Closeness and Distance - the Persuer and the Distancer.
Originally posted by bridgeoutahead, and reposted kindly with permission - posting because this is too useful a set of insights to leave quiet. (and yes, I mean you)
We all need: affirmation, support, security, love, and approval
While also needing: independence, autonomy, freedom, and self-direction.
These two circles of needs look like opposites. We need both closeness/togetherness AND distance/separation.
I recently read something in my homework assignment that has stuck in my brain:
"We are typically attracted to people who have the same needs for closeness or distance that we do....each person keeps the balance by playing the role of persuer or distancer....if one role chnages, the other usually changes too to keep things in balance.
I agree that the lovers in my life generally had the same needs for closeness and distance. In my marriage, we often expressed it the *same* way - the sameness is a lot of what kept that marriage going for as long as it lasted. But in the end, that emphasis on sameness was only a temporary glue - we spent so much time trying to be *the same*, that I know I lost sight of who *I* was. I imagine he did too.
The apparent need for sameness can be very strong. When I've felt anxious about differences between my lovers and myself, I've tried to get my lovers to change. There are four basic responses to my request/demand: comply, rebel, attack, or cut off. During the course of my marriage, I only ever saw comply and, in the last few years, cut off (subtly). It's only now that I'm facing, head on, the other three (and cut off without any subtlty)- rebel, attack, and cut off. These unknown responses are new and scary - and because I don't like either of them much (they don't yield me the results I'd expect!) I've felt compelled to take a good hard look at my actions, the results, and what I can do to get the results I *do* want instead. And that has lead me back to the persuer/distancer dance routine I've been practicing for years.
Not all of the lovers in my life have acted the same or expressed th same needs in the same ways.
I need closeness - I'm the persuer. Persuers are people who need people are are motivated by fear of abandonment. I can remember often asking of my lovers "talk to me more!" and hearing "leave me alone more" in reply.
I have routinely and predictably sought out and invested myself in intimate relationships with distancers whose need for distance roughly equals my need for closeness. Distancers are people who have trouble being themselves when they are (too) close to others. They feel suffocated and want to do things their own way. They are motivated by fear of engulfment.
In my intimate relationships, I've often found myself "fighting" over this closeness/distance issue, without even knowing I was doing so! As I continue to demand more closeness, and my lovers demand more distance, neither of us have recognized that we're both helping to maintain our closeness/distance comfort levels. As I've wanted more, they've wanted the same amount of "more".
And as I've learned to throttle things back a bit and actively want *less* of my current lover, he distances himself LESS in reply. Wow!!!
Part of my homework right now is to read and process a book called "Family Ties that Bind" by Richardson. It's an amazing book that is giving me an introduction to family of origin work.
One of the chapters of the book deals with the dance of closeness and distance. It describes each of the dancers and their characteristics. I'll be damned if I didn't see so much truth in what I've been reading.....
Outwardly independent people are often only psedo-independent. They use distance as a way of conrolling their fears about closeness. They can have great needs for closeness, but have become afraid of it (tied to being afraid of being swallowed up and engulfed in another), that they distance themselves instead. Many who have no apparent need for closeness often choose a partner who insists on closeness because this partner represents the other side of the person's own ambivalance about closeness and distance.
People who distance themselves talk about the lack of support, caring, consideration, respect from the persuer who is nagging, stressing, or hounding them. One of their favourite responses is silence. They withdraw. They also respond with "I don't know" as a way to avoid or draw out an unwanted/uncomfortable close encounter with someone else.
People who need constant closeness and togetherness, (like the person I've been for so many years), have trouble accepting that others are not the same as them (hence the years and years of trying to maintain a sense of sameness in my marriage). I have had much trouble thinking of myself separately from my lovers, and have definitely had trouble expressing how I feel individually.
People who need constant closeness see a real problem with acting with selfish intentions and they often almost martyr themselves for the greater good of the relationship. They espouse the values of love and compassion for others, but often use those things in a manipulative way to get what they want and what they need. They feel responsible for the happiness of others, and if someone in their intimate circle isn't happy, ask the person "What have *I* done wrong?" Because they blame others for their own unhappiness, and are often unwilling to turn the pointed finger back on themselves, they just assume that others will in turn blame them for their own unhappiness. They write negative internal dialogues based on the assumptions of others' feelings and based on owning other people's shit.
So where does this analysis leave me? It leaves me wanting to be more goal-directed instead of relationship-directed. Being goal-directed means that I'd be able to clarify my own values and decide what is important to me. I want to live in a way that is truly expressive to me - my wants, beliefs, values, needs, in both my intimate relationships, as well as all of my relationships - friends, coworkers, etc.
I am learning to express myself in spite of being different from intimate others. It doesn't mean being aggressive by attacking others or using my values to put others down. It also doesn't mean always saying exactly what I think - but having the wisdom and the judgement and the self-worth to know when to speak up. Being goal-directed mans being able to choose how I want to be and not being controlled by the approval or disappoval of others.
Who have I been? Who am I transitioning from?
I've been a relationship-directed person who has been less emotionally mature and secure. I've often depended on others to provide me with a sense of worth and self-esteem. My time and energy has often been spent seeking approval in relationships rather than seeking my own goals and needs. It has often been absolutely critical that people like me and care for me and it's been catastrophic when they don't. I've spent years assuming that people don't like me or care for me, and have been obsessed with getting approval and praise and love. I've been over-sensitive and tend to see signs of rejection in even minor differences between myself and lovers.
I've not been able to make firm distinctions between thinking and feeling. I do well in the work world, or when performing thing-oriented tasks, but people-oriented tasks leave me drained and stressed and upset and feeling bad. I can think of too many times where I've made compromises for the sake of the relationship at the time that I wouldn't make if I had felt more secure about who I am.
Because I have trouble distinguishing between thoughts and feelings, I have assumed that my subjective feelings are an accurate reflection of the actual state of things around me. I've begun to realize that saying things like "I feel that you dismissed me." is not a statement about how I feel. It's an interpretation about the other person's behaviour - the person I'm talking to. When I combine the words "think" and "that", I'm expressing a thought, not a feeling. Feelings are about *me* - they cannot be about someone else! A more accurate feeling statement would look like "When you walked out of the room, I felt dismissed." It takes the other person right out of the equation.
I've been talking that way my entire life. And how I've talked is tied directly to how I've always thought about things and how I've viewed the world around me. Looking back, I've always wanted love and acceptance and care from others and have desparately sought it from lovers that I couldn't be *me* around. I wasn't direct, realistic, or me-focused. Until now, I didn't know there was another way to live.
We all need: affirmation, support, security, love, and approval
While also needing: independence, autonomy, freedom, and self-direction.
These two circles of needs look like opposites. We need both closeness/togetherness AND distance/separation.
I recently read something in my homework assignment that has stuck in my brain:
"We are typically attracted to people who have the same needs for closeness or distance that we do....each person keeps the balance by playing the role of persuer or distancer....if one role chnages, the other usually changes too to keep things in balance.
I agree that the lovers in my life generally had the same needs for closeness and distance. In my marriage, we often expressed it the *same* way - the sameness is a lot of what kept that marriage going for as long as it lasted. But in the end, that emphasis on sameness was only a temporary glue - we spent so much time trying to be *the same*, that I know I lost sight of who *I* was. I imagine he did too.
The apparent need for sameness can be very strong. When I've felt anxious about differences between my lovers and myself, I've tried to get my lovers to change. There are four basic responses to my request/demand: comply, rebel, attack, or cut off. During the course of my marriage, I only ever saw comply and, in the last few years, cut off (subtly). It's only now that I'm facing, head on, the other three (and cut off without any subtlty)- rebel, attack, and cut off. These unknown responses are new and scary - and because I don't like either of them much (they don't yield me the results I'd expect!) I've felt compelled to take a good hard look at my actions, the results, and what I can do to get the results I *do* want instead. And that has lead me back to the persuer/distancer dance routine I've been practicing for years.
Not all of the lovers in my life have acted the same or expressed th same needs in the same ways.
I need closeness - I'm the persuer. Persuers are people who need people are are motivated by fear of abandonment. I can remember often asking of my lovers "talk to me more!" and hearing "leave me alone more" in reply.
I have routinely and predictably sought out and invested myself in intimate relationships with distancers whose need for distance roughly equals my need for closeness. Distancers are people who have trouble being themselves when they are (too) close to others. They feel suffocated and want to do things their own way. They are motivated by fear of engulfment.
In my intimate relationships, I've often found myself "fighting" over this closeness/distance issue, without even knowing I was doing so! As I continue to demand more closeness, and my lovers demand more distance, neither of us have recognized that we're both helping to maintain our closeness/distance comfort levels. As I've wanted more, they've wanted the same amount of "more".
And as I've learned to throttle things back a bit and actively want *less* of my current lover, he distances himself LESS in reply. Wow!!!
Part of my homework right now is to read and process a book called "Family Ties that Bind" by Richardson. It's an amazing book that is giving me an introduction to family of origin work.
One of the chapters of the book deals with the dance of closeness and distance. It describes each of the dancers and their characteristics. I'll be damned if I didn't see so much truth in what I've been reading.....
Outwardly independent people are often only psedo-independent. They use distance as a way of conrolling their fears about closeness. They can have great needs for closeness, but have become afraid of it (tied to being afraid of being swallowed up and engulfed in another), that they distance themselves instead. Many who have no apparent need for closeness often choose a partner who insists on closeness because this partner represents the other side of the person's own ambivalance about closeness and distance.
People who distance themselves talk about the lack of support, caring, consideration, respect from the persuer who is nagging, stressing, or hounding them. One of their favourite responses is silence. They withdraw. They also respond with "I don't know" as a way to avoid or draw out an unwanted/uncomfortable close encounter with someone else.
People who need constant closeness and togetherness, (like the person I've been for so many years), have trouble accepting that others are not the same as them (hence the years and years of trying to maintain a sense of sameness in my marriage). I have had much trouble thinking of myself separately from my lovers, and have definitely had trouble expressing how I feel individually.
People who need constant closeness see a real problem with acting with selfish intentions and they often almost martyr themselves for the greater good of the relationship. They espouse the values of love and compassion for others, but often use those things in a manipulative way to get what they want and what they need. They feel responsible for the happiness of others, and if someone in their intimate circle isn't happy, ask the person "What have *I* done wrong?" Because they blame others for their own unhappiness, and are often unwilling to turn the pointed finger back on themselves, they just assume that others will in turn blame them for their own unhappiness. They write negative internal dialogues based on the assumptions of others' feelings and based on owning other people's shit.
So where does this analysis leave me? It leaves me wanting to be more goal-directed instead of relationship-directed. Being goal-directed means that I'd be able to clarify my own values and decide what is important to me. I want to live in a way that is truly expressive to me - my wants, beliefs, values, needs, in both my intimate relationships, as well as all of my relationships - friends, coworkers, etc.
I am learning to express myself in spite of being different from intimate others. It doesn't mean being aggressive by attacking others or using my values to put others down. It also doesn't mean always saying exactly what I think - but having the wisdom and the judgement and the self-worth to know when to speak up. Being goal-directed mans being able to choose how I want to be and not being controlled by the approval or disappoval of others.
Who have I been? Who am I transitioning from?
I've been a relationship-directed person who has been less emotionally mature and secure. I've often depended on others to provide me with a sense of worth and self-esteem. My time and energy has often been spent seeking approval in relationships rather than seeking my own goals and needs. It has often been absolutely critical that people like me and care for me and it's been catastrophic when they don't. I've spent years assuming that people don't like me or care for me, and have been obsessed with getting approval and praise and love. I've been over-sensitive and tend to see signs of rejection in even minor differences between myself and lovers.
I've not been able to make firm distinctions between thinking and feeling. I do well in the work world, or when performing thing-oriented tasks, but people-oriented tasks leave me drained and stressed and upset and feeling bad. I can think of too many times where I've made compromises for the sake of the relationship at the time that I wouldn't make if I had felt more secure about who I am.
Because I have trouble distinguishing between thoughts and feelings, I have assumed that my subjective feelings are an accurate reflection of the actual state of things around me. I've begun to realize that saying things like "I feel that you dismissed me." is not a statement about how I feel. It's an interpretation about the other person's behaviour - the person I'm talking to. When I combine the words "think" and "that", I'm expressing a thought, not a feeling. Feelings are about *me* - they cannot be about someone else! A more accurate feeling statement would look like "When you walked out of the room, I felt dismissed." It takes the other person right out of the equation.
I've been talking that way my entire life. And how I've talked is tied directly to how I've always thought about things and how I've viewed the world around me. Looking back, I've always wanted love and acceptance and care from others and have desparately sought it from lovers that I couldn't be *me* around. I wasn't direct, realistic, or me-focused. Until now, I didn't know there was another way to live.