Trialbyfire Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Is it possible to make yourself emotionally available? Or is that something you just realize one day after some time to yourself? It's a matter of time and understanding yourself. In my situation, I found that when I anchored within myself, really believed in my gut instincts/ability to judge, that it happened naturally after that. Also, luck was with me, that I met an amazing man who was also emotionally available. We're mutually crazy about each other. No drama or games.
carhill Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Absolutely. I experienced it without even knowing it when I emotionally detached from my wife, prior to MC. I started wondering why all these other women were being "friendly" with me, even my friends wives and wife's friends, none of whom ever had been before. What was happening was that I was sending out signals of emotional availability and they were picking up on it. After working with the psychologist, I practiced turning it on and off and now understand how to project a proper reflection of where my head is. Prior, I was empty and wandering aimlessly. Women saw that as the "lost puppy" and responded. Can't say I hated it, TBH So, as TBF related, it is about time (life experience) and understanding yourself. OK, shutting this thing off
Dumbledore Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Hands up all those people who are currently in a relationship that's lasted more than a month! Let's all try to keep our egos out of this thread, please.
Trialbyfire Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 To be honest though, for me at least, it isn't at all about playing games. It is quite uncomfortable for me to be this way. I'm not "winning" anything. It's actually hard work for me push myself to be more emotional and vulnerable. After a year together I am only just beginning this process. He's very happy about it. I'm scared to death. You have to ask yourself what is it about this relationship that you fear. Is it possible it's commitment in general? If so, what was the root cause of it? Time to do some serious digging within yourself.
AlektraClementine Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Oh the digging has been done. I know exactly what it is. How to overcome something so deeply rooted is quite a different task.
Dumbledore Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 To be honest though, for me at least, it isn't at all about playing games. It is quite uncomfortable for me to be this way. I'm not "winning" anything. It's actually hard work for me push myself to be more emotional and vulnerable. After a year together I am only just beginning this process. He's very happy about it. I'm scared to death. Just let it happen naturally. Don't fall into the trap of being overanalytical, and internalising everything. Some people make an online career out of it!
Author seamaid Posted January 26, 2009 Author Posted January 26, 2009 It's a matter of time and understanding yourself. In my situation, I found that when I anchored within myself, really believed in my gut instincts/ability to judge, that it happened naturally after that. Also, luck was with me, that I met an amazing man who was also emotionally available. We're mutually crazy about each other. No drama or games. That sounds so great! I know I *want* to be emotionally available and able to give my all again. I guess that's a start. Is there a difference between the way an immature person falls in love and mature person falls in love? I mean, in relation to rose-colored glasses?
confused_2008 Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Absolutely. I experienced it without even knowing it when I emotionally detached from my wife, prior to MC. I started wondering why all these other women were being "friendly" with me, even my friends wives and wife's friends, none of whom ever had been before. What was happening was that I was sending out signals of emotional availability and they were picking up on it. After working with the psychologist, I practiced turning it on and off and now understand how to project a proper reflection of where my head is. Prior, I was empty and wandering aimlessly. Women saw that as the "lost puppy" and responded. Can't say I hated it, TBH So, as TBF related, it is about time (life experience) and understanding yourself. OK, shutting this thing off How do you send out signals of emotional availability? I know, simple question with a complex answer but I'm intrigued
Trialbyfire Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 That sounds so great! I know I *want* to be emotionally available and able to give my all again. I guess that's a start. Is there a difference between the way an immature person falls in love and mature person falls in love? I mean, in relation to rose-colored glasses? I can't honestly say that we're in love yet but most definitely, we're invested to a degree and moving forward at a pace that's comfortable for both of us. We just "get" each other.
Dumbledore Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 I think somebody's got a schoolgirl crush. Hardly surprising, but let's not let our egos get carried away with the outcome. A person claiming they know everything after a couple of weeks is amusing, though. Emotional availability is a term used by people who want to pretend they are smart. If you want to be with someone, you will. Saying you're "emotionally unavailable" is simply a fake way of saying you're not into them, or they're not into you.
Adamagnet Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Spot on. You'll notice that these are the only relationships which work. While it is true that a relationship's length is positively correlated with an objectively more attractive female in a m/f pairing, it's fallacious to assume that the physical attraction discrepancy is the only variable to effect said length.
Dumbledore Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 with an objectively more attractive female in a m/f pairing, it's fallacio Could be. I'm not too sure about that one.
Isolde Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 I can see it being better if the guy is the more nurturing, protective partner to some extent, but not actually the more loving partner. That just doesn't work in the long run.
OpenBook Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 In a relationship, the man should want the woman more than the woman wants the man. The other way around, a woman wanting the man more than he wants her, is not so good. I agree, based on all the marriages I've witnessed. The ones where the man is clearly more nuts about the woman than she is about him, are the ones that last and appear to be in the best shape. Both are happy and healthy, well-maintained inside and out. I have no idea why. But I do know that men DO NOT LIKE it when a woman is more into him than he is into her. They do not handle it well at all. And they end up treating her like a servant, or worse (i.e., making fun of her, negating/demeaning her, etc.). I have never met a man who is an exception to this rule.
Isolde Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 I don't know. I feel like to be loved and yet not feel an equal or almost equal love in return, wouldn't be right for me at all. I guess everyone has different needs.
GoodOnPaper Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 But I do know that men DO NOT LIKE it when a woman is more into him than he is into her. This is consistent with my experience. After a lifetime of being shot down by women, I thought it would be a nice change for someone to actually be more into me, even if I wasn't that much into her. Not so much . . . I can't imagine that being too unbalanced in the other direction would really work that well. At some point, doesn't the male fail to be sufficiently challenging? How does he generate enough attraction to keep her faithful?
peteyj Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 I think there has to be a mutual attraction. Yes one might like the other a little more but for things to last both partners need to actually want to be together for various reasons otherwise it's either going to fail or it's going to be a miserable relationship. I also think a woman who isn't all that into the guy while the guy is head over heels into her is far more likely to cheat. She already isn't that much into him so who is to say that some other guy she really is into doesn't approach her one day and suddenly 'it just happened.' It's just that most of the time guys never imagine their wives or girlfriends would cheat and half the time they don't know it's actually happening. Females always have an easier time attracting and picking up males. So a spouse or girlfriend who isn't all that much into the guy probably is one that's bound to cheat one day. Whether or not the guy ever knows about it is another story.
Trialbyfire Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 I think there has to be a mutual attraction. Yes one might like the other a little more but for things to last both partners need to actually want to be together for various reasons otherwise it's either going to fail or it's going to be a miserable relationship. I also think a woman who isn't all that into the guy while the guy is head over heels into her is far more likely to cheat. She already isn't that much into him so who is to say that some other guy she really is into doesn't approach her one day and suddenly 'it just happened.' It's just that most of the time guys never imagine their wives or girlfriends would cheat and half the time they don't know it's actually happening. Females always have an easier time attracting and picking up males. So a spouse or girlfriend who isn't all that much into the guy probably is one that's bound to cheat one day. Whether or not the guy ever knows about it is another story. Men and women cheat for all kinds of reasons, of which the most prevalent, is for purely selfish reasons. I think you need to assess the character of the person, rather than their gender. Stay away from someone who's always looking for external validation, who lacks moral fibre. If they don't feel they're getting it within their relationship, reasonable level or otherwise, they'll look elsewhere for it. Add in selfishness, and those are the ones most prone to cheat.
carhill Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 Intertwining morals with caring more or less would make for an interesting discussion, IMO. I think the psychology which makes up morality (each person's interpretation) also has a lot to do with how people "care" or "like" more or less. For example, can I "care" more because I trust more? I trust that my love will be received and valued in a positive way? Does focusing that love specifically, without conscious desire for external validation make it more "pure"? Does the emotional capacity for empathy and caring impact that "care"? Just a few of the subjects covered in MC regarding compatibility.... Well, have fun
Still Trying Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 This discussion really hits home for me. I've been on both sides of it. I can tell you that both have their merits and while I agree that someone "always holds the baton" (I really believe that) it's so nice when you can get something that is close to mutual as possible. Currently I'm in a relationship where I'm the lover and it's nice - I'm completely crazy about her and she knows it. I think she really likes holding the power, and it's OK - FOR NOW. I made another thread about it so I don't want to go into the details of that now. In my last relationship I was the loved person and I can tell you that really neither are all that great if you're not somewhere close to being mutual with your feelings. Unfortunately I feel as though I'm stuck playing a little bit of a game in my situation. I want to really be head over heels in love with this person but she's stoic - and if I show her too much more enthusiasm it would likely turn her off at this point. In regards to the general discussion I'm really not sure that gender plays any roll in this what-so-ever. Is it really better if the woman is the one who is loved? Dammit I want to be loved sometimes too!
carhill Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 I wonder if some of the "it's better for the man to like/love the woman more" than the reverse has to do with the traditional and increasingly outdated stereotype of the male being the exclusively polyamorous party in the relationship.....simply, if the man is p*ssy-whipped, he'll be less likely to stray. The woman manages that dynamic intellectually, caring less (about what is keeping the man interested and faithful). Now, with women more independent and more equally as likely to be polyamorous, I don't know that the hypothesis holds water. I've actually seen the indicators of switches in this dynamic in long marriages, as societal norms have changed. Interesting subject, anyway. Thanks, OP
clv0116 Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 Typically if it seems like she's not that interested in me I just move on. She'll either let me know my estimation of her interest was wrong or I've just avoided getting involved with a very time consuming situation. Win-Win.
Trialbyfire Posted January 27, 2009 Posted January 27, 2009 When you get equal investment and clear communication, thus resolution to issues, a relationship flows naturally. Lopsided relationships tend to end with one person feeling used or unappreciated, thus walking.
Recommended Posts