Youve heard it before: She wants kids, but he doesnt. He wants to move to another town but she doesnt. She wants sex but he doesnt (or vice-versa).

All relationships have issues like these to be resolved, and the question is Who has the power?

In some relationships, the power goes to the physically strong and abusive person. This is not constructive power.

But power issues are often much less obvious. It is these subtle power issues that are frequently misunderstood, and can be the cause of problems in normal relationships.

The following story illustrates what can happen when there is a power imbalance:

Mary and Tom were childhood sweethearts and dated for seven years before they got married.

Tom was the adventurous type. One day he said, Lets go skinny dipping after dark at the beach. It would be fun! To which Mary replied, Youve got to be kidding! Thats disgusting! What if we got caught? I should add, Tom is both adventurous and romantic. He says, Honey, weve had such a nice day together, and this fire in the fireplace is so cozy, lets do it right here. I want you right now. Tom, dont be silly. The fire is beautiful, but it wouldnt be at all comfortable on the floor. We should go up to the bedroom.

Tom wanted to see the world and do things. He wanted to experience life. He wanted to do things together. But Mary typically did not, and typically got her way. She had more power. Why?

One problem was that both Mary and Tom were emotionally immature. They werent good at pleasing or understanding each other. Lack of emotional maturity makes it difficult to deal with power issues when they arise.

The more subtle problem was that Mary didnt feel the same amount of romantic chemistry as Tom. Romantic chemistry comes in degrees, and may not be the same for both partners. The degree of romantic chemistry has a lot to do with who has the power in the relationship.

In our case example Tom was very much in love with Mary, perhaps 90%. Mary, although she tried her best to make the relationship work, was only marginally in love with Tom, perhaps 70%. They got married because it was the natural and expected thing to do, and they didnt really know about true romantic chemistry or emotional maturity.

The person who feels less romantic chemistry has more power (in our case Mary). This is because the person who feels less chemistry is less motivated to work towards the success of the relationship, can more easily walk away from it, and therefore can more easily have his or her own way. It is highly unlikely that both partners will feel the same identical level of romantic attraction, so there will always be some degree of power imbalance.

Its often better when the man is a little more interested in the relationship than the woman is. This tends to make up for the power differential that already exists between the sexes in todays culture. Fair or not, men usually have more power in our society than women. But if a mans romantic interest in his partner is somewhat higher than hers in him, he will be more highly motivated to please her and this gives her some extra power.

Power factors can be very important when it comes time to resolve basic relationship conflicts and come up with a solution that is fair to both. If the partners are emotionally mature, the more powerful person will not take advantage of his or her position. The goal should be to find reasonably balanced good chemistry along with reasonably balanced good maturity so that power issues can be dealt with constructively.

Mary and Tom should have measured their romantic chemistry and emotional maturity before they got married. Their marriage was doomed from the start by the large difference in chemistry, but they were not mature enough to know. The marriage lasted three years and ended in divorce. This is unfortunately all too typical.

By understanding the effects that romantic chemistry and emotional maturity have on relationships, couples can make better choices, deal more effectively with power issues, and have more satisfying and lasting relationships.

Copyright 2005 Randy Hurlburt