Monday, 16 April 2012

The injured lover's hell, the green eyed monster...


"Born in love but propelled by rage, jealousy is a complex relational experience. It is a
visceral fear of loss, a set of paradoxical feelings and thoughts, an action and a reaction. Milton referred to it as the ‘‘injured lover’s hell,’’ Shakespeare, as the ‘‘green eyed monster’’ that destroys love and annihilates the beloved person. The 19th century Brazilian writer Machado de Assis described it as a ‘‘doubt,’’ a twilight between fantasy and reality, that drives a person into madness"

So, while going through some articles online I came across this one, and I found the definition breathtaking... Not only is it so poetic it makes it sound beautiful in an odd way, but I believe it defines that feeling so accurately I could never match it.
At one point, before I started this new relationship I'm in, I thought I had overcome that feeling and was rid of it for good - I couldn't have been more wrong... And yet, who's to say that some jealousy isn't healthy? Looking back I have come to realize I have only stopped feeling jealous altogether when I am not afraid I will lose the person I love - this can either mean that I don't really care or that I'm being arrogant.
At one point I was in a relationship with someone who I was pretty sure wouldn't leave me, no matter what I did. My indifference towards his absence was proportional to the intensity of the happiness that relationship brought me - in simpler words, I didn't care much if he left because he wasn't bringing much into my life anyway. 
Now, how do people normally react when they're jealous? Well, the article I'm quoting goes on:

The experience of jealousy tends
to arise without warning at a particular moment when one partner behaves in a way
that stirs up a fear of betrayal in the other. To manage the anxieties engendered, the
jealous partner may become sullen, inquisitive, or aggressive.


Ok, so I'm interested in the partner "stirring up" a fear of betrayal... This, of course, does not mean that they actually betrayed anyone, they just disturbed a sleeping monster that was already there! Like the author says "Some of the vulnerabilities that typically underlie jealousy are: a need to be recognized as the most special person in the life of the partner, fears of abandonment and betrayal, and feelings of inadequacy in which the person feels unattractive or unworthy". Are you relating to any of this yet?

The experience of the jealous person resembles a trance-like state characterized by
intrusive fantasies and fears, compulsiveness, and irrational associations.

I love that, a "trance-like" state. Have you ever found yourself going on a jealous rant while inside your head you're like "but this is stupid, I'm being silly"... And yet, there's no way to stop it once it gets going...


The French
philosopher Roland Barthes speaks of the contradictions involved: ‘‘As a jealous man,
I suffer four times over: because I am jealous, because I blame myself for being so,
because I fear that my jealousy will wound the other, because I allow myself to be
subject to a banality: I suffer from being excluded, from being aggressive, from being
crazy, and from being common’’


And one ends up having an internal battle on top of the one going on with their partner, stuck in an ambivalence that seems to eat him up.
The article goes on, explaining how this can be treated... But it doesn't mean that everyone's going to pull an Othelo on their partner just because they have wandering eyes!
I prefer to put a more positive spin on this. When jealousy is controlled (not violent or obsessive), it can show the person they are loved and cherished - I'm sure we all like to feel like someone appreciates us enough to not want to lose us. Of course, if this turns into incessant questioning, passive-aggressive behavior and meaningless fights, it stops being good for the relationship.
So, yeah, jealousy is irrational, it can turn love into rage in seconds and is more related to what one has going on in his own head than what is really happening. But most of us can't make it go away entirely, the best we can hope for is to learn to manage it, identify its absurdity and work through it with our partner... Because, in the end, it is just love expressed in a not-so-functional way and it needs only be set back on track.

SCHEINKMAN, M. (2010). Disarming Jealousy in Couples Relationships: A Multidimensional Approach SCHEINKMAN & WERNECK. Family Process, 49(4), 486-502.

Tuesday, 3 April 2012

Letting go versus bear-hugging someone to death

Lately I've understood this saying, perhaps truly for the first time. If you love someone, let them go... Well, you know the rest.

I've been reflecting on the idea of 'holding on to someone'... When I try to picture it, it's like that person is trying to run away and you're stopping them, grabbing on to them for dear life, because it feels like letting go would mean not seeing them again. But, how much satisfaction can one possibly get from achieving 'love' like that? Forcing someone to stay despite what they may want? Also, when you hold someone too tight, you mostly end up suffocating them.
I am the kind of person who (and perhaps this is a cultural thing, but I'll get to that on some other post), when I start dating someone, I spend as much time as I can with that person. And only in the past few years did I learn that when someone says 'I need some space' it doesn't necessarily mean they don't want to be with me or they want to go hunting for someone else...

I have especially grasped the concept that, when you love someone, if you let them go they won't necessarily run away; I mean, why would they? Someone who loves you is with you because they want to be with you, not because you're holding on to them.

In short, now I think that if you love someone, you should let them go (even if just as an experiment)... They will probably stay in the same place they were, close to you, showing you that they have more than one reason to be there... And if they do run away, you're better off - there's no point in trying to force someone to stay since, eventually, they will find a way to escape anyway.

Sunday, 1 April 2012

Muegano - Bearing the distance.

So, this is a typical Mexican candy (muégano). It's little flour squares dipped in caramel and stuck together. It is also what a typical Mexican family looks like; so much, in fact, that we would call them a "Muégano family". This means that it is a family whose members are ALWAYS together and do EVERYTHING together... Of course, this also applies to friends... And couples.

Trying to read more books related to my real profession (Psychology) I happened to come across Bowlby's theory of  "Optimum Distance" - and while this may not have been a new concept for me, I saw it in a new way.

So, this theory explains that a child will always venture to walk some distance away from his or her mother up to a point. Children experiment to see how far they can go without feeling separation anxiety and, when reaching that limit, they go back to their mother to get their sense of security back (kind of like recharging it) before giving it another go. "Optimum Distance" refers to how far a child can go from their mother without feeling said anxiety. This happens as long as the child can be sure that the mother will always return (or will be easily found) after being apart from a certain amount of time. This allows the child to develop a basic security that, despite not being there, the mother will not disappear and will return when needed.

While I do not really believe in determinism in terms of how one cannot escape the consequences of our childhood, I think this can be applied quite easily to how we relate to a romantic interest...

Some couples develop a specific dependence on each other because they are afraid that distance will mean that the other person will disappear... Or at least whatever feelings they have might.

This may sound insane but it really isn't. It depends on how much they can trust that the other person will be there when they come back. Someone who is always threatening with "if you do that again, I will leave you", or disappears without warning at random intervals, fosters an insecurity in the other person that they might go away at any time. The frequency of the meetings is not what is important, but rather the security that they will meet again and all the things they share will be there when they do.

I have found that, in Mexico, it is very common for this 'Optimum Distance' to be very short... And, considering how most people grow in a household where all members of the family seem to be stuck together by some apparently sweet but incarcerating caramel layer, it really isn't much of a wonder.

As much as you love someone, you cannot (and should not) be together 24/7, we all need our space and, without such, there wouldn't be much to share with your partner either. It's all about being able to trust that the other person will be there and learning to negotiate that Optimum Distance at which both can feel free to continue with their lives without feeling like the other person is so far that they cannot see them anymore.

It is awesome when you get to a point in a relationship when either can ask for some space without feeling guilty or anxious... It gives the couple a sense of freedom and independence which, far from creating a gap between them, strengthens their bond since their relationship does not depend only on being together, but on something beyond that. Being able to have their separate lives and share them to create something new.