The value of compromise in relationships

One of my friends who has struggled in his relationship for years recently wrote a great entry, which I am sharing with you to contrast my view:

The more I think about it, the more I wonder if the importance of compromise in a relationship is over-emphasized.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's useless or unimportant, just that maybe it's given too much credit for its ability to make a relationship work.

Occasional compromise is certainly necessary.  No two people in any type of relationship, be they spouses or family or coworkers or friends, will ever see eye-to-eye on everything.  This makes compromise an occasional necessity.  But to hear some people talk about it, you would think compromise is all you need, and can solve every problem in a relationship.

To be sure, there are certain times it comes in handy.  Let's say Jack and Jill are married, and Jack wants "A" in the relationship, while Jill wants "C".  One would think that Jack and Jill should settle somewhere in the neighborhood of "B", meaning that neither person got exactly what they wanted, but neither is totally unsatisfied.  Sounds great, right?  Sure.  But we all know things aren't always that simple.

There are always situations in which a person in the relationship is completely unwilling to budge from their wishes.  There's nothing wrong with this - if Jack's not having "A" would make him completely unhappy, he is justified in standing up for his position.  What do you do in these situations?  The only viable alternative that will keep the relationship functioning is if Jill caves completely and lets Jack have his "A".  So long as Jack is willing to do the same for Jill when she has similarly strong feelings about something she wants, this can work, and ultimately is another form of compromise.

Looking at it another way, let's say that Jill still wants "C", and will be miserable without it.  If Jack loves Jill, shouldn't he want to cave in and let Jill have her "C"?  Maybe.  But contrarily, if Jill loves Jack,  shouldn't she be willing to deny herself "C" to keep Jack happy and their relationship strong?  After all, one of the commonly-cited definitions of love is a strong enough desire to see the other person happy that you are willing to deny yourself something to make the other happy.  So, should Jack be willing to cave and let Jill have "C"?  Should Jill give up her desire for "C" to make Jack happy?  Both?  Neither?  Somewhere in between?  Hell if I know.

I don't know how much of the above makes sense, but it's meant to point out my uncertainty on just how helpful we should expect a willingness to compromise in our relationships will be.  It seems to me, on the surface, that a healthy, wide-ranging area of common ground might prove more beneficial, while reserving compromise for the fringes of disagreement.  It's not healthy or even very nice for us to be stubborn and totally resistant to finding the middle ground, but it's equally if not more unhealthy to make ourselves miserable by constantly sacrificing our own desires for the "good of the relationship".

So as I have mentioned in different ways in the past, I have struggled with this. What is the level of compromise in a relationship? Should I forgo clubbing (one of my favorite activities) if my boyfriend doesn't like it? Should I do something that I abhor just to make him happy?

I have recently come to the conclusion that you should never do something that doesn't feel right, even if someone else wants you to. I know that many will say that this is bad advice, but in my experience, the best relationships are those in which there needs no compromise. I am idealistic, but I believe that the right relationship doesn't have compromise. This doesn't mean that you don't change, or "give in" in certain circumstances, it just means that you don't go against who you are while you are doing so.

Let me give you an example. I am interested in someone, and they tell me what they do. Chances are, I would have not had any previous interest in their line of work. I have 2 possible feelings at this point: Become interested, or not. If I don't become interested, I shouldn't force myself too. By doing so, I undermine my happiness and build our relationship on something false. I am a creative businessman. Science holds little for me. But say for example I were with a... geneticist... I might have an interest created for me that never existed before. With that created we can share in his life's work mutually and honestly.

So when and where do I feel that compromise works? Only when it is a creative solution that honestly makes both parties happy. If I want blue walls, and he wants red, purple won't really make either one of us happy, and thus is not the answer. That is a bad compromise. If we look at it and realize that we both would really like green walls, then suddenly we have a real and effective compromise.

I never think that one person's happiness means denying another's and in a relationship this is even more important. Use compromises only if it is true happiness that you get. "Give in" to them only if it really makes you happier than what you thought you wanted. That is, in my opinion, the only way to succeed and truly be happy.