From the author: This article was once heatedly discussed on the Internet. It was written in 2003, since then my views have changed and expanded somewhat. I would be glad to discuss the topic stated in the article at a new level. Clarification of relationships - a way to come to an agreement or an opportunity to look at the true face of a partner? Every person, be it a man or a woman, has at least once gone through the painful procedure of “showing the relationship.” There are those who love to do this, others consider sorting things out as a meaningless and useless activity. What prompts some to look for an opportunity to clarify, explain and talk through everything, while others, on the contrary, incline to avoid any conversations on painful topics. Which of them is right and can anyone even be right in this opposition of positions? Figuratively, a showdown can be compared to a negotiating table, at which the two sides are trying to resolve a political or some other confusing situation. It is clear that parties interested in each other are sitting down at the negotiating table, that the current situation no longer suits both camps and that the moment has come when it is no longer possible to postpone mutual demands, claims and wishes for the future. A typical case from everyday life is a love relationship that has reached a dead end or is not developing in the direction expected by one of the partners. Sooner or later, in this case, someone will request “negotiations.” This is a very important and decisive moment. This is the turning point, but in which direction the turn will lead, both do not know. Negotiations are therefore a risky undertaking. It is quite possible that during a decisive conversation you will have to bring to the light of day something that you previously managed to hide or circumvent. “Should I wake up a sleeping dog?” - here partners’ opinions may differ. Therefore, negotiations can be compared to an everyday emergency situation, and how a person behaves in an extreme situation is very revealing. Here it immediately becomes clear: “Is it possible to go on reconnaissance with such a person or not.” And for serious love relationships this is important. So, what is this “breed of people” that strives to sort things out? These are open people, accustomed to solving their problems through their own efforts. They believe that if something doesn’t work out, they need to try to correct the situation – “do something.” Taken to the extreme, this position can lead to the fact that a person does not give himself time to think and wait; any anxiety pushes him to action. Further, these people are brave, they are not afraid of risk and unpredictability, they are ready to “jump into the abyss empty-handed” just so as not to sit on its edge in eternal anticipation. Such courage can be found in a truly brave, courageous person and in someone whose courage is like the fearlessness of a child who simply does not yet know about many dangers. This position can also be compared to the categorical attitude of a teenager who lives under the motto “all or nothing.” If one of the lovers starts a showdown too often, this suggests that for him an intense conversation compensates for something that he lacks in the relationship , perhaps attention to himself, perhaps the existing relationship seems too formal and cool to him, so he is trying to add passion. It is possible that such a person is simply accustomed to venting sexual passions through other channels, for example, through serious conversations or quarrels. During the conversation, he calms down - the partner is with him and only with him, all the partner’s attention is directed to him and to the common problem, even if they swear or speak in a raised voice. In addition, such people may be intolerant of uncertainty of any degree, they may be anxious because they have not had the experience of calm guarantees, they have been little loved and they need a lot of attention and confirmation of love in order to begin to slowly calm down. They can even destroy relationships becausethat they cannot allow themselves to be happy, and even if they experience happiness, they do not believe that it will last, and they bring the denouement closer. After all, the painful expectation of the end is worse for them than the end itself. All these possible options for the underlying tendency to sort things out still have something in common - these people strive for active interaction and consider themselves masters of their lives. Others, those who do not like to sort things out, do the same may be guided by different motives, but in general they can be characterized as more passive and more introverted (turned more inward than outward) people. They are not sure that their actions, efforts, words can fix something; they are rather inclined to believe that if something goes wrong, they need to wait until “everything will work itself out.” This position may be reinforced by unsuccessful showdowns in the past, when they were followed by a break. Among representatives of this type of people there is even such a certainty that if people begin to sort things out, then this relationship is over. If people sit down at the negotiating table, it means they are in a state of war, what can be fixed? “You can’t mend a broken vase,” etc. Such people are, in some ways, obedient children who are afraid to do anything their own way and wait, wait, wait until either the desire disappears, or suddenly they become “adults” (circumstances, fate, other people) will do everything for them. The attention of such people is more focused on the possible negative consequences of any efforts than on their possible positive results. The ghost of a strict parental figure scolding “for arbitrariness and destruction” circles over them - whether they realize it or not. Naturally, they prefer to wait, avoid sharp corners, and wait for other people’s decisions. To avoid conflict, they may even disappear for a while or simply evaporate from the life of another person, just to protect themselves from the situation of choice and decision-making. In fairness, it must be said that in a mild version, such a position can help maintain complex relationships for quite a long time, until the time when past conflicts are no longer relevant and the couple gently and imperceptibly enters another phase of the relationship. And how unresolved conflicts will manifest themselves - will they be buried under the weight of time or will they manifest themselves in one form or another in the future - is another question. But let’s return to our negotiating table - a situation that serves not only to clarify relations, but also for partners to test each other - how will everyone behave, what will be manifested in his behavior - nobility, steadfastness, belligerence or cowardice? All the nuances are important here. First, who is requesting negotiations. More often, this is the one who is more concerned about the fate of the relationship and is more interested in it. Or this is someone who internally wants to quickly free himself from unsatisfactory relationships and tries to bring this moment closer. Further observation of the partners’ behavior will help you understand which option is taking place. Secondly, the chosen location is important. If this is the house of one of the partners, it is important whose it is. The owner of the house is most likely the one who strives for reconciliation or preservation of relationships. This partner may also be worried and even if his conscious desires are to end the relationship, he may not be internally sure of this. Therefore, he needs support at home, his territory. In general, whoever is more nervous will offer their home for negotiations. The third option is some public place. If this is a place associated with the memory of idyllic times, then the one who chose it indirectly reminds of the past, and therefore calls for the restoration of lost relationships. Thirdly, it is important who came first and who was late. Psychoanalysts have a joke: “If a client is late, it means he’s angry, if he arrives ahead of time, it means he’s anxious, and if he arrives on time, he’s obsessive.” This is, of course, a joke, but like through any joke, some reality emerges through this one. The one who is late - no matter whathe had valid reasons beyond his control, unconsciously wants to avoid the meeting or at least postpone its beginning. Anyone who arrives early is most likely nervous, has a speech prepared and is impatient to deliver it and hear what will be said in response. It is clear that this person is still strongly attached to the other and this relationship is very important to him. Fourthly, the poses are very informative. If the partners sat opposite each other, this may mean that both are willing to be both outspoken and combative. A face-to-face pose implies openness, a willingness to show all of yourself, and therefore your thoughts and feelings. But if, in this position of the body, the arms are crossed on the chest, the legs are crossed, then this position should be perceived rather as defensive, but still openly defensive. A person in such a position does not hide the fact that he will hide something. He seems to be saying, “don’t come, don’t infiltrate, I’m closed.” If people sit half-turned towards each other, part of their face is hidden, gestures are not so obvious, it is possible to hide their facial expression with a slight turn of the head. In general, this is a more peaceful posture, but also more masking of true intentions. To test your partner, you can sit in the first place where the negotiations are taking place, so that he has a choice - to sit opposite or diagonally. His preference will already tell you something. If you are talking at a table, it is important where your partner's hands are located. If he hides them under the table or in his pockets, this indirectly indicates that he is not looking for contact. If he puts his hands on the table and leans towards you, this is a sign of trust, he is looking for contact, wants to be heard. During the negotiations, the posture may change; it is very important after what words and topics these changes in posture were made. If, after a tense moment, the interlocutor suddenly leans back in his chair and opens his folded arms on his chest, this is a signal that one of the knots has been untied, he has relaxed, and some of his fears have been released. This may also be a sign that he internally decided - well, this is a hopeless matter. But in any case, this person takes off some of the tension. Something that was said brought him relief. If a person looks to the left, this is an indication that he is remembering something reliable, and is not trying to invent, model or assume something. If to the right - on the contrary, he either assumes, thinks - how it could be, or simply deceives. If a person’s eyes look up, it means he thinks about what he saw, to the side - he heard, down - about what he felt. Accordingly, to the left up - he remembers what he saw, to the right - what he could have seen or what he wants to present to the other as seen. Since in the process of a decisive conversation, it is hardly possible to maintain impartiality and observe your partner calmly and soberly, you should not overly rely on all these indirect indications of his true intentions. Your own feeling, intuition, and simple trust can be the best advisors. But if you are completely confused and your feelings do not influence your perception so much, then the recommendations outlined can help you navigate the situation. In conclusion, I would like to return once again to the question - is it worth sorting things out? If we are talking about sorting things out, and not about repeated quarrels and mutual accusations, then, in addition to the individual psychological make-up, the attitude towards this procedure is also influenced by belonging to the cultural and historical environment. The contrast between the West and the East is also manifested in this problem - the ethics of interpersonal relations. Adherents of Western culture will try to resolve conflict or confusion through conversation. People close to the East would rather not interfere in the course of events, wait a while, and if they discuss events, then, when they are already a thing of the past, they will not be so emotionally charged. Therefore, it is even more difficult to say unequivocally “to find out or not to find out” where we encounter cowardice and where with wisdom, where openness and.