Waiting is an 'action' verb

As I wait for the time when I can see my partner again (a month or so... And then another month before I can move in with him) I have gone through many different stages... Mainly unpleasant, frustrating and conflictive ones.

I have always taken pride in the fact that I don't shy away from a challenge - in fact, I like complicated situations that push me to do more than I usually do - I am a hopeless workaholic and I always try to do the best that I can... But when it comes to 'waiting'... Ah, that's my weak spot.

I always thought that waiting was a passive state in which you were helpless, completely at the mercy of the universe without the possibility to actually do anything. I would feel frustrated and anxious, clenching my jaw constantly without realizing it, feeling all my muscles tense and my mind racing, obsessing with all the possible outcomes. No matter what I was doing and despite the fact that I work from dusk till dawn (and later), my hyperactive mind didn't seem to know how to stop.

Today I realized something. Waiting is not a passive thing. Waiting for something is fostering, or rather protecting the hope you harbor for something. Beyond what you do to achieve your goal, sometimes it's more important to keep that hope safe, like a little light inside you. Despair is a very powerful feeling when you let it in, and it will quickly tarnish your hope turning into premature grief. That is what makes waiting hard, the constant thought that your wish won't come true, that all your work will go to waste.

How about making sure it won't?

Even if, in the end, things don't turn out the way you wanted them to, it doesn't mean that you can just sit and watch your hope be swallowed by those dark feelings (frustration, fear, despair). There is something you can do while you wait. Something of utmost importance and that requires action. Keep that hope alive. It's not easy. It takes a lot of work. But it's worth it. And it can be done.

Suspicious minds

Often condemned, rarely appreciated and mostly troublesome, this emotion seems to give lots of people a terrible headache. But, is it 'bad'? Is it 'normal'? Can we control it and does it mean anything if your partner is not jealous of you?

To my mind, it is nearly impossible to trust your partner one hundred percent; I mean, to the point that you are absolutely certain that there is no way that this person would ever stray from the path that has been set. We are all humans and we all make mistakes, so what makes it impossible for your partner not to do so?

In a way, I think that some degree of jealousy is healthy for a relationship. It shows that you are not taken for granted, that your absence would be more than just 'noted'... Then, again, I said 'some degree' of jealousy - when someone is checking your e-mails, texts and can't stand to let you out of their sight, well, that just becomes creepy.

Recently I read an article on this, defining jealousy as the feeling of the threat of real or potential rivals to an existing relationship. Not that any of us are alien to this feeling, but there was something else that caught my eye. These researchers were proposing the idea of two kinds of jealousy: 'reactive jealousy' and 'suspicious jealousy'.

Reactive jealousy happens when there is something external that makes you feel threatened; for example, when your partner has cheated on you. This type of jealousy is characterized by anger, sadness and fear. Whereas suspicious jealousy is more related to insecurity and self-esteem, and is more characterized by anxiety, insecurity and doubt.

While this makes a LOT of sense, it seems odd how different they actually are and what discrepant reactions they provoke. I mean, when someone cheats on you, it is only normal that you'd be pretty pissed off, right? Or sad because the person disappointed you... However, I don't think this is the most common form of jealousy...

Somehow, I think that mostly people (like me) suffer from suspicious jealousy. The idea of what 'might' happen but not because of what the other person could or not do, but rather because our mind creates an infinite number of stories that, while possible, aren't necessarily probable.

So, when you tell somebody you're jealous and that person asks what they can do to help you feel more confident... It's not always something that they can do. Because they can tell you they love you, give you proof they do, even get a tattoo of your face on their butt and it would STILL not help you feel less jealous! Why? Because, if it's suspicious jealousy, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with them!

The only thing that happens in these cases is that the jealous person feels anxious and insecure, which brings stress into the relationship, and their partner feel like nothing they ever do is enough, even when they try to comply with any demands that the jealous partner might make!

In the end, I think that reactive jealousy is normal and can even be beneficial for a relationship, giving the person the feeling that they are important enough to take care of... As long as it's not psycho. And if there's good communication between the couple then there's no reason why it should be a problem at all. On the other hand, suspicious jealousy is something that the person has to work with on their own; sure, their partner can help by understanding how it is not about their behavior per se, but rather some issues which are more personal and less related to the relationship itself. This means that the jealous partner should understand that, while their partner can be supportive, their behavior will not necessarily make them feel better or worse.

This could be a relief, in fact, for some people. Knowing that your partner is jealous because of their own insecurities releases you from the "responsibility" of provoking such an emotion and gives you the opportunity to be there for them in a whole other way.

Commitment : What makes a long distance relationship work.

Why would you want to stay with one person when there are so many other choices? Why stay with someone despite all the trouble it causes and the effort it takes to make a relationship work?

I found a very interesting article that addresses these questions (and many others that most of us have) with a very simple concept: commitment.

The main statement of the article drew my attention instantly: "A study has suggested that Long Distance Relationships (LDR) are more stable than Geographically Close Relationships (GCR)."

Wouldn't it be the other way around? I mean, surely being close to someone makes the relationship grow stronger and makes it easier to stay together; and I'd think it quite obvious that those who spend lots of time separated tend to slowly grow apart. However, this study attests that the factors that we assume could break such a relationship aren't really intensified by the physical closeness or lack of it.

Commitment, they say, is influenced by three factors: a) satisfaction or happiness with the relationship; b) perceived alternatives (such as other attractive partners); and c) investments that would be lost if the relationship ended.

According to this research, there's not much difference between satisfaction in LDR's and GCR's, which is the main predictor of whether these relationships will last or not.

Now, the second predictor, alternatives or other possible partners, is one that drives someone like me completely crazy. I mean, why would two people choose to be in a relationship in which they can't see each other if they have plenty of other choices right around the corner, right? Well, according to this study, this isn't that much of an issue either. Evidently, people who go for LDR are normally those who have a hight work intensity and idealization; they tend to segment their life into work and relationships. This means that people in LDR's normally focus a lot of their time apart on their work. Oddly enough, high alternatives do predict lower commitment when talking about GCR's.

This actually makes sense. People who are actually happy with the relationship they have will hardly put some time aside to look for other alternatives. Also, focusing on their work keeps them occupied and allows for more experiences the couple can share when together; isn't it awful when you spend all day, every day with someone and, come nighttime, you have nothing to say to each other?

The third predictor, investments that would be lost, is a little colder but also easier to understand. People in LDR's invest money in communication and commuting (at least), all which would be lost if they broke up. Also, when both people are striving towards being together after whatever period of time, this is seen as an investment for the future... Which makes the relationship grow even stronger. Something that, by the way, is not as easy in GCR's, since most investments are limited to shared possessions (which they can just fight over in the end).

So far, the article seems to be quite cheery about LDR's and even appears to suggest they aren't that hard. However, there is one point yet to be discussed:

"Attachment and caregiving cognition, motivation, and behavior are aspects of evolutionary-based behavioral systems that produce strong emotion (Bowlby, 1988). In important romantic relationships, partners have attachment and caregiving bonds with each other. Theoretically (Bowlby, 1969), LDR separations activate the attachment system and lead to separation protest, even when separation is a choice. The protest is attachment behavior, action designed to gain or maintain a comfortable range of proximity to the partner. Protest is evident in LDR interviewee comments (e.g., "I grieve every Monday"; Magnuson & Norem, 1999, p. 131) and reports of loneliness, sadness, missing the partner, and dreading  separation (Guldner, 1996)."

Ouch, right? So, how does one deactivate this natural reflex? This 'separation protest'? Well, here's where it gets interesting.

In GCR's, the satisfaction of each other's attachment and caregiving needs depends exclusively on their ability to do so; conversely, in LDR's this means little, since neither can do much while being apart. No matter how 'functional' their relationship may be, the apart-together cycles  they go through naturally inflict stress in the relationship.The article here relies on a theory of separation anxiety which I am not going to describe in much detail here; I will only say that most people deal with separation either by being anxious to be with the other person (and thus needing the closeness) or by avoiding contact so as to minimize the effects of said separation.

Happily, the authors of the article has some suggestions for both:

For the first kind of people, research indicates, there are many ways to reduce this anxiety as long as they can perceive the partner as available. This can be done by having pictures of the partner or frequent e-mails or phone calls.

The second group has it a little easier, since avoidant attachment makes distance work as a motivating factor for commitment. Still, this isn't always a good thing. Since this kind of partner doesn't feel as much anxiety from the separation right away, they might feel their commitment is weakening... But with time they realize it is not so.

The one thing that is definitely compromised in LDR's is caregiving. The couple may feel disappointed that they can't be there for the other person and thus 'fail' in being a safe 'haven' for them. Still, this is normally compensated through finding ways to actively demonstrate their love for the other person and substituting physical caregiving with verbal communication. Actually, this also makes for the development of better communication with each other.

In the end, the research goes on to show that what most people believe makes LDR's break up (anxiety, avoidance, fear of losing the other person, etc.) is significant only when ignoring the three factors which influence commitment. In other words, commitment in GCR's and LDR's is quite similar, except the former rely more on satisfaction and the latter on the investments made in the relationship; this since LDR partners are more likely to rule out any other alternatives before beginning said relationship. 

Once I read that "some men seem larger at a distance"; I found it funny that, in this research, people in GCR's are more likely to compare their partner's flaws with other possible alternatives, while people in LDR's tend to be in their best behaviour and appearence in the little time they see each other and, thus, increasing the satisfaction factor. Still, this also means that they see each other in situations of high anxiety and stress due to separation, which keep them from idealizing each other.