Hah, I'm not *that* easily pigeonholed

[trixtah]

Ganked from kinzokutaka. I'm not going to paste the whole blurb about the "Five Love Languages", which is some "psychology guru's" pop-science way of describing the differing communication styles we use in relationships, but it's interesting food for thought.

Does anyone really think that gifts are a measure of someone's love for them? Ok, it's really nice to get them, especially when they're thoughtful ones, but as proof of someone's feelings? Hm.

The survey link is here.

And, yes, FWIW, I do think that quality time is the most important thing that someone can give me.

The Five Love Languages

Your primary love language is probably
Quality Time
with a secondary love language being
Acts of Service.

Complete set of results

Quality Time:		9
Acts of Service:		7
Physical Touch:		7
Words of Affirmation:		7
Receiving Gifts:		0

Comments

[grey-evil-twin.livejournal.com]

I got physical touch followed by quality time. I really dont get the gift giving thing.

[surelars.livejournal.com]

I agree. I never got this "gift" stuff. Don't get me wrong - I love giving gifts, and I like receiving them as well. But as a love language? No.

However, I know people (including my very dear sister) who are high on little gifts, beautifully wrapped and presented - all the time. For them, it's definitely a love language. It has nothing to do with "getting stuff" or the financial aspects. I figure it's a channel for keeping the other in your mind, and for sharing that you have mindspace. I can sort of understand intellectually, but I still don't get it.

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Good observation. I suppose I can get it in terms of "reminders of you", but yeah, it's not in my priority list.

[surelars.livejournal.com]

I think it's also related to the point made elsethread (http://surelars.livejournal.com/58594.html?thread=202722#t202722) about "giving". My sister can spend a lot of time picking gifts, wrapping them, doing little origami birds, presenting the gift, etc, and I think that in doing so she's both expressing her love and reminding herself that she is loved.

Somewhat related is also "exchange of symbols", wedding rings probably being the most common example. My primary and her OSO have given each other a luxury, every-day item, something they have along all the time and yet is clearly special; for both of them it serves as a "reminder of you", as you say. It's a "I know you're there in my life all the time, even when we don't get to see each other often" thing. I get that better than the regular gift thing.

[surelars.livejournal.com]

I score on Physical Touch and Quality Time (http://surelars.livejournal.com/58594.html) and none of the other three. Describes me pretty well.

I have the book, but haven't read it yet. The reason is actually the test - the print version of the test in the book, that is. The online one is gender neutral and generally OK; the one in the book is gender-specific, hetero-normative, and sexist.

There's actually two tests in the book, called respectively "Love Languages for Husbands" and "Love Languages for Wives". In one of the questions, the "physical touch" side of one question reads "I can't keep my hands off my wife", while the wive version of the same question reads "I love it when my husband can't keep his hand off me". This is wrong in more ways than I care to explain.

That was enough to make me put the book back on the shelve. I might yet get around to reading it one day.

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Blech, I'm glad the online test was recast appropriately. The author's website is a whole bunch of psychobabble as well - I wonder if it's being marketed towards Christians, because that's what it looks like - and I didn't get far reading through it. Still, at least we can glean the useful insights and not take on the rest of the rubbish.

[surelars.livejournal.com]

Yep. Even though it can be hard to ignore the stereotyping and gender-normative stuff in books like that, it's sometimes worth it. Despite the rubbish, there's often real insights inside. I'm getting better at not letting my anger at the stoopid stuff get in the way of getting what benefit might be there.

Of course, with a bit of luck someone else will read it and extract the useful bits for us.

[surelars.livejournal.com]

OK, so I sat down and read the book yesterday. It is indeed written for Christian and very traditional (err, old-fashioned) people. That and some heavy-handed pop-psych made it a not terribly exciting read. Some of it felt to me like I fell into a time-warp; the marriages described sounded like something my mother would describe from the '50s. I was genuinely surprised to see that it's actually written in the '90s.

It's a quick read, though, and I picked up some useful bits along the way, so it's not a complete waste of time. However, the online test and a two-page summary would do nicely.

I was surprised that I didn't get angry or frustrated with all the Christian babbling. If anything, I found it a bit amusing and curious. Speaks volumes about how I have changed in the past years.

I also re-read the print edition of the test. It's bad. Yuck. Example: one of the "acts of service" questions reads in the male test "I like it when my spouse does my laundry", and in the female test "I like it when my spouse helps with the laundry". Feh.

[saluqi.livejournal.com]

I did a similar quiz a while ago but it was posted on a Christian site at the time. It's an interesting idea, doing it has made me realise how much baggage can attach to different behaviours.

I didn't get a zero for gifts, partially because whenever gifts is paired against touch in the questions, gifts is much less loaded to me than touch. Some of the touch examples they use remind me that touch is just as useless as an expression of love if what the person is after is to take something. Plus with the gifts questions, there seemed to be more about getting than giving, and for me giving is a big part of it and is pretty seemlessly integrated with "acts of service" (which I think is a crappy way of expressing "doing nice tangible stuff for your partner").

The Five Love Languages

My primary love languages are probably
Acts of Service and Words of Affirmation.

Complete set of results

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

That's interesting that gifts seem less loaded to you than touch. For me, I find aggressive gift-giving (if that's the term) much more loaded in terms of trying to buy me than any touch I've experienced. But I haven't been on the receiving end of "you're going to take what I'm going to give and be grateful and obligated" in the physical sense, ever. Heh.

Regarding your point about giving gifts, yes, THAT is the missing part for me. I think I would have scored something there if the questions had been cast with that aspect in mind. And, yeah, if we look at it like that, there really isn't much of a boundary between it and "acts of service" (silly term, indeed) which I think I would have scored more highly in if there had been a bit more about giving rather than receiving.

Mind you, I suppose if someone's going the giving, someone else needs to be doing the receiving - relationships are all about compromise, aren't they? *snerk*

[ataniell93.livejournal.com]

Um, that would be me. In my experience what people give you on gift-giving occasions is directly related to how they perceive you, not to mention I am related to people who use gifts to convey expectations (they buy what they think you should have even when it is pretty clear that this is nothing you want) or even to offer insults. My mother is the master of the $25 gift certificate to the store where she wishes you'd shop, where nothing in the store is under $25 and gift certificates are nonrefundable, and if a man gave me a kitchen or cleaning implement as a present I'd probably run like hell.

It's not that I expect presents all the time, but I like to give things that suit the other person and get things that suit me. It really can be very small, but the way it's done is telling. One of the most selfish men I ever was involved with always gives women purple flowers, which is HIS favourite colour, even when he knows perfectly well that they prefer red, or yellow...or, in some cases pink...

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

*sends pink gerbera thoughts your way*

(I don't know if you like gerberas, but they do pink with attitude :-)

Getting to the point, I totally agree that what people give you can be an interesting indication of what they think of you, how they want to manipulate you, and how clueless (or not) they are about what kind of person you are. (Don't ask me about the windchime with the anodised pink metal chimes, "crystal" dolphins and "gold" chains that my family got me for my 30th.)

The slant of the questions in the quiz seemed to me about people requiring gifts as proof of devotion, or needing those concrete symbols of it. I really enjoy gifts as tokens of someone's regard, yes, but more as an adjunct to the way they've proven their feelings in all the other ways.