 |
| 10-17-10. Michelle, Anastasia, and Jean. Caye Caulker, Belize. |
Hey my peeps,
I have been seriously lagging in the posting department, and I sincerely apologize to all of you!
Yesterday, I went on a short 20 minute boat ride to one of my favorite little islands here in Belize: Caye Caulker!
I took a lot of time to myself while I was on the island, just contemplating the direction of my life. I've been having a difficult time recently, in the love department particularly.
My best friend Todd, sent me an email about a week ago. Within this email, were 3 scanned chapters from one of his reading requirements for a current college class. The book is "Passionate Marriage" written by David Schnarch, Ph.D.
Within this reading, it discussed the concept of two levels of intimacy, more specifically in regards to facing conflict within relationships. (Intimacy is defined as: a close, familiar, and usually affectionate or loving personal relationship with another person or group, from dictionary.com) Schnarch claims that intimacy in relationships is developed "through conflict, self-validation, and unilateral disclosure," and NOT through "accumulated experiences of mutual trust, acceptance, empathy, validation, and reciprocal disclosure," as many marriage therapists claim (p.103). These two differing perspectives are those of self-validated intimacy and other- validated intimacy, respectively.
Now, before your perverted minds wander,
Other-validated intimacy is the over-dependence upon your partner for your own validation and approval, "the expectation of acceptance, empathy, validation, or reciprocal disclosure from one's partner" (p. 106). When conflict arises and you face an "emotional gridlock" as Schnarch calls it, other-validated intimacy occurs when there is low differentiation (the ability to maintain sense of self when pressure to conform).
This is the need to focus on self-presentation, rather than self-disclosure. When you need a reflected sense of self and acceptance from your partner, your priority becomes getting the response you want. This is adaption to reduce our anxiety about the differences our partner has. However, this never provides the security and acceptance that the other-validated individual craves, because the partner never really knows the genuine self. Additionally, other-validated intimacy allows for one partner to manipulate the others' reality. One person's happiness is dependent upon the other.
"Sounds" like: "I'll tell you about myself, but only if you then tell me about yourself. If you don't, I won't either. But I want to, so you have to. I'll go first and then you'll be obligated to disclose- it's only fair. And if I go first, you have to make me feel secure. I need to be able to trust you!"
Self-validated intimacy involves providing support for yourself while letting yourself be known. It is reliant upon "a person maintaining his/her own sense of identity and self-worth when disclosing, with no expectation of acceptance or reciprocity from the partner" (p. 106) This is dependent upon one's ability to maintain a clear sense of oneself when loved ones are pressuring for conforming and sameness. This involves the relationship with yourself, as well as your relationship with your partner.
"Sounds" like: "I don't expect you to agree with me' you weren't put on the face of the earth to vailidate and reinforce me. But I want you to love me- and you can't really do that if you don't know me. I don't want your rejection- but I must face that possibility if I'm ever to feel accepted or secure with you. It's time to show myself to you and confront my separateness and mortality. One day when we are no longer together on this earth, I want to know you knew me."
Although these two forms of intimacy are brief examples and are explained much clearer in the book, I've realized that what I like to call "codependency" is more like other-validated intimacy. I don't always seek out validation from others when in friendship roles. However, when in romantic relationships, it is a very different story.
I guess I've always seen intimacy and reciprocation as synonymous. I've shared the belief that therapists and marriage couselors have had, about empathy, understanding, willingness to compromise, listening, acceptance, validation and reciprocal disclosure- as fundamental ingredients to healthy, successful relationships.
There's my problem! Intimacy is NOT synonymous with reciprocation!
When "push comes to shove" and conflict arises in relationships, I've had the tendency to try to alleviate my anxiety by obliging to the other person, only ensuring more dependency upon that other person for acceptance. This occurs in other-validated intimacy relationships, and within low-differentiated people. (People that have a difficult time maintaining sense of self when pressured to conform). I have always encouraged and pushed honesty in relationships- and have been under the delusion that if I was being honest, open, sharing, understanding, empathetic, and willing to compromise, the other person would/could/should be. I have been confusing reciprocity with intimacy the entire time!
"You have to love yourself first, before you can love anyone else", has never made any sense to me. I think its because I had a definition problem. My definition of love has always included intimacy, affection and reciprocation.
However- Love, intimacy, affection, and reciprocity are all separate things!
Examples that each are separate:
- I can love you without loving myself, but I cannot be intimate with you.
- I love my close [male] friends, am insecure, but will not enter into a "more serious" relationship with them
- I can love you while loving myself, but it doesn't mean you have to reciprocate the love.
- In a romantic relationship, I can love you, I can love myself, but cannot require you to love me back
- I can be affectionate with you, without being intimate.
- I can show you physical affection without wanting to be close with you (get to know you).
- I can be affectionate and intimate with you, without loving you.
- I can show you physical affection and be open with you, as far as who I am. We can bond and get to know each other, but I can do so without loving you.
- I can be affectionate and intimate with you, while loving you, but not loving myself.
- I can show physical affection, disclose selective information to you (reflected sense of self), love you, but not be secure with who I am and love myself.
Maybe the above can show a little clearer what scenarios run through my head, and why I might have been a little confused.... :)
AFFECTION ≠ LOVE ≠ RECIPROCITY ≠ INTIMACY
Ultimately, in order to have a long lasting relationship, you must be able to challenge yourself, your own beliefs, and have the courage to stand up to someone you care about (or love), in order to maintain your sense of self. Ironically, the author stresses over and over again, that as partners move away from other-validated intimacy and towards self-validated intimacy, the partners receive more validation and acceptance from the other, spontaneously.
I hope this helped some of you like it helped me.
Anastasia
No comments:
Post a Comment