|
|
Post by anne12 on Jan 20, 2020 18:17:07 GMT
The under dog: "The more I try to get your attention, get your love and closeness, the more you try to avoid me."
The caption is: I feel disappointed, let down, neglected, jealous, rejected and as the loser of our relationship.
The top dog: "You demand too much from me!" Or "I think I need a good long break from you to find out for myself and what I really want."
The subtitle is: I feel guilty when you let me have so much power over your feelings and life - and I'm sorry that I obviously don't love you with the same intensity.
It is stressful to feel responsible for someone else's mood ect.
What's happening?
The typical love dream is to live with an equal partner in a safe, warm, productive, fun-loving and uplifting family, where both have the desire and courage to develop and become themselves.
But dreams and expectations are often not matched by reality. And when each party in the relationship has their own dream pictures of reality, they quickly lose contact if they do not take a "reality check" with each other and instead complain to friends and other people.
Top Dogs and underdogs
Even though the couple basically wants to meet at eye level and stand straight, they have established themselves in a balance of power that is odd: an Under- and Over-dog position. The underdog thinks he loves the most and feels that he is just adjusting.
As he experiences a greater and greater loss and loss of control, his desperation increases. He thinks the partner is loved the most and is the one who decides everything and sets the agenda in the relationship. He feels that the more he turns to her; the more he wants, the more distant, cooler, dismissive and unloving she becomes.
Woody Allen's movie "Me and Annie" is a school example of this imbalance in the scene where Alvie and Annie are each in therapy. Alvie complains that he and Annie almost never make love: "A maximum of 3 times a week," he says. With her therapist, Annie complains that he constantly wants her to go to bed with him. She sighs: "We do this at least 3 times a week!"
What's the problem?
The fish in the sea probably is the last to realize how important the water is to its existence. Similarly, we often find it difficult for people to interpret our own behavior in the context of others and to see our reaction to that behavior.
We do not see the larger patterns and consequences of the power plays we are involved in. We only see what happens and is concerned with whose fault it is. Instead of looking at the relationship from above, we look inward ("my fault") or outward ("your fault").
But the world seen through the dog's optics is completely different from the way the dog sees reality.
The problem is not that one "loves the most." It is quite common for the small imbalance to exist. But in a strong and healthy relationship, it changes regularly.
The problem is also that the under dog feels less worthy than the top dog. Certainly it is just as painful and humiliating to be a top dog - it is just some other emotions and mechanisms that drive the top dog.
The problem is not that one of Them "loves the most." It is quite common for the small imbalance to exist. But in a strong and healthy relationship, it changes regularly.
The problem is also that the under dog feels less worthy than the top dog. Certainly it is just as painful and humiliating to be an over dog - it is just some other emotions and mechanisms that drive the over dog (more on that later).
The problem is that it is just as difficult for an Overhund and an Underhund to talk about want, desires and longings in a way that is not perceived as criticism by the other party.
what you don't say can be more important than what you say
The under dog: "The more I try to get your attention, get your love and closeness, the more you try to avoid me."
The caption is: I feel disappointed, let down, neglected, jealous, rejected and as the loser of our relationship.
The top dog: "You demand too much from me!" Or "I think I need a good long break from you to find out for myself and what I really want."
The subtitle is: I feel guilty when you let me have so much power over your feelings and lives - and I'm sorry that I obviously don't love you with the same intensity.
It is stressful to feel responsible for someone else's mood, and typically there are high demands hidden behind the dog's seemingly loving and caring demands for closeness. And whatever you think you are feeling too much and getting too little in return, or you are constantly chasing and wanting and therefore becoming more dismissive than you like, you are the one party to an unbalanced relationship.
When the parties choose to communicate with their screen textsplay, what is said affects the other party in a way that reinforces the polarization and imbalance of the relationship.
If, on the other hand, the parties chose to communicate what they really think (the subtitles), they would of course expose their vulnerability - but achieve that the soft would not sound like accusations, attacks, criticism or attempts to blame them.
|
|
|
|
Post by nyc718 on Jan 20, 2020 18:26:27 GMT
The under dog: "The more I try to get your attention, get your love and closeness, the more you try to avoid me." The caption is: I feel disappointed, let down, neglected, jealous, rejected and as the loser of our relationship. The top dog: "You demand too much from me!" Or "I think I need a good long break from you to find out for myself and what I really want." The subtitle is: I feel guilty when you let me have so much power over your feelings and lives - and I'm sorry that I obviously don't love you with the same intensity. It is stressful to feel responsible for someone else's mood, But what's the solution then? No one wins here. |
|
|
|
Post by anne12 on Jan 20, 2020 19:31:07 GMT
Underdog/topdog dynamics in relationships:
Examples:
You each live by your self. Every time you have to meet, it has to be at your partners house. You actually also want visits in your own home, but you give in.
Your partner talks bad about you or complains Infront of his friends while having dinner. You don't speak up.
....
|
|
|
|
Post by tnr9 on Jan 21, 2020 2:58:45 GMT
This was soooo painful to read because I was the underdog with B. I definitely gave him the power in the relationship and I was so jealous because I saw our relationship as so fragile...like glass...and I felt so insatiable....I just wanted to feel ok and instead I just kept feeling desperate.
|
|
|
|
Post by nyc718 on Jan 21, 2020 5:44:24 GMT
nyc718 Communicate directly and openly. Take responsibility for your own emotions. Don't neglect your partner. Take the other person into consideration. Don't punish your partner. Don't be passive aggressive. Put yourself in the other person's shoes. Find a relationship mentor (older person who has been married awhile). Seek growth on a personal independent level. Have other things, loves, passions. Take responsibility for your actions. Recognize the other person as an autonomous individual. Stop choosing unavailable partners. (Not to "you" but trying to think of objective ideas having been on both sides of this.) So I was thinking about all of this. I know I personally never chose anyone on a conscious level who I felt was unavailable, so being aware makes a big difference in how we choose partners. Also there have been a few discussions here about FAs presenting as available from the get go, and if we're not aware then it's easy to first miss the signs that pop up later that then show they are unavailable, especially if those signs are subtle at first. As for the other stuff, I think those only work with a secure partner, because FAs get engulfed, withdraw etc. so they don't allow you to communicate directly and openly because it makes them shut down. I think partners of FAs who know that they are FA do nothing BUT take their partners into consideration because they know they have to tread lightly with them in an effort to not engulf them. I don't know what don't punish your partner means. Punish how? Being passive aggressive - I could see how someone else may have seen my protest behavior as passive aggressive, namely I would withdraw when he would withdraw, but I would do that because I didn't want to engulf him when he seemed to need space, so I don't know if that qualifies as being passive aggressive. Putting yourself in the other person's shoes - both parties have to do this, but in my experience FAs can't really do that. Seeing your partner as an autonomous individual - this is something mrob has said many times and honestly it is confusing to me, as I never wanted to or tried to see my partners otherwise, so saying see them as autonomous individuals implies their partners make them feel they aren't autonomous individuals, but I don't understand why. I personally was never trying to take anyone's autonomy away, so seeing this pop up so much is confusing to me. I always wanted my partner to choose me, not be with me because they were forced, and I was very clear about that with my ex. I said I never demand anything from my partner, they do things because they want to do it. I never want to be guilted or manipulated into anything, nor do i want to do that to anyone else. Everyone should be in a relationship because they chose to be there on their own. Who wants someone who feels obligated to be there? I sure don't. |
|
|
|
Post by nyc718 on Jan 21, 2020 12:34:49 GMT
So I was thinking about all of this. I know I personally never chose anyone on a conscious level who I felt was unavailable, so being aware makes a big difference in how we choose partners. Also there have been a few discussions here about FAs presenting as available from the get go, and if we're not aware then it's easy to first miss the signs that pop up later that then show they are unavailable, especially if those signs are subtle at first. As for the other stuff, I think those only work with a secure partner, because FAs get engulfed, withdraw etc. so they don't allow you to communicate directly and openly because it makes them shut down. I think partners of FAs who know that they are FA do nothing BUT take their partners into consideration because they know they have to tread lightly with them in an effort to not engulf them. I don't know what don't punish your partner means. Punish how? Being passive aggressive - I could see how someone else may have seen my protest behavior as passive aggressive, namely I would withdraw when he would withdraw, but I would do that because I didn't want to engulf him when he seemed to need space, so I don't know if that qualifies as being passive aggressive. Putting yourself in the other person's shoes - both parties have to do this, but in my experience FAs can't really do that. Seeing your partner as an autonomous individual - this is something mrob has said many times and honestly it is confusing to me, as I never wanted to or tried to see my partners otherwise, so saying see them as autonomous individuals implies their partners make them feel they aren't autonomous individuals, but I don't understand why. I personally was never trying to take anyone's autonomy away, so seeing this pop up so much is confusing to me. I always wanted my partner to choose me, not be with me because they were forced, and I was very clear about that with my ex. I said I never demand anything from my partner, they do things because they want to do it. I never want to be guilted or manipulated into anything, nor do i want to do that to anyone else. Everyone should be in a relationship because they chose to be there on their own. Who wants someone who feels obligated to be there? I sure don't. , I agree with you on not ever not wanting a partner to be an autonomous individual and I’ve thought about this a lot since seeing mrob say it a bunch. While I’m not one of these people, from what I’ve gathered in my head, it’s one or a combination of the following (maybe something else or I could be entirely wrong): - There are a ton of people out there who want to spend every waking moment with SOMEONE else or be in contact with them non-stop or just generally not wanting to do things outside of the relationship or without the person. Some reasons might include: deep need for attention, emotional soothing from another, feeling incomplete without someone else, no personality or interests of their own, lack of self respect, fear of losing the person or being cheated on, etc ... all insecure reasons. - Even in a person who doesn’t consciously want their partner to not be autonomous can have their own insecurities get to them so much that they act in a way that makes it seem like they can’t be alone (in a physical sense, emotional sense, whatever)... which makes their partner feel trapped, engulfed, etc which in turns equals their autonomy is threatened by this overwhelming person (As an AP, I’ve even felt this from others before (and it’s incredibly offputting for me but I usually just see it as they’re insecure / have some deep wounds - but it is some people’s conscious preference too  ), but again I do think it’s because despite all my AP issues, I’m on the independent, inward side IRL) - FAs/DAs (and even others) can easily perceive someone as not wanting them to be autonomous or having their sovereignty threatened even if the partner is not actively doing anything that a secure or other person would take the same threat from - this can be based in poor boundaries from caregivers growing up etc / sometimes not even conscious but it’s a core threat / fear Maybe that helps. - Wanting to spend every waking moment with someone is something that is not healthy place to come from, and I think everyone here agrees with this and is working on balance in some way, either from AP or FA side. - I wonder if because of FAs own feeling of engulfment, they can project that onto their partners, that it was the partners who made them feel that way, and you said as much in your last paragraph ( I think, please correct me if I'm wrong) I'm not saying that that never actually happens where a partner may make a FA feel engulfed, but even if you're not doing anything to make your partner feel overwhelmed, they may feel overwhelmed. I know this because of my last FA. I was being careful to not make him feel overwhelmed while also making sure I was expressing myself, and it was too much for him. No winning for me which is why I ultimately left. We hit the wall as far as I was concerned where my needs most of all weren't being met, and no matter what I tried for him, his needs couldn't ever be met by me, or anyone for that matter, unless he meets himself first fully to know what he needs, and how to meet himself and a partner. So again, this autonomy thing from a FA viewpoint of don't take away my autonomy/sovereignty, well, I personally wan't trying to do that at all. Again, I want no one with me out of obligation, fear, manipulation or guilt. I want someone there because they want and choose to be there, just as I am doing with them (and just as I can easily choose to no longer be with them.) So I am feeling that being a sovereign individual being taken away is something from much deeper place and not necessarily from the partner. |
|
|
|
Post by Dualcitizen on Jan 21, 2020 20:17:37 GMT
- Wanting to spend every waking moment with someone is something that is not healthy place to come from, and I think everyone here agrees with this and is working on balance in some way, either from AP or FA side. This is where true "self sovereignty" comes into play, you have you're own goals, drives, hobbies and your individuality you have to bring to a relationship. Which is all linked to attraction to the other as well, on top of biological and attachment style. It's a balance like you say. This is where codependency comes in. You're consumed by the other to the point where you are thinking about what you need to do to satiate the other person, please them, fear of losing them etc etc, to an extreme. You're not really living your life. I can confirm that you do not have to be doing anything that would be considered anxious etc to have the partner become "engulfed" and pull away. Janedoe's other thread on enmeshment and fear of engulfment is pertinent. If you watch Thais Gibsons videos, she literally talks about F-A and fear of helplessness and being trapped to "love or relationship". Mrob talks about losing his "sovereignty", which is how I interpret what he says. It would vary from individual to individual surely as it's all on a spectrum. It's clear that anxious/clingy behaviour etc would probably hasten being triggered in a F-A, just makes sense logically. Because from my experiences as well, although I didn't text daily, was fortnightly, once a week at worst, my ex. was clearly in the engulfed stage after the breakup and within the push-pull cycle, never ever got back to what it originally was, in terms of the relationship. Just the whirlwind and then her being engulfed, pulling away, push-pull. She was in a state of depression by that stage. And it makes sense, directly seemingly linked to the enmeshment with caregiver and the unreasonable/abusive demands placed on the child, they had their boundaries totally quashed, no real freedom, and that would create fear around anyone that get's close, as they can't be trusted, it's always happened that way in life. As with FA1972's thread in the D-A section, clearly due to lack of self love and therefore blurred boundaries (learnt from enmeshment) there is a mistaken belief that the F-A can feel "secure" in that the D-A is removing that "fear of engulfment", but it's actually not, it's the F-A having poor self boundaries and accepting the D-A's behaviour as acceptable, a fantasy bond and enabling the behaviour of even less "intermittent reinforcement" than even an F-A would give probably. There is no effective communication around feelings, emotion and partner requirements, therefore causing anxiety in the F-A. In that case, it's clear that Fa1972 feels the D-A partner is not encroaching on her sovereignty, when infact, the D-A is, because Fa1972 has dropped a self sovereign boundary in self respect, accepting the intermittent reinforcement, lack of communication, and literal showing of any emotions/feelings reinforcing that someone in a committed relationship actually cares about her in any capacity. It gets back to Janedoe's Enmeshment & Engulfment thread (which was good to think about). Black and white vs shades of grey around the issue. The original training of the child, via enmeshment and engulfment by the caregiver ensures that the child can't ascertain boundaries, and "self sovereignty" is confused. |
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Jan 21, 2020 20:42:00 GMT
You can cause a feeling of enmeshment by barely contacting anyone if your contact consists of making someone responsible for your emotions (or other things you need to be responsible for). All it takes is once. That's engulfment, not enmeshment. Enmeshment is more like codependency. Everyone involved has shaky boundaries. Engulfment can threaten someone (fear of self being swallowed up and replaced by someone else), but if they don't respond in kind and enable it, no one will enmesh. Someone can also engulf themselves ie give too much of their own identity to a relationship. Enmeshment requires everyone's participation in the dependence, so boundaries as a whole are blurred and ill-defined. |
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Jan 21, 2020 21:17:39 GMT
alexandra Hm. I guess I still have them mixed up. So engulfment is one person and enmeshment is two? Maybe I’m wrong because I still don’t quite get the distinctions but I think a lot of people think codependency is based on time. Spending a lot of time together isn’t codependency. Enabling bad behavior and lacking individualism and boundaries is. Yes. You can fear someone will engulf you (or fear you'll engulf yourself). Which is why I said in the other thread, you can't be engulfed unless you allow it. But enmeshment is all people involved actively having weak and blurry boundaries with each other, which to your point doesn't need to depend on amount of time. I think of it more as once you allow engulfment, then that leads to enmeshment. |
|
|
|
Post by Dualcitizen on Jan 21, 2020 21:45:39 GMT
alexandra Hm. I guess I still have them mixed up. So engulfment is one person and enmeshment is two? Maybe I’m wrong because I still don’t quite get the distinctions but I think a lot of people think codependency is based on time. Spending a lot of time together isn’t codependency. Enabling bad behavior and lacking individualism and boundaries is. Yes. You can fear someone will engulf you (or fear you'll engulf yourself). Which is why I said in the other thread, you can't be engulfed unless you allow it. But enmeshment is all people involved actively having weak and blurry boundaries with each other, which to your point doesn't need to depend on amount of time. I think of it more as once you allow engulfment, then that leads to enmeshment. Wouldn't it be Enmeshment creates engulfment, Engulfment is the outcome of the boundaryless Enmeshment. basically hand in hand? So as a child, you are "enmeshed" (i.e. as you say baseline blurry boundaries created by the caregiver being abusive etc, and creating the dynamic that the child would think "I am responsible for your feeling, and you're responsible for my feelings") and the engulfment is the overwhelm, submerging of oneself into a relationship, and the dependency that follows caused by the enmeshment. Would you see it as that? Excerpt taken from here: www.harleytherapy.co.uk/counselling/what-is-engulfment.htm"Engulfment could be seen as part of growing up. A mother, in her attempt to protect and take care of her child, can overwhelm her child with love. As the child grows he or she feel suffocated, wanting their independence and making moves to break free. A healthy mother recognises and accepts this, proud her child is progressing."
|
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Jan 21, 2020 23:24:15 GMT
Dualcitizen, that can be the original cause, but as an adult getting into new relationships and fearing it, the fear of engulfment comes first because the childhood enmeshment taught you bad boundaries. So you actually fear not being able to hold your boundaries if you get involved with someone else prone to codependence / who has bad boundaries, because it's happened before, and you're hypervigilant. And then, if your fears about the situation in front of you are valid and not unfounded overcoupling or projection, and the new relationship does engulf you and you allow it to with your bad boundaries, you and the new person who also has bad boundaries will enmesh. So I agree that from a chicken or the egg perspective, being enmeshed as a child and not having healthy tools to handle it since you haven't learned boundaries yet created the original problem. But once you're an adult with an awareness of your fear of engulfment, that's the initial issue and the enmeshment outcome happens after if your boundaries still stink. (Or if you're scared of losing yourself getting engulfed in the relationship due to your own inability to have boundaries and you're creating that situation, even if the other person does have good boundaries and doesn't enmesh with you.)
|
|
|
|
Post by nyc718 on Jan 21, 2020 23:47:28 GMT
(Or if you're scared of losing yourself getting engulfed in the relationship due to your own inability to have boundaries and you're creating that situation, even if the other person does have good boundaries and doesn't enmesh with you.) This sounds awful. Just a forever losing battle. |
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Jan 22, 2020 0:07:38 GMT
nyc718, welcome to the life of the type of AP who struggles with codependency and trusts / idealizes others ahead of themselves  that's why self-work and healing when you're not ready to date healthily is so important!
|
|
), but again I do think it’s because despite all my AP issues, I’m on the independent, inward side IRL)
that's why self-work and healing when you're not ready to date healthily is so important!