Get Your Weekly Digest

Receive the best podcast summaries and insights delivered to your inbox every week.

We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe anytime.

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Lori Gottlieb: Stop Mistaking Calm for Boring! (Follow THIS Simple Rule to Build REAL Love)

with Laurie Gottlieb

Published October 29, 2025
View Show Notes

About This Episode

In this live episode recorded at DAR Constitution Hall in Washington, D.C., therapist and author Laurie Gottlieb joins the host to unpack common relationship challenges around love, acceptance, communication, and vulnerability. They discuss why people feel they must "perform" to earn love, how to create true emotional safety, the difference between chemistry and compatibility, and how childhood patterns show up in adult conflicts. The conversation includes a live on-stage exercise with a couple from the audience and a Q&A addressing conflict timing, gift-giving stress, asking for attention, and relationships involving neurodivergence.

Topics Covered

Relationships Romantic relationships Self-esteem in relationships Therapy Emotional intelligence Communication skills Marriage Mental health Personal Development Neurodivergence in relationships

Disclaimer: We provide independent summaries of podcasts and are not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by any podcast or creator. All podcast names and content are the property of their respective owners. The views and opinions expressed within the podcasts belong solely to the original hosts and guests and do not reflect the views or positions of Summapod.

Quick Takeaways

  • Trying to "earn" love through performance and perfectionism often comes from a deeper belief that we are not inherently lovable, but real love is earned by showing up relationally, not by impressing a partner.
  • A common dynamic in couples is one partner pushing for emotional talk while the other shuts down; early, gentle conversations and creating genuine safety are key to changing this pattern.
  • The most important form of chemistry is compatibility-feeling at peace, bringing out the best in each other, and sharing aligned values-rather than the anxiety-fueled "spark" many people chase.
  • Acceptance of yourself and your partner (including flaws and history) is more crucial than abstract notions of self-love; you can't truly accept another if you haven't honestly accepted yourself.
  • Unresolved childhood experiences and past relationships often show up in current conflicts-"if it's hysterical, it's historical"-so partners need to notice when old figures are "in the room."
  • Controlling a partner out of perfectionism undermines their autonomy and damages the relationship; emotional stability and flexibility are core traits that help couples thrive.
  • Clear, specific requests (for me-time, gifts, or attention) work far better than mind-reading tests of love or vague demands, and reduce the chance of both partners feeling like failures.
  • Differences in "fight styles" (one wants to fix now, the other needs space) can be navigated by scheduling conflict talks when both are resourced, trusting the connection is intact.
  • Labels like narcissism or neurodivergence should not replace seeing the actual person; the core work is still about understanding strengths, challenges, and communicating needs.
  • Small behavioral shifts by each person can create a virtuous cycle in couples, where working on your own patterns positively influences your partner instead of escalating conflict.

Podcast Notes

Live introduction and framing of the conversation

Setting and relationship to the guest

Episode recorded live at DAR Constitution Hall in Washington, D.C. as part of the host's first podcast tour[2:44]
Laurie Gottlieb introduced as a dear friend and one of the show's most popular recurring guests[3:06]
Host expresses excitement about doing this conversation in person instead of the usual studio setting[3:26]

Opening theme: worrying what others think, especially partners

Host frames a core issue: many people are highly sensitive to their partner's perception of them[3:44]
Describes feeling like we have to perform in relationships to gain validation, attention, and affection[4:01]
Asks Laurie why so many people feel this way and what to do about it[4:08]

Performing for love vs being relational

Why people feel they must earn love

Laurie notes that in the beginning of a relationship people act as the "ambassador" of themselves, putting their best foot forward[4:19]
Once in the relationship, many carry a fear they are not actually lovable, especially if they are going through something difficult or feel they don't "measure up" to a partner's success[4:38]
This leads to feeling like love must be earned through external criteria-being attractive, funny, entertaining, and impressive[4:50]
Laurie emphasizes that while you do have to earn love, you earn it by being relational, not by constant performance[5:03]

What it means to "earn love" in a healthy way

Being relational includes listening, being emotionally generous, and showing up as a real, present person[5:03]
If you are stuck in your head worrying about being lovable, you are not actually present in the relationship[5:58]
The core belief that "you won't love me unless I earn it" is what needs to be challenged and discarded[5:26]

One open partner, one closed partner

Host observes a common pattern: one person wants to talk about everything while the other avoids emotions and vulnerability[6:22]
Many people feel their partner "doesn't want to open up" or "doesn't want to talk about their feelings"[6:10]
He asks Laurie what to do when you want to be relational but your partner seems unavailable or unwilling[6:22]
Laurie says it's important to notice this dynamic early in the relationship instead of assuming it will magically change later[7:53]
She compares relationships to cement: if you let patterns harden, you'll later need a jackhammer to change them, whereas wet cement can be shaped more easily[7:46]
She encourages bringing things up early and often despite the fear of breaking the "ambassador" persona[7:44]
Example wording: "I'm having trouble making contact with you" or "I really want to get to know you better, but I'm having trouble understanding what's going on inside"[8:13]

Vulnerability, safety, and "people in the room"

Gendered expectations and space for male vulnerability

Laurie notes some of the dynamic is gendered: many men worry that opening up will make them appear weak[8:28]
Women may say they want emotional openness but then feel unsafe or uncomfortable when their male partner actually cries or shows strong emotion[8:35]
In couples therapy Laurie often sees a woman ask for vulnerability, then react with "whoa" when her partner tears up, revealing her own ambivalence about male vulnerability[8:42]
Partners need to make sure they are genuinely providing space and safety for the less-vulnerable partner to open up[9:17]
Laurie suggests asking directly what would be helpful for the partner who struggles to open up, rather than assuming they are incapable[9:26]

Fear that our full selves are "too much"

Host notes we are all looking for safety yet fear that if we show our true selves, the space will no longer be safe[9:36]
People worry that their full self will be "too hard to handle" or "too hard to hold," so they hide it[9:47]
This hiding leads one partner to think the other lacks capacity for depth, while the hidden partner secretly doubts the other's capacity to handle their authenticity[10:10]
Creating safety requires both communicating readiness to hold whatever comes up and building resilience in oneself to hear difficult truths[10:26]

Two types of vulnerability

Laurie distinguishes between vulnerability about one's own past (e.g., delicate personal history) and vulnerability about the relationship itself ("you and me" issues)[11:28]
The second type-sharing something delicate about how the partner affects you-is often more triggering and leads to defensiveness[11:24]
When someone shares relational vulnerability, it is usually an invitation to come closer and a sign of trust, but it is often misheard as criticism or blame[12:03]
Laurie explains the paradox: the speaker is saying "I trust you and feel close to you," while the listener often hears "something is wrong with you"[12:06]

The "dozen people in the room" and historical triggers

Laurie says that in any conversation between two people there can be up to a dozen people in the room-parents, grandparents, teachers, first partners, etc.[12:22]
She suggests "taking attendance" when a reaction feels outsized: asking which past figures are influencing the current interaction[13:22]
Phrase she uses: "If it's hysterical, it's historical"-if your reaction goes from 0 to 60, it likely taps into old pain, not just the present moment[13:15]
She recommends mentally telling those internalized figures (e.g., "mom, dad, ex") that they are not invited into this conversation, then returning attention to the actual partner[12:46]

Acceptance vs love and embracing full humanity

Reframing the question: self-love vs self-acceptance

Asked whether you can truly love someone if you don't love yourself, Laurie reframes: the better question is whether you can truly accept someone if you don't accept yourself[14:16]
She defines acceptance as embracing the fullness of your and the other person's humanity, not as settling or compromising[14:35]
When people ask "Will you love me if...?" the deeper question is "Will you accept all of me?"[14:53]
Laurie argues you cannot fully accept someone else if you do not fully accept yourself[14:50]

You can't order people à la carte

Laurie says we try to treat people like online orders with "special instructions," wanting to keep some traits and leave others "on the side"[14:58]
You can't accept only the parts you like and try to return the rest-people come fully formed, "no substitutions"[15:24]
She notes we forget that our partner is also accepting challenging aspects of us, not just the other way around[16:06]
She contrasts honest self-knowledge with job-interview style "weaknesses" like "I work too hard" and encourages naming real traits like inflexibility[15:48]
Once you accept your own difficult traits instead of obsessing over them, they take up less emotional real estate and feel smaller[16:33]

Example from host's marriage: accepting core priorities

Host describes himself as mission-oriented, with purpose as his top priority, and notes his wife has always known and accepted this[17:06]
His wife's top priority is her family, and he highlights that her deep family bonds are part of what make her lovable to him[17:52]
He frames acceptance as recognizing you don't want to remove the "secret sauce" that makes your partner who they are, whether it's ambition or family devotion[18:17]
If you try to take away those core traits, you become their kryptonite-weakening them by attacking what they value most[18:28]

Respecting differences and not controlling partners

Relationship as a startup and protecting the essence

Laurie compares a relationship to a startup: two co-founders building something unique together[19:04]
Every relationship is like a snowflake-there will be overlap with others, but each pair creates something no one else can[18:47]
She distinguishes between changing interactions (how you relate) and trying to change the essence of who your partner is, which is not desirable[19:21]

Host's vacation-planning conflict and self-awareness

Host shares he used to resent that his wife didn't organize vacations and felt he was doing all the planning[19:37]
When he asked her to plan more, she replied that if she organized a trip he would have "a million pieces of feedback," but if he planned it she was happy to go along[20:04]
He realized she was right-his perfectionism made him highly critical, which discouraged her from taking initiative[20:18]
This reflection showed him he was unintentionally preventing her from taking responsibility by how he responded[20:41]

Strawberries story: control, autonomy, and flexibility

Laurie recounts a couple where the wife asked her husband to get organic strawberries for their baby on his way home[21:13]
The store didn't have organic strawberries, so he bought regular ones, which sparked a conflict[21:22]
For her, this meant he didn't pay attention to what was important for her and their baby; for him, it meant he followed her directions instead of using his own judgment and still "got in trouble"[21:39]
Laurie points out that couples often fight about small things that symbolize much bigger issues like respect and being understood[21:37]
Trying to control your partner removes their autonomy to creatively contribute in ways that could enhance the relationship[22:38]
She names emotional stability and flexibility as the top traits that make couples work; perfectionism and control reduce flexibility and make someone hard to live with[23:23]
Laurie uses an "aquarium" metaphor: a fishbowl is too tight, an ocean has no rules; a healthy relationship is like an aquarium with room to swim and agreed-upon boundaries[23:20]

Compatibility vs chemistry and the myth of boredom

Audience poll and Laurie's answer

They poll the audience on whether compatibility or chemistry is more important, with people strongly supporting both sides[23:37]
Laurie answers that the most important form of chemistry is compatibility[24:14]
She defines compatibility as vibing together, sharing ideas of fun, having aligned goals, and bringing out the best in each other[24:15]
This kind of compatibility feels like "red hot chemistry" but is rooted in mutual support rather than anxiety and volatility[24:39]
By contrast, some people define chemistry as feeling on edge around a very attractive person, which can be intense but unstable[24:47]

Study on "spark" as stress plus excitement

Host references a study suggesting that the "spark" when meeting someone new is a combination of excitement and stress[25:53]
• Examples: excitement that the person is attractive paired with stress about whether they find you attractive; excitement about getting their number plus stress about whether they'll text back
Over time, as you get to know someone and feel secure they like you and will respond, the stress declines[26:07]
People misinterpret this loss of anxiety as "boredom," when it may actually be peace and safety[26:19]
Laurie notes that what people report wanting in therapy-safety, peace, and fun with someone who clearly likes them-is exactly what they later label as "boring" once they have it[27:14]
She points out that people were actually miserable during the early anxious phase, constantly decoding texts and delays, even though they later romanticize it[27:53]

Couples therapy as individual work and cycles of influence

Laurie's method: individual goals within couples therapy

Laurie explains that, as she practices it, couples therapy is also individual therapy[31:00]
Before starting, she asks each partner privately: "If you were going to be the best version of yourself in this relationship, regardless of what the other person does, what is one thing you want to work on?"[31:11]
Each person keeps their goal to themselves and works on it throughout therapy, independent of the other's behavior[31:27]
As each person changes their own behavior, they don't directly change the other, but they influence them, creating a virtuous cycle instead of a vicious one[31:57]

Context asymmetry and attribution in conflicts

Laurie highlights a common bias: if I snap at you, it's because I'm tired or stressed; if you snap at me, it's because you're disrespectful and don't care[32:15]
We know our own context and motives but assume negative motives for our partner, especially when we feel hurt[32:39]
She stresses we often have zero context for our partner's behavior because we don't ask; feeling hurt stops us from being curious[32:35]
Effective couples work has to address each person's history and "the 12 people in the room," not just the surface issue like who does the laundry[32:57]

Live couple exercise: navigating "me time" and communication

Inviting a couple on stage and role-reversal setup

Host invites couples in the audience to volunteer for an on-stage exercise with Laurie[33:59]
A couple, Stephanie and Nico, come on stage; Laurie asks them to hold hands to help calm their nervous systems during the exercise[35:36]
Laurie casts them in a role-reversal play where each plays the other partner[35:13]

Identifying the issue: mutual need for me-time

When asked about the issue, Nico (played by Stephanie) describes feeling overwhelmed by supporting the family and needing time for his own mental health[35:49]
He feels annoyed when he thinks Stephanie doesn't understand his need for me-time and believes she also wants her own me-time[36:51]
Stephanie (playing herself) then describes Nico working from home, going to his computer early, and sometimes going for a run mid-day to clear his mind[37:42]
She feels jealous and resentful when she sees him taking time for himself while she is not getting similar time for her own pursuits[38:33]
Laurie points out they are struggling to stay in character because they have the exact same complaint: each feels the other doesn't give them enough me-time or understand why they need it[40:37]

Acting out conflict and naming emotions

Laurie asks Stephanie to act out, in exaggerated fashion, how she comes across to Nico when she is frustrated about me-time[41:14]
Stephanie dramatizes saying things like "you don't listen" and demanding time for herself while criticizing him for thinking only of himself[42:21]
Laurie then asks Nico to describe how her approach makes him feel, using "I" statements instead of accusations[42:19]
Nico struggles to name specific feelings, so Laurie offers options like anger and shame; he resonates with feeling both[42:54]
She probes the shame: what it means for him to disappoint her and feel he can't measure up to her expectations[43:27]
Nico acknowledges that in response to shame he shuts down and stops listening, finding it hard to have the conversation[45:00]

Modeling a different request and addressing logistics

Laurie invites Nico to act out how he would like Stephanie to approach him instead when she wants me-time[45:52]
He suggests she'd say something like needing an hour to focus on herself and asking if that could work, framed as a request rather than a demand[46:41]
Stephanie repeats a version of this softer request, and Laurie adds that she could ask, "Is that okay, and what can I do so that this can happen?"[47:10]
Nico notes he is on a schedule with meetings and work blocks, so it's hard to just step away randomly in the middle of the day[47:42]
Laurie emphasizes two takeaways: the difference between a request and a demand, and the importance of planning (e.g., asking the night before) instead of expecting immediate accommodation[49:13]
She suggests that asking in advance and acknowledging his constraints helps prevent both from feeling shut down and unseen[49:07]

Host's reflection on emotional skills

Host points out that watching others' exercises reveals how limited most people's emotional vocabulary and communication skills are[49:55]
He notes it's not our fault because no one taught us these skills, and urges having grace for partners who are learning[50:01]

Audience Q&A: handling fights, gifts, needs, and neurodivergence

Question 1: Handling disagreements before an event

Priya asks how to handle a disagreement that happens right before going somewhere together-whether to talk when upset or wait[56:05]
Laurie says people often feel they must resolve issues immediately or the whole night will be ruined, but when they're worked up they haven't processed and can't give grace[56:45]
She recommends acknowledging you care about each other, trusting you can resolve it later, and choosing to have a good time in the meantime[57:09]
Laurie insists that what you focus on is a choice; people claim they "can't help" what they think about, but they can redirect their attention[57:57]
Host adds that different "fight styles" complicate timing: he tends to be a fixer who wants to talk now, while his wife needs time to reflect[58:15]
They compromise by agreeing on a later time (e.g., the next day) to discuss, allowing them to enjoy the event without pretending nothing happened[58:49]
Laurie likens learning to resolve disagreements to building a muscle; repeated successful repairs build confidence that the connection remains strong despite conflict[59:43]

Question 2: Gift-giving stress and mind reading

Audience member Snehul describes his struggle to choose gifts his wife will love and feeling bad when her reaction is less than perfect[1:00:19]
Laurie notes many people see perfect, intuitive gifting as a test of love, as if "if you loved me enough, you'd know what I want"[1:00:51]
She suggests reframing: "I love you so much that it hurts me to disappoint you-can you give me a list of five things and I'll surprise you with one?"[1:01:49]
This preserves some surprise but ensures the gift aligns with the recipient's desires, and expresses love as wanting them to be happy[1:02:05]
Host shares a story of being disappointed by a tablet gift that didn't match his brand expectations, illustrating how childhood experiences shape what we think a "perfect" gift is[1:02:57]
He realized he was setting his wife up to fail by expecting her to guess perfectly, and that no one wants to feel like a failure in a relationship[1:04:18]
Both emphasize that clear communication about what would make a birthday or occasion feel special is kinder and more effective than silent tests[1:04:44]

Question 3: Needing more time and attention vs being narcissistic

A woman reads a question asking whether needing more time and attention in a relationship is selfish or narcissistic, or simply a valid need to feel connected and valued[1:06:50]
Laurie comments that social media would quickly reassure her she's not a narcissist and deserves all the time she wants, but the reality is more nuanced[1:06:50]
She says relationships are relational: the partner also has needs, and if they experience you as too demanding it may mean there isn't enough room for both people's needs[1:07:39]
A key guideline is whether both partners feel their needs are being met and whether there is space for both in the relationship[1:07:39]
Host adds that clarity matters: vague desires like "I want you all the time" are different from specific, bounded requests like two hours on a Saturday afternoon[1:08:32]
He notes people sometimes want a partner who is both extremely ambitious and constantly available, which is often unrealistic[1:09:20]
He urges looking at the whole person and lifestyle, and adjusting expectations rather than demanding extremes in every area[1:09:48]
Laurie clarifies that having needs and wanting time with a partner is not narcissistic; narcissism is being solely about oneself, whereas wanting connection is human[1:10:16]

Question 4: Neurodivergence and relationship advice

Kaylin asks how the advice given applies to couples where one or both partners are neurodivergent, noting challenges with task-switching and executive functioning[1:11:27]
Laurie responds that everyone exists on some spectrum of neurodivergence and differences, whether diagnosed or not[1:10:54]
She emphasizes focusing on each person's strengths and challenges and communicating about them, rather than reducing the person to a diagnosis[1:11:35]
A diagnosis may make certain aspects more challenging, but the fundamental work is still about how to communicate differences and co-manage them[1:12:12]
She warns that seeing everything solely through the lens of neurodivergence can obscure seeing the full person behind the label[1:13:03]

Closing remarks and further resources

Wrapping up the live show

Due to time limits, the host notes they must end the questions and thanks Laurie for her contributions[1:13:22]
The audience gives Laurie a round of applause as the conversation concludes[1:13:31]

Pointer to other content with Laurie

Host mentions another episode with Laurie where she answers common therapy questions about love, relationships, heartbreak, and dating[1:13:55]
He references advice from that episode about holding hands during difficult conversations to calm both partners' nervous systems[1:14:07]

Lessons Learned

Actionable insights and wisdom you can apply to your business, career, and personal life.

1

Real love is not earned by constant performance or perfection but by being relational-listening, showing up authentically, and making space for your partner's inner world.

Reflection Questions:

  • • Where in my current relationships am I still trying to "earn" love through performance or achievements rather than honest connection?
  • • How could I change the way I listen and respond this week to make someone in my life feel more deeply seen and understood?
  • • What is one small behavior I can stop doing that is about impressing my partner and one I can start doing that is about truly being present with them?
2

When a reaction in conflict feels extreme, it usually has roots in past experiences-recognizing "who else is in the room" helps you respond to your partner rather than to your history.

Reflection Questions:

  • • In my last intense argument, what older memory or relationship did my emotional reaction most resemble?
  • • How can I pause in future conflicts to mentally "take attendance" and notice which past figures might be influencing my reactions?
  • • What specific phrase or ritual could I use to gently "disinvite" those past influences so I can engage more directly with the person in front of me?
3

Acceptance-of your own flaws and your partner's full humanity-is a prerequisite for a resilient relationship; trying to edit a partner à la carte undermines both of you.

Reflection Questions:

  • • What are two or three traits in myself that I secretly wish I could hide from a partner instead of accepting and integrating?
  • • Which aspects of my partner have I been trying to "leave on the side," and how might it change our dynamic if I chose to fully acknowledge them instead?
  • • What is one conversation we could have this month about the things we each find hardest to accept in ourselves, framed with curiosity rather than judgment?
4

Specific, respectful requests (for me-time, attention, or support) create collaboration, while vague or demanding approaches trigger shame, defensiveness, and shut-down.

Reflection Questions:

  • • Think of a recurring complaint I have in my relationship-how could I rephrase it as a clear, time-bound request instead of a general criticism?
  • • When my partner makes a request of me, how often do I hear it as a demand, and what could I ask them to say differently so I can receive it better?
  • • What is one concrete request I can plan and communicate in advance this week, taking into account my partner's schedule and constraints?
5

Chasing the early "spark" of anxiety plus excitement can sabotage stable love; deep compatibility often feels like peace, not adrenaline, and requires us to recalibrate what we find attractive.

Reflection Questions:

  • • When I think back on past relationships, which ones felt peaceful and supportive versus dramatic and uncertain, and how have I been labeling each in my mind?
  • • How might my dating or relationship choices change if I started valuing emotional safety and mutual growth as highly as intense chemistry?
  • • What is one way I can actively cultivate appreciation for the "quiet" forms of love-like reliability and kindness-instead of overlooking them as boring?

Episode Summary - Notes by Skylar

Lori Gottlieb: Stop Mistaking Calm for Boring! (Follow THIS Simple Rule to Build REAL Love)
0:00 0:00