He could/should have noticed that he was being jerked around by my lack of self-knowledge and thus my inability to set a hard bottom line. He could/should have realised that what he wanted from me was not what I could give, and have considered what to do with that in mind.
What did he do that worked? Well, he was patient with me, but that did not work for him. I just didn't have the ability to give him what he wanted.
I felt it necessary, then, to keep changing the perameters of the relationship over and over, to be constantly unhappy with all the situations we could devise, but to give it 'a fair shot' and to 'see if it could work'. At some point I realised that, right then, it just couldn't, and there the parallel diverges. Here I am being asked to give it two more tries, one 'interim' try and another after that where things will supposedly be settled.
In what sense should it matter? Should the fact that people are well-meaning change my response to their actions? It has been so far, and it has not made harmful actions any less painful. What would make the situation less painful is, well, fewer harmful actions. A malicious mindset would make things easier as well, because then I would not strign myself along.
Now, they are trying for fewer harmful actions between themselves, which is supposed to also result in fewer harmful actions for me. My dilemma is this, and it was Jan's dilemma while ago. When they say 'wait, it will be better soon' how many times do I believe that?
When I understand why you do something, often the first thing of value I get out of it is the realisation that it's not about me. When I can see that a hurtful thing you say isn't actually designed to hurt me but to protect yourself, that it's a flag that says you feel threatened, I can learn to hear it as a cry for a hug rather than as a "harmful action."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Devil's advocate, as usual
Date: 2004-07-20 02:55 pm (UTC)So the question is, what did you think he could/should have done that you might be able to do, now?
Alternatively, what did he do that worked that you can do?
More challengingly, what did you feel it necessary to do then that you see others doing now, and does it matter than you understand why?
Re: Devil's advocate, as usual
Date: 2004-07-20 04:53 pm (UTC)What did he do that worked? Well, he was patient with me, but that did not work for him. I just didn't have the ability to give him what he wanted.
I felt it necessary, then, to keep changing the perameters of the relationship over and over, to be constantly unhappy with all the situations we could devise, but to give it 'a fair shot' and to 'see if it could work'. At some point I realised that, right then, it just couldn't, and there the parallel diverges. Here I am being asked to give it two more tries, one 'interim' try and another after that where things will supposedly be settled.
In what sense should it matter? Should the fact that people are well-meaning change my response to their actions? It has been so far, and it has not made harmful actions any less painful. What would make the situation less painful is, well, fewer harmful actions. A malicious mindset would make things easier as well, because then I would not strign myself along.
Now, they are trying for fewer harmful actions between themselves, which is supposed to also result in fewer harmful actions for me. My dilemma is this, and it was Jan's dilemma while ago. When they say 'wait, it will be better soon' how many times do I believe that?
Re: Devil's advocate, as usual
Date: 2004-07-21 01:56 pm (UTC)Do you see what I mean?