How to tell whether you're just an "option."

[Zapbasket]

"Never make someone a priority when all you are to them is an option." ~Maya Angelou

 

This is an inspiring quote but...how can you tell when you are only an "option" for someone? People's feelings for us are never guaranteed, so isn't this quote akin to saying, "Always maintain very low expectations of others"?

 

In all my relationships, there were periods of evident high commitment from my partners--or what appeared as high commitment. They showed ardor, they showed up, they made plans and they lit up when in my presence. ANd then somewhere along the way they checked out. In all but one case, I didn't take their distance to mean they were done or had fallen out of love, yet when they unceremoniously dumped me it certainly seemed to be the case.

[firmness]

I heard another saying that you reminded me of when I was posting about my divorce on another site a few years ago - "the common denominator in all of your relationships is YOU"

 

That hit me pretty hard.

 

I wish I had an answer. There is no way to know. I cannot tell if you are male or female, so not sure what side of the equation this lands. Perhaps it is a gender neutral thing.

 

I think, and it is only a thought, that the less invested we are in another person, the more freely they will come to us. There is such a thing as too much commitment and too much love - hell even Epicurus warned against loving too much!

 

So being strong and loving yourself in a healthy way is the best way to get grounded. If you are grounded and a "solid" person - physically, ethically, morally, and psychologically (I consider emotions, feelings, love, and spirituality all a part of psychology) - then you will likely attract a similar person.

 

That is how the best of long-term relationships start - from a stable, strong, equally stacked base built on mutual respect.

 

The rest of it is the magic of chemistry and love... and I have not yet begun to figure all that mess out yet.

[Scorpio Chick]

I think if you're left having to ponder if you're a priority in someone else's life, then you're most likely to them an option. I really think it's that simple.

[beach]

I think if I needed to ask myself if I was an option - then I already knew the answer.

 

When someone makes me their priority - I'm never left "wondering".

[carhill]

I can tell I'm an option when that cursed thing my father endowed me with, the mental calculator, starts calculating.

 

If I reflect, even where I've ignored it, it's never been wrong. The part which has required the work has been to cease bargaining with it and hoping for a market rebound; to end 'benefit of the doubt'.

[xxoo]

Reiteration what others have said: if you have to ask, you probably are.

 

Guys are not vague when they want to make a future with a woman.

[Zapbasket]

I think, and it is only a thought, that the less invested we are in another person, the more freely they will come to us. There is such a thing as too much commitment and too much love - hell even Epicurus warned against loving too much!

 

So being strong and loving yourself in a healthy way is the best way to get grounded. If you are grounded and a "solid" person - physically, ethically, morally, and psychologically (I consider emotions, feelings, love, and spirituality all a part of psychology) - then you will likely attract a similar person.

 

That is how the best of long-term relationships start - from a stable, strong, equally stacked base built on mutual respect.

 

The rest of it is the magic of chemistry and love... and I have not yet begun to figure all that mess out yet.

 

This is great. To clarify one point: when you say that perhaps the less invested we are in another person, the more freely they will come to us, do you mean less that we should dis-invest in the other person but rather always invest the most into ourselves? I'm interpreting what you said as to never love another more than you love yourself. Is that right?

 

As for the rest of what you say, that's exactly why I think it's best I remain single for a while, until I can look up and say, "I love my life just as it is." I've waffled on this because it has been going on 10 months since we broke up, but even though I'm 37 (and I'm female, FWiW), maybe it's best to take my time and really ground myself so that I can truly shoot for something much, much more than my previous (all sucky) relationships when the time comes to date.

[Zapbasket]

So the consensus seems to be that if you even have to ask whether you're a priority, you're not.

 

And, that a man who wants a future with you will be very clear and direct in his gestures and communication that this is his intent.

 

How, then, is a person like this different from the "Oh, s/he's just an option" person in the beginning to middle of a relationship? Is the difference evident almost immediately?

[Eggplant]

How, then, is a person like this different from the "Oh, s/he's just an option" person in the beginning to middle of a relationship? Is the difference evident almost immediately?

It is evident almost immediately. I don't think the evaluation of your worth to him takes long on a subconscious level.

[xxoo]

I think there is almost always some uncertainty and nervousness in the very beginning, but that should sort out by about month 2. After that point, you should not be questioning if this guy sees you as an option.

 

The big topics should be discussed easily from the beginning, including marriage and kids. Not necessarily first date, but first month. And those topics should continue to come up naturally, and steadily get more personal and less theoretical.

 

Beware of guys who come on fast and heavy and then move backward instead of forward at the 2-3 month mark. The more reckless he is in the beginning with his pursuit, the less likely it is rooted in serious and lasting interest.

[Zapbasket]

It is evident almost immediately. I don't think the evaluation of your worth to him takes long on a subconscious level.

 

But what exactly IS it that you can interpret is evident almost immediately? That the guy is really-super-mega into you or that he has in mind a future with you? And then HOW is it evident? Is it how he treats you? How he talks about your relationship? How he talks about / his willingness to talk about / his initiation of talks about the future? Your gut feeling of

what?--safety? Comfort?

 

Because lots of people know how to "future-fake," to borrow the words of Natalie Lue in her excellent relationship blog, Baggage Reclaim. Meaning, they can wax so poetic about a future with you that you're lulled into their vision only to find, when it comes time to actually start realizing parts of that vision, that the person was all talk because now s/he's running in every way s/he possibly can.

[beach]

Future faking is "talk" and no action.

 

I think actions show me what a persons intentions are. If a man makes a lot of EFFORT consistently for me as his priority then that shows he's interested.

[BC1980]

But what exactly IS it that you can interpret is evident almost immediately? That the guy is really-super-mega into you or that he has in mind a future with you? And then HOW is it evident? Is it how he treats you? How he talks about your relationship? How he talks about / his willingness to talk about / his initiation of talks about the future? Your gut feeling of

what?--safety? Comfort?

 

Because lots of people know how to "future-fake," to borrow the words of Natalie Lue in her excellent relationship blog, Baggage Reclaim. Meaning, they can wax so poetic about a future with you that you're lulled into their vision only to find, when it comes time to actually start realizing parts of that vision, that the person was all talk because now s/he's running in every way s/he possibly can.

 

With my ex, I really didn't see signs of future faking until 6 months into the relationship. He bought me a book for Christmas for couples who are engaged or thinking about getting married, a book with practical things to discuss before marriage like finances, in-laws, how to constructively settle differences, ect. Sort of like a self-help book I guess. Anyway, a few months later, he made some comment about not knowing if our relationship would lead to marriage. That was my first big clue, but I wrote it off. I thought maybe I had simply read too much into him giving my the book. By that time, we had actually read the book together and discussed what was in it.

 

Even a few months into the relationship, he would use phrases like, "If we get married. . . . " and he would act excited about it. After he bought me the engagement ring, he would say "When we get married. . . .," and he would always seem so excited about it. He constantly put ideas in my head, and it really effed me up in the end. Honestly, future faking is one of the most effed up things you can do to someone. You literally think you are going crazy.

 

Looking back, I definitely should have bailed sooner because he just back pedaled too many times. What always shocked me was how he was usually the one to bring up marriage and want to plan a future. I wasn't pressuring him by any means. It was totally his idea to go look at rings and buy one with the intent to get married. He told my family and his and acted so excited about it. 6 weeks after he bought me the ring, he told me he didn't know if we should get married. That was 2 years into the relationship, and I should have left at that point.

 

I think the answer of WHY people do this stuff is complicated, and I don't know all the answers. I asked him a lot of questions about this after we broke up, and he said that he would go for months wanting to marry me. Then, I would do something that would make him doubt that. I don't think he knew, and I think it's best to just stay away from people like this. They will mind f*ck you to the extreme if you allow it. I've had a h*ll of a time getting over this guy because he did such a number on me.

[BC1980]

Future faking is "talk" and no action.

 

I think actions show me what a persons intentions are. If a man makes a lot of EFFORT consistently for me as his priority then that shows he's interested.

 

With future faking, they will also put in just enough action to keep you hanging around.

[tbf]

I didn't take their distance to mean

A fully committed man doesn't distance himself. He's all in. That's how you tell.

[beach]

Green cove - what, exactly, is your guy doing - or not doing - that's making you wonder?

 

Do you think he's dating someone else too - as well as you?

[Zapbasket]

A fully committed man doesn't distance himself. He's all in. That's how you tell.

 

Even one who is emotionally reticent across the board?

[xxoo]

Even one who is emotionally reticent across the board?

 

Yes.

 

I know a lot of guys who are low on the emotional scale, but undeniably loyal, attached partners. Their actions are the clear evidence of being "all in". These guys tend to be no-nonsense, and want to lock down a great woman when they find one.

 

Greencove, you have too many excuses for these guys! You need a partner, not a project. Remember that, in early months, you should be deciding if this guy is a good match for you. You should not be trying to win over the love of someone who is unwilling to give you it.

[Zapbasket]

Green cove - what, exactly, is your guy doing - or not doing - that's making you wonder?

 

Do you think he's dating someone else too - as well as you?

 

I'm single now; my last relationship broke up in August of last year. I've had three long-term, serious relationships and I have noticed a pattern whereby I choose men who are emotionally distant. They are distant with everyone and about everything, and they are simultaneously intrigued by and resentful of my expressiveness and attempts to draw them out. I get lost in all the mixed messages, but without fail, by the end, they close off even more, are mean and angry and they throw the relationship away violently and never look back.

 

All three guys seemed really enamored of me. They always wanted to do stuff with me and were proud of me in public and with their friends and family. They were all closed off emotionally, however, and all three acknowledged that this was a problem and they wanted to overcome it. Yet they resented my interest in them, resented my joie de vivre, resented just about everything about me. This would be concurrent with signs that they were really into me. They all said they wanted to be with me forever. The scales would seem to tip when I finally demanded they open up more, tell me what was going on, tell me what they wanted for themselves for the future, and for our relationship.

 

This is the pattern in every one of my romantic relationships. Additionally, I've had "friends" who turned scary cold on me and cut me off; earlier this year someone who I thought was a good female friend out where I live told me over dinner, "You're the only person here with whom I've developed a truly close relationship," and then never spoke to me again. She had admitted years earlier that because she moved around a lot as a kid, she had a hard time letting people get close, but I never saw this coming--she always seemed to downright adore me and said so all the time.

 

So I'm just trying to sort all this out so that I don't keep going through this, as it hurts awfully and I'm at the end of my emotional rope. I seriously contemplated ending my life earlier this year because I just felt overwhelmed and imprisoned by this repetitive dynamic across so many relationships.

[Zapbasket]

 

Greencove, you have too many excuses for these guys! You need a partner, not a project. Remember that, in early months, you should be deciding if this guy is a good match for you. You should not be trying to win over the love of someone who is unwilling to give you it.

 

Thank you, xxoo. That's the mental shift I need to make. It seems it all comes down to self-worth.

[MissBee]

"Never make someone a priority when all you are to them is an option." ~Maya Angelou

 

This is an inspiring quote but...how can you tell when you are only an "option" for someone? People's feelings for us are never guaranteed, so isn't this quote akin to saying, "Always maintain very low expectations of others"?

 

In all my relationships, there were periods of evident high commitment from my partners--or what appeared as high commitment. They showed ardor, they showed up, they made plans and they lit up when in my presence. ANd then somewhere along the way they checked out. In all but one case, I didn't take their distance to mean they were done or had fallen out of love, yet when they unceremoniously dumped me it certainly seemed to be the case.

 

I don't see the situation you're describing as what that refers to and no it isn't akin to having low expectations of others actually.

 

It simply means do not prioritize those who do not prioritize you and who do not value you.

 

You know when you are not a priority and aren't valued...it's self-evident. When you feel valued, loved, respected etc you aren't confused about this...however if you have to ask and rationalize...then clearly you aren't.

 

It doesn't mean someone will not break up with you ever or that things cannot change ... that's unrealistic. Change is constant.It's not about guaranteed feelings, it's about responding to the current reality or a pattern. If you were once a priority and you no longer are...the quote is saying once you realize you are now an option do not continue to treat this person as a priority when your status has now changed.

 

If all of a sudden your bf of 5 years is neglecting you, cheating etc...then at that point you are no longer a priority and should act with this knowledge in mind. If however the 5 years before you were a priority then it doesn't negate that...but when things change, then demand more...don't allow yourself to be treated poorly or put someone on a pedestal essentially who doesn't value you similarly...that's what the quote is about. It's akin to not giving more than you're getting and putting people on pedestals while you're the acting doormat.

 

It's especially useful in dating where some people just meet someone and the person barely makes any time for them yet they are willing to drop all and bend over backwards for someone who isn't bothered by them...this is also obvious...you KNOW when you're putting more effort and when you don't feel like you're valued. That's how you know if you're an option. You cannot control if you later become an option...but the minute you feel like an option then adjust your mentality accordingly, essentially.

Edited June 1, 2014 by MissBee

[firmness]

when you say that perhaps the less invested we are in another person, the more freely they will come to us, do you mean less that we should dis-invest in the other person but rather always invest the most into ourselves? I'm interpreting what you said as to never love another more than you love yourself. Is that right?

 

I guess you could put it that way, but to me it is a bit more nuanced. Like you said (and we are in the same boat) it is a good idea to be solid with yourself before you can be good for another person.

 

When I was younger, I believed in sacrifice. Honor, respect, courage, loyalty. I took these things very seriously. I joined the Marines and my 4 years of active duty are among the best times of my life. Fortunately I never saw war.

 

When I got out of the Marines it was a big adjustment. Compared to THAT level of trust, teamwork, and camaraderie, everything else pales in comparison.

 

I also realize that I was a tool for rich people. They start wars by bribing our government, we go to war and men like me die. We go away and the main people who are left to procreate are NOT people like the men I served with. The ones who live and keep all their limbs and prosper are those who do NOT believe in sacrifice - on average. It isnt' like all civilians are devoid of values, so I want to be careful here. But I hope you can see my point.

 

This is my long way of saying that the same was true in relationships. I believed that a man should be like x, y, and z for a woman. That got me 2 divorces and life shattering heartache - my children and both sides of our family have suffered as well.

 

I am now in a new relationship 3 years post divorce. This woman is incredibly beautiful, intelligent, and creative. She is fun, easy going and amazing all around. And I could leave her in a heartbeat if it came down to it. The absence of a marriage contract means I am less invested in her. The fact that I can walk away means that I am less emotionally invested in her. The fact that I don't see her every day means that I am less logistically invested in her. And she absolutely adores me.

 

Go figure.

 

As she invests more in me, I will decide if and how to match that. It is a reasonable thing to do given my past experiences with women. They are not evil or bad, they are just reacting to my being fully invested without them having earned it.

 

That cannot and will not ever happen again. In the meantime I am happier, freer, stronger and more relaxed than ever before.

 

When I come home at the end of the day, I am a good man. Not a jerk for being 15 minutes late for dinner because traffic was backed up. I am a good father, a good neighbor, and my colleagues at work seem to really respect and appreciate me. When I was married, my wife considered me to be not this good. I like the single me better than the married me- same guy, same simple easy behavior, different context.

[firmness]

...I think the answer of WHY people do this stuff is complicated... Then, I would do something that would make him doubt that. I

 

This is very telling right here. Have you considered looking in the mirror on this one? What were the things you did that made him doubt marriage? And if you acknowledge this, then why is HE effed up?

[firmness]

...I have noticed a pattern whereby I choose men who are emotionally distant. ...and they are simultaneously intrigued by and resentful of my expressiveness and attempts to draw them out...This is the pattern in every one of my romantic relationships... I'm at the end of my emotional rope. I seriously contemplated ending my life earlier this year because I just felt overwhelmed and imprisoned by this repetitive dynamic across so many relationships.

 

Fist of all, let me say that I know where you are coming from. I am also sorry that you are struggling with this. No one should have to deal with this. You sound like a nice person.

 

A female colleague once told me that the worst type of employee is one who is not coachable. We agreed that we both appreciate feedback - negative and positive and have grown tremendously thanks to the people close to us who had the courage to tell us to our faces what we were doing wrong. That is a rare gift, I can tell you, and one that I have come to really appreciate.

 

Unfortunately, most of the rest of the people I know are not so coachable. People have preconceived notions of themselves and they filter out what does not fit for them.

 

If someone is very sensitive to feedback (ie uncoachable) but always struggling with one thing or another, then I just stay away. If I say nothing, I will spend all of my time watching this person deal with messes of his/her own making. That is frustrating for any friend, lover or family member. Besides, that feels wrong to just watch someone you care about flail around and know damned well that no one else wants to be the one to tell them how screwed up they are.

 

If I DO say something, then I risk losing the friendship. Some people just do not want to hear negative feedback. Period. Especially if it is unsolicited.

 

Now if you ask this particular group of people, who are almost by definition lacking self awareness, if they are like this - they would likely deny it. They would say "no, that's not me. I DO listen. I am a great listener" But their results scream otherwise.

 

In past relationships I have found my romantic partners to be very difficult to talk to. Women, it seems to me, are great at giving feedback, but stink at accepting it. If a woman dresses too provocatively, and you tell her this, watch what happens. I am picking a controversial thing to make the point and I am sure you will agree that even if it is true that a woman dresses "slutty" a man should never tell her this.

 

There are hundreds and perhaps thousands of things that men learn to not say. So we shut up. We do not reveal our feelings because we are trained from a very young age by the women around us that being honest is bad. Instead you should be polite, and considerate, and appropriate.

 

Men can be much more honest with each other. Once a man observes too much sensitivity or imbalance in this particular communication dynamic, it means a life time of "yes dear" or else he will pay a price. That sounds sick and twisted, but this sort of "shut up or I will make you pay later" mentality has become an ingrained part of American culture.

 

Based on your post, I would start with that.

 

Good luck.

Edited June 1, 2014 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Zapbasket]

Fist of all, let me say that I know where you are coming from. I am also sorry that you are struggling with this. No one should have to deal with this. You sound like a nice person.

 

A female colleague once told me that the worst type of employee is one who is not coachable. We agreed that we both appreciate feedback - negative and positive and have grown tremendously thanks to the people close to us who had the courage to tell us to our faces what we were doing wrong. That is a rare gift, I can tell you, and one that I have come to really appreciate.

 

Unfortunately, most of the rest of the people I know are not so coachable. People have preconceived notions of themselves and they filter out what does not fit for them.

 

If someone is very sensitive to feedback (ie uncoachable) but always struggling with one thing or another, then I just stay away. If I say nothing, I will spend all of my time watching this person deal with messes of his/her own making. That is frustrating for any friend, lover or family member. Besides, that feels wrong to just watch someone you care about flail around and know damned well that no one else wants to be the one to tell them how screwed up they are.

 

If I DO say something, then I risk losing the friendship. Some people just do not want to hear negative feedback. Period. Especially if it is unsolicited.

 

Now if you ask this particular group of people, who are almost by definition lacking self awareness, if they are like this - they would likely deny it. They would say "no, that's not me. I DO listen. I am a great listener" But their results scream otherwise.

 

I was totally with you on this part. I think what you say here is spot-on--especially about how people who cannot receive criticism tend to be unaware that they are people who cannot receive criticism and actually will claim otherwise. That's part of what makes it nearly impossible to be around such people--the amount of denial you have to tip-toe around just makes the difficulties in relating to them insurmountable.

 

So. With you there; not so much with you on this part:

 

Women, it seems to me, are great at giving feedback, but stink at accepting it. If a woman dresses too provocatively, and you tell her this, watch what happens. I am picking a controversial thing to make the point and I am sure you will agree that even if it is true that a woman dresses "slutty" a man should never tell her this.

 

There are hundreds and perhaps thousands of things that men learn to not say. So we shut up. We do not reveal our feelings because we are trained from a very young age by the women around us that being honest is bad. Instead you should be polite, and considerate, and appropriate.

 

Men can be much more honest with each other. Once a man observes too much sensitivity or imbalance in this particular communication dynamic, it means a life time of "yes dear" or else he will pay a price. That sounds sick and twisted, but this sort of "shut up or I will make you pay later" mentality has become an ingrained part of American culture.

 

Based on your post, I would start with that.

 

Good luck.

 

I think one reason I stayed in relationships with men who were emotionally closed off was because I always was told not to expect men to be as emotionally forthcoming as women "usually" are. I've seen women in relationships with men who can barely grunt in reply to questions directed about them about pretty much anything. So when I picked up on the emotional reticence of the men I was dating, I told myself they were "just being a man."

 

So I'm not sure what you're saying I should start with? I can't be held responsible, after all, for a man who enters a relationship assuming that "all women" can't hear criticism and therefore they have to say, "Yes, dear" and express nothing. But maybe that's not what you're suggesting? I lost you there and hope you'll clarify.