The Glad Game

Recently, I thought about a relationship I was in during high school in which I was kind of an assclown. But I did have on or two good ideas that showed at least some promise for the future.

One of those ideas was the Glad Game.

The intent of this game was to turn an upsetting or uncomfortable fight with a loved one into a hokey compliment-fest centered around being grateful rather than feeling spiteful. Because I was like 17 and a dumbshit, I didn't know how to design a good game at all, so I'm going to give you the original game, and then attempt to make some modifications based on some modern Game Theory.


Basically, the idea was that in order to turn a fight (typically the uncomfortable silence portion) into something pleasant. initiative would have to be taken by one of the two warring factions by announcing something about their partner that makes them "glad." These can be completely sentimental, or relatively surface things, but it's best to mix them up.
"I'm glad you're a good cook."
Your partner then has to announce one to you.
"I'm glad you listen to me when I ask for help."

The two continued until they had forgotten about being mad, replacing feelings of irritation, frustration, and anger with positive emotions.

Looking back, it was a good idea at its heart, but it made one fairly fatal mistake; the game avoided the actual problem. Instead of discussing or approaching what was actually behind the conflict, it was covered up by irrelevant positive feelings.

While it does have that flaw, the game intentionally reminds you of the 5:1 ratio that I discussed back in Communication and How Not to be Terrible at it. Despite the existence of current negative emotions, the game forces you to remember why you're with your partner. What things you love about your partner. To that end, the game delivers something incalculably important despite its problems. With that in mind, I want to update the game to be a little more on-point.


 The Glad game must continue to incite positive emotions in place of negative ones. For this, the basic premise and mechanism by which the game functions is totally fine. However, we need to introduce a new rule to cover the issue of relevancy.

There are two ways to approach this:

Starting with the current problem; or

Ending with the current problem.

I think either one could work fine in theory, and it would likely depend on your relationship to determine which one works better for you.

In starting with the current problem, you tie the initial argument/fight into traits that you find admirable that your partner exhibited on the issue.
"I'm glad you're so passionate about the topic."
"I'm glad you understood my position regarding _____."
"I'm glad you're having this discussion with me."
etc.

From a minimum of 2-3 back-and-forths that are directly related to the argument at hand, you can begin generalizing into traits that you just like about your partner. This requires you to tie your fight into positive feelings that are relevant to the issue, finding an excuse to stand on common ground with your partner. This simple distinction from the original game can allow for far more understanding between partners after a spat.

If you end with the current problem, the idea is to take the heightened positive feelings from the entire exercise and apply them to traits you admire about your partner regarding the argument. While it's a little more distant from the fight itself, this method winds up associating positive feelings far more easily with the fight. It will also feel less forced and more genuine.

Do you eat your dessert first or last? Either way, you're getting the same meal.

As a final rule, when concluding (You can pick an arbitrary number of compliments to run through. Let's say 10-15 each), you must point to one of the compliments your partner gave you that you appreciated most (or very much in general). This gives direct feedback to how each player did in their participation in a way that can only be positively reinforcing.

Will this solve your conflict? Nah. But it will associate and remind you of positive emotions while arguing so that it might be a little easier for you to start discussing again. This is not a solution to your problem, but rather, it's intended as a means of turning a problem into a game. From something unpleasant that you have to do into something pleasant that you choose to do.

Other rules:
Things you can NOT do while playing this game.
Falsify sincerity.
Sarcasm.
Be silent.
Be a jerk.

You must be making eye contact with your partner. Any other meaningful or happy contact helps too. Holdings hands, backscratches, etc.

As with any relationship advice, this would not be a replacement for communication. It must be used as a supplement to active communication, or a tool to encourage active communication.

Let me know if you have any suggestions for how I might improve the game! I thought of some of these changes kind of on the fly... >.>

-
Waddles