|
Post by northstarmom on Nov 27, 2017 19:52:53 GMT -5
I know the below was true for me, which is why I say it's better for the refused to chase their own whys, not their partners'. When I started chasing my whys was when I began detaching from my sm. From Psychology Today www.psychologytoday.com/blog/compassion-matters/201711/are-you-creating-your-own-nightmare-in-your-relationship?utm_source=FacebookPost&utm_medium=FBPost&utm_campaign=FBPost:"Who we choose has more to do with our history than we may like to think. Whether our attractions seem mysterious or totally reasonable to us, there are often invisible elements at play that draw us to individuals who remind us of elements of our past. We’re often attracted to partners who allow us to relive negative patterns, which may have been painful, but are also comfortable and familiar. For example, if we felt ignored as kids, we may seek relationships with people who are less available. If we felt intruded on, we may wind up with partners who try to control us. We sometimes tend to feel an extra sparkly attraction toward people who have qualities similar to those of our early caretakers, or who make us feel in similar ways about ourselves as we felt in childhood. For example, a man who had an emotionally unregulated, critical, and unpredictable mother found himself dating women with these same characteristics. Eventually, he got married to someone whose behavior was erratic and abusive. In his adult household, he wound up feeling very much like he had as a child: cautious, fearful, and at fault for something he didn’t know he’d done This type of recreation based on selection happens in many relationships in large and small ways. A woman I worked with described being drawn to men who were “mysterious” and had a “faraway look in their eyes.” She felt compelled and attracted by their cool demeanor. However, when she started a relationship with these men, she’d find herself feeling frustrated by their distant, dismissive, or rejecting way of being. She had trouble recognizing that she was upset by the very traits that also compelled her. It wasn’t until she reflected on her childhood, where both her parents and her brother kept to themselves, that she started to make this connection. No one in her childhood household talked openly or expressed a lot of warmth or affection. She felt isolated and abandoned growing up, and here she was as an adult, choosing partners who provided her with the same emotional climate.
|
|
|
Post by Caris on Nov 27, 2017 20:29:18 GMT -5
I relate to this. My therapist said, I chose a husband with the same narcissistic qualities as my mother. I said, I didn’t know he was like that when I married him. However, this article speaks of “invisible elements at play,” and I think our subconscious mind “sees” things, or recognizes familiarities that our conscious mind does not, and it draws us to what we know, without us being aware of it. When we eventually recognize familiar behavior patterns, we don’t want to believe it, so we live in denial, and false hope, thereby perpetuating the problem.
Since my husband died, people are surprised at how much I miss him in my life, considering how he treated me, but I knew him. He was familiar. He was a known entity. We had history. Everyone else I meet in this new place is a stranger, or a distant acquaintance. No history. No shared experiences. No connection. It’s made me think that familiarity is a powerful force, maybe more powerful than love in some cases, and why so many stay even when it’s miserable.
|
|
|
Post by workingonit on Nov 27, 2017 20:36:24 GMT -5
This is exactly what I am working on in therapy right now. it is so true that I am reliving my parent's marriage in some ways although theirs was not sexless. There are still patterns that are repeated in our marriage. I think the why chasing for ourselves is such a great thing to do and is my main focus right now. For whatever reason, we each got here. This is the work to be aware of the pattern in yourself that allowed that to happen so it cannot happen again.
Thank you for bringing this!
|
|
|
Post by baza on Nov 27, 2017 21:13:15 GMT -5
"Sort your own shit out first" is my take on all this.
But the difficulty in this is in the timing. For me, I met my missus to be when I was in my mid 20's. But at that time I was probably in my mid teens emotionally and personal growth wise, with a whole heap of learning about myself to do. And I think I "chose" what seemed familiar from my past.
For me (and my missus to be) to have made a success of our deal would have been a matter of sheer luck.
It puzzles me to this day how our deal survived as long as it did.
I reckon my personal growth - and emotional development - and learning about myself - kicked in when I was about 41/42. But by then, I was already about 16 years in to my deal...and although I didn't know it then, with a further 14 years to go.
At the time I was choosing a life partner, I still had a lot of shit to sort out. And unsurprisingly, I didn't choose very well. There's the conundrum. If I'd waited until I had most of my shit sorted out, I'd have been in my 40's and likely have missed the boat.
Ahhh, life and choice. Oh what fun it is !!
|
|
|
Post by h on Nov 27, 2017 21:31:36 GMT -5
I'm not sure. I can see some similarities between my marriage and my parents but other stark contrasts. I know almost nothing about my parent's intimate life (before they divorced). It was a very conservative home and nothing suggestive was discussed EVER. I got all my knowledge of sex from the school sex-ed class which was all mechanics and nothing about how it relates to relationships. Pair that with the "Don't do it until marriage," message all throughout my youth and I had no idea what was reasonable to expect. I just assumed that if I followed the rules and did as I was told, it would all work out. That made me less comfortable with talking openly about sexual issues until I was almost done with college. The lack of affection at home probably made me more accepting or tolerant of the passionless life I have had so far.
My parents fought all the time though. I hated being home with them. I avoided fights with my W because I didn't want to live in that kind of relationship. My desire not to have the kind of tense, angry marriage my parents had is probably why I allowed my dissatisfaction to go on unchallenged for so long. I have always given in on everything to avoid conflict. In an effort not to be a condescending jerk, I became a doormat.
Some people gravitate towards the same toxic relationships they grew up with. Others avoid those but fall victim to completely different problems they weren't aware of because they were focused too intently on avoiding a specific few. Works both ways I guess.
|
|
|
Post by shamwow on Nov 28, 2017 13:50:51 GMT -5
I'm not sure. I can see some similarities between my marriage and my parents but other stark contrasts. I know almost nothing about my parent's intimate life (before they divorced). It was a very conservative home and nothing suggestive was discussed EVER. I got all my knowledge of sex from the school sex-ed class which was all mechanics and nothing about how it relates to relationships. Pair that with the "Don't do it until marriage," message all throughout my youth and I had no idea what was reasonable to expect. I just assumed that if I followed the rules and did as I was told, it would all work out. That made me less comfortable with talking openly about sexual issues until I was almost done with college. The lack of affection at home probably made me more accepting or tolerant of the passionless life I have had so far. My parents fought all the time though. I hated being home with them. I avoided fights with my W because I didn't want to live in that kind of relationship. My desire not to have the kind of tense, angry marriage my parents had is probably why I allowed my dissatisfaction to go on unchallenged for so long. I have always given in on everything to avoid conflict. In an effort not to be a condescending jerk, I became a doormat. Some people gravitate towards the same toxic relationships they grew up with. Others avoid those but fall victim to completely different problems they weren't aware of because they were focused too intently on avoiding a specific few. Works both ways I guess. Ditto. Honestly, I dislike articles such as this one. It fits half the audience, and they see truth in it. The other half sees it as the opposite of their experience. In the end, the article cites no study, no research, no experimentation. Basically, it is just some professors pulling stuff out of their asses. I've got a degree in sociology, and know exactly how easy it is to craft a bullshit study to conclude whatever you want it to. Come on, Psychology Today...You didn't even citing a bullshit study to back up your claims? That's just lazy.
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Nov 28, 2017 13:55:50 GMT -5
“Some people gravitate towards the same toxic relationships they grew up with. Others avoid those but fall victim to completely different problems they weren't aware of because they were focused too intently on avoiding a specific few. Works both ways I guess.”
Bottom line is the relationships of our childhood caretakers influence the kind of relationships we get into as adults.
|
|
|
Post by M2G on Dec 2, 2017 5:11:40 GMT -5
Finding that to be all too true in my case and it seems a pretty pervasive theme in psychology books and self-help I've read recently.
My favorite quote of caution so far, for those in their first serious relationship or especially those recently out of a breakup with an abusive partner
"Beware the person you meet who seems perfect, or whom you feel you've known all your life - because you probably have." (Beverly Engel)
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Dec 4, 2017 10:46:31 GMT -5
The article's claim seems like a conjecture, and I don't see that it backs up its conjecture with citing studies or research. I could buy that this is plausibly part of how we select a partner, but I don't see it as dominant.
Plus: I personally don't relate to this view. If you asked me how my spouse is like my mother, I'd list positive attributes like "intelligent", "similar political views to me", "interested in the world". So maybe I just chose someone LIKE my mother.... not "dysfunctional like my mother". Or maybe: I just chose someone like ME... which is correlated with what my mother is like since she raised me.
And -- of course -- the main sticking point in my marriage is our disparate views of the role of sex and intimacy in a marriage, which a) I have no basis to compare to my mother's views/experiences, b) didn't know in advance about my spouse. So to suggest I "married the dysfunction I was comfortable with" simply does not ring true for me.
If you needed one more nail in this theory: I've had plenty of friendships/relationships with plenty of women (counting the non-intimate relationships). They each are just different. Seems to shoot a hole in the theory "we gravitate to the relationships with the opposite sex that embody the dysfunction we are comfortable with".
Here's a different view: "Women pick somewhat aloof, partly emotionally distant men with different views on sex and intimacy... because most men are somewhat aloof, partly emotionally distant men, with different views on sex and intimacy than most women." That statement seems similarly "obvious" and yet fundamentally flawed as the gist of the cited article.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Dec 4, 2017 11:48:27 GMT -5
Here is a possible restatement of the point of the article in the OP. I think this version is: - funnier - shorter to read - somehow makes the correct point better than the article
|
|