Your partner says something that stings, and you decide it is not worth it. They forget the thing they promised, and you fix it yourself rather than mention it. When you are disappointed, you say it’s fine, and you say it warmly, because you mean to keep the peace. From the outside, you are the easy one. There are no rows in your house. And yet something in you is getting heavier, and something between you is getting thinner. Psychologists call this conflict avoidance, and it is one of the most respectable ways a relationship dies. It looks like kindness. Yet it works like a slow leak. I want to show you what happens to the things you do not say, where the habit of swallowing them comes from, and how to start saying them without setting the house on fire.
Because a relationship without fights is not necessarily a peaceful one. Sometimes it is just a quiet one.
What conflict avoidance actually is
The counselor Kari Rusnak, a certified Gottman therapist, starts her Gottman Institute article by challenging the assumption most avoiders hold. Many people, she writes, think a healthy relationship is one without conflict. It is not. In fact, a good relationship includes having fights. What matters is how you fight, not whether you do.
Her examples of conflict avoidance are ordinary, which is what makes them worth listing. You ignore a hurtful comment rather than raise it. A problem comes up, such as a dent in the car, and you handle it alone instead of telling your partner. A frustration builds and stays unspoken. Or you expected something, did not get it, and said nothing about the disappointment. None of these is a fight avoided. Instead, each is a fight postponed, with interest. There is no such thing as truly avoiding conflict, she writes. The problem and the hurt feelings remain; they simply never reach the other person.
The psychologist Robert Johansen, writing in Psychology Today, has a good word for what happens to those unsaid things. They hibernate. In other words, they do not go away; they sleep, and then they come back later, usually larger. His phrase for the avoider’s bargain, meanwhile, is comfort in a cage: you get safety, and you pay for it with depth.
Where conflict avoidance comes from
Nobody is born unable to say that hurt, though. The silence has a classroom, and the therapist Erin Leonard describes it in Psychology Today. Children who grow up with parents who cannot handle confrontation productively learn to stifle what they feel, because saying it only made things worse. A child who raised a complaint and got a slammed door, a sulk that lasted three days, or an explosion, learns fast. The complaint was the problem. So, in the end, the complaint stops.
Leonard then adds a second source: a past relationship where a minor confrontation set off a nightmare. If you once said I did not like that and spent the next week paying for it, your body remembers, and it will vote for silence next time before your mind has weighed in. And underneath both is attachment. The safety of the first relationship in your life, she writes, decides how safe you feel voicing discontent in every relationship after it.
When I worked in counseling, the avoiders I met had almost always been the child who kept the peace at home. Some had a parent whose anger was frightening. Others had a parent so fragile that any complaint was met with tears and guilt. That is the same territory as the fawn response, where appeasing becomes the body’s first move, and of self-abandonment, where your own needs are the first thing dropped.
Here is the part I most want you to hear. Swallowing it was intelligent. In a house where a complaint could cost you a parent’s love, or your own safety, staying quiet was the only sane move. Conflict avoidance protected you. It simply never learned that it could stop.
What conflict avoidance does to a couple
Rusnak’s account of the cost is short and, in my experience, exact. Unresolved conflict leads to resentment and to a lack of connection. The resentment is the part people see coming. The lack of connection, however, is the part they do not. It arrives slowly, because every unsaid thing is also an unshared one. Your partner cannot know you if they only ever meet the version of you that is fine. Leonard, likewise, puts it starkly: without the ability to resolve conflict productively, resentment and distrust proliferate.
There is a body under all of this, and it explains why conflict avoidance is not a decision you can simply reverse. Rusnak describes emotional flooding, the body’s alarm system for perceived threat, and notes that for conflict-avoidant people the alarm tends to produce flight or freeze rather than fight. That is why the moment you try to raise something, your mind goes blank or your throat closes. It is not cowardice. Rather, the alarm is firing, and it is pulling you towards stonewalling, or towards a shut-down that feels like nothing at all.
And there is a trap at the end of the road, past the functional freeze of the person who has stopped feeling the swallow. What you swallow does not disappear; it stores. Stored grievances, as I wrote about the harsh startup, come out sharp when they finally come out. So the avoider, who has spent years being the calm one, eventually says the sharpest thing in the house. Then the explosion confirms the old belief: see, conflict is dangerous. And the silence closes over again.
Why keeping the peace is not the same as having it
I want to draw the line that Rusnak draws, because avoiders blur it constantly. Gottman’s research found that about two-thirds of a couple’s problems are perpetual: they never go away, and a couple can only manage them. Avoiders, though, hear that as permission. If it has no solution, why raise it? But the point is the opposite. A perpetual problem that you talk about becomes a known difference between two people who love each other. A perpetual problem that you never raise becomes a wall.
Johansen describes the difference with a story from his own marriage, about money for their adult children. He and his wife disagreed, and they talked, and they talked again, until both could see that the other’s position was valid. What came out was a compromise neither could have reached alone, on what he calls neutral emotional ground. His summary is the line I would put on the wall of every avoider’s kitchen: tensions explored are tensions relieved. Intimacy takes a step forward.
How to loosen conflict avoidance
The work is not to become a fighter. Rather, it is to make saying the thing survivable. Here is the sequence I use.
First, catch the swallow. Notice the moment you decide it is not worth it. That decision is fast and usually silent, and until you can see it happen you cannot change it. For a week, simply keep a note: what I did not say, and to whom. Nothing else. After a week, the length of the list shocks most people, and the list is the data you need.
Then, choose the safe moment on purpose. Johansen’s advice is to pre-arrange the conversation, in a moment of security rather than crisis. Avoiders wait for the perfect moment and it never comes, so choose an imperfect but calm one. Can we talk on Sunday morning about the holidays? gives both of you time to arrive regulated. If you feel the alarm rising mid-conversation, Rusnak’s twenty-minute break applies to conflict avoidance as much as to shouting.
Saying it without the explosion
Also, use Leonard’s three-part opening. Start, first, with something warm and true. Then say the feeling in an I-statement. Then name the issue, respectfully. Her example is worth copying: I really like working with you. I was surprised and hurt when you presented my idea without me. Warmth comes first, because it lowers your partner’s defences and, just as important, yours. Learning to communicate your needs in that shape is most of the cure.
Finally, stay for the repair. The avoider’s instinct after saying a hard thing is to flee, apologise for raising it, or take it all back. Do not. Instead, stay in the room and let the repair attempt happen, because the repair is what teaches your nervous system that conflict can end well. If you cannot raise anything without freezing, or if your partner’s reaction to complaints has ever frightened you, please talk to a therapist or your doctor. A trained ear can tell the difference between an old alarm and a present danger.
Journaling prompts for conflict avoidance
Write these somewhere private, and do not show them to anyone until you are ready.
- What did I decide was not worth raising this week, and what did it cost me to carry it?
- In the house I grew up in, what happened to the person who complained?
- When I imagine saying the thing, what exactly do I picture my partner doing?
- Has my partner ever actually done that, or is the picture from somewhere else?
If the fourth answer is somewhere else, you have found the room your silence was built for. Your partner, however, is not in it.
Conclusion: the quiet is not the peace
Conflict avoidance is the habit of swallowing what you need to say to keep the peace, and it costs you the very closeness it was meant to protect. You learned it in a home where a complaint was dangerous, and it runs on an alarm that fires before you can think.
You do not have to become someone who enjoys a row. Instead, the task is to make one true sentence survivable: choose the calm moment, open with warmth, say the feeling, and stay for the repair. Every time the conversation ends well, the alarm behind your conflict avoidance learns a little. The quiet you have now is not peace. Peace, in fact, is what comes after you speak.
Check out the author’s book here: Love and Relationship Workbook for Couples
Leave a Reply