When Someone Uses You

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/Slot_machine.jpg/500px-Slot_machine.jpg

 

The people we think of as friends don’t always act that way.

In one case I recall, a patient of mine was in an intimate relationship with a cross-dressing man. She accepted his desire to use some of her clothes, but felt taken advantage of when he didn’t return them.

When you want those close to you who ask for your time, help, sex, grocery pickup, or loans they rarely repay, you may have a problem.

You fear losing them if you become noncompliant.

They only contact you when they need your services.

Finally, you are unsure of yourself—uncertain whether you are generous and kind rather than selfish.

Some folks treat you like a candy machine requiring no coins to deliver the product into their hands. You are thought of as reliable and uncomplaining.

Reciprocity is a word they do not understand.

Imagine you were to list their shortfalls. They might register disbelief and injury at what you said.

At your job, such Individuals might take credit for your work, blame you for their errors, and talk behind your back while smiling when they interact with you.

Sexual partners can come to expect you to make a living for them. This might involve their routine job losses, your having to supply their living expenses, and paying off failed investments.

Providing their post-high-school tuition, or their attempts to start another new, surefire, can’t-miss business that never works out, also add to the financial woes you’re expected to remedy.

Those on the losing end of similar predicaments ought first to reckon with what has kept them from standing up for themselves.

Therapists are used to encountering individuals who have long endured people who take advantage of them, perhaps since childhood.

When they begin to address these one-sided relationships, the results are complicated. They often don’t realize they will be tested as they try both to change the nature of the affiliation and keep it going on a less distressing level.

Maintaining the connection is not guaranteed.

Mark this down. Anyone making a brave, face-to-face effort to repair such relationships must prepare for the worst. Alleged friends may lean against the new version of yourself, hoping to reclaim your earlier, more docile and accommodating form.

Let’s assume you turn away from being the comrade’s private candy machine and become more like a slot machine.

The candy machine is dependable, reliable, and consistent. Every time your chum inserts his coins and makes his selection, he receives the item he chose. You are the prize he expects, not a chocolate bar.

He assumes you are at his service 24/7, without putting money into your pocket.

The slot machine is a different story.

Your thoughtless pal’s knowledge and life experience tell him that the machine’s failure to pay on one occasion doesn’t mean he won’t be a winner the next time or the time after that.

It might take him a long period of failure before he concludes that the machine is broken beyond repair. Broken from where he stands, but not for the now gifted human who refuses to be someone else’s sucker.

Do you want to be the one who waits on another when he makes a request?

Perhaps you have delivered the desired results on an intermittent (or inconsistent) reinforcement schedule. Reinforcing for someone else, not for you. Don’t do what the other asks intermittently. Doing so only encourages further requests and makes them harder to extinguish.

You used to show up and do your master’s bidding each time he asked. Now you only sometimes fulfill his needs, a choice that still works against you.

By giving him what he wants on occasion, he is likely to do two things:

  1. Try to charm you back into the dutiful individual you were.
  2. Tell you that you’ve changed for the worse, have become selfish and unlikeable, and tries to make you feel bad about yourself in the interest of your returning to duty.

Getting the picture?

If you become consistent and reliable (like the candy machine) in responding to another’s desires and pleadings, the other party will become aware that repeated requests will do no good: the answer shall be NO every time.

And once they have learned this (you will still have to hold your ground before he gives up), your peer makes fewer requests of you after the first.

But if he perceives you as similar to the slot machine, you’re in trouble! He keeps at you because he recognizes one failure at winning doesn’t mean the game is lost. Perhaps the second try will work, or the fifth, or the fiftieth.

This fellow grasps your nature better than you know yourself. He is aware that he has a good chance of wearing you down and pestering you until you are both long gone.

His assault includes threats to stop the friendship you have, so that you return to your previous butler-like self.

The message is simple. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Do what you say you must do.

Every time you give in, it gets harder because you are reinforcing the kinds of behavior in your friend that you are trying to extinguish.

It will work only if you stay the course.

=========

The top image is a Slot Machine by Jeff Kubina from the Milky Way galaxy,

The next image shows Two Grotesque Heads Facing One Another in a Circle by Gaetano Piccini (1727). Both pictures are sourced from Wikimedia Commons.

Is Your Relationship OK?

Lasting relationships have become a “maybe/maybe not” roll of two slippery dice.

MAY 30, 2024 — The U.S. Census Bureau today released estimates showing that married-couple households made up 47% of all households in 2022, down from 71% in 1970.*

Before I discuss how to evaluate your relationship’s stability, let’s examine some reasons for the decline noted above.

  • The sexual revolution of the 1960s removed the shame attached to premarital intercourse, especially for young women. To the extent that sex is an incentive to marry, one needn’t commit to marriage anymore for this kind of togetherness.
  • The change in standards just described captures what Oscar Wilde said in the late 19th century:

“I have no objection to anyone’s sex life as long as they don’t practice it in the street and frighten the horses.”

  • Divorce is also more frequent than it used to be, making marriage a more obvious gamble. While the annual rate of divorce has declined in recent years, it remains far higher than it was before the ’60s:

Figure 1. Women’s Divorce Rate, 1900-2018

orange line chart showing Figure 1. Women’s Divorce Rate, 1900-2018

  • Many more women have lives outside the home and in the workplace. Historically, women left their residence only with their mate or a chaperone. Now, both partners have more freedom to meet other attractive people. 
  • The church doesn’t have the hold on individuals and their lives to the extent it once did. Oral contraceptives have reduced the number of “accidents,” which used to cause the parents and clergymen of a young couple to encourage or insist on their marriage.
  • Many women have discovered they can have fulfilling lives without a significant other and prefer to enjoy that freedom. Society’s historical expectations to produce children have diminished, and the birth rate has declined, leaving females less encumbered.
  • The Internet provides endless opportunities to meet new people. Pornography offers a substitute erotic charge.
  • Our disposable world encourages us to get rid of objects and obtain new ones. This objectification extends to lovers. Those who depart often miss the learned experience of repairing relationships, an essential skill for a relationship to endure.
  • We live in a world that changes at an accelerating pace, demanding more of us and requiring adaptation that is not our choice. If persuaded to “Be all you can be,” there is less encouragement to attend to the needs of others, including a partner and children. The Me generation is not the We generation.
  • Women are less inclined to put their interests second or submit to men. The once-accepted dominance of men has been put in its place to some degree, but there is significant resistance. The cliche of “moving on” often wins over those who would otherwise view the one they love as worth fighting for or adapting to.
  • Many believe the partner should complete him or her, producing a whole and blissful existence. If we are to feel complete and happy, that circumstance is more the work of each of us than anyone else.

Solutions? Whether you wish marriage or a less formal relationship, here’s one piece of advice. Do not assume that your significant other can read your mind. He or she cannot, even if he is a therapist. Speak up!

From time to time, it is wise to do a relationship check-up. In effect, you might call it an effort to determine the State of the Union. 

Cover at least the following areas:

  • Understanding. Does the partner see you as you wish to be seen?
  • Non-sexual displays of affection.
  • Sex.
  • Do you enjoy your time together, and is there enough?
  • Do you want more time apart?
  • Do you want your partner to take initiative in any area, from sex to planning events?
  • Would you like to engage in more activities, such as concerts, plays, spectator sports, workouts, seeing your family, dining out with others, taking courses together, watching movies, reading to each other or sharing the same book, etc.?
  • Showing appreciation and kindness.
  • Are chores and responsibilities fairly distributed at home and with children?
  • Money.
  • Conflict and Apology.
  • Future Plans.

One could go on. Love continues for those who pursue it. It remains the thing that poets praise, and, for a great many, make the complications of a life together worth all the trouble.

Sigmund Freud reminded us that love and work are essential to our humanity. But perhaps he should have added that work on love is required to sustain love.

Why bother?

Because nothing else takes us over the moon.

===========

*The National Center for Family & Marriage Research (NCFMR) at Bowling Green State University notes.

**Sources: NCFMR analyses of data from the National Vital Statistics, CDC/NCHS, 1900-2000; U.S. Census Bureau 2000 Decennial Census; U.S. Census Bureau (IPUMS), American Community Survey, 2010 and 2018 (IPUMS). Note: Data for Alaska begin in 1959. Data for Hawaii began in 1960.

The Maiden is the work of Gustav Klimt, 2013. The second painting is Paul Klee’s Architecture of the Plain, 1923. Both of these are sourced from Wikiart.org.

Forgiveness: If and When?

Much is made, especially by the religious, about the importance of forgiveness. But the topic is worthy of some discussion before one gives a blanket endorsement to forgiveness of everyone and everything. Should all acts be open to forgiveness? Is apology essential before there is any forgiveness? Are some offenses unforgivable? Are some people permitted more leeway to act inappropriately and exempt from the expectation of apology?

First off, who has the right to forgive? Only those who have been injured. I have no right to forgive your mistakes unless you have done me harm in some fashion. Certainly, this right might include an injury done to someone I love, if I too will have suffered pain due to the harm done to the other person. The idea that I can’t forgive you for an injury you did to someone I don’t know, for example, is allied to the notion of legal standing. I can’t bring a law suit against you unless the court agrees that I have a stake in the matter. As the old saying goes, “I don’t have a dog in this race.” That doesn’t mean that I don’t care about what happened; rather, it means that in matters of injury, compensation, or apology, I’m not directly involved.

Another consideration is whether the injury is ongoing. If someone is in the process of playing practical jokes on you day after day, to take an example that is relatively small, would you forgive his poor taste or judgment? He’d probably laugh at you if you did, because that individual sees nothing wrong with what he has done. Better to get him to stop or get out of his way, than to consider any generosity of spirit on your part that is likely to go unappreciated.

Then there is the question of apology. Let’s assume the joker just mentioned has a moment of self-awareness, or perhaps has been persuaded that his actions are rude. What must he do to apologize? According to Aaron Lazare’s book On Apology, he should acknowledge what he did to hurt you, say that he is sorry, and attempt to compensate you in some way. In the case of public humiliation caused by the practical jokes, for example, it would be appropriate (although perhaps impractical) for the prankster to make a public admission of his foolishness in front of the same people who were present when he embarrassed you. Moreover, he must do his very best to make sure that his boorish behavior isn’t repeated. Simply saying “I’m sorry” isn’t enough. Nor is it sufficient to state, “I’m sorry if I’ve hurt you,” a turn-of-phrase we hear from public figures, but one that is absolutely inadequate. According to Lazare, it is crucial that the transgressor be precise in admitting what exactly he did that caused harm, leaving no ifs, ands or buts, and making no excuses. This is the same sort of thing that happens in court, when, after a plea bargain, the accused admits exactly what he did without excusing it away, and recounts the consequences that followed from that behavior. In legal terms it is called “allocution.”

With respect to the question of some offenses being unforgivable, that is for the injured party to decide. Murder, rape, torture–all terrible–still permit the possibility of forgiveness if it is in the capacity of the afflicted to give it. The same answer would apply to the question of having a different standard for the behavior of one person than for another. We all do this in practice, accepting the failures and misbehavior of those we love when we aren’t so generous with a stranger who does exactly the same thing; and we often let things go without apology.

Forgiveness, however, is not the same as forgetting. If you have been injured, it is most often worth remembering who did what to you, lest you put yourself at risk of being hurt once again. Nor does forgiveness require that you continue your relationship with the person who harmed you; it is sometimes good judgment to forgive the person at the same time that you end the relationship with him.

Relationships are messy and we all can do better and be kinder. Many people have trouble telling others when their actions have caused an injury. The victim can suffer silently or in grumbling discontent, and passive-aggressively try to pay-back the injurer in some indirect fashion. Often, the hurt that the injurer caused is inadvertent and might be easily remedied if the one who has done the harm is told gently but firmly that he caused unhappiness.

Of course, some relationships, if they regularly cause injury, can be quickly dispensed with at little cost. But for those closest to us, we usually will suffer more and longer before limiting contact or severing the bond with that individual. And contact with parents or siblings, for example, cannot be replaced. So, for most of us, we will usually put up with some measure of unhappiness in order to keep a place in our lives for even the unrepentant relative. And, in part, it depends on how much one is willing to put up with.

There is at least one additional very important and useful reason to forgive. It follows from the old Italian expression, “If you want revenge, you should dig two graves (one for yourself and one for the object of your revenge).” The point here is that carrying anger is costly and letting go of that anger might allow you to be happier and more at ease in the rest of your life.

But, be careful not to let go automatically and too soon. Anger is often a necessary part of getting over an injury. While it doesn’t always have to be expressed at someone else, neither is turning the other cheek invariably the best policy for your psychological well-being. Writing about your feelings will oft-times help, and talking to a friend or counselor can be useful. But once you are through the stage of anger, forgiveness is at least a possibility.

Still another reason for accepting an apology and forgiving is that the relationship can be continued and sometimes improved by the act of mutual understanding that is involved. Life is full of disagreements and differences, in addition to unintentionally hurt feelings. Those parties who can survive conflicts, communicate about them, and come to a point of acceptance, understanding, and appreciation often are bonded together more strongly by the experience.

It takes maturity to know when to ignore something and when, instead, to confront the person who has injured you. Most things probably aren’t worth the trouble of a conflict, lest one always be fighting and accusing others. Best to wait for a cool and calm moment to decide whether confrontation is worth it, than to act in the over-heated instant. That is nothing more than common sense.

But, as a wise man once said, common sense is rather uncommon.