|
|
Post by unmatched on Aug 30, 2016 17:30:42 GMT -5
Of course, the best way to resolve it would be to fuck someone else and look him in the eyes, LOL. Of course - I have thought of that! But - I have other reasons to hold back from that for the moment. Sobriety is one. Increasing my own sense of value & worthiness. Distrust of potential mates (as - I overtrust and usually/often quite wrongly). For now - I'll take the space alone and do what I can do myself. This includes a lot of lewd and/or suggestive fun, flirting, teasing with males at support group meetings. We understand that it is in jest (for now). I don't see any suitable candidates for the title of "next lover" quite yet. Maybe soon. Thanks - I really got a lot out of your blog. something I have been wondering about recently is whether it is possible to feel that fully and enjoy it without getting so sucked in and attached. How much of the attachment is because we take a powerful experience and add a lot of meanings to it which aren't real? And how much is a purely physiological or biochemical process that is unavoidable? I don't have an answer, but I am very curious about it. |
|
|
|
Post by GeekGoddess on Aug 30, 2016 22:12:27 GMT -5
@unmatcheed - me too! I used to be a master of strings-free fun (before the marriage). At the start of the LoverMan affair, I was still fine at not getting all caught up. Something about his over-attentiveness when it wasn't expected....well....I don't know. I got off-kilter somewhere along the way. One time, when he told me I had come up at therapy - he told her FWB was the nature of our relationship and she asked him if I knew that. He asked me to be sure. I said yes - and I meant it at that time. I did. But somewhere between that time and later - expectations, hopes, secret (emotional) desires crept in there unnoticed. It's all fun & games until somebody gets their eye poked out (as mom used to say to us kids). I tried very hard to not get emotional bound up in him. But at the same time, in the rest of my life, I'm also trying to become emotionally mature and FEEL my feelings. And I felt ones I didn't want. My brain literally didn't want to get a huge crush. I tried various times to "talk myself down" (and often succeeded). It became almost more so an addiction process than actual love or whatever. The withdrawals are bad - - well - - they WERE. Now that I read flashjohn's blog and had this little epiphany, I'm already better-detached from the whole angst angle of it. I don't know where stuff comes from but I did figure up and suspect that within 8 months, I got more orgasms from the LoverMan affair than my body had experienced in the 10 years prior. And - we always came with eyes open (it was a thing - a fun, but dangerous thing, perhaps). I definitely find it an interesting question too! |
|
|
|
Post by solodriver on Sept 1, 2016 23:37:28 GMT -5
SmartKat,
I enjoyed reading your blog, especially about the way you feel towards refusing wives.
Thank God there are women like you in the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by smilin61 on Sept 7, 2016 9:40:42 GMT -5
GeekGoddess
and wewbwb
I read a piece from a book called "Chasing the scream" by Johann Hari that talked about a fascinating theory on addictions and human nature.
" Professor Peter Cohen argues that human beings have a deep need to bond and form connections. It's how we get our satisfaction. If we can't connect with each other, we will connect with anything we can find -- the whirr of a roulette wheel or the prick of a syringe. He says we should stop talking about 'addiction' altogether, and instead call it 'bonding.' A heroin addict has bonded with heroin because she couldn't bond as fully with anything else." So the opposite of addiction is not sobriety. It is human connection. "
Of course, this is a small part of the larger picture, but the upshot is that "Human beings are bonding animals. We need to connect and love. The wisest sentence of the twentieth century was E.M. Forster's -- "only connect." But we have created an environment and a culture that cut us off from connection, or offer only the parody of it offered by the Internet. The rise of addiction is a symptom of a deeper sickness in the way we live -- constantly directing our gaze towards the next shiny object we should buy, rather than the human beings all around us."
I believe that the bond you still feel for your lover is not only chemical, it's innate. Until the basic human need to feel connected/accepted/loved is met is it really possible to let go of all of those things we cling so tightly to in order to shield ourselves from pain?
|
|
|
|
Post by GeekGoddess on Sept 7, 2016 9:52:32 GMT -5
GeekGoddess
and wewbwb
I read a piece from a book called "Chasing the scream" by Johann Hari that talked about a fascinating theory on addictions and human nature.
" Professor Peter Cohen argues that human beings have a deep need to bond and form connections. It's how we get our satisfaction. If we can't connect with each other, we will connect with anything we can find -- the whirr of a roulette wheel or the prick of a syringe. He says we should stop talking about 'addiction' altogether, and instead call it 'bonding.' A heroin addict has bonded with heroin because she couldn't bond as fully with anything else." So the opposite of addiction is not sobriety. It is human connection. "
Of course, this is a small part of the larger picture, but the upshot is that "Human beings are bonding animals. We need to connect and love. The wisest sentence of the twentieth century was E.M. Forster's -- "only connect." But we have created an environment and a culture that cut us off from connection, or offer only the parody of it offered by the Internet. The rise of addiction is a symptom of a deeper sickness in the way we live -- constantly directing our gaze towards the next shiny object we should buy, rather than the human beings all around us."
I believe that the bond you still feel for your lover is not only chemical, it's innate. Until the basic human need to feel connected/accepted/loved is met is it really possible to let go of all of those things we cling so tightly to in order to shield ourselves from pain?
It's all true, smilin61 - I found articles similar and seeing it a lot of places now. It totally resonates with me (an alcoholic - sober just over 9 months now). And distancing myself from loverman, with loving detachment, also building self-esteem and growing in confidence - - I feel like the self-love aspect is my key. Now - I suspect other folks learn their self-love from parents who hug, touch, caress a baby or toddler and from what I gather, I didn't get that. (I see it in my granddaughter though) I can learn it - now. Once I have it, then connecting to others in my life is easier and more authentic. My thoughts on it are a bit jumbled still - but I definitely believe this theory on addiction and connection and am working to increase my understanding of it, my acceptance of self & others, and building a new set of relationships (good relationships with new people and "revising" the relationships I had with family & older friends). It's a journey - and well worth it! |
|
|
|
Post by greatcoastal on Sept 7, 2016 10:18:45 GMT -5
GeekGoddess
and wewbwb
Of course, this is a small part of the larger picture, but the upshot is that "Human beings are bonding animals. We need to connect and love. The wisest sentence of the twentieth century was E.M. Forster's -- "only connect." But we have created an environment and a culture that cut us off from connection, or offer only the parody of it offered by the Internet. The rise of addiction is a symptom of a deeper sickness in the way we live -- constantly directing our gaze towards the next shiny object we should buy, rather than the human beings all around us."
I believe that the bond you still feel for your lover is not only chemical, it's innate. Until the basic human need to feel connected/accepted/loved is met is it really possible to let go of all of those things we cling so tightly to in order to shield ourselves from pain?
The need to feel connected/accepted/loved goes all the way back to Adam. He had a one on one relationship with God, and he was lonely. I hear advice on having a one on one/ connection with God and that is highly sought after and understandable. Along with relationships with others and the opposite sex. I will say that my STBX finds books to read that teach one on one with God first and eliminate the importance of having relationships with others. Not a very suitable approach in a marriage, or the rest of her life,eh? Society has also conditioned us to treat a woman as a princess and place them on a pedestal . Look at the costumes we dress little girls in, women are raised to be pampered, provided for, have their needs met, men are programmed and expected to fulfill these rolls, while being scoffed at for accepting,or demanding equal treatment. Meanwhile a man is balancing the contrast of equal rights, equal treatment, until the topic of emotional, and physical needs comes up. That part of today's society,and judicial system has a far way to go. My heart goes out to you ladies that give love, respect, trust, compassion, and understanding, to men, only to be pushed aside for porn, money, power, drugs, whatever substitute. The damage that is done emotionally. It is a two way street. I am still one of those that believes there are far more people out there that can evenly share, and thrive in a working relationship. I am willing to do the work to make it happen. |
|
|
|
Post by unmatched on Sept 8, 2016 0:12:47 GMT -5
GeekGoddess
and wewbwb
I read a piece from a book called "Chasing the scream" by Johann Hari that talked about a fascinating theory on addictions and human nature.
" Professor Peter Cohen argues that human beings have a deep need to bond and form connections. It's how we get our satisfaction. If we can't connect with each other, we will connect with anything we can find -- the whirr of a roulette wheel or the prick of a syringe. He says we should stop talking about 'addiction' altogether, and instead call it 'bonding.' A heroin addict has bonded with heroin because she couldn't bond as fully with anything else." So the opposite of addiction is not sobriety. It is human connection. "
Of course, this is a small part of the larger picture, but the upshot is that "Human beings are bonding animals. We need to connect and love. The wisest sentence of the twentieth century was E.M. Forster's -- "only connect." But we have created an environment and a culture that cut us off from connection, or offer only the parody of it offered by the Internet. The rise of addiction is a symptom of a deeper sickness in the way we live -- constantly directing our gaze towards the next shiny object we should buy, rather than the human beings all around us."
I believe that the bond you still feel for your lover is not only chemical, it's innate. Until the basic human need to feel connected/accepted/loved is met is it really possible to let go of all of those things we cling so tightly to in order to shield ourselves from pain?
Thank you for that. I just watched his TedTalk - it is very good. www.ted.com/talks/johann_hari_everything_you_think_you_know_about_addiction_is_wrong |
|
|
|
Post by eternaloptimism on Sept 8, 2016 2:18:47 GMT -5
GeekGoddess
and wewbwb
I read a piece from a book called "Chasing the scream" by Johann Hari that talked about a fascinating theory on addictions and human nature.
" Professor Peter Cohen argues that human beings have a deep need to bond and form connections. It's how we get our satisfaction. If we can't connect with each other, we will connect with anything we can find -- the whirr of a roulette wheel or the prick of a syringe. He says we should stop talking about 'addiction' altogether, and instead call it 'bonding.' A heroin addict has bonded with heroin because she couldn't bond as fully with anything else." So the opposite of addiction is not sobriety. It is human connection. "
Of course, this is a small part of the larger picture, but the upshot is that "Human beings are bonding animals. We need to connect and love. The wisest sentence of the twentieth century was E.M. Forster's -- "only connect." But we have created an environment and a culture that cut us off from connection, or offer only the parody of it offered by the Internet. The rise of addiction is a symptom of a deeper sickness in the way we live -- constantly directing our gaze towards the next shiny object we should buy, rather than the human beings all around us."
I believe that the bond you still feel for your lover is not only chemical, it's innate. Until the basic human need to feel connected/accepted/loved is met is it really possible to let go of all of those things we cling so tightly to in order to shield ourselves from pain?
Thank you for that. I just watched his TedTalk - it is very good. www.ted.com/talks/johann_hari_everything_you_think_you_know_about_addiction_is_wrongI just watched that too. It makes sense. Thanks for sharing  X |
|
|
|
Post by itsjustus on Sept 8, 2016 21:38:43 GMT -5
GeekGoddess
and wewbwb
I read a piece from a book called "Chasing the scream" by Johann Hari that talked about a fascinating theory on addictions and human nature.
" Professor Peter Cohen argues that human beings have a deep need to bond and form connections. It's how we get our satisfaction. If we can't connect with each other, we will connect with anything we can find -- the whirr of a roulette wheel or the prick of a syringe. He says we should stop talking about 'addiction' altogether, and instead call it 'bonding.' A heroin addict has bonded with heroin because she couldn't bond as fully with anything else." So the opposite of addiction is not sobriety. It is human connection. "
Of course, this is a small part of the larger picture, but the upshot is that "Human beings are bonding animals. We need to connect and love. The wisest sentence of the twentieth century was E.M. Forster's -- "only connect." But we have created an environment and a culture that cut us off from connection, or offer only the parody of it offered by the Internet. The rise of addiction is a symptom of a deeper sickness in the way we live -- constantly directing our gaze towards the next shiny object we should buy, rather than the human beings all around us."
I believe that the bond you still feel for your lover is not only chemical, it's innate. Until the basic human need to feel connected/accepted/loved is met is it really possible to let go of all of those things we cling so tightly to in order to shield ourselves from pain?
The need to bond with others or as Prof. Cohen noted, with anything that feeds the need for some kind of satisfaction, is innate in humans. I've know many with an "addictive" personality that have bounced from heroin, cocaine, alcohol, and even overeating. One very good friend in fact went from drugs to alcohol to food, then back to alcohol after gastric bypass surgery. Feeding his "addiction. But I think there's a tie in to those in a SM that illustrates it very well also, at least to those of us here. I wonder if the need for a bond, a human connection, is what keeps some in their marriage, long after they've figured out that what was supposed to be the most intimate bond humans can have, isn't what they are getting. If maybe the spouse has a lower "need" for that bonding, and those who are dissatisfied, a higher need. Does that carry over to the need to stay in a disfunctional relationship even after it's been determined that it's not going to be a good outcome. The feeling of bonding from just being with someone, having a home place, of being married. If some people in the many studies can be said to be bonding with those things that hurt them, the hangovers, the DT's after a high....then what says that the bonding felt from the dysfunctions in a SM, with all of its issues, isn't an "addiction"? As you noted smilin61, the current culture has a way of cutting us off from that bonding with others, isolating us from friends, family, and other loved ones. The human beings that are all around us. Maybe it's also not just a shield from what hurts us, but also a comfort as we sink to the lower level of acceptance of our spouse. A lowering of our expectations, to shield us from the pain of leaving. |
|
|
|
Post by GeekGoddess on Sept 9, 2016 9:32:11 GMT -5
itsjustus - I strongly agree. The pain of staying the same (in my SM) wasn't "that bad" for a long time. After a point, though, I realized that the pain of changing (leaving) no longer seemed worse than the pain of staying. This is a similar analogy as we hear/use in AA that when the pain of change no longer exceeds the pain of the alcoholism - that is when we are ready to get sober. It "fees right" to me that when I was "stuck" as a victim in my SM, it was very much like be dependent on his rejection and the poor treatment. It was what I knew. It was "easy" to accept - - until it REALLY started to hurt my spirit. I'm grateful that I'm taking the time for now to not look for another relationship. Truly - a lot of folks who get sober end up "trying" to substitute new loves instead of alcohol (as a way to cope with pain and/or reproduce pain-generating patterns) instead of walking through pain as a growth opportunity - and that usually boomerangs and bites them in the ass. So - following my spirit in trying to recover my whole me before I go trying to share it with anyone (in a romantic sense). For now, learning human relationships on the friend, close friend, confidant levels. This is very rewarding actually. Later - I will look to add intimate relation as well. But for now, it's about trying to not reproduce my obsessive-sort of over-fascination with any thing or person or look outside myself for my comfort level. I agree with your theories - at least in my case, it was very applicable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 13:41:29 GMT -5
I updated my blog today
|
|
|
|
Post by unmatched on Oct 26, 2016 19:11:13 GMT -5
I read your last blog and you know what it reminded me of? The way that hostages bond with their kidnappers and feel a close connection with them forged through a period of time spent together in an extremely stressful situation. You might want to consider that just because you feel something very strongly, that doesn't make it good for you. And the meanings that your mind creates based those feelings may not be real. So your connection with your ex is clearly still very strong for you. Just don't be tempted to think that means something it doesn't. It just means there is no avoiding being a human being, and it takes time to heal and find yourself again. |
|
|
|
Post by baza on Oct 26, 2016 21:35:49 GMT -5
Dysfunctional marriage fucks with your head, gets you thinking weird shit, gets you making uninformed choices that feed back in to the loop.
-
The damage to your psyche, your ego, your self esteem are way more serious than you think.
-
Yet, this compromised position is the base from which you presently have to make your choices.
-
Exposure to this Co-Dependents support group you mention in your blog has to be a good thing.
It may help in challenging your present thinking.
And if you get your thinking back to an objective basis, you are highly likely to start making big strides in building a solid and realistic base under your feet, and from that base start making fully informed and objective choices.
And that, is what will get you out of your ILIASM shithole.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2016 11:52:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by unmatched on Nov 17, 2016 21:04:50 GMT -5
@smartkat I like K (although I do realise I don't actually get a vote here!) I know there is a part of you that really wants to jump into a 'proper' relationship, but if you are getting out and enjoying yourself then maybe you could hold out for a K who is actually available and fits some of your other requirements. Especially if you are getting laid along the way - there is nothing like really good sex to make you look and feel attractive.
|
|
