It’s never a pleasant experience when you and your partner aren’t communicating effectively. Misunderstandings, disagreements, anger, and hurt can all contribute to periods of silence between you. However, there’s a massive difference between taking some space apart to work through emotional upheaval and intentional silence as a cruel punishment.
One involves acknowledgement that silence is needed to let the dust settle, while the other is usually used to control or manipulate the other person, whether intentional or not. Here’s how to tell the differences between them:
1. How you communicate the withdrawal.
Of the many things my partner and I have in common, our shared preference to withdraw into our own space to clear our heads is one that we both deeply appreciate.
Many people have caused irreparable damage to their relationships by blurting things out in anger or pain that they didn’t really mean, but could never be unsaid. We learned early on in our relationship that we could just say a code word like “jagged” or “overwhelmed”, and we’d agree to part ways to go for a walk, do some yoga, etc., so we could think clearly again.
This is in stark contrast to someone who simply stomps off in the middle of a conversation and doesn’t tell their partner where they’re going, when they’ll be back, or anything else for that matter.
Whereas the former approach acknowledges the need for a “cool-down” period, the latter just shows disrespect. Though it might not be the intention, giving the silent treatment essentially tells the other person that they don’t deserve any interaction or reassurance; that your wants are all that matter at that moment, and only you get to decide when interaction will resume.
It’s important to note that, whilst it can be intentional manipulation, this kind of storming off just as often stems from previous experiences where expressing yourself was punished or ridiculed, leaving people to default to the passive-aggressive patterns they learned from earlier relationships.
2. When you withdraw with parting shots or not.
Are you familiar with the term “parting shot”? It’s used to describe an insult or other barbed comment that’s spat over one’s shoulder before leaving the area, thus preventing the other person from retaliating. It comes from the term “Parthian shot”, referring to the ancient Persian horse archers who would fake a retreat, and then loose a volley of arrows over their shoulders.
When someone throws a parting shot and then retreats, it stonewalls the other person by denying them the opportunity to either refute what’s been said or defend themselves against the insult or accusation that had been hurled their way.
It’s a technique that’s often used by narcissists, children, and the emotionally immature — those who either lack the decency or skills to engage with someone on equal terms for optimal resolution.
3. Whether you acknowledge the other person or not.
Before we met, my partner was briefly involved with a man who simply refused to acknowledge or engage with any topic he didn’t want to discuss. She would raise a subject that needed to be addressed, and he either changed it to something he preferred instead or refused to speak to her at all.
This went beyond talking over her: he treated her as though she hadn’t said a thing, and continued to do so in the hope that she would behave as desired. After several days of silence, he would start chatting to her about something else entirely, and if she brought up the unresolved issue from before, that would be met with another several days’ worth of silence.
This was his means of controlling their discussions, and by extension, her behavior. And of course, to him, the breakup “came out of nowhere,” and he never acknowledged how his own actions were the primary cause of it.
It’s one thing to respond without much enthusiasm when upset, whilst still acknowledging something that’s being said, and it’s another thing entirely to treat the other person as though they’re an insect that’s making an unpleasant noise until they stop annoying you with it.
4. Whether it’s an unintentional nonverbal reaction or an intentional punishment.
Some people — especially those who are neurodivergent or have traumatic pasts — shut down in stressful situations. Their nervous systems get so overwhelmed that they can’t process what they’re experiencing and are rendered mute. This isn’t a chosen response, but is rather a knee-jerk, automatic reaction to what their bodies and minds interpret as intense stress and/or danger.
This cannot in any way be compared to someone who refuses to speak in order to punish the other person. Narcissists and other abusers often give others the silent treatment as a means of making them feel unbalanced and isolated, especially if that person is dependent upon them or has no other social net to lean upon. The goal here is for that individual to grovel and do whatever the abuser wants in an attempt to be acknowledged and spoken to again.
5. Whether it’s about emotional safety or emotional abuse.
For some people, the most effective way for them to regulate their emotions is to retreat into solitude for a protracted period of time. This is particularly true for those who aren’t as attuned to their feelings as others are, and need quite a while to process what it is they’re experiencing, and how they want to proceed from there. It’s also true of those who may struggle with emotion regulation, but who are working to try to manage their overwhelming feelings.
Although it may be frustrating to deal with from the other person’s perspective, it’s understandable because this is their coping mechanism for dealing with difficulty. This isn’t a case of trying to manipulate the other person’s emotions to abuse and control them; it’s actually a mature response to help understand or safely manage one’s own emotions, and should be respected for the benefit of both couples.
6. How long it lasts.
When one or both people are pausing to gather their thoughts or being quiet so they can work through whatever they’re thinking, it’s usually a temporary situation. It may last anywhere from a few hours to a day or so, but there’s normally some interaction between them to keep lines of communication open, even though they aren’t being used fully.
In contrast, silence that’s being used as punishment can last anywhere from several days to several weeks. Even months, depending on the individual and what it was that had transpired.
You can tell a lot about the person’s intentions by how quickly they come back to clear the air. If they return in a short period of time, their goal is resolution and forward momentum. If they don’t, then their goal is to punish the other person by causing as much distress as possible with their silence.
7. Whether or not you can break your silence to communicate about other issues.
I saw a post online earlier that was meant to be a joke, but it shows just how damaging silence as punishment can be. It described a couple that was giving each other the silent treatment because they were angry at one another.
The husband had a flight the following morning for an important meeting in another city, and he left his wife a note asking her to please make sure he was up when she woke at five a.m. in case his alarm didn’t go off. He woke at nine, panicked, and saw a note beside his bed that said: “It’s five a.m. Wake up.”
While some people might be amused by this level of pettiness, the consequences of this type of immature punishment would affect everyone involved. He missed his meeting, which put his job in jeopardy, which would affect their financial stability, their children’s well-being, and so on. That’s not needing space; that’s just cutting off your nose to spite your face.
8. Whether or not you continue the discussion after you’ve had enough space.
This is perhaps the most telling difference between healthy space and silence as a weapon: what happens when you come back together.
When someone takes healthy space, they return with the intention of resolving the issue at hand. The withdrawal was a means to an end — the end being better communication and mutual understanding.
Stonewalling, on the other hand, often ends with the issue being swept under the rug entirely. The person who withdrew either acts as though nothing happened at all or returns with demands that the other person apologize or change their behavior before any discussion can take place. The original concern that sparked the conflict is dismissed, minimized, or outright ignored.
Consistently refusing to revisit difficult conversations after a period of silence is not needing space to process them — it’s trying to train the other person not to bring up anything that makes you uncomfortable, whether you’re consciously aware of it or not.
Final thoughts…
“Stonewalling” gets its name from a literal stone wall: an impenetrable barrier of cold, grey rock. When a person refuses to speak, they’re essentially erecting that kind of barrier between themselves and the one they’re on the outs with.
It’s a massively disrespectful response to another person, and if it’s intentional rather than subconscious, it’s almost always an abusive, manipulative tactic. If someone stonewalls you intentionally on a regular basis, consider ending your relationship with them before they have the chance to cause you lasting damage with this cruel method of punishment and control.
And if you’ve identified that you’ve been unintentionally giving the silent treatment due to poor conflict resolution skills, it’s time to do the work to change that pattern — for both your sake, and the sake of your relationships.
