Chasing those emotionally unavailable

[PatriceA]

@ TheRealJuliane - yes! That Princess Di and Prince Charles and Camilla triangle was a complete mess wasn’t it? For everyone involved.

Regarding my own observations…yep…well my beliefs have been forged from the fires. I’ve fowled things up enough times to learn from my mistakes…and it’s always easy to sit on the sidelines and dish-out advice.

The good thing is I’m more accepting of “reality” these days and am slowly coming to understand that you can’t push or mold relationships into something *you want * them to be…instead you work with what you have, or instead realize it’s not something you could ever work with.

I think part of the difficulty in this is that to really be able to forge a good relationship with someone requires a lot of self-knowledge. That is, knowing yourself extremely well…knowing what you need in life and what type of relationship would make you happy. And this is difficult because it requires taking a really good, long, hard look in the mirror and seeing yourself as you truly are, warts and all; and then to be “ok” with that. Because that is reality…no one is perfect. And then, if you can accept that, and be ok with that, than you’ll naturally attract those who in a way, reflect this belief; that is, someone who enforces that love you feel for yourself. And likewise, when you finally enter a relationship, then the person your with, will feel the love they have for themselves, through your love for them…through your eyes. And in that way, the two of you act as mirrors to each other…each reflecting and supporting this truthout through life.

I remember reading once somewhere, and it struck me as very beautiful and also very true…that the person we love, is the one who allows us to see ourselves through God’s eyes…that is, perfect and whole…

Of course if you don’t love yourself (and I don’t mean loving yourself in the modern way, or the way current society seems to mean (like some kind of ego-feed))…but if a person doesn’t love himself or herself…than they are essentially running from who they are, and therefore will often “chase” those who aren’t good for them because in that *other person *they’re trying to attain that love which they don’t have for themselves. I feel this is often why we see people seeking out those who have attributes or characteristics we feel we “lack” - like perhaps the older man with the much younger female (he feels he lost his youth so he finds it in her as being with the younger woman makes him feel young again too) - or the woman who seeks out the man with power does so because she feels or at one time felt somehow powerless or insignificant, so being with him makes her feel more important - etc…

But these are transient things, and will never be fulfilling. Strangely, with these types of relationships, people often find themselves pursuing them feverdly, like they’re some kind of drug - an infatuation or desperation…I think that’s because people in these types of situations are *so lacking * love in their lives, so lacking it (and here I don’t mean in the romantic sense of love, but simply feeling “loved” by family or friends or parents, etc.) - that they chase after it like a starved animal.

But oddly, in reality…they’re not running towards someone or something, but rather from something…and that something, is themselves…because they were never able to embrace themselves wholly and realize that who they are is simply…enough…there is no lack…nothing was ever missing…because they are…and what they are, is enough.

Absolutely!

 

[BlueSprite]

BlueSprite, one of the things that makes it harder to walk is all the stories about dedication and persereverance and work and it turns out some of our forefathers really had to do some repeat coaxing and things dragged on for a long time.

This leads to a bit of a romantic mini-paradigm, in which the woman is allowed and expected to display a range of behaviours ranging from spoilt to small-scale sociopathic. Which supposedly makes the pursuit and the reward more exciting. Be a spoilt brat, treat the men like dirt, behave like you’re the centre of the world, choose one of the idiots in the end to acknowledge his presence grudgingly and then be surprised that he’s making your life miserable for the next 50 years. Figures. But I’m digressing.

On the other hand, some people sometimes find themselves in a bit of a challenge from life, we aren’t always at our best and we’re all fallible, so it’s hard to cross people out for not being perfectly responsive.

Hope I’m making some sense. It’s been a rough couple of days in terms of sleep etc.

Yes I know what you mean…and I think that’s due to “cultural” influences - the idea that a woman should play “hard to get” or have lots of say (not to be antiquated here), “suitors” - in this regard the woman is getting her ego fed and the man may in a sense “value” her more because she’s “hard to get” or there is a lot of competition…in the modern world people refer to this type of behavior as “playing games.” In the days of knights and kings…and even on through the 1900’s and today many still hold to these uh, beliefs…and again, I feel they are “cultural.”

And today’s world is so darn hard to navigate because we’re trying to wade through the varying tides of culture and tradition and science and religion…and everything is changing and in flux…we have so many cultures now which we interact with on a day-to-day basis just in the U.S. alone - and with those cultures are carried varying belief systems…etc…and then there is the influence of the media and “popular culture” which has a huge influence over people’s minds…so it’s just all very difficult to figure out and know which way to turn.

But this is why I, personally, find our faith to be so profound…and that is because it cuts through all the nonsense and reveals the truth…the heart of the matter…what is important. Ultimately, it’s about love. And love in the truest sense of the word - unconditional love. Love which to us, oftentimes makes no sense. Love which isn’t “rational” - which isn’t about “fairness” or a balancing of the scales…but is unifying, glorioius…transcendent.

I heard an excellent semon on youtube the other day from a Franciscan priest…it was all about Mercy vs. Justice…and how God is about Mercy…not Justice. And how to our minds this often seems “irrational” or “incomprehensible” - that is, in our world…we often hold the philosophy of “you did this to me, than I must do this to you” - but that’s our minds…and our way of thinking…and as we’re only human, and we can’t always comprehend God’s infinite wisdom…I dunno…I’m not doing a great job describing this but you can probably do a search for it on youtube or I can post the link here if anyone is interested (we can post links like that here right?).

But I thought of this sermon, and how in a way, it parallels relationships…how these days people all seem to want this for that…you give me this, I’ll give you that…as if a relationship were some kind of trade…and many cultures hold to this belief as do much of modern society. But as Catholics, we’re meant to echo God right? To try and do as he would…and that requires sacrifice. But none of these tenents are reflected in the modern world…or even in some of the things we mention about the old world…because wanting to feed one’s ego goes against everything the Catholic church teaches…we’re to learn of humilty. To learn of acceptance. To learn to see the world as God sees it. And we can’t see the world as it truly is, when it’s viewed through the eyes of our own self-absorbtion.

I dunno…I’m probably getting way off track here. But yeah, lol, to sum it up…I do know what you mean though and where you’re coming from.

 

[keephope]

Wow! I initially came to CAF to find out how to heal heartache and have been searching the threads to help find out about me in that regard. I come upon this thread and have a headache after reading the posts. Some thought provoking posts and insight. Now I wonder if I am an emotionally unavailable (EU) person or just cautious. I wonder how a person can immediately identify whether another person is EU without being with them for a significant amount of time. I tend to agree with the post(s) that say that EU might be a long term state of mind or condition, or a transient state of mind or circumstance as a reaction to a particular person.
Just Wondering

 

[chevalier]

Yes, definitely it can be either permanent or just temporary. Ironically, after starting this thread some two months ago it seems I’ve got myself in the temporary kind right now.

 

[anon87900350]

I think the advantage of the emotionally unavailable person is that I do not have to show them my true feelings.

You hit the nail on the head. I didn’t fully realize or accept that I did this until recently. I had convinced myself that I cared about an emotionally(and physically) unavailable person because I felt close to him, and wanted to know more about him, but I couldn’t understand why I kept trying when it didn’t bear any fruit, and why I couldn’t convince myself it wouldn’t work despite all the odds against it. I think the key was that he never wanted to know much about me. All our conversations were centered around him, and my thoughts were always on what he thought of me vs. what I thought of him. It didn’t matter what I really thought of him as long as he didn’t scrutinize me, and I was the person giving the love, while he was on the receiving end. I felt normal giving love, because in my otherwise isolated existence, I couldn’t bring myself close enough to someone to give them love. I would have ran away had he truly cared about me. However, I would have these occasional outbursts with him when he would push me to the limit, because my self-deception about loving him would come to the fore. But sure enough, I would push it aside after some time, and pursue it again to keep myself deceived, and ‘normal’. This was a key piece of understanding that truly freed me because until then I was hurt by this person’s regard for me, and realizing that I subconsciously orchestrated it to be just that way helped me to let go.

Also as others have said in a different manner, if person X hurt me in the past and never apologized, I date someone who will hurt me the same way hoping to get them to apologize so I can win over person X or at least fool myself into thinking it didn’t happen.

Also, I was treated a certain way as a child (details not necessary) so when men treat me a certain negative way, I didn’t know at the time it was wrong.

This may sound like a cliche, but it is so true. I was physically abused by a male peer when I was a child for some years, and coming from a patriarchal society where being an emotionally unavailable male is accepted, and often the norm, I just understood it as how men are.

CM

 

[BlueEyedLady]

You hit the nail on the head. I didn’t fully realize or accept that I did this until recently. I had convinced myself that I cared about an emotionally(and physically) unavailable person because I felt close to him, and wanted to know more about him, but I couldn’t understand why I kept trying when it didn’t bear any fruit, and why I couldn’t convince myself it wouldn’t work despite all the odds against it. I think the key was that he never wanted to know much about me. All our conversations were centered around him, and my thoughts were always on what he thought of me vs. what I thought of him. It didn’t matter what I really thought of him as long as he didn’t scrutinize me, and I was the person giving the love, while he was on the receiving end. I felt normal giving love, because in my otherwise isolated existence, I couldn’t bring myself close enough to someone to give them love. I would have ran away had he truly cared about me. However, I would have these occasional outbursts with him when he would push me to the limit, because my self-deception about loving him would come to the fore. But sure enough, I would push it aside after some time, and pursue it again to keep myself deceived, and ‘normal’. This was a key piece of understanding that truly freed me because until then I was hurt by this person’s regard for me, and realizing that I subconsciously orchestrated it to be just that way helped me to let go.

This may sound like a cliche, but it is so true. I was physically abused by a male peer when I was a child for some years, and coming from a patriarchal society where being an emotionally unavailable male is accepted, and often the norm, I just understood it as how men are.

CM

Welcome to the forums!

Just a heads up, it’s against forum rules to revive old threads because so many people are no longer active or have been banned.

But please, feel free to start your own thread and the community will offer what advice they can.

 

[marymary1975]

I think there are many reasons but a majority of situations fall into twomain reasons. One is what I call “the rescuer complex.”. It is a subconscious need to be with someone emotionally unavailable, emotionally damaged or problematic personalities to try to recipe the person. This is very common among women. This is exactly where the issue of “I will change him”. For some reason that I don’t know the “rescuer” has a subconscious need to be with a person that has some kind of issue, and has some subconscious need for the “issue”. The person feels validation when trying to “rescue” the other person hence subconsciously that person will constantly be attracted to emotionally unavailable because she or he feels validation through “rescuing” others. I had this problem and it took lots of therapy to help me to get rid of this recuer complex. After I was finally to overcome it was impressive how the people I dated changed.

The other thing that I think causes this is because is probably a behavior that the person observed during their childhood either in their household or in people close to them. Most human tend to replicate behavior that they observed in their close wnvieoment as children. If a woman had a father who was emotionally unavailable, chances are that for most of her adult life she is going to look for emotionally unavailable men. Somehow as a kid she learned that was the way relationships were and got used to it so even if she subconciusly know that the relationship is not going anywhere her brain is used to it and she subconsciously seek dir that kind of relationship.

 

[Sarcelle]

There’re a few reasons I can think of.

1. 
   *]People want what they can’t have.
   *]People who are emotionally unavailable are usually those who have many choices, so they’re in no hurry to make a decision.
   *]Women tend to think they can change a man, and turn it into a project of sorts.
   *]And sometimes it’s just an ego thing.

1. 
   I would like to address the point of women trying to change men.
   
   Women have grown up being bombarded with the idea that the love of a good woman is all that is needed to turn a bad boy good. This is the staple of many a romance novel.
   
   Pure.balderdash, I say. The love of a good woman may play a part but the man would have to want to change. Even then it is a struggle for both.

 

[Sarcelle]

BlueSprite, one of the things that makes it harder to walk is all the stories about dedication and persereverance and work and it turns out some of our forefathers really had to do some repeat coaxing and things dragged on for a long time.

This leads to a bit of a romantic mini-paradigm, in which the woman is allowed and expected to display a range of behaviours ranging from spoilt to small-scale sociopathic. Which supposedly makes the pursuit and the reward more exciting. Be a spoilt brat, treat the men like dirt, behave like you’re the centre of the world, choose one of the idiots in the end to acknowledge his presence grudgingly and then be surprised that he’s making your life miserable for the next 50 years. Figures. But I’m digressing.

On the other hand, some people sometimes find themselves in a bit of a challenge from life, we aren’t always at our best and we’re all fallible, so it’s hard to cross people out for not being perfectly responsive.

Hope I’m making some sense. It’s been a rough couple of days in terms of sleep etc.

For a woman to display the range of behaviors of merely spoiled to borderline sociopathic, she must have the physical beauty to back it up. Beauty does cover up for a.variety of sins. This is true for both men and women. The more physically attractive someone is, the more they get more of a leeway with regards to how they act.

Homely men and women do not have that luxury.

 

[Sarcelle]

Have you read De Rougement’s Love in the Western World?

It appears that the Western European and US view of love has been influenced by dualistic ideas.

It all started with Provencal troubadours and their poetry of ‘courtly love,’ in which they sang the praises of an ideally virtuous and beautiful lady, who was invariably in a mundane, arranged, loveless marriage with someone else. They never hoped to receive anything from her, and she was completely unavailable. They saw her rarely, if ever, and the most they could expect was to be sent on a quest for her and receive, say, a ring in token of her gratitude and favor. There was no consummation, physical or emotional.

De Rougement believes this poetry was at least partly an allegory of the dualist Cathars’ relationship with (their) God. It was a yearning for self-annihilation in returning to the distant, indifferent, utterly transcendent Source of light from whom all the spirits were snatched into the evil material world. This system of belief scorned marriage and the drudgery that came with it, especially raising children. They cherished extreme, rapturous experiences, taking one from this prosaic world, and cultivated a sentiment of yearning for the unattainable other-worldly nothingness. Or something.

It appears this poetry and this sentiment has been increasingly influencing us - some revivals of the sentiment include Romanticism and Modernism - as more and more people consume narratives. And then there were those, now already ancient, romantic movies. Difficulties, obstacles, heartache, which all end in a kiss.

The moral of all these seems to be: true love has to hurt, to be difficult; the ‘One’ has to be elusive, mysterious, dark; but when you succeed, you enter a mystical union that will take you far from this boring, insignificant dungeon-world. Far from everyday life as you know it now, far from the drudgery, far above those average middle-class sheep blissfully trapped in it.

And stable, sane, nice people are boring and mundane in this view of the world. On the other hand, narcissists, messed up people, abusers, alcoholics, drug addicts and the like do just fine. They will put you through hell, they will elude you, you will suffer and never be just… content.

People can break free from this century-long mass hypnosis, but it isn’t easy. True, orthodox Christianity helps - and in this I include C. S. Lewis, who wrote in his *Mere **Christianity *against the ideal of constant romantic infatuation, although not ‘being in love’ itself.

Great post.

Tied into it the chivalric notion of a knight and his Lady. The lady is married and unavailable and the relationship between the knight and the lady is platonic. The knight goes on to an impossible quest with a token of the lady’s affection. To the knight, the lady is his guiding star.

I remember reading one of Tolkien’s letter where he disagrees with the concept of the lady as a guiding star. Women are fellow survivors of a shipwreck. Fallen and just as error prone as men.