A lot of what we say to one another can be classified as either “moving closer” speech or “moving away” speech — both in our manner of speaking and in the words we use. A harsh, accusatory remark is “moving away.” A warm and understanding remark is “moving closer.”

There is plenty of speech that is simply neutral — in its delivery and in its message. Neutral talking back and forth has minimal impact on a relationship. On the other hand, charged speech (closer/further away speech) can have a major impact, particularly on relationships between partners and between parents and children.

There are relationships that are basically no, many that are mixed yes and no, and some, although perhaps not many, that are really yes relationships.

Most of us could use a lot more yes in our relationships.

Here’s what could become an interesting experiment: Say yes much more often and no a lot less often.

The problem with this approach, for many people, is that “yes” is usually taken to mean assent, as in “Would you do my laundry for me?” “Yes, I’d be glad to.” This is unlikely to work if you don’t want to do his (or her) laundry.
However, “yes“ does not have to mean assent or agreement. It can mean —

• “Yes, I can see where you are coming from.“
• “Yes, I sense your urgency. I want to know why the issue is important to you.”
• “Yes, I would be happy to go there, but I am working tonight.”
• “Yes, we need to talk about that.”
• “Yes, there are parts of your criticism that I think are legitimate.”
• “Yes, I hear what you are asking. Now give me a day to think about it.”

As each of these examples shows, it is possible to say “yes” and move closer — in understanding, sympathy, interest, or appreciation — without necessarily agreeing nor giving up a different point of view.

A caution: The “yes” experiment is not going to work if you are simply using it insincerely or to manipulate your partner. The intent to move closer — without assenting to all or even part of what is being asked of you — has to be there.

An “overall yes relationship is a much happier one that is a “mostly no” relationship. Experiment with adding more “yes.” Then tell us how your experiment worked out.

If you want to become a more loving person, you need to think of love as a verb. It is a “doing” more than a “feeling.” When you seek to be more loving, the way you behave matters more than what you feel.

Thinking of love as behavior has a number of important advantages. Here are some.

• If love is behavior, then loving becomes a skill. Skills can be learned. With this view, you don’t have to worry about not being a loving person (i.e., a bad person). Everybody is potentially loving. What you need is skill, plus intention, plus follow-through. You can get all that.
• You come to realize that just as there are different expressions of love (e.g., compassion, listening lovingly, dealing with differences loving), there are also different skills that are needed. You can pick one expression of love and learn that particular skill (e.g., the skill of listening lovingly). You can take learning to love one skill at a time. And you can focus on the particular skills that every day life shows you you need.
• When you commit yourself to acting more lovingly toward your partner, you inevitably confront the issue of where you are going to get the love that you want to give. A lot of us are busy, harried and often tired. Figuring out how to get the energy to give love becomes an important question that will take you into an equally important area of growth.
• Treating love as behavior allows for growth, in a way that regarding love as feeling alone doesn’t. You can experiment with different loving behaviors, note their result and then modify your approach. In that manner, you can become more skilled at loving your partner well.

Loving behavior doesn’t have to wait for loving feelings. You can learn to behave lovingly to your partner even when you don’t feel loving. Fortunately, loving behavior often generates loving feelings, which makes behaving lovingly the best way to get the loving feelings that benefit yourself as well as your partner.

Maybe it’s the influence of my years as a couples therapist, maybe it’s that love is simultaneously watered down and hyped so much — I need a simple, basic, show-me approach to love.

The best one I know is this: Love is action, augmented by feelings. “Oh, I am so devoted to my wife.” “Show me. What are you doing that expresses your devotion?” If you aren’t actually doing anything — then, sorry, but I don’t think that your “devotion” amounts to much more than a good opinion about yourself. On the other hand, if you express your devotion by doing your share of the work around the house, by knowing what is important in her every day life and asking her about it, by sitting with her with an open and attentive heart when she needs your company — well then, you are devoted. And hopefully your wife feels your devotion, and both she and you are the better for your devotion.

At the risk of sounding tough and uncompromising, I think it is important that we get clear about what love is and what it isn’t. Why? Because the survival of our marriages, our families, our relationships and, indeed, our nation and our world depends on loving behavior — showing through your actions that you regard the other person’s well-being as equal in importance to your own. Talk is cheap. Feelings come and go. It is loving action that makes a difference. Make room in your heart for the other person’s reality and then translate your open heart’s knowing into action.

“Love“ is such a familiar word, but what does it actually mean? The problem with defining “love” is that the word is used so commonly and for so many different things and conditions that it is very easy to get lost when you want to find the core meaning of “love.”

“Love” is what people declare about their feelings for God, the marinara sauce in a favorite Italian restaurant, their children, the pretty dress seen at the mall and even cold beer on a hot summer day. Is all this really “love”?

In pursuit of  love’s meaning, we need to make a distinction between loving feelings and loving behavior. They mean something different, although neither does well without the other. For now, let’s stick to feelings.

In common usage, love turns out to be lots of feelings, all masquerading as “love” Here are a few examples:

• Dependence: “I love you, baby. I can’t love without you.”
• Sexual passion: “Oh I love you so much!” said during “love“ making.
• Appreciation: “I just love your flower garden.”
• Infatuation: “I’ve met the most wonderful man. I just love him.”
• Receptivity: “Thanks for the invitation. I’d love to go.”

The more feelings and sentiments we call “love,” the less the word means. “Love” as the common name for everything from desire to gratitude is just that — common. “I love touching you.” “I love your apartment.” “I’d love to talk more, but I’ve got to go.” So what?

Most likely this vague, covers-everything, ordinary something is not the love you have in mind when you describe loving your partner, your kids, or a good friend. Okay, tell me about it: What are the real feelings of love that you have when you think about the people that you really care about?