The Fear of Intimacy Thread

[LovelyLady]

Is it intimacy that is feared? Or, is it really about the things that are the common consequences, desired or undesired, of intimacy that are typical of the matrix?

A master DJ would not fear these consequences as he would be confident in his ability to deal with them.

Having said that, behaviors and attitudes characteristic of DJ's may not necessarily be the result of "fear of intimacy". To someone in the matrix observing certain aspects of DJ behavior and lifestyle it may certainly appears to be so.

On the other hand it is possible that adopting DJ attitudes could lead to extreme behaviors on the part of a man. For example, a DJ could take his criteria for a quality woman to such extremes that no woman is going to qualify as an LTR or potential spouse. (Think about mothers who reject every person their offspring identifies as a possible LTR or spouse.)

If one is to hold to these high criteria then, if one wants intimacy, LTR, or marriage then said DJ better be meeting, spinning and nexting at a rate that provides the opportunity to find that one in a million.

And just in case you are of the opinion that having intimacy, LTR or spouse automatically disqualifies you as a DJ, think of DJ's in such situations that post on this board, namely RT.

Yes. This is a powerful statement.

If you require a depth of maturity and ability to function intimately with a person, you do date/spend a lot of time meeting and passing on people.

And you indicate early on what your purpose/frame is.

I communicate it by saying that although I like to have fun while dating a man, I don't date for "sport". I am hoping to find a man I can genuinely connect with.

A male friend of mine says "I am not a little boy, I have no need to have a stream of easy women running through my bed. I am only interested in spending my time with special women who are capable of holding my attention and have something of real substance to offer me."




Often I see the same men who say they want a quality, intimate relationship/woman put time and energy into women/relationships without this. I know there is the philosophy here of just sleeping with the woman in front of you until the "bigger, better deal" woman comes along. But if you truly value a relationship of quality - how is it you are willing to lower your self in giving your self to a person that is less than what you say you believe you are worthy of?

In my thread on intimacy (http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=144038) I speak of the sexual frames men set, but it can be applied to the TOTAL frame.

If you truly require a woman who can truly meet you as an equal mature quality feminine counterpart - then I do not understand why there is all this settling going on.

If a person truly is comfortable "being alone" than he/she is not giving/wasting his time in relationships that do not satisfy his entire frame.



So much criticism of women who settle for Mr. Right Now rather than holding out for Mr. Right - and yet isn't that what is happening in some of the interactions described above? These women get angry when they realize they are a "Ms. Right Now" because they thought they were meeting your 'frame' -your needs. (and the truth is they are meeting that frame you set - as you have not required more of them). So of course they think you have been dishonest and they feel duped. (If a woman kept indicating you were doing everything she needed (her 'subframe' as it were, and then said "nope' you're not afterall" wouldn't you be like "WTF?")

If you do not reveal what your ideal frame/desire/relational needs and wants are, - she will not be able to address them.

It's like some of you sit and flex your muscles saying how you demand such high quality in your women and your relationships. Well, you can flex all you want - but what can you lift?

The truth is we rise to what we are most capable of - we get what we settle for. If you are setting low-quality frames and giving your selves and your time to low quality women and relationships - that is what you are going to get.

Is that high quality Woman you want going to be attracted to your low quality woman frame? No. She is going to be repulsed by it. She won't settle for second best in her Man - and she is not going to want a man who doesn't command respect for his wants and needs being met either.

Is the life and frame you are creating the life/frame you honestly see a top-notch woman wanting to be a part of?

 

[Luthor Rex]

If you truly require a woman who can truly meet you as an equal mature quality feminine counterpart - then I do not understand why there is all this settling going on.

A person may 'require' (as you say) a quality feminine counterpart, but that doesn't mean they end up finding one that's available. Just because a man has this 'need' doesn't mean he may also have the strength of character to be alone for the years and years it may take before he finds that woman.

Most human beings are not comfortable being hermits. Solitary confinement is considered a punishment in prison (personally I'd ask the warden real nicely for solitary).

But this is exactly the dilema that some of the men who want 'quality' face: be alone or be with someone who is 'ok'. That man may hit 35, 40, or 50 years old being alone and say to himself "maybe it's been unrealistic for me to find the kind of quality I think I need." Then he is prone to make a less than prudent decision.

The flawed premise I think you have embraced, Ms. Lady, is that good people will have a 'happy ending.' Mother Nature doesn't care about what human beings believe is right and wrong, Nature doesn't enforce human justice. A person can do 'all the right things' and still get screwed in the end.

 

[LovelyLady]

The flawed premise I think you have embraced, Ms. Lady, is that good people will have a 'happy ending.' Mother Nature doesn't care about what human beings believe is right and wrong, Nature doesn't enforce human justice. A person can do 'all the right things' and still get screwed in the end.

Luthor,

I actually do not subscribe to the "just world" belief system. I do, however believe that if you want to create an intimate bond with a quality woman (or as a woman want a relationship with a high quality man)- then you have to be one yourself.

The true foundation of being one is because you respect your self. You genuinely recognize your real value. The byproduct is that you do attract higher quality people because the entire energy of your life resonates at that frequency.

If you lower the bar and choose to settle for less, you will attract less. A woman of high character with a great capacity for love and intimacy is not going to give herself to a man who does not guard his own value - and therefore cannot recognize and appreciate her complimentary value.

If a man compromises in the key area of his primary romantic relationship - who he chooses to be intimate with - what other areas is there lack of strength and integrity in?

Just because a man has this 'need' doesn't mean he may also have the strength of character to be alone for the years and years it may take before he finds that woman.

Most human beings are not comfortable being hermits. Solitary confinement is considered a punishment in prison (personally I'd ask the warden real nicely for solitary).

But this is exactly the dilema that some of the men who want 'quality' face: be alone or be with someone who is 'ok'. That man may hit 35, 40, or 50 years old being alone and say to himself "maybe it's been unrealistic for me to find the kind of quality I think I need." Then he is prone to make a less than prudent decision.

This is key, isn't it? To get your intimacy needs met in a healthy way that does not compromise one's integrity inorder to remain a person of character so when the right person comes into our lives we are ready.

If we are entangled in the giving of our selves to the creation of "frames" or relationships that do not honestly reflect what we truly believe we are worthy of, how is that we can then honestly expect that quality person to recognize our value and want us?




Also... I often think of this part of Moonstruck when I have these kinds of conversations with people
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhifn6Q6DQo&feature=related

 

[decades]

omg for a second there I thought I was Redirected to LoveShack! :crazy:

 

[LovelyLady]

omg for a second there I thought I was Redirected to LoveShack! :crazy:

LOL Not by me! hahaha ...But I will say when they were talking about LS I went to the dot com and couldn't figure out what all the men here were complaining about it (it's porn!!!) I didn't realize the LS they were talking about was dot org :crackup:

 

[Interceptor]

omg for a second there I thought I was Redirected to LoveShack! :crazy:

omg for a second there I thought we were dealing with intelligent mature people here!!

:moon:

LOL


should we start a fart joke thread instead?


Yeah, maybe we should.



LOL!

Never mind

You know, I was thinking about how hard it is for some guys to relate to this.

I think I understand the difficulty more now. Not that many guys have expereinced good quality intimacy, and so they fear it. Its understandable.
We all need to understand this and ourselves better.
So we can move forward with faith in ourselves and confidence as well.

 

[Alexander the Great]

There's such good material in this thread, I just had to post. I think you guys are spot on.

Personally I think wielding the argument "fear of emotional intimacy" is only valid if you're dealing with a person with issues. I think Luthor Rex said it all in regards to that actually:

People who don't like themselves are afraid of intimacy because they are afraid that if you see the "real them" instead of the 'public face' they put on, then you won't like them anymore.

This is true.

All too often the "fear of emotional intimacy" card is played where people should realize they are just being rejected. They seem to use it to rationalize why someone doesn't want to go into the deep end with them. Indeed, generally, women seem to suffer from this phenomenon more than, generally, men do.

Unless you have real issues, people's so-called fear of intimacy disappears like snow when the right person walks into their lives. And that's the truth.



I'd like to relate a personal experience that I immediately thought of when I read this thread. It might illustrate this matter:

There was this female friend of mine, who was obviously madly in love with a co-worker of hers. She was a bit of a strange person in this, in that she didn't describe it as "being in love" herself.

Despite her longing for him, despite her sensitivity to his smell, despite her not being able to speak with him without shaking and being shy. Despite her dreams being filled with him (and no doubt her too). No, she definately wasn't in love with him, she said.

We talked about it often, exchanged long mails about it. She just couldn't shut up about her favourite subject. It was the only time she'd put her things on the backburner (she never did that, she said. of course, this too always goes out the door once Mr. Right walks in): to talk about this guy. He was effectively an obsession of her.

She said she didn't want sex from him. She said she didn't want a relationship with him. She just wanted him to open up to her. Why was he so closed? Why was he afraid to talk about his feelings? Why was he afraid to tell her what he thought she and he had? A working relationship? Friendship? More? Less?

She just wanted him to like her. She wanted him to think well of her. Why did he act so nasty to her at times? Why did he avoid her? Why did he avoid talking about "the both of them"? She just wanted to be his friend. On the side, she really hoped to convince him to live with her in a house close-by their work, so they could both move out of their parent's house.

In short: she would have jumped into something that we healthy people call a relationship with this guy if she could. She even stole his worn shirts so she'd have something that held his smell. Every now and then, she'd get a new worn shirt...

But no, despite all these obvious signs, she maintained she wasn't in love and she wanted nothing but friendship from him. Yes, she was a bit funny that way.

I think she had issues, and still does. I kind of suspect this is obvious from the above. If not, than the following should prove this.

I think she was one of those few people who genuinely suffer from a "fear of emotional intimacy" issue. She always told me how she felt she had to put up a front for her boyfriends, so they would stay attached to her. She always told me how she felt she had to wear certain underwear, that she had to appear attractive and beautiful, how she felt she couldn't look imperfect or unattractive. She was afraid to show boyfriends that she was human too, like going to the toilet and doing a stinky number two, belch after drinking soda, things like that. She was even afraid that not giving into the sexual desires of her boyfriends would mean losing them.

In short, she always felt she couldn't show her true, geeky, not-liking-sex-that-much-self to a potential or established boyfriend out of fear of putting them off. As a result, she preferred to be friends with people, not lovers. She felt she could be herself with friends. To her, friends were people who had no expectations that she had to live up to...

(In this case I learned that the appearance she put up was rather a good thing, as what was beneath wasn't that pretty. Nor healthy. Rather damaged and misled and in need of therapy. But that's another story altogether...)



The point is: She discarded this attitude entirely when she wanted to be together with this co-worker of hers. Who obviously didn't want to be with her.

The fact that he was gay didn't seem to put her off either, no...

She clung to every possible excuse she could find to explain why he didn't warm up to her attempts at closeness. She doubted his gayness and figured he struggled with it himself. She figured he didn't love himself and therefore couldn't love another. She figured he couldn't handle someone becoming close and intimate. She figured these were all reasons why he didn't open up to her and why he remained distanced to her.

But we do figure it, right? So did I. Telling her didn't help though. Ever.



The point is: He didn't like her that way. She did. She probably couldn't handle the rejection in some way or another, and she came up will all sorts of excuses. I can't help but thinking that she exhonourated herself and her actions in this matter by doing this rationalizing. Something women are more often accused of on this forum. Sad, but I agree. In general.

The point is: She lost her alledged fear of intimacy when she thought the right person came along. Something that greatly surprised me, having heard her previous tales on herself. All of a sudden she no longer cared about showing her true self. She wanted to show her true self to this person more badly than an exhibitionist likes to show himself in a busy mall.

The point is: This friend may have been an extreme case, but we all have had our instances where we felt that another we liked, but who didn't like us in the same way, had intimacy issues. What other reason is there for another not to be close with you? Only if you're blinded by feelings.



The point is actually: Even if you have issues, fear of intimacy is lost when the right person comes along. Always. I would even go so far to say that there's not really such a thing as fear of intimacy. There's only fear of being intimate with, what you feel is, the wrong person.

The same with fear of commitment: You're only afraid to commit yourself to someone if you have doubts. Doubts exist for a reason: The person whom you're having doubts about, doesn't appeal to your entire frame, as LovelyLady put it. Correctly I feel.



As women in general are more into feelings than men (AFC's being the exception), the behaviour of accusing someone of attachement issues, or fear of intimacy and / or commitment, occurs more often with them. Or so spells my theory anyway.

In this case, my friend just needed to hear a definite "no" to cure. "He" never gave that to her.



There are so many of such stories. People rationalize why people don't like them that way and the most ridiculous theories are conjured up in the process. Not to mention the time wasted on it. Or the lives even.

Why?

Fragile ego's? A certain upbrininging that didn't teach a healthy attitude towards others and yourself? A lack of belief in one's self? A lack of healthy personal boundaries? Something else? I guess so.

It always surpises, amazes and disappoints me that so many people can't just sit down together, and talk about the emotional attachement of one to another, where the other doesn't want to return it. To me, being able to do that, and being able to be "even stevens and be amicable and civil" like penkitten remarked, is the true sign of maturity. I suppose many people aren't mature in that fashion.

To me, this is the essence of the matrix: it all begins at the programming phase. Fathers and mothers not raising their sons and daughters in a healthy manner. Because they weren't raised that way themselves.

I suppose this suffering all has a point. It makes you wonder: Who started this?

 

[LovelyLady]

should we start a fart joke thread instead?

Hey! now isn't that a bit radical? I mean... this isn't Sunday night on Chatzy for goodness sake! :crackup: :flowers:

 

[iqqi]

Break rules again, delete it if you wish.

You can stop starting off your posts like this.

You aren't the only youngster who triapses over here occasionally. Just speak your piece and be out.

 

[Alexander the Great]

The other point that is discussed is "fear of committment does not exist." Thus far in this topic that it been spoken as none of it exist. However, could we agree it is more that it is overused and it does exist?

[...]

What does this say, fear of committment does exist. There are those who are afraid of showing sides they others may not like and those who don't to let their guard down. Though the problem is that it is rare, but people throw it around for every rejection.

I agree. A serious phrase for real issues is too often abused for something as trivial as to explaining why a person just isn't that into you.

People often tend to blame others, instead of looking to themselves. Please excuse them.

 

[iqqi]

Well I used to think that fear of commitment = doesn't want to commit to YOU, til recently.

I do have a few issues I am working out from previous LTR's, but no serious issues like being raped or beat up by a man, yet I can testify I now know what it means to have a fear of commitment and intimacy, and it does not have to do with rejection or self loathing.

I am not saying my (unmentioned) reasons are the only reasons either, just that NOW I KNOW that it does exist.

I guess I can shed a little light on my own reasons. ONE reason being that I take commitment of any type very seriously, and the thought of having to choose someONE at this point, I know I am not ready. And when I meet someone who is fantastic and wants more from me or might want more, I freak out.

Also I know that most relationships don't work out, and my last one ended pretty badly, and I am not ready to take on any chances of such devastion in the near future. I prefer it fun and light. Mr. Wrongs over Mr. Rights! Or atleast not Mr. Everything Is Right and Perfect. And no, this is not fear of rejection, as I am the one who ended my last LTR.

 

[Alexander the Great]

Well I used to think that fear of commitment = doesn't want to commit to YOU, til recently.

I do have a few issues I am working out from previous LTR's, but no serious issues like being raped or beat up by a man, yet I can testify I now know what it means to have a fear of commitment and intimacy, and it does not have to do with rejection or self loathing.

I am not saying my (unmentioned) reasons are the only reasons either, just that NOW I KNOW that it does exist.

I guess I can shed a little light on my own reasons. ONE reason being that I take commitment of any type very seriously, and the thought of having to choose someONE at this point, I know I am not ready. And when I meet someone who is fantastic and wants more from me or might want more, I freak out.

Also I know that most relationships don't work out, and my last one ended pretty badly, and I am not ready to take on any chances of such devastion in the near future. I prefer it fun and light. Mr. Wrongs over Mr. Rights! Or atleast not Mr. Everything Is Right and Perfect. And no, this is not fear of rejection, as I am the one who ended my last LTR.

Why is that, Iqqi? Why? Why do people freak out when someone, who's percieved as "great", wants more? Is it fear of not being able to live up to expectations? Fear of not being able to give what the other wants? Something else?

I've never understood why this is, really. Unless a person deep down feels they are not worthy and thus somehow feel this "great person" is not the right one for them, or unless you're not that into the other person and / or you don't want to give yourself fully because you somehow feel you don't really "click" on a deeper level. In essence, a fear of not being understood or a fear of things not working out when the other person gets to know the real you. A fear of commitment out of a sense of preservation of feelings, of self.

Maybe it's a feeling that this person is great, but not the greatest, i.e. not entirely what you're looking for? It's quite unsettling to meet someone with potential, but still having a feeling that it isn't meant to be, that this is not The One (excuse the term). In other words, as LovelyLady put it earlier, not entirely in your frame.

But maybe I'm off and looking with a narrow vision.

So please shed some light, if you can, on why this is, if you have no real issues as you say?

 

[Latinoman]

iqqi is in her upper 20s...and was hurt by a kid in his very lower 20s. Perhaps instead of picking kids, she should have picked a man.

 

[My Name is Nobody]

iqqi is in her upper 20s...and was hurt by a kid in his very lower 20s. Perhaps instead of picking kids, she should have picked a man.

hahahaha.. I knew Iqqi was hurt and bitter.

 

[jophil28]

And when I meet someone who is fantastic and wants more from me or might want more, I freak out.

.

You really do have problems don't you ?
The scenario above does not make one lick of sense at any level.
IF your response to a fantastic man's quest for intimacy with you is for you to BOLT, then you have no business putting yourself on the market and dating guys who are seeking genuine and sane women.

YOu are, in fact, a fraud if you date men with your current pathology, because you KNOW in advance what your reply will be to a man's attempt at deeper involvement with you.

PLease remove yourself from the dating pool.

 

[Alexander the Great]

You really do have problems don't you ?
The scenario above does not make one lick of sense at any level.
IF your response to a fantastic man's quest for intimacy with you is for you to BOLT, then you have no business putting yourself on the market and dating guys who are seeking genuine and sane women.

YOu are, in fact, a fraud if you date men with your current pathology, because you KNOW in advance what your reply will be to a man's attempt at deeper involvement with you.

PLease remove yourself from the dating pool.

Ouch. That's probably going to hurt.

But I can't help but agreeing with jophil here. Something must be wrong if your response to someone you genuinely feel is great who wants more, is to head out the door.

Indeed it's best to figure out what it is before exposing yourself and others to the associated misery. Too many people get hurt because of things like this, and it's totally unnecesssary.

 

[My Name is Nobody]

The thing that bugs me about Iqqi is she parades around here like nothing is wrong and thinks she is the best thing to hit sosuave since sliced bread.

Well I've got news for ya Iqqi, I've been hurt and I'm bitter too b!tch, I'm not afraid to say it. I'm not afraid to say ANYTHING.

 

[iqqi]

iqqi is in her upper 20s...and was hurt by a kid in his very lower 20s. Perhaps instead of picking kids, she should have picked a man.

????

Where oh where do you get this stuff from? My last LTR was with someone my exact age.

I haven't been involved with anyone since. As a matter of fact, I have never been seriously involved with anyone younger than me. Yet.

The scenario above does not make one lick of sense at any level.
IF your response to a fantastic man's quest for intimacy with you is for you to BOLT, then you have no business putting yourself on the market and dating guys who are seeking genuine and sane women.

Talk about bitter!

I never put myself out there as looking for anything, not even a date. I pretty much make it clear I am just looking for friends. And I meet people through going out with my current friends. I am not on any dating websites or anything like that.

When it comes to more than friendly encounters, I am drawn romantically to men who themselves are emotionally unavailable, in the present moment.

Why is that, Iqqi? Why? Why do people freak out when someone, who's percieved as "great", wants more? Is it fear of not being able to live up to expectations? Fear of not being able to give what the other wants? Something else?...

Well Alex the Great, I thought I explained it. Sometimes I think the audience here at sosuave filters everything a woman says with their own bad experiences, instead of just taking the words that are given for what they mean.

I was in a bad LTR. It was hard. I missed being single. When I am not single, I might as well be married because commitment is a big deal to me. I do not want to get back into a LTR any time in the very near future. Because my last one was hard and ended badly. And I missed being single, especially when my honor to my commitment was not being met equally.

I want to have fun and meet people, and not be stressed out by a man.

When I DO meet a man who is great, I do not BOLT, but I do freak out. Because I am not ready yet, and I do worry I might ruin something good by being indecisive, rude, and hard to read. And I see how great they are, and mourn the fact that I might have to let it go for now, which means maybe forever. AKA stress. Which I don't want right now. Or need.

Does it get clearer?

I am not desperate for a relationship, so I do not jump on every boat with my name on it. I just want to stick my toes in the water for now, I do not want to go deep sea diving.

 

[Victory Unlimited]

Intimacy is REAL.

But what exactly IS this definition of INTIMACY that I speak of?

It is the desire for connection, to know and to BE known. It is a NEED to matter.

And as a result, the Fear of Intimacy is also just as REAL. But it is an adversary, a stalker; a potential Soul-Killer that comes in many guises. Yes, it is a cloaked death-dealer that enters a person's life boldly-------like multiple metaphorical "Trojan horses". And when this FEAR strikes it's Death Blow, all types of dreams and goals are numbered among it's casualties.

But just to name THREE of the many masks that the Fear of Intimacy frequently tends to wear:

FEAR of COMMITMENT: Yes, it is true that this is an oft-used statement thrown out by people trying to "manipulate" others into a bond that is NOT mutually desired. And yes, it is often used by people to blithely discount even the IDEA that it could be possible that they themselves ARE NOT seen as the "Prize" by the object of their affections.

And the list COULD go on and on. So it is well understood that these statements of rebuttal that have already been made by some here ARE true. But the realities and the dangers of EMOTIONAL VULNERABILITY are equally as real. So, please DO NOT miss the next point that I will make "ON PURPOSE"------as is the custom of the apathetic, the bitter, and the proud (whose viewpoints I have already addressed in great depth in THIS POST).

But the way Fear of Intimacy hides within SOME instances where the Fear of Commitment line is thrown out is when a man self-sabotages a burgeoning relationship at the last minute. Sometimes he does it out of his own low self-esteem. Other times he does it because he KNOWS that there is a previously unspoken recognition of a TRUE incompatibility present------dooming the relationship to ultimate failure. And still other times, because the nature of the relationship, or his motivations for entering it NEVER WERE conducive to any kind of long-term connection.

But no matter which example may apply, it was STILL his need to connect, his desire to "BOND" (for no matter how LOFTY or LOWLY a reason------or how BRIEF a time) that inspired him to initiate the interaction.

NEED for DISTRACTION: This is another way that Fear of Intimacy can hide itself. In the past, I have referred to it as "Loneliness in search of CROWD". It is this overwhelming drive that some of us can have to surround ourselves with MANY sources of flesh and blood distractions-------to turn our eyes away, to KEEP us from looking within, and spending time with OURSELVES. Sometimes, it's true, that it's people who would rather NOT know themselves who ALWAYS rush to lose themselves in the process of getting to know OTHER people instead.

And for those of you who doubt that THIS form of a "fear" of Intimacy with OURSELVES exists, I would ask for you to get offline, turn off your TVs, cut off your radios, and unplug and turnoff all your phones. THEN, sit alone for just an hour, and NOTICE how comfortable you are with yourself WITHOUT the distractions of other people, places, or things. How many of us can actually DO this and enjoy our OWN company, AND what we begin to know about ourselves will speak volumes to just how comfortable we are with SELF-INTIMACY alone.

HEDONISTIC ABANDON: This CAN be yet another manifestation of a FEAR OF INTIMACY. Sometimes, a man who lives his life totally devoted to the pursuit of pleasure and self-gratification is often doing it to provide for himself a temporary fix. For him, pleasure in and of itself, acts as a drug--------of the numbing or painkilling variety. Through pleasure, men can, for a time at least, shut off or weaken that NEED inside of them for a true connection-----that burning desire within them to know and to BE KNOWN on a deeper level.

And in this scenario, there exists examples of men's POSSIBLE compulsion to place the importance of ACTIVITY over ACCOMPLISHMENT. They consume their time with SO MANY out-wardly important goals, plans, and projects that they can sometimes successfully ignore their NEED to really connect with other human beings TOTALLY------but only for a time. When the buzz of one thrill ends-----another MUST be sought. When the “conquest” of one woman ends----another MUST be sought. And even as basically as when one EJACULATION is achieved-----yes, ANOTHER one must be sought. Indeed, a man's need for TRUE Intimacy WILL rear it's head again and again, no matter how increasingly UNSATISFYING the means he chooses to satisfy it becomes.

And again, the nature of the relationship does not matter, whether it be friends, lovers, or fukk buddies-------at the end of the day, every man has a hidden desire for at least SOMEBODY to really give a damn about him. And this is not just demonstrative of socially well-adjusted people either. That's why this is true even of vicious gangbangers and serial killers:

What better way to leave your mark on the world than by VIOLENTLY changing the lives of other people (or their SURVIVING families)? True, this is a negative and MORBID form of "connecting" with the world, but I'm SURE you get my point.

In Conclusion…

The thrill and satisfaction that comes with accomplishment are great things indeed. But greater STILL is the inner joy and peace that a man gets when his accomplishments reach a higher level of success. That level of success where he recognizes that his life is not given to him simply for him to JUST be "happy", but rather, to ALSO be SIGNIFICANT----to matter.

To affect the lives of others in such a way that only HIS being here alive during his brief time on earth COULD. Many non-relationship-centric endeavors tend to PALE in comparison...

I will leave it to the statisticians, the social "scientists", and the Bob Costas fans to go get the numbers, BUT I will only share with you that I personally know of many cases where people on their death beds have cried in utter despair over estranged, broken, or failed RELATIONSHIPS. And whether those relationships in question were friends, family, or LOVERS--------the fact that they are all "relationships" is undeniable.

And PROOF that they were intimate, or that they represented "missed opportunities" FOR intimacy is in the reality of the REGRET that that dying person was expressing in THAT moment------even to the point of grieving.

GRIEF is a word that is associated with LOSS.

LOSS is a word that is associated with the awareness that something has either been taken from you, or is NOW no longer in your possession for some reason------it is a sense that a connection was broken, or a recognition that the CHANCE for such a connection is NO MORE.

So let us NOT delude ourselves, all you "soldiers of (hopefully) GOOD fortune". Life is ALL about relationships.

And all relationships are forms of ESTABLISHED INTIMACY.

A man's relationship with others. A man's relationship with "things". And MOST importantly, that man's relationship with HIMSELF. A man's search for intimacy is ALWAYS proven in his desire for these connections, and to what lengths he's willing to go to obtain them.

Yes even in these times in which we live where the UNPRINCIPLED are heralded and the DISHONORABLE are honored-------these "Scoundrel Days"...men STILL seek intimacy. A man STILL wants to MATTER----to himself, and to those around him.

He ALWAYS wants to have SOME sort of an impact.

To make a difference...in a world of INDIFFERENCE.


PEACE...One day.

 

[edger]

Bingo. Gold star for EDGER.

No one is 'afraid of intimacy'. This is yet more feminized jingoism like "men have fragile egos" or "men are threatened by successful women" and lets not forget "he's commitment-phobic", all brought to you by Oprah & Dr. Phil.

What both sexes are afraid of is REJECTION, so we create Buffers against it and rationalizations for it to lessen the impact. All of the above examples are rationalizations for rejection of intimacy. Women love to complain about how they are objectified, how they become sex objects, when in fact this objectification is yet another buffer against rejection by men. It's far easier to accept rejection from an object than from a person.

Conversely, the same is true for women when they rationalize for themselves that a man is 'commitment-phobic' or has a 'fear of intimacy'. This rationalization similarly objectifies men as 'the problem'. It's not that he's rejected her intimacy, it's HIS problem with intimacy or commitment, not her personally. Buffers are ego protection devices. Again it's much easier to accept rejection of intimacy for her if the man is fundamentally flawed.

The crime here, and I assume the reason for starting this thread, is that men (such as FRIVOLOUS from his prior thread) buy into their being the problem. They internalize the Matrix created schema, "I have/Men have commitment issues" or "I have/Men Have a fear of intimacy." This then becomes a part of their personalities by ego-investment in the schema.

I just remembered one important component of my situation with that girl that I forgot about. After she had told me she would "feel weird being in a relationship with me because I'm established", she told me a few weeks later that she wanted to be in a relationship with me. Again, I didn't respond. Then, several days later was when I told her I didn't want a relationship with her.