Jump to content

Damaged Goods: General Discussion


Recommended Posts

SycamoreCircle

My understanding of "damaged goods" has always been that a person has been seriously mistreated in a previous relationship. That hurt transfers over. "Hurt people, hurt people."

 

But as was the case with the relationship that brought me to LS, I knew the person for a year before becoming aware of serious problems. Namely anger, emotional immaturity, deflection of blame, low self-esteem, lack of empathy.

 

I guess I saw the faint outline of those things over time, but not until they were focused on me did I understand their depth.

 

Is it fair to assume that most people carry some baggage? If we hold ourselves to a strict account of other people's baggage, don't we limit the scope of people we can know? Must we all make the decision, "is it worth the risk?"

 

To go back to my first statement about the origin of "damage", wouldn't it be a fair assumption that ultimately our relationship with our parents serves as the model superior to our relationships? We may get burned by a partner, but that is not going to be the teacher of how we treat and respond to future romantic partners, the relationship to our parents will serve as the final say. Agreed?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with this:

 

Is it fair to assume that most people carry some baggage? If we hold ourselves to a strict account of other people's baggage, don't we limit the scope of people we can know? Must we all make the decision, "is it worth the risk?"

 

One person's baggage is another's life experience. I'm not sure I'd be able to relate to an adult human being without any "baggage", because it's pretty universal to have had troubling relationships, pain, and fear; someone who claims to have no baggage IMO is either in denial or has held back from becoming too involved with others (a kind of "baggage" in itself). The question is what the person does with those experiences, and whether they can gain perspective on them - enough to realize when/if they're carrying them over into a new relationship, and to be able to step back and figure out a new strategy.

 

But I don't know about this part that I've bolded:

 

To go back to my first statement about the origin of "damage", wouldn't it be a fair assumption that ultimately our relationship with our parents serves as the model superior to our relationships? We may get burned by a partner, but that is not going to be the teacher of how we treat and respond to future romantic partners, the relationship to our parents will serve as the final say. Agreed?

 

I don't think that one's relationship with one's parents will necessarily be the final say - and I would hope not, because many many people are damaged by their parents, and by observing their parents' dysfunctional relationships with each other. It certainly must make a powerful impression, coming at such a young age. But people tend to be resilient - so no, I wouldn't say it will always serve as the final say.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think our parents relationship has the final say, but it's definitely influential. I know people that have good parents, but due to an outside trauma (for example, sexual abuse by a neighbor), they are unable to be a good partner. And I also know people who had horrible parents, who managed to overcome it and looked to other adults in their life as "role models". Take myself, for example. My dad was an addict and my mom his enabler, but my husband's family (we began dating when I was 15), became my models. I paid close attention to how his normal family operated, and I learned healthier ways to cope.

 

Many of us have been damaged in some way, but I have noticed that the people who overcome it usually share two common traits: good coping skills and a healthy sense of self worth. If you know someone has had a rough childhood, a good way to gauge whether or not they have the potential to be a good partner for you is to pay close attention to those two things.

 

How do they react to conflict? Do they get very angry & act out? Do they detach & pretend it's not happening? Do they calmly focus on the issue and attempt to resolve it?

 

How do they handle a big disappointment or a loss? Do they isolate themselves? Do they use drinking or drugs to cope? Do they help themselves feel better in healthy ways- such as exercise, hobbies, family & friends?

 

Another positive trait to look for is healthy self worth. This is often confused with confidence, but it's different. For example, there are many people who are confident in their looks and careers, but make terrible choices in their love life. Their self esteem appears to be intact, as they appear confident and will admit that they deserve better than their crappy BF/GF. But deep down, they're lost. They continually accept less than they deserve, are driven by their feelings and often ignore all logic (for example, a girl who sees sexts from her BF to other girls multiple times, but blindly believes his illogical explanations). I think it's not smart to trust someone who doesn't value themselves. Their sense of self is stunted and dependent on outside forces (instead of from within). People need to be able to genuinely care for themselves (with actions that match), before they are capable of loving another person in a healthy way.

 

Even if people have the traits I mention above, they can still change, but it will usually take lots of hard work, introspection and therapy. "Damaged" sounds permanent, but it's often just old hurt and pain that hasn't been properly dealt with. A wound that never healed. If someone recognizes this and gets help, a good therapist can peel back the layers and help the person to resolve that original pain. Counseling can arm them with the tools that are necessary to make good choices, manage their feelings, cope and love themselves.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

My therapist thinks that having a mother with mental health issues growing up has affected how I deal in relationships. If people display unhealthy behaviour, particularly if it affects me, I consider this "normal" subliminaly. So instead of being like other people and walking away if you know it just means trouble in the long run, I stick with it because that's why I did with my mum.

 

That was one helluva revelation for me.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure I'd be able to relate to an adult human being without any "baggage", because it's pretty universal to have had troubling relationships, pain, and fear; someone who claims to have no baggage IMO is either in denial or has held back from becoming too involved...

 

I don't think that one's relationship with one's parents will necessarily be the final say - and I would hope not, because many many people are damaged by their parents, and by observing their parents' dysfunctional relationships with each other.

 

The theory goes...

 

As young children we are taught that certain aspects of our whole person are unacceptable and must be shut down, hidden, denied in order for us to be deemed lovable, and to receive the acceptance that we need to survive at that critical time in our lives.

 

These lost aspects of ourselves continue to haunt us throughout life and our strongest motivation is to reunite with them, be able to express them in a loving relationship and thus be made whole again. But who holds this acceptance that we so need... those for whose love we repressed it, our parents. Not literally, of course, but figuratively in our psyche.

 

So our model for attraction is defined by our need to be made whole, and by the image of a person who has the ability to do so. It's called the imago and it is a composite image of those aspects of our parents that deemed parts of us unacceptable, and for whom we split them off.

 

We marry someone who closely matches the imago of our parents, and then have the expectation that they will magically reunite us with the lost self, love us unconditionally, heal all of our pain... make us whole and fully acceptable as we so desired but didn't receive as babies.

 

Of course this is too tall an order for anyone. Romantic love is not unconditional and we are expected to behave as responsible adults. The fantasy of being reunited with our lost self remains unfulfilled. When the expectation is not met we begin to view our spouse as withholding, and that eventually turns to resentment. Of course, resentment is expressed as anger and the relationship starts to deteriorate. None of this is happening in the conscious mind; it all occurs beyond our awareness so we have little ability to alter the course.

 

Becoming aware and taking conscious steps to express our needs, to understand the other's needs, to always express love and acceptance and positive regard to the best of our ability, to consciously engage in showing appreciation... doing these are how we escape the pattern. And understanding that when the other is unhappy or angry or hurt or dissatisfied with us, it's almost certainly an expression of pain, grief, loss, etc., related to the split off parts that haven't been accepted or healed.

 

Now there are those who were so damaged as children, due to having been fundamentally unaccepted, that they have limited capacity for awareness, acceptance, healing and rising above their pain. Their resentment surfaces quickly, they remain focused almost entirely on receiving and don't have the resources to love another generously. No amount of love and acceptance is enough to change their pattern of neediness... and this manifests as selfishness, uncaring, lack of empathy.

 

These are the people we refer to as damaged goods. They invariably end up in abusive or unstable adult relationships. They project their pain and inability to see themselves as lovable and acceptable onto their partners. No matter how aware, emotionally mature, or generously loving a person (their spouse) manages to be, we all need reciprocity, love, acceptance and appreciation ourselves as well, so we can't sustain role of giver indefinitely without receiving some of the same in return... because after all, we have our own split off parts and need for acceptance and appreciation.

 

Read Getting the Love You Want by Harville Hendrix

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everyone has baggage but we can learn from it and move forward.

 

My father was a verbally abusive alcoholic and my mom put up with it for much longer than she should have. This has affected my approach to relationships in that when I was dating I was extremely picky and I dumped people the instant I saw some kind of incompatibility or potential problem. I saw what happens when people get entrenched in a bad relationship and I never wanted that to happen to me.

 

I come off as cold sometimes, but it's worked well for me so far!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My concept of "damaged goods" has always been people who were hurt and went through bad stuff (which is fairly common) and then allow themselves to become bitter, hateful, controlling, disrespectful, etc - basically spend the rest of their lives punishing everyone around them for the crimes of only a few people. They're the ones who weren't inherently sinister, selfish, hostile, etc but they allowed themselves to become that way.

 

If someone struggles with the aftermath of trauma, poor parenting, abuse in past relationships, and so on - but they are determined not to give up an inch of their humanity, empathy, compassion, etc - then they won't.

 

And genuine empathy in a relationship is what holds it together in the long run. You think about how your words and actions will affect your partner. You care about how your partner feels. It guides your decisions when you're struggling.

 

For example maybe you have a rough day in some way that is relevant to your personal baggage, and you're tempted to drink. But if you have empathy for your partner, then you don't want to subject them to you being drunk and getting relevantly ridiculous, or even developing alcoholism.

 

If anything sometimes bonds with others can help people with baggage prevail even more, because sometimes when your self worth is through the floor, empathy for others you care about can serve as the foundation for better choices and efforts to get better.

 

And you do get better, gradually, as long as you're genuinely trying.

 

But when someone deep down says **** it and stops caring about how others feel, it's game over.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
My understanding of "damaged goods" has always been that a person has been seriously mistreated in a previous relationship. That hurt transfers over. "Hurt people, hurt people."

 

IMO, depends on intrinsic personality. Some damaged people, whatever that means, damage people. Others don't. I saw this most markedly as a young person dealing with bullies. Many had very difficult home lives. However, some, as brutal as things were at home, were exactly the opposite of the damage they endured. They were shockingly kind and generous. A couple saved my bacon during beatings so I remember them well. While people do grow and change during life, elemental personality characteristics are formed at a young age as a default tape. Whether or not that tape is accessed depends upon the individual.

 

But as was the case with the relationship that brought me to LS, I knew the person for a year before becoming aware of serious problems. Namely anger, emotional immaturity, deflection of blame, low self-esteem, lack of empathy.

 

I guess I saw the faint outline of those things over time, but not until they were focused on me did I understand their depth.

 

Your tape gave you a basic indicator of how to react to such perceptions. Life experience modified, or not, the tape and your intellect processed the results into actions. There are endless possibilities, as with anything in life.

 

Is it fair to assume that most people carry some baggage? If we hold ourselves to a strict account of other people's baggage, don't we limit the scope of people we can know? Must we all make the decision, "is it worth the risk?"

 

It's fair to assume that all people have experienced life in their own unique way, have dealt with all aspects of life and processed them in their own unique way. Life, and people, are imperfect. Society sets boundaries of imperfection with laws and social mores and we as individuals have our own boundaries of interaction, beyond which we defend our safety or disengage as circumstances dictate. Generally, in any interaction set, especially where boundaries are being brushed against, communication is critical.

 

To go back to my first statement about the origin of "damage", wouldn't it be a fair assumption that ultimately our relationship with our parents serves as the model superior to our relationships? We may get burned by a partner, but that is not going to be the teacher of how we treat and respond to future romantic partners, the relationship to our parents will serve as the final say. Agreed?

 

IMO, it's fair to assume that but leave the door open for exceptions as found. I mistakenly left the door too wide open, leaving room for too many benefits of the doubt and by my own choice eroded my own boundaries through such actions. I would say the single largest 'baggage' from parental interactions/socialization was their failure to provide an adequate skillset and example to defend against what is a relatively cruel world out there. Too much 'turn the other cheek' and not enough 'put em in the dirt'. In all things there is balance and too far one way or the other can be unhealthy.

 

What I've found strangely odd is that, contrary to what is presumed to be 'normal', since divorcing I have no relevant emotional content regarding any failures in our M by myself or my exW and I think the 'lesson' was to work things, resolve them, look each other in the eye and make a decision and move forward without global anger or regret, rather acceptance of the real. IMO, that was the operative tool from MC that paid dividends in an otherwise very painful situation. If I have any 'baggage' with women in general anymore it's a hard concrete wall of boundaries and lots of freedom between those very liberal walls. That's a lesson I learned from the consistent male in my life, dad. I just forgot it for awhile.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
My understanding of "damaged goods" has always been that a person has been seriously mistreated in a previous relationship. That hurt transfers over. "Hurt people, hurt people."

 

Is it fair to assume that most people carry some baggage? If we hold ourselves to a strict account of other people's baggage, don't we limit the scope of people we can know? Must we all make the decision, "is it worth the risk?

 

This is unfortunately, the problem with dating as you get older. In youth, with exceptions of different forms of parental abuse, we havent had much chance to get damaged. The future looks bright and in relationships, the past is quite short. In teen years the stakes are pretty low, your not dealing with living together, children or finances.

 

As we get older, we either take on damage by being alone for a long time and not getting relationship experience, or we take on damage in the form of troubled or failed relationships, and they hurt. We go into the next relationship somewhat gunshy, wary, and guarded.

 

From my position, the best time to find your future spouse is in your early 20s.

 

From a guy's perspective, there are three land mines in dating.

 

You have the women who are watching their biological clock who want to rush guns blazing into childbirth, marriage so they can relate to their peers. For whatever reasons, these women (usually in their 30s), never ended up going that route earlier in their lives, either because they didnt meet Mr. Right or because they just decided to bibble around. Usually pretty screwed up girls who once they get what they want will change into a different person. On the uptake, they are everything you dreamed of in a woman. Once your in a relationship, everything that they told you turns out to be either watered down or false.

 

Then you have the women who have been "strong and independent" for most of their lives, who have not been in many serious relationships because they chose to wait. They tend to be very bossy and headstrong, and old habits die hard: their habit is not compromising on anything. They look at you more like an accessory like a purse or a pair of shoes than someone with needs.

 

Finally you have the women who have been in several serious relationships that ended badly. Maybe one of the exes was violent, or a cheater. Maybe a failed marriage and all the dashed hopes and dreams that go along with that. Perhaps kids involved. Tend to be quite emotionally unstable. They may be highly suspicious that you are going to be like their ex; for example if an ex was abusive they will be looking for any little thing that could be an indicator. If you yell in an argument, you are abusive. If the ex was a cheater, they will be digging dirt and snooping all the time which will drive you nuts.

 

Problem is, broadly, most women (and men in different ways) fall into these categories by the time they are in their mid 30s. You could date down in age and try for early 20-somethings but then you have a hard time connecting. I dated a 26 year old for a few months, and I found her choice in music not only annoying, but she was blaring it on her phone all the time. Silence was a rare virtue with that one- date too much younger than yourself and you will find you just arent on the same wavelength.

 

Try dating older and you may find they are better at managing their baggage, but they could also simply be even worse because they have even more baggage.

 

I think that the reason why a lot of guys my age and older just casually date, date younger, and avoid committment. I've had 7 serious relationships in the past 18 years, ranging in length from 6 months to 9 years, and each one simply added to the scars I now wear in one way or another. In contrast, in 2014 I dated 25 different girls casually, up to 9 at a time, and while some of them were right nutters I met some fantastic girls who never had a chance to go batty because we werent in a committed relationship.

 

Just my two bits

Link to post
Share on other sites

Becoming aware and taking conscious steps to express our needs, to understand the other's needs, to always express love and acceptance and positive regard to the best of our ability, to consciously engage in showing appreciation... doing these are how we escape the pattern. And understanding that when the other is unhappy or angry or hurt or dissatisfied with us, it's almost certainly an expression of pain, grief, loss, etc., related to the split off parts that haven't been accepted or healed.

 

This was actually my point too - it's why I said it's not necessarily the final say. Because some people are able to take steps to overcome that damage. I think it's a bit much, though, to say that one is always so damaged by one's parents - i.e.

 

As young children we are taught that certain aspects of our whole person are unacceptable and must be shut down, hidden, denied in order for us to be deemed lovable, and to receive the acceptance that we need to survive at that critical time in our lives.

 

I mean, I am familiar with this idea that the driving force in relationships is for one's image to be made whole, but frankly, it sounds extremely oversimplified to me. It's just one of many forces acting on you throughout your life, and the things that you feel you want complemented are also going to change throughout that lifetime, so ... how can it all be down to the parents' influence on what's missing? Certainly, as I said, the influence of parents - relationships with the child and with each other - looms large, perhaps largest. But this idea that

 

These lost aspects of ourselves continue to haunt us throughout life and our strongest motivation is to reunite with them, be able to express them in a loving relationship and thus be made whole again

 

...well, it is a bit...overdramatic, to me. I don't think it's quite so black-and-white as this makes it sound. One is always longing for things, and may feel intense loneliness and isolation at times, and a longing for acceptance no matter what, etc. - but that's human nature. We are all islands in a common sea. Is this loneliness and need necessarily because parents long ago squashed one's feelings of self-worth and self-actualization? I don't really think so.

 

I think, to return to the OP's question, that people do acquire fears and anxieties about who they are over a lifetime, and that it's simply part of interacting with the world and realizing that it's not a figment of one's own imagination, but does in fact exist objectively. And that other people are going to have opinions about who you are, and you're going to have opinions about them, and people will need/want different things at different times, and in the end, whether one chooses to acquire some perspective on and a sense of humor about all this messiness that doesn't tie up neatly with a bow is the deciding factor in a healthy relationship. IMO.

 

That, of course, doesn't apply to people who really have been abused by their parents, which is a whole other playing field.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As we get older, we either take on damage by being alone for a long time and not getting relationship experience, or we take on damage in the form of troubled or failed relationships, and they hurt. We go into the next relationship somewhat gunshy, wary, and guarded.

 

From my position, the best time to find your future spouse is in your early 20s.

 

I know you were talking from a guy's perspective - one could, of course, just as easily counter with a woman's. But that seems unnecessarily gender-divided; what we're really talking about is the nature of "damage" and "baggage", which is pretty universal. I would actually say that finding a future spouse in your early 20s isn't necessarily the ideal - doesn't mean it's never a good thing! But at that age there's a lot you don't yet know about who you are and what your boundaries really are. You may indeed be searching too much for someone to "save" you from yourself, rather than for someone who can be a partner. Most people have had some bad relationships; how those people talk about their exes and themselves, what they learned, whether they see their own role in the demise of those relationships, whether they've grown as a person, whether they have a new appreciation for the different ways that people can see the world - all of these things are what convert "baggage" into experience.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
SycamoreCircle

There's this scene in the film "Nebraska" where the grown 30-something son is sitting across from his elderly, cantankerous father in a bar talking about his love life and comparing it to his father's. He brings up a woman he lived with for two years but recently broke up with, "You think I should've married her?"

 

"Who?" the father asks.

 

"______, the woman I lived with."

 

"I don't know," the father says.

 

"Why did you marry Mom?" the son asks.

 

"I don't know. Seemed like a good idea."

 

The son goes on to ask all these earnest, probing questions into the nature of his father's relationship and gets a string of witless, casual answers.

 

It gave the impression that we live in an age where everything is evaluated and over-analyzed. We're so intent on moving without injury, faultlessness and meeting the right one. We approach love and togetherness like we're fighting a strategic battle. We jump at red flags, retreat.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
mortensorchid

I for one no longer believe in the concept of baggage. Baggage is what you take with you, usually something negative that people use as a reason or excuse not to do something the right way. I have had many hardships and hurts and stabs in the back, I do not take it with me. I pulled myself up out of the gutter and said I will do better than that person has done to me or others.

 

 

And you know what? I have. When friends mistreated me, I do not take them back. I do not hold grudges, I just move on and say "this person and I are not meant to be friends and that's that." If they feel bad, they feel bad about it, but not me. I don't want to be an object of pity or use things in the past as a justification as to how and why things are the way they are now. And if that means slaving on forward alone, so be it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
SycamoreCircle
I for one no longer believe in the concept of baggage. Baggage is what you take with you, usually something negative that people use as a reason or excuse not to do something the right way. I have had many hardships and hurts and stabs in the back, I do not take it with me. I pulled myself up out of the gutter and said I will do better than that person has done to me or others.

 

 

And you know what? I have. When friends mistreated me, I do not take them back. I do not hold grudges, I just move on and say "this person and I are not meant to be friends and that's that." If they feel bad, they feel bad about it, but not me. I don't want to be an object of pity or use things in the past as a justification as to how and why things are the way they are now. And if that means slaving on forward alone, so be it.

 

But I detect a kind of "defiance" in your attitude and it would seem, from a distance anyway, that you are resistant to the notion of forgiveness---that is a kind of baggage. We must learn, no matter how much we're hurt by other people, not to become too steel-hearted.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
I know you were talking from a guy's perspective - one could, of course, just as easily counter with a woman's. But that seems unnecessarily gender-divided; what we're really talking about is the nature of "damage" and "baggage", which is pretty universal. I would actually say that finding a future spouse in your early 20s isn't necessarily the ideal - doesn't mean it's never a good thing! But at that age there's a lot you don't yet know about who you are and what your boundaries really are. You may indeed be searching too much for someone to "save" you from yourself, rather than for someone who can be a partner. Most people have had some bad relationships; how those people talk about their exes and themselves, what they learned, whether they see their own role in the demise of those relationships, whether they've grown as a person, whether they have a new appreciation for the different ways that people can see the world - all of these things are what convert "baggage" into experience.

 

Oh of course. Women have to deal with mens' baggage as we age as well, its just usually different. Men are far less likely to be victims of physical violence, for example, although I myself have had an ex girlfriend try to stab me with a kitchen knife and poison me with bleach it is not very common. I would surmise that the worst baggage a woman has to deal with in a man is what a previous woman did to him; I could imagine its heartbreaking to love someone who cant be as willing to take a chance as you are.

 

I myself probably fall into this category. With my ex-fiancee, I was in the relationship with my whole heart and then some (we met when I was 22 and she was 17). After she had an 8 month affair with my friend, we worked through it and I forgave her then she did it again and dumped me, it still is exceedingly hard for me to truly believe in the whole "always and forever" thing. Now I go into a relationship expecting an expiry date, and unfortunately I have been proven right every single time. Where before I would have fought and tried to change to keep the girl from walking out the door, now I offer to hold it open for them. (Threatening to leave seems to be a common threat made by women when things arent going their way)

 

That is, well, baggage. In the early 20s, that kind of hurt doesn't often exist, you are more likely to be more idealistic in your relationships, more pilable in personality and more able to compromise and change. You also have opportunity to grow together into more mature adults, whereby starting a relationship in your 30s or 40s and especially beyond you are pretty fixed in who you are. Now, when a woman wants me to "change" for the sake of the relationship I look at it with a lot of skepticism and I'm more likely to just end the relationship. I ran that treadmill for over two years, and I ended up broken hearted all the same.

 

Also unfortunately, and this is from a guy's perspective, women are more prone to look at a man as a diamond in the rough to be shaped and molded. Hence you get the "woman who is everything you wanted" and once you commit not only does she change into who she really is but then she puts the pressure on you to change who you are. This is really stressful on a relationship, because we all just want to be ourselves with our partners. Hence you get men complaining that their wife is a nag. Its not really a smart way to enter a relationship, but it is quite common.

 

I'm sure from a womans' perspective the baggage thing is just as encumbering, albeit different. I would guess that men with baggage are aloof, unlikely to be able to commit, and perhaps in the case of infidelity very jealous at times to the point of appearing controlling. Some may be excessively needy and needing reassurance because a prior partner spent a lot of time belittling them. I dont know, I've never dated or been in a relationship with a man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Show me a person who doesn't have "baggage," i.e. some messy love life, made a mistake or two, and I'll show you a person who was didn't have the nerve to get out and live life. Of course, you have to decide what baggage you can live with. I personally think emotional baggage from failed relationships is easier to deal with that baggage from having crap parents or having some mental conditions or being inherently afraid to live life. I know for a fact that a person can live a pretty wild life and still be capable of being responsible and faithful. People who have really lived a diverse life often reach a point they've done it all and now know who they are and what they want and just settle in and do it.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
This was actually my point too - it's why I said it's not necessarily the final say. Because some people are able to take steps to overcome that damage. I think #1) it's a bit much, though, to say that one is always so damaged by one's parents - i.e.

 

I mean, I am familiar with this idea that the driving force in relationships is for one's image to be made whole, but frankly, it sounds extremely oversimplified to me. #2) It's just one of many forces acting on you throughout your life, and the things that you feel you want complemented are also going to change throughout that lifetime, so ... how can it all be down to the parents' influence on what's missing? Certainly, as I said, the influence of parents - relationships with the child and with each other - looms large, perhaps largest. But this idea that

 

#3)...well, it is a bit...overdramatic, to me. I don't think it's quite so black-and-white as this makes it sound. One is always longing for things, and may feel intense loneliness and isolation at times, and a longing for acceptance no matter what, etc. - but that's human nature. We are all islands in a common sea. Is this loneliness and need necessarily because parents long ago squashed one's feelings of self-worth and self-actualization? I don't really think so.

 

I think, to return to the OP's question, that people do acquire fears and anxieties about who they are over a lifetime, and that it's simply part of interacting with the world and realizing that it's not a figment of one's own imagination, but does in fact exist objectively. And that other people are going to have opinions about who you are, and you're going to have opinions about them, and people will need/want different things at different times, and in the end, whether one chooses to acquire some perspective on and a sense of humor about all this messiness that doesn't tie up neatly with a bow is the deciding factor in a healthy relationship. IMO.

 

That, of course, doesn't apply to people who really have been abused by their parents, which is a whole other playing field.

 

Well, I'm not going to expend too much energy defending; it's not some miracle revelation that occurred to me while on tripping on peyote or anything. You can use as much or as little as you like.

 

It's a theory developed by Dr. Harville Hendrix, a respected psychologist and author who works in the area of relationship and marriage therapy. The book is a NYTimes bestseller and has sold two million copies. He has trained thousands of psychologists in his method which he calls Imago Therapy. I just tried to summarize his theory in a few paragraphs.

 

#1 - You seem to be in literal mode here, as in if you can't measure it it doesn't exist. Why is it hard to believe that we all split off pieces in order to be lovable? I don't believe I used the word damage in this context, but that's a minor point.

 

#2 - because the first few years of life are developmentally critical. We become pretty resilient later (relatively speaking) if we are given that secure foundation from birth to age 4 or 5. Disruption or failure to establish the mother/child bond is thought to be the etiology for many pervasive dysfunctions.

 

#3 - Eh, like I said you seem to be stuck in literal mode tonight. I like to embrace theories and I'm comfortable with ambiguity. It's not nearly so important to me to pronounce it right or wrong as it is to contemplate the possibility. The more I learn, and the more I realize what I don't know, the more open I become to a even wider range of potentialities.

 

We have very little knowledge or understanding of why we are the way we are, how we got here, where our fears and motivations originate, or in which direction we're actually headed. Have you ever wondered how much of what is, is completely beyond the comprehension of even the best human minds? I mean, how is it possible for an intelligent person to actually believe that something is not possible?

 

Anyway, sorry if that's too dramatic for you... you must be an S type, right?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its the great thread, i enjoyed reading it. I wonder if someone here really felt the weight of bad memory, that literally cripples you? Like you having memories haunting you everywhere and when you look back at your past, to see the big messed up picture, you just can't help but feel like you never will be normal person again? Im afraid that there are things in human relationships that getting some people so damaged that they will never recover. Especially, when they have been hurted both by parents and by lovers.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Damaged goods to me is when somebody allows themselves to become no better than the people who hurt them.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to think looking at just the parents relationship or past relationships is oversimplifying it a bit. We're a product of everything that has happened to us, AND to others, and how we choose to interpret and react and relate to those things. We have some choice as to how we decide to view the world and our role in it.

 

See, I don't think "damaged goods" means a person is bad.

 

It generally just means they have some issues. Maybe they make bad decisions, etc.

 

And honestly, who doesn't have issues?

 

I think it's more about the type of issues that someone can handle a partner having, and how they deal with and relate to that partners issues, compatible that makes them. There are people who would make great partners for say, alcoholics, and people who wouldn't. That's how I tend to view it anyway.

 

But I'm also a theatre person, and everyone in the theatre has issues. Scary, scary issues.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
I tend to think looking at just the parents relationship or past relationships is oversimplifying it a bit. We're a product of everything that has happened to us, AND to others, and how we choose to interpret and react and relate to those things. We have some choice as to how we decide to view the world and our role in it.

 

I agree. People are affected by their experiences, but I wouldn’t view someone’s life experiences as baggage or negative unless the person himself does, or it keeps him from living in the moment and feeling good about himself, life and the potential in love. I think that our own relationships have a greater effect on our future relationships than our parents do in general. In our own relationships, we play an active equal role, we create the relationship as much as the other person does, and we put hearts on the line- we stretch ourselves. That’s the best learning experience and has the greatest effect on us, in my opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I'm not going to expend too much energy defending; it's not some miracle revelation that occurred to me while on tripping on peyote or anything. You can use as much or as little as you like.

 

It's a theory developed by Dr. Harville Hendrix, a respected psychologist and author who works in the area of relationship and marriage therapy. The book is a NYTimes bestseller and has sold two million copies. He has trained thousands of psychologists in his method which he calls Imago Therapy. I just tried to summarize his theory in a few paragraphs.

 

#1 - You seem to be in literal mode here, as in if you can't measure it it doesn't exist. Why is it hard to believe that we all split off pieces in order to be lovable? I don't believe I used the word damage in this context, but that's a minor point.

 

#2 - because the first few years of life are developmentally critical. We become pretty resilient later (relatively speaking) if we are given that secure foundation from birth to age 4 or 5. Disruption or failure to establish the mother/child bond is thought to be the etiology for many pervasive dysfunctions.

 

#3 - Eh, like I said you seem to be stuck in literal mode tonight. I like to embrace theories and I'm comfortable with ambiguity. It's not nearly so important to me to pronounce it right or wrong as it is to contemplate the possibility. The more I learn, and the more I realize what I don't know, the more open I become to a even wider range of potentialities.

 

We have very little knowledge or understanding of why we are the way we are, how we got here, where our fears and motivations originate, or in which direction we're actually headed. Have you ever wondered how much of what is, is completely beyond the comprehension of even the best human minds? I mean, how is it possible for an intelligent person to actually believe that something is not possible?

 

Anyway, sorry if that's too dramatic for you... you must be an S type, right?

 

Actually no, I'm 100% N. I think you just completely misunderstood my post. As I already said, I've heard of the theory and of course of the book; it's not exactly obscure. I have no doubt that he's a very successful guy; not sure why that would mean that I should agree just on that basis. I like to have my own philosophies.

 

Basically, I'm just disagreeing with the premise, which really doesn't need to mean that I'm uncomfortable with ambiguity :laugh: - quite the opposite, IMO. I was explaining my (rather abstract and theoretical, actually) point of view, which simply differs from his (and, I guess, yours). The suggestion that what's missing in one's self must be down to one's parents seems very black-and-white and a bit pop-psych to me - I don't happen to find it helpful or illuminating. I would instead argue that people contain multitudes, and that one's baggage - to return to the topic of the thread - is created throughout one's life, not in the first few formative years. It's a moving target and a shape-shifting beast. That's how I see it; yes, I do think that it's really reductive to bring it all down to the parents. I don't know where you get "if you can't measure it it doesn't exist" from that - that doesn't seem to have any connection that I can figure out to what I said, which is why I say I think you misunderstood me. I'm certainly not interested in measuring anything, and I certainly never said that parents have no influence. I believe I actually said it may loom largest. But I maintain that they don't always set the tone of one's life, and I can't see how anyone can refute that, as we are discussing hypotheses (not theories) that really can't be proven anyway. We all just get to espouse our opinions and they don't really mean a damn thing, even that of a NYT bestselling author. If people find his therapy and framing device helpful to them, that's awesome. But I wouldn't, you know? And that's OK; it's why people seek out different therapists to find a good match.

 

But you know, people can disagree even if they're both abstract thinkers - that's part of being an abstract thinker: accepting and even enjoying different philosophies. That's really the fun of it. I'm concerned that you took my criticism of Hendrix's book personally, which isn't necessary.

Edited by serial muse
Link to post
Share on other sites
I tend to think looking at just the parents relationship or past relationships is oversimplifying it a bit. We're a product of everything that has happened to us, AND to others, and how we choose to interpret and react and relate to those things. We have some choice as to how we decide to view the world and our role in it.

 

Exactly.

 

See, I don't think "damaged goods" means a person is bad.

 

It generally just means they have some issues. Maybe they make bad decisions, etc.

 

And honestly, who doesn't have issues?

 

 

I think it's more about the type of issues that someone can handle a partner having, and how they deal with and relate to that partners issues, compatible that makes them. There are people who would make great partners for say, alcoholics, and people who wouldn't. That's how I tend to view it anyway.

 

Exactly. Couldn't agree more.

 

But I'm also a theatre person, and everyone in the theatre has issues. Scary, scary issues.

 

:laugh: True dat.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh of course. Women have to deal with mens' baggage as we age as well, its just usually different. Men are far less likely to be victims of physical violence, for example, although I myself have had an ex girlfriend try to stab me with a kitchen knife and poison me with bleach it is not very common. I would surmise that the worst baggage a woman has to deal with in a man is what a previous woman did to him; I could imagine its heartbreaking to love someone who cant be as willing to take a chance as you are.

 

I myself probably fall into this category. With my ex-fiancee, I was in the relationship with my whole heart and then some (we met when I was 22 and she was 17). After she had an 8 month affair with my friend, we worked through it and I forgave her then she did it again and dumped me, it still is exceedingly hard for me to truly believe in the whole "always and forever" thing. Now I go into a relationship expecting an expiry date, and unfortunately I have been proven right every single time. Where before I would have fought and tried to change to keep the girl from walking out the door, now I offer to hold it open for them. (Threatening to leave seems to be a common threat made by women when things arent going their way)

 

That is, well, baggage. In the early 20s, that kind of hurt doesn't often exist, you are more likely to be more idealistic in your relationships, more pilable in personality and more able to compromise and change. You also have opportunity to grow together into more mature adults, whereby starting a relationship in your 30s or 40s and especially beyond you are pretty fixed in who you are. Now, when a woman wants me to "change" for the sake of the relationship I look at it with a lot of skepticism and I'm more likely to just end the relationship. I ran that treadmill for over two years, and I ended up broken hearted all the same.

 

Also unfortunately, and this is from a guy's perspective, women are more prone to look at a man as a diamond in the rough to be shaped and molded. Hence you get the "woman who is everything you wanted" and once you commit not only does she change into who she really is but then she puts the pressure on you to change who you are. This is really stressful on a relationship, because we all just want to be ourselves with our partners. Hence you get men complaining that their wife is a nag. Its not really a smart way to enter a relationship, but it is quite common.

 

I'm sure from a womans' perspective the baggage thing is just as encumbering, albeit different. I would guess that men with baggage are aloof, unlikely to be able to commit, and perhaps in the case of infidelity very jealous at times to the point of appearing controlling. Some may be excessively needy and needing reassurance because a prior partner spent a lot of time belittling them. I dont know, I've never dated or been in a relationship with a man.

 

Hm, interesting. You know, I'm sure all those things you mention - aloofness, commitmentphobia, controlling behaviors - are the typical things one thinks of when it comes to men with baggage. Certainly trust issues, but of course that goes for both genders as they get older. The neediness, I think, is more often considered the trait of a woman than a man. And in fact, in the course of dating I've encountered men who expect me to change for them, to make their hobbies mine, to subsume my interests to their own. To make me less me. In short, trust me - men are fully capable of being irritating nags. Nagging is just another way of being controlling, and no gender has a monopoly on that.

 

But I don't know - to me, all this stuff isn't really the point, though. If, as you're suggesting (and I don't disagree), baggage accumulation is as much about adult relationships than parental influence, then I think the point, as TheGuard said above, is what you do with all that stuff you pick up over time. I'd say it's a shame that you seem to have a self-fulfilling prophecy going on - I can't of course say what that's about for you, but it's naturally the first thing that springs to mind when one reads the words, "I expect this, and then it happens". But yes, you seem to have accumulated baggage that you aren't willing/able to shed. And I think it's the shedding, not the accumulation, that makes the man (or woman). JMO.

Edited by serial muse
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Million.to.1

Cool thread guys. Some great posts here.

 

Reminds me of one of my favourite quotes.

 

"I don't care if you have baggage.... As long as you can carry it, not lay crushed beneath it"

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...