The article talks about his ability to be friendly to strangers but abusive to his long term acquaintances. I have observed this pattern and curious if anyone knows what drives this?
My personal theory is that you have some sort of obligations to long term acquaintances but you owe nothing to strangers on the trail. It's this feeling of obligation that leads you to resent people over time.
I struggle with this in my personal life. To most friends and acquaintances I can be friendly, personable, interesting, and engaging when we meet. But at home, with close family, and especially with my wife I struggle to be that person. My default state is that I mostly want to be left alone. All the people closest to me seem to want something -- time, attention, help, emotional support etc. none of which I seem to need from anybody else and leads to annoyance and resentment on my part. It doesn't help that I have a particularly stressful job managing a large team with silly interpersonal issues and politics that I have to deal with.
My wife and I have our good moments, are good parents (I think), but day to day is such a struggle. It is constant cycle of me wanting to be left alone and her wanting something or the other from me and getting annoyed that I show reluctance to do it leading to resentment on both sides. Not sure how to fix it or where to turn to for help. I am not an angry person and I don't physically yell or hurt her but she has said that me being reluctant with most things is a form of emotional abuse, which after reading this concerns me and is cause for introspection.
How strange, just created an account to say that I am the same way and was thinking about this a lot last night. (Although, I don’t think I am emotionally abusive, as I feel my spouse demands things that are entirely unreasonable, like frequently asking me to leave work in the middle of the day to come help with something or buying a house and dog when we had less than $1,000 in our account).
All I wanted my whole life was a happy family with a happy relationship like my parents had. That didn’t happen and now all I want is to be left alone, and it’s like everyone wants something from me but I don’t need or want anything from them. I have a great job now, so the only thing I look forward to each day is hopefully reaching financial independence before I’m 40. At least then I can “buy” some alone time.
There has been plenty of unreasonable stuff over the years. Early in our marriage she spent close to 1000$ at the mall which left us short of funds to pay her grad school tuition that I had been saving to pay for her. Till date she refuses to understand our financial picture and will be completely lost if I were to get hit by a bus tomorrow. Also, she has not worked for >90% of our ~10 year marriage to follow her passion for art which has made ->$0 so far. I am fine with that because we don't need 2 incomes and I am happy she has the freedom to pursue her passions. Thankfully, like you, I have done pretty well in my career and could probably retire in a cheaper country or some midwestern town tomorrow. This is in addition to all the other things she has anxiety about doing -- driving the car to new places, walking the dog when it is dark outside etc.
I had the exact same wish. I just wanted a happy family like my parents had. I adore my child. Now I just wish we could both get out of this without damaging him too much and I can be left alone.
> she has said that me being reluctant [...] is a form of emotional abuse
> her grad school tuition that I had been saving to pay for her
> she has not worked for >90% of our ~10 year marriage
My friend, you are not abusing your wife. She is abusing you. She is also gaslighting you into thinking you are the problem. You're not. And she is using your child to blackmail you emotionally.
> things she has anxiety about doing -- driving the car to new places, walking the dog when it is dark outside
This isn't anxiety, it's laziness. But if you're merely reluctant about the exact same things, she calls it "a form of emotional abuse." Brilliant.
Unfortunately, the way the law is currently applied, there is nothing you can do without violating it.
I agree 100% with 08-15s reply. Looks more that she is abusing you.
I was married to a woman who behaved in a similar fashion. Calling me during work days for ridiculous reasons. Never satisfied. Needed constant attention. Took all disagreements as personal attacks. Needy, prickly, never thankful to anyone. In the end we separated as everything in the marriage was one way street in her direction.
Today I regret that I did not leave her more early but tried to rescue the family by letting everything her way.
Looking back she had a Narcistic Personality Disorder (which was meanwhile confirmed by a psychologist).
Get books on narcissism. Try to speak to a professional if you believe she is narcistic. But NPS is (almost) not treatable. So the only solution is to leave if she is narcistic.
Luckily I managed that our kids stayed with me after separation. And for the kids protection, don't leave the kid with her when you leave. (Recommended Reading: "Children of the self absorbed" by Nina Brown).
She’s likely wanting your presence and testing your loyalty or something? Definitely would help to see a couples therapist but if not, I think setting clear boundaries - like work time is work time - but also scheduling time together would put her at ease and prevent random requests.
100% this. I've been working through similar issues in my personal life (complicated by COVID, natch) and what I've come to is that I need to get way better about setting clear boundaries and expectations with people I care about. This can be done in a compassionate way, and relationships will be better in the long run even if doing the boundary setting feels hard or mean in the short term.
I’m going to get downvoted for this but here goes. For a marriage to be successful, one partner has to be dominant. A marriage of equals doesn’t work and your parents (and mine) have happy relationships because this principle was followed. I converted to Islam around 8 years ago and married a Muslim woman and I could not be more happy. For the last 6 years, everyday is bliss and I’ve never performed better at work.
Well you're certainly right that it's easy to want to downvote your statement. I'd like to learn:
Can you explain what the advantages of the dominant marriages are? Since you mention Islam, I assume you're the dominant one. I'm going to assume your wife is happy in her role. Do you think the female can be the dominant one in a relationship, too, or how is that decided?
Not my post, but if I may I’d like to offer my input, please.
The word “dominance” seems to carry a negative connotation in the context of interpersonal relationships. There a lot of historical factors that are the cause of this and it's beyond the scope of this conversation to delve deeply into that.
Nonetheless, as far as Islam is concerned, it is the role of the man to wield the influence/be dominant in his household. This is by virtue of his responsibilities -- his attachment to the Masjid (or “Mosque” in the West), his duty to earn a living for the household and his duty as an educator and paragon of good character, not just in the home but in his community as well.
The word “dominance” may suggest a sense of oppression in modern times. But in the scope of Islam, that husband who is “dominant” in reality eschews all reprehensible conduct that could be associated with the word.
As I mentioned before, yes, in Islam there are expectations on the Muslim wife. But likewise there are expectations (if not more) on the Muslim husband. Again, that Muslim man assumes dominance in the household out of the necessity that is to submit himself both internally and externally to the conduct of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and prayers be upon him).
The advantages of this lie in the husband assuming his natural role as prescribed by Allah and exemplified by the Messenger of Allah (peace and prayers be upon him). If the situation were to be reversed, then this could not be the case. If anything, the man would not just be neglecting his duties as a husband, but as a Muslim as well. If the situation were to be reversed, it would behove the woman to instead leverage this dominance in order to encourage her husband to fulfill the rights he owes to her and to humanity. If he accepts this, then the natural order as described above would inevitably fall into place.
As salaamu alaikum. I love you. Thank you for sharing this post and making the most profound comment that I have read on this site, bar none.
It is strange to assume that two people who are different by their very nature can be “equal”. The sense of equality between a man and a woman can only come about by the fulfillment of the rights that exist between the two of them, which are different but have to be observed reciprocally.
The problem is that we (meaning humanity at large) are totally unaware of the rights that we owe to each other. Not just in the household, but outside of it as well. Worst of all, we are unaware of the rights that are due to our Creator.
May Allah, the One who is Most Gracious, strengthen you and your wife. Ameen.
Just a thought, but what if you set a daily time limit of being fully engaged and present with your wife, say for an hour or two, but then it is understood that you need ~3 hrs of alone time.
Sounds like you’re an introvert and need time to recharge from managing a team and you’re burnt out from that.
I think she’d be delighted with an hour a day of full presence, perhaps more on the weekend.
This is a good suggestion and something I am going to attempt to negotiate. I think part of the problem is something a person called out below -- we are fundamentally different. She does not need the same amount of time alone and may resent me for wanting that. But something to try.
Counselling might help too, perhaps. It can be very difficult to explain what you need and why, but doubly so when the other party has difficulty hearing and understanding what you're trying to say. A professional counsellor can really help with that.
If she resents you for something that is your nature, that’s (as you know) unsustainable. Resentments like that may need to be dealt with with the help of a neutral therapist.
I’m not sure how I would feel if my partner wanted to spend 3 times as much time alone as with me. That’s kind of degrading unless you are both into that.
What are you getting out of the relationship at all? Sounds like they should leave and be alone.
In the TV show Six Feet Under one of the couples found happiness when they realized they shouldn't live together but they were happy to date each other and see each other regularly, just not all the time, because the boyfriend went through cycles when he enjoyed socializing and cycles when he wanted to be alone.
That strikes me as fine if both people are happy with the arrangement, but if kids are in the picture or one of the partners is unhappy with this arrangement I don't know if it will work.
Yea for sure but I think the message is that 1 hour of engaged time - such as going on a short date (at home or other) is much better than 4 hours disengaged and thinking of work while watching Netflix
Have you considered getting a psych evaluation? I’m not trying to swipe at you, I’m approaching this with the most positive of intent.
What you’re describing sounds like a personality disorder of some sort. Identifying such may help surface strategies for lessening those feelings. Disclaimer: not a mental health professional, but have had a couple in my personal life.
I believe it's called a mask. People with some personality disorders gradually develop a sort of behavioral mask to wear in public in order to fit in into the wider society and be able to achieve one's goals. However, having it 'on' is apparently taxing, so it comes off around people who are in one way or another part of some inner circle for whom there's no point to pretend.
> I believe it's called a mask ... a sort of behavioral mask to wear in public
It is indeed fairly common. I'm affected (thankfully not strongly these days) by bipolar behaviour. I try to present a more average me as the mask.
> in order to fit in into the wider society and be able to achieve one's goals.
It can be more selfless than that. In work life it is about fitting in (or at least not standing out in an inconvenient way) but in personal life it is more that I don't people to worry overly. I have things well managed, I know I can push through, I know it will pass, there is no need to cause stress in others.
> However having it 'on' is apparently taxing
During a bad patch, the extra concentration adds up over time if you find yourself having to work at it for a while. I don't have many prolonged bad patches, I imagine it can get exponentially harder for those more severely affected than me. It is why a lot of people experiencing mental health issues retreat away from interaction even if they are not otherwise particularly introverted.
How do you know you've changed and it's not just the perception of how you see yourself post the event? Did you change your thinking patterns as well? If you're uncomfortable to share that's more than okay and very understandable.
Love to. I’m a card-carrying member of the Over-sharers Club
The way I think and care about people has changed. I no longer care what people think about me. At the same time, I have a depth of compassion and empathy I couldn’t have had before.
I have no obligation to anyone. This lets me choose to care about someone without getting unnecessarily attracted. As a result, I can share my love and support freely without worrying about people taking advantage of me. I have no guilt showing people the door.
As a result of this, my motivations have changed. To use a metaphor, I see myself as a light in a dark world. My goal is to make everyone’s day a little better. I’m not some kind of savior, though I have saved lives. I’m just a “good person” trying to do “good things”.
My interests have changed in odd ways. I’d never have written erotica but sex is far more interesting to me now. This isn’t a result of me being repressed. I’ve always been asexual and been hypersexual since I was nine. But now I’m deeply exploring sexuality in my writing.
The last one is both odd and the most fundamental to my being. Just take it at face value.
I had a deep, spiritual connection with wolves from six years old until my break. That connection was a core part of me and without it, I wouldn’t have known who I was.
That connection is gone and I really don’t care about it. As far as I’m concerned, it was delusional thinking.
I no longer have the spirituality that was such a part of me. There is only the rational world now. (Side note: My faith in God had always been rational, not emotional or spiritual.)
If I had to guess, I think sexuality took the place of spiritually in my brain.
It’s quite possible I haven’t changed as much as I think, but the world inside my head is so vastly different, I can’t understand the person I was before.
Another note on masks. If you’ve always been known for your positive traits and your negative ones can be overlooked by people who like you, many people won’t notice if your positive traits get better and your negative ones become smoothed out.
Yes, this happens quite a bit as we can’t really see what’s going on inside other people’s minds. It is very interesting to say your sexuality took over spirituality in your case. How old were you when this happens? During puberty, adolescence and early adulthood we go trough transformations that are in a way not very well understood, in regard to sexuality I mean, think all the hormonal production going through the roof and stabilizing later on in life, but this is connected to mental health as well. Although I am not suffering of serious mental issues, just some anxiety and depression here and there for short periods of time, I remember first experiencing anxiety as an adolescent and didn’t know what it was then. It was mild though.
I assume you can be an introvert who has no mental issues.
I also assume you can be an introvert who has some spectrum and type of mental illness, sexual and gender classification they choose, past exploitation and/or violence committed against you, etc.
I just think it is interesting b/c the person underneath the shell is different person to person and I think we lump very granular groups into large piles for ease of discussion and use.
I think he wanted a mental health, possibly a moral/spiritual awakening but he was toward the end or had completed the hike and was facing reality that there was a mental issue or past event in his life that he could not get past. Maybe just going back to the "real world" was just to much if it had to be in his own skin with his past.
It's... Not even close. What I had in mind was what clinical narcissists, sociopaths and psychopaths do. Their brains are wired completely differently than what is regarded as normal, to the point where you can see that on CT scans. There was a story about a researcher who figured out he's a high-functioning psychopath by looking at his CT scans. I'm digressing. So, typically, starting from a very early age they'd learn the behaviors they need to do in order to not get into trouble. Down to 'make an upward arch with your mouth when you see someone who knows you'. Must be very hard to live like that, I don't think it's comparable to what introverts do. Because introverts simply amplify behaviors that they do have, or understand, or are at least able to relate to from parts of personal experience. Contrast that to literally coming up with an artificial persona that you can't even relate to in any way and having to always stick to that.
This is why the masks ar pretty much always super charming and likeable. If you're acting anyway, might as well act like someone that's super likeable. Pretty much how you max out a player in some game.
Maybe this is oversharing, but maybe not. I have shades of this in myself. I have a much smaller friend group than many folks and a cynical take on most peoples motivations. I can say that some of why I feel this way is just "how Im bent" and some is from childhood experiences of having my trust betrayed or my naivety taken advantage of. Throw in a bit of unpredictable mom behavior and I generally dont want to owe anything to anyone.
When I first meet people Im more than happy to share, give of myself, etc. Usually I will either feel that gestures are not reciprocated, or taken for granted, so I pull back. Ive wondered if I feel like Im expecting too much of my generosity and I think Ive been guilty of that before. At this point though I think I have reflected enough and changed to where this is not the case.
Long term- I feel like being social requires me to "be on" which is exhausting to me. I would rather only see people when I can be decent company so I end up seeing people much less than more socially adept folks...
I've had this problem in many contexts. Some of it stems from childhood circumstances, but it's also that I often read people better than they seemingly know themselves, i.e., noticing anger that they don't think they have. This can cause a lot of stress.
From the about portion of that, it mostly reads like symptoms of people with Schizoid Personality Disorder or Avoidant Personality Disorder. While it can be a good survival trait in the grand scheme of things, culturally in the US it's as useful as being born poor.
It's pretty different. My kid had it, and there were some things we did early to help him study, but nothing like either of those disorders. It's more tied to very high empathy.
However, you do have to learn how to avoid taking on other people's emotional burdens.
Or on the autism spectrum. A lot of people with HFA/asperger's would describe their inner experience as very much like 'HSP' even if from the outside they wouldn't be obviously considered so.
I can relate to some of your quirks. I am now 50+, with 3 kids, and I've left most of the quirks behind.
I used to always try to please others. My dysfunctional family liked it that way. It made their life easier. That was one of the last quirks to go. It was only after being forced into being assertive to defend my kids, I've realized that it is ok to stand up for yourself. Life's been much better since, surprisingly, most people appreciate assertiveness. And being assertive is not nearly as exhausting as being nice.
It was a long journey, started with therapy 25 years ago.
I have the same issue as well. Often I feel like people are taking advantage of me. I feel like I have a good sense of people's intentions even before they say them. Also if I don't receive reciprocation in any way, it further reinforces to me the taking advantage of belief.
This is indicative of a personality disorder. My father had BPD and behaved this way. My mother was borderline and behaved this way.
People like this do not behave abusively towards their loved ones all the time, it's pretty on-and-off. The loved one is typically a dependent or avoidant. They remain in the relationship because they need the positive affirmations, and healthy people do not want to be with a dependent or avoidant. So, no choice but to suffer the negativity also.
It's clear that this man developed a personality disorder as the result of suffering abuse as a child.
> It's clear that this man developed a personality disorder as the result of suffering abuse as a child.
I don't think the causality is clear at all. If he treated his parents the way he treated his girlfriends then his childhood would have been rough no matter how loving they were.
If he behaves like he did in the article: polite at first but increasingly hostile the longer the relationship lasted then he must have been a hellish teenager to wrangle. One part of the article mentions that his anger at his father may have been the result of putting him in an institution.
> It's clear that this man developed a personality disorder as the result of suffering abuse as a child.
I'd say that is pretty hard to tell from the hearsay and all these are just speculations, which are okay. We're learning more from these conversations anyway.
Thank you for your gentle and respectful method of disagreement.
I agree that my assumption was based on hearsay. Fundamentally, I don't believe that children who are loved and protected by their primary caregivers shoot themselves in the stomach in an attempt to die.
You're welcome. Mental health is a very misunderstood topic because it is something we cannot directly peer into and the stigma associated with mental health makes people hide it very well.
It is possible to have a who child goes off the rails in a very nurturing and a generally normal family. I've seen cases where one of the many siblings gets to become a sociopath and the family never understands why and they continue to be normal and consistently try to get their sibling back on track. It is clear that abuse in the family doesn't always play a role. But quite often it does and while mental health has a hereditary component, a bad environment only makes things worse.
I recommend Ramsay's movie 'We need to talk about Kevin' to make an idea of how wrong it could go. Surely, it is a movie but it's not too far from reality.
This is indicative only of specific personality disorders. There are several other personality disorders that don't behave this way and are defined by other actions entirely, eg. schizotypal personality disorder is mostly being defined by distorted perceptions and belief systems.
It is sadly typical and can result in something a friend of mine experienced. She left her husband, told friends that he was abusive, and the general response was "Him? But he's such a great guy! You must be lying."
( Fortunately for her, the friends who attempted to console him pretty soon noticed how violent he got when he talked about her. When he threw a glass at the wall at a friend's apartment, she started getting a lot of apologies. )
It's almost an adaptive behavior. If they were violent to strangers, they wouldn't have long term acquaintances.
Could be politeness as a response to social uncertainty followed by aggression once things are more clear. Like how some people fight with loved ones because they can’t just walk.
I think there may be an element of survivorship bias at play. There's kind of a 2x2 you can draw where people can be publicly/privately kind/abusive. People who are kind all the time (or at least, not abusive all the time) are unremarkable, I'm not sure there are many people who are publicly abusive and privately kind, and people who are both publicly and privately abusive are way more likely to end up in prison, or homeless, or otherwise away from people. So that leaves us noticing the strange pattern of people who are publicly kind and privately abusive. It's like, the most remarkable pattern that's actually present for us to remark upon.
I think you can find people who are publicly abusive and privately kind in online communities.
I just finished listening to a podcast called My Year in Mensa, which centers around an unmoderated Mensa facebook group, and the author's interactions with them. As you can imagine from an unmoderated community, it sucks and a lot of people say shitty things there.
A common refrain the author heard from people defending the group is "They're the nicest people in real life!", which may absolutely be the case, but publicly, they are presenting abusive versions of themselves.
I've watched a lot of his shows and have developed a kind of celebrity respect for him, enough that I've gone on and read interviews with him and with people in his orbit (like the restauranteurs featured on his shows.) Turns out a lot of people say he's actually far kinder than you'd think, off-camera, to all the people he's seemingly abusive to!
All the yelling and vitriol is kind of a spliced-down highlights reel, is the impression I've gotten, the stuff that makes for good tv. It's there and it's real, but it's a smaller part of a guy who's generally nice and genuinely cares about the people on his shows.
There could also be a survivorship bias of relationships. The friends you still have are the ones who are willing and able to put up with your shit. The others are no longer in your life.
So when you're around them, you know you can let out your bad side to some extent. You don't know that with random strangers.
there is a broad class of psychological problems called "personality disorders" and they're basically "spectrum" disorders, there's no one size fits all diagnosis for anybody, and even skilled practitioners go through a tricky and time consuming process of diagnosing patients directly, i.e. we can't diagnose him from here based on 2nd hand information, and especially because we are not skilled practitioners.
wrt your "personal theory" (sense of obligation leads to resentment), that's too simplistic, but for the sake of argument, let's say you are on the right track, here's how to improve your understanding of personality disorders: all people feel the resentment of obligations to those close to them. That part is actually the normal part. The question is, why doesn't the person with this disorder (we are hypothesizing) feel the other positive parts of a close relationship that help a better adjusted person feel in balance, and then take the normal resentment of obligations in stride.
Its the idea that the more you learn about people and have to be around them, you start to judge them and then realize they aren't like you, so you push them away and crater relationships on purpose so you can be alone and unencumbered by other people's problems. It sounds to me like he did just that. Easier to have short-term relationships and human contact when you need it, but not long enough where you start to get bitter about having to continue being around people you don't like.
He created a world that seemed to fit his personality better than what he had been doing most of his life. It must have been beneficial in some way if he continued doing it for so long.
> But soon he started to clam up and shut her out. “If something upset him, he would stop talking to me completely. Which can be lonely when you share a 500-square-foot apartment,” she says.
You definitely get the sense that he just wanted to be alone at times. Hard to do that when you're in a long term relationships because you have to adjust to some else's schedule. Easier when your acquaintances are short-term.
1) If you are weird, then you have mismatched expectations about relationships (and other social obligations) than majority society. Not providing something that is expected would be 'neglect', while expecting something that is not provided would be 'entitlement'. Social rules with strangers or casual acquaintances are much simpler.
2) Being in some kind of deep relationship means emotional stakes are higher. Perceived violations due to (1) causes higher emotional damage if they are from someone near than someone distant.
Could be the fact that strangers don't know you so they can't judge you. Your long term friends and family know you possibly better than you do. Being around friends and family can be a great way to learn about yourself. The problem is, some people see themselves and hate it.
My theory about what might have governed his behavior: boredom. He was designing a game, which is a system designed to mitigate the boredom issue. Knowing people better could make them boring to one's eye -- there are familiar patterns, and not much interesting new patterns developed. Nature has a lot of interesting new patterns.. but maybe he eventually got bored out of that too.
Reading the article he was someone who was prone to neglect people close to him. I wouldn't look for an explanation that applies to everyone for that behavior.
I've known people closely people like that, there's a selfishness to their lack of acknowledgement of others' needs and wants, but it's more of a drive to do that than a reaction to their existence; if and when they have nobody else to hollow out with their negativity and neglect, they'll turn it on themselves, and over time there will be just less and less of themselves.
Notwithstanding that they can be charming on a superficial level.
There's lots of ways people can have that pattern of being a completely different beast to strangers than to intimate partners in a bad way. Say on the other end the ones that make their whole world about you, but that specially means that every single bad feeling of theirs will be offloaded or straight up blamed on you.
From experience, I would explain it by an inability to accept others, which could be traced to perfectionism and low self-esteem.
With long term acquaintances, you start to notice imperfections. If you have a low self-esteem, you could develop this peronality where you are constantly judging others, and trying to control and make them perfect, because they are part of your life.
This could have been caused by constant criticism received during childhood, or abusive parents who were themselves perfectionist in treating you, and didn't show enough acceptance, pride and love.
I think its easy to lice in a shell you create for yourself 10-12 hours a day. Its harder to live that life with people you're around all the time. My Dad for instance was well liked at his job and in the community. As soon as he left work and those people behind the smiles and jokes stopped and he was just mean and quiet with a temper that was never far from reach. I think the person he was at work was the person he wanted to be, but the person he was with us was his true self.
Its either that or he truly hated my mother, my brother, and myself.
I think it comes from liking people a priori, but having a habituated expectation that the people we know will take from us (our happiness, our time, etc.)--so that one can't feel safe to be oneself with those one knows. IMO this expectation typically comes from childhood and can best be mitigated via mindfulness.
Perhaps some form of social anxiety or avoidant attachment? It's easy to be friendly (or an asshole) in brief superficial interactions, but longer interactions lead people to intimacy that some find undesirable... fear of rejection can present as hostility (essentially proactive rejection).
I had an ex that was sort of like this. She wasn’t necessarily abusive, but she needed everyone to like her and the people that already did she didn’t have to do anything to impress. I interpreted it as a deep insecurity resulting in really fake behavior: a mask as a sibling poster said.
I think it's because when you spend a lot of time with someone, you start to notice all of their annoying quirks you don't usually see when you just met them. So after a while you start to get tired and annoyed of them, and the way to deal with it is with anger.
There could also have been some trauma/abuse with parents/family. The author of the story seemed to suggest something happened between him and the father.
My personal theory is that you have some sort of obligations to long term acquaintances but you owe nothing to strangers on the trail. It's this feeling of obligation that leads you to resent people over time.