My girlfriend and I rarely argue. I am at a loss to express in words how deeply I love her, and there’s nothing in this world I wouldn’t do for her, but like most people we sometimes don’t see eye to eye. We tend not to discuss The Walking Dead often, since it usually ends with her telling me to shut up. She’s a huge fan of the show, and any time I start speculating on who I think is going to die next, she thinks I’m spoiling too much even though I don’t have any inside info. So she shoots me a side-eyed look which says stop talking or I’m going to slap you.
But the one other place where we sometimes argue is over politics. While we agree on many issues, we fundamentally disagree about the nature of politics. My girlfriend is Mexican by birth, but grew up in the United States as a permanent resident, which gives her a unique perspective. She sees the system —the connections between government, media, and society itself— as inherently flawed, and thinks a belief in the ability of politics to affect positive change as something borne out of American arrogance and self-delusion. Therefore, taking part in said system is something she thinks of as a waste until something else replaces it. While I agree with some of her critiques, my biggest problem with her position is that throwing up our hands and saying “FUCK THE SYSTEM!” without working inside the system to change it doesn’t solve anything. In fact, it would only make things worse, since it would let people like Donald Trump, and probably some even worse than Trump, to take power. However, this conversation usually ends with the same side-eyed slap look, and me seeing her pretty smile and remembering why I love her. And honestly, I like it when she challenges me.
Conventional wisdom holds a relationship is based upon common interests. The general course of most couplings involves going out on dates where people have to find interesting things to discuss, through continued interactions it builds intimacy, trust, and closeness, and hopefully good sex, commitment and love comes afterwards. But common interests doesn’t always mean sameness. Some of the most boring conversations in the world can be where someone just repeats: “Yes, me too.” For some, the most attractive quality in a partner is to have someone who’s different and challenges what one thinks. However, how different is too different?
So this got me thinking a good topic to discuss is the idea of how ideology intersects with relationships. People all over this world are in love with someone else who probably have cultural differences, class differences, religious difference, or even political differences. All of us have family and friends we care about deeply, but who think differently than we do on one aspect or another. But in this time of political polarization and internecine battles even between people who are ostensibly on the same side of the left-right divide, what is your limit? What ideological difference is the point where you say I can’t date this person, let alone be friends?
Adult relationships are built upon intangibles that are as different as the genetic combinations which make up the human species. What I like is not what someone else may like, and what I find important may not be what another finds necessary and intrinsic. The qualities one finds attractive or repugnant are all over the scale of diverse choices. If on a date with someone who had a shitty taste in music or movies, would that be deal breaker for some people? Would being a Yankees’ fan be something that tipped the scales for someone dating a Red Sox’s fan? I’m sure there are individuals out there where these things are important enough to walk away.
So what about having a go with a partner who has shitty taste in politics?
About 3-years-ago, Dan Savage received an interesting letter asking for advice in how to deal with a disagreement with a boyfriend. A young woman had just learned her boyfriend believes life begins at conception, and is “strongly against abortion.” She went on to say he’s “a sweet, loving guy and progressive in every other way” and “won’t go so far to believe abortion should be banned,” but she was unsure whether or not this should be a deal breaker or it’s just an issue where two people in a relationship disagree.
Savage counseled the woman to tell her boyfriend she’s pregnant and see how he reacts. Let the news that at least the next 18 years of his life is going to be responsible for supporting another life and parenting, and Savage believes his belief might go from personhood at conception to “offering to drive you to the nearest abortion clinic himself.”
As for whether you should date someone who is anti-choice, well, women have to be in control of their own bodies—and when and whether they reproduce—in order to be truly equal. I don't think I could date someone who didn't see me as his equal or who believed that the state should regulate my sexual or reproductive choices. So, yeah, this shit would be a deal breaker for me, LIFE, if I had a vagina.
Actually, this issue is a deal breaker for me, even though I don't have a vagina. I wouldn't date a gay dude who was anti-choice. Any gay man who can't see the connection between a woman's right to have children when she chooses and his right to love and marry the person he chooses is an idiot. And I don't date idiots.
However, not everyone makes this choice. For example, Paul Ryan’s wife, Janna Little Ryan, comes from a Democratic family and supported liberal causes during her college years at Wellesley before marrying the future Republican Speaker of the House. According to reports during the 2012 campaign, her thinking has shifted to being “pragmatic” and a “practical conservative.” The classic example is James Carville and Mary Matalin, with Carville comparing it to a Catholic and Jew being married to each other, who have different interpretations of God and existence, and still find a way to make it work.
Research indicates, though, that these examples might be more the exceptions than the rule. At least one study claims relationships between people of similar ideologies last twice as long as those where the political attitudes were more conflicted. There’s also some opinions on differences between the enjoyment of sex and what partners of different ideologies see as important.
A
survey by Binghamton University and dating website Match.com of more than 5,000 single American men and women, politically liberal respondents were more likely to have sex more often, but conservative respondents reported having "better" sex. Specifically, 53% of those who described themselves as conservative Republicans said that they reached orgasm every time they had sex, compared with 40% of liberal Democrats.
"Orgasm, particularly among women, takes practice and knowing one's body," suggests Justin Garcia, a postdoctoral fellow at The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction and a co-researcher on the study. "Conservatives tend to be more traditional and rigid. So, it reasons that this might also manifest in the bedroom -- once they've found something that works, they stick to it!"
That's just a guess, of course. But the survey also uncovered some other interesting sexual-political tidbits.
For example, the liberal Democrats surveyed placed more importance on sense of humor, independence and equality in a partner, while conservative Republicans were more likely to seek out someone of the same background and political party and were more apt to want to get married.
There’s also research which indicates the experience of breaking up has an effect on political beliefs. Going through a divorce tends to make men become less supportive of the Democratic party, where women tend to become more favorable to Democrats after a failed marriage. However, that’s because women tend to become more favorable in their disposition to Republican candidates after becoming married.
So, when all is said and done, the options for how to deal with ideological differences in a relationship generally boil down to three strategies.
-
Deal Breaker: The differences are too great and the other person’s beliefs cross a boundary which offend your sensibilities to the point of not being able to lead a happy life with them as your partner.
-
Compartmentalize: Basically, don’t talk about it. No one brings it up, and if the subject is breached it’s quickly ignored and forgotten. The other qualities of the two partners are enough to compensate for that which shall not be named or talked about.
-
Respect The Other Person’s Right To Be Wrong: I know and am friends with many, many people I disagree with totally on one issue or another. But I listen to them and then they listen to me. We may not agree, and we may both think the other person is wrong, but we respect the other person’s belief enough to listen. Of course there are limits to what someone can tolerate, but if there’s love, sometimes it finds a way to work.