You thought you’d seen it all on TikTok? It was without counting on
“The first to react loses”. The principle is simple: surprise your partner by deliberately destroying an object they particularly care about, then film their reaction.
Games console, makeup, sentimental gift, collection… everything can go there. And the more the object matters to the other, the stronger their reaction is likely to be. Some videos clearly seem to be staged intended to make Internet users react or to make a joke. But the principle remains no less problematic when it is actually applied within the couple.
When the couple becomes a playground
In these videos, the objective is to push the other person to the limit without them “breaking” first. A logic that can seem harmless when presented as a simple joke between partners. However, for psychologist Amélie Boukhobza, the problem is precisely there: we are not only attacking an object, but what it represents for the other.
“Because it is obvious that we never destroy just an object”she explains.
An object can be associated with a memory, with a person, with a period of life. It may have sentimental value, be difficult to replace, or simply mean a lot to the person who owns it.
“It doesn’t matter whether we understand this attachment or whether we find it disproportionate. What matters is that the other person cares about it.”
Deliberately destroying this object therefore amounts to using against your partner something that you know is important to him.
A way to test each other’s limits
For the psychologist, this challenge is all the more disturbing because it does not simply consist of making a joke: it amounts to testing the extent to which the other will accept that we cross their limits.
“How far can I go before you break down? How far can I damage something that matters to you before you react?”she summarizes.
A particularly unhealthy logic, since it consists of voluntarily provoking a negative emotion in your partner, then observing their reaction as if it were a show.
“It’s a game about the limits of the other”, believes Amélie Boukhobza.
The problem is therefore less the financial value of the destroyed object than the message sent: I know that this matters to you and I still choose to attack what affects you.
Not reacting doesn’t mean everything is okay
Another trap of this type of challenge: believing that the person who does not react has “won”.
For Amélie Boukhobza, the absence of reaction absolutely does not mean that the partner is more relaxed, more solid or that he takes the joke with more humor. We can stay silent because we are stunned, because we are trying to avoid conflict, because we are used to taking it in, or simply because a camera is trained on us.
In other words, an absence of anger is not necessarily proof that the joke went well.
What if the real problem is lack of respect?
Behind these videos ultimately arises a much more important question: can we really put our relationship to the test by voluntarily attacking what matters to the other?
In a relationship, partners obviously do not need to like the same objects, share the same passions or understand the sentimental value that the other places on certain things.
“But there is still something quite paradoxical in wanting to test your relationship by attacking precisely what should constitute one of its bases: knowing that what matters to the other deserves to be respected, even if it does not matter to us” supports the psychologist.
So, before pulling out the hammer for a few seconds of video and a few likes, it might be better to ask yourself what you’re really testing. Their partner’s ability to keep calm? Or his ability to tolerate when his limits are not respected? It’s a bit more toxic, it’s better to know that.