From Judging to Joining: Why Your Stone Age Brain is Sabotaging Your Modern Love Life

I used to lie awake at night wondering: Am I the problem?

Every relationship felt like a courtroom drama where I was simultaneously the prosecutor, defendant, and very harsh judge. I'd mentally catalogue my partner's crimes against domestic harmony while building an airtight case for my own innocence. Sound familiar?

For years, I thought this was just how relationships worked, a constant negotiation between two people trying to prove they weren't the worst human in the partnership. Until I discovered something that changed everything: the "Judging vs Joining" framework. It transformed how I showed up in every relationship after.

Suddenly, the pattern became crystal clear. And more importantly, I learned why we do this to ourselves and how to stop.

The Question That Started Everything

Here's what I couldn't understand: Why do intelligent, successful people turn into defensive teenagers the moment their partner loads the dishwasher "wrong"?

I first encountered this puzzle early in my career, working in team development. I watched groups either click into productive collaboration or spiral into subtle warfare, and the pattern was always the same: when people felt judged, they became smaller versions of themselves. When they felt genuinely joined with, they expanded.

Simple concept. Relationship-changing implications.

But it wasn't until I started applying this lens to intimate relationships, first my own disasters, then later as a coach, that I realised we're all walking around with Stone Age brains trying to navigate modern love. And it's not going well.

Enjoying so far? Subscribe to my newsletter, let's get more personal!

Your Inner Caveperson is Running Your Love Life

Here's the uncomfortable truth I learned the hard way: your brain hasn't figured out that you're not actually fighting for survival when your partner gives you that look after you mention forgetting to book the restaurant.

For thousands of years, our judging instincts kept us alive. Is this person a threat? Are they stronger? Can I trust them with my resources? Quick social assessments meant the difference between thriving and becoming someone else's lunch.

The problem? We're still running this ancient software in our modern relationships. Research in evolutionary psychology confirms we're hardwired to scan for social threats, especially from those whose opinions matter most. Which explains why your partner's casual "Fine, whatever" can trigger the same fight-or-flight response our ancestors felt facing down predators.

I used to think this made me weak. Now I know it makes me human.

The Judging Trap: How We Accidentally Kill What We Want Most

For years in my early relationships, I perfected the art of scorekeeping. I kept mental tallies: who initiated difficult conversations (always me), who remembered important dates (definitely me), who was more emotionally mature (obviously me).

I thought I was being reasonable. What I was actually doing was slowly poisoning every connection I touched.

Because here's what happens when we default to judging mode:

• We keep careful score ("I always have to bring up problems first")
• We make helpful evaluations ("You never think before you speak")
• We defend our righteousness ("Well, you started it...")
• We build airtight cases for why we're right and they're... less right

The cruel irony? Both partners usually feel judged simultaneously. Both shrink. Both stop investing in the relationship's emotional bank account. And both wonder why love feels more like a cold war than a partnership.

I see this pattern constantly now in my coaching practice, brilliant, well-meaning couples locked in win/lose dynamics, each convinced they're the reasonable one. (Spoiler alert: you're both reasonable. And you're both missing the point.)

The Research That Changed My Mind

I used to think joining meant becoming a doormat. Then I discovered the science, and everything shifted.

Fredrickson's Broaden-and-Build Theory showed me that positive emotional states like curiosity and trust literally expand our cognitive capacity. When we feel safe, we think better, solve problems more creatively, and crucially see more possibilities in our relationships.

Self-Determination Theory revealed that we thrive when our autonomy, competence, and connection are supported. Judging mode threatens all three. Joining mode nurtures them.

But the research that really got my attention was Gable's work on Active Constructive Responding: how couples respond to good news predicts relationship success better than how they handle conflicts.

Think about that. Your response when your partner shares something exciting, enthusiastic and engaged versus distracted or dismissive matters more than your conflict resolution skills.

The message was clear: relationships aren't built in the trenches of arguments. They're built in moments of genuine curiosity, shared celebration, and choosing each other again and again.

What Joining Actually Looks Like (Spoiler: It's Not Weak)

I had to unlearn everything I thought I knew about relationship strength. Joining isn't about agreement or avoiding difficult conversations. It's about approaching your partnership as a collaborative project rather than a competitive sport.

Here's what I learned actually works:

Trade interrogation for investigation. Instead of "Why did you do that?" try "Help me understand what you were thinking." One feels like an accusation; the other feels like genuine curiosity.

Choose exploration over evaluation. When you catch yourself sizing up your partner's behaviour, pause. What would happen if you got curious instead of critical?

Extend trust, especially when it's difficult. Yes, even when they've left the dishes again. Trust isn't earned through perfect behaviour, it's built through consistently choosing to believe in each other's good intentions.

Use "we" language for shared problems. "How can we handle this?" creates partnership. "You always..." creates defensiveness and distance.

The most powerful joining happens precisely when you disagree, but choose to stay engaged rather than retreat into your protective shell.

Have I convinced you yet? Subscribe to my newsletter, for weekly updates!

A Critical Distinction: Joining ≠ Abandoning Yourself

Let me be crystal clear about something: joining should never mean excusing harmful behaviour, suppressing your voice, or bypassing your boundaries. I've worked with too many clients who confused "joining" with people-pleasing or fawning, essentially abandoning their own needs in service of keeping the peace.

Real joining requires discernment. It works beautifully in healthy relationships where both people are committed to mutual respect and growth. But if you're dealing with manipulation, abuse, or someone who consistently disregards your wellbeing? That's when your judging instincts are actually serving you, they're telling you to protect yourself.

Healthy joining means extending trust AND maintaining boundaries. It means choosing curiosity over criticism while still advocating for your needs. The goal isn't to become a doormat; it's to become a conscious partner who can distinguish between situations that call for openness and those that require protection.

The Truth About Perfect Relationships (They Don't Exist)

Here's something I wish someone had told me earlier: the goal isn't to eliminate conflict or become some blissed-out couple who never disagrees. The goal is to approach conflict as teammates working toward shared solutions rather than opponents fighting to be right.

This requires putting your ego in the passenger seat occasionally. Revolutionary concept, I know.

But here's what I discovered: when you stop needing to be right all the time, you create space for something much better, actually being happy!

The Bottom Line

We're wired for both self-protection and deep connection. The judging vs joining framework taught me that in relationships, we get to choose which wiring takes priority.

Your Stone Age brain will always be scanning for threats. But your evolved brain gets to decide whether your partner is one of them.

I spent years in past relationships choosing wrong. Now I help others choose differently before they make the same mistakes I did.

Because life's too short to spend it proving you're right instead of building something extraordinary together.

I'm Helena—The Relationship Architect, reformed perfectionist, and recovering scorekeeper. I help successful people learn from my mistakes and create the relationships they actually want from the start.

For the fellow science lovers: these are the heavy-hitters that prove this isn’t just coaching fluff ,it’s evidence-based psychology

Buss, D. M. (2005). The handbook of evolutionary psychology. Wiley.

Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218

Gable, S. L., Gonzaga, G. C., & Strachman, A. (2006). Will you be there for me when things go right? Supportive responses to positive event disclosures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 904–917. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.904

Katz, J. H., & Miller, F. A. (2013). Judging others has not worked … so let’s join them. Leader to Leader, 2013(67), 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/ltl.20073 

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68