There are five love languages: physical touch, words of affirmation, gifts, quality time, and acts of service. (You can read the whole love languages book if you want to know more.) All of these are equivalent, meaning that there is no “better” or “more real” way to express love. Intellectually, people will agree with this, but on a deeper, more personal level, people tend to think that their preferred love language is somehow more genuine or meaningful. I see this all the time in couples work, and it sabotages couples’ chances for empathy, closeness, and progress.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Most of the time, the way I see this manifest is when women think that physical touch is a less important love language than verbal affirmation, quality time, or acts of service. (For whatever reason, nobody feel that gifts are their primary language, or maybe nobody admits to it.) The woman (or the lower libido partner, which is more often the woman in a long term monogamous heterosexual pairing) often feels one of the following ways about her husband’s physical touch love language:
(1) Physical touch, especially sex, is like the “bells and whistles” on top of a relationship. It is not necessary, but is a nice add on.
(2) Physical touch, especially sex, should never be something you try to get in the mood for. That is icky and smacks of nonconsent. It should arise organically.
(3) Physical touch outside of sex is nothing that anyone “needs.” Sexual release itself may be a need for a man; therefore, any sex that is provided, even unenthusiastic duty sex, can meet this need.
It is interesting to think about how this would look if it were the woman’s verbal affirmation love language being discussed. What if the husband said:
“Saying nice things is the bells and whistles on top of the relationship. She shouldn’t need it. If I’m not in the mood to be nice, it is gross for me to try to make myself say nice things. She shouldn’t want me to force it. If anything, I can say, ‘You look nice today’ in a flat, dull monotone with no eye contact and this can meet her need for verbal affirmation.”
Within the context of our feelings- and verbal-focused culture, which manifests nowhere as much as it does in couples therapy (which is why guys often hate couples counseling), the partner whose love language is physical touch is set up to fail. It is somehow thought of as more real, genuine, or good for partners to bond via talking or spending time together than for them to bond via physical closeness. This is completely false and puts the partner whose love language is physical touch in a one-down position in the relationship, where they are made to feel that their needs are less real than the other partner’s, or that the other partner’s needs should be met before theirs are even considered.
Imagine a parent saying, “My child loves to hug me, but I prefer talking. Therefore, I routinely deny, minimize, and even mock her need for hugs and initiate long conversations about how she feels about me, her, and our relationship as mother and daughter. If she talks for long enough, I will give her a quick hug at night, although sometimes I tell her that her hug quota for the week is already met.” This would be considered sadistic and emotionally abusive. Yet, the child in this scenario and the partner with the unmet physical touch need likely feel very similarly. (Incidentally, there is no utility in saying, “Well, a child shouldn’t go without touch but an adult can.” There is not too much difference emotionally between adults who are vulnerable in an intimate relationship and children who are vulnerable with their parents. This is why a healthy marriage reparents you, and allows you to get needs met that weren’t met in childhood.)
I am not saying that women should force themselves to have sex despite feeling visceral disgust or revulsion. If you have to force yourself past a point of disgust to have sex, you should immediately head into counseling to figure out if your relationship can be saved. If you feel this way, it is likely due to a lot of bitterness, unrepaired empathic ruptures, and anger. However, I am saying that physical touch is no different from any other love language within the context of a relationship. Often, when the partner without a physical touch love language has the epiphany that the other partner feels they NEED touch to feel loved, the same way as they themselves NEED nice comments or time together to feel loved, they can finally empathize with and deeply understand their partner. This lays the groundwork for growth together as a couple, and the possibility of both partners finally being able to meet one another’s deepest needs.
Share this with your partner if one of you has the physical touch love language and the other does not. It may well lead to some very interesting and useful conversations. And till we meet again, I remain, The Blogapist Who Says, Also Read This.