:51] finding someone yes and I just think the [19:54] systems that we've built social [19:56] networking the screens have have only [19:59] exacerbated this frustration and [20:02] Desperation my question which is [20:04] somewhat linked to this is really around [20:06] the old ways of doing things like you [20:08] were talking about your grandmother and [20:10] I was really curious about one subject [20:11] in particular and wondered if you you [20:14] had any data on this which is arranged [20:15] marriages yes yes are arranged [20:19] marriages as successful as the [20:23] relationships we form today via social [20:27] media screens etc etc [20:29] because you know back in the day we were [20:30] kind of put together um with somebody [20:33] based on I don't know family or economic [20:35] reasons did those marriages succeed many [20:39] of us don't want to acknowledge how [20:42] successful arranged marriages actually [20:45] have been and continue to be really [20:48] continue to be but we have to look at [20:50] the why right now when people hear this [20:54] they immediately say oh well what about [20:56] all the abuse and the dissatis action [20:58] that happens in these relationships does [21:01] it happen absolutely but it also happens [21:04] in non arranged marriages at [21:07] significantly High rates so why are [21:10] arranged marriages so successful to some [21:13] researchers they have a higher level of [21:16] satisfaction than non- arranged [21:18] marriages and here's the reason why the [21:20] reason why is because you have families [21:24] coming together and negotiating and [21:28] determin in whether or not this [21:30] particular person fits within their [21:32] family structure and what does that mean [21:35] that means that you have literally a [21:37] mother a father a grandmother [21:39] grandfather a brother a sister who come [21:42] together and they discuss and debate the [21:45] characteristics they discuss and debate [21:48] whether or not this person is an [21:49] upstanding you know is this an [21:51] upstanding human being you know is is [21:53] this person open-minded is this person [21:55] going to be resourceful right are they [21:57] resilient they debate these [21:59] characteristics and the reason why it's [22:01] so beneficial is because the person [22:04] getting married is not involved and [22:06] they're not involved because they would [22:07] be entirely biased what happens today is [22:11] incredibly dangerous what happens today [22:13] is when we meet someone we typically do [22:16] not involve any friends and family we [22:19] are already infatuated with the person [22:21] so we're obsessed with them therefore we [22:24] can't even [22:25] determine whether or not they have any [22:27] of the traits that we want we are living [22:30] through our own [22:32] trauma and we're not even selecting them [22:35] typically they are selecting us so we [22:37] end up sliding if you will into a [22:40] relationship that was never right for us [22:43] to begin with whereas in arranged [22:45] marriages you have a true debate [22:49] happening around whether or not someone [22:52] will fit within that with within the [22:55] life of that individual another example [22:58] is why my wife and I in a matchmaking [23:00] agency we pioneered something that had [23:02] never been done at least to our [23:04] knowledge in [23:05] matchmaking like Stephen if you were a [23:07] client of ours you came you would be the [23:09] perfect client at that time right [23:11] because we had many men who were uh [23:15] incredibly successful professionally and [23:18] felt as if okay what I'm missing is I'm [23:22] missing love I'm missing partnership so [23:25] if you came to us as a client instead of [23:28] me saying all right Stephen tell me what [23:29] you want right and you give me this long [23:31] list I know you'd give me a list of like [23:33] 150 things that you [23:36] want right instead I would say no no no [23:40] you go sit over there I'm not I'm not [23:42] even going to talk to you instead let me [23:45] talk to your [23:46] brother let me talk to your [23:49] co-workers let me talk to your exes yes [23:52] let me talk to your exes let me get a [23:54] 360 perspective of who you you are from [24:00] the people who you are closest to and I [24:02] would then build out a profile based on [24:05] the consensus of what they're telling me [24:09] this is so [24:10] true I've got a one of my best friends [24:12] in the world has struggled with a few of [24:14] my best friends but there's two I'm [24:15] thinking about in particular but one I [24:16] really want to focus on he's struggled [24:19] in relationships for the last I'd say 15 [24:21] years and every single time he gets in a [24:23] relationship as his friend I get that's [24:25] not that's not it that's not it and [24:28] every single time he gets with somebody [24:29] else I go that's not it either and I [24:32] after this last relationship failed I [24:34] sat with him and I I'm trying not to [24:36] like you know intervene too much but I [24:38] said bro I will know I feel like the [24:40] same way that he knew when I'd found the [24:42] right one and he would lit if I was to [24:44] dump my current partner he would [24:46] literally reverse the decision yes he [24:48] would write an executive order to [24:50] reverse the decision because he knows [24:51] that person is exactly what was right [24:53] for me in the same way I could literally [24:56] draw a picture I could tell you the [24:57] occup ATI the age of the the right [25:00] person for him based on knowing him and [25:02] him being my best friend for 10 15 years [25:06] but for some reason he goes for [25:08] everything opposite than that right and [25:11] I've always wondered this I've always [25:12] wondered like should we be picking our [25:16] friends partners for them no I if if as [25:20] a society we went back to our nearest [25:23] and dearest family and Social Circle [25:26] yeah and I want to emphasize the people [25:27] who we TR truly love cuz like not all [25:29] family's family yeah so if we had that [25:32] Circle making the decision for us we [25:36] would have much higher satisfaction [25:38] rates in marriages without question or [25:41] much higher satisfaction rates in in [25:43] Partnerships it's because of precisely [25:45] what you [25:46] said reading a study here it says a 2012 [25:49] study published in the Journal of [25:50] comparative family studies found that [25:52] couples and arranged marriages in [25:54] collectivist cultures reported similar [25:56] or higher levels of satisfaction over [25:58] the long term compared to those in love [26:01] marriages yes yes go back Eli 80% of our [26:06] marriages have a lower level of [26:09] satisfaction today than than than any [26:12] point in in history and and you think [26:13] about even what we were uh you think [26:16] about the emphasis that we place on the [26:18] individual this this is something that [26:20] needs to really be emphasized because [26:24] the the more that we require our partner [26:28] to deliver everything to us the higher [26:32] their bar becomes the expectation and [26:35] the moment that they're not meeting that [26:37] expectation we're we're not satisfied [26:40] now they could be delivering on nine out [26:42] of 10 things but because our expectation [26:44] is 10 we have low satisfaction because [26:47] ultimately that's what satisfaction is [26:49] is satisfaction is really based on our [26:51] expectation so what do we do about that [26:53] because a lot of people will be able to [26:54] relate to this idea that their partner [26:57] is multiple things in their life or that [26:59] they feel like they are expected to be [27:02] their Partners therapist maybe [27:05] financier um best [27:08] friend uh Sports uh buddy on the weekend [27:12] to play paddle with um I don't know life [27:16] coach Etc some people will feel that [27:18] pressure while they're also trying to [27:19] run their own life what' you do about it [27:21] because you can't come home and say babe [27:22] listen it's over I'm only going to be [27:24] your boyfriend from now [27:26] on a lot of people people won't like [27:28] this but we have to lower our [27:31] expectation of our partners we really do [27:34] and and and what I mean by this is first [27:37] we have to be begin with determining [27:40] what do we want out of our partnership [27:44] because if we go back and we don't have [27:46] to go back thousands of years we can [27:48] literally go back to my [27:50] grandparents the decisions were not am I [27:53] going to get all 10 things from my [27:55] partner it is three of the the 10 things [27:58] and I'll be satisfied with the three of [28:00] the 10 things why because I have a full [28:03] community that I can go to of friends [28:06] co-workers colleagues people who you [28:08] know in my running club that I can go to [28:10] for uh for for other facets of my life [28:15] confidence intellectual stimulation [28:17] whatever it may be so that's where it [28:20] begins what what do you want from your [28:22] marriage then the next step becomes all [28:25] right are you then prepared to do the [28:27] work required to sustain that [28:30] relationship you know uh the the Gans [28:34] who I know you you've had on the podcast [28:36] and are really the foremost experts in [28:38] the world around couples therapy right [28:41] John and Julie gotman they said [28:43] something to me that was profound when I [28:45] was talking to them and that is we're [28:47] all compatible with each [28:50] other and and let that sit in for a [28:52] second it's like okay what does that [28:54] really mean what it means is [28:56] that if I were to drop you with another [29:00] human being on a desolate Island and say [29:04] that's it it's just the two of you for [29:06] the rest of your lives you were going to [29:08] form a very strong emotional bond and [29:11] chances are you're going to form a very [29:13] strong physical and sexual Bond right [29:16] why because you are required there's no [29:18] other outlet but to make it work with [29:22] them look at [29:25] today we don't feel like we have to make [29:27] it work there's countless options we can [29:30] just leave right and and so the this [29:34] notion that we are compatible with [29:37] everyone I think is profound because [29:39] what it means is that you can get [29:41] through that you can you can increase [29:43] your satisfaction by putting in the [29:46] work I um I can totally relate to that I [29:49] remember working in a call center once [29:50] upon a time and I was broke and lonely [29:54] and as I worked in this call center it [29:56] was late rooms call center in cheet Mill [29:57] in man Chester um I basically like fell [30:00] in love with the girl sat next to me in [30:02] the call center now listen um I've seen [30:05] her since I think 10 10 years later she [30:07] came to one of my meetting greets which [30:08] is she's called Rosie I literally she's [30:11] probably the first time she realized I [30:12] fell in love with her but in the context [30:14] of there not being many options and me [30:17] being a guy that basically had no other [30:19] options I wasn't going out to my clubs I [30:20] couldn't afford it I just fell in love [30:22] with someone who was in close proximity [30:24] and I just was really really into her [30:26] and it shocked me because [30:28] objectively speaking had I written down [30:30] what my type was at that period of my [30:33] life I wouldn't have written that but [30:34] just because we were held in close [30:36] proximity for long enough I found the [30:39] the the attraction yes it the attraction [30:41] came to be unfortunately that's not the [30:43] world we live in and in fact one of my [30:46] friends who's struggling the most in [30:47] relationships her job is literally to [30:50] meet people that's like the the base [30:52] premise of her job and she can't find [30:54] anyone MH and I think part of what we're [30:56] what what I'm seeing there is we've [30:58] described with having too many options [30:59] but what does someone do about that do [31:02] they like what's the what's the [31:04] actionable thing to do if you live in [31:06] the modern world and you're struggling [31:08] to find somebody even though you realize [31:10] that if you were held in a room with [31:12] five total strangers you'd probably fall [31:13] in love with one of them yeah it's it's [31:16] tough right but it always begins with [31:18] self and self-awareness and I would [31:21] literally start at well what is my [31:23] attachment that will inform an [31:26] incredible amount if she goes back and [31:28] does the work and realizes that she is [31:31] avoidant that will begin to fill in the [31:34] gaps as to why maybe she's been [31:36] emotionally distant relationships why [31:38] she feels like she doesn't need anyone [31:41] right why people need to jump an even [31:43] higher bar to be in a relationship with [31:45] her start with your attachment and [31:48] realize that if you are avoidant or you [31:50] are anxious you can earn a secure [31:54] attachment and there's work that's [31:56] involved but you can do that and by by [31:58] the way you can do that without a [31:59] therapist it's always advisable to go [32:01] with therapist but let's face it the [32:03] wait times for therapists the uh the [32:06] cost for a therapist they're they're not [32:09] and also the number of therapists on a [32:12] per capita basis is is decreasing so [32:15] they're not as accessible as often it we [32:18] we make it at the mount to see so that's [32:21] one is you want to start with self [32:23] that's one secondly is really get [32:26] grounded on the type of relationship [32:29] that you want and the reason why this is [32:31] important is because therefore you can [32:34] make it clear what your boundaries are [32:36] when you begin to engage with people [32:39] because I always say that if you don't [32:42] assert your boundaries you can take [32:45] well-intentioned people and turn them [32:47] into bullies just as a result of not [32:49] asserting your boundaries so in order to [32:51] know your in order to assert your [32:53] boundaries you have to know your [32:54] boundaries so that's the second piece is [32:57] beginning to know okay what do I want [32:59] what do I want for example there are [33:02] hundreds of variations of relationships [33:04] that you could have today my grandmother [33:07] right there was one it was committed [33:10] relationship committed marriage until [33:13] you die that was it now you don't have [33:16] to be married you could live apart but [33:19] be together see each other on weekends [33:21] you can decide I want we we don't want [33:24] to have children you can decide like [33:26] there are hundreds of variations [33:28] be very clear on what your what you want [33:32] and when I say assert your boundaries is [33:34] assert what you are interested in right [33:37] from the [33:38] beginning the the these three steps are [33:40] incredibly important I want to talk [33:43] about the different variations of [33:44] relationships and a lot of the sort of [33:45] myths that keep us held [33:48] in the the sort of modern idea of what a [33:51] relationship looks like okay but you [33:52] said something there which I which [33:55] sparked a thought that I had read in [33:56] your book um [33:58] when you said till death do us part yes [34:00] I read about this study that says that [34:03] cancer research on heterosexual couples [34:06] found that if a man becomes terminally [34:08] ill and his wife becomes the caretaker [34:11] there was a 2.9% separation rate if the [34:14] woman is terminally ill and their male [34:16] partner becomes the caretaker they leave [34:19] at a 21% rate which basically means that [34:22] men are approximately 64% more likely to [34:26] separate from a woman woman if the woman [34:28] gets sick yes and that was on page 48 of [34:32] your new book keep love yes what the [34:34] [ __ ] is going on there that is alarming [34:37] shocking and it was so alarming and [34:39] shocking I had to include the study in [34:41] the book for for me and and I wrote this [34:44] in the in the chapter around love is [34:47] conditional and we have to understand [34:49] that the myth that presents itself is [34:51] that love is unconditional it is you [34:54] know if you find the right person [34:56] there's no condition [34:58] that could be true with your children [35:00] right your child could go do something [35:03] heinous and I believe there could or [35:07] would still be love for them but that's [35:10] not the case with our partners and for [35:13] us to be aware that there are conditions [35:16] when we go into these relationships [35:18] that's the most important so it's almost [35:20] a warning sign in particular to women in [35:23] that chapter to say there there are [35:25] conditions and unfortunately when people [35:27] have gone through and interviewed these [35:29] men who have left the the the women at [35:32] at at on on their deathbed and even the [35:35] women because it's 2.9% of women leave [35:37] men even the women who've left the men [35:40] what they will say is that they're no [35:42] longer getting fill in the blank they're [35:45] no longer getting the emotional intimacy [35:47] they're no longer getting the physical [35:49] intimacy they're no longer getting the [35:52] you know you fill in the blank and as a [35:53] result of no longer getting this thing [35:56] and the thing is the [35:58] condition they're out so why men though [36:01] 600 they're over 600% more likely to [36:04] leave a termin Le old partner than women [36:06] are yeah you know there's a [36:09] disproportionate amount of the [36:11] relationship that's placed on the [36:14] physical side of the relationship right [36:18] sex sex yeah you're like Paul say [36:23] actually what it is well it's it's not [36:24] all about sex right it's not all about [36:27] sex but what it typically means is that [36:30] there is a low level of satisfaction in [36:33] the relationship and as a result of [36:36] there being a lowlevel of satisfaction [36:37] and the low level of satisfaction could [36:39] come [36:40] from not having enough sex or not having [36:42] the sex that they like it could have [36:44] could be from there's a you know there's [36:46] no respect they don't feel like there's [36:48] equity in the relationship whatever it [36:49] may be but because there's already a low [36:52] level of satisfaction when they go into [36:56] a place where the the the the partner is [36:58] terminally ill they're more ready to [37:01] leave right this is normally what you [37:03] see what you see happen when you see um [37:07] a partner leave another partner where [37:09] you see infidelity happening is you see [37:12] that there was already a low level of [37:15] satisfaction the level of satisfaction [37:18] in the relationships not only dictate [37:20] the survivability of the relationship it [37:24] dictates the survivability of us there [37:27] was a study done James coin this this [37:30] one blew my [37:32] mind he pulled 200 patients who had [37:37] congenital heart disease right so not [37:42] terminally ill but as close as you get [37:44] to terminally ill and he was able to [37:47] look at the 200 and he broke down the [37:49] group based on those who have a high [37:52] level of satisfaction and those who have [37:54] a low level of satisfaction in their [37:56] relationship two years later the couples [37:59] who had a high level of satisfaction the [38:02] person in that partnership who had [38:03] congenital heart failure you know what [38:06] they died about 11% of the time so 11% [38:09] they died but those who had a low level [38:13] of satisfaction two years later [38:16] 45% of them had [38:19] died think about that little greater [38:22] than three times the likelihood of death [38:25] because of the low level of satisfaction [38:29] in the relationship so the satisfaction [38:32] in the relationship is the key and this [38:34] is part of what I've been trying to [38:36] drive in this book and a lot of my [38:37] messaging is that we place too much [38:41] value on [38:43] longevity it's ridiculous when I sit [38:46] down for interviews typically the top [38:49] see and thank you for not asking me this [38:51] the typically the first two or third [38:54] question is Paul how so you've been [38:57] married for how long how long have you [39:00] been married how long have you been [39:01] married and the idea is that because [39:04] I've been married for 23 plus years that [39:09] I'm successful in my marriage it's [39:11] ridiculous it's ridiculous the question [39:13] should be how satisfied are you in your [39:16] marriage or in your partnership and so [39:18] we can't we have to stop putting [39:20] emphasis U on on the longevity and [39:22] really focus on the satisfaction how [39:24] satisfied are you in your marriage [39:26] Stephen [39:27] this [39:28] [Music] [39:29] [Laughter] [39:33] is I hate you fing this question no no I [39:37] am so the reason why I your wife and we [39:40] got her answer before so we'll just [39:42] compare yeah you tell me what she said [39:45] you sure you want to know on on [39:48] air what the reason why I hate trying to [39:52] answer a question like this is because [39:54] so many people are say oh I don't [39:56] believe I don't believe what this guy [39:57] say [39:57] truly hand on my heart word to my [40:01] children I have the highest level of [40:05] satisfaction with Jill you know with my [40:07] best friend today than ever ever ever [40:11] ever ever ever and I think the reason [40:13] for this is because of the enormous [40:17] amount of work that we put in you know a [40:19] lot of people don't realize is that when [40:22] I read a [40:24] stat Jill is typically right next to me [40:27] last night literally last night we're in [40:30] the bed and we are talking about the [40:34] history of marriage and we're debating [40:37] Clovis the first of Franks and how he [40:40] made an impact in relationships we're [40:43] always discussing these topics and as a [40:47] result of having the conversation around [40:49] these topics it helps us to be open it [40:52] helps us to dialogue it helps us to [40:54] debate it helps us to have doubt it [40:56] helps to have trust and autonomy and [41:00] therefore it helps us to have this [41:01] strong level of communication and [41:04] emotional intimacy that then feeds into [41:07] all aspects of our life into our sex [41:10] life right into our ability to parent [41:14] our our our children into our work right [41:18] all of this feeds from having the strong [41:21] connection so the satisfaction is Sky [41:24] High and this is a topic that it was [41:28] funny because I was like I know Stephen [41:30] does the research so he could have asked [41:31] Jill I am very confident Jill would say [41:35] the same the reason why is because we [41:37] always check in with each with each [41:39] other we're always check how are you [41:41] feeling right now right are do we feel [41:44] like we're going in the right direction [41:46] you know when I think about do you have [41:48] strong satisfaction in your relationship [41:50] the questions that always come to mind [41:51] is do you feel safe with your partner do [41:55] you feel safe do you feel like you can [41:57] express your true vulnerability to them [42:00] right that's one secondly is do you feel [42:02] respected you know with John gottman's [42:05] research number one you know he saw he [42:07] could predict divorce at 99 plus perc or [42:10] 90 plus perc because of contempt or [42:13] disrespect in the relationship so do you [42:15] feel like you have [42:16] respect another one are you optimistic [42:21] about where the relationship is going [42:23] which suggests how much effort and work [42:26] your part is placing in the relationship [42:29] so many of us are hopeless about the the [42:32] future is because we know our our our [42:33] partner's not doing anything to to to to [42:35] further the relationship so are you [42:38] nurturing the [42:39] relationship many of us are quick to [42:42] focus on self-love now and nurturing [42:46] ourselves but the question is how much [42:49] nurture are you giving to the [42:51] relationship because that's a separate [42:53] entity you talking there about sort of [42:56] the pillow talk with Jill about [42:57] relationships and constantly it being [43:00] part of the conversation in your [43:01] household one of the things that I was I [43:03] was pondering as you said that is should [43:06] we spend more time talking about the [43:08] relationship with our partner because if [43:10] I think about the relationship I'm in [43:12] now we spend a lot of time talking about [43:13] the relationship um whereas in previous [43:16] relationships it was kind of the [43:17] elephant in the room all the time so we [43:19] never really had an opportunity or a [43:21] forum [43:22] to ask those questions right about unmet [43:25] needs or are you happy etc etc and I [43:28] just think that probably the missing [43:30] piece for a lot of people in [43:31] relationships is they just don't have a [43:33] a space in their week where they sit and [43:36] talk about the relationship itself yes [43:39] so so yes should we be speaking more [43:42] absolutely would it save many [43:45] Partnerships absolutely would it [43:47] increase the satisfaction absolutely do [43:50] we not have enough time I would say this [43:53] becomes our copout like we're so busy [43:56] with life think about this I'm so busy [43:59] with life that I can't give the person [44:02] that I plan to spend the rest of my life [44:04] with time right we have to [44:08] prioritize our relationship with our [44:12] partner we have to prioritize this we [44:14] have to figure out when we can build in [44:16] time to talk and we have to actually [44:20] talk about the real things you know I'm [44:23] willing to bet that most men don't even [44:26] realize especially in in in in [44:28] heterosexual relationships [44:29] heteronormative uh relationships most [44:31] men don't even realize that their [44:33] partner doesn't even orgasm when they [44:36] have sex like you look at the orgasm Gap [44:39] and you say oh my God you have men [44:42] orgasming at 95% and women at roughly [44:46] 65% maybe a little bit higher in in [44:48] these committed relationships that means [44:50] that there's a significant percentage [44:52] that never orgasm I bet you their [44:54] partner has no idea no noide idea why [44:59] because there's there hasn't been a [45:00] conversation around it now the issue is [45:02] a two-way street it's not only the man's [45:04] issue that he needs to be aware and have [45:07] the conversation but she also needs to [45:09] be able to tell him but you know why she [45:11] probably doesn't tell him [45:13] because she doesn't want herur his [45:16] feelings she has not she's not been [45:19] having an orgasm for the last 10 years [45:21] so she feels like if she brings it up [45:23] now it's going to be detrimental to the [45:24] relationship so she's trying to protect [45:26] him right right and or she's embarrassed [45:30] or whatever it may be he is completely [45:33] oblivious and unaware and they never [45:35] talk about their sex life a matter of [45:36] fact their sex life is a script which is [45:38] typically most people's sex life it's [45:40] just a script it's two or three moves [45:43] that are done man orgasms women woman [45:46] doesn't that's [45:47] it think of how powerful it would be if [45:51] they could just simply have dialogue and [45:53] discussion it's hard to start that [45:55] behavior though I imagine in your Rel [45:56] reltionship with Jill you guys are [45:58] pretty Advanced right so if you're level [46:02] one what's level one in karate is it [46:03] like a white belt oh yeah white belt if [46:05] you're like a white belt in this stuff [46:07] where there been 10 years you and your [46:08] partner just really don't talk about [46:09] these things it's kind of always been [46:10] the elephant in the room loads of words [46:13] have been unsa what would you suggest as [46:15] like a good starting point to to get the [46:17] ball rolling in this Direction all right [46:19] I like this so baby steps so in the book [46:22] I talk about how we have to normalize [46:26] the fact that we will be attracted to [46:29] people other than our partner no one [46:31] wants to talk about that no one wants to [46:34] talk about you know it's just my partner [46:36] that's it I'm not looking at anyone else [46:38] right are you attracted to other people [46:39] oh my Sten come on man are [46:46] you AB but but absolutely absolutely and [46:51] not only that and there are different [46:53] forms of Attraction you know there's [46:54] physical there's there's sexual [46:56] attraction there's there's emotional [46:57] attraction but to your question of what [47:01] do you do if you're level one in your [47:03] relationship is you start with these [47:05] baby steps so Jill and myself we had to [47:08] start around this topic of Attraction [47:11] because I had a very hard [47:14] time just thinking about my wife being [47:18] attracted to someone else I couldn't [47:20] fathom it the jealousy the anxiety the [47:23] anxiousness I have an anxious attachment [47:25] style so so it just it was just fear [47:29] right and there there many different [47:32] things that that that that you can do [47:34] but I'll give two one is that you just [47:36] have to normalize that these behaviors [47:39] are a part of our Human Experience well [47:42] all have physical attraction some of us [47:46] will have sexual attraction some of us [47:48] will have emotional attraction to people [47:50] who are not our partners if anyone [47:53] denies it they are lying okay this is [47:56] one we have to normalize this we [47:59] normalize it then we begin having [48:00] conversations around it so what my wife [48:02] and I used to or did around this and she [48:05] uh will hate me for saying this but I [48:07] wrote I wrote this in the book so it's [48:09] it's it's cool is um we started talking [48:12] about celebrities easy low-level way [48:16] people who are arm length distance who [48:18] do you find attracted blah blah blah I [48:20] saw that my wife as does I think [48:24] 99.999% of uh women and Men loves Idris [48:29] Elba she's like Idris is is is is it to [48:32] the point where I was like will you [48:34] leave me for I think she will leave me [48:35] for it's like she will definitely leave [48:38] me for this man but we begin having [48:41] conversations around it it becomes a bit [48:44] of a joke right it is embedded in our in [48:49] in the normalization of it and then I [48:53] begin to do what I call taking my [48:56] thought to court take your thoughts to [48:59] court right whereas I would identify [49:01] okay what is the issue what's the [49:06] emotion it's actually fear if Jill's [49:09] talking about someone else she was with [49:11] it was it was fear but then I and then [49:13] then I then I draw on that fear what am [49:15] I in fear of I'm in fear of her of her [49:18] leaving me she's just going to leave me [49:20] right but then take that thought to [49:22] court what are the facts that can that [49:26] that what are the facts that I have to [49:29] support or discredit those feelings well [49:33] I've been with Jill for 20 plus years [49:35] right she has never we have a high level [49:37] of satisfaction it's normal to have [49:40] attraction right so you take your [49:41] thoughts to court and then you could [49:43] begin to recalibrate your perspective on [49:47] the thing so it gets to the point where [49:49] do you know that every [49:52] anniversary Jill gets the biggest [49:55] bouquet of flowers [49:57] from Idris [49:59] Elba I write love Idis Elba so I I'm I'm [50:05] writing so I've now it's now it's moved [50:07] to a point where I couldn't even stand [50:10] this idea to now it's it's so normalized [50:14] I'm I'm it's jokes about it so so it's [50:18] very important for us to normalize have [50:20] these conversations take our thoughts to [50:22] court and if we are and we have to [50:25] realize this and I wrote about this in [50:27] the book is that it is also [50:30] healthy to have doubts about your [50:33] relationship we're told that if you're [50:35] in the greatest [50:36] relationship if you found your soulmate [50:39] you should never have doubts myth myth [50:42] right it's healthy to have doubts but [50:45] there are healthy doubts and there's [50:47] unhealthy doubts if it is a doubt that [50:51] is [50:52] about uh the growth of your [50:54] relationship that's healthy to express [50:57] that if it is a doubt that is predicated [51:00] in your own fear or your anxieties your [51:04] traumas that's that's that's unhealthy [51:07] so to know that informs you know how how [51:12] how how how Jill and I have have tackled [51:14] that idea of let's normalize a [51:17] conversation is this a healthy doubt it [51:19] is let's build this into to to our [51:22] relationship so Jill so uh I know jills [51:28] adors ID Ela and she knows I would leave [51:30] her for Beyonce yeah I mean that's [51:34] fair yeah I I just I can just imagine [51:36] that I've got a certain type of listener [51:38] who is [51:40] more how would you word [51:42] it advanced in terms of the like belt [51:46] you know when I talked about white belts [51:48] and black belts more advanced in their [51:51] curiosity their um Intrigue their [51:55] willingness to like develop and evolve [51:57] in the relationship I would bet and this [51:59] is stereotyping I understand that it's [52:01] typically women more than men that are [52:03] like more open-minded to like learn to [52:05] grow to deepen the bond I think it's t [52:07] typically women more than men I would [52:09] Hazard a guess that it's more women [52:11] buying your books than men yes and and [52:14] I'd Hazard a guess that when I make [52:15] conversations about love and [52:16] relationship it's typically not always [52:18] because I can kind of see the numbers [52:19] but typically more women that are trying [52:22] to learn to deepen their relationships [52:24] so I imagine there's a certain person in [52:26] my audience that sat there thinking I [52:28] want to do this I want to have these [52:29] conversations with my partner I want to [52:31] take down some of these walles and start [52:32] talking about the lack of orgasms I've [52:34] had in the last couple of years I want [52:35] to talk about x y and Zed but I know if [52:38] I bring this conversation up to Dave [52:40] Dave's gonna like think I'm weird he's [52:43] gonna like roll his eyes and like put [52:45] the football back on and um and I feel a [52:48] sense of dissatisfaction in this [52:49] relationship but because we just don't [52:50] have a bridge of communication I feel [52:53] like I'm faced with a choice now do I [52:54] just leave this guy or do I just stick [52:58] tolerate it and put up with this and [53:01] that like first step to Bridging the Gap [53:03] what is it do I turn the football off [53:04] and scream at him do I do I send him the [53:07] link to this podcast I think that's [53:08] probably the best option I think it's [53:09] just keep sharing the podcast I think I [53:11] think sharing the podcast with everyone [53:13] you know I think is probably the I'm [53:15] joking no no no no no no [53:19] no laughing I was like I was with you I [53:22] was like this is this is it but I [53:25] thought it's really pushing this yeah [53:27] yeah he said it five times the [53:31] link [53:33] truly this is the first step uh so say [53:36] it's uh it's uh it's lah and Dave yeah [53:38] okay L's listening to us right now and [53:41] she wants to deepen her emotional [53:44] connection with her partner Dave what [53:46] does she do she sends Dave a link to [53:51] this podcast and she says let's listen [53:54] to this together let's have a date night [53:57] let's listen to this together and let's [53:58] just talk about what's happening you [54:01] know what I've noticed with um with one [54:03] of the shows that I co-host mared at [54:04] First Sight UK what I'm so proud about [54:07] is I'm stopped all the time by men and [54:12] they'll say Paul I watch your show with [54:16] my partner and our kids watch it as well [54:21] and we debate what you're saying and [54:23] sometimes we disagree with you but [54:25] sometimes we agree with you and I think [54:27] this is what we need because just [54:31] talking about it and having the [54:33] conversation around it helps to [54:36] contribute to awareness which puts you [54:38] on the path to developing skills which [54:42] then allows you to begin to heal and [54:46] ultimately that's what therapy is [54:47] therapy is healing and so having the [54:51] dialogue based on this podcast based on [54:53] a book based on a television show is [54:56] truly not just a first step that's a a [54:59] significant step towards your black belt [55:02] I am thinking about the history of [55:04] relationships I often wonder how many of [55:06] the rules of relationships that we've [55:08] been handed by Society are now invalid [55:11] or maybe we're never valid so you know [55:13] we have these sort of constructs of like [55:15] marriage and monogamy and um even like [55:18] heterosexuality all these things that [55:20] have been passed to us through religion [55:22] and through history I was looking at [55:24] some stats about marriage and it says [55:25] that in 2019 marriage rates for opposite [55:28] sex couples fell to their lowest on [55:30] record since [55:31] 1862 that's in the UK and in the US [55:34] marriage rates have been declining since [55:36] the early [55:38] 1970s I I'm not married but I spend a [55:42] lot of time thinking about whether I [55:43] should be or not I actually had a [55:45] conversation recently with my partner [55:46] where I said do you want to get married [55:47] and it was abundantly clear that she [55:49] does want to get married but then I [55:51] asked why and really it seems like it [55:54] was really just more for the wedding [55:56] than [55:57] then for some kind of legal contract [56:00] that we sign with the government so I'm [56:02] I'm I'm I'm really wondering based on [56:04] everything we know about history and the [56:06] tradeoffs of marriage should I be [56:10] getting married yes because your partner [56:12] wants to is that reing enough but but [56:16] here all right so um I think the [56:19] institution of [56:22] marriage what you're going to see this [56:24] is my my my prediction is is that [56:27] because nuclear families what do you [56:30] mean by nuclear family so having um to [56:33] well it's interesting there's there's [56:34] different perspectives now on nuclear [56:36] family but I look at it as you have two [56:39] partners and children and that creates [56:43] the nuclear [56:44] family that becomes an economic unit [56:48] which drives a [56:50] society and as that has disappeared [56:54] there's been less of a base [56:57] to drive Society per many researchers so [57:01] as a result what I believe is going to [57:02] happen as we see right now in Singapore [57:05] as we see right now in China as we see [57:07] right now in Japan you're going to see [57:10] government heavily involved in [57:14] incentivizing marriage and marriage is [57:16] already incentivized right now in terms [57:18] of uh you know tax benefits uh being [57:22] able to um uh you know leave assets [57:26] to your partner leave assets to family [57:28] members so as a result of the decrease [57:32] of marriage and decrease of of nuclear [57:34] families you will see government step up [57:36] even more to incentivize so you're going [57:40] to see all types of benefits being [57:42] thrown at people to to to to get married [57:46] you know especially as you not only see [57:49] marriage rates decline but as you also [57:51] see birth rates declining as they as [57:53] they are now your question around what [57:57] what what should you do is that um this [58:00] is a question around [58:03] values and this is a question that I [58:06] believe is very important to have early [58:08] on now I was saying you know when you [58:10] meet someone you should lay out exactly [58:13] what you want this is a very important [58:15] question to have early early on now in [58:18] terms of where you where you are with [58:20] your partner I would say that if she is [58:24] for if she is Pro Pro [58:27] this and you were indifferent sounds [58:30] like it feels like you're indifferent [58:32] not anti but indifferent yeah I think [58:34] I'm I'm somewhat agnostic um to it [58:39] however I can call out a bunch of [58:41] downsides to getting married really like [58:44] uh well again I don't know because I'm [58:45] not married so all the married people [58:47] are like screaming at me right now I [58:48] know this because they DM me they've [58:49] been dming me for many many years since [58:51] I started the D Co because in some of [58:52] those early episodes I was really like [58:54] not I was really quite against it but um [58:57] over time I've kind of developed my [58:58] thinking here I just wonder I can't [59:01] understand the first principles as to [59:02] why having a like government or [59:06] religious contract with somebody is [59:08] going to increase the probability of [59:10] success in the union of Love um there's [59:14] obviously the issue with the prenup [59:16] situation I actually don't have this [59:17] concern with my my partner so I think [59:19] she's um I think you've met her you [59:21] you've met her yeah yeah uh yeah from a [59:23] distance yes from a distance yeah I I [59:25] don't a concern that she's going to try [59:27] and bankrupt me or that I might try and [59:29] bankrupt her um so that's not really a [59:31] concern um the whole charade of like [59:35] doing a massive wedding I think is a [59:36] little bit weird I think why can't we [59:38] just have lots of events over the next [59:41] 50 years where we bring our friends and [59:42] family versus like one I've also watched [59:45] a couple of my friends at the moment who [59:46] are getting married the the like two [59:48] years of pain in heart a can like [59:52] canceling date nights so that they can [59:53] afford this one wedding day yeah feels [59:55] like highly logical to me I've got one [59:57] particular friend who is having to [59:59] cancel so much of their like everyday [60:00] joy to save up for this one big event [60:03] which is stressing them both out and I [60:05] don't think they're going to have well I [60:06] don't think he's going to have a great [60:07] time at the wedding anyway because he [60:08] seems so stressed by it all I just I [60:11] sometimes hear that people can't like [60:12] get out of their marriage without having [60:13] to like file a divorce um thing with [60:16] like the with through lawyers and going [60:20] to court and battling out in court I [60:22] just think you should be free to leave [60:25] if you want to leave [60:26] I don't know I just [60:28] think this is a terrible analogy and [60:30] completely unrelated but like in [60:32] football many of the problems we see [60:36] with my favorite Club Manchester United [60:38] at the moment is we've got people on [60:40] fiveyear contracts who we just can't get [60:42] rid of and like they want to go we want [60:43] them to go but because we sign these [60:45] long contracts with them it's like [60:46] incredibly difficult and you now these [60:48] players have been like thrown in the [60:49] back room and they're not playing [60:51] football and we're like just completely [60:53] ignoring them because we can't get out [60:54] the contract yes so I I just think yeah [60:57] I hear you I hear you all right can we [60:58] talk about this yes all right there are [61:01] many secular marriages so you don't have [61:05] to do anything religious [61:08] related and it sounds like a big [61:12] difficulty that you have could could be [61:13] the the number one is the [61:15] wedding because but the wedding to me [61:19] the premise of it is a public [61:22] Declaration of your love and to your [61:24] point it could be a small as you want it [61:26] could be as big as you want you could [61:27] have as many as you want right that [61:29] public declaration Could Happen 50 times [61:32] over 50 years it is up to you so that is [61:34] you and your partner navigating that [61:37] space with regard to getting out of it [61:41] this is the single biggest change that [61:45] we need in marriages marriages in my [61:48] opinion should be much harder to get [61:50] into you shouldn't be able like [61:52] literally you and your partner could go [61:54] to Vegas Drive up so a drive-thru you [61:58] could have an Elvis Presley impersonator [62:00] marry you you pay [62:04] $25 and you're married it's ridiculous I [62:07] think that there needs to be there needs [62:10] to be hurdles in place there needs to be [62:13] some type of vetting some type of [62:16] premarital coaching counseling so [62:19] everyone is aware of the commitment that [62:22] is about to be made and you have the [62:24] tools you have skills around Conflict [62:27] Management Etc needs to be [62:29] hard but then if you want out you should [62:32] be able to get out in an hour it should [62:35] be easy drive up Elvis Presley says it's [62:38] over [62:39] $25 it's free yeah yeah free right [62:43] that's the way it should be but it is [62:45] the the the the the reverse now you're [62:49] right marriage is hard to get out of [62:51] that's changing there's now the [62:52] introduction especially in the UK of the [62:54] no fault right but but that still takes [62:56] it still could take 6 months or so there [62:58] still is a lot of haggle so so I I agree [63:01] with you there is that it should be much [63:04] easier to get out but [63:06] ultimately what marriage is is marriage [63:09] is a declaration of commitment done in a [63:13] formal way can you not do that without [63:17] the marriage like can you not do a [63:19] declaration of commitment without having [63:21] to go to like a church or whatever else [63:23] and sign documents and stuff I don't [63:25] know is it not possible I it is you know [63:27] it is it is so I think I just have [63:30] commitment issues I think that's [63:31] probably what it is yeah I think that's [63:33] the core of it because you know what's [63:34] so interesting to me is that you're [63:36] already going to well how do I get out [63:38] of this yeah right and it almost feels [63:41] as if there is a [63:44] fear of [63:46] committing to someone for the rest of [63:49] your life because that that's a massive [63:51] I mean think about this you're going to [63:54] commit to someone for the rest of your [63:55] life for the rest of your days and what [63:58] we feel because I've been there because [64:00] when I I'm getting anxiety as you say it [64:02] I'm like [ __ ] know the rest of my [64:04] life the rest of your [64:06] life but think about this the anxiety is [64:09] the fear of what is not even come yet so [64:14] that means that you can now interrogate [64:16] your [64:18] thoughts okay you have fear over what [64:22] what's the [64:23] fear but isn't it just a terrible idea [64:26] to commit to someone till death do you [64:29] part because like imagine if I said to [64:32] you you got to pick a job and then you [64:34] got to do it forever yes you would the [64:36] amount of procrastination that would [64:37] occur because of the significance of [64:39] that decision would would basically stop [64:42] you picking any job at all because you'd [64:43] be like I can know I got to pick one and [64:44] do it forever and you know you'd be [64:46] you'd become a perfectionist you know [64:48] you'd be looking for perfection in every [64:50] single job and maybe this is in part the [64:52] issue is that because we see marriage as [64:55] being such a final thing that we really [64:58] have to make sure the pick is perfect is [65:01] perfect I agree this is one of the myths [65:03] right this whole notion of till death do [65:06] us part which really was handed to us in [65:10] religion if you look through [65:11] Christianity Hinduism even a lot of the [65:14] modern day Islamic marriage ceremonies [65:17] there's some formation of you will be [65:20] with this partner for the rest of your [65:21] life and I think what that does is it [65:23] actually sets us up for a lower level of [65:26] satisfaction it sets us up for [65:28] complacency oh this is all we get right [65:31] it instead they can't leave me they [65:33] can't leave me so therefore I don't have [65:35] to try as hard I don't even have to talk [65:36] to them now yeah I don't have to get to [65:38] the gym no I can just sit here like [65:41] so that is a myth though because we know [65:44] where where divorce rates are separation [65:46] rates are we know that there are you can [65:49] get a divorce so you can get out she can [65:52] get out we have to we have to put that [65:53] to the side but the key is is to think [65:56] about when I always like interrogate the [65:58] fears is well what's the [66:01] upside what's the upside of having a [66:04] partner for Life what what would you say [66:07] upsides I mean I could also name the [66:09] upsides I think so there's a certain [66:12] sense of stability and focus that comes [66:15] when you know that home is kind of [66:17] locked down so as an entrepreneur in [66:19] particular I I advise anybody that's [66:21] going to pursue a big grueling [66:23] tumultuous uncertain challenge like [66:25] building a business business to have a [66:26] partner at home um and and I know Sir [66:28] Alex Ferguson was big on this when he [66:30] was selecting players for Manchester [66:31] United he would often inquire about [66:33] whether they were in a relationship [66:34] because if they had a stable home life [66:36] then they would be much more focused on [66:37] a training ground and I see that with [66:39] myself you need a stable base um if [66:42] you're single I think as an entrepreneur [66:43] it can become an immense distraction an [66:46] immense distraction because on one hand [66:47] you're trying to build something over [66:49] here and you're trying to build [66:49] something over here I think marriage is [66:52] useful as well because when you know [66:55] that it's hard to get out of it means [66:58] that exiting isn't the path of least [67:01] resistance which means that you you [67:03] probably will go to therapy first and [67:04] you probably will see if you can fix it [67:06] and figure it out versus just throwing [67:07] it away yes so it becomes less [67:09] disposable yes which means that you're [67:11] more likely to fight to fix the thing um [67:16] and what are the other upsides [67:20] um I mean the stats right so the stats [67:22] around health and wealth all suggest [67:24] that if you're in a good productive [67:27] healthy relationship you're going to [67:28] earn more money I think it's 4% more a [67:30] year in a productive uh marriage both [67:33] Partners net earn 4% more a year and [67:37] according to Robert waldinger who came [67:38] on the show you're going to live longer [67:40] so I get it yeah and you're going be [67:42] healthier you're going to be healthier [67:44] yeah yeah L less disas come on Stephen I [67:47] know you know do you know what it is I'm [67:49] not trying to throw the marriage out I'm [67:51] wondering if there's an alternative [67:53] which do you know what it is part of me [67:54] as well if you look at the way I've live [67:55] my life I've always tried to test the [67:57] system so school like not going to [67:59] school dropping out of University being [68:02] an entrepreneur there's always been a [68:03] bit of a [ __ ] you and me to the system [68:05] and a real pause in questioning what I'm [68:08] being handed as the right answer to [68:10] interrogate whether it's still valid now [68:12] okay so like many of the answers I was [68:14] given you go to university then you go [68:15] get a job and then you hand out your CV [68:17] all of these things proved in my life to [68:19] just be BS there was a better way so [68:21] when I I'm approached with a [68:22] conventional system like marriage [68:24] immediately I go hm let's interrogate [68:27] this thing and I would say I'm with you [68:31] throw the system out think about just [68:34] one thing and you you said this and [68:35] there's research behind this it's the [68:36] investment model Right theory so the [68:40] more you [68:42] invest in the preparation of your [68:46] partnership in the actual partnership [68:48] the more that you're investing time res [68:50] all resources the higher satisfaction [68:53] you have that's fact right that's that's [68:55] that's research that's in essence what [68:57] you're saying right so that's the way I [69:00] that I would approach it is how can I [69:03] invest as much as I can in this [69:05] partnership with this person that I love [69:08] what is it that predicts a successful [69:11] marriage in your view well once again [69:15] what is success is it to to me success [69:18] is high satisfaction High satisfaction [69:21] is has a strong correlation around [69:24] well-being uh Dr Carol riff I think is [69:27] the OG of well-being she doesn't get [69:30] enough credit she created a model called [69:32] The Six Dimensions of psychological [69:34] well-being and in essence if we are [69:38] working to increase each one of these [69:40] Dimensions so for example one is having [69:44] a vision of your life like what is that [69:46] Vision that you have for life and the [69:48] question though is do you feel like you [69:50] are actively in pursuit of that Vision [69:53] if you don't feel like you know what [69:54] your vision is or you're not in pursuit [69:56] of it you're going to have lower [69:57] well-being right so the higher [69:59] well-being that you have [70:02] individually the higher satisfaction you [70:05] have in your [70:07] relationship the more successful your [70:08] relationship is all that like [70:11] fundamental qualities that I should be [70:13] looking for in a good partner oh yeah I [70:16] mean there's a million but the the core [70:19] the core that I I like to write about is [70:21] and and I'll actually I I'll even uh [70:24] synthesize it you want to have a partner [70:28] who is aware of their well-being and who [70:31] is focused on their well-being this this [70:33] is this is incredibly important because [70:37] one of the most profound re uh bits of [70:40] research that I I feel like I included [70:41] in the book is that most of us believe [70:45] that having [70:46] alignment in the values of our partner [70:51] is the most successful or is the high is [70:53] the number one determinant of having a [70:56] successful partnership we think it's [70:58] about values we're told it's about [70:59] values we're fed values which by the way [71:02] goes back to you know where that goes [71:03] back [71:04] to religion you know how have you heard [71:09] of you need to be equally yolked no oh [71:11] you haven't heard this you're not [71:13] reading your [71:14] Bibles exp me all right [71:18] so the [71:20] Bible talks about you have to have a [71:23] partner you have to find a partner who's [71:24] equ equally yolked what does that really [71:28] mean equally yolked comes from oxen [71:31] right so two you have one Ox here one Ox [71:33] here they're tethered together they're [71:35] plowing the land if they're walking lock [71:37] step they can plow the land if you have [71:39] one going off this way one going off [71:41] this way you can't plow the land you [71:42] can't produce so the Bible says you need [71:44] to have a partner who is equally [71:46] yolked pastors then interpreted that [71:49] over the years to be what values you [71:53] need to have a partner who shares your [71:55] value vales has the same religion has [71:57] the same accent this is how we became [71:59] regimented in class this happened [72:02] Century after Century after Century [72:04] right we get to today you ask anyone on [72:08] the street we grab 10 people nine out of [72:10] 10 would say and and we said how [72:12] important are values nine out of 10 [72:14] would say values is [72:15] everything [72:17] what values change they change I value [72:21] things much differently today than I did [72:23] 10 years ago our values change they're [72:25] not constant we need to throw away [72:27] values are they important yes are they [72:30] the most important no so therefore let's [72:34] deemphasize the focusing on finding [72:36] someone who matches all of our values [72:39] instead well-being key are they focus on [72:42] their well-being that's one two yeah [72:44] values is important but you know what [72:46] what's what's what's equally if not [72:48] more is you know what how open-minded [72:51] are they like H how how how much do they [72:53] lean in how how curious are they and [72:55] then the third is how resilient are they [72:59] because having a relationship with [73:01] anyone means tough times so are they [73:04] able to bounce back or when things get [73:06] tough do they just lay on their back so [73:08] if you have a partner who's resilient [73:10] you have a partner who's open-minded you [73:13] have a partner who's focused and [73:15] nurturing their well-being you have a [73:17] great partner what about ambition does [73:18] that matter I I think ambition is a [73:22] value set okay [73:27] e yeah I just wonder because a lot of [73:29] people would say that they want that in [73:31] a partner but just by I mean like [73:34] running the mental numbers not everybody [73:35] can be ambitious and people that aren't [73:37] necessarily hugely ambitious also find [73:39] love and keep love but when you ask them [73:41] on what they're looking for they'll tend [73:42] to have a preference towards someone [73:44] who's ambitious or goal [73:45] orientated one of the things we talked [73:47] about kind of in between the lines was [73:50] how Society has changed and one of the [73:52] ongoing conversations in dating at the [73:54] moment is around how women are [73:56] struggling to find compatible men [73:58] because women are more educated I think [74:01] there's more women graduating with [74:02] college degrees now the top 10% of men [74:05] seem to be having all of the sex [74:06] According to some studies that I read a [74:07] lot of the sex and then there's this [74:09] bottom 50% of men that are somewhat [74:11] disenfranchised because they they're not [74:14] getting the attention they're probably [74:15] turning to things like pornography women [74:17] are dating up into the right I'm told so [74:21] women I did read a study that said the [74:23] majority of women are still looking for [74:25] a man who's earning more than them but [74:27] in a world of equality which we all [74:29] agree is a good thing where women are [74:30] more educated now there's there isn't [74:32] enough men up and to the right anymore [74:35] so there's this sort of disparity [74:37] between you know what women are looking [74:39] for but actually what's available in the [74:41] market [74:43] potentially these these these are all [74:46] facts however we have to in we have to [74:53] interrogate the this this this data but [74:55] more so I think we have to interrogate [74:57] The Narrative that's being handed to us [74:59] so I feel like the The Narrative that's [75:01] being handed us today is that you know [75:03] what the top 20% of men or 10% of men [75:07] they're good but the bottom 80% you [75:11] suck that couldn't be further from the [75:14] truth and I think we have to acknowledge [75:17] and this is where uh you know two things [75:19] could be true one we live in a [75:22] patriarchal society absolutely [75:24] absolutely [75:27] but do we need to extend more grace to [75:31] our men absolutely we do are men lonlier [75:36] than they ever have been absolutely are [75:39] men confused absolutely right are men [75:43] being misled absolutely let's extend [75:47] more grace to our men what does that [75:51] mean that means being aware that we do [75:53] live in a loneliness epidemic [75:55] being aware that less than 27% of men [75:58] have a friend that they can feel is a [76:00] confidant that 0% of them now feel like [76:04] they have someone who they can go to at [76:06] 3:00 a.m. in the morning it's being [76:08] aware of these things it is saying you [76:11] know what I um can appreciate other [76:16] traits and characteristics outside of [76:19] how much you earn or how tall you are [76:22] right these are it's important to be [76:24] able to understand and and you just [76:25] asked me you said where are the most I [76:27] said nothing about how much money [76:29] someone makes nothing about how tall [76:31] they are right but at the same time what [76:34] we have to understand is the narrative [76:36] that is handed to about women is that [76:39] all women are looking for the six foot [76:42] plus CEO right who's making over 100,000 [76:46] pounds or dollars a year and that is [76:49] also not the case this study here says [76:52] despite advancements in gender equality [76:54] resarch indicates that better educated [76:56] women still tend to prefer husbands who [76:59] earn more than they do that's from The [77:00] Institute for family studies an analysis [77:03] of online dating behaviors across 24 [77:05] countries found that women are more [77:06] selective than men showing a marked [77:08] preference for men um with high incomes [77:11] and education levels which which again [77:12] proves this up and to the right thing [77:14] but there's just not enough men up and [77:15] to the right so there's going to be a [77:16] lot of women that are somewhat [77:18] dissatisfied according to this all right [77:20] so the challenge if if I'm really [77:21] interrogating this is one is it's [77:24] talking about High educated women so we [77:27] know that Highly Educated women are on [77:31] average dating hypergamous right which [77:34] is what you're talking about up so [77:36] someone who's dating someone who has the [77:38] same or higher level of Education the [77:41] same or higher level of financial [77:43] resources and why is that because that's [77:45] the script that Society handed to women [77:47] to say the only way you can survive is [77:51] by finding a man who can deliver this to [77:53] you right right that's and and I think [77:56] we have to accept where it came from it [77:59] was this terrible Society of you know [78:02] what you're not going to be safe unless [78:04] you find a man who could provide but you [78:06] fast forward to to [78:08] today a large percentage of high Highly [78:11] Educated women are dating this way but [78:14] that's not all women the other part is [78:17] yes are women beginning to out earn men [78:20] and outeducate men absolutely in certain [78:23] cities [78:25] not in every everywhere of the world men [78:28] on average still earn more income so so [78:32] so if you look at at at at the The [78:34] Narrative that's handed to us you could [78:36] say well you know what men on average [78:39] Still Still earn more but my point is [78:41] this my point is that I think we all [78:42] need to [78:43] re-evaluate what it is that we want no [78:46] longer do we need to have a partner for [78:50] most of us or should I say this is me [78:53] speaking out of privilege for many of us [78:55] in the west no longer do we need to have [78:59] a partner for pragmatic reasons if you [79:03] think about maso's hierarchy of needs [79:06] and you just divided it into three [79:07] categories you would say the bottom the [79:10] bottom kind of rung is all of our [79:13] psychological and physical needs food [79:17] shelter right then that kind of middle [79:19] rung is belonging and connection and the [79:23] top rung is selfish evolved self you [79:26] know we want to be you know we you know [79:28] well self- evolved living our best self [79:30] contributing the most that we ever could [79:33] to this [79:34] world marriage and partnership and [79:36] selecting a partner was largely based on [79:39] that lower rung all the way through to [79:41] the 1960s that's like yesterday if you [79:43] think about how long we've lived but [79:45] it's that Evolution as well because you [79:46] see the same thing in the animal kingdom [79:48] with like the orangutang which has like [79:49] 98% the same DNA as us they still select [79:53] for survival [79:55] factors so I think what's interesting [79:58] when you look at uh different [80:00] mammals and the uh the The evolutionary [80:05] biology is that there's lots of [80:08] similarities but then there's also lots [80:11] of traits that are different you know so [80:13] it's it's one of those where we have to [80:14] appreciate that as Homo [80:16] sapiens we are unique and we live in a [80:21] structure that we have largely created [80:23] ourselves [80:25] we're talking we're debating about the [80:26] institution of marriage I mean marriage [80:28] didn't exist for the vast majority of [80:30] our existence but this Golden Rule thing [80:32] you told me about this yeah and you told [80:34] me that it's cross-cultural yes so so it [80:38] is and this Golden Rule thing please [80:40] explain it for people but for me that is [80:42] evidence that there's still an [80:43] evolutionary component to selection for [80:46] men and women and I read I was reading [80:47] this study that said women um almost 50% [80:51] of women prefer to date only men that [80:53] are taller than themselves while only [80:55] 13% of men prefer to date only women [80:57] that are shorter than themselves and [80:59] another study revealed that women are [81:00] most satisfied when they're partner is [81:03] approximately 8 Ines taller whereas men [81:05] are most satisfied with a height [81:07] difference of about 8 centimeters taller [81:08] than their partner so women clearly have [81:10] a preference here significant amount of [81:12] them to dating a man that is bigger than [81:14] they are yes but all right yes this is [81:18] so good all right couple things here M [81:20] do we have these preferences absolutely [81:23] it's a lot of this handed us through [81:26] evolutionary and our biology [81:30] absolutely is most of it handed to us [81:33] through [81:35] socialization definitely do we change as [81:39] we increase our [81:41] well-being yes so here's my point if you [81:44] were to go back and say Zena look you go [81:48] back 10 years say Z look would you [81:51] prefer to date a man that is taller than [81:53] you [81:55] I would say there's a there's a good [81:56] chance she would say I would prefer it [82:01] yes has that been her result no does she [82:06] appear to be incredibly happy and [82:08] satisfied yes right with Tom Holland [82:11] that's from my op from from my outside [82:14] looking in yes why could that have been [82:17] the case because she grew up being [82:19] handed to script she grew up the disn [82:21] ification of relationships she saw the [82:24] The Prince and how large the prince [82:26] always was in comparison to the princess [82:28] she saw that the prince was able to pick [82:29] up the princess like she saw all these [82:31] things she believed all of these things [82:33] and then as she became more mature as [82:37] she realized that she doesn't need [82:40] anyone's validation as she understood [82:42] the things and the traits that she loved [82:45] she was like this Tom Holland guy is hot [82:47] yeah but is it that is an exception not [82:51] because Al Tom Holland's got 30 million [82:53] in the bank so [82:55] yeah but but but this does happen you [82:57] hear happens but it's it's the exception [82:58] isn't it it's not the rule it is and you [83:00] know why also that's the exception and I [83:02] agree I'm with you it's the exception [83:05] because most of us have poor [83:08] well-being most of us have low [83:10] self-esteem most of us do I would argue [83:13] most adults have low self-esteem mid to [83:16] low self-esteem and what does that mean [83:18] it means that we need the validation of [83:22] others right and this is the reason why [83:24] I always say it goes back to us do you [83:27] really think this is the answer to this [83:29] do do you not believe that there's a big [83:31] evolutionary component to attraction [83:34] selection preferences like [83:37] because I I'm struggling to believe that [83:41] Society is the only reason why we're why [83:45] we pick certain people and I I do part [83:47] of me wonders and slightly worries that [83:51] we've we've almost accidentally [83:53] inadvertently designed design Society in [83:55] such a way where what we're looking for [83:57] no longer exists necessarily so we have [84:01] to confront this new reality that in [84:02] fact we're going to have to adjust some [84:04] of our preferences if we are going to be [84:05] happy and find what we're looking for [84:07] yes I do believe that a large percentage [84:11] of the decisions that we make have been [84:14] handed to us genetically so I'm I'm I'm [84:17] with that uh and I think the research [84:20] suggests that so if you have for example [84:25] um you know uh I was talking to to Dr [84:27] taros wart and talking about you know a [84:29] woman in the club if she's ovulating or [84:31] not ovulating just based on that men are [84:34] going to be attracted or or or or or or [84:36] not attracted or you think about scent [84:39] right really what we're trying to do [84:40] with scent the reason why we're turned [84:41] off with scent is that it's genetic it's [84:45] that if we end up mating with someone [84:48] who has too close of a a genetic mirror [84:51] to ours the child won't be as [84:55] so we need [84:56] diversification in our in our genetics [84:58] and we don't realize this but we can [85:01] determine that through our scent by [85:03] being turned off it's it's it's a whole [85:05] sniff test so does Do genetics play a [85:08] role absolutely golden mean we talked [85:11] about Golden mean where in essence this [85:13] is women on average loving to see wide [85:17] shoulders and a thinner waist and Men on [85:21] average loving to see smaller hips uh [85:25] smaller waist wider hips now can people [85:29] debate these Concepts absolutely do they [85:31] stand up um I mean are there uh [85:35] evolutionary reasons for these yes [85:39] because it speaks to being fertile for [85:42] women or it speaks to being uh strong to [85:45] protect right for a man all of this does [85:48] play a role and sometimes we don't [85:50] realize [85:52] how much of a role [85:55] Evolution has played in why and how we [85:58] make decisions which is why it's also [86:00] important though to understand how the [86:04] society that we have created as human [86:07] beings also plays a role how we were [86:11] handed you should you need to have a [86:13] partner who's the same class as you you [86:16] need to when you find your partner [86:18] that's person that completes you when [86:21] you find a partner that's till death do [86:23] you part those pieces were handed to us [86:25] so there's no wonder why we're confused [86:27] we have all this [86:29] evolutionary uh uh decision-making [86:32] happening that we're not even aware of [86:34] and then on this side we have Society [86:36] telling us this is the person that we [86:38] that we should have and this is this is [86:39] the reason why and I go back to why [86:43] awareness is key and understanding how [86:47] and why we are gives us a power it gives [86:52] us a t autonomy over our decisions so [86:57] that when you are making that decision [86:59] on your partner you can ask yourself you [87:02] know yeah I would love to have a partner [87:05] who's over six feet but how important is [87:08] that really to me why why do I think I I [87:11] feel this way yeah and once you begin to [87:13] have those debates with yourself that [87:16] puts you on the path to making a [87:19] decision that you're going to be more [87:21] satisfied with in the Long Haul I think [87:23] that's the key and I think the awareness [87:26] comes from confronting both realities [87:28] which is on one hand there are some [87:29] evolutionary things that are going to [87:30] make me have a bias towards a certain [87:32] type of person that has certain [87:34] attributes even if those attributes [87:35] actually um not going to lead to a [87:39] long-term healthy relationship like [ __ ] [87:40] boys yes like Charisma and bravado and [87:44] confidence is like somewhat attractive [87:45] but it might not be a great husband and [87:47] then on the other hand there is tons of [87:49] things Society has handed me through [87:50] magazines and media that have portrayed [87:52] an image of what beauty looks like that [87:54] are also just [ __ ] I think [87:56] understanding both is the key to that [87:59] sort of autonomy being able to say [88:01] actually I understand where that's [88:03] coming from in me but I will make a [88:05] rational prefrontal cortex decision to [88:07] select something else some evidence of [88:09] this The evolutionary basis of [88:11] Attraction comes in this idea that [88:13] people who have symmetrical faces are [88:15] more beautiful and more attractive [88:17] across cultures is that true yes so [88:20] there are many scientists that will say [88:21] absolutely but here's what one thing I [88:24] know definitively about attraction is [88:29] attraction to someone else is largely [88:32] based on your [88:34] self-esteem and this is what I mean is [88:37] that the lower your self-esteem the more [88:40] dependent you are on the validation of [88:44] the public so therefore you will want to [88:47] have a partner who is considered to be [88:51] attractive so if Society if the script [88:54] is is that symmetry is it or if the [88:57] script is um [88:59] wearing this type of trainer is it if [89:04] that's what Society is saying then if [89:06] you have low self-esteem you want a [89:08] partner to look like that because you [89:10] need the validation of the partner [89:12] however whenever you see this is what I [89:15] this is what I say whenever you see [89:17] someone who's walking around with a [89:19] partner and you think how did those two [89:21] get together right chances are there's [89:24] an element and remember I'm not talking [89:27] about one has super high income or one [89:29] has super high status I'm just talking [89:31] about you look at at at at a couple and [89:33] you say they look odd right one of them [89:37] could be traditionally attractive one of [89:39] them might not normally what's happened [89:41] is that you have someone with high [89:43] self-esteem who has no need for the [89:49] Public's validation of their partner at [89:51] all I don't think people talk about this [89:52] enough but it's so unbelievable true in [89:55] fact I know an individual who has a [89:59] historically low self-esteem and went [90:01] through a lot of stuff when they were [90:02] younger and I remember when they got [90:04] into a relationship I remember exactly [90:05] where I was stood in London I remember [90:07] the time of day when they turned to me [90:09] they just got into a relationship [90:10] someone with historic low self-esteem [90:12] and they said to me Steve I really like [90:15] her but I'm kind of worried this is an [90:17] exact quote I'm kind of worried like if [90:20] I walk into a restaurant with her on my [90:21] arm is it going to be a good look [90:25] and I remember saying to this person [90:26] like if that's the way you're assessing [90:29] this person based on how they'll look on [90:32] your own when you walk into a [90:33] relationship my God this relationship is [90:36] [ __ ] because you're overlooking the [90:38] actual things that matter the most [90:39] important things and this person has [90:41] gone from one relationship to the next [90:43] to the next to the next all of them [90:44] failing as the more time I've spent with [90:46] them I thought to myself like it's [90:48] because their selection is being made [90:51] through insecurity and low self-esteem [90:53] yes just back to back to back to back to [90:55] back yes it's not being made based on [90:57] the like the essence of the person the [91:01] the other areas of compatibility that [91:03] matter more over the long term it's that [91:05] constant like surface level connection [91:07] yes and and I think most of us are [91:10] making decisions based on our [91:13] self-esteem did you see this as a [91:15] Matchmaker you know yes cuz you saying [91:18] Rich guys right yeah exactly I you know [91:21] uh I distinctly remember when I was on [91:23] previously and and You' ask about like [91:24] what was one of the most profound things [91:26] that that you saw and I never had [91:28] thought about that question until you [91:30] asked it and it was uh these men who [91:34] were coming who had incredibly low [91:36] self-esteem and what it was is these [91:38] were what I call Lake [91:39] Bloomers you know it was the the the the [91:43] guy who always felt like no one liked [91:48] you know no one liked how they appeared [91:51] they were the quote unquote ugly [91:52] duckling they they then found the gym [91:56] later in life right they they they they [91:58] found their Mojo later in life they were [92:00] always studious um they were a bit [92:03] introverted maybe shy at the same time [92:06] um and here they are and when people [92:08] walk past them they're like oh my God [92:09] this guy's a stud like look at look at [92:11] this guy he's a stud but he never [92:14] thought he was a stud nor does he think [92:16] he's a stud today which is why I say go [92:20] back to doing the inner work we would [92:23] take a CL like that and oppos just [92:25] saying let's put you on a date we can't [92:27] do that we have to begin to work with [92:30] you so that you realize how incredible [92:33] you actually are why can't you just [92:34] check them on a date if they've got low [92:36] self-esteem be because [92:39] okay we can sit them across from the [92:41] most incredible match but they won't [92:43] recognize it because they're making [92:45] decisions based on their self-esteem so [92:47] they're making the decision that your [92:48] friend made right how will this person [92:50] look on my arm when I bring them to the [92:52] Christmas party opposed [92:55] to what's their well-being look like or [92:58] do we do do we share any values Etc so [93:01] you can end up taking someone who could [93:04] be great for you and push them away or [93:08] dismiss them or worse you can invite [93:11] someone into your life who's not the [93:13] best placed for you because of a result [93:15] of your insecurities like a narcissist [93:17] like like like a narcissist like a SST [93:20] like a psychopath like a mellian right [93:23] you know there's a distinct group of bad [93:26] people in the world David bus writes [93:28] about this that we have to realize they [93:32] play on our fears they understand when [93:35] someone has low self-esteem low [93:37] well-being they're attracted to that [93:40] person why because they're better able [93:42] to manipulate them what's our best [93:45] defense the best defense in any [93:49] relationship in life is our [93:51] well-being it acts as a wall [93:54] against all of the bad people in the [93:56] world and what it also does is it acts [93:58] as a magnet for the great people in the [94:01] world because people with high [94:03] well-being and high self-esteem tend to [94:06] surround themselves and and and [94:08] understand and even attract people with [94:10] high well-being and high self-esteem [94:12] okay so two personal case studies popped [94:16] to mind in my friendship group that I [94:17] that I'm aware of people that I'm aware [94:18] of um they are approaching their 40s [94:22] okay they would both probably say say [94:23] that they had low self-esteem they don't [94:25] feel like they got the time pull to [94:28] figure out their self-esteem because in [94:30] both situations they're like I need to [94:31] find someone and they're in a bit of a [94:34] rush I'd say one of them is a male one [94:36] of them is a female now what would you [94:38] say to both of those people approaching [94:40] their 40s feel like they're in a bit of [94:42] a rush one's sort of contending with a [94:44] biological clock MH um the other just is [94:47] contending with like social comparison [94:49] all of his friends are in relationships [94:51] and settling down and he's still single [94:54] both fundamentally have low self-esteem [94:56] so the way that they're trying to solve [94:57] this problem is they're trying [95:00] to get blow Dres to make themselves look [95:03] pretty on the external to attract people [95:05] in and dating as many people as they [95:08] possibly can to try and find someone as [95:09] soon as possible yes I would tell them [95:12] you haven't even lived half your life [95:15] yet you have plenty of time period but [95:20] I've got a biological clock over here [95:22] you know what I understand that but you [95:25] know what's worse you know you know you [95:27] know what what is what is incredibly sad [95:31] is that I've seen a large percentage of [95:35] people say I have a biological clck I [95:38] want to have a child so therefore I'm [95:40] just going to have a child with with [95:42] with with [95:43] anyone what happens what happens what [95:47] ends up happening is it ends up becoming [95:50] a incredibly difficult scenario to [95:53] manage because you now are in a [95:56] partnership with someone who you don't [95:58] like you don't feel safe with there's no [96:00] emotional connection they create stress [96:03] on you they end up not being apparent to [96:06] the child that stress leads to other [96:09] issues that you may have like autoimmune [96:11] disease you end up not being able to [96:13] show up as your best self for the child [96:15] the child sees this and they they have a [96:17] myriad of issues as a result of you [96:22] wanting to beat your biological clock I [96:26] say this I understand the desire to have [96:29] children I get it I wanted my wife and I [96:32] tried for eight years a lot of people we [96:34] we we went through IVF you know I get it [96:38] to this day we still pay for our embryos [96:41] to be frozen it's like it's one of those [96:43] where I understand the desire to have [96:45] children what age were you oh my God it [96:49] was probably 16 years ago when we [96:52] started IVF we were early to to to IVF [96:57] we [96:59] um and by the way even before the 16 [97:01] years we had tried like naturally to to [97:03] have a child we went through one year of [97:07] Cycles [97:09] unsuccessful we end up we ended up [97:11] losing one of our losing a child right [97:16] um devastating absolutely devastating [97:19] and then we then have a cycle that that [97:22] works which which is our first son [97:24] Kingston and then we have a cycle that [97:27] works fairly close after our Second Son [97:29] uh Liam but one of the unold stories [97:32] about IVF and I and I wish people talked [97:35] about this more is that you may still [97:37] have eight embryos six embryos that are [97:41] still viable we have nine embryos that [97:43] are still viable and so what do you do [97:47] some people will donate them to science [97:49] some people will have them destroyed but [97:51] there's other folks like my wife and I [97:52] that are thinking know these are lives [97:54] that we've created like what are we [97:56] going to do and so we have paid to store [97:59] them so every month since we began our [98:03] Cycles we have paid to store them now [98:06] from what I uh uh some people have told [98:09] me that there there limitations in [98:10] certain countries around how many years [98:13] you can actually uh store your embryos [98:15] but it's such a grueling decision to [98:19] have to make um and um and it's it's [98:23] it's it's it's one that that we made [98:26] so I understand the desire to be a [98:29] parent I fully do how old were you and [98:32] Jill when you decided to do IVF I say [98:36] this because you said 16 years ago you [98:38] look about 30 yeah yeah I mean yeah I [98:40] mean this is the thing is everyone's [98:41] like well how old are you what a lot of [98:43] people don't realize is I this year 50 [98:45] so you were about 34 35 yeah uh I would [98:49] say I was about 30 yeah I was mid-30s [98:53] and Jill was same mid-30s okay yep and [98:57] you've been training for eight years so [99:00] quite honestly we had been trying so we [99:02] got married uh when I was [99:05] 25 right uh we started trying shortly [99:11] thereafter because I've always wanted to [99:14] be a father always and so very quickly [99:18] after we got married we thought you know [99:23] children as us will have it and it just [99:26] doesn't happen that way and what we [99:27] began to see is that one of the [99:32] challenges was around the [99:34] stress that we had in our lives and how [99:39] we were unhealthy as a result of the [99:42] stress and and the impact that was [99:43] having on our inability to have [99:47] children did it cause a strain on your [99:50] relationship when you went through these [99:52] struggles with fertility absolutely you [99:55] feel like you know the script that I [99:57] felt was handed to me and this was a [99:59] script is [100:01] that you're a [100:03] man and if you can't have a child you're [100:05] not a man that was the script that was [100:08] literally I remember being at the barber [100:10] shop right when I had hair when I used [100:12] to go to the barber shop um and that was [100:15] that was the idea you know you'd have [100:17] the guy who was like I've got eight kids [100:19] you know and and as a result I'm the [100:22] manliest man in the room and I would [100:25] leave thinking my God I can't I can't [100:27] even have a child like what what's [100:30] what's the issue and then you begin to [100:31] think okay you know [100:33] um [100:35] um what are all the factors and you [100:37] begin to go through the test and you [100:39] begin to your point and you've already [100:40] done this is you see there's a multitude [100:43] of issues and for some [100:47] people they're incredibly fertile and it [100:51] takes boom eight times but for others [100:55] and I'm in the others it [100:58] takes [101:00] years you know um but I will say this [101:03] and this goes back to the investment [101:05] Theory the more that we invested in the [101:09] pursuit of having children the more the [101:12] desire increase and then now the level [101:16] of cherishing our our boys is on a whole [101:19] another I think because of that [101:21] experience is on a whole another Lev [101:23] I can imagine it really tears [101:25] relationships apart this issue of [101:27] fertility in children especially if the [101:29] results come back I was super scared [101:31] when them sperm analysis came in and [101:34] they like sent me the email with [101:35] password on it I was like oh my God if [101:36] imagine if I open this document now and [101:38] it says that my spam are like not not [101:41] good like she's going to leave me you [101:43] know that's what you kind of think yeah [101:45] and I'm sure she she might have felt the [101:46] same way she might have there might have [101:47] been a doubt in her that said if if her [101:49] results came back and it was bad then [101:51] maybe I would leave or something OB I [101:53] wouldn't but um I'm sure it tears a lot [101:56] of families apart a lot of relationships [101:59] apart this these issues of fertility yes [102:02] and and and that's why it's so important [102:04] for us [102:06] to spend more [102:10] time in determining whether or not we [102:13] feel like we have the right [102:16] partner before we decide to commit to [102:18] them before we decided to have to have [102:21] children with them which is a massive [102:23] decision before we decide to move house [102:26] or move into a [102:28] house our [102:33] partner our our partner is often life or [102:37] death for us the selection of our [102:39] partner the selection of our partner is [102:43] I truly believe the most important [102:46] decision that we will have because of [102:49] all these things that it that it [102:50] dictates that we've talked about so [102:52] having [102:53] more emphasis on who that partner is and [102:55] the dialogue upfront is so incredibly [102:58] important you know you think about this [103:00] is like the top uh the [103:05] Gans you know they talk about how [103:08] 69% [103:09] of problems in a relationship will never [103:13] be resolved 69% never be resolved that's [103:16] scary that's scary what does that mean [103:19] that means that you have to learn how to [103:20] manage it so that means that you have to [103:22] have a partner who has Superior conflict [103:26] management skills and so do you if you [103:29] can't if your partner doesn't have that [103:31] you are in for a world of hurt wouldn't [103:34] it be great to have determined that [103:36] before you decide to have a child with [103:37] someone because once you have a child [103:40] the level of conflict is going through [103:42] the [103:43] roof I umum I had some stats that show [103:47] that in terms of mental health a study [103:48] published in nature showed that [103:50] unmarried individuals have a 79% high [103:53] risk of developing depression compared [103:55] to their married counterparts maybe I [103:57] should get married but also Research [103:59] indicates that strong social connections [104:01] like a romantic relationship can [104:02] increase longevity significantly and a [104:04] comprehensive study analyzing 43 data [104:06] sets revealed that the quality of one's [104:09] romantic relationship is a significant [104:11] predictor of overall life satisfaction [104:14] High relationship satisfaction [104:15] correlates with increased happiness and [104:18] well-being um and the stats go on and on [104:20] and on and on even financial [104:22] implications which is quite quite [104:24] staggering yeah I I this is a bit of a [104:26] different question but um we talked a [104:28] second ago about self-esteem and how if [104:30] someone came to you in your matchmaking [104:31] days and they were like Keen to form and [104:33] find love one of the first things you'd [104:34] say is like we need to work on the [104:36] self-esteem but if a man comes to you [104:39] and they are let's say you're one of [104:42] your sons okay Kingston is that your [104:44] oldest yes that's my oldest Kingston [104:46] goes that listen what what should I be [104:49] doing to increase the probability now [104:52] that I find and keep a partner what work [104:55] can I do on my own now like do I need to [104:58] hit the gym do I need to read a book [105:01] what do I need to do do I need to go out [105:02] and earn money and I want the honest [105:04] answer that you would say to Kingston [105:05] when no one's looking you know what's [105:06] Wild is I've already started talking to [105:08] Kingston about this okay because we work [105:10] out together on the weekends uh and I'm [105:12] shocked at how strong he's getting he's [105:14] 14 uh all the time I tell him King [105:18] Kingson King surround yourself with [105:22] great people [105:23] that's it surround yourself put yourself [105:26] in proximity to people who have healthy [105:29] relationships to people who have high [105:31] satisfaction in their relationships it's [105:33] no different than in business you want [105:35] to succeed surround yourself with folks [105:36] who are succeeding in business you [105:38] surround yourself with those people and [105:40] what you begin to do is you begin to [105:42] observe their habits you see their [105:45] skills you adopt their habits you adopt [105:48] their skills you understand where the [105:51] boundaries should be what is a healthy [105:54] doubt what is an unhealthy doubt you [105:56] learn all of these behaviors by simply [105:58] surrounding yourself with good people [106:00] this is the [106:01] key as you guys know whoop is one of my [106:04] show sponsors it's also a company that I [106:06] have invested in and it's one that you [106:08] guys asked me about a lot the biggest [106:09] question I get asked is why I use whoop [106:11] over other wearable technology options [106:14] and there is a bunch of reasons but I [106:15] think it really comes down to the most [106:17] overlooked yet crucial feature it's [106:19] noninvasive nature when everything in [106:22] life seems to be competing for my [106:23] attention I turned to whoop because it [106:25] doesn't have a screen and will armed the [106:27] CEO who came on this podcast told me the [106:30] reason that there's no screen because [106:32] screens equal distraction so when I'm in [106:34] meetings or I'm at the gym my whoop [106:36] doesn't demand my attention it's there [106:38] in the background constantly pulling [106:40] data and insights from my body that are [106:42] ready for when I need them if you've [106:44] been thinking about joining woop you can [106:46] head to join. whoop.com [106:48] CEO and try whoop for 30 days risk-free [106:52] and zero commitment that's join. [106:54] whoop.com [106:55] CEO let me know how you get [106:58] on myths yes we talked about a lot of [107:02] myths today and your book contains 21 [107:05] different myths um I won't go through [107:08] them all because I think people should [107:10] buy the book and read them all and we [107:12] don't have enough time to go through all [107:13] of them but just picking out some of the [107:14] ones that really stood out to me okay uh [107:16] one of the myths that you say in your [107:18] book is that more sex equals a happier [107:21] relationship is that true [107:23] does having more sex increase the [107:25] happiness in your relationship [107:29] no no [107:32] now here's the investigation of [107:36] that studies show that couples who have [107:40] a high level of satisfaction in their [107:44] relationship they have a high amount of [107:46] sex but it's not as a result of the sex [107:50] that gives them the high satisfaction [107:52] it's the high satisfaction that gives [107:54] them the high amount of sex so the [107:56] challenge is that we have to reframe and [107:58] we have to stop thinking that just [108:00] because we're having a lot of sex it [108:03] doesn't mean that we have a great [108:04] relationship I see this happen all the [108:06] time especially I'm Married at First [108:07] Sight a couple sits down the first thing [108:09] they say is oh Paul I don't need any [108:11] help we're having sex like [108:13] rabbits first of all lions have much [108:16] more sex than rabbits secondly is that [108:20] doesn't mean you have a great [108:21] relationship the fact that you're having [108:23] lots of sex it tells me nothing [108:26] so the the the myth is that if you have [108:30] lots of sex it means you have a healthy [108:33] relationship but could you be in a [108:34] sexless relationship and also be [108:37] extremely happy you can many people many [108:40] people are in that space you've met [108:41] people that are like this yes there are [108:43] a significant percentage of people that [108:46] are like that especially as we get older [108:50] you have couples in their 80s [108:53] who've now reached a point where the [108:56] desire for sex is not there maybe it's [108:58] once a [108:59] year and I know everyone in their 20s [109:02] 30s 40s even 50s like oh my gosh once a [109:05] year this is crazy but if you have a [109:08] couple you know you know uh there are [109:10] two different desires here there's one [109:12] is called a spontaneous desire and one [109:14] is called a responsive desire now there [109:17] is a gender difference here most men [109:20] even if if you look through the ages all [109:22] the way up to' 60s '70s they have what's [109:25] called a spontaneous desire which means [109:27] that they are ready 24/7 they could just [109:30] go they they they need no emotional turn [109:33] on in order to have sex they just get a [109:35] hard on sat there hard on demand okay [109:39] pretty [109:41] much whereas as women get older [109:46] typically they require responsive desire [109:49] what is responsive desire they want some [109:52] emotional connection some emotional [109:54] currency they want some safety they want [109:57] a conversation and not just one but they [109:59] want to have a buildup of that emotional [110:03] currency in order for them to have a [110:05] responsive desire to the sex in order to [110:07] have sex so there's different desires [110:11] when you talk about sex um and I think [110:13] that more discussion needs to be had [110:16] around responsive desire and the [110:19] importance of building what Dr Karen [110:22] gurnie talks about is as emotional [110:25] currency to build up that connection [110:27] with your partner so it's almost [110:29] emotional currency is almost like [110:31] putting deposits in the bank account [110:34] right if you if you're if if there's an [110:37] empty sexual bank account and you just [110:39] go to your partner and you say I want to [110:41] have sex in other words I want to make a [110:42] withdrawal there's nothing there you're [110:44] getting nothing literally you're getting [110:46] nothing however if you are placing [110:50] deposits in [110:54] what is that that is just wanted to send [110:56] you a text to to tell you you know how [110:59] much I do love you to I appreciate how [111:01] well you take care uh of the kids um uh [111:05] I can't wait for us to have date night [111:08] tonight uh you know just to watch the [111:10] movie and have wine right these [111:14] deposits hugs kisses with no requirement [111:19] of of of sex you know I often talk about [111:22] 30 second hug and I gave you a 30 second [111:24] hug [111:26] once why don't you look happy about [111:29] that no it matters it's important deina [111:32] does the same she's a really exceptional [111:33] hugger yes she's very good so the 30 [111:36] second hug I talk about the sixc kiss [111:39] and so many people respond back well if [111:42] if I gave my husband a 30 second kiss [111:44] he'd think that se sex is at the end of [111:46] that no we need to normalize these [111:49] things that's putting emotional dep [111:52] deposits into our partner so then once [111:54] it's built up then you can go make your [111:56] withdrawal right and and so um yeah sex [112:02] needs to be looked at it I think more [112:05] and more from the standpoint of [112:07] responsive in spontaneous [112:10] desire desire management term that I [112:12] talk about with my friends sometimes um [112:16] should we spend more time apart in our [112:18] relationships we we live in a society [112:20] now as you said where we're becoming [112:21] more and more individualistic which [112:22] means that there's more demands being [112:23] placed on our partner to be everything [112:25] and if they're everything surely they're [112:27] less attractive because if they're our [112:29] counselor our therapist our accountant [112:31] or our best friend there's it seems like [112:34] logically then they wouldn't be as spicy [112:37] yeah if if they are everything we set [112:40] ourselves up with a very high stakes [112:43] relationship because the moment that [112:46] they don't become everything they could [112:48] be 99% of everything but the moment [112:51] they're not 100% we're disappointed but [112:53] also like if this person is [112:56] like my emotional support in so many [113:00] areas of my life they are my friend they [113:02] are my uh co-founder of my company I [113:06] wonder if the the spice you know they [113:10] say absence makes the heart grow fond I [113:13] wonder if the spice is going to leave [113:14] the [113:15] building the the spice can but there are [113:18] other I think more challenging issues [113:21] that that can arise and I'll give you my [113:23] example because I fell into this right [113:25] so I uh reached a point in my marriage [113:29] where my wife was everything to me she [113:32] was my co-founder we were running a [113:34] matchmaking agency we spent nearly all [113:36] of our time together we were co-parents [113:39] uh right we were uh if I had a a a a [113:42] business question a platonic question a [113:45] romantic question I would go to her uh [113:48] it got to the point where I saw myself [113:51] disconnecting from my Social Circle I [113:54] used to go uh to I had season tickets to [113:57] to to watch basketball I would stop [113:59] doing that stop watching my NFL football [114:01] on the weekends because it was just [114:02] spending time with with with you know [114:04] with with Jill and the boys and I [114:06] realized very quickly that what was [114:08] happening is I was investing everything [114:12] into my wife and my family and the issue [114:16] is that and this is this is what happens [114:19] with so many people is that I had had no [114:23] other confidence in my life I had [114:26] distanced myself from from almost [114:29] everyone and the issue from from that is [114:32] is then I'm bringing no value into the [114:34] relationship because I have no no other [114:37] relationships that's ultimately what [114:39] that means is when you have other [114:41] relationships when you have other [114:42] friendship circles you're learning new [114:44] things you're bringing novelty into your [114:47] relationship you are adding spice to [114:49] your relationship I wasn't doing any of [114:50] that that continued for quite some time [114:52] this this is one of the reasons why I [114:55] got involved with football here is that [114:58] being involved now with a with a with a [115:00] football team in England has allowed me [115:04] an outlet outside of my family and even [115:08] outside of my Social Circle that I was [115:11] building here that is entirely different [115:14] right it's it's it's a different group [115:16] of PE it's a group of people who I had [115:19] not come across in my walks of of of [115:21] life who I love and adore and learn so [115:25] much from and I have a sense of [115:27] enjoyment and because I have a sense of [115:29] enjoyment there I begin to have more [115:32] purpose in my life I begin to have more [115:36] joy in my life and the more joyful I am [115:40] about my entire life I can bring that to [115:42] my relationship and help to boost that [115:45] that that relationship and and so it's [115:47] almost like you know if if you think [115:49] about uh if you're an electrical battery [115:53] right and you're charging and you are [115:55] the battery how wonderful would it be to [115:58] be able to get a charge from 8 sources [116:01] opposed to one right maybe the the one [116:03] is not working today and therefore you [116:04] you you don't get charged up but if You' [116:06] have eight if you're getting charged [116:08] eight different sources right it hires [116:11] the likelihood of you being charged up [116:14] um to uh you know to to to live your [116:16] best life and I think this is where the [116:18] attachment Styles comes into to play [116:20] again because I think in my relationship [116:22] I'm maybe a little bit more of on the [116:23] avoidant side and she's maybe a little [116:26] bit more on the anxious side so I think [116:27] there's a desire in me to like space [116:29] Freedom explore Wonder um she has that [116:32] too of course but I think I just I have [116:34] it a little bit more so it can sometimes [116:36] feel like she's pursuing yes the the [116:41] quality time and I'm maybe pursuing [116:45] being on my own yes which causes this [116:47] sort of dysfunction or this this [116:49] imbalance I guess some couples who are [116:51] both anxious I don't know if they get on [116:53] but no I mean what happens most of the [116:55] time is [116:57] anxious find avoidance oh okay yeah so [117:01] th those are the two that that end up [117:03] matching and it's very important to work [117:05] for for you both to work on an earned [117:07] secure one of the best ways to do that [117:09] is to surround yourself with couples who [117:12] are secure why is it that anxious [117:15] relationship attachment Styles go for [117:17] avoidance you'd think they'd go for [117:18] anxious right and and we should probably [117:20] pause to Define what these attachment [117:23] Styles mean sure sure so uh out of Mary [117:27] answorth and John bulby uh research uh [117:31] which you know buby from the UK answorth [117:33] from from Canada the whole idea is is uh [117:37] it was something called The Strange [117:38] situations test which examined the [117:42] relationship that we have with our first [117:44] caregivers and those who had a secure [117:47] attachment is where your caregiver was [117:51] really always there for you so in your [117:53] time of need your caregiver was always [117:55] there to to to be of support anxious [117:59] which a large percentage of the [118:00] population is is is anxious anxious is [118:03] where your caregiver was there sometimes [118:05] other times they they weren't this is is [118:08] very prevalent in Immigration [118:09] communities first second generation [118:11] especially second generation immigrants [118:13] where your uh parent was working you [118:16] know they're out hustling multiple jobs [118:19] and they're there for you sometimes but [118:21] they can't be there for for you all the [118:22] time and then you have avoidant avoidant [118:24] is when the caregiver wasn't there so [118:27] you had to learn to self Soo you end up [118:31] seeing a large number of very successful [118:34] business people [118:36] are avoidance why because they've [118:39] learned to be [118:41] self-reliant [118:44] anxious turn tend to be more of the what [118:47] feels to be needy right secure I'm I'm [118:50] okay you know I'm I'm okay about myself [118:53] now why does to to do anxious and [118:55] avoidance end up matching because the [118:58] anxious feels comfortable in [119:02] Pursuit that's their that's our because [119:05] I'm that's our that's our disposition [119:07] and I think I'm I'm earning more of a of [119:09] a secure but our my natural inclination [119:13] is that I'm comfortable in [119:15] Pursuit and avoidant is comfortable [119:18] being pursued [119:22] because you have an opportunity to [119:24] connect but then create the distance you [119:27] know when you want to so you end up [119:28] seeing many anxious and avoidance come [119:32] together and it's important to recognize [119:35] that so you've already recognized this [119:36] which is half the battle is the [119:39] awareness now you can begin to develop [119:42] the tools to become more secure that's [119:45] difficult that's the work it's difficult [119:48] isn't it I think Step One is obviously [119:50] awareness because then you can start [119:52] start to sort of catch yourself out and [119:53] see yourself when you're exhibiting [119:54] certain behaviors and really start to [119:55] question them that's kind of what I do [119:57] now as an avoidant I when when my [119:59] partners like looking for attention and [120:02] looking for you know making those bids [120:04] for attention as they call them I [120:07] observe what they're doing I observe how [120:09] I feel about it I and I then rationalize [120:14] it um above both of those observations [120:17] in a different way so I'll rationalize [120:19] it as I love this person so much and if [120:21] they need some attention now just play [120:22] the game Steve just give them what they [120:23] want whereas before I'd be like why are [120:26] they annoying me [120:29] mean yes but I have to do that every day [120:32] like as many of these podcasts as I've [120:33] done as many times I've heard about [120:34] attachment Styles it's still an ongoing [120:37] battle yes and I think this is important [120:39] because sometimes we believe that we're [120:40] fixed or cured because we have [120:42] information that we're going to act upon [120:44] it at all times but the wiring is so [120:47] deep it it is and it it is it is a [120:50] Continuum it it never ends [120:52] and to your point is this is the work [120:55] the work is that mental energy right [120:58] that you had to go through uh you you're [121:00] doing uh this uh uh thing Dr Julie Smith [121:02] talks about it metacognition is really [121:04] what you're doing having the thought [121:06] about the thought and [121:09] that is tiring Tire exhausting it's [121:12] exhaust to do that all the time is [121:14] exhausting but that's the [121:17] price that you're paying to have the [121:20] relationship that's the work yeah and [121:23] she's worth it yeah people that listen [121:25] to this podcast will know that like you [121:27] know when I talk about marriage and [121:28] stuff it's not um anything to do with [121:30] her in particular in fact she's the [121:31] person that's made me want to get [121:32] married she's the person that's made me [121:33] agnostic before I was against it now I'm [121:35] like it doesn't really matter if she [121:36] wants it then I I don't really care um [121:39] so I'm saying all of this in spite of [121:41] the fact that I believe I'm with the [121:42] perfect person yes and when I say [121:43] perfect I mean Perfectly Imperfect as [121:46] well yes as as I am to her but I just [121:49] couldn't imagine ever finding anyone [121:50] better so I'm saying all of this in [121:52] spite of that just in case anyone was [121:53] wondering and I genuinely mean that like [121:55] I wouldn't say otherwise I'm not saying [121:56] that just for the sake of it I my [121:57] friends know this too my friends all [121:59] believe and I believe that she is [122:00] there's no one I'm ever going to find [122:01] that's better than her yes [122:04] um few more questions that I had that [122:07] came emerged from reading your book [122:08] which by the way is superb thank you I [122:11] have to say it is published by flight [122:12] books and there's probably some kind of [122:13] disclaimer I have to give for the ASA [122:15] com for me but um so that's hasht ad but [122:19] um one of the ones that was quite [122:21] provocative to me me is this [122:26] question should you keep secrets from [122:28] your [122:29] partner this is big [122:33] yes so many people are like well don't [122:38] say that this is crazy what you're [122:41] saying there are quite a few studies on [122:45] a concept called selective disclosure [122:49] and a matter of fact one of I think the [122:52] most provocative compelling studies on [122:55] selective disclosure looked at uh you [122:58] know many many couples and one couple or [123:02] one one group was told to be entirely [123:06] transparent to your partner so tell them [123:09] everything every issue every concern [123:12] that pops into your mind tell them right [123:15] that's full transparency then the other [123:17] was selective disclosure now what is [123:19] selective disclosure there rules to [123:21] selective disclosure one is is that you [123:24] share information that's relevant right [123:27] you share information that considers [123:29] their [123:30] emotions information that considers [123:32] their [123:33] boundaries information that acknowledges [123:37] the future of your relationship that is [123:40] timely and the tone is very important [123:43] how it's delivered that's selective [123:45] disclosure so this group was told to do [123:48] that what do you think happens at the [123:50] end of the result at the end of the [123:53] experiment everyone in the transparent [123:55] group they've killed each other no I'm I [123:59] was going to say Jesus no no no they [124:01] they haven't killed each other but the [124:03] group that had selective disclosure has [124:05] higher [124:06] satisfaction less conflict more autonomy [124:10] in their relationship so it's very [124:12] important to know that what I say secret [124:14] is is I'm saying you have to [124:18] selectively decide and I think selective [124:20] disclosure is a concept we should spend [124:24] more time thinking about so give me an [124:27] example of something that I shouldn't [124:28] say to my partner okay so well once [124:31] again it depends what your partner's [124:33] boundaries are right so so you discussed [124:36] these boundaries you know all these [124:37] things but but but just generalizing [124:38] I'll give an example so your partner [124:42] always leaves the cap off the toothpaste [124:45] always it annoys you it annoys you right [124:49] it annoys you [124:52] however you know your partner is going [124:54] through a lot of stress at work they're [124:55] working on a new [124:57] project is it the right time to bring up [125:00] the fact that the cap annoys [125:04] you probably not probably not here's a [125:09] juicier [125:10] one your [125:12] ex slides into your [125:14] DMs and wants to congratulate [125:17] you and it's platonic it's [125:21] congratulations you respond [125:24] back thank you that's it nothing [125:28] more look at you speaking from [125:32] experience was it on the new book what [125:34] was it on what did she congratulate was [125:36] it the podcast congratulations on your [125:38] new [125:40] podcast thank [125:41] you arive delet block right it's like [125:45] thank you right so [125:47] boom you know your partner [125:52] is working through a trauma around [125:55] jealousy is it do you run home and say [125:58] so and so sent me this message probably [126:01] not right so selective disclosure means [126:04] that you're taking into consideration [126:06] the relevance of the information their [126:08] boundaries their emotions Etc try to it [126:11] it truly is a concept that I believe [126:13] will help to increase satisfaction and [126:15] lower conflict in your relationship I [126:17] think that's super important uh because [126:19] a lot a lot of the narrative has just [126:20] never lied to your partner and it's it's [126:22] interesting cuz all of those things [126:23] you've said have happened to me in my [126:25] relationships before where an ex slides [126:27] into your DMs and I'm literally sat with [126:28] my girlfriend and my the ex is just [126:30] saying oh love this or something and you [126:32] like almost panic because I'm like I [126:33] don't want to lie yes but at the same [126:35] time what's the point in me stopping [126:37] this moment to say something that's [126:38] irrelevant and you know [126:41] um interesting very very interesting [126:45] it's an important Insight you you're [126:46] talking there about diminishing conflict [126:48] and I am I was recording some stuff over [126:51] the week weekend where I was thinking [126:52] about relationshipss and one of the [126:54] things I've really come to believe over [126:56] time is that the [126:57] the the best predictor of a long-term [127:00] relationship is what how you are at [127:02] conflict resolution yes and there's this [127:04] quote that I love that I've never [127:05] forgotten that says You can predict the [127:08] long-term health of a relationship by [127:10] whether each cut heals to 99% or [127:13] 101% does your conflict make you [127:15] stronger I love that and in the big [127:17] thing that I noticed in this [127:18] relationship versus my previous [127:19] relationships is there was this in built [127:23] natural conflict resolution system based [127:25] on who we were as people okay and I say [127:28] that because like she doesn't want to [127:29] shout she doesn't want to scream she [127:30] wants to listen I don't want to shout I [127:32] don't want to scream I want to listen [127:34] which meant that from the first moment [127:35] of conflict we were able to resolve it [127:37] and move on yes whereas in previous [127:39] relationships it was like two people [127:41] that were just broken records trying to [127:43] get their point across at the other [127:44] person yes almost trying to win yeah you [127:47] know so one is I love that quote I love [127:49] that and what I found and I age our [127:52] ability to and I say you know I I I'm [127:55] careful with using the word management [127:58] now opposed to resolve given the [128:00] research from the Gman around how uh 69% [128:04] of these issues won't be resolved but [128:06] but managing the conflict there's two [128:08] ways that we typically try to manage it [128:11] one is we try to win the [128:14] argument that is the route that is [128:17] always going to lead to a low level of [128:20] satisfaction the other route is to try [128:23] to gain understanding about why your [128:26] partner thought [128:28] that so so so it's just simply I just [128:32] want to understand right should you [128:35] apologize absolutely should you always [128:38] apologize all right so so here here's [128:40] what the research shows this is well I [128:42] will say this I uh when I was writing [128:43] the [128:44] book I was writing a chapter on [128:47] apologies and I go to Jill and I say [128:50] Jill how many times a month do you think [128:53] I apologize to you and she's like [128:58] H you only apologize like every other [129:00] month so she's saying that I apologize [129:03] about six times to her per year and I [129:05] was thinking oh this is terrible because [129:08] the data shows the most successful [129:11] Partnerships there's an apology every [129:13] week on average once a week and what I [129:17] realized in the Trap that I fell into [129:20] and I think a lot of men fall into this [129:22] is the threshold in which we believe we [129:25] should be apologizing so something will [129:28] happen in the relationship and I'll [129:31] think what I need to apologize for for [129:33] that it's just like it it is what it is [129:36] you know so for example I mean the the [129:38] trash is is always a big issue in my [129:40] household right so I'm supposed to take [129:42] the rubbish out or take the trash out [129:43] and sometimes I forget okay I forget I [129:46] don't think it's apology worthy to [129:49] forget to take it out but but I realize [129:52] that's my threshold but to my wife that [129:55] is a I mean there's World War III and [129:59] there's not taking out the rubbish so [130:02] that's a major issue so her threshold [130:04] level is different so part of what I [130:07] learned in investigating this chapter is [130:10] for us to be so in tune with our partner [130:12] that we understand what their threshold [130:15] is and we meet them at it I had an [130:18] incident in my relationship a couple of [130:20] weeks back maybe five six weeks ago [130:22] where I didn't want to apologize because [130:27] I wasn't sorry because I didn't think I [130:30] did anything wrong okay and I'm I think [130:32] I am actually quite quick to apologize [130:34] to my partner I've I've apologized this [130:36] week I've probably apologized last week [130:38] for something but it was a really [130:39] interesting moment we're actually in um [130:41] like relationships counseling therapy or [130:43] whatever we've been for since the start [130:45] of our relationship been doing this [130:46] we've been through like three different [130:47] therapists and I looked at the situation [130:50] of effectively and arrived at the [130:52] conclusion that in the future I would [130:55] not have done anything different so I [130:57] arrived at the conclusion that an [130:58] apology would actually be disingenuous [131:01] like I'm I would be apologizing for [131:02] something and probably setting a new [131:04] standard in our relationship that I know [131:06] I can't me in the future so I I [131:09] explained that and said I don't I don't [131:10] want to apologize because I wouldn't [131:11] mean it in this situation and I wondered [131:15] whether there's any Merit in that like [131:16] does your apology genuinely have to be [131:18] sincere or are you just doing it just to [131:20] keep the peace you're you're doing it [131:23] only when it's sincere but how we're [131:26] doing it is very important so in in the [131:28] research that I found only 50% of [131:32] apologies are actually effective right [131:35] what constitutes an effective apology [131:38] there's a system that I I've created [131:39] called Arc okay a acknowledge [131:44] acknowledge what happened yeah so for [131:47] example I am sorry that I interrup [131:51] interrupted you genuinely sorry right [131:54] that I'm sorry that I interrupted you [131:57] two is remorseful and I [131:59] apologize for the fact that you may feel [132:04] undervalued or not listen to as a result [132:08] that's the remorse and then the C is the [132:10] commitment and in the future I'm going [132:14] to try to um you know pay more [132:18] attention when we're having these [132:20] conversations so that I'm not [132:22] interrupting you right so this is this [132:24] is the the kind of you know what I call [132:27] Arc method but the idea is to make it [132:29] effective is to acknowledge what [132:31] happened be remorseful for the emotional [132:35] impact that's the key and that's where I [132:37] wanted to come with with yours and then [132:38] see is what's your commitment for the [132:40] future that makes it a comprehensive [132:43] apology so in your [132:45] situation perhaps what you did [132:49] objectively you would do in the future [132:52] but you are remorseful for how it made [132:54] her feel so I'll give you some context I [132:57] was basically working on something very [132:59] very important I was going through it [133:00] and I told her previously I'm going to [133:04] be going through this thing I need to be [133:06] working on this thing it's very very [133:07] important she knew the every single [133:09] detail of this project I was working on [133:12] okay she knew the the deadline she knew [133:14] the significance of it profound and one [133:16] thing I'd learned probably from doing [133:17] this podcast and speaking to you was [133:19] that assume people can't read your mind [133:21] yes so brief them yes and like if you're [133:23] going to be a bit strange if you're [133:25] going to be a bit focused let them know [133:27] ahead of time so I'd sat her down and [133:28] said listen for this period of time here [133:30] I'm going to be a bit weird and I'd [133:32] asked her to lower her expectations on [133:35] me okay which I think is a pretty like [133:37] Forward Thinking thing to do and within [133:41] a short period of time we had had uh a [133:45] disagreement a moment of conflict [133:48] because upon like while I was working on [133:50] this thing [133:52] on the third bid for attention I had [133:55] seemingly ignored it which caused a [133:57] spiral and I hate when you ignore me and [133:59] I'd said listen I told you I was I sat [134:01] you literally sat you down night before [134:03] and in the morning and had a [134:04] conversation with you just to tell you [134:05] what was going on and how I needed to [134:06] focus on this thing yes so I thought the [134:09] reason why I didn't want to apologize [134:10] was because I thought I did everything I [134:12] thought I was supposed to do like I [134:14] thought I was like i' let the person [134:15] know told them exactly what let them in [134:16] on it let them know what was going on in [134:18] my nervous system let them know what was [134:19] going on in my mind and we still ended [134:22] up in this like situation where there [134:25] was a bid for attention and I wasn't [134:26] quite there but I literally said I'm not [134:28] I'm probably not going to be very [134:30] present right now yes so I thought well [134:33] what could I have done in [134:34] future like what more could I have done [134:37] Y in that situation so I thought maybe I [134:38] shouldn't be apologizing here because I [134:41] actually don't know what commitment I [134:42] can make [134:43] to so then do you just not apologize [134:46] then you just didn't apologize so we [134:48] were in theer we were in like a the [134:50] coup's therapy thing okay so I was [134:52] telling the therapists this to see what [134:53] they their perspective was and they [134:55] didn't they I think they kind of sided [134:57] with me really I think they started with [135:00] me and then my partner ended up [135:01] apologizing which is quite rare because [135:03] I typically think that I should [135:05] apologize oh my gosh okay well so I may [135:07] have a different take then okay please [135:10] one [135:12] is you have you're clear that your [135:15] partner is anxious yeah she knows she's [135:17] anxious so you're aware that as a result [135:21] of her being anxious there's a higher [135:24] level of reassurance that she is going [135:26] to need while she is working on healing [135:28] and becoming earn earn detached but [135:31] people never really heal you never I [135:34] never heal you well you know what [135:36] healing is continual yeah the question [135:40] though is can she get to a place of [135:42] being secure absolutely happens to many [135:44] people so she's in the process of [135:46] evolving into secure so while she's [135:48] evolving into secure you have to give [135:50] her that benefit of the doubt that she's [135:51] going to need a little bit more on the [135:53] reassurance front that's one secondly is [135:57] if you did sit her down you explain all [135:59] these things what also could be the case [136:02] I'm not saying this is but what also [136:04] could be the case is that there's not [136:07] enough emotional deposits that she [136:11] currently has in the account I think [136:13] that's fact so as a result of there not [136:16] being enough she's checking in for for [136:19] the for the uh re Assurance so being [136:22] aware of those two things the fact that [136:25] she has an anxious attachment she's [136:27] developing secure but she has anxious so [136:29] she'll her threshold is is is higher for [136:31] the need or lower for the need and you [136:34] may not have given enough emotional [136:36] currency early on it makes sense to me [136:40] that she would kind of check in and and [136:42] and there would be a bid now given the [136:47] fact that you're head down you're [136:48] focused you acknowledge the bid and you [136:51] specifically said you chose to [136:54] ignore the bid the third one it was the [136:58] third bid it was the third it wasn't it [137:00] was I actually didn't feel like I not it [137:02] I looked up and smiled but she was 100 [137:04] meters away from me okay and she and [137:07] then I okay I'm GNA be completely honest [137:08] okay because I'm there's no point me [137:10] bullshitting this is good this is okay [137:11] okay so I I looked up I smiled and then [137:14] I got up and walked across and I picked [137:16] up my headphones and I came back and [137:21] s [ __ ] up when I say I know I [ __ ] [137:25] up no I [137:27] know it's worse than I thought I thought [137:30] the two I thought there were two [137:31] separate incidents I thought it was the [137:34] smile and then I thought maybe if I put [137:36] my headphones on I could focus no no you [137:39] you need immediately after this you need [137:41] to go apologize [ __ ] yeah you you know I [137:44] I thought there were two separate [137:45] incidents I thought look up smile H and [137:48] then I need to go get them headphones [137:51] because because I need to focus on [137:53] writing this thing no no when when a bid [137:56] comes through when a bid comes through [137:59] we know Goins talk about this all the [138:00] time when the bid comes through is it's [138:02] important to affirm the bid but this is [138:06] a great opportunity to discuss what [138:09] affirming a bid is you know what would [138:12] in that moment what would have been [138:14] enough for her to feel reassured have [138:16] that conversation maybe it she would [138:19] have said if when you right before you [138:21] picked up the [138:22] headphones a hug or a kiss on the cheek [138:25] would have been great I would be good [138:27] right and so to be aware of what it [138:30] means to be reaffirmed is is is is so [138:33] important or should I say affirmed is so [138:34] important so in this case I would a if I [138:37] were you I I would [138:40] apologize and do that investigation [138:43] around what affirming means because [138:46] everyone needs to be affirmed you know [138:48] differently I'll apologize to her [138:50] promise but no it's a good I'll actually [138:52] I'm seeing her tonight so I'll just let [138:53] her know that I've got a slight [138:54] different perspective on it now I love [138:55] it um let's go for one more myth okay [138:59] okay let's go for two more all right um [139:02] because this one's a prevailing one that [139:03] I've been exposed to in my relationships [139:05] should you go to bed angry at your [139:07] partner this is perhaps the most [139:11] believed [139:12] myth period we always hear [139:16] this just apologize and it's not just in [139:20] romantic relationships you know I [139:22] noticed this all the time when I was in [139:25] school when I was when I was younger is [139:27] if there was a disagreement or an [139:29] argument the teacher would say just [139:31] apologize right I I played football uh [139:34] American football and you know the coach [139:36] would say just just just you know just [139:38] just swipe it like Ju Just make up like [139:42] and you think about that and what we're [139:46] saying is that if you appear to be in [139:50] Harmony you have a great relationship [139:54] but we know that's a falsehood in [139:57] actuality the key is that if you are [139:59] able to fully manage what is happening [140:02] be aware acknowledge make adjustments [140:04] around the conflict then at that point [140:08] you are living in a true harmonious [140:10] relationship in a healthy relationship [140:12] so whenever people say oh we got into [140:14] disagreement just make up before bed I [140:16] think that is some of the most [140:17] disastrous advice you can have why [140:20] because you're going to be dist like you [140:22] just get into an argument you're going [140:23] to be entirely distressed entirely [140:26] distressed and then what kind of [140:28] response are you going to give you're [140:29] going to give the worst qualitative [140:32] response that you can will you reconcile [140:34] what's happening absolutely not a [140:36] profound study around this researchers [140:39] divided two groups of people one group [140:42] they showed distressing images to [140:45] terrible images terrible right and the [140:48] other group they say they showed the [140:50] same image [140:51] however the second group was allowed to [140:54] sleep for 8 hours at the end of 8 hours [140:58] so what group one can't sleep group two [141:00] saw the distressing images they can [141:02] sleep at the end of the eight hours they [141:06] then track the reaction to the images [141:09] what do you think happens the group that [141:12] didn't sleep that didn't rest that [141:14] didn't get regulated they report a much [141:17] higher level of distress around the [141:19] images the group group that is reporting [141:21] back that had sleep they're regulated [141:23] they're able to look at the images [141:27] differently they're not it's the same [141:29] image but they're not as distressed the [141:31] point here is that the best thing that [141:34] we can do to give ourselves regulation [141:36] is a cooling off period sleep on it so [141:40] you should go to bed angry you should go [141:42] to bed angry and when you wake [141:45] up resolve it the brain does wonderful [141:48] things in in your sleep doesn't it it [141:49] really helps to sort of pack things and [141:52] and make sense of things and rationalize [141:53] things better but also obviously it's [141:55] regulating hormones and the and the [141:57] Brain in a way which I guess will make [141:58] you make more rational decisions the [142:00] next morning not from the amydala but [142:02] from the logic centers of your brain [142:05] exactly exact rest is is a superpower [142:10] and we don't use it enough last myth [142:12] then if someone cheats on you okay is [142:18] that the end of the relationship [142:21] no or at least it doesn't have to be it [142:24] doesn't have to be uh I I I've referred [142:28] to the Gman a lot and I think the reason [142:30] why is because you know they really did [142:33] starting in the 1970s [142:36] change couples therapy right where [142:39] couples therapy primarily between like [142:42] the 1950s and 70s was about these [142:46] interventions when your relationship was [142:48] doomed and and and it was about to be [142:51] over so it was a last ditch effort was [142:53] to go to these therapists but the Gans [142:55] came along and said no you could build [142:56] these skills you could build these these [142:58] these these tools to help you all the [143:00] way through your relationship no matter [143:02] at what stage you're in but they also [143:04] spend a lot of time in what I call these [143:06] these these these these existential um [143:09] um issues like cheating and from their [143:13] research they show that 70% of people [143:15] who go through uh their process can end [143:19] up having a higher level of satisfaction [143:23] the key though is around the ability to [143:27] truly forgive your partner and what I [143:30] say all the time with infidelity whether [143:32] it may be emotional infidelity or [143:34] physical [143:35] infidelity is go see a professional [143:38] first especially if you've [143:40] built what you consider to be something [143:43] profound and special with your partner [143:46] they believe it's profound and special [143:48] and in particular they want to fight and [143:51] you have an awareness for how special it [143:53] is go see a professional because seeing [143:55] a professional literally can put you [143:57] back on track to have a phenomenal [144:00] relationship question I didn't think I [144:02] was going to ask you but I probably [144:03] should ask you based on that because [144:04] we're talking about infidelity what [144:06] about digital [144:08] infidelity only fans only F well so I [144:11] mean is that infidelity does that count [144:13] does pornography count as infidelity [144:15] well long story short is it depends on [144:17] who you ask most people that I talk to [144:20] qualify that as infidelity if you're not [144:25] disclosing to your partner that you're [144:27] doing it so if you were out here on only [144:30] fans or or a a full pornographic site [144:35] and you do not disclose to your partner [144:38] that this is something that you do [144:41] that's infidelity that's cheating right [144:45] if it's something that you disclose you [144:47] have a conversation about then then [144:48] clearly it's not right so for some [144:50] people they will say that's still it is [144:53] in my opinion if you were not disclosing [144:56] that to your partner it is I'm reading [144:59] some stats here and it says that about [145:01] 80% of men view porn on their [145:06] own um and roughly [145:10] 35% of women reported to watching [145:13] pornography on their [145:17] own so watching on your own [145:21] without your partner having any [145:23] awareness of [145:26] that for for many people that would be [145:29] or or or I I believe many people would [145:31] consider that [145:33] infidelity with a quarter of men [145:36] reporting that they conceal their [145:37] pornography consumption from their [145:39] partner and nearly a third of women [145:41] Express concerns about their partner's [145:43] pornography use [145:45] yeah yeah you know this is why I I think [145:49] it's so important [145:51] we have to normalize it almost goes back [145:53] to [145:54] normalizing being [145:56] attracted to people we have to normalize [146:00] this because with the attraction there's [146:03] emotional there's physical and there's [146:05] sexual attraction and we have to [146:08] understand that this is a part of Being [146:10] Human this is what we've been given and [146:14] the reason why one reason why that we [146:17] hide it is because Society likes to [146:18] shame us and say oh no once found your [146:20] partner you should never have eyes for [146:22] anyone else and part of that is what the [146:25] script that's been handed to us and we [146:26] talked about religion having impact on [146:28] this and we have we have to normalize [146:30] these conversations because when we do [146:32] we'll have higher satisfaction because [146:35] we'll realize that you know like you [146:39] turn around and say oh my God like my [146:40] partner does this too you know what I [146:42] mean um so it's incredibly important for [146:46] us to normalize this concept around [146:48] having an a level of attra raction [146:51] outside of our [146:52] partner when it comes to food I trust my [146:55] gut and I trust Zoe a business I'm an [146:57] investor in and today's sponsor of this [146:59] podcast all the nutritionists I've [147:01] spoken to have highlighted just how [147:02] misleading information is out there when [147:04] it comes to food take healthy Halos the [147:06] claims you see on packaging that say [147:08] things like low sugar and nothing [147:10] artificial are often a sign of foods to [147:12] avoid have you ever noticed a health [147:14] claim on fresh fruit you probably get my [147:16] point understandably there's loads of [147:18] distrust out there who should you turn [147:20] to for accurate information I use Zoe [147:23] which is backed by one of the world's [147:24] largest microbiome databases and most [147:27] scientifically Advanced atome gut health [147:29] tests Zoe gives you proven science [147:31] whenever you need it as a Zoe member [147:33] you'll get an atome test kit and [147:35] personalized nutrition program to help [147:36] you make smarter food choices that [147:38] support your gut to sign up visit [147:40] zoe.com and use my code steven1 for 10% [147:44] off your membership that's zoe.com code [147:47] steven10 trust your gut [147:50] so I've invested more than a million [147:53] pounds into this company Perfect Ted and [147:55] they're also a sponsor of this podcast I [147:57] switched over to using matcha is my [147:58] dominant energy source and that's where [148:00] perfect Ted comes in they have the [148:01] matcha powders they have the matcha [148:03] drinks they have the pods and all of [148:05] this keeps me Focus throughout a very [148:07] very long recording day no matter what's [148:09] going on and their team is obsessed with [148:11] quality which is why they Source their [148:13] ceremonial grade matcha from Japan so [148:16] when people say to me that they don't [148:17] like the taste of matcha I'm guessing [148:18] that they haven't tried perfect Ted [148:20] unlike lowquality matcher that has a [148:22] bitter grassy taste perfect Ted is [148:24] smooth and naturally sweet and without [148:26] knowing it you're probably a perfect T [148:28] customer already if you're getting your [148:29] match at places like blank Street or Joe [148:31] in the juice but now you can make it [148:34] yourself at home so give it a try and [148:36] we'll see if you still don't like [148:37] matcher so here's what I'm going to do [148:39] I'm going to give you 40% off our [148:41] matcher if you try it today head to [148:43] perfect head.com and use code Steven 40 [148:46] or if you're in a supermarket you can [148:48] get it at tesos or Holland and Barrett [148:49] or in the Netherlands at Albert Heine [148:51] and those of you in the US you can get [148:53] it on [148:55] Amazon is it ever productive in a [148:57] relationship to be overtly jealous like [149:00] to be babe where are you texting when [149:03] are you coming home like that kind of [149:04] jealousy where you're like expressing [149:05] the jealousy so so so that level of [149:08] overtness in your jealousy I would say [149:10] is is is dangerous and it speaks to your [149:16] insecurities and this is why I always [149:17] say like because that goes to doubts in [149:19] the relationship and you know there are [149:21] healthy doubts if if the question is [149:22] around growth of the [149:24] relationship that's healthy if it is [149:27] about a fear based on an [149:30] insecurity that's [149:33] unhealthy Paul this is a exceptional [149:36] book this is an exceptional book um [149:38] really it's exceptional because it [149:40] confronts some of the biggest myths that [149:42] I think hold us all back from being able [149:44] to keep love and in many respects find [149:46] love in our relationships so I highly [149:48] recommend everybody who's listening [149:50] right now check out the link in the [149:52] description you can get a copy of this [149:53] book on pre-order it'll be out a week [149:56] from now roughly on the 6th of February [149:58] I believe it comes out the 6th of [149:59] February [150:00] 2025 and it is the book probably the [150:03] only book you'll need um in order to [150:05] increase the probability drastically [150:08] that once you find that person you will [150:10] do the very difficult maybe even more [150:12] difficult thing of being able to keep [150:13] that person um because I like many [150:16] people listening Once Upon a Time [150:18] thought the game was to find them and [150:20] now I've been in a relationship for some [150:22] time I realized that that's actually [150:24] when the work begins and that's what [150:25] these 20 this this book that debunks [150:28] these 25 myths really helps us to do in [150:31] a way that is so accessible so um [150:35] actionable um and really strikes at the [150:37] heart of a lot of society's BS to be [150:40] quite Frank um it's published by flight [150:42] books which I probably have to say for [150:43] legal reasons which is our publisher as [150:44] well um but nonetheless I read this book [150:47] and you're this is the reason why I [150:48] wanted to speak you today cuz it's [150:50] really essential book and there's a lot [150:52] of mass media social media propagated [150:55] myths that I think are really standing [150:56] in the way of most of us Paul we have a [150:59] closing tradition on this podcast where [151:00] the last guest leaves a question for the [151:02] next guest not knowing who they're [151:03] leaving it for and the question that's [151:05] been left for you is what experience did [151:09] you have around age 10 to 13 where you [151:13] discovered your own power to get things [151:15] done without your parents being involved [151:19] I know right away [151:20] right away when you said 10 to 13 I [151:22] zeroed in to me in New York in Long [151:29] Island on a bus on a school bus getting [151:33] my head smashed in to that school bus so [151:40] I was uh our family was one of the first [151:44] black families to move into this all [151:47] Italian neighborhood um in Long Island [151:50] New York and uh there were a lot of [151:55] people who you would put into the to the [151:56] bully category and there was one person [152:00] in particular that [152:02] really was was was was trying to get to [152:05] me and time after time he would taunt me [152:08] he would say certain things uh he had [152:11] control he was like the bully of the bus [152:13] and I had no friends on this bus and he [152:15] would literally sometimes like smash my [152:19] head into the the the glass as he was [152:21] walking out and the bus driver would [152:23] look and never stop never say anything [152:25] and I remember that but you know what [152:28] every day I got back out on that bus and [152:32] a lot of the times that he was smashing [152:34] my head it was because I would say [152:36] something to him as he was walking out [152:38] or he would be outside and I never [152:40] forget like he would walk off the bus [152:42] and I would still flick him off right [152:45] and he would get back on the bus smash [152:47] my head in the next day [152:51] I I hit him again and I learned how [152:53] resilient I am I'm a resilient guy [152:56] resilient right I keep you you you push [152:59] me down I get right back up Maybe not [153:01] immediately but I'm definitely getting [153:04] back up and so that was what I learned [153:07] and that was without having uh you know [153:09] my parents involved that was just me [153:11] it's crazy how you can remember that so [153:13] quickly I I love how uh that question [153:15] was posed because you know it it focused [153:17] on the lesson yeah you know know from [153:20] from um from from that moment and it's [153:23] interesting because I've thought about [153:25] that moment many times but I've never [153:27] thought about the lesson until this [153:29] question you know and so it's empowering [153:32] to look at it from that perspective but [153:33] it's interesting because you chose an [153:35] empowering lesson oh do you know what I [153:38] mean so that's like the choice you made [153:40] there I was reading this book called the [153:41] courage to be disliked I don't know if [153:43] you've read that book no but it [153:44] basically says that what happened the [153:46] first chapter in it anyway says that [153:48] what happened to us in our past doesn't [153:50] determine our future in fact we choose [153:54] how to take what happened in our past to [153:57] serve a current goal so that thing that [154:01] happened to you on the bus you've chosen [154:04] to take the goal of like it's going to [154:06] make you resilient today and you've said [154:08] to yourself now I'm a resilient person [154:10] because I get back up now someone else [154:12] could have [154:13] said they could have chosen today to [154:17] adopt a like a victim mentality and they [154:20] could have said I'm always the one that [154:23] gets picked on yes and that's just my [154:26] luck yes and that would serve a current [154:29] goal of an image that you want to [154:31] maintain and construct today now the [154:33] image you want to construct is you [154:34] you're the type of person that gets back [154:36] up so anyway the power is within you no [154:38] that's brilliant it really is Paul thank [154:41] you everybody please go get this book [154:43] it's an incredible book and it's [154:44] probably the definitive book on this [154:46] subject and that pulls on so many [154:47] different reference points from PS [154:49] experience as a Matchmaker to a lot of [154:51] the science to the interviews you've now [154:52] done it's an Incredible Book keep Love [154:55] by Paul C brunon 21 Truth for a [154:57] longlasting relationship thank you [154:59] brother thank you thank [155:03] you do you know that 80% of New Year's [155:06] resolutions fail by February it's [155:07] because we focus too much on the end [155:10] goal and we forget the small daily [155:12] actions that actually move us forward [155:13] those actions that are easy to do are [155:15] also easy not to do in life it's easy to [155:17] save a dollar so it's also easy not to [155:19] making one small Improvement each day [155:22] one tiny step in the right direction has [155:24] a big difference over time and that is [155:26] the 1% mindset which is why we created [155:28] the 1% diary a 90day journal designed to [155:32] help you stay consistent and focus on [155:33] the small wins and make real progress [155:36] over time it also gives you access to [155:38] the 1% Community a space where you can [155:40] stay accountable motivated inspired [155:42] along with many others on the same [155:43] Journey we launched the 1% diary in [155:45] November and it sold out so now we're [155:47] doing a second drop head Toth diary.com [155:51] to grab yours before it sells out again [155:53] I'll put the link below [155:56] [Music] [156:07] [Music]