Enhancing Emotional Intimacy in Couples: Connection, Vulnerability, and Communication

The Importance of Emotional Intimacy in Relationships

In my clinical practice in recent years, I have seen an increase in the number of couples who present for therapy with the stated need to be closer to each other.  Whether it is the fast-paced nature of our hectic world, or the demands of careers and families, or the intrusion of technology, we appear to be caught up in the hustle and bustle of life and are gradually losing the energy to connect with our partner on levels beyond merely the pragmatic urgency of daily tasks and responsibilities.

Inadvertently, many of our intimate relationships have dropped way down a long list of other priorities.

Research indicates that a significant portion of couples, even those who do not experience intense conflict or discord, report feelings of disconnection and alienation from their long-term partners.  It seems that opportunities for intimacy are overlooked or avoided, even in relationships which on the surface appear to be “successful.”

Beyond merely attempting to prioritize our partners, intimacy has been described as “an art,” encompassing many facets of close relationships including a “mutual understanding with the loved one and being able to share one’s self”; the “receipt of emotional support … while giving emotional support back”; and “intimate communication and being able to value the loved one in one’s life.”

In this article, we will explore what, in my view, are the three major pathways to enhancing the degree of intimacy in our relationships:

• Closeness/Connection
• Vulnerability
• Communication

While these are certainly not new terms in writings on relationships, I will approach them from a slightly different angle and discuss how each represents a set of interrelated competencies that can work synergistically to improve the overall quality of a relationship.  When these competencies are pragmatically applied, as I will illustrate, the emotional spark between partners will not only be re-ignited but the overall depth and quality of the relationship will be improved.

1. Closeness and Connection: The “Glue” of Emotional Intimacy

Emotional intimacy is dependent upon how close and connected partners feel toward each other.  During the “honeymoon stage,” connecting is typically easy and even quite exhilarating.  Yet, inevitably, one or both partners resists getting closer for any number of reasons, including the following:

• Unresolved emotional trauma from dynamics within one’s family of origin
• Conflict, turmoil, or abandonment experienced in previous romantic relationships
• Personality or psychiatric issues
• Fear of uncertainty (difficulty tolerating all that cannot be controlled in a relationship, especially the feelings and actions of one’s partner)

Each of the factors above may play a role in triggering defensive behaviors, even early in a relationship.  The goal is to push the approaching partner away or at least keep him or her in a comfortable range: not too distant, but not too close.  The film Gia is a compelling example of the many ways in which we attempt to push our partners away and the complex reasons why.

It may also be the case the one or both partners have difficulty communicating their needs, as well as their own boundaries, in the context of a relationship.  Consequently, wall-building, distancing, and even self-sabotaging acts (such as infidelity) are the only alternatives available to establish emotional safety given the perceived danger of potential or increasing intimacy.

Difficulties in resolving conflict are yet another challenge to maintaining closeness and connection.  Research indicates that most couples struggle with the basic competencies involved in conflict resolution, including empathic listening and strategic collaborative problem-solving. It has been my clinical experience that couples therapy usually reveals the underlying factors responsible for ineffective conflict resolution.  These include negative assumptions about, and projections onto, one’s partner regarding his or her intentions (e.g., “you drank too much at the party because you wanted to hurt me”) and triggering re-enactments in which a partner becomes psychologically transformed into a problematic or unresolved figure from the projecting partner’s past (e.g., “your obsession with work is my father’s sudden death all over again”).

An additional problem impacting closeness and connection is contending with the reality of who your partner is (vs. who you thought he or she was or who you idealized him or her to be).  An ongoing tension in all relationships is finding a balance between negotiating with your partner (i.e., to advocate for your preferences, needs, etc.) and accepting the reality (and likely shortcomings) of your partner. Many couples do not manage this balance effectively; in the most extreme cases, high conflict (stemming from little or no acceptance) or silent resentment (linked to consistent failures at negotiation) results.

Ways to Establish/Maintain Closeness and Connection

Here are ways in which couples (either new to the relationship or long-term committed partners) inspire closeness and connection in their relationship:

1. Putting Down Walls. A pre-requisite for closeness and connection is a willingness to be vulnerable and take risks. This involves trying to achieve closure on whatever issues from the past continue to impact the degree of intimacy you are willing or able to reach.
2. Moments of Closeness. In his article “Creating Moments of Closeness Can Change Your Relationship,” Robert Navarra, a therapist trained in the couples therapy approach of the renowned researcher John Gottman, Ph.D., emphasizes the importance of brief moments of connection that emerge in relationships, especially when one partner postures toward the other, however slightly or casually.  Gottman described these “bids for connection” and “turning toward” as crucial opportunities for contact and connection.  In couples who stay together and report a high degree of relationship satisfaction, bids for connection are positively responded to, especially during conflict.
3. Avoiding Judgment. There is nothing more injurious than being judged by your partner, the very one with whom you hope to be fully authentic and vulnerable.  There is a difference between encouraging or even challenging your partner to be “better” vs. implicit or explicit judgments that serve to eradicate connection and posture a sense of superiority or even pity.
4. Establishing Shared Experience. The accumulation of shared experiences over time, not only positive ones but also challenging dilemmas, promotes deeper levels of connection.  This involves planning, consistently creating new experiences and learning opportunities, and collaborating on long-term goals.
5. Noticing Each Other’s Strengths. While honest, open communication is imperative for couples to achieve emotional intimacy, many partners fail to recognize the importance of noticing/commenting on each other’s strengths and abilities. The experience of being noticed and recognized in this way is not only validating and affirming, but also encourages and supports increasing vulnerability and the willingness to share insecurities and fears.
6. Maintaining Autonomy/Not Losing a Sense of Self. While any relationship involves the transition from a “me” to a “we,” as the philosopher Robert Nozick argued, the mutually constructed identity of the couple should not interfere with each partner’s individual interests, activities, and social network.  The potential to lose one’s own identity in order to maintain the relationship is most common in narcissistic-codependent coupling dynamics in which interpersonal boundaries and self-directed motivations and interests directly threaten, for different reasons, both personality styles.
7. Vulnerability in Relationships

A large body of research indicates the role of vulnerability in building intimacy and increasing trust in relationships, yet it has been the work of Brené Brown who has popularized the significance and utility of vulnerability.  Brown characterizes vulnerability as “uncertainty, risk, and emotional exposure,” which is in line with other descriptions emphasizing taking the risk to offer honest direct expressions of thoughts and feelings in the context of fears. Interestingly, vulnerability is often described as a personal capacity linked to emotional intelligence and existing in one or both partners outside of the circumstances of a given relationship.

While experts view vulnerability as a pathway to deep connection, trust, and intimacy, to be vulnerable implies taking risks and, as such, is often approached with a fair amount of trepidation.  Moreover, people frequently associate vulnerability with weakness; when you open up, you are “letting your guard down” and revealing fears, insecurities, and personal fallibilities.

Given this exposure, some may opt to limit or avoid vulnerability, even in their long-term committed relationships; here are some reasons why the risk associated with being vulnerable may be intolerable:

1. Hesitation or resistance to being vulnerable is often linked to previous failed relationships in which trust was broken, leading to a set of psychological defenses to ensure “never again.”

 

2. Long-held personal insecurities, including elements of shame and embarrassment, perhaps from long ago, may inhibit a person from being fully open to his or her partner.

 

3. Narcissistic styles of personality are precisely organized to resist their own vulnerability and capitalize on the vulnerability of others; narcissism conceals and guards fundamental holes in one’s self-esteem and seeks, instead, to disempower others by exposing their vulnerability and using it against them.

 

4. Vulnerability is the necessary condition for the expression of needs and desires in relationships. Yet research indicates a common difficulty among partners is expressing their emotional and physical needs.  Most men, for example, as discussed by panel expert Doug Braun-Harvey at Esther Perel’s conference “The Masculinity Paradox,” rarely share with their partners their sexual desires and preferences.  As for my own practice, when I begin working with couples, I often conduct a “needs assessment.”  More often than not, partners tend to have shallow or even erroneous understandings of what they need from each other across a range of factors including emotional and physical closeness, recreational activity/health and wellness, financial considerations, and domestic chores and routines.

Despite the many challenges involved in being vulnerable, the one factor that appears to be linked to a high degree of vulnerability may surprise you.

Partners who are able to be vulnerable are very good at establishing and maintaining boundaries with each other. To use interpersonal boundaries effectively within the context of a relationship, partners must first recognize and then be able to express and defend what it is they actually want and do not want.  This capacity to be direct and authentic is indicative of a relationship that is not contrived, superficial, or managed merely by compromises and deference.  Instead, the partners aim to build a strong emotional connection with each other by prioritizing self-expression and self-protection over and above simply “not making waves.”

In other words, these partners can risk the fate of the relationship by remaining true to their inner sense of self.  Ironically, this generally does not damage – but only deepens – the quality and closeness of the relationship.

III. Effective Communication to Enhance Emotional Intimacy

Research indicates that a common reason why couples seek therapy is to learn how to communicate better.  And it is generally assumed that partners who can communicate effectively are likely to experience feelings of closeness and are likely to be more vulnerable with each other.  Further, direct, honest, and constructive communication is presumed to help couples address problematic issues and resolve conflict.

Early research on the efficacy of couples therapy, and the approaches to couples therapy these findings spawned, emphasized the importance of communication in intimate relationships and its association with long-term marital satisfaction. Couples characterized as “high conflict” or whose relationship were described as “toxic” were often observed to be lacking in effective communication. This historical precedent has set the stage for many popular intervention strategies clinicians offer couples today that are designed to build communication skills.

Among these strategies are the “speaker-listener” technique in which couples are presented with a structure and set of skills to help with conflict resolution and problem-solving.  The speaker-listener technique organizes communication into two discreet roles, emphasizing the use of “I” statements (to avoid expressing criticisms or judgments about one’s partner simply assumed to be true), paraphrasing of content, confirming accuracy of understanding, and actively listening to request clarification and additional detail.  Related techniques involve the clinician’s attempt to shift one or both partners away from an approach to communication based solely on problem-solving (“fix-it listening”) to, instead, a mode of dialogue that relies on empathic listening.

These communication skills are undoubtedly important, but, surprisingly, research has indicated that their improvement among couples does not necessarily correspond to increased marital satisfaction over time; some findings even indicate that a reliance on building communication skills among couples may inadvertently damage their relationship.

In my own clinical practice, underneath the couple’s communication patterns usually lie more important and problematic relational dynamics that manifest in how partners talk to each other.

“Getting triggered” is technically a communication issue, but it signals more significant underlying problems, mostly likely an accumulation of frustration, hurt, and unresolved conflicts.  Moreover, angry outbursts and the ensuing heated exchanges that often occur in couples therapy sessions frequently correspond to a “walking on eggshells” dynamic existing outside of the therapy office.  This dynamic points to a history of rejections or emotional failures within the relationship that have calcified into resentment.  Instead of getting triggered again and again, one or both partners may have resorted to a strategy of keeping the peace/avoiding stirring the pot.  This is similar to Gottman’s notion of “stonewalling” in which one partner shuts down emotionally and withdraws from an interaction that is intensifying in order to prevent further escalation.

Other problematic relational dynamics underlying poor communication among couples include the pursue/withdraw pattern, the narcissistic/codependent union, and the projection/identification dynamic (in which one’s partner is no longer an “ally” but is psychologically transformed into the “enemy” from the projecting partner’s past).

These dynamics arise not from problematic communication per se, but from a series of empathic failures between the partners that, over time, have led to an erosion of emotional acceptance and trust.  The most striking characteristic of couples in this scenario is the high degree of negative attributions (i.e., assumptions about the rationale or intentions of another) frequently made by one or both partners.  “You came home late because you were mad at me, you are so passive-aggressive,” a partner might say, for example.  Negative attributions such as this tend to be so inflammatory because they are often untrue and also reveal characterizations of one’s partner that are quite divergent from the benign and loving motivations likely present.

The most helpful approach to communication in couples, in my opinion, involves the commitment of both partners to forming a culture of emotional validation, acceptance, and attunement (resulting from “mentalization”) in the relationship.

• Although there is no consensus on what it means to “validate” your partner, communication that promotes emotional connection and intimacy begins with emotional intelligence. At its core, emotional intelligence involves the recognition that others are distinct beings (different from ourselves) who have unique and highly personalized sets of perceptions, beliefs, values, and ways of functioning emotionally, behaviorally, and psychologically.

 

• When applied to relationships, the act of validating originates from a deep interest in and awareness of the identify of one’s partner, his or her intentions, motivations, fears, and desires. If this awareness has not been actively pursued over time, then attempts to validate come across as superficial or hallow.

 

• The process of building this detailed understanding of your partner’s identity involves “mentalization.” Essentially a reflective function, mentalization is the capacity to display and utilize the deep understanding one has about another to that other person – providing a mirror for that person that not only (1) accepts and empathizes with his or her emotional life, but (2) anticipates how circumstances will likely impact him or her.

 

• The linking of understanding-validating-reflecting/mirroring one’s partner is what is referred to as “attunement.” The maternal figure, for example, who by her consistent presence and ongoing observation and understanding of her infant (mentalization), inevitably becomes highly attuned to her infant’s feeling states, temperament, and behavioral tendencies. Based on situational cues and other circumstances, the mother anticipates and then lovingly accepts and empathizes with her infant’s mood states.  This is wholistic and powerful validation that the infant internalizes and uses to build psychological capacities such as self-reflection, self-attunement, and self-esteem.

Now imagine if your partner had engaged in their own mentalization process and was now able to be attuned with you – it might feel pretty good!

Conclusion: Cultivating Lasting Emotional Intimacy in Relationships

Establishing emotional intimacy with a partner and maintaining it over time is a challenging yet deeply rewarding experience.  In this article, I have described how intimacy is supported by three interrelated factors (closeness/connection, vulnerability, and communication).  Presented as competencies, these are relational tasks that can be practiced and improved upon, if both partners are willing to do the work necessary in a long-term commitment.

• Building closeness and connection involves an investment in shared experiences in which each partner becomes “known” to the other, without judgment or censorship. Paradoxically, closeness is enhanced as partners maintain their own separate sense of self. Numerous unresolved issues from one’s past may result in one or both partners resisting or sabotaging the emerging closeness between them.  “Putting up walls” helps tolerate feelings of danger as intimacy develops and avoids having to come to terms with the reality of who one’s partner is, including his or her shortcomings and imperfections.

 

• Vulnerability is the pathway for increasing intimacy. By its very nature, to be vulnerable implies risk.  The corresponding fears associated with revealing ourselves to another whom we desire and value are profound. Narcissistic personality styles are precisely organized to avoid this exposure and, instead, capitalize on the vulnerability of others.  Those who are able to be vulnerable express their needs and desires as the relationship deepens and more is at stake; the recognition of one’s needs and a willingness to set boundaries promotes trust and reinforces ongoing vulnerability in the relationship.

 

• Communication skills per se are often not as relevant for intimacy and long-term satisfaction among couples as was once believed. Rather, communication problems such as difficulty resolving conflict, shortcomings in problem-solving, getting triggered, and choosing to problem-solve rather than being empathic usually suggest underlying dynamics that give rise to the poor communication.  Establishing a culture of emotional validation, mentalization, and attunement in the relationship advances the communication possible between partners and makes it possible to feel “reflected” by your partner in the mirroring he or she provides.

The joy of being understood, accepted, and loved for who you are is perhaps the most profound emotional and psychological experience possible.  To mutually sustain intimacy is not a static enterprise.  Both partners must continuously seek to address how their ability to be close, vulnerable, and attuned fluctuates with changing circumstances, evolving personal needs and values, and the organic trajectory of the relationship.