# Anger vs. Apathy



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

So a friend of mine had a huge fight with her husband this weekend and ended up spending part of the weekend at my house. She and I are each others' sounding boards about our relationships, and we were discussing at one point which option was worse and I thought I'd throw it out there and see what other folks thought.

In the context of an already strained relationship, which do you think is worse, anger or apathy? That is, is it worse in your mind to be in a relationship with loud, in-your-face screaming matches or is it worse to be in one where there's not enough engagement/ interaction with one another to even really disagree?

Is there a benefit to being able to let things explode, resolve them and move on? Or does having a fighting-type relationship leave too much room for things to be said that can't be taken back. Is it a relief, or even somewhat comfortable to be in a place where you never worry about having a fight or disagreement because there's never enough interest to spark disagreement?

What do you think?


----------



## lysis (Sep 12, 2010)

I vote neither. Apathy implies that the feelings are dead, and wild and crazy blowouts can tear a couple apart. People tend to say things in anger that can't be taken back.

But I think you bring up a good point. Good marriages aren't without arguments; they just argue constructively. They attack the problem, not each other, and they argue about the real issues without dredging up past grievances. If tempers are really flaring, a couple can agree to disengage for a half hour, then come back together again to air their differences more constructively. And they choose their battle wisely.


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

COGypsy said:


> So a friend of mine had a huge fight with her husband this weekend and ended up spending part of the weekend at my house. She and I are each others' sounding boards about our relationships, and we were discussing at one point which option was worse and I thought I'd throw it out there and see what other folks thought.
> 
> In the context of an already strained relationship, which do you think is worse, anger or apathy? That is, is it worse in your mind to be in a relationship with loud, in-your-face screaming matches or is it worse to be in one where there's not enough engagement/ interaction with one another to even really disagree?
> 
> ...


I like neither, but as a person who actually shows what I'm feeling, not a person who hides it behind a wall of disinterest or whatever, I feel it can be easier to bring an argument under control as opposed to trying to get a clam to open up.

If you have the tools, and your partner is a reasonable person, but prone to getting angry in an argument, it's easy enough to head off an all out screaming match.

1) Mirror
2) Validate
3) Empathise

Hard to stay angry at someone who LISTENS to what you are saying, repeats it back to show they have taken it in, admits you have a right to feel upset/sad whatever, and tries to empathise. Much easier then to also do the same for them.

If a couple actually manages to practice this successfully, I imagine over time that it would become second nature, hardly requiring effort to see their partners point of view and to deal with whatever problem comes up with hardly a ripple. This doesn't mean they lack interest, but that they are mature in their thinking and in showing their love for one another.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Apathy is worse. In order to be angry, you have to care what the other person said or did. They had the power to hurt you or offend you. Apathy means the other person no longer exists to you.


----------



## AFEH (May 18, 2010)

For me apathy, indifference etc. is a relationship killer. It means there’s no emotional connection. On the other hand pain, anger etc. is a lot of emotion. The latter is something that can be worked on. Nothing to be done with apathy and indifference.

Bob


----------



## greeneyeddolphin (May 31, 2010)

I don't think either of them is good even in a good relationship, much less one that is already strained. Anger makes it too easy to say hurtful things, to give up and walk away. Apathy means you don't care, and if you don't care, you don't try. 

I think if either of them exists in a strained relationship, the couple needs to go to counseling or read some books or something to try to gain better communication skills and try to get past their anger or apathy.


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

The points most of you made were pretty much what she and I have said at various points.....although this weekend she was wishing for maybe just a little less anger and a little more apathy. 

I think that in general, I shy away from the angry interactions. Partly I think that on the rare occasions that we disagree in our house, we just aren't yellers--we aren't terrible communicators, just not that interested in doing it, I suppose. That would be the key difference. I think that I communicate pretty effectively (heck, I taught it long enough!) and he's gotten better since he and I have been together. It's really a matter of having gone in different directions or something to the point where it's not even hiding behind a wall of indifference. There's just not enough interest to generate a lot of conflict. 

That, and I really feel that yelling is just demeaning--to me it's something saved for children running into streets or people under falling ladders or something--not for communicating. Of course, I didn't put it quite that way when my friend and I were talking  I can't imagine living with that much stress and drama.

So then what I wonder is the extent to which either of those states exist in "normal" or "average" relationships? Are there people who disagree or even argue regularly, whether it escalates to spending the night on a friends' couch or not? How stressful does that get day to day? How many people have areas of their spouse's life that they're apathetic about (cars and cigars come to mind) where it doesn't extend to most of the relationship? Or are both states completely wrong and problematic? How would the spectrum for things like that work?


----------

