gem
So I'm still up to no good, reading all the relationship-and-healing related non-fiction I can get my hands on. It's good, though, really. Because every once in a while I find passages that resonate so strongly that it's like I'm going through all of this just to discover these tidbits of what seems to me to be pure wisdom, right there on the page.
Like this, from the book Attached by Levine and Heller:
"Today's experts offer advice that goes something like this: Your happiness is something that should come from within and should not be dependent on your lover or mate. Your well-being is not their responsibility, and theirs is not yours. Each person needs to look after himself or herself. In addition, you should learn not to allow your inner peace to be disturbed by the person you are closest to. If your partner acts in a way that undermines your sense of security, you should be able to distance yourself form the situation emotionally, "keep the focus on yourself," and stay on an even keel. If you can't do that, there might be something wrong with you. You might be too enmeshed with the other person, or "codependent," and you must learn to set better "boundaries."
The basic premise underlying this point of view is that the ideal relationship is one between two self-sufficient people who unite in a mature, respectful way while maintaining clear boundaries. If you develop a strong dependency on your partner, you are deficient in some way and are advised to work on yourself to become more "differentiated" and develop a "greater sense of self." The worst possible scenario is that you will end up needing your partner, which is equated with "addiction" to him or her, and addiction, we all know, is a dangerous prospect.
While the teachings of the codependency movement remain immensely helpful in dealing with family members who suffer from substance abuse (as was the initial intention), they can be misleading and even damaging when applied indiscriminately to all relationships. Biology tells us a very different story."
The authors go on to explore the science of attachment, which delightfully applies not only to babies and children but (gasp!) to adults as well. It's a fascinating read and I highly recommend it.
It does bring up some big questions for me, though, around the nature of advice for relationships as well as for break-ups. It seems that there are directly contradicting suggestions out there, not unlike the dietary guidelines for one or another version of ideal health. Don't eat animal protein. Eat more meat. Limit gluten, dairy, sugar and salt. Eat in moderation.
Likewise, this is what you get when you ask (or don't) for advice after a break up:
Feel everything. Let it all go. Trust yourself. Trust in the universe. Everything happens for a reason. Some things don't make sense. You are 100% responsible. It's not your fault. Focus on yourself. It's not about you.
I know there's a way through, and it doesn't come from aiming to follow all or even any of the advice I've been given. I'm certainly grateful for the different perspectives, because at the end of the day, it does make it easier to check in with yourself and know what feels right. Yes, that. No, not that. Done, and on some points, still doing. Revisiting all that you believe when your foundation has been shaken; being willing to question and change but also standing strong in the place that is YOU.
It's a mind and heart-opening time, and I'm starting to be glad for it.
Like this, from the book Attached by Levine and Heller:
"Today's experts offer advice that goes something like this: Your happiness is something that should come from within and should not be dependent on your lover or mate. Your well-being is not their responsibility, and theirs is not yours. Each person needs to look after himself or herself. In addition, you should learn not to allow your inner peace to be disturbed by the person you are closest to. If your partner acts in a way that undermines your sense of security, you should be able to distance yourself form the situation emotionally, "keep the focus on yourself," and stay on an even keel. If you can't do that, there might be something wrong with you. You might be too enmeshed with the other person, or "codependent," and you must learn to set better "boundaries."
The basic premise underlying this point of view is that the ideal relationship is one between two self-sufficient people who unite in a mature, respectful way while maintaining clear boundaries. If you develop a strong dependency on your partner, you are deficient in some way and are advised to work on yourself to become more "differentiated" and develop a "greater sense of self." The worst possible scenario is that you will end up needing your partner, which is equated with "addiction" to him or her, and addiction, we all know, is a dangerous prospect.
While the teachings of the codependency movement remain immensely helpful in dealing with family members who suffer from substance abuse (as was the initial intention), they can be misleading and even damaging when applied indiscriminately to all relationships. Biology tells us a very different story."
The authors go on to explore the science of attachment, which delightfully applies not only to babies and children but (gasp!) to adults as well. It's a fascinating read and I highly recommend it.
It does bring up some big questions for me, though, around the nature of advice for relationships as well as for break-ups. It seems that there are directly contradicting suggestions out there, not unlike the dietary guidelines for one or another version of ideal health. Don't eat animal protein. Eat more meat. Limit gluten, dairy, sugar and salt. Eat in moderation.
Likewise, this is what you get when you ask (or don't) for advice after a break up:
Feel everything. Let it all go. Trust yourself. Trust in the universe. Everything happens for a reason. Some things don't make sense. You are 100% responsible. It's not your fault. Focus on yourself. It's not about you.
I know there's a way through, and it doesn't come from aiming to follow all or even any of the advice I've been given. I'm certainly grateful for the different perspectives, because at the end of the day, it does make it easier to check in with yourself and know what feels right. Yes, that. No, not that. Done, and on some points, still doing. Revisiting all that you believe when your foundation has been shaken; being willing to question and change but also standing strong in the place that is YOU.
It's a mind and heart-opening time, and I'm starting to be glad for it.
I do believe you've nailed it! :)
ReplyDeletereal change is always hard. because it demands we release our attachment to our old paradigm to make way for a new one.
real learning is always expensive - one way or another.
anyway, i admire your clarity and perspective.
b.