The "I" Principle

THE "I" PRINCIPLE

In ancient Israel, when farmers harvested their corn, they’d use oxen to tread it to remove the kernels of grain from the husk. And to prevent the animal from grazing while it worked, they muzzled it. The prophet Moses later outlawed this practice. One reason he did was to set a key precedence and law that if a person works, they should get paid. And I believe he knew that this practice was unfair to this beast of burden and counter-intuitive to sucessful farming best practices.

Let’s look at it from the ox’s perspective. After it had trodden corn for some time, it needed to eat to replenish or replace the energy it burned. Naturally, it wanted to get this energy by grazing while it worked, but the farmer muzzled it. How long could it go before fatigue and hunger rob it of the will and desire to continue doing the farmer’s work? Probably, not long, right? It would eventually have to quit working. Not because it didn’t want to do the farmer’s bidding. It just physically wouldn’t be able to. This is the same problem committed relationships have and this problem centers around what I’ve dubbed…the “I” principle.

What is this “I” principle? The “I” principle acknowledges that everything an individual does in life must first benefit him or her first, even when what he or she does is directly for others. In the ox analogy, the ox wasn’t treading out its own corn harvest. It was the farmer’s harvest. So, the ox wasn’t reaping the ultimate benefit of the corn harvest. Yet it was giving its own energy, time, and strength to meet the farmer’s need. But the farmer muzzled it to keep it from consuming any of his crop. Judging by the farmer’s actions, one could easily draw the conclusion that the animal was gluttonous. But the animal needed to graze long enough to restore the energy it lost working. And grazing was the least payment the farmer owed the animal as it labored to do a benefit for him.

"What is this “I” principle? The “I” principle acknowledges that everything an individual does in life must first benefit him or her first, even when what he or she does is directly for someone else."

Many committed relationships often deprive their occupants of the energy needed to do the relationship's work and this is one of the main reasons they fail. Unfortunately, this isn’t as obvious to the people in these relationships as it is being so glaringly pointed out in the farmer and ox's relationship. And obviously, it wasn’t obvious to these farmers, either. If it was, perhaps Moses wouldn’t have needed to outlaw the practice. Like the ox, people in these relationships want to do the relationship’s work but doing so requires that their own energy needs be met first. Not because they’re selfish. But because work requires energy. This problem demonstrated by the ox and farmer’s relationship is at the heart of the human nature dynamics that often destroy committed relationships.

Think back, if you will, to my first blog, “Why Do Solely Committed Relationships Fail.” Remember, I said you can’t know and understand why committed relationships fail until you know and understand why people commit? The “I” principle is at the heart of why people commit. At its core, the “I” principle is about energy. It’s about the energy an individual in a committed relationship needs to do the work committed relationships usually require to make the relationship a remarkable success. And like in the ox’s case, when the relationship doesn’t offer that energy, that individual loses hope. And when he or she loses hope, he or she naturally loses faith in the relationship, too. And believe it or not, we can lose both hope and faith without losing any love. But all too often, love alone isn’t enough to keep the relationship healthy and thriving. After love gets all bruised, battered, and torn from carrying the load all by itself, it too falls victim to the fatigue that plague the relationship.

Let’s take this a bit further. The “I” principle is based on one’s desires. Our desires or passions being met is where our energy comes from to do the relationship’s work. But what are desires? Desires are unfilled needs and wants. Think of these needs and wants like the daily food commodities our bodies consume and use to get the energy it needs to stay alive. And once they’re all used up, they must be replenished or we die. Just like our bodies need energy from a daily renewable food source to stay alive, so does our resolve for our committed relationship. The relationship’s ability to meet our individual needs, wants, or expectations for the relationship in a renewable and sustainable way not only gives us the energy we need to do the relationship’s work, but is critical to the vitality of our resolve to remain committed to the relationship. For this is the very reason we committed in the first place. This is the relationship’s promise. And like the ox, we don’t mind doing work that primarily benefit our partner. But it frustrates us to no end when they muzzle our ability to do so and blame us. Truth is, often they don’t mean to. It’s just one of the symptoms of human nature dynamics.

That last paragraph is where it gets tricky, though. How so? It does because individual needs, wants, and expectations tend to change as people grow and mature. And this is the very reason people end up putting undue burdens on love. They often ignorantly believe that love will automagically indemnify the relationship against unforeseen needs and wants that will arise at some future date and time. And when that time comes and their partner doesn’t meet those needs and wants, the first thing they often cry is, “You don’t love me!” But not loving them isn’t the issue. Many people think that if their partner loves him or her or are in love with them that they’ll automatically and dynamically be able to meet these needs. Nothing could be further from the truth.

And even the person who believes that love automatically and dynamically enables their partner to meet their needs often don’t live up to that belief. It’s been my experience that women hold to this notion more so than men. A woman will say if you love me, you’ll…(just fill in whatever you like.) But then, that same woman will turn around and withhold sex from her husband for trivial reasons. Not because he physically or emotionally cheated on her, beat on her, or any harmful thing. But, because he didn’t do what she wanted or thought he should’ve done, she’s emotionally feeling some type of way about it. Therefore, she doesn’t feel he’s earned her body, at least until she gets past the emotional disrespect she feels. But if she loves or is in love with him, should she let that stop her from meeting his sexual needs? Shouldn’t the fact that she’s in love with him be bigger and better than that? I’m not saying she should. But if she’s going to pull the ole "If you love me or are in love with me" card out the bag when it favors her, she should also pull it out of the bag when it favors him, too. Ultimately what I’m saying is…often love gets used as a catch all phrase when truth is…often in committed relationships, it’s not a love issue. It’s an energy issue.

Many partners in committed relationships have wanted so badly to do the work that’ll meet their partner’s energy needs, but they can’t. And in part two of this blog, I’ll tell you why. As always, if you’ve enjoyed this blog series, please share it with others. And if you haven’t, please consider subscribing to receive the latest updates about future books, podcasts, and materials. I won’t sell your information. I value your patronage too much to do that. And always remember, committed relationships often cost more than their price tag!

Subscribe

Subscribe to stay in the know when new content is posted.