Harmonizing vs. Compromising

The fallacy of equitable sacrifice

In the traditional vocabulary of relationships, the word "compromise" (understood as giving in or making concessions) has been elevated to the status of supreme virtue.

We are told that for a couple to work, both must give up a portion of what they desire in order to meet at a gray middle ground.

However, this philosophy has a serious structural flaw: if every time there is a disagreement, one or both must act against their will or nature, a precedent of self-abandonment is set.

Each time someone silences his or her authentic desires to please the other for fear of conflict or rejection, a seed of resentment is sown.

Over time, the accumulation of these "small renunciations" creates an unpayable emotional debt, where people feel they have lost their identity for the sake of marital peace.

Imagine a situation where one is passionate about opera and the other is fascinated by heavy metal.

The "compromise" solution would be for both to attend a pop concert that neither really likes, or to take turns suffering through the other's event with a bad attitude.

In this scenario, no one really wins; both lose the opportunity to fully enjoy themselves or one wins at the expense of the other's suffering.

This "lose-lose" or "win-lose" dynamic unbalances the relationship, as it perpetuates the idea that to be loved you have to stop being yourself.

The sustainability of the couple depends on eradicating the obligation to suffer for companionship.

Bridge engineering and harmonization

The healthy alternative is the art of "harmonizing" and building bridges. Harmonizing means finding a way for each individual's different notes to sound well together without any of them having to change their pitch.

It is based on the premise that the well-being of the couple is a priority, and that loving someone means wanting that person to thrive and enjoy, not sacrifice.

If there are divergent interests, the solution is not renunciation, but logistical creativity so that both can satisfy their needs without imposing them on the other.

Returning to an example of physical activity: suppose one partner is a high-speed cyclist who needs intensity to release stress, while the other prefers contemplative walks to relax.

Instead of forcing each other to go together at the same pace (which would frustrate the cyclist and exhaust the walker), they can harmonize by going to the same park together.

They start the activity with a joint warm-up, separate to perform their preferred exercise at the pace their bodies demand, and meet again at the end to cool down and share the experience.

In this way,