Avoid this 4/20 in your Relationships

Avoiding a toxic relationship is much simpler than leaving one. We are naturally drawn to nourish our dependency needs by emotional bonding through skin and eye contact. This need can make anyone overlook the "too much" in relationships with one’s boyfriend, girlfriend, mom, dad, brother, sister, grandparent, uncle, aunt, cousin, husband, wife, adult child, friend, in-laws, pastor, boss, co-worker, mentor or any other title.  

The threat lies in bonding with people whose prior histories and personalities make them ripe for spewing the venom of their incurable – or at least untreated – mental illnesses. In this post, you are encouraged to scan your relationships for the following 4 patterns that represent a rising intensity of toxicity in relationships with 20 associated examples.     

1.     The fast-moving pattern

People who seem “too good to be true” likely are. The pace for developing emotional intimacy is important because the desire to care and be cared for can speed up our seeking for attachments. A fast moving relationship is a red flagged pattern as it can be used as a tool to hook you emotionally before the cracks in one’s mask begin to show. When one’s love is real, they won’t insist on meeting up every other – if not every – day. They’ll take their time to get to know you, rather than pushing you for a commitment. It’s not healthy to be begged for your time.

2.     The meaning-confused pattern

When in this type of relationship, your search for genuine respect and love is met by something seemingly similar but ultimately depleting. There is a fine but firm line between experiencing chaos and passion; finding yourself infatuated and or feeling love; and receiving apologies while needing empathy. The intensity is the compelling but destructive force in these relationships. Narcissists and sociopaths, for example, do not enter or stay in relationships for love. They are there simply to have specific needs met. You’re entrenched in it and completely confused at the end.

Illustration by Nasim Golkar 

3.     The never-winning pattern

The masters of manipulation use unfair tactics in arguments that shift the focus from the topic at hand to you. If they commit a wrongdoing, you will unexpectedly find the talk turned around on your own “sensitivity” or “jealousy”. If they do something hurtful, it’ll be followed by emotional descriptions of their own hurtful past, so you end up feeling bad for them not realizing how your own hurt feeling remained unnoticed. The purpose is the same: to control the dialogue and ensure that one’s bad behavior is never addressed.

4.     The “gaslighting” pattern

The most manipulative relationship pattern that often exists in relationship with narcissists and sociopaths is gaslighting – a tactic of manipulation used to obstruct and distort their victim’s understanding of reality. As a victim, you feel crushed and minimized, constantly second-guessing yourself wondering whether you’re going crazy. So much like rewriting history when used, gaslighting involves blatantly denying that the event ever took place by first provoking negative feelings in their victims, then rejecting the victim’s genuine concerns by labeling him or her with labels like “crazy”, “bipolar”, and “sensitive”. Gaslighting fails to manipulate healthy individuals because feelings of insanity and states of chaos must first be produced.

Here are some examples of reported abusive tendencies to me in my work as a therapist:

1.     Telling the victim “You can’t ever do anything right”

2.     Getting jealous of victim’s friends, family, time spent away

3.     Laying blame on victim for cheating

4.     Shaming or embarrassing the victim with put-downs

5.     Micro-managing every penny spent in the household

6.     Refusing to give money for expenses

7.     Looking at or acting in ways that scare the person they’re abusing

8.     Controlling where the victim goes, who they see and what they do

9.     Dictating how the victim dresses or wears their hair

10.  Stalking the victim

11.  Preventing the victim from making their own decisions

12.  Telling the victim they are a bad parent

13.  Controlling the victim’s emails and social media accounts

14.  Intimidating the victim with weapons

15.  Pressuring the victim to have sex when they don’t want to

16.  Pressuring the victim to do things sexually they’re not comfortable with

17.  Forcing sex with others

18.  Refusing to use protection when having sex

19.  Pressuring for forcing the victim to use alcohol or drugs

20.  Sabotaging the victim’s performance at school or work by keeping them up all night

Toxicity of relational nature impacts many people. As abusers’ circle of influence – and therefore destruction – is sadly widespread, the best revenge is expressing indifference – not giving a shit! Getting un-stuck from draining relationships is not usually easy and for some, requires the support of a competent mental health professional to learn to forgive oneself for counting on the disloyal, trusting the deceitful and loving the unlovable.

On how anger is kept inflamed

About two weeks ago, I began exploring the emotional experience of anger in humans. By identifying primary emotions behind it, my aim was to  show that anger is rarely a primary emotion; that it is, therefore, a consequence of another emotional state that has not been acknowledged or been poorly expressed in a person who is now being angry. If you haven’t read the last post, you may read it here.

Today, I explore the general style of thinking that supports the progression and continuity of anger problem, by identifying four sets of fallacies in our ways of thinking: sense of entitlement, the “should mentality”, the fallacy of fairness, and global labeling.

~ entitlement ~

Have you ever wanted something so much that you had come to believe “I ought to have it”? What happens when you are not given that which you desire? The more intense your perceived need for something, the deeper it justifies the claim that someone else must provide for it. The undercurrent mental activity – known as cognitive process – is that if I am entitled to certain things in life, and if I don’t get them, someone is selfishly, deliberately or wickedly leaving me without them.

Let’s not confuse desire with obligation. The fallacy of entitlement is based on the false belief that wanting something very much makes it unacceptable for others to say no. Such demandingness requires that others give up their boundaries and limits because your need and pain must come first. To moderate such extreme levels of demandingness and entitlement, you may want to modify your speech with the following reminders:

·       I have my limits and you have your limits.

·       I am allowed to want, and he or she is allowed to say no.

·       I have the right to say no and so do you.

·       My desire doesn’t make it necessary for you to meet it.

~ the should mentality ~

Anger often follows after a judgment based on a set of rules about how people should and should not behave. Those who act according to the rules are right, and those who break the rules are wrong. The conclusion of angry people is that others know and accept their rules but willingly – and even viciously – decide to violate them. There are two problems with this conclusion.

Let’s be real: people with whom we feel angry rarely agree with us! Their perception of the situation leaves them fault-free and even reasonable. Their rules – and not ours – seem to exempt them from the judgments we think they deserve. The second problem with the “should mentality” is that people never do what they should do. Social psychologists have long agreed that we often don’t know why we do what we do, failing to fact-check our intentions behind actions. We tend to do what is reinforcing and rewarding for us to do. We can avoid imposing our values and needs on others and infer their ways of thinking by contemplating on …  

·       What problems, limitations or fears influence this behavior?

·       What needs influence this person to act this way?

·       What values or beliefs influence him to act this way?

·       Forget the “should mentality”, it only gets us upset.

·       People do what they want to do, not what I think they should do.

~ fairness ~

Recall a heated argument when you were called “unfair” and remember how you felt dreadful right away or even inflamed with anger. You felt you are being “more than fair” probably; and you are right! The fairness misconception is that there is some absolute standard of just and correct behavior that people should understand and aspire to. In the context of relationships, this fallacy of fairness can push us to always look out for balancing out what is given with what is received.

This is problematic as there is no mediator to sort through our emotional balance sheets in relationships and that people may not agree on what fairness is because it is a subjective judgment that depends on what each person expects, needs or hopes for from the other. As long as the idea of fairness remains a reflection of one’s beliefs and desires, people can practically call anything fair or unfair. To cope more effectively when feeling unfairly treated, you can use the following disarming as well as inviting strategies in your communications:

·       Our needs are equally important. Let us consider both of them.

·       Each need is legitimate – we can negotiate.

Also problematic are exaggerating words like terrible and awful as well as generalizing words such as always and never. “You never help” or “this is going to be an awful evening” are magnifications that wind up our sense of anxiety in a state of helplessness. It makes a person feel convinced that “I am innocent and they’re bad”. I recommend letting the following statements replace these extreme analyses:

·       Let the facts speak for themselves.

·       Accuracy, not exaggeration.

~ global labeling ~

Yes, relying on concrete categories simplifies our life, but it is neither a useful nor effective cognitive strategy in making sense of our life and the world around us. The ways in which anger is produced and regulated in human brain paves the path for labeling others as bad, idiot, selfish, screw-ups, and so on. Also, extreme and absolute categories leave no space for adequate perspective taking and reality testing. This is fuel for anger as it accuses the totality of an individual instead of focusing on a particular deed or manner. Once a person is labeled as completely flawed, it is easy to get angry with them. Try replacing a global way of relating to others with these assertions:

·       Be specific (please).

·       Do not assume anything, or else check out every assumption.

·       I don’t second-guess the motives of others. I ask questions.

During angry situations, it works better to invite problem solving strategies and give up altogether settling scores with your opponent. Fueling the underlying intention for punishing or hurting the other person only proves to be self-destructive and does not resolve the situation. Pain must not be paid back for it to heal. The resolution is found in understanding the feelings behind and the thoughts surrounding the experience of anger. My recommended self-love first-aid is: pause. And ask yourself this liberating question:

“what do I really need/want in this situation?”

In part three, I will provide the Biweekly readers with a step-by-step inner-work guide towards healing from anger. 

Thanks for staying this long and see you in a couple of weeks!

Dr. Hessam