Advertisement
This subject has been floating around in my head for awhile, mostly with respect to my LO, but also to limerence in general.
My attraction to all previous LO's, as far as I was limerent, was accompanied by a sense that I was "entitled" to their validation. Having had a similar difficult "background" to my current LO, for instance, I have felt entitled to empathy and reciprocation from him. There was a not-so-faintly menacing subtext to that sense of entitlement that I was the only one who could *really* understand him.
In high school, I had a similar feeling respecting a friend I became limerent over. We both came, again, from similarly difficult childhoods, therefore he "owed' me catharsis of our shared, residual sense of guilt.
With LO's I haven't known as well, or have only distantly "detected" a sympathetic vulnerability in, it has been the same.
Most importantly- I felt entitled to have my affection for them acknowledged, and received. That was where the catharsis lay. Their active reciprocation was almost immaterial. But my need to have them receive, and show gratefulness for, my affection, knew no bounds.
I wondered if this was a more widely shared "conviction," among LE members- the sense, maybe lying just below the benevolent surface of limerence, that your LO "owes" you something- whether that "something" is a strong display of affection for you, or- conversely- a profound gratefulness for your attention to them.
My attraction to all previous LO's, as far as I was limerent, was accompanied by a sense that I was "entitled" to their validation. Having had a similar difficult "background" to my current LO, for instance, I have felt entitled to empathy and reciprocation from him. There was a not-so-faintly menacing subtext to that sense of entitlement that I was the only one who could *really* understand him.
In high school, I had a similar feeling respecting a friend I became limerent over. We both came, again, from similarly difficult childhoods, therefore he "owed' me catharsis of our shared, residual sense of guilt.
With LO's I haven't known as well, or have only distantly "detected" a sympathetic vulnerability in, it has been the same.
Most importantly- I felt entitled to have my affection for them acknowledged, and received. That was where the catharsis lay. Their active reciprocation was almost immaterial. But my need to have them receive, and show gratefulness for, my affection, knew no bounds.
I wondered if this was a more widely shared "conviction," among LE members- the sense, maybe lying just below the benevolent surface of limerence, that your LO "owes" you something- whether that "something" is a strong display of affection for you, or- conversely- a profound gratefulness for your attention to them.
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Unsu...
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, July 20, 2012 - 2:56 PM@Lauren "Most importantly- I felt entitled to have my affection for them acknowledged, and received. That was where the catharsis lay. Their active reciprocation was almost immaterial. But my need to have them receive, and show gratefulness for, my affection, knew no bounds. "
is this is a limerence that doesn't demand a return of feelings, but a return of gratitude? is that getting awfully close to reciprocation? -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, July 20, 2012 - 3:19 PMI always assumed "reciprocation," meant something closer to shared feelings and mutual appreciation of each other. As in, "I like you very much," being answered by, "I really like you, too," etc., with commensurate demonstrations of mutual affection and appreciation. My projections for "reciprocation," though, tend towards LO showing gratitude for my affections, but not showing active affection for me. I have a hunch, based on the dynamic between my mother and I, that this is a bit reflective. When she shows affection, it is in bombastic displays- explosions of energy and creativity. If we failed to show adequate gratitude for these (and no gratitude was ever adequate), she would break down. The other message we received from this, whether this was intentional or not, was that there was no way we could ever match the affection she showed for us. Our love was always inadequate, as compared to hers. Part of it, for me, is likely a revisiting of that dynamic on people I, at some level, do genuinely care about. Part of it is also likely about exorcising all the pent-up "inadequateness" I feel around showing people affection.
That's where LO comes in- and that's probably why my limerence "targeted" him, even before we became friends. His body language is very apologetic and nervous. And I remember having the distinct thought, again- before we even started talking to each other- that he was someone who would appreciate any care I showed him.
Not the most flattering character portrait of myself - but I think I passed that point about ten miles back... : / -
-
Unsu...
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, July 20, 2012 - 4:09 PMI just had a long conversation with my LO. Found out he felt all the things I thought he felt. We've agreed to be friends and leave it at that. I'm just going to have to deal with it. But I'm so relieved that he was honest. I feel 100% better because he's not the ass I thought he was. I feel much less crazy than before. The fact that he was freaked out by my behaviour means he cares and that's more important to me than anything else. -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, July 20, 2012 - 9:53 PMNax,
I am glad you have some confirmation- and are able to talk with your LO honestly about these things. Also glad he's not an "ass" :) And moreso that you don't feel crazy. Even if it's not the answer you were *hoping* for, it must be reassuring to have your intuition validated. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 5:35 AMIt was exactly the answer I was hoping for. I tell you what... having realistic hopes met is a lot nicer than wishing for the impossible. :)
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 1:34 AMNax, I really really hope you can succeed in the friendship; a middle way.
Good luck :^)
-
-
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, July 20, 2012 - 4:41 PM@Lauren: "I wondered if this was a more widely shared "conviction," among LE members- the sense, maybe lying just below the benevolent surface of limerence, that your LO "owes" you something- whether that "something" is a strong display of affection for you, or- conversely- a profound gratefulness for your attention to them."
I would say for me this would kick-in later. In the early stages of limerence it was just exhilerating to be helpful to the LOs and enjoy the light they reflected back upon receiving the help. If they had not displayed this gratitude in the early phase, I might not have noticed it as much. But, yes, I could sense a bit of "wait a minute.....I'm not doing this dance for my health" creep in later on if the real or perceived gratitude was reduced. Nevertheless, those episodes also triggered the "loss-of-LO" anxiety, so they only served the desperate hope all the more..... -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, July 20, 2012 - 5:19 PM" But, yes, I could sense a bit of "wait a minute.....I'm not doing this dance for my health" creep in later on if the real or perceived gratitude was reduced. Nevertheless, those episodes also triggered the "loss-of-LO" anxiety, so they only served the desperate hope all the more..... "
I guess this is kind of what I'm getting at. At some point, I think most LO's would start asking themselves, "wait, why is this person paying so much attention to me?" and pull back a little bit if they weren't interested or were just kind of weirded out by it.
I think you're right, too, that the sense of entitlement became particularly obvious at that point (for me anyways). There was a very clear feeling that LO *shouldn't* want to pull away from someone showing him that much attention. But again, I feel like I "targeted" LO, however subconsciously, for that reason. It's exactly the dynamic you're getting at- "I will give you everything you want, I'll put all my emotions into you, I'll cherish you for everything unique and beautiful in you, so long as you perpetually feel that I'm the only person who *really* sees you." I never could visualize any "relationship" with LO that went beyond the stage of me flooding him with emotions, and him being exceedingly grateful for being "seen" for who he was (which, of course, only I could do).
The expectation was that he was someone who "would" feel grateful for any attention I showed him, even though another part of me knew that was manipulative on my part, and he deserved better. Yet, my motivations for pursuing him were so malleable and changeable, even to myself, that I could pretty much credit my actions with any benevolent-rationale-of-the-moment that would stick. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 12:48 AMI read a very interesting article a couple of weeks ago about narcissism and compulsive giving.
samvak.tripod.com/journal96.html
It struck me that this is probably a large part of my limerence. I was constantly giving to my LO, whether it was time, emotion, compliments, silly gifts. I wanted him to feel indebted to me and end up reciprocating in some way, if only to even out the balance.
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 3:27 AM"Gradually, people fall into line. They begin to feel that they are the ones who are doing the compulsive giver a favor by succumbing to his endless and overweening charity. "What can we do?" - they sigh - "It means so much to him and he has put so much effort into it! I just couldn't say no." The roles are reversed and everyone is happy: the beneficiaries benefit and the compulsive giver goes on feeling that the world is unjust and people are self-centered exploiters. As he always suspected."
This hits close to home, Nax. Thank you for posting this. -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 10:59 AMI have an "LS" of sorts, who is ragingly co-dependent and a people pleaser. Being so close to his real self, I am where he comes back to with all of his feelings of resentment and of being exploited. The world owes him everything he cannot seem to get himself to provide for himself. He pours time and energy into people who give him nothing in return. In actuality, he is surrounded by people who care for him, but expect him to take more responsibility for his own care and cannot seem to convince him to take an active role in it. He will go out of his way to indulge anyone's requests of him, and then ends up feeling drained, and no one will return favor. He, naturally, has a habit of getting involved with people who DO exploit that, but I also understand the average person's perspective. I didn't demand this. He insisted on helping me or giving me this. What can I do? I didn't even want to take his help, how can he hold it against me when I have come to his aid and he doesn't recognize it as aid?
On his end, he believes the best thing you can do in the world is to invest in your neighbor, because when you are in need, your neighbor, basically owes you. That's not his perspective, he just thinks everyone should be like he is, and if they were, he'd want for nothing. It's incredibly idealistic and I have many times told him that he can't give to anyone else until he makes sure he is okay himself first. A message I need to hear too. I'm useless to everyone because I reject caring for myself.
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 11:49 AMInteresting article!
I think I am a more benign version of the "narcissistic giver." I see those traits in myself for sure.
I can also relate to this notion of being owed something by my LO. I was somewhat over the top in terms of the things I would do for her in comparison to the other people in my life that I care about. And I would feel (but not express) some frustration that these things I would do didn't make her love me.
I do have a fair amount invested in having others perceive me as a good, kind person. Yeah - lots to think about here.
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 9:15 PMI think the feelings you have are so intense and "real" that you naturally feel they are pure and deserve to be appreciated, if not reciprocated. It's like adoration and you desperately want it to be accepted and sanctioned. I believe that if you received that approval, it would not be enough. You'd still want more. You'd want constant reinforcement because you can't help but perceive every action of the LO toward you as either positive or negative. There's no in-between. It's like the petals of a flower--she loves me! She loves me not! You move from a moment of brief euphoria to despair based on the most mundane things, things by which she probably meant absolutely nothing. It's terrible and sick. -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 11:02 PM"I think the feelings you have are so intense and "real" that you naturally feel they are pure and deserve to be appreciated, if not reciprocated."
This made sense, up to a point, for me. A lot of the confusion following non-reciprocation, or withheld reciprocation, did seem to draw a direct line from "It's simple: I like LO, LO likes me. And they lived happily ever after" to- a few months later- "Not so much, I guess."
The hope of reciprocation, when there seemed potential for it, did temporarily alleviate a lot of the initial limerent weirdness surrounding my feelings for LO. My initial limerence for LO, though, was grounded in a seeming need to have the upper hand, emotionally, in relation to someone else. Hence the sense of entitlement. I was ready to give and give and give until he capitulated, but equally ready to take offense should his eventual capitulation reflect anything less than "pure" attachment to me. Again, I have to consider, in this, that my "identification" of LO did not come from any sense of comfort in fulfilling my childhood role with him. Nor has LO ever convincingly been enough of a "histrionic, yet distant and emotionally unavailable" authority figure to fulfill the role of "lost parent."
It seems to me, so far as the sense of entitlement is concerned, that I was actually forcing my childhood role of perpetual acquiescence on LO, and taking up the role of "distant and emotionally unavailable" authority figure myself.
In retrospect, it makes a lot more sense of everything. When kids "play house," they tend to enact the role of "parents," as they understand "parenting." A younger child, or a doll, standing in for the "baby." You can find out a lot about a kid's home life from observing how they handle admiration from a younger child. My bearing towards LO, over time, has sort of been a radically inappropriate, grown-up version of "playing house." It has revealed a lot about my relationship to my parents, which is a good observation that is brought up here a lot. However, I've also spent a long time- for that- mistakenly trying to find the key to my attachment to LO in his treatment of me. That is, I've been trying to find the "distant" parent figure in LO, and the "damaged child" in myself. In the case of my limerence, I think it's actually the opposite relation. LO doesn't represent the withholding parent so much as he is standing in for, and absolving me of my role as, the "unworthy child" who should feel grateful for any attention.
My sense of myself as a "damaged," but also a highly empathetic and "kind" person is not exactly boosted by this. It *is* a good entry point for further thinking, about just how much of that manipulative behavior and dynamic I've absorbed, internalized, and "paid forward," to people I care about.
None of this is unrelated to your initial comment, Charlie. In my case, the feeling is still eerily close to that I would call a "pure" love. It "feels" like agape love, in it's own way. It's only revealed for what it is when I try to wrap those "pure" feelings, dually, around the statements, "I care about LO," and "even if LO feels indifference." The possibility of "indifference" provokes a reactive, "shutting down" of my emotional openness to LO (so much for purity), and an urge to degrade him- and make him "unworthy"- in my own mind. Seeing LO's faults, for me, isn't a testament to my genuine, down-to-earth feelings for him. It *is* a testament to how far my limerent mind is willing to go in asserting the inviolability of its impulse to "adore," even as it sacrifices the dignity (through valorization or victimization) of the person it has seized upon as its object.
Bottom line- I don't trust the purity of my feelings towards LO, in any sense, nor do I trust their "innocent" desire for reciprocation, at base.
-
-
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 1:51 PMI certainly had a sense of entitlement to my LO's behavior towards me. Like he owed me some recognition at all. But when I did something nice for him, and he felt guilty and wanted to return the favor, it horrified me. Absolutely horrified me. -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 5:17 PMI think it probably has something to do with whether or not you identify your 'feelings' as limerence at the time.
Nobody likes to associate themselves with negatives.
Everyone likes to think that you 'feeling' so strongly about someone would be something flattering, that they'd recognise as a postive sign - ie "if he/she feels that way about me, then I must be doing something right".
The distinction surely comes if you know 100% in real-time that what's going on in your head is limerence and not something more meaningful - that's my take on it anyway.
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 5:23 PM
< this, to me, goes back to the strange infant biology/psychology of "It can't be true that my biological father/mother doesn't love me.......it just CAN'T be true!......MY very life and soul depend on that fact....that it CAN'T be true." >
Should a child feel "entitled" to a parent's love? Do they "owe" you that? -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, July 21, 2012 - 6:33 PMGood question. Culturally, we tend to look back at our infancy, and consider "entitlement" to our parents' love unquestionable. Objectively, there may be no biological "entitlement" to that love. As with a lot of traumatic experiences, much of the "trauma" comes less from the original trauma than our perception of it at the time, and the way the immediate community reacts to us afterwards. Consequences of parental inattention turn next to who else is stepping in to make sure a child is adequately cared for, taught, and integrated socially. In a society where childcare is so concentrated within the nuclear family, though, neglect at the parental level is less likely to be compensated for from outside.
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 7:45 AMRelative to this, I was thinking about "Frankenstein" of all things, last night. In the novel, the monster feels like he's been brought into the world unfairly and has been "made" in such a way as to be completely isolated and unloved by humanity. Now that he is in the world, though, he will not stop destroying things his creator loves, until his creator makes him a female companion. In turn, the monster sees himself isolating and reaffirming the unlovability of his companion- to everyone but him, of course.
So, yeah. Kind of like that. -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 11:50 AMWow!!!...Yes! I knew there was some reason that I wanted to re-read Shelley's original 'Frankenstein'. I was informed later in life about the psychological underpinnings of this story as opposed to the 'horror' story we feel it simply is when we are young. Thanks for reminding me of this Lauren2....
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 12:11 PM@ Chrysalis: "< this, to me, goes back to the strange infant biology/psychology of "It can't be true that my biological father/mother doesn't love me.......it just CAN'T be true!......MY very life and soul depend on that fact....that it CAN'T be true." >
Should a child feel "entitled" to a parent's love? Do they "owe" you that?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dang you, Chrysalis, you're playing with my head again!.... :-) If I'm understanding this post correctly....which you lifted from a different thread and dropped down into this one....you're bringing up the fundamental issue of entitlement between infant and parent and juxtaposing it with the entitlement we feel for LO attention.
My answer, from a biological perspective is "Yes", a child "should" feel entitled to a parent's love. I place 'should' in quotations because it feels strangely insufficient to define, what I feel, is a powerful evolutionary directive. Biologically (psychologically and emotionally) the unfolding of a developing child is inherently "primed" for the interaction for a loving parent. It escapes me right now...the authors of the work had the last name of Russell....who observed that an infant perceives neglect as "hostility". We tend to think of an infant alone in a crib as first "safe", and later if left to long as "neglected". Why would an infant perceive the absence of attention as hostility? One answer would be if the base need...the "intent" of being born... is to be loved. In Paul Shepard's "Nature and Madness", one of his concluding descriptions of (broken) modern man is that " worst of all, (he possesses) a readiness to strike back at a natural world that we dimly perceive as having failed us". So yes, without such attention, some version of life goes on...but at what cost?
So, if I'm understanding your intent with this post (here I go 'abstracting' again!.... ;-P ), we have/had a feeling of entitlement to be loved by our caretakers, which, if unmet at that time, is being played out with LO as partial parent projection (PPP) where we now feel entitled to their affection? -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Thu, January 10, 2013 - 2:26 PM
< ..who observed that an infant perceives neglect as "hostility". We tend to think of an infant alone in a crib as first "safe", and later if left to long as "neglected". Why would an infant perceive the absence of attention as hostility? One answer would be if the base need...the "intent" of being born... is to be loved. >
It is not so far-fetched then, that lack of nurturance be labeled as abuse? -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, January 11, 2013 - 9:02 AM@Chrysalis: "It is not so far-fetched then, that lack of nurturance be labeled as abuse?"
That would be my opinion and increasingly, that of others. Don't know if she coined the term,
but Karen Walant in her book "Creating the Capacity for Attachment: Treating Addictions and
the Alienated Self", she refers to the "normative abuse"; i.e., that which becomes "normalized"
in any given culture. An interview with her where she talks about this can be found here: www.naturalchild.org/guest/k...ant.html
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, January 11, 2013 - 6:51 PMJohn, I had a recent little meltdown and tried to observe my feelings in this vein.
My thought process was: If I am neglected and treated as a nuisance, my survival is a negative to my caregivers. I should not survive. My survival is an unfortunate accident. But I am here. And I long for validation of my existence, because otherwise I feel like a grievous mistake has been made. I'm torn between the desperate longing for validation and an impulse towards self destruction. And I feel an intense mixture of anger and grief for that not-belonging. Is there any way to change that belief that I shouldn't exist? The floating urge is to *demand* that validation from someone who triggers the attachment process. If they "fail" me, the anger and grief increases the desperation.
Please accept me. Please nurture me. Give me what I want.
Knowing that is not how it works does little to negate the feeling and craving. -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, January 11, 2013 - 8:29 PM@Lauren2 "The dichotomy of "reciprocation or rejection" was the value system I set on his behavior, but it was- by design- a rigged one. Any prophecy is self-fulfilling in a dichotomy, and it pretty much justified me in feeling slighted no matter what he did. Overlaying that dichotomy on LO's behavior, I was able to read any sign of kindness that fell short of "utter devotion" as neglect, and dismiss any clear boundaries which fell short of "outright rejection" as "keeping me at arm's length".
Great insight Lauren. You are describing what I believe to be a definite pathology within limerent behavior that is articulated repeatedly on this board.
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, January 11, 2013 - 9:43 PMFrom www.changeprocess.org/articles/KLR2.pdf
"These mothers appeared more fearful and inhibited, in general, and sometimes appeared particularly sweet or fragile. They were very unlikely to be overtly hostile or intrusive and they usually gave in to the infant’s concerted efforts to make contact. However, they also often failed to take the initiative in greeting or approaching the infant, and they often hesitated, moved away, or tried to deflect the infant’s requests for close contact, before giving in. The infants of helpless/fearful mothers all continued to pursue their mothers for contact. They all expressed their distress, approached their mothers, and attempted to gain some physical contact with them, even though they also displayed disorganized behaviors, including signs of conflict, fear, uncertainty, helplessness, or depressed mood."
My mother matched this model, and my primary caretaker as a child matched the hostile model. I see myself and LO both in this parent model, and child model, alternating the dynamic. I strongly internalized anticipation of parental hostility and read great hostility into my LO's behaviors which in retrospect I am not sure existed.
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, January 12, 2013 - 6:49 AM>> Please accept me. Please nurture me. Give me what I want. <<
This is your job. This is what you need to give yourself. Self-acceptance, self-nurturing, self-gratification.
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Fri, January 11, 2013 - 11:34 PMLong post warning!!! :) Going back to what John posted from the naturalchild article~ and I apologize because this is somewhat off-topic but it's really been eating at me lately.
"...we, as a society, have raised our children with the expectation that they become totally self-reliant and autonomous rather than with the hope that they have the capacity to form close, loving, intimate relationships with others. As a result of our social insistence upon self-reliance, we have witnessed an epidemic of addictions and what I call "the alienated self," meaning people who are disconnected from their internal thoughts and feelings - their inner selves - and are unable to form true intimacy with others. Addiction exemplifies how, by not allowing ourselves to deeply connect to other people, we have attached only to the other things."
It's funny to read this (esp. coming from a parenting website), because when I returned home to the US from South Korea over the holidays--to the news that 20 kids had been murdered at Sandy Hook while I was in flight--it sent me into a contemplative mood for several days. I don't think there could have been a more shocking wake-up call to the differences I was about to experience. As I re-adjusted to American society, I was struck by all the ways (subtle and not so) that we do violence to each other in the States, and the Western world in general. And the more I pondered and tried to suss out the feelings of *What is going ON here? Why is my home country like this and why is Korea not?*, the more I realized the truth of exactly what this article is stating.
There is a fundamental sense of alienation, separateness, and competition in American society that does not exist to the same extent, or in the same way, here. I noticed it on the subway, when walking into a bar, while driving on the road in the US. We are so quick to "other" people, to almost/actually treat them as objects or threats, and to stubbornly believe in our own narratives. This probably has a lot to do with the fact that we are nation of immigrants, of diversity, and have little in the way of a collective sense of identity. When I walk into a public space in the States, I have the sense of being "sized up" immediately. The look on many peoples' faces is a hard one, a guarded one. Unease is pervasive--people are afraid, or worried, or angry, or condescending. I cannot really point to concrete evidence or explain it except to say it was unnerving and it was in the very atmosphere of many places/situations I ended up in.
Koreans experience the same emotions, of course, and commit crimes and have problems in their culture, but there is a friendliness and connectedness in public places. No fear or unease or guardedness. People may be angry but it's a qualitatively different kind of anger. They are not going to hit you, endanger your life over an argument, or rob you. Koreans are more aware of *this is another living person* in front of them. You can leave your things unattended in shops for more than 15 minutes, and come back to find them untouched. Homeless people do not accost you and make you feel uncomfortable. This is a society in which drinking is extremely prevalent, and all men complete mandatory military training for two years. The cities are very close and crowded. You would expect more problems from this kind of combination, but it's much safer at all hours of the night. And so all of this caused me to wonder...what the hell is going on? And that was the conclusion I drew: our society has created a maladaptive culture in some major, possibly crippling, ways.
The more frightening part is that I'm pretty sure there is only a small minority of people who realize this, judging by the firestorm of debate which occurred after Sandy Hook. So many people still think that our problem is guns, or mental health care (lack thereof), or the absence of God, or violent video games/movies. It's all of this and more, but we continue to focus nearly exclusively on external THINGS and practices to blame. We are not looking at our own selves, our own culture, our way of conducting relationships--intimate, platonic, or perhaps most importantly, with strangers. When I first went home I had this terrifying feeling of disintegration, as if I was witnessing the earlier stages of social breakdown across the country. It was unexpected and alarming, then became normalized as I adjusted. It may sound overly dramatic to some people, and my feelings were probably heightened by reverse culture shock, but I still feel that we are not headed in a good direction as a nation. I didn't like what I saw when I went home. -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, January 12, 2013 - 7:18 AMThinker, it probably is a minority who see this problem clearly, but the minority is growing rapidly. It includes people who write and teach about and practice so-called attachment parenting. There was a brief period in American history when "quality of life" became a prime objective and it was all about acquiring, using, and maintaining in mint condition a variety of luxury material goods. The "1950's housewife" thing. I got into attachment parenting after I read a research sociology book from the period that describes in detail, from hundreds of interviews and in-home visits by researchers, the abhorrent infant care practices of the period. The book detailed how women spent their days home alone with their babies, devoting the entire day to elaborate cooking and baking, cleaning to impeccable standards, and making luxury goods (couture sewing and knitting, embroidery, refinishing furniture, etc etc). Rather than hire the services of others they purchased "time saving" machines and appliances, the use of which occupied all their time and attention. They did all this alone and as anyone knows who has taken care of a small infant, very little can be accomplished while engaging with the baby. To get things done these women confined the baby in isolation in a crib or "playpen" with high sides, in another room, and ignored it for hours on end. Feeding involved handing the baby a bottle (or propping it in the bedding) and then leaving the room.
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, January 12, 2013 - 7:32 AM"I noticed it on the subway, when walking into a bar, while driving on the road in the US. We are so quick to "other" people, to almost/actually treat them as objects or threats, and to stubbornly believe in our own narratives."
Just listening to people, this last part especially resonates with me. We are terribly antagonistic- especially when we're talking with each other about someone else in the third person. There's a bit of hyperbole in peoples' sense of moral indignation, anyways, but the way it's communicated makes for an estranged environment. Everything is taken as an offense, everything is taken as being a personal attack, everything is a conspiracy. When I first started questioning my own dissociation and tried "plugging back in," it hit me how detached most people are and how much of a challenge it is to be present. There's a reason that's the exception and we have to work so hard at it.
I've repeated this line before, but your post reminded me of it. It's from a history study on early American communities, which were by necessity closer-knit and more interdependent, and individuals were gradually integrated to their roles by a whole town (takes a village, and all that:)
"The way to maturity appeared not as a cliff to be mounted in a series of sudden and precarious leaps, but as a gradual ascent the stages of which were quite literally embodied in the many siblings variously situated along the way." -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sat, January 12, 2013 - 9:21 AMI am married to a native Italian. Spent our early marriage in the southern part of Italy with our young son. It's a culture bent on feeding and nuturing their children. the parents, as far as I could tell, spoiled the boys and the girls. maybe not equally, because "mama's boy" syndrome really did exist, and probably does to a lesser degree today. the women are not really going to cater to the men in that culture the way they once did. "progress" but it is a society about family. family stays near. families get together, families eat together, and help one another.
that being said, it is still a materialistic society. it is a society where fashion prevails. there are a lot of very beautiful and well dressed italians in south italy. they are pretty vain people. but they are quick to smile, and feed you, that's for sure.
it's a society where guns are only in the hands of the military or the police. Italians do not own guns. There are no mass shootings. there are fights and aggression, maybe more than Korea, I don't know that culture, but there are no mass shootings. italians get mad easy, but they get over it quickly. i would say they get their aggression out in their cars. (they drive at insanely high speeds).
but it is a culture with its own identiy. they know who they are, the're "italiani" and they love who they are. i think we are sometimes a lost tribe. we are so many different cultures, and have lost our sense of self. we have lost our sense of family. there is one tradition in my house that I learned to honor, and that is the family meal. every single day of the last 24 years of my marriage we have sat down as a family and eaten a meal together. come hell or high water, and it's a pretty soup to nuts version of the italian meal. it takes a lot of energy and time to do this. we have made a committment to our two kids. and i don't believe i could live without this experience. but i did not inherit this from my American culture. and my kids tell me that it does not exist in many of the homes of their friends. if the family can not sit down together and eat a meal even because everyone is off and running, what is there to life? if we can't send our kids to school and wonder if they are coming off the bus, what is the meaning of all our riches?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 12:01 AMThis topic came up in my therapy a few weeks back. T felt it was a very young part of me that "wanted it and wanted it now and that i was entitled to it" -she felt it was also part of my narcissistic tendencies as well. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 12:25 AMI think there's a lot of narcissism in limerent behaviour. It's odd because I see people talking here a lot about low self esteem, fragility, insecurity and fear etc., while at the same time thinking so much of themselves that they feel they earned or deserve the attention of the LO. And then we have difficulty accepting the rejection. If we truly believe we're so flawed and imperfect, then why would we expect LO to see us otherwise? Talk about a contradiction! -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 12:47 AM"And I would feel (but not express) some frustration that these things I would do didn't make her love me."
I think this is closest to my experience. Or, it's like this: People join the military for many reasons, but for some it's truly love of country and a desire to serve it. But after a while, if that service member isn't given a fair salary and decent housing, he or she might start to feel a bit cross. It's not a perfect analogy, but I did experience immense pain that I was showering my LO with praise, support, and little gifts, none of with he asked for-- but he only seemed to "reward" me with attention when I pointedly ignored him. But I nonetheless I felt almost constantly wounded at not only his non-reciprocation, but sometimes his outright shove-backs, as when his parents invited me to visit them at their home one morning and he never so much as showed his face while I was there. I felt embarrassed and rejected.
Maybe it's because in my situation, the personal and professional are all tangled up. If LO opened himself up to me and allowed me to do my job in writing about him, I could do my job better, which would in turn boost his public standing and could take his career and life just about anywhere he wanted. So it felt like a slap in the face on both cheeks-- a personal rejection, and then passing over the chance to do something to help his professional prospects. The latter felt like the refusal of a gift, although I did not extend it to him on the condition of reciprocation.
I don't feel as if I extended myself on his behalf so that he would in turn have to "equalize" the relationship. But I felt compelled to fling my way into his affections when it became clear that wasn't going to happen naturally. Mostly, though, the endless stream of attention and petting comes from the fact that he is rarely far from my thoughts, and the idea to say and do these things arise unconsciously. And so I do them. However, I can't discount the role of OCD-- the desperate impulse for contact with him every now and then. In these cases, I don't necessarily compliment or give him anything; just say hi. Still, it feels like a "give."
"It's odd because I see people talking here a lot about low self esteem, fragility, insecurity and fear etc., while at the same time thinking so much of themselves that they feel they earned or deserve the attention of the LO. "
I'm often baffled by the fact that I'm self-centered, and at the same time really don't like that self very much.
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 5:05 AMI dunno if everyone feels that they 'deserve' their LO or even the appreciation/admiration of him or her.
Narcissism can also be heavily linked to the feeling one might have that they are being 'victimised'.
Nobody chose their LO, but then again he/she didn't choose you either - it's complicated, but how many on here had that feeling of. "why hath thou foresaken me...again!!".
You're right that narcissism kicks in at some point during limerent behaviour, but in my experience it was more a case of, "please either acknowledge my existence and help keep this alive on a mutual basis, or tell me in 100% clear cut terms that I'm wasting my life, and set me free".
Is the narcissist not just 'the limerent victim?'.
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 5:49 AMI like the distinction between "classical" narcissism (actual self-aggrandizement, backed up by a fundamental feeling of superiority), and compensatory narcissism (repeatedly asserting the primacy of the self and its needs, stemming from a fundamental sense of inferiority).
I was less curious about entitlement as a diagnostic tool (i.e. uncovering limerence primarily as an outgrowth of pathological self-centredness, rather than seeing it- as it most evidently presents itself- as a symptom of emotional injury), than "entitled" as an adjective. That is, I guess I wanted to shift the frame of reference for my own behavior a bit. I feel the pain of non-reciprocation so intensely at times, that I tend to victimize myself, while overlooking how much my behaviors actively hurt other people- even people outside the me-LO-SO "system." Acknowledging the fallout of limerence on other people is, for me, not just another cause for shame (or conversely, further navel gazing on why I see "doomed" to both be alone and to "hurt other people"). Taking into consideration that my behavior may be, at some level, "compensatorily" narcissist, may not reinforce my protected status as "perpetually innocent victim," but it does help me understand better the defense mechanisms and dynamics that help keep my limerent behavior firmly in place. As a child, I could have been raised better, by both my family and my neighbors. But I tend to lose sight, for that, of the probability that I'm revisiting an ethos of neglect, self-centredness, and devaluation on other people. -
-
Re: Limerence and Entitlement
Sun, July 22, 2012 - 6:26 AMIn my situation, I can see where I might behave in a way that could be classified as compensatory narcissist, because that was my own family's primary mode of self-defense. (I learned it from watching them, okay? :) Anyone who is either emotionally available or emotionally dependent on them is "inferior," anyone who is emotionally unavailable is "superior." My LO has a foot, so to speak, in each of those camps. We are- to all appearances- friends. We have, at least in the past, been pretty emotionally open with each other as friends. He is also in a long-term relationship. Which meant- according to his own sense of rightness and wrongness regarding relationship boundaries- he couldn't be emotionally available to me in all the ways I wanted him to be. The effusive compliments and gift-giving I offered in response felt, at the time, as if they were the purest, no strings attached, form of affection I could give him. I'm still a bit confused on this, as even now I remember that behavior as being motivated by a feeling of generosity, not grasping. I tend to forget the anxious crashes in between, the sense of dread if- after an hour-long text exchange- I was the last one to write. Even if he spent an hour, two hours, three hours with me everyday, it was never enough. I was perpetually reading "neglect," and "narcissism" in the smallest signs.
And how "should" he have responded to this? LO is not a perfect person, and he- like most people- has his own issues. That said, I'm not sure I can judge him for not either reciprocating or openly rejecting me. How would I have responded, as a 20 year old, to relentless showers of affection from someone who I did not feel the same way for, but who I didn't want to lose as a friend? In my case, I think my LO set up his boundaries pretty clearly a number of times. The dichotomy of "reciprocation or rejection" was the value system I set on his behavior, but it was- by design- a rigged one. Any prophecy is self-fulfilling in a dichotomy, and it pretty much justified me in feeling slighted no matter what he did. Overlaying that dichotomy on LO's behavior, I was able to read any sign of kindness that fell short of "utter devotion" as neglect, and dismiss any clear boundaries which fell short of "outright rejection" as "keeping me at arm's length."
-
-
-