That sounds like an oxymoron to me. The other person's "loss" will invariably feed back into the system.

You're right that serious domestic disputes never actually have a 'winner', in that their very existence is an indication of a breakdown in the relationship somewhere to the extent that emotions boiled up to the point of a verbal fight. Even if you win one of those arguments in the traditional sense, both sides still lose because of the breakdown in trust and the hurt experienced by the losing side.

But Crichton seemed to understand that. His essay contains advice not on how to triumphantly win each and every fight as though you were in a high school debate, but rather on how to resolve domestic disputes without them turning into fights, how to limit the emotional damage fights can cause and, importantly, how to do all of that without being weak and merely acquiescing to the demands of your partner no matter what. As such, it's really better described as a guide to domestic dispute resolution.

So I'm not defending the way he wrote it. Just pointing out that beyond the tone and poorly-used words, the message is pretty solid and worth reading.

Before that I was a political analyst for a time, but quit that profession after I realised it wasn't really my passion. Not much to tell, really.

You win if you can resolve the issue and make her feel better without making major loss to yourself or the relationship. Usually, this involves her winning, as well.