|
|
Post by annieb on Nov 26, 2019 18:05:51 GMT
I've been thinking about something that seems to confuse non-DAs on the boards a lot... the concept that DA have "high self-esteem." And trying to reconcile that idea, because none of the insecure styles have a solid and healthy relationship to self and others. I think that ex-partners of DAs can even use this concept, which is present in some attachment style writings from various sources, to vilify their ex-partner -- the DA never cared about me, just shut down and walked away, wish I could do the same. So posing the question to any DAs still lurking... do you think it's not necessarily having "high self-esteem," but it's simply not looking to others or to relationships for validation? I think FAs avoid and then come back because they (like APs) crave validation from others as they have trouble self-regulating their emotions. And DAs don't do that because they were neglected earlier in life and never received external validation, so they don't seek it out. They try to find validation in other ways, but it appears to a more anxious and trusts-others-more-than-self insecure person as "high self esteem" allowing them to shut down and bail without a second thought (which isn't actually true, even if deactivation can look that way). I've met and been in relationships with a couple DAs and their high self esteem is a mask. Beneath the surface there is worse loathing you could ever imagine. They dismiss you because they can not believe you could actually love them. The disrespect you because they think you are lying. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 18:43:07 GMT
annieb , you can speak subjectively to your limited experience with people you have been in toxic relationships with, but you can't speak claiming to know the internal state of all DA's. Just qualifying your remarks as your opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by annieb on Nov 26, 2019 19:31:53 GMT
annieb , you can speak subjectively to your limited experience with people you have been in toxic relationships with, but you can't speak claiming to know the internal state of all DA's. Just qualifying your remarks as your opinion. I must have struck a nerve. I am sorry for not qualifying my opinion as my opinion. I am not a moderator or founder of this site. I didn't know I had to qualify my opinion as my opinion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2019 19:38:02 GMT
annieb , you can speak subjectively to your limited experience with people you have been in toxic relationships with, but you can't speak claiming to know the internal state of all DA's. Just qualifying your remarks as your opinion. I must have struck a nerve. I am sorry for not qualifying my opinion as my opinion. I am not a moderator or founder of this site. I didn't know I had to qualify my opinion as my opinion. Relax, you can post whatever you think and so can anyone else. Your post made generalizations, I simply replied with my own opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by annieb on Nov 26, 2019 19:41:13 GMT
I must have struck a nerve. I am sorry for not qualifying my opinion as my opinion. I am not a moderator or founder of this site. I didn't know I had to qualify my opinion as my opinion. Relax, you can post whatever you think and so can anyone else. Your post made generalizations, I simply replied with my own opinion. I am a perceptive person, and I made an observation and I shared it with the world. because I hope it will help people. Because there is absolutely no way a DA would have a high healthy self esteem. They may hold themselves in higher esteem than others, but in no way they have an actual healthy high self esteem. |
|
|
|
Post by nyc718 on Nov 27, 2019 15:52:46 GMT
Relax, you can post whatever you think and so can anyone else. Your post made generalizations, I simply replied with my own opinion. I am a perceptive person, and I made an observation and I shared it with the world. because I hope it will help people. Because there is absolutely no way a DA would have a high healthy self esteem. They may hold themselves in higher esteem than others, but in no way they have an actual healthy high self esteem. In my (thankfully) limited experience with DAs, I would say healthy self esteem is a complete mask. There may have been the facade of high self esteem because of success in their professional life, but looking back, I can see the low self esteem in so many ways. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2019 16:48:45 GMT
Levels of self esteem and self worth are influenced by a lot of factors outside of attachment style alone. All attachment adaptations manifest on a spectrum, and there are variations in all the attributes. A small sample size of exes can't predict the real status of 25-30 percent of the population. I think all insecure styles suffer from low esteem and worth to some degree, but it's not the same for all people and again, influenced by other factors. There are many self improvement activities and endeavors, as well as individual circumstances and the existence of supportive relationships outside attachment figures, that can increase and individuals self esteem and self worth. These things are not static, and unchangeable.
|
|
|
|
Post by tnr9 on Nov 27, 2019 17:47:39 GMT
Everyone has a story that impacted their ability to relate to others....that is what I am learning from my somatic therapist...there is no bad guy or good guy in my story...just 2 insecure people who became my parents. Understanding their stories helps me to understand mine.
|
|
cukie
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by cukie on Dec 11, 2019 19:00:31 GMT
Taking a stab at this, I think each attachment style has its own set of "strengths and weaknesses."
I think its fairly intuitive to say that DA's are going to have a higher self-confidence than most other attachment styles, because their single person self-support system encourages that.
Likewise I wouldn't be surprised if AP's are probably better at forming deep friendships and interpersonal relationships because by definition they derive their self-worth by going out and empathizing with others.
Neither is bad on its own necessarily, its just in context of a relationship their needs become too extreme and self-sabotage.
|
|
|
|
Post by amber on Dec 15, 2019 20:38:58 GMT
My ex DA came across like he had high self esteem but I know he didn’t. He was such a people pleaser and had no insight into himself. He literally never shared any vulnerability or feelings with me which infuriated me no end...how do you have true intimacy with someone if they never share their fears/issues about themselves/insecurities etc? My gosh I could never be with someone like that again
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2019 15:50:58 GMT
My ex DA came across like he had high self esteem but I know he didn’t. He was such a people pleaser and had no insight into himself. He literally never shared any vulnerability or feelings with me which infuriated me no end...how do you have true intimacy with someone if they never share their fears/issues about themselves/insecurities etc? My gosh I could never be with someone like that again Infuriated? I am puzzled by this post. Did you feel entitled to his vulnerability? Why did you pursue intimacy with him? I do not understand the part of you being infuriated by someone's inability to be vulnerable with you. That seems like a red flag in your own psychology. And yes you definitely shouldn't be with a partner you find infuriating. It's not good for either of you. |
|
cukie
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by cukie on Dec 19, 2019 16:45:45 GMT
My ex DA came across like he had high self esteem but I know he didn’t. He was such a people pleaser and had no insight into himself. He literally never shared any vulnerability or feelings with me which infuriated me no end...how do you have true intimacy with someone if they never share their fears/issues about themselves/insecurities etc? My gosh I could never be with someone like that again Infuriated? I am puzzled by this post. Did you feel entitled to his vulnerability? Why did you pursue intimacy with him? I do not understand the part of you being infuriated by someone's inability to be vulnerable with you. That seems like a red flag in your own psychology. And yes you definitely shouldn't be with a partner you find infuriating. It's not good for either of you. I think this isn't exactly a fair viewpoint. I think you are getting hung up on an exaggerative word choice and kind of missing the forest in the trees. There's nothing wrong with expecting a degree of vulnerability from your partner. I would argue that yes, if two people are mutually choosing to pursue a relationship that one is entitled to a degree of vulnerability and it isn't some flaw in their psychology - its a pretty standard relationship expectation. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that being a deal-breaker. idk, I feel like there's a tendency on here for people to say things like "you knew what you were getting into" when in reality a lot of these deal breakers were obscured early in the relationship/in the honeymoon period and weren't immediately obvious. Most people are just painfully ill equipped to spot the difference between "takes a while to open up/goes slow in a relationship" and "systemically incapable of intimacy." I guess what I'm trying to say is its unfair to draw conclusions about someones psychology when you don't know the background to a relationship. There's an irreconciably massive difference between "I left this guy after 7 months because I was frustrated by his inability to meet my need for intimacy" and "I dated this person for 4 years with the expectation that they would change despite the increasingly obvious signs they can't." One is a pretty standard relationship and the other is very AP. Point is, there's nothing wrong with expecting mutual vulnerability in a relationship. What differentiates an secure vs AP isn't the expectation but whether or not they can actually acknowledge if their partner can change and either accept that level of closeness or leave. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2019 16:56:41 GMT
Infuriated? I am puzzled by this post. Did you feel entitled to his vulnerability? Why did you pursue intimacy with him? I do not understand the part of you being infuriated by someone's inability to be vulnerable with you. That seems like a red flag in your own psychology. And yes you definitely shouldn't be with a partner you find infuriating. It's not good for either of you. I think this isn't exactly a fair viewpoint. I think you are getting hung up on an exaggerative word choice and kind of missing the forest in the trees. There's nothing wrong with expecting a degree of vulnerability from your partner. I would argue that yes, if two people are mutually choosing to pursue a relationship that one is entitled to a degree of vulnerability and it isn't some flaw in their psychology - its a pretty standard relationship expectation. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that being a deal-breaker. idk, I feel like there's a tendency on here for people to say things like "you knew what you were getting into" when in reality a lot of these deal breakers were obscured early in the relationship/in the honeymoon period and weren't immediately obvious. Most people are just painfully ill equipped to spot the difference between "takes a while to open up/goes slow in a relationship" and "systemically incapable of intimacy." I disagree with you, but I think that is ok. What I see is a tendency for AP people to pursue a relationship with someone in spite of not receiving the cues of emotional availability in the first place. Then persist and get angry and bitter when it turns out just like it started. I see that as a symptom of their own emotional unavailability, and those further in the process of self evaluation seem to come to that conclusion as well. Insecure dynamics are dynamics between two people. But we are free to disagree, I don't think a lot of what I see here is fair either but it's just a lot of opinions . What one learns in their own process will benefit them eventually regardless if anyone here endorses it- proof is in the pudding of self awareness. I do not believe someone is entitled to emotional intimacy from someone who never exhibited the capacity to warrant that expectation. I do believe it is a mark of their own unavailability to expect what wasn't offered. I do. We can disagree but the point should be, in my perspective, an empowering one. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2019 16:57:49 GMT
The issue for me isn't about blaming. It's about "How can you introspect and get to where you yourself want to be, without blaming everyone else?"
|
|
cukie
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by cukie on Dec 19, 2019 18:17:16 GMT
The issue for me isn't about blaming. It's about "How can you introspect and get to where you yourself want to be, without blaming everyone else?" I don't disagree necessarily. What I'm trying to say though is hindsight is 20/20. Like now I can look back and say "yeah these behaviors were obviously indicators of DA tendencies and I should have known" but at the time I wouldn't have had the insight to thread those together. I firmly believe most people probably don't, which is why the anxious avoidant trap is a thing in the first place. And sometimes the emotional availability gets worse over time. For me things were at acceptable levels until 2 years in, when the push and pull became really bad. I accept my role in failing to address the issue and being okay with something that wasn't fulfilling me - but prior to that it did fulfill me. I just think you are applying this cookie cutter template of: "well they were never really available" which I don't know if I agree with. I find that these things come in a thousand flavors,I think a very common narrative that things were good early and got worse - because relationships evolve maybe things were fine at the start but suffered as expectations grew. What I'm trying to say is that: - Its not fair to imply people knew what they were getting into with a DA. I could equally turn around and ask why the DA got together with someone who was clearly incapable of appreciating their need for space. The true issue is that neither party probably knew the extent of the issues until problems arose. That's okay. But I think it dimishes someones pain when you say: well they were never available - you don't know that.
- Amber basically said (paraphrased) "I was frustrated by his emotional unavailability, i would never be with someone like that again." - Thats not enough to say someone has red flags. Neither of us know the situation. There's a massive difference between "I was frustrated by his unavailability so we broke up after 5 months" and "I voluntarily stayed in a 3 year relationship with the expectation of him changing." I would argue the first is very secure. Idea being, its kinda rude to psychoanalyze someone with 0 context to the situation.
|
|
