Yer_Blues Posted November 9, 2010 Posted November 9, 2010 As a person trying to get a better understanding on how relationships work realistically instead of idealistically, this is a question that's been on my mind a lot lately. As a person who is less secure than the next guy and a little over concerned with how others are feeling/making evaluations at all times, I do not currently set "secure, happy with themselves" as one of my top priorities in looking for potential dates. Is there any hope in finding a diamond in the rough among the less social, more anxious type? Or is it a healthier approach to always keep the blinders on improving oneself and not consider the project relationship? I don't know if its just built out of ignorance of how this **** actually works or some kind of immature conception of love, but I find the idea of two people who are a little less trusting and a little more emotionally needy being a bit more ideal than a situation where one "happier" person is the crutch/stepstool for the other. But again, I know nothing of the topic first hand.
Eeyore79 Posted November 9, 2010 Posted November 9, 2010 I am probably a little needy and insecure. Someone who is less needy usually gets frustrated with me, and I feel neglected by them. I actually LIKE it when the other person is also a bit clingy, because we sort of cling to each other, and both of us are happy.
Author Yer_Blues Posted November 9, 2010 Author Posted November 9, 2010 I am probably a little needy and insecure. Someone who is less needy usually gets frustrated with me, and I feel neglected by them. I actually LIKE it when the other person is also a bit clingy, because we sort of cling to each other, and both of us are happy. Precisely. I haven't had this happen to me yet, but it's a primary concern of mine. I feel like I am going to have to really force the no cling factor on a far greater level if somebody is of a healthier mindset. Which is why I'm not entirely sure such a notion is sensible or healthy. If only external validation wasn't so hardwired to be the #1 priority...
Author Yer_Blues Posted November 9, 2010 Author Posted November 9, 2010 In fact, is being needy itself something that should be strived to be fixed or is it more of a character trait that's pretty set in stone?
Knittress Posted November 9, 2010 Posted November 9, 2010 I think what matters most is that both parties are similar and on the same page emotionally. If two people are 'attached at the hip' types they'll fulfill each other's needs for closeness and not get annoyed at what other types might perceive as 'clingy' behavior. It can work, and it can work wonderfully. The only problem is that as the pair gets older often one of the partners will become more confident/independent than the other - which can lead to the less secure party feeling threatened and resentful. Then things can go downhill fast. Being affectionate, passive, humble... these are all personality traits. Being insecure or lacking in confidence are not - those are issues.
Eeyore79 Posted November 9, 2010 Posted November 9, 2010 Different people have different relationship styles. I want to contact someone at least a couple of times a day, see them 3-4 times a week, have my hands all over them all the time, have sex like rabbits, and be all kissy and romantic. Other people are happy and fulfilled with a more distant, less intense relationship, and may have lower sex drives, but I'm not compatible with those people - they find me clingy and I find them cold. If you find someone who wants the same type of relationship that you do, you'll both be happier.
brainygirl Posted November 9, 2010 Posted November 9, 2010 Relationship between two needy, insecure people . . . . is called co-dependency. Everyone has needs and some insecurities. But when the relationship becomes the validation for the people in it, things get unhealthy.
sally4sara Posted November 9, 2010 Posted November 9, 2010 Yeah, I've seen it happen. Both couples have really low self esteem and body image issues on both the guy and the girl's part. Both couples have zero tolerance for platonic associations to a level I rarely see in others. And it keeps working for them because no one in these two relationships feels they can get anyone else. And since they whip themselves into a frenzy over platonic associations, there is little experienced opportunity to see if their partner would stick by them out of choice instead of a lack of options.
Author Yer_Blues Posted November 10, 2010 Author Posted November 10, 2010 Relationship between two needy, insecure people . . . . is called co-dependency. Everyone has needs and some insecurities. But when the relationship becomes the validation for the people in it, things get unhealthy. Is it unrealistic/idealistic to think that one can learn to appreciate themselves through proper/meaningful appreciation from others? As in, even if the relationship doesn't pan out, could the process improve both people and make them more comfortable seeking partners going forward?
brainygirl Posted November 10, 2010 Posted November 10, 2010 Is it unrealistic/idealistic to think that one can learn to appreciate themselves through proper/meaningful appreciation from others? As in, even if the relationship doesn't pan out, could the process improve both people and make them more comfortable seeking partners going forward? No, that just sets the person up to seek external validation from others and crash when they don't get it. Cultivate internal appreciation of yourself before getting into a relationship.
Recommended Posts