The article ” You are not alone ,” now popular psychologist and journalist Michael Labkovsky in Elle magazine has caused a flurry of approving responses and critical comments on the network. I will share my thoughts. Immediately I say, that I am not a psychologist by profession, and said reflects my personal experience of family relations and observing the surrounding vapor. It is not a dogma, not teaching, not technology family happiness – this is experience, and more, he does not pretend.

It’s hard not to agree that in the article Michael a lot of sensible ideas. But what I personally argued, it is this:

1) Neurotics (both women and men) in the power unit of its psyche are doomed to lack of relationship or extremely unhappy and unsatisfying their relationship.

Nonsense! It is not necessary to spend a few years in the office of a therapist and a perfect cure your neurosis to find a pair and live happily ever after. So we have to demography will still be worse … The idea that you need to start a relationship only when I feel completely self-sufficient, is implemented in a profession and a hobby, I have a bunch of friends, get pleasure from the loneliness, love themselves and do not have the psychological problems – in my opinion, absolutely mythological and utopian. People – living being with them all the time that something happens: the ups and downs, they feel joy and fullness of life, depression and de-energized, then firmly and confidently stand on their feet, they want to support and the substituted friendly shoulder and sympathy . Living (and including live in relationship) is necessary here and now.

Moreover, I believe that good relations in the pair themselves much treated. There is much greater role is played not by childhood trauma and adult neuroses, and the ability to calmly (key word!) To reflect about what is happening between you and openness to change (in the first place itself, of course).

A simple example: the husband did you remark, which seemed harsh, you were upset and felt rejection, resentment or anger. You can respond rapidly and directly, and for you to distance himself from the situation and look at it from the side (in Tolstoy was a wonderful welcome “estrangement”). As they say, to stand on the ground of reality. Perhaps the calm analysis of the situation shows that the sharpness of her husband’s comments, you exaggerate, because you have difficulties at work and you feel uncomfortable and insecure. Now you need support, and when criticized instead you loved one, his criticism seems unbearable (in a different, more peaceful period of your life you would have on her and did not pay attention). Carrying out such an analysis, we can just quietly ask her husband to express their requests and wishes softer. The conflict is settled, it began.

The situation, of course, are more complex, but I have not seen any in which to conduct this model would be ineffective .. Of course, I now have in mind ordinary neurosis, not heavy psychopathological states. From daffodils, psychopaths and other heavy personalities better to stay away (and to know what they look like, you can read relevant articles and books). Such diseases cure only a doctor, and only when a very large human desire.

If a philosophical talk about human nature, that is, the doctrine that human behavior is considered strictly deterministic (and no matter what: biology, psychology – the same neurosis, society), and there are those who defend his freedom. Personally, I am convinced that a person remains free even in his neurosis, because it can always choose – whether to follow it for its own skewed settings, or to go beyond them, look in distorting mirrors or not (and it says a lot existential philosophy and psychology).

2) But back to that stage in life when the relationship had not yet. Michael writes that a healthy woman does not want to marry . However, after a couple of pages, he contradicts himself: “If you want a family and children, safely talk about it to my man.”

Probably, this is only one side of the coin. Yes, fashionable psychological theories now from each of the iron (that is, sorry, online edition) tell us psychologically healthy person in anybody does not need, it is able to live alone indefinitely and still enjoy life struggles. And if not absolute, this thesis, it is absolutely correct – every one of us to be able to be with the other, must learn to be able to be with yourself.

But there is another side of the coin, which usually falls in these arguments: attraction to the opposite sex is quite natural and simple human desire to have a family, children built into us as eye color in DNA. That most of the great book: “It is not good for man to be alone.” I think the problem is just for those people who deny it, pretending that “it does not hurt much and wanted.” Rather, the point is the fear of relationships. Maybe that’s why in a more or less healthy society, marriages are made to sign before it is done now – simply because there is no specific internal obstacles. Again, a healthy desire of a family does not mean obsession, but it seemed obvious.

3) Next. Michael says seems to be very correct idea: “A woman should never be tolerated in a relationship that she does not like” . If you start a relationship, and you have something does not suit, you voiced this man, and if he does not change his behavior, then immediately to part with it – that’s the sound advice of a psychologist.

I would say that this is absolutely true in theory. If a man for the third time in a row is late for a date with you, regularly making scathing remarks about your appearance or professional success, not escorted home at night, do not come to help you when you are sick, disrespectful talking about your parents and other and other – to run away from him, dropping sneaker! More precisely, the first to say that you do not like, and if it continues, then run. Of course, if you need to, to be respected and valued.

The question in the form in which a woman its demands (or, in other words, the man indicates how to treat it). Man – this is not a trained dog is not an object of manipulation, and if he is dear to you, to communicate with him in the tone of an ultimatum, to put it mildly, strange. Either it will have a nervous tic to communicate with you, or he will run away from such military discipline.

Adult man can bring his thoughts calmly and in a respectful tone. “I do not know, how do you feel otneseshsya but important family and children for me. If you do not fit, let’s discuss – perhaps we did not turn out the relationship and it is better not to start. ” And “Goodbye” can be quite polite.

Quite another story begins after marriage: before marriage, the fear of losing the relationship and unacceptable compromises – this evil, the marriage comes a time of great care, forgiveness and generosity. All the choice is made, you seek now to both of you were good together, and preferably 50-60 years of commercials – dissatisfaction and constant claims ruin relationships very quickly. However, the generosity and sympathy for the weaknesses of others does not equal condoning (like love itself is not equal to the absolute acceptance of all the shortcomings of the beloved).

So before marriage demands, but not manipulation, after the wedding – generosity, but not condoning.

But most importantly, what I have with Michael agree: in marriage and outside of marriage is the most interesting is the man who is himself – a genuine, true, without masks (which are sometimes really so hard on yourself to pull out), strong and weak at the same time whose inner world wants to know and rejoice in the fact that he lives and breathes around you.