beth
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by beth on Oct 31, 2018 12:24:02 GMT
I understand that to be emotionally unavailable is not an insult, and i understand that it was not meant as an insult towards me. What i find insulting is that people assume that settling for crumbs is subconsciously more comfortable for me because subconsciously i have some level of unavailability. THIS IS WRONG. I settled for crumbs and engaged in his 'games' because i already love him. And i hoped that i could provide a steady, secure, reliable person who wan't going to criticise him, or react rashly, or object to his desire for distance but was going to stay calm and accepting, thereby hopefully encouraging him towards more secure feelings for me. And as to why i so quickly fell in love with him in the first place - because APs are desolate in terms of affection, any kind of affection and attention fires up our systems. You have it completely wrong if you believe that when APs become activated they are emotionally unavailable. In fact, if anything, it is the opposite - we become too available, willing to trust completely very quickly and willing to give over all of ourselves. These are not the traits of emotionally unavailability. I disagree with you, I think that hyper-availability is a form of emotional unavailability, and accepting and staying in a relationship that is hardly there and does not meet your needs is makes you unavailable for a relationship with an emotionally available partner. You can't secure-base your way into someone's life in the hopes that they will become your secure base, but I understand your thinking because it's a classic AP move. I have done the "fixer-upper", many times. Your love is not big enough for the two of you to make this whole thing go round, and that is the hole we fall into as APs. Accepting less-than relationships that can only work if we disown our needs or work to change the other person are making us unavailable to the right relationships where we won't need to do that. You are emotionally unavailable if you need to "shave off" and disown parts of yourself in order to fit into a relationship and make it work, when you aren't your genuine self, when you hustle for love and try to become The Best Girlfriend Ever™ in the hopes you can win someone over, how can you be yourself and communicate your true needs and feelings, especially when they are suffocating to him so you have to become some misshapen version of yourself. If you would rather be in this desolate situation than be alone, it is worth having another think about whether that is having emotional availability for your own self. It is an oxymoron to say that hyper availability is unavailability - it doesn't make sense. And yeah, you can secure base your way into someone's life in the hope that they will become your secure base. Are you DA yourself? Because i am only going by what DA people have described made a difference in helping them to move towards the secure end -and it is an extremely constant, reliable, steady and patient partner. The best description of it i have read is here medium.com/@krisgage/how-to-get-love-from-someone-whos-guarded-or-won-t-open-up-e2ed6bcbc652 I am not emotionally unavailable if i need to shave off parts of myself to fit into the relationship. I am choosing to do so because i am already committed to the person. If i wasn't already all in, of course i would choose to have the ideal partner - we all would. But real life is not like that. I believe that if someone has a disability, and you are aware of it, and are ABLE to compromise (because they may not be able to), and you are ABLE to find VALUE in compromising (which not everyone can) that you should, in order to help them. It is tiring and draining to do so much for someone with a disability, but if you love them, you do it willingly. Many people such as yourself say "Well, you shouldn't love someone who requires you to shave off parts of yourself". Shouldn't you? Thank god for the kind, gentle people who do love DAs, are willing to give them second and third chances, and don't just slam the door in their face touting the ever popular "i'm putting myself first" line. Nobody should put themselves first in a relationship. This is the codependency myth and it's why the divorce rate is so high. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 12:34:38 GMT
I disagree with you, I think that hyper-availability is a form of emotional unavailability, and accepting and staying in a relationship that is hardly there and does not meet your needs is makes you unavailable for a relationship with an emotionally available partner. You can't secure-base your way into someone's life in the hopes that they will become your secure base, but I understand your thinking because it's a classic AP move. I have done the "fixer-upper", many times. Your love is not big enough for the two of you to make this whole thing go round, and that is the hole we fall into as APs. Accepting less-than relationships that can only work if we disown our needs or work to change the other person are making us unavailable to the right relationships where we won't need to do that. You are emotionally unavailable if you need to "shave off" and disown parts of yourself in order to fit into a relationship and make it work, when you aren't your genuine self, when you hustle for love and try to become The Best Girlfriend Ever™ in the hopes you can win someone over, how can you be yourself and communicate your true needs and feelings, especially when they are suffocating to him so you have to become some misshapen version of yourself. If you would rather be in this desolate situation than be alone, it is worth having another think about whether that is having emotional availability for your own self. It is an oxymoron to say that hyper availability is unavailability - it doesn't make sense. And yeah, you can secure base your way into someone's life in the hope that they will become your secure base. Are you DA yourself? Because i am only going by what DA people have described made a difference in helping them to move towards the secure end -and it is an extremely constant, reliable, steady and patient partner. The best description of it i have read is here medium.com/@krisgage/how-to-get-love-from-someone-whos-guarded-or-won-t-open-up-e2ed6bcbc652 I am not emotionally unavailable if i need to shave off parts of myself to fit into the relationship. I am choosing to do so because i am already committed to the person. If i wasn't already all in, of course i would choose to have the ideal partner - we all would. But real life is not like that. I believe that if someone has a disability, and you are aware of it, and are ABLE to compromise (because they may not be able to), and you are ABLE to find VALUE in compromising (which not everyone can) that you should, in order to help them. It is tiring and draining to do so much for someone with a disability, but if you love them, you do it willingly. Many people such as yourself say "Well, you shouldn't love someone who requires you to shave off parts of yourself". Shouldn't you? Thank god for the kind, gentle people who do love DAs, are willing to give them second and third chances, and don't just slam the door in their face touting the ever popular "i'm putting myself first" line. Nobody should put themselves first in a relationship. This is the codependency myth and it's why the divorce rate is so high. An activated AP will always win this debate, because you have both reality and fantasy to choose from to formulate a case. (Speaking as a fellow AP - I am FA who leans more toward AP) Okay beth , you win. You can find out for yourself at what expense. Reality will inevitably continue to speak for itself regardless of what we have to say about it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 12:38:31 GMT
For an attachment oxymoron, check out the dependency paradox, I think it was proposed by Bowlby
|
|
|
|
Post by tnr9 on Oct 31, 2018 12:42:55 GMT
I disagree with you, I think that hyper-availability is a form of emotional unavailability, and accepting and staying in a relationship that is hardly there and does not meet your needs is makes you unavailable for a relationship with an emotionally available partner. You can't secure-base your way into someone's life in the hopes that they will become your secure base, but I understand your thinking because it's a classic AP move. I have done the "fixer-upper", many times. Your love is not big enough for the two of you to make this whole thing go round, and that is the hole we fall into as APs. Accepting less-than relationships that can only work if we disown our needs or work to change the other person are making us unavailable to the right relationships where we won't need to do that. You are emotionally unavailable if you need to "shave off" and disown parts of yourself in order to fit into a relationship and make it work, when you aren't your genuine self, when you hustle for love and try to become The Best Girlfriend Ever™ in the hopes you can win someone over, how can you be yourself and communicate your true needs and feelings, especially when they are suffocating to him so you have to become some misshapen version of yourself. If you would rather be in this desolate situation than be alone, it is worth having another think about whether that is having emotional availability for your own self. It is an oxymoron to say that hyper availability is unavailability - it doesn't make sense. And yeah, you can secure base your way into someone's life in the hope that they will become your secure base. Are you DA yourself? Because i am only going by what DA people have described made a difference in helping them to move towards the secure end -and it is an extremely constant, reliable, steady and patient partner. The best description of it i have read is here medium.com/@krisgage/how-to-get-love-from-someone-whos-guarded-or-won-t-open-up-e2ed6bcbc652 I am not emotionally unavailable if i need to shave off parts of myself to fit into the relationship. I am choosing to do so because i am already committed to the person. If i wasn't already all in, of course i would choose to have the ideal partner - we all would. But real life is not like that. I believe that if someone has a disability, and you are aware of it, and are ABLE to compromise (because they may not be able to), and you are ABLE to find VALUE in compromising (which not everyone can) that you should, in order to help them. It is tiring and draining to do so much for someone with a disability, but if you love them, you do it willingly. Many people such as yourself say "Well, you shouldn't love someone who requires you to shave off parts of yourself". Shouldn't you? Thank god for the kind, gentle people who do love DAs, are willing to give them second and third chances, and don't just slam the door in their face touting the ever popular "i'm putting myself first" line. Nobody should put themselves first in a relationship. This is the codependency myth and it's why the divorce rate is so high. Beth...the question then becomes...who is being that stable, consistent, available love for you?? Although being consistent towards someone else is great...if you don't have that in your own life..it simply leads to resentment and an unbalanced relationship. APs are hyperavailable to their partner and completely unavailable to themselves. The concept that I have to change for someone else is a very old tape...probably goes all the way back to your childhood. Only in Hollywood movies do such grand displays lead to winning the love interest..in real life...having one person focused on self and the other person focused on the other person typically does not lead to a mutually fulfilling and long lasting relationship. Just something to consider. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 12:50:15 GMT
It is an oxymoron to say that hyper availability is unavailability - it doesn't make sense. And yeah, you can secure base your way into someone's life in the hope that they will become your secure base. Are you DA yourself? Because i am only going by what DA people have described made a difference in helping them to move towards the secure end -and it is an extremely constant, reliable, steady and patient partner. The best description of it i have read is here medium.com/@krisgage/how-to-get-love-from-someone-whos-guarded-or-won-t-open-up-e2ed6bcbc652 I am not emotionally unavailable if i need to shave off parts of myself to fit into the relationship. I am choosing to do so because i am already committed to the person. If i wasn't already all in, of course i would choose to have the ideal partner - we all would. But real life is not like that. I believe that if someone has a disability, and you are aware of it, and are ABLE to compromise (because they may not be able to), and you are ABLE to find VALUE in compromising (which not everyone can) that you should, in order to help them. It is tiring and draining to do so much for someone with a disability, but if you love them, you do it willingly. Many people such as yourself say "Well, you shouldn't love someone who requires you to shave off parts of yourself". Shouldn't you? Thank god for the kind, gentle people who do love DAs, are willing to give them second and third chances, and don't just slam the door in their face touting the ever popular "i'm putting myself first" line. Nobody should put themselves first in a relationship. This is the codependency myth and it's why the divorce rate is so high. Beth...the question then becomes...who is being that stable, consistent, available love for you?? Although being consistent towards someone else is great...if you don't have that in your own life..it simply leads to resentment and an unbalanced relationship. APs are hyperavailable to their partner and completely unavailable to themselves. The concept that I have to change for someone else is a very old tape...probably goes all the way back to your childhood. Only in Hollywood movies do such grand displays lead to winning the love interest..in real life...having one person focused on self and the other person focused on the other person typically does not lead to a mutually fulfilling and long lasting relationship. Just something to consider. A really eloquent and kind way to describe this |
|
beth
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by beth on Oct 31, 2018 12:52:41 GMT
For an attachment oxymoron, check out the dependency paradox, I think it was proposed by Bowlby A paradox is not an oxymoron. They have two completely different meanings. And yes i am familiar with the dependency paradox. Are you? Because it proposes that ONCE we know we are can depend on someone, THEN we become more secure and confident in the world. The security and confidence does not occur first. As described by Levine and Heller in Attached: The new science of adult attachment "an elegant coexistence that does not include uncomfortable feelings of vulnerability and fear of loss sounds good but is not our biology" (p28). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 12:58:27 GMT
I'm a therapist, that's how I came across attachment in the first place, it was important to integrate it into my work. My point is the same as tnr9 's point - you also need a secure base. You sound like you can talk around the houses to solidify the point you are making and that's fine if that works for you, but you came here for input, and this was the input I had for you. It's okay to not take it, but I don't agree with your point. You can reference all the attachment books you like, but as I said, ultimately this is more than intellectual. It's a felt sense, and if you don't feel safe in a relationship, that will speak for itself in the symptoms you end up with. That's all I have to say. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 13:09:21 GMT
beth, how's it working for you so far?
|
|
beth
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by beth on Oct 31, 2018 13:09:50 GMT
It is an oxymoron to say that hyper availability is unavailability - it doesn't make sense. And yeah, you can secure base your way into someone's life in the hope that they will become your secure base. Are you DA yourself? Because i am only going by what DA people have described made a difference in helping them to move towards the secure end -and it is an extremely constant, reliable, steady and patient partner. The best description of it i have read is here medium.com/@krisgage/how-to-get-love-from-someone-whos-guarded-or-won-t-open-up-e2ed6bcbc652 I am not emotionally unavailable if i need to shave off parts of myself to fit into the relationship. I am choosing to do so because i am already committed to the person. If i wasn't already all in, of course i would choose to have the ideal partner - we all would. But real life is not like that. I believe that if someone has a disability, and you are aware of it, and are ABLE to compromise (because they may not be able to), and you are ABLE to find VALUE in compromising (which not everyone can) that you should, in order to help them. It is tiring and draining to do so much for someone with a disability, but if you love them, you do it willingly. Many people such as yourself say "Well, you shouldn't love someone who requires you to shave off parts of yourself". Shouldn't you? Thank god for the kind, gentle people who do love DAs, are willing to give them second and third chances, and don't just slam the door in their face touting the ever popular "i'm putting myself first" line. Nobody should put themselves first in a relationship. This is the codependency myth and it's why the divorce rate is so high. Beth...the question then becomes...who is being that stable, consistent, available love for you?? Although being consistent towards someone else is great...if you don't have that in your own life..it simply leads to resentment and an unbalanced relationship. APs are hyperavailable to their partner and completely unavailable to themselves. The concept that I have to change for someone else is a very old tape...probably goes all the way back to your childhood. Only in Hollywood movies do such grand displays lead to winning the love interest..in real life...having one person focused on self and the other person focused on the other person typically does not lead to a mutually fulfilling and long lasting relationship. Just something to consider. I do not HAVE to change for anyone, but i may CHOOSE to. Just like if i have a disabled child, i can choose to give it up for adoption because i know i will get little support and and few thanks for the extremely hard work it takes, or i can choose to keep it and effectively give up my life as i know it. You say "who is that stable, consistent, available love for you?" Well, if i could maintain a 'relationship' with someone who i saw once every few weeks that WOULD BE stability and consistency. It would be FAR more than i have every got (and ever will get) from anyone else. What is enough for one person, may not be for another person. And that is perfectly okay. Its not 'a grand display' - it's actually small, constant, steadiness - don't know where you get the idea of 'grand displays' from. Our attachment tendencies are like disabilities - how nice would it be if someone were patient with us, and didn't just think about their own needs and wants all the time, regardless of what attachment style you are. We all would benefit from that. Oh an APs are not unavailable to themselves - they are available to themselves in arenas outside the relationship. I have a different value system to you. You should not try to convince me of your value system. You could share with me your value system, and share with me what works for you, but on this forum, we should not tell the OP what to believe about the particular situation they are in. |
|
beth
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by beth on Oct 31, 2018 13:14:14 GMT
I'm a therapist, that's how I came across attachment in the first place, it was important to integrate it into my work. My point is the same as tnr9 's point - you also need a secure base. You sound like you can talk around the houses to solidify the point you are making and that's fine if that works for you, but you came here for input, and this was the input I had for you. It's okay to not take it, but I don't agree with your point. You can reference all the attachment books you like, but as I said, ultimately this is more than intellectual. It's a felt sense, and if you don't feel safe in a relationship, that will speak for itself in the symptoms you end up with. That's all I have to say. Actually i came here for input in how to keep the man i had. I NEVER once asked for input in how to fix my attachment problems. And as i said in my original posting I DO FEEL SAFE in a relationship where i see a man once every few weeks. When did everyone decide that i should not? Everyone says "you will feel so supported by the forum here" but i will never post here again, because i do not feel supported. Like i said above, people on this forum should share what works for them, but they should not tell the OP what to believe about the situation they are in. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 13:16:23 GMT
I'm a therapist, that's how I came across attachment in the first place, it was important to integrate it into my work. My point is the same as tnr9 's point - you also need a secure base. You sound like you can talk around the houses to solidify the point you are making and that's fine if that works for you, but you came here for input, and this was the input I had for you. It's okay to not take it, but I don't agree with your point. You can reference all the attachment books you like, but as I said, ultimately this is more than intellectual. It's a felt sense, and if you don't feel safe in a relationship, that will speak for itself in the symptoms you end up with. That's all I have to say. Actually i came here for input in how to keep the man i had. I NEVER once asked for input in how to fix my attachment problems. And as i said in my original posting I DO FEEL SAFE in a relationship where i see a man once every few weeks. When did everyone decide that i should not? Everyone says "you will feel so supported by the forum here" but i will never post here again, because i do not feel supported. Like i said above, people on this forum should share what works for them, but they should not tell the OP what to believe about the situation they are in. OP, it's your life man. |
|
beth
New Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by beth on Oct 31, 2018 13:23:29 GMT
beth , how's it working for you so far? How's it working for me so far? - do you mean how is this forum working for me? It's absolutely disgusting, if thats what you mean and i will never have the courage to post here again - because it took a lot for me to share here. I haven't felt supported - can you empathise with that? I am currently broken hearted and now i am being patronised by you facetiously asking "hows that working out for you?" Not appropriate. I NEVER asked for help with my own attachment issues, hence why this is not on the AP page, but on the dismissive avoidant page. And you know what juniper, considering you have been really upset on this forum with people attacking DAs for being bad partners who never have anyone's back, i thought you of all people would appreciate someone accommodating DAs downfalls. |
|
|
|
Post by stayhappy on Oct 31, 2018 13:27:58 GMT
I think OP have decided what she wants. So I don’t really understand what is the meaning by open this thread. As you said you will do whatever it’s necessary to keep this guy on your life and accept whatever he wants to give. That’s your choice and whatever you’re happy or not is that what you want. The problem is that it doesn’t matter what you do or don’t do you can’t force someone to want you back even if it’s all on their terms. Enjoy when he comes to you and do other stuff when he is gone. If he never comes back just accept, you can not control anyone else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 13:35:24 GMT
beth , how's it working for you so far? How's it working for me so far? - do you mean how is this forum working for me? It's absolutely disgusting, if thats what you mean and i will never have the courage to post here again - because it took a lot for me to share here. I haven't felt supported - can you empathise with that? I am currently broken hearted and now i am being patronised by you facetiously asking "hows that working out for you?" Not appropriate. I NEVER asked for help with my own attachment issues, hence why this is not on the AP page, but on the dismissive avoidant page. And you know what juniper, considering you have been really upset on this forum with people attacking DAs for being bad partners who never have anyone's back, i thought you of all people would appreciate someone accommodating DAs downfalls. beth, keep coming back. this wasn't intended as a slight, or patronization. i want you to see how this is working for you. it's left you hurt, and broken hearted. it's not because you're a bad partner. it's because you are afraid of not finding a partner who is what you long for, someone to grow a family with , and cherish you, and meet you in your capacity for love and trust and mutual support. the bondage of our fear thwarts our growth and turns us away from greater potentials, we limit ourselves. you're limiting yourself, and your happiness. i have a tremendous amount of empathy for you, because my attachment injuries limited my life in very painful ways a long time. Most of my life. I'm 48, and it's been a long road, but i still see myself as young and full of hope. You have a much better start than i, i much earlier start at least. I can't convince you that it's not too late. but i can believe it. just let your guard down a little here and let us show you some things we've learned by experience. we've all hurt so much. the only way any of us made it out of the pain was to heal our own hearts and let life lead us to a better way, through a process of our own inner work. i hope that you will reconsider leaving the forum and will try what we suggest, but either way i wish you the best. i just don't think you'll find the best things for yourself with the approach you've been taking. i think it's a kindness to say that to you. not an insult. i'm sorry it's been painful , but it can be transformational for you if you can trust what we're saying here and try another way. |
|
|
|
Post by tnr9 on Oct 31, 2018 13:59:18 GMT
Beth...the question then becomes...who is being that stable, consistent, available love for you?? Although being consistent towards someone else is great...if you don't have that in your own life..it simply leads to resentment and an unbalanced relationship. APs are hyperavailable to their partner and completely unavailable to themselves. The concept that I have to change for someone else is a very old tape...probably goes all the way back to your childhood. Only in Hollywood movies do such grand displays lead to winning the love interest..in real life...having one person focused on self and the other person focused on the other person typically does not lead to a mutually fulfilling and long lasting relationship. Just something to consider. I do not HAVE to change for anyone, but i may CHOOSE to. Just like if i have a disabled child, i can choose to give it up for adoption because i know i will get little support and and few thanks for the extremely hard work it takes, or i can choose to keep it and effectively give up my life as i know it. You say "who is that stable, consistent, available love for you?" Well, if i could maintain a 'relationship' with someone who i saw once every few weeks that WOULD BE stability and consistency. It would be FAR more than i have every got (and ever will get) from anyone else. What is enough for one person, may not be for another person. And that is perfectly okay. Its not 'a grand display' - it's actually small, constant, steadiness - don't know where you get the idea of 'grand displays' from. Our attachment tendencies are like disabilities - how nice would it be if someone were patient with us, and didn't just think about their own needs and wants all the time, regardless of what attachment style you are. We all would benefit from that. Oh an APs are not unavailable to themselves - they are available to themselves in arenas outside the relationship. I have a different value system to you. You should not try to convince me of your value system. You could share with me your value system, and share with me what works for you, but on this forum, we should not tell the OP what to believe about the particular situation they are in. ...I think you have misread my post...I was not telling you what to do...I was simply asking a question that my therapist asked me. I have been in your shoes...so many times....I can completely relate to the heartache of dating someone only to see that person marry the next woman...it has happened to me 3 times. Only recently have I realized that accepting someone fully does not necessarily cause them to stay...yes, it is a beautiful gift....but free will also allows that person to move on to someone else...not because of anything that I did...but because love and acceptance are not the only things that drive a relationship. I am sorry you feel attacked...I think other posters here are simply trying to help you to consider yourself in the equation....we can't provide a magic formula that will keep this man....every person is different....but we can be here for you. I hope whatever you decide, that you will be as gentle and kind towards yourself as you are being to this man. I wish you the best. |
|
