logo
Is There A 'Right' Way To Fight In A Relationship? We Asked Psychologists

Is There A 'Right' Way To Fight In A Relationship? We Asked Psychologists

NDTV09-05-2025

" Ladne se pyaar badhta hai" (Love increases when you fight)."
If you've grown up in a desi household, chances are high you've witnessed your parents, or someone else, arguing right in front of you. And more often than not, they might've brushed it off with this phrase.
The idea of going to another room to discuss 'personal' matters is more or less alien here. You see, we don't really classify anything as 'personal' in a desi house. But let's not get into the privacy issues in Indian households. That's another topic altogether. Right now, we're talking about 'the fighting'.
The yelling. The screeching. The occasional drama. It may all seem normal to many of us, having grown up in that environment. But here's the thing - experts believe there is, in fact, a right way to fight. And doing it in front of everyone? That tops the list of things not to do.
But don't get us wrong. The phrase above does hold some truth. Studies show that fighting in a relationship might actually help save it. Couples who don't have it in for each other to fight for each other might not last long. That doesn't mean constant heated arguments make for a healthy bond.
Simply put, if you have conflicts with your partner in a constructive way, it can bring you closer.
A 2012 paper published by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology found that expressing anger to a romantic partner might create short-term discomfort but also encourages honest conversations that strengthen the relationship over time.
So, what's the right way to fight with your partner - or any loved one? Let's fight... erm, find out:
Start Using 'I' Over 'You'
Use 'I' in your relationship. Now, we are not asking you to become selfish. Experts suggest that one of the best ways to avoid escalating conflict is to steer clear of the blame game.
Dr Pavitra Shankar, associate consultant psychiatry at Aakash Healthcare, says, "Use 'I' statements to express feelings, not blame. Saying 'I feel overwhelmed when plans change suddenly' is far less inflammatory than 'You ruin everything'."
Shahszeen Shivdasani, relationship expert and author of Love, Lust and Lemons, agrees: "No name-calling. Use the word 'I'. Say 'I feel that way' instead of 'you never'," she adds.
Remember The Intention
It's crucial to understand why you're fighting. Is it with each other, for each other, or something else entirely? Your intention should be that it's you versus the problem, not you versus your partner.
Vasundhara Gupta, founder and counselling psychologist at Humraahi Psychotherapy, says that while there's no perfect way to fight, there is a better way - and intentionality is key.
"The best fights aren't about winning or being right-they're about understanding, repair, and staying connected even in conflict. Sue Johnson [British clinical psychologist and couples therapist known for her work in psychology] teaches that couples tend to fall into predictable negative cycles-like one partner pursuing and the other withdrawing. The key is to recognise the cycle as the enemy, not each other," she says.
For Vasundhara, intentionality means asking yourself: What am I hoping for in this conversation? To be heard? To feel less alone? To move towards closeness? Or am I trying to punish, withdraw, or prove a point?
"Being intentional helps shift the fight from a reactive space to a relational one," she adds.
Timeout
All the experts we spoke to had one consistent piece of advice - know when to pause. When things get too heated or your emotions run high, that's the time to take a break.
Priyanka Kapoor, psychotherapist, psychologist, sex therapist and couple and family counsellor from Mumbai, recommends using the 'STOP skill' during conflict.
"When you sense the argument worsening, you need to STOP-take a break, think, calm down, and plan your conversation so the other person doesn't feel attacked," she says.
"Also, choose the right moment to bring up difficult topics. Not when the person is busy, hungry (very important), angry or already upset," she adds.
Respect, Respect, Respect
Ask any expert how to build a solid foundation in a relationship, and respect will always rank among the top three. Even when fighting, respect is non-negotiable.
Gupta says it's not about whether you fight, but how. Conflict handled with mutual respect and a willingness to listen can actually foster growth.
Shivdasani agrees. "Fighting is important in a relationship because, before you marry or commit to someone for life, it's crucial to know how you both behave in conflict. It shows your growth as a couple and how you resolve issues. But no matter what, it should always be handled with respect. Respect, respect, respect," she concludes.
End On A Connecting Note
Ending a fight on a good note matters. It helps repair and strengthen the relationship, rather than allowing the conflict to fester. A positive conclusion fosters forgiveness, kindness and emotional reconnection.
Dr Shankar says even unresolved issues can be softened with small gestures. "A warm touch or a 'We'll get through this'-these simple things can really diffuse the tension," she says.
The Red Flags
So, how do you know if the way you're fighting isn't healthy? Dr Shankar lists a few red flags to watch for:
Escalation over trivial issues: Minor disagreements spiralling out of control often reflect poor emotional regulation.
Name-calling and character attacks: Saying "You're lazy" instead of "I need help" damages trust and self-esteem.
Stonewalling or silent treatmen t: Emotionally shutting down kills communication and builds walls.
Recycling past arguments: Repeatedly revisiting the same issues suggests nothing's being resolved.
Emotional or verbal abuse: Sarcasm, intimidation or threats are never acceptable. If fear is involved, seek professional help.
Emotional exhaustion after every fight: Constant fatigue or anxiety after arguments signals relational burnout.
How To Know If You're Fighting Too Much
Fighting is good in a relationship. But couples shouldn't feel like they're constantly at each other's throats.
Shallu Chawla, Delhi-based matchmaker and Co-founder of Make My Lagan, says there's no magic number of arguments that's 'too many'. It's more about how the fights affect your emotional wellbeing and the atmosphere of the relationship.
"I always ask couples to reflect on the space between arguments. Do you experience peace, affection, connection? Or does it feel like you're always recovering from a fight?" Chawla says.
A toxic relationship always has signs. Representational Photo: Pexels
Dr Shankar shares signs that you might be fighting too often:
Arguments dominate your time: If peace is the exception rather than the norm, take note.
Same issues come up repeatedl y: This hints at unresolved deeper problems.
You feel emotionally drained: A healthy relationship recharges you, not the opposite.
Fights get personal or abusive: Insults and manipulation show deeper dysfunction.
You avoid each other: Withdrawing emotionally may be a response to chronic conflict.
Bottomline
Every couple fights. It's a byproduct of different perspectives, misunderstandings and expectations, and it is bound to happen when two people are in a relationship. It only becomes a problem when you can't resolve issues or express your views respectfully and constructively.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Finger on the pulp - Print and publishing picks of Cannes Lions : BE Extraordinary
Finger on the pulp - Print and publishing picks of Cannes Lions : BE Extraordinary

Time of India

time2 hours ago

  • Time of India

Finger on the pulp - Print and publishing picks of Cannes Lions : BE Extraordinary

This section showcases masterclasses in impactful communication. Dove, a champion of real beauty, innovatively celebrated the everyday ritual of "getting unready." Their print ads subtly depicted post-celebration moments, from St. Patrick's Day makeup to Holi colors, with a simple call to action, reinforcing Dove's authentic role in daily life. Meanwhile, The Times of India tackled low voter turnout in India with a powerful civic message. They printed newspapers using unused electoral ink, transforming a symbol of missed participation into a tangible reminder. This bold move urged citizens to vote, demonstrating how a traditional medium can deliver a profoundly relevant and actionable message. OMO/Persil, It's part of the Game, Mullen Lowe UK The household cleaning brand, OMO (known as Persil in some markets), has long championed the mantra "Dirt Is Good." This philosophy was initially portrayed quite literally, with memorable ads showing children joyfully playing in mud puddles. However, the brand has now boldly expanded this message to encompass all forms of "dirt," even challenging societal taboos around menstrual blood. Their recent campaign specifically tackles the contradiction where blood on a shirt from a minor injury is seen as "brave," but blood from a uterus is often met with shame. The campaign features images with the outline of women's underwear, where inside the outline, the word "shame" is subtly placed, while outside, "bravery" is highlighted. This powerful visual representation aims to erase societal stigma, declaring that "every stain should be part of the game." Beyond its powerful social commentary, the campaign also implicitly showcases the product's efficacy, demonstrating its ability to remove even challenging stains like period blood, thereby challenging and changing perceptions. Dove: Get Unready, Ogilvy Dove has consistently championed real beauty, challenging conventional ideals and promoting self-acceptance. Their latest campaign embraces a simple yet powerful message: Dove is there not just to help you get ready, but also to help you get unready. This idea is particularly evident in their visual print ads, which highlight the aftermath of vibrant celebrations. Imagine a close-up shot of a face after St. Patrick's Day, green and yellow remnants of festivities still clinging to the skin, with a timestamp like "St. Patrick's Day, 11:32 p.m." The accompanying text simply reads: "Get unready." Another striking example features a face dusted with colorful powder, clearly from the Indian festival of Holi, with the caption: "Holi, 4:03 p.m. Get unready." These ads powerfully convey that after the party, after the makeup and the fun, Dove is there to cleanse and restore, embracing the human reality of daily rituals. The simplicity of the visuals, coupled with the relatable scenarios, creates a deeply human connection, reinforcing the brand's enduring commitment to authentic beauty. The Times of India: Ink of Democracy, Havas, Mumbai In India, where the physical newspaper still holds significant influence, especially for a national publication like The Times of India, a compelling campaign was launched to address low voter turnout during general elections. With 33% of eligible voters often not participating, despite elections occurring every five years, the challenge was to galvanize civic engagement. The campaign leveraged a uniquely Indian symbol of democracy: the electoral ink applied to a voter's finger after casting their ballot. This indelible purple mark is a widely recognized sign of participation, often proudly displayed on social media. The Times of India drew attention to the thousands of liters of this special ink that go unused due to non-voters. Their powerful statement was to print the newspaper using this very unused electoral ink. This bold act served as a poignant visual reminder to readers that the ink should have been on their fingers, marking their vote, rather than on the newspaper pages. By literally transforming wasted potential into a tangible message, The Times of India underscored its commitment to informing the public and fostering democratic participation, effectively challenging the public to turn out and make their mark. (At BE Extraordinary, a series about the winners at Cannes Lions in collaboration with Harsh Kapadia, CCO, Grey India, we peer outside the Grand Prix, and look at clutter breaking work that picked the silvers and the bronzes, but don't often get discussed.)

Air India crash survivor released from hospital, to perform brother's last rites
Air India crash survivor released from hospital, to perform brother's last rites

India Today

time3 hours ago

  • India Today

Air India crash survivor released from hospital, to perform brother's last rites

Viswashkumar Ramesh, the sole survivor of the Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad, has been released from the Civil Hospital in Ahmedabad. In a telephonic conversation with Aaj Tak, Ramesh confirmed that he is heading home and will perform the last rites of his younger brother on an Indian-origin British national, was amongst the 242 people on board the London-bound flight that crashed shortly after take-off on April 12, slamming into the BJ Medical College hostel and aircraft, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, was en route to London's Gatwick Airport when the tragedy occurred. This was the first fatal accident involving a 787 since the model entered commercial service in 2011. Ramesh was seated in 11A, next to the emergency exit, when the aircraft broke apart. His seat detached and was flung clear of the wreckage, sparing him from the massive fireball that followed. "The plane broke, and my seat came off," he had earlier told doctors."The place where I landed was low...I took off the seat belt and for a moment, I was scared for my life. But I was near ground level, so I tried to get out," he told DD News.A video of him emerging from the BJ Medical campus shortly after the plane crash had gone viral earlier. Following this, he was admitted to a hospital. Earlier, several leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah, met him at the has since described his survival as nothing short of a miracle and expressed disbelief at how he lived through the crash. "I can't believe how I survived," Ramesh told reporters. "I thought I would die. People died in front of my eyes," he Watch

How court stood by queer couple's rights as a ‘chosen' family
How court stood by queer couple's rights as a ‘chosen' family

Time of India

time5 hours ago

  • Time of India

How court stood by queer couple's rights as a ‘chosen' family

In a quiet room of the Madras High Court , a young woman's freedom was restored. More than that, something beautiful unfolded. The court recognised that family, in its deepest and truest sense, is not always something we are born into. Sometimes, it is something we choose. And sometimes, it chooses us. This was the case of a young lesbian woman who was confined by her biological family. Her partner, brave and undeterred, approached the court seeking her release through a habeas corpus petition. What began as a personal struggle for one couple became a significant moment in India's legal history. The court ruled that under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, the right to form a "chosen family" is protected. The judgment came without fanfare. No front-page headlines, no breathless TV panels. Yet, its quiet compassion may make it one of the most meaningful verdicts for queer communities in India, perhaps for anyone who has ever felt out of place in their own home and longed for a different kind of belonging. What emerged from this case was not merely an order for release but a broader constitutional articulation, one that shifts the prevailing legal understanding of family in India. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like What She Did Mid-Air Left Passengers Speechless medalmerit Learn More Undo Traditionally, Indian statutes and jurisprudence have treated family as a legal unit formed through blood ties, marriage, or adoption. The judgment suggests that such a framework, while still operative, is no longer exhaustive. It affirms that emotional interdependence, mutual care, and voluntary association can constitute family, and that such relationships merit protection under the Constitution. The approach is grounded in landmark Supreme Court decisions: Justice K S Puttaswamy vs Union of India (2017) declared the right to privacy a fundamental right under Article 21, redefining liberty to include decisional autonomy over intimate choices; Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India (2018) decriminalised consensual same-sex relationships, holding that constitutional morality, not social morality, must guide the interpretation of fundamental rights; and Supriyo vs Union of India (2023), while declining to legalise same-sex marriage, unequivocally recognised the dignity of queer relationships and acknowledged their right to cohabit and form households. These decisions established a framework wherein personal autonomy, dignity, and identity are intrinsic to the constitutional promise of liberty. The Madras HC extends this logic: if individuals are constitutionally entitled to love and cohabit with whom they choose, it necessarily follows that such relationships must be seen as familial in nature. Each of these rulings reminds us that freedom is not simply the absence of interference; it is the presence of dignity. A striking element of the judgment is its explicit critique of police inaction. Despite the woman's stated preference to reside with her partner, law enforcement authorities failed to act with urgency. She told the police she wanted to live with her partner. But the police, perhaps fearing backlash from her biological family, did not act. This is not uncommon. For many LGBTQIA+ people in India, the law is not always a shield. The home, far from being a safe place, can become a site of silence, shame, or violence. And when people turn to police or the courts, they are often met with hesitation, suspicion, or indifference. Citing Shakti Vahini vs Union of India (2018), the HC ruling reminds the state that honour, tradition, or family control cannot be excuses to deny someone their freedom. The Constitution's promise of liberty does not stop at the doorstep of one's natal home. The HC reiterated the state's duty to protect people from honour-based coercion, forced confinement, and familial violence. The judgment makes clear that the state cannot abdicate its constitutional obligations on the basis of social discomfort. The court also emphasised that constitutional rights are enforceable within the domestic sphere. When an adult expresses autonomous choice, state institutions must act to safeguard it. For a long time, Indian law has measured family by only a few yardsticks: blood, marriage, or legal adoption. These categories do not always leave room for the love between two friends who raise a child together, or the care between ageing companions who share their final years, or queer couples who are denied legal recognition but live like any other family. The judgment implicitly challenges the formalistic boundaries of Indian family law. Currently, statutes such as the Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Succession Act, Guardians and Wards Act, and employment and pension rules operate on presumptions about what constitutes family. However, the court's recognition of chosen families requires a rethinking of these frameworks. If a queer partner is legally acknowledged as part of one's family for purposes of liberty and cohabitation, ancillary rights such as access to healthcare decisions, housing, pensions, inheritance, and next-of-kin status must logically follow. This creates a necessary tension between constitutional rights and statutory limitations. The Constitution, as interpreted by the higher judiciary, recognises a more inclusive notion of family. The legislature and subordinate rule-making authorities must now respond with corresponding reform. Courts in several jurisdictions have recognised non-traditional family forms: In Canada, jurisprudence has acknowledged "functional families" based on emotional and financial dependency, even in the absence of marriage or consanguinity. The Yogyakarta Principles, developed under international human rights law, urge states to ensure that individuals of all sexual orientations and gender identities can form families of their choosing without discrimination. The Madras HC's judgment implicitly aligns with these global developments. No parade will mark this judgment. No stamp will seal it in textbooks just yet. But it is revolutionary in its own way. It reminds us that families are not just born—they are also made. By extending constitutional shelter to chosen families, the court has not merely resolved a dispute. It has reaffirmed the dignity of the individual, the autonomy of choice, and the capacity of the Constitution to embrace a plurality of lives. (The writer is an advocate at Madras High Court) Email your feedback with name and address to

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store