Recurring and unsatisfiable themes arise wherever people get together, particularly if they spend any time together. Here are two routes out of the danger zone.
it takes two to start an argument, but only one to stop it. There's only one person who can stop and you know who that person is, right?
Certain negative communication styles are so lethal to a relationship that Dr. John Gottman calls them the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. They predict relationship failure with over 90% accuracy if the behaviour isn't changed. So, what can you do?
Anyone can argue. There’s no talent in fighting. There’s no glory in ‘winning’ an argument, though you wouldn’t know it from the evidence we see around us.
There's a point in an argument at which the arguers lose sight of what the original dispute was about. From then on it is what I call a meta-argument; and argument about an argument, rather than a fight or dispute about whatever the difference was that caused it.
Fairy stories only tell part of the tale, and they miss out the hard work needed for success.
Have you noticed how arguments often develop a life of their own? Quite apart from the messy interpersonal stuff like feelings and judgements, there's the question of understanding HOW to argue. For example, the difficulty (tension, disagreement, argument), can be resolved quickly, as long as you can learn to coexist with the differences between you.
Conflict and disagreement don't have to do lasting damage. The reason why so many disputes, especially close, personal ones (like the ones that which get blamed for separation or divorce, for example) are so acrimonious, is not because of the circumstances. It is because we lose control of ourselves. It's possible to disagree and to vigorously defend yourself if you need to, without being nasty.