You Are So Right! But Now What?
What cats and dogs can teach us about the hidden dangers of validation
In my early 30s, I did a lot of training to become a better manager. Again and again, I heard the same lesson: stop trying to fix everything. Listen. Reflect. Validate.
So that’s what I did. Instead of preparing my response while someone else was talking, I trained myself to listen closely and affirm what they were feeling. I came to think of myself like a dog at feeding time: attentive, positive, and endlessly supportive.
At first, it felt like magic. I no longer had to solve everyone’s problems! I could simply empathize, repeat back what I heard, and feel like I was doing my job well.
If you’re thinking I missed the point somewhere along the way, you’re right.
Before long, the cracks started showing. Personality conflicts hardened. Strategic disagreements became more entrenched. Instead of helping people move through conflict, my validation-heavy approach sometimes made them feel more righteous, more certain, and less curious about anyone else’s perspective.
Years later, I realized this wasn’t just a management problem. It was a relationship problem. Many of us do the same thing at home: we try so hard to make our partner feel heard that we accidentally help them become more certain, more stuck, and less open to another point of view.
That confused me.
I had been taught that listening and validation are foundational to any healthy relationship, personal or professional. So how could something so good turn out so badly?
Food, Shelter, and… Validation?
First off, validating your partner is generally a very good thing. Many couples struggle because they try to solve each other’s problems when their partner mostly wants to feel heard. Relationship science identifies validation as a key part of relationship happiness and a core human need.1
So yes, every couple needs to learn how to validate well. There is a reason that it is a staple of couples therapy.2
But too much of the wrong kind of validation can have unintended consequences. If your partner feels hurt, angry, or certain they are right, and you reinforce that entire story, you may help them feel supported in the moment while making them more entrenched over time. Research has shown that social agreement can make people’s opinions more extreme.3 And studies of conflict narratives suggest that when we tell stories primarily through our own feelings, grievances, and justifications, it becomes easier to rationalize the ways we may have mistreated others or to see ourselves as the injured party.4
Imagine your partner has had a bitter disagreement with a friend. They are venting about how hurt they feel and how unreasonable the friend has been. Trying to be supportive, you say, “I can’t believe they said that,” or “You’re absolutely right to be furious.” Your partner feels validated, but also more convinced that repair is not their responsibility. The friendship suffers, and everyone is worse off.
The mistake is thinking validation means agreement. It doesn’t. Validation means finding the part of someone’s experience that makes sense without endorsing their entire story. Our partner needs us to be like a dog: warm, attentive, and loyal. But we also need a bit of cat in us: calm, discerning, and not automatically swept into the emotional current.
So, how can we put the power of validation to work for the good of our relationship?
I Can See Part of Your Point!
One of the most useful things I learned in couples therapy training was a simple definition of validation: agreeing with some part of what someone said.
That matters because validation does not have to mean certainty. It does not have to mean, “You are completely right.” It can simply mean, “I can see why that would make sense to you.”5
That small distinction changes everything. You can honor your partner’s experience without endorsing their entire story. You can help them feel less alone without helping them become more entrenched.
Let’s return to the example of your partner having a painful rift with a friend. Instead of saying, “You’re absolutely right to be furious,” you might say, “I can clearly see why you are so hurt. I also know your friend cares about you, and I hope this doesn’t cause long-term damage.”
That response still validates your partner’s feelings. But it also leaves room for perspective, repair, and the possibility that the story is not finished yet.
That is the difference between validation that gets us stuck and validation that helps us move forward.
Here are the biggest takeaways:
Treat validation as a core need in your relationship. Your partner needs to feel heard before they can think clearly with you.
Remember that validation is powerful enough to help someone get unstuck or become more stuck. The key question is: what part of this can I honestly validate without reinforcing the whole story?
Be careful where you seek support. Research shows that friends who always take your side may give you what you want in the moment, but not what your relationship needs over time.6
We may talk about “fighting like cats and dogs,” but maybe we need to listen like cats and dogs, too: warm and loyal enough to help our partner feel loved, but calm and discerning enough not to chase every emotional squirrel.
Along with feeling understood and cared for, validation forms part of the core trio of believing your partner is responsive to your needs. Reis, H. T., Clark, M. S., & Holmes, J. G. (2004). Perceived partner responsiveness as an organizing construct in the study of intimacy and closeness.
John Gottman is quoted as saying that “validation is such a fundamental component of attunement that summarizing [your partner’s perspective] without it is like having sex without love.”
https://www.gottman.com/blog/stop-trying-fix-partners-feelings/
Baron, R. S., Hoppe, S. I., Kao, C. F., Brunsman, B., Linneweh, B., & Rogers, D. (1996). Social corroboration and opinion extremity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32(6), 537–560. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1996.0024
This is NOT to say that all stories are just in your head, only that they follow consistent patterns. Knowing when to fight for change and when to seek greater perspective on other people’s behaviors is, obviously, a lifelong process.
Baumeister, R. E., Stillwell, A., & Wotman, S. R. (1990). Victim and perpetrator accounts of interpersonal conflict: Autobiographical narratives about anger. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 994–1005.
Schütz, A., & Baumeister, R. F. (1999). The language of defense: Linguistic patterns in narratives of transgressions. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(3), 269–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018003003
Doesn’t that sound like something a cat would say? This is actually one of my favorite things to say to other people, and it’s fascinating how much better it often makes them feel.
This study showed that the presence of “partisan supporters,” as opposed to supporters of the relationship, is associated with more conflict and less compromise. In a fascinating nuance, the researchers found that to have better relationships men should seek out critics of their own behavior (because they tend to not have them in their network) and women should seek out more allies of the relationship (because they tend to have too many partisan supporters).
A. Klein, R. C., & Milardo, R. M. (2000). The social context of couple conflict: Support and criticism from informal third parties. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(4–5), 618–637. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407500174008