What's the difference between emotionally unavailable and "just being a man"?

[Zapbasket]

I'm not sure the title of this thread reflects the question I'm really asking. I've been reflecting upon the kind of man I tend to choose for a romantic partner, and it seems I consistently choose one who is emotionally unavailable to a pretty big degree.

 

The ex that initially brought me to LoveShack, for instance, could not communicate about difficulties in our relationship, and would close off and shut me out when difficulties arose rather than tell me how he felt and what he wanted. It's been almost seven years since we broke up, and I hear he still is closed off, and while all his friends are now married with children, he is not engaged though he's been dating his most recent girlfriend for close to two years. He's 36.

 

The second ex for whom I moved out west was, plainly and simply, a narcissist. We've been broken up for four years now and he remains single, at age 54.

 

My most recent (3 weeks) ex was very challenging to be with, irritable and enjoyed pushing my buttons rather than engaging with me to foster an intimate relationship. Our counselor (whom we never saw together, only individually) has labeled him as counterdependent and "constitutionally incapable" of intimacy. He doesn't think my ex is an out-and-out narcissist.

 

As I talk about my difficulties with these relationships with people IRL, it seems I get two kinds of responses. One is that these men are by constitution emotionally unavailable and thus make unhealthy partner prospects--for any woman. The other is that men just aren't as communicative with their feelings or as interested in emotional intimacy as women are and thus, to be a woman with a man, you have to accept a certain degree of closed-off-ness.

 

These divergent responses leave me confused. I mean, which is it? Is a closed-off man just being a man or someone who is not capable of participating in a relationship of mutual love, trust, respect and care?

 

The reason I ask this is that I'm trying to understand whether I indeed have been with men who, no matter what woman they're with, will offer only a limited relationship. If so, then the appropriate boundary-drawing that I lacked would have been to interpret their emotional closed-off-ness as an incapability rather than a "potential" for something more down the line or a trait I would just have to contend with and enable, and to bow out.

[knitwit]

The reason I ask this is that I'm trying to understand whether I indeed have been with men who, no matter what woman they're with, will offer only a limited relationship. If so, then the appropriate boundary-drawing that I lacked would have been to interpret their emotional closed-off-ness as an incapability rather than a "potential" for something more down the line or a trait I would just have to contend with and enable, and to bow out.

 

My excellent therapist had several rules of thumb for finding the right mate. One of them comes to mind when reading your above thread: "Can't=won't. Don't waste time on a two-letter difference."

 

In other words, it is irrelevant whether your exes were potentially capable or were absolutely incapable of being emotionally open and available to you. All that matters is that they weren't.

 

At the time, this particular rule of thumb kinda grated on me. I tended to give too much leeway if I thought a guy "can't" do that (such as- he just isn't comfortable showing his feelings) vs "won't" do that (which would mean he was a jerk.)

 

She was totally right, though. I worked out what characteristics were most important to me, and anyone who didn't present with those characteristics went off the list of potential/continued dates. It took some getting used to. It felt weird and counter-intuitive. It was easy to write off the guys who were obviously jerks, but it was harder to do to the guys who weren't.

 

But, it worked. And now, I see the use of that rule in many different types of relationships (work, family, etc.)

 

You might look into therapy to find out why you are attracted to guys who are not emotionally available. My therapist was a HUGE help to me, the best money I ever spent, and I am sure I would not have my DH without her.

[giotto]

I feel for you... I married an emotionally unavailable woman and gave her all the excuses in the world. She can open up but, unfortunately, she won't. It's easier for her...

[Philosoraptor]

There is no blanket statement here. Everyone is different, some people are open and others are not. If you're not happy with someone so closed off, then move on and look for a degree of openness when you are looking for a new partner.

[Zapbasket]

Men are hard-wired differently. It's a rare day when you get one that wants to sit and drink tea and talk for hours about your relationship.

 

I don't think I suggested anywhere that "emotional availability" equated to drinking tea and spending hours talking about the relationship.

[Zapbasket]

...look for a degree of openness when you are looking for a new partner.

 

That's the thing: what's a degree of openness that's reasonable to look for, when a prevailing idea about men is that by definition they are closed off to an extent?

 

Not, by the way, that I agree with that idea. I think it's an excuse advanced by many an emotionally unavailable man, and the women who has resigned to that being "just men being men." I imagine that men's openness is different from women's openness in certain respects and the same in other respects.

[Philosoraptor]

That's the thing: what's a degree of openness that's reasonable to look for, when a prevailing idea about men is that by definition they are closed off to an extent?

Reasonable? That's a silly question. Look for what you want, not what you think is reasonable. You shouldn't settle for something because you think you can't do better, you should be satisfied by what your partner offers.

 

I'm pretty much a fully open human who happens to have a y chromosome. I know plenty of other men who are open and emotionally available as well.

[Zapbasket]

"Can't=won't. Don't waste time on a two-letter difference."

 

In other words, it is irrelevant whether your exes were potentially capable or were absolutely incapable of being emotionally open and available to you. All that matters is that they weren't.

 

At the time, this particular rule of thumb kinda grated on me. I tended to give too much leeway if I thought a guy "can't" do that (such as- he just isn't comfortable showing his feelings) vs "won't" do that (which would mean he was a jerk.)

 

Good point, and me, too. I can see the "available" person behind all the defensiveness and closed-off behaviors and I think, "If only..." and it keeps me hooked in, hoping.

 

She was totally right, though. I worked out what characteristics were most important to me, and anyone who didn't present with those characteristics went off the list of potential/continued dates. It took some getting used to. It felt weird and counter-intuitive. It was easy to write off the guys who were obviously jerks, but it was harder to do to the guys who weren't.

 

I can imagine having a hard time with that, too--writing off the guys who weren't overtly jerks or overtly not what I was looking for.

 

I'm curious: what were your characteristics that you used to screen prospects? I ask because I thought I *was* going into my relationships with my eyes open. My most recent ex, for example, seemed like such, such a nice guy at first. And then he stopped being aggressive in his pursuit of me, which I remember finding confusing, and then he started up these antagonistic behaviors about which I have written so many threads here. But I was blinded by that initial nice guy, that still showed itself through all the white noise. I don't feel like I can trust myself anymore to know what characteristics would truly make a reliable "screen."

 

You might look into therapy to find out why you are attracted to guys who are not emotionally available. My therapist was a HUGE help to me, the best money I ever spent, and I am sure I would not have my DH without her.

 

I started therapy near the end of June for this very issue. What was your process like, in therapy? What was it that ultimately freed you to seek a relationship with someone who was able to give you what you wanted? Right now I just feel more lost than ever.

[Zapbasket]

Reasonable? That's a silly question. Look for what you want, not what you think is reasonable. You shouldn't settle for something because you think you can't do better, you should be satisfied by what your partner offers.

 

Thank you. That's the mind shift I need to make. I need to learn to stop apologizing for wanting a relationship with someone who truly is open to and excited about having one.

 

I'm pretty much a fully open human who happens to have a y chromosome. I know plenty of other men who are open and emotionally available as well.

 

Where are these men? I honestly have never met one. I've met men who *seem* open at first, but evidently that's only to "win" me. Then, they close off, won't discuss the future, antagonize me, compete with me, all sorts of things that get in the way of building any kind of true companionship and intimacy.

 

I'm not at all doubting you that guys like you exist, but...where? And why have none ever come my way? I can't think of anyone who has shown interest in me who truly gave off a vibe that he was open and someone I should want to know more.

[Philosoraptor]

Thank you. That's the mind shift I need to make. I need to learn to stop apologizing for wanting a relationship with someone who truly is open to and excited about having one.

Yep, nothing wrong with waiting for what you want. After all, you're the one who has to be in a relationship with them, so who cares if someone else might think you're too picky?

 

 

Where are these men? I honestly have never met one. I've met men who *seem* open at first, but evidently that's only to "win" me. Then, they close off, won't discuss the future, antagonize me, compete with me, all sorts of things that get in the way of building any kind of true companionship and intimacy.

 

I'm not at all doubting you that guys like you exist, but...where? And why have none ever come my way? I can't think of anyone who has shown interest in me who truly gave off a vibe that he was open and someone I should want to know more.

It takes patience to find the right fit. Finding someone who you like, who likes you back, and fits what you want is something that takes a bit of time.

 

Last summer alone I went on more first dates than I could count looking for a good fit. Just talking to anyone I crossed and asking the ones out that seemed appealing. Then I crossed my now fiancee and she met everything I was hoping for and more. It takes a lot of patience and I had to let a lot of women down, but I would have been doing them no good getting their hopes up.

 

Just know what you want and don't accept less. Plenty of people will be very attractive in different ways, but if you're looking for something more serious make sure to stick to what you truly need out of a partner before settling into anything serious.

[Zapbasket]

Yep, nothing wrong with waiting for what you want. After all, you're the one who has to be in a relationship with them, so who cares if someone else might think you're too picky?

 

 

 

It takes patience to find the right fit. Finding someone who you like, who likes you back, and fits what you want is something that takes a bit of time.

 

Last summer alone I went on more first dates than I could count looking for a good fit. Just talking to anyone I crossed and asking the ones out that seemed appealing. Then I crossed my now fiancee and she met everything I was hoping for and more. It takes a lot of patience and I had to let a lot of women down, but I would have been doing them no good getting their hopes up.

 

Just know what you want and don't accept less. Plenty of people will be very attractive in different ways, but if you're looking for something more serious make sure to stick to what you truly need out of a partner before settling into anything serious.

 

I just read part of your thread, "Does openness scare people away?" Oh man, I would love to meet a guy who would even feel the necessity of asking such a question. I never have...so does that mean that I'm stuck being drawn to guys who are more emotionally reticent? In each of my three unfortunate, long relationships, every one of the guys seemed great at first.

 

I'm a very open person, I think without being pushy or anxious about it. Maybe sometimes I can be effusive--not towards a person I just met, but about something that grabs me, like a beautiful scene or an exciting or funny idea. But that's just me; I am very ebullient when I'm having a good time. Maybe that scares people off, I dunno. What confuses me is why I'd attract emotionally closed-off people in the first place; why would they be drawn to someone who is open, intense, prone to philosophical discussions, who loves to laugh? Why, when later on those very things threaten them, they can't keep up, and then they resent me for it?

 

Congrats on your engagement, by the way.

[stillafool]

Men are hard-wired differently. It's a rare day when you get one that wants to sit and drink tea and talk for hours about your relationship.

 

Actually, there ARE men like that.

 

Unfortunately, they're gay.

 

I'm a woman and I hate talking about that stuff and can't stand to hear my friends go on and on. So boring.

[carhill]

What confuses me is why I'd attract emotionally closed-off people in the first place; why would they be drawn to someone who is open, intense, prone to philosophical discussions, who loves to laugh? Why, when later on those very things threaten them, they can't keep up, and then they resent me for it?

 

When in limerence, people are often attracted to aspects which, in that state, they feel 'complete' them, as well as, during such periods, people socially 'mask' their authentic self, sometimes as a tool, sometimes out of fear, but also sometimes without even realizing what they're doing, being absorbed in the moments of romance. Once that settles out and the 'real' people emerge, and especially when and where conflict occurs, always a natural part of human relations, the true picture of the dynamic can be observed.

 

IMO, a healthy man knows when and where to compartmentalize his emotions away and when and where to bring those strengths to the foreground and share them. I've found it's more in the 'how' and less in the 'what'. How a man shows his emotions and shares them.

 

I spent about eight hours yesterday afternoon and evening at the wake of a younger friend who died an untimely death and saw a lot of this dynamic in action, meaning how men (he has three living brothers, as an example) handled things in their own way, plus how the rest of us interacted, each in our own style of dropping the male 'shield', and coming together during a difficult time. I was quite impressed with some of the young males, including the friend's young (20's) son in how they handled things and interaction with us.

 

In my case, my parents never socialized me to 'be a man', rather to 'be a human and a productive member of society' so I never got the messages about being stoic or 'unavailable', much to my own detriment in interactions with women later in life. Being emotionally open as a man has its own set of disadvantages, one clear one being experiencing the difference between what women 'want' and what they're 'attracted to'. What I've learned is that, generally, they are attracted to the men they're attracted to and they 'want' those attractive men to be emotionally available, so such availability is completely or mostly divorced from the attraction process; in fact, the desire for the attractive man can be enhanced by his emotional distance because 'want' is or can be a powerful attractant. IME, the most successful (with women) men are the ones who precisely balance availability with distance, providing just enough availability to meet but not satiate the woman's need for closeness and openness. I'm talking about marriages of 25 years or more; long-term partnerships. I've been quite surprised by how this works and have resigned myself to accepting that I don't possess that style of interaction so leave it at that and move on. Good luck.

[Philosoraptor]

I just read part of your thread, "Does openness scare people away?" Oh man, I would love to meet a guy who would even feel the necessity of asking such a question. I never have...so does that mean that I'm stuck being drawn to guys who are more emotionally reticent? In each of my three unfortunate, long relationships, every one of the guys seemed great at first.

That's a really old thread Truth is openess does scare people away who aren't comfortable with it. But it was a good thing, as it made some of the less open people wary and made it easier to find a good fit.

 

Only you can answer why you're attracted to some guys who aren't available. But you've said, they pretend to be until they've hooked you. I think if you stay with them after you see their true colors, that's your issue. Once you see how they are after the honeymoon ends you need to make a decision or at least stand your ground. Let them know what you expect from the relationship, and if they are not willing or able to give it to you, you need to move on.

 

I'm a very open person, I think without being pushy or anxious about it. Maybe sometimes I can be effusive--not towards a person I just met, but about something that grabs me, like a beautiful scene or an exciting or funny idea. But that's just me; I am very ebullient when I'm having a good time. Maybe that scares people off, I dunno. What confuses me is why I'd attract emotionally closed-off people in the first place; why would they be drawn to someone who is open, intense, prone to philosophical discussions, who loves to laugh? Why, when later on those very things threaten them, they can't keep up, and then they resent me for it?

The same questions plagued myself. Insecure people tend to often admire those who are truly comfortable and confident being themselves. If they aren't comfortable in their own skin though they may trigger a lot of insecurity and attempt to bring the comfortable person down to their level. Trick here is to be patient, set boundaries, don't be afraid to end things when you've seen their true colors, and again, be patient.

 

Congrats on your engagement, by the way.

Thank you

[knitwit]

Good point, and me, too. I can see the "available" person behind all the defensiveness and closed-off behaviors and I think, "If only..." and it keeps me hooked in, hoping.

 

 

 

I can imagine having a hard time with that, too--writing off the guys who weren't overtly jerks or overtly not what I was looking for.

 

I'm curious: what were your characteristics that you used to screen prospects? I ask because I thought I *was* going into my relationships with my eyes open. My most recent ex, for example, seemed like such, such a nice guy at first. And then he stopped being aggressive in his pursuit of me, which I remember finding confusing, and then he started up these antagonistic behaviors about which I have written so many threads here. But I was blinded by that initial nice guy, that still showed itself through all the white noise. I don't feel like I can trust myself anymore to know what characteristics would truly make a reliable "screen."

 

 

 

I started therapy near the end of June for this very issue. What was your process like, in therapy? What was it that ultimately freed you to seek a relationship with someone who was able to give you what you wanted? Right now I just feel more lost than ever.

 

Hi Green Cove, I am running around today but will write out a more comprehensive post later on. The short story is that I had to right several deep-seated erroneous self-beliefs, and I had to test out the new thinking/values in real life. It took a while but was so,so worth it.

[acrosstheuniverse]

Don't settle for somebody who is bottled up about their feelings just because they're 'a man' if talking things over is something that is important to you.

 

I've dated men who've struggled to discuss their feelings even slightly, and it has usually ended up going horribly wrong when everything they're suppressing ends up bubbling to the surface and destroying their equilibrium.

 

I'd much rather a guy who can sit and talk about his feelings when necessary, obviously not all day every day, and I just couldn't be with somebody closed up any more.

 

I've known men who are extremely emotionally open and talkative and women who refuse to even acknowledge a single difficult emotion they're experiencing. I volunteer as a counsellor on a 'suicide hotline' and have done some counselling training, and there really doesn't seem to be as hardline a difference between the sexes as people make out.

[Keats]

I agree with acrosstheuniverse..

 

My husband is amazinglyopen and able to express himself emotionally.

 

Whereas I am a woman who is very cagey. I find it difficult expressing.

 

I think what society believes a man should be and what the media dictates a man should be affects us all.

 

Men who are closed off were brought up a certain way, or had personal experiences that taugh them to protect themselves. Etc.

 

In the end you look for a guy who's willing to adapt in life. And only a lack in this quality in both men or women is the deal breaker.

 

You shouldn't be looking for someone who is happy or sad.

[Zapbasket]

 

In the end you look for a guy who's willing to adapt in life. And only a lack in this quality in both men or women is the deal breaker.

 

You shouldn't be looking for someone who is happy or sad.

 

I Hear You On Willingness To Adapt (How Do You Recognize That In The Early Stages Though?). But Can You Please Clarify Your Last Statement? I Don't Understand What You Mean. (Sorry For Caps. New Phone.)

[Zapbasket]

That's a really old thread Truth is openess does scare people away who aren't comfortable with it. But it was a good thing, as it made some of the less open people wary and made it easier to find a good fit.

 

I once confided in a mentor of mine that I feared I was "too much." She gave some good advice: it all boils down to where you're coming from. If you're coming from an open, good-hearted place, intending to connect and include, eventually that intent will become evident. Likewise, if your "too-much-ness" is intended to dominate, exclude and disconnect, that, too, will eventually become evident, to those who are capable of paying attention. I took that to mean that perhaps sometimes, even if you're intent is to connect and include, people might read you as trying to dominate, and they may shrink away, or feel dislike toward you. At that point, you must ask yourself honestly whether your intent indeed is as pure as you'd like to think...and if it is, then you can go forward confidently, just as you are.

 

Gosh, I need to remember that. I've been torturing myself with what my ex's mom told me a couple of weeks ago, after the breakup, that my ex felt he always was failing to measure up. It makes me sad that he felt that way in the relationship...but at the same time, I have standards for myself, and I supported the standards for himself that he said he had, but he wasn't living up to them. So do I fault myself for pointing out what was true? I think perhaps no.

 

Philosoraptor, I've skimmed several of your threads, and I can relate so much to all the things you felt in your earliest threads, even down to feeling like life isn't worth living, not like this. I'd never end my life, but in my isolation where I live (I don't have friends here at all, just acquaintances, and my job situation is shaky, and so I really feel like I'm just spinning all alone even as I keep showing up to things hoping eventually to make some meaningful connections), I am overwhelmed with a sense of this life, right now, just not being at all something to feel proud of, or good about, or to want to be in. I take heart that you found your way out of this pain. You are a romantic, like me. I can never easily accept that things could just not fundamentally work out, with the right kind of care and effort, between two people who love each other. But that insistence harbors more, for me, than just being a "romantic." It's got some stuff mixed in that probably is not healthy, in my case.

 

Anyway, I just wanted to tell you I am grateful for your contributions to this board! Even only in skimming your threads, I feel a bit less alone. I'm heartened to see that things seem to have worked well for you, too.

[ChooseTruth]

Ugh, there are tons of men who are emotionally available men. I think the problem is that women aren't attracted to them as easily.

Look at this dating advice:

The lady in the video gets very good ratings..and all that in 2 days. And it isn't because of her looks, I've seen other good looking women give tips and get scathing reviews.

 

Anyway

I had the reverse problem in my marriage. Exwife couldn't tell me what was wrong, unless I really pressed and then she'd finally blow up. It was the only way I could get her to finally speak her mind. It was ridiculous. Finally instead of facing problems she cheated... She complained I wasn't empathetic enough, which in her case I take as "mind reading". Cheating is a massive sign of lack of empathy imo..

[Zapbasket]

When in limerence, people are often attracted to aspects which, in that state, they feel 'complete' them

 

But then why go from reaching for those aspects as a missing piece of their puzzle, and therefore something that helps them (which is what they want), only to resent, down the road, those same aspects and the "help" they imply? Why not just embrace the increase the partnering with those qualities gives them? I've not yet been with a man who does this.

 

IME, the most successful (with women) men are the ones who precisely balance availability with distance.

 

To my thinking that's true for both sexes, no? It's just that more open people know *when* to be 100% available and don't use distance as a way of evading the progression of the relationship. I guess here by distance I mean "space." It's periods of refreshing space that enables individuals in a relationship to reclaim themselves, which in turn makes the "availability" that much more intimate. Just thinking aloud.

[Woggle]

In most cases if you make a man feel safe where he won't feel like he will get chewed out if he says what he really feels a man will open up. Men are just afraid of stepping on an emotional landmine when they discuss their feelings with women.

[Zapbasket]

In most cases if you make a man feel safe where he won't feel like he will get chewed out if he says what he really feels a man will open up. Men are just afraid of stepping on an emotional landmine when they discuss their feelings with women.

 

How do you make a man feel safe? Just want more specifics so I can understand where you're coming from.

[carhill]

How do you make a man feel safe? Just want more specifics so I can understand where you're coming from.

One example would be to refrain from using the man's expressed emotional vulnerabilities as tools in disagreements/arguments/fights.

 

Another would be to ask him how he feels being 'open' with you, compared to how his daily interactions in life go, and listening. Listening is underrated, and IMO a large portion of the 'feeling safe' dynamic. I spend a lot of time listening to both men and women and find the interactions quite interesting, especially in the realm of active listening and emotionally engaging through such behaviors.

[Keats]

GreenCove, what I mean is that you dont fall in love with someone because of their life or material circumstances. You fall in love with them because they are human.

 

You dont choose to fall in love with someone who's got it all or has nothing, who's insecure or secure, who's fixed or who's broken etc Because these circumstances nobody can avoide in life. They happen to all of us.

 

You just fall in love.

 

Even a jerk is a human. And I get the trap that women fall into when they want to change a man or a help someone mean and broken.

 

You only look for one trait and thats adaptability. If you dont adapt basic principles like communication and compromise and the circumstance of living with a partner... are all compromised.

 

In my circumstance.... I am what I am, very emotionally secret. Bottle everything till it pops. Etc. But I've adapted over time. Change happens slowly. And Im creative. I love having fun and making my own solutions to fix myself. Having a husband who listens to me has helped. I've told him to just listen to me. And not offer solutions because they must come from myself.