7 posts tagged “relationships”

I used to tell people that when an alcoholic stops drinking, it won’t solve all of the family’s problems. In fact, it might create new problems. The alcohol covers up a lot of problems. When it’s gone, certain of those problems become visible.

I’m experiencing some of that now. After years of running around on persons that I “loved,” I decided to play it straight…very straight. It is a good feeling to be a changed man. It was a conscious choice. I feel like I’m acting my age for a change. Now, my issues are coming visible.

My beloved is pointing out my weaknesses in listening. I’ve been a trained listener for clients, but for family, my listening has not been so good…as I thought. I knew I needed to be more consistent between work and home, but somehow I wasn’t pulling it together. She’s made it clear how I can go about it. I’m working the issue—slowly, but surely.

The biggest impact of low commitment was that I was able to maintain emotional distance relatively easily. It felt like good boundaries, but I was only fooling myself. It was more like a wall enclosing my self-centeredness. Not being in the relationship wholeheartedly prevented me from connecting fully and deeply. In hindsight, I see my connections as superficial at best. That’s probably why I haven’t had the intensity of love that I yearned for and have witnessed in others.

So being in love backed by full commitment, I can see the difference. For one thing, my level of joy is extremely high. I also feel a stronger desire and willingness to be emotionally available for my beloved. I want her to know I’m available. Moreover, I sincerely want to do those things that are helpful for our growth as a couple.

But, I’m learning that this is not so simple as it seems. I need to balance my feelings and desires so that I don’t assume that I know what is best for us and unwittingly impose something that is not love on her (or us). In other words, my love needs discipline. If it is random and reckless, it will be damaging and hurtful, not loving at all.

My biggest learning, however, has been discovering what it is like to be on the other side of a loved one who appears to have another active relationship going on. Having been on the other side for so long, the signs are very obvious. They are even more obvious when she doesn’t deny it.

For me, that’s the pain of love and commitment that I had not imagined nor prepared for. It’s the quintessential paradigm of the sobered up alcoholic. It is painful to see what you’ve been missing after all these years of denial. Like the stages of grief, denial is followed by a lot of anger.

The evidence is all circumstantial, of course. But ex-playas know game when they see it. So, I’m in unknown territory because deciding to stay means keeping faith that it will work out in the end.

I had no idea of how painful this position is. None. I’ve put several excellent, I mean top-notch, women through this for extended periods of time. Now, I’m going through it for two months and it’s about to eat me alive. Call it karma, divine retribution, whatever. It’s a terrible feeling to be #2. I mean it’s bad. It keeps my stomach in knots at times.

This is no doubt part of the suffering involved in love. Many times, I’ve wondered how people have stayed in marriages where one partner philanders. I’d tell myself how strong the other spouse must be, but my understanding was so nonchalant and cursory. Now, that I’m living it, I see clearly that I didn’t have a damn clue about the pain associated with the infidelity. It is tough! And I’m not even freaking married to her.

Nevertheless, I know that I need to stick it out; live my commitment. Be it. What one woman or man can do, another can do. Perhaps, this is what is meant by lone suffering. One can only go through this alone.

My prayer is that the other relationship will end. I really love this woman. Of course, this is where real love begins to develop—when the “falling in love” stage has passed and the couple deal with real issues. But, if it doesn’t cease, I’ll have to make a decision. It’s not a decision I’m prepared to make now.

But, whatever I do, I don’t want to go back to my old ways. That person deserves no resurrection. Being a committed lover is who I choose to be. The new me deserves life and a fair chance to thrive and grow. The alcoholic is dead.

Ciao 4 niao.

We were on the Road Less Traveled. Now, we're off. The sad thing for me is that getting off the road was a unilateral decision that I had no opportunity to participate in. She simply sent me an email, titled "My Decision".

For me, the Road Less Traveled was a beautiful thing; a work of priceless art. From the start, we were simply in the groove. We had exceptional chemistry, conversation, and common interests. We went to movies, museums, hung out with her son, visited her other son, ate good food, simple food, listened to music in lounges, then we traveled.

During our trip, we had a snag on Day #3. The disagreement definitely disrupted our flow. But we worked through it. I thought we had recovered nicely. She said she wouldn't tolerate certain demands upon her person; demands that prevented her from being herself. She didn't want to be challenged. I agreed.

I didn't see her for two days, but we talked a little. The conversations felt superficial. I tried to go deeper, but only managed to go so far. Then, there was silence. Then, the letter came and it was over.

In Robert Frost's famous poem, The Road Not Taken, the traveler comes to a fork in the road and has to decide which way to go. The last stanza goes like this:

The road to love often reaches a fork and the lovers have to decide which path to take. In my relationship with Felicia, I believe we came to that fork. In my mind, we needed to decide whether to stay on the seldom trod road of deep, intense love (the road less traveled) or get on the road of the same ole thing (the beaten path). Seems she chose some version of the latter.

Being on the Road Less Traveled has a toll. For me, that toll is having a willingness to journey with a companion, trying to meet their needs while getting your own met in a reasonable manner, compromising, and recognition that being with someone might require some personal changes. I was committed to all that and a bag of chips.

I was never so fulfilled by a woman in my life! Never. I told her she was my Michelle Obama, someone who is strong, reliable, a devoted mother, beautiful, fine (very fine), and the apple of my eye--my heart. Being with her "made all the difference." I felt so alive, whole, and with joy.

Now, I find myself off the Road Less Traveled...not on the Road Not Taken.

I'm back on the beaten path. It's a tough place to be. A journey back into the wood.

Ciao 4 niao.

In worship today, the pastor preached an elegant sermon from the poem, Knots, by Carl Dennis. It is an amazing poem that deals with the knots that people's lives are filled with. At least, according to her interpretation. In her unpacking of the poem, she related it to how families pass down grudges and other experiences to the next generation. People often envision that at some time in the future through the softening of hearts and conflict managing, said knots will become unraveled and peace will rule where once conflict was king.

She also brought into play the notion of bowline knots from the poem. Apparently, a bowline know is one that has been passed down over generations by sailors to younger sailors. It is unique for its capacity to neither slip nor jam. In life, she said, one benefits from distinguishing between which knots we ought to let slip [my words] and which knots are more permanent and keep us appropriately tethered to family, community, ideals, etc. Either way, we can claim our own knots or create our own bowline knot.

This was tied together with words from Al-anon: "take care of your own side of the street." Since family knots tend to keep us bound to our family members in unhealthy ways, it helps to be mindful that tending to our own knots, not the knots of others, can be liberating.

I began reflecting on my personal style of relating to people. This analogy is congruent with my style. I try to attend to my own knots and encourage people to do the same and to be mindful that my knots are not thier knots. IN other words, I try to take care of my own side of the street, not other persons' side. Over the last several years, I've worked hard to recognize when an issue does not belong on my side of the street. When I do, I gently release myself from that knot and let the other person do the unraveling. A person that wants to befriend me that requires a lot of help unraveling their own knots will have a difficult time with me because I feel it is healthier for me avoid certain entanglements, especially those that do not originate with me and the other. Therefore, in order for me to have a good relationship with another person, I need someone that knows how and is confident tending to their side of the street.

Another article came to mind. Brought to my attention by a close friend, it is in the March 6 NY Times and is titled, "Insufferable Clinginess, or Healthy Dependence?" The article examines the distinction between healthy and unhealthy interpersonal dependency. Needy people, it asserts, seek constant assurance and advice, engage in "playing geisha for each new partner" and cannot leave bad relationships.  Healthy personalities provide a "protective warmth that cements romantic relationships."  They can manage, or modulate impulses better. The latter is similar to taking care of one's own side of the street.

It should be obvious by now where I'm going with this, so I won't belabor the details. In short, bring me the healthy dependence, not the clingy.

I have enough knots of my own. As I work them out, it is helpful to have someone interdependent to listen to my story, but not feel entangled by it. That was a great message. Putting this down might solidify this reflection in my mind more clearly and help me become a better person.

Anchors away!!

Keep it real.

I've drawn a conclusion regarding the elements of partnership between two people trying to make a relationship work. Having two leaders does not a good couple make. That's my conclusion.

Prior to marriage, I had a philosophy that two persons could co-exist doing their own things even if they were quite different. Say, he wants to spend time at the movies; she wants to dance. I thought this might work out. Say, she believes the kid should do sports; he believes emphasis should be on academics. The last one was real. I was working off of the theory of mutuality that gives persons equal regard rather one over the other.

I've come to find fallacies in that approach. Especially as regards the need for a leadership position. Sometimes, equal regard is incorrect and  can lead to poor decision making. Or no decision making and one person asserting his or her will against the better judgment that doesn't prevail.

My philosophy now is this: the person with the most expertise should take the leadership role on issues that fall under his/her purview, esp. when it's clear that person is correct. When it's fuzzy, the couple probably would do well to consult an outsider that they both respect, then decide. On issues where this is no clear solution, compromise needs to take place. And disagreeing to disagree and then one party acting unilaterally is a poor outcome.

I believe both voices should count even when one party is at a severe disadvantage in terms of experience. Sometimes, common sense is just as good as education; sometimes better. Wisdom for sure is preferred to gut instinct.

This leads me to a new litmus test. Can my partner take my suggestions even when the suggestion appears to go against the grain of her position? Can this transpire or do I have to listen to, "You can't tell me what to do!" If it's the latter, we probably will not be a good match.

I know that I can take suggestion. Indeed, I have a track record of taking suggestions and following through. I attribute much of this approach to my overall happiness with life. It gives me a sense of being flexible and resilient. I feel closer to the friends that I take counsel from. And I keep an attitude of gratitude for their friendship, which I value very highly.

So I guess the vital elements here are negotiation and willingness to suggestibility. It's not that tired line--communication. What is that? Usually, when people say that they really mean they want their partner to talk more. They don't realize more talking means more listening. That's something that seldom happens with the communication advocates.

So there you have it. My new paradigm for partnership.

Keep it real.

There is something about being mature that enables relationships to last and stand the test of time. Two things come to my mind that I've been pondering for a few weeks now. These are giving up selfish desires and handling boredom constructively. I feel a need to work on these if I am to have sustained relationship as an adult.

Giving up selfish desires is about putting one's own pleasures, wishes, fantasies, & whatnot aside in order to better accomodate the needs of the conjoint relationship. If one continues to assert self over coupledom without reflection about the couple's need, the couple is destined to breakup. Pure and simple.

Handling boredom constructively is about finding something to do with your downtime that doesn't distract your attention from your home life. At least, it needs not to take you outside the home in ways that you lose interest in satisfying your mate. Losing sight of one's mate and his/her needs and desires also will wreck havoc on your relationship because sooner or later the primary relationship will become secondary. Longevity demands privilege I've come to learn, not restriction.

Putting these together strengthens the relationship and shows sign of maturity on part of both individuals. One can't do enough for both. The two persons need to pull their own weight and try not to resist the feedback that comes when you aren't pulling your own weight.

Of course, this isn't the only sign of maturity. But it is, in my judgment, an important one that I will be working on. As Michael Richards called it, this is personal work.

Keep it real.

I had an odd experience as I was walking into the gym this evening for my daily swim. I noticed an attractive woman walking in ahead of me. She caught my eye because she reminded me of the actress Thandie Newton, who co-starred along Terrance Howard in "Crash" and with Tom Cruise in MI:2. She was fair and had luscious dreadlocks twisted back on her head.

As I walked pass her at the desk, I tried to offer a compliment, only. I gently touched her shoulder. She looked at me with a sneer, then said, "What?" I repeated myself. Then she frowned, turned her nose up, and said, "Don't touch me!" It caught me off guard--being chided for a gentle compliment.  I thought, "How wierd was that?"

Being honest, that encounter disturbed my evening flow somewhat. I felt unnerved. Still, I went about my swim as usual. I wonder what was going on or had gone on with her that caused such a hostile response. If I did anything inappropriate, I pray to the universe to forgive me. I meant no harm.

Keep it real

I've discovered the primary reason that I dislike cell phones. And this doesn't mean that I dislike cellphones in their entirety; just certain aspects of owning and carrying one. The reason is that cellphones seem to import upon you unlimited accessibility of other persons' expectations. People that have your phone number immediately expect that if they dial you, under all circumstances, regardless of time, place, era, or what you might be doing, you are obligated to answer the phone when it rings. If you don't answer the phone, friends are quick to inform you how irritating and annoying it is that they can't reach you at their convenience.

Cells phones, in my judgment, take away your ability to be unavailable. Ten years ago, it would be normal to call a colleague, leave a msg, then wait several hours for that person to return your call. Then, it was normal, or routine, to grant a person the benefit of the doubt that they might not get your message until they returned home from work or wherever they spent their time during the day. We were accustomed to waiting. If you wanted someone urgently, you might ring them at work. But work was reserved for immediate family and significant others.

Now persons, regardless of closeness or relation, expect the right of immediate access to you whenever they call. It matters not whether you are at work, in an important meeting, at church, having a meal, driving somewhere, conducting a business deal, in court, making love, etc. It seems we have advanced individual needs and elevated the urgency of communication without giving serious consideration to the relative merit of such communications.

When I was in grade school, it was customary for me to come home after school and go through a routine of getting something to eat (usually a bowl of cereal) and watch TV for about an hour (usually The Flintstones & Gilligan's Island). If I needed something, I'd phone my mother at work (the family business); I rarely called my father. Nowadays, kids have unlimited access to their parents and their parents insist on getting calls for every little matter. It seems that kids have unreasonable access and their parents are uninterested in capping this. I believe it gives kids an unreasonable expectation concerning getting help and robs them of the chance of developing life skills regarding decision-making. But that's a side point.

The main point is that I (and probably others) can understand that people will need to reach me for certain issues. I can grant that. But I will be "the decider" or the arbiter of that decision, not the people making the call.

Sometimes, this can get me in trouble with close friends. But if they leave a message saying the matter is urgent, I will call them back immediately. Otherwise, they might have to wait until I finish my Frosted Flakes!