I don’t think there are many people who have not been exposed to author Gary Chapman’s, “The 5 Love Languages”. Simply put, language is used as metaphor to explain different wants that people express love, and need to have love expressed, in their relationships. The argument goes that if I speak Mandarin, but you only understand German, it matters little what I’m saying to you; you’re simply not going to understand.
Hence the need to study oneself, and one’s partner, to ensure that genuine affection doesn’t get lost in translation. It would, indeed, be a tragedy for there to be an assumption of disinterest and animosity, when in fact one partner simply packages ‘love’ in a way foreign to the other.
It's a Great Starting Point
For reference, Chapman itemises the love languages as: words of affirmation, acts of service, gifts, quality time and physical touch. He goes on to explain that most of us have two primary ones, and then the rest remain important, but to a lesser degree.
I’m of the view that this concept is a really great starting point, but it's oversimplified. To be fair, there are infinitely more than five ways that humans may expect to feel and offer love. Many of the people in my practice, for example, prioritise “feeling safe” over many of the others. Or they value being chosen,
When I work with the love languages, I simply ask people 2 questions:
- When you are feeling quite estranged and distant from your partner, what one thing could they do to repair that? (i.e. What is the first thing that would make a real impact on you, and provide a sense of connection?)
- When you are ‘loved up’ and full of goodwill for your partner, what is the first thing that you want to do? Is it gifting, a date night, physical intimacy, verbal validation, etc.
Another Way To Analyze This
There's another school of thought, though, which upsets the applecart somewhat, and I provide simply as food for thought: Some have suggested that love languages are not expressions of love at all, but rather learnt responses to childhood neglect, abuse or abandoments. In such a framework, these actions would be unconscious or subtle efforts to avoid ill feeling in friendships, marriages and relationships. Essentially, they’d represent a list of the ways we can people please, framed perhaps around what worked to broker harmony and peace in acrimonious childhood situations.
As with most things in psychology, I’d probably argue that context is pivotal, and each circumstance needs to be unpacked and understood on its own merit. Certainly within a co-dependent relationship, for example, these “languages” may well be tools to curry favour, manipulate, compensate for an utter (even pathological) lack in another area, or to self-sacrifice to a fault. This quite jaundiced view remains an interesting concept that needs to be explored within each individual relationship.
Key questions here may be:
- Are you doing this out of the fullness of your heart because you want your partner’s best?
- Or is the action motivated by a fear of feeling rejected or abandoned or, or conflicted..?
In short, “The Five Love Languages” is a great communication starter, and personal development tool, but needs to be critically read and understood so as not to overlook what may lie beneath.
