"A troop of porcupines is milling about on a cold winter's day. In order to keep from freezing, the animals move closer together. Just as they are close enough to huddle, however, they start to poke each other with their quills. In order to stop the pain, they spread out, lose the advantage of commingling, and again begin to shiver. This sends them back in search of one and other, and the cycle repeats as they struggle to find a comfortable distance between entanglement and freezing." Arthur Shopenhauer
We are wired for love and connection. Without it, as babies, we don't survive. Without it, as adults, we can't thrive. Self actualization simply doesn't happen inside a vacuum. We need others in order to be and share our best. While in the 1950's psychologists still believed that children shouldn't be coddled, nowadays scientists are certain of the detrimental effect that lack of warmth and closeness has not only in childhood but in adulthood as well. Conventional wisdom held that mothers who coddled their offspring created clingy, overdependent youngsters who grew up into incompetent adults. The proper way to rear children was to have an antiseptic, rational distance. In those days, for example, parents weren't allowed to stay in the hospital with their sick sons and daughters; they had to drop the children off at the door.
The troubling effects of this were documented by John Bowlby. It was he who revolutionized this area of psychology by introducing "Attachment theory", which was initially ridiculed and despised by his peers. This theory supports a child's need for safe, ongoing physical and emotional closeness. In the 1990s this theory was broadened to include adults: having a secure connection to our loved ones is empowering. It allows us to thrive.
And so we have an innate desire for community and connection. As the porcupines in Shopenhauer's fable, however, closeness comes with the risk of getting hurt. We prick each other with our figurative quills, and then we retreat to keep a safe distance. To create a sense of emotional safety, we tend to do one of two things: either we strive for closeness at our own detriment, not setting any boundaries and allowing ourselves to be treated badly for the sake of keeping the connection. We won't say no because we fear abandonment. Alternatively, we set up walls and fences, not letting anyone get close, in an effort to keep ourselves safe. Accepting help is out of the question and those softer emotions like intimacy, love, and care are kept at bay.
Neither strategy gets us what we truly want. It creates a false sense of security that eventually will lose its effectiveness. Shopenhauer saw this dance of separateness and closeness as an inevitable dichotomy. I don't agree with him. I strongly believe it is possible to synergize the two and build our connections on "effective dependency". It means being separate (independent) enough to truly bond and allow yourself to be dependent on someone else. This certainly doesn't mean you'll never get hurt. It simply means that you'll have a healthy way of relating to this hurt, so that your emotional safety comes from within first and foremost. You fully accept that risk, because you can choose with whom to connect and with whom not.
My belief in this synergy did not automatically mean I experienced it in my own life. In fact, it has been quite the contrary. I've struggled with maintaining my autonomy and feeling truly connected at the same time. For a long time I was stuck in either feeling completely true to myself, yet alone, or in deep connection with others yet losing myself in the meantime. My desire for connection was so great that I would forget (or, to be honest, flat out refuse) to set conditions to the relationship, whether it be a friendship, love relationship, or even in my work. If the other person wasn't carrying their weight in our relating, I would pick up the slack for them.
A great example of this happened with a friend of mine in high school who lived about 5 miles away from me. Those miles always seemed a lot farther for her than they did for me. So I ended up cycling her way 98% of the time, which was metaphorical of our connection. That kind of lob-sidedness in any kind of relationship won't hold forever. Unless, of course, you're willing to lose yourself in the meantime.
My love relationships weren't much different. In my wanting for others what they want for themselves, I would simply lose connection with what I wanted and needed for me. Then, when I would eventually awaken to that again, I found myself in a situation where the other person wouldn't reciprocate nor was willing to extend themselves. In fact, as I started to take care of myself first, they'd feel betrayed by my sudden "lack of care".
The pain that came from that has led me to explore and uncover the ingredients of how to love yourself and your relationships. How can we be an expression of our authentic essence and truly connect with those we care about? What needs to be present in a connection for it to be able to flourish and strengthen over time? I started reading books on boundaries, on connections and relationships, and all things concerning authenticity and autonomy. I've spoken to countless of people, got coaching, and coached others on this topic. Through all of it, I started to notice patterns. The same essential ingredients seemed to be presented in everything I read or heard, and experienced in my own life. And so my research, my work with my clients, and experimentation in my personal life has led me to a 7-step system that focuses on building a strong inner bond from which we can grow sustainable, loving connections.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/7358177
We are wired for love and connection. Without it, as babies, we don't survive. Without it, as adults, we can't thrive. Self actualization simply doesn't happen inside a vacuum. We need others in order to be and share our best. While in the 1950's psychologists still believed that children shouldn't be coddled, nowadays scientists are certain of the detrimental effect that lack of warmth and closeness has not only in childhood but in adulthood as well. Conventional wisdom held that mothers who coddled their offspring created clingy, overdependent youngsters who grew up into incompetent adults. The proper way to rear children was to have an antiseptic, rational distance. In those days, for example, parents weren't allowed to stay in the hospital with their sick sons and daughters; they had to drop the children off at the door.
The troubling effects of this were documented by John Bowlby. It was he who revolutionized this area of psychology by introducing "Attachment theory", which was initially ridiculed and despised by his peers. This theory supports a child's need for safe, ongoing physical and emotional closeness. In the 1990s this theory was broadened to include adults: having a secure connection to our loved ones is empowering. It allows us to thrive.
And so we have an innate desire for community and connection. As the porcupines in Shopenhauer's fable, however, closeness comes with the risk of getting hurt. We prick each other with our figurative quills, and then we retreat to keep a safe distance. To create a sense of emotional safety, we tend to do one of two things: either we strive for closeness at our own detriment, not setting any boundaries and allowing ourselves to be treated badly for the sake of keeping the connection. We won't say no because we fear abandonment. Alternatively, we set up walls and fences, not letting anyone get close, in an effort to keep ourselves safe. Accepting help is out of the question and those softer emotions like intimacy, love, and care are kept at bay.
Neither strategy gets us what we truly want. It creates a false sense of security that eventually will lose its effectiveness. Shopenhauer saw this dance of separateness and closeness as an inevitable dichotomy. I don't agree with him. I strongly believe it is possible to synergize the two and build our connections on "effective dependency". It means being separate (independent) enough to truly bond and allow yourself to be dependent on someone else. This certainly doesn't mean you'll never get hurt. It simply means that you'll have a healthy way of relating to this hurt, so that your emotional safety comes from within first and foremost. You fully accept that risk, because you can choose with whom to connect and with whom not.
My belief in this synergy did not automatically mean I experienced it in my own life. In fact, it has been quite the contrary. I've struggled with maintaining my autonomy and feeling truly connected at the same time. For a long time I was stuck in either feeling completely true to myself, yet alone, or in deep connection with others yet losing myself in the meantime. My desire for connection was so great that I would forget (or, to be honest, flat out refuse) to set conditions to the relationship, whether it be a friendship, love relationship, or even in my work. If the other person wasn't carrying their weight in our relating, I would pick up the slack for them.
A great example of this happened with a friend of mine in high school who lived about 5 miles away from me. Those miles always seemed a lot farther for her than they did for me. So I ended up cycling her way 98% of the time, which was metaphorical of our connection. That kind of lob-sidedness in any kind of relationship won't hold forever. Unless, of course, you're willing to lose yourself in the meantime.
My love relationships weren't much different. In my wanting for others what they want for themselves, I would simply lose connection with what I wanted and needed for me. Then, when I would eventually awaken to that again, I found myself in a situation where the other person wouldn't reciprocate nor was willing to extend themselves. In fact, as I started to take care of myself first, they'd feel betrayed by my sudden "lack of care".
The pain that came from that has led me to explore and uncover the ingredients of how to love yourself and your relationships. How can we be an expression of our authentic essence and truly connect with those we care about? What needs to be present in a connection for it to be able to flourish and strengthen over time? I started reading books on boundaries, on connections and relationships, and all things concerning authenticity and autonomy. I've spoken to countless of people, got coaching, and coached others on this topic. Through all of it, I started to notice patterns. The same essential ingredients seemed to be presented in everything I read or heard, and experienced in my own life. And so my research, my work with my clients, and experimentation in my personal life has led me to a 7-step system that focuses on building a strong inner bond from which we can grow sustainable, loving connections.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/7358177
No comments:
Post a Comment