Inviting open insecurities in deep relationships

Infjente said:
I've learned it's not a good idea for me to fully open up to someone close to me. If I have to do it, I need to remind myself to have realistic expectations for how it's being received and what the other person does with it. I used to think that opening up and being completely vulnerable was a natural part of any relationship (like, what's the point if not?), but now I see it differently. When I go into the mental state where I need to be in order to access these insecurities, I basically become a child. Defenseless, irrational, directionless, helpless. Like a child, I have no other choice but to trust the other person to protect me, to be sensitive and cautious, and to guide me through it safely. But since I'm not a child, another adult will not treat me as one, and if they're not trained professionals (or my mom), chances are they won't recognize the vulnerable state I'm in, and they will hurt me. Since I'm still a child in that moment, I will react like one, which will cause a reaction from the other person that's probably even less suitable for "a child". In therapeutic relationships, they call this transference and countertransference, I think.

My last relationship was with an ENFP who was also a clinical psychologist. I felt very seen and very safe, so opening up was almost effortless. He felt seen and safe too, and did the same. That became a disaster, because we basically became "children" at the same time. The danger of entering this ultra vulnerable state (the more you trust, the more vulnerable you can allow yourself to be), is that you can get stuck there. If the one you trusted to protect you, breaks that trust, you have to get out of there with the navigation skills of a child. That happened to the both of us, and it has taken years to get back to where we were before this happened.

I know I'm prone to trusting people who I feel seen by, or people I idealiz, with my inner feelings and thoughts. But I've learned that I must be very mindful about placing unreasonable responsibility on them, and of my expectations for them to recognize the level of vulnerability.
Click to expand...
This! <3
 
Infjente said:
I've learned it's not a good idea for me to fully open up to someone close to me. If I have to do it, I need to remind myself to have realistic expectations for how it's being received and what the other person does with it. I used to think that opening up and being completely vulnerable was a natural part of any relationship (like, what's the point if not?), but now I see it differently. When I go into the mental state where I need to be in order to access these insecurities, I basically become a child. Defenseless, irrational, directionless, helpless. Like a child, I have no other choice but to trust the other person to protect me, to be sensitive and cautious, and to guide me through it safely. But since I'm not a child, another adult will not treat me as one, and if they're not trained professionals (or my mom), chances are they won't recognize the vulnerable state I'm in, and they will hurt me. Since I'm still a child in that moment, I will react like one, which will cause a reaction from the other person that's probably even less suitable for "a child". In therapeutic relationships, they call this transference and countertransference, I think.

My last relationship was with an ENFP who was also a clinical psychologist. I felt very seen and very safe, so opening up was almost effortless. He felt seen and safe too, and did the same. That became a disaster, because we basically became "children" at the same time. The danger of entering this ultra vulnerable state (the more you trust, the more vulnerable you can allow yourself to be), is that you can get stuck there. If the one you trusted to protect you, breaks that trust, you have to get out of there with the navigation skills of a child. That happened to the both of us, and it has taken years to get back to where we were before this happened.

I know I'm prone to trusting people who I feel seen by, or people I idealiz, with my inner feelings and thoughts. But I've learned that I must be very mindful about placing unreasonable responsibility on them, and of my expectations for them to recognize the level of vulnerability.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting perspective because a lot of psychological views of romantic love in fact do say that in order to romantically love you become a child. This is because we learn to love in childhood and yes romantic love is the most intimate form. So although it's scary I think that's normal and everybody goes through that. It's part of the process, not something to be feared or avoided, but then again that's my opinion. You can still be vulnerable like a child in a relationship and be responsible for yourself like an adult. It is about balance. But I think that's what you're saying.
 
slant said:
That's an interesting perspective because a lot of psychological views of romantic love in fact do say that in order to romantically love you become a child. This is because we learn to love in childhood and yes romantic love is the most intimate form. So although it's scary I think that's normal and everybody goes through that. It's part of the process, not something to be feared or avoided, but then again that's my opinion. You can still be vulnerable like a child in a relationship and be responsible for yourself like an adult. It is about balance. But I think that's what you're saying.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. Yes, I think it's about balance (and about finding that balance if you're off-balance like me).
 
Hell I need to have a relationship of any kind before I can manifest my own insecurities lol

I've managed to sever, destroyed all my previous relationships i.e. family friends(only had 1), etc lol...granted most of this was by my wilful design lol
 
Slant, this is a wonderful thread.

Vulnerability can be terrifying, but it is what is required to have deep, genuinely meaningful relationships. The beautiful(and most terrifying) thing about it is that there are no guarantees. We all want to be loved and accepted for who we are, with all of our hurt, scars, and quirks. To expect that the other person will be fully loving and accepting and understand is to place a lot on the other person, especially if they aren't ready for it. Everyone has their own things to deal with and often people aren't ready for the kind of vulnerability that nurtures genuine love.

I have an ex in my life that is very important and I love her. I shared the love I have for her as a friend and it freaked her the fuck out. Currently, she isn't talking to me because I triggered something deep inside her, an anxiety. This made her uncomfortable and she responded in a non-accepting way. Most people, including myself, often don't know what to do with this kind of vulnerability and genuine love.

I say, be vulnerable when you are comfortable being uncomfortable. I would always be mindful considerate of the other person and how they may respond. That should help you form the right approach for expressing yourself. Everything else is out of your hands. Comforting, isn't it? lol
 
slant said:
How do you feel about this concept, does it make sense, do you view it differently?
Click to expand...

I agree, as you stated in the quote following, so yes on the what, but the how is individual and consists of what is agreed upon, consented to.

slant said:
I think by recognizing our own insecurities and triggers we can better control our own desire to dash to defensiveness if somebody we are close to touches on one of them, usually accidently. And also being able to see patterns when other people react bigger than usual and what those topics are so we can understand there is emotional importance to that topic for that person that we don't understand, and that if we're patient maybe they'll tell us about it.
Click to expand...

Knowing yourself, down to the level of how you are wired, is of benefit in all of life, and of particular value in any and all relationships...even the one you have with yourself.

slant said:
If you agree with some of the premises, how do you foster vulnerability and openness in your closer relationships? What have you learned from your experiences?
Click to expand...

First, learn how to nonviolently communicate, as per Marshall B. Rosenberg. That is key, essential even, and will be of benefit to you in every domain. If a person doesn’t feel safe, they aren’t going to share of themselves. Don’t destroy the possibility by not knowing how to verbally engage with someone such that they become unsure of you, have reason not to trust you, and on some level, fear you.

Second, if you actually get this far, make the choice to model vulnerability for the other person as a first step. Doing so will help to foster trust, and demonstrate what is both safe and possible. I suppose you can also consider this a good example of you have to give a little to get a little in return.

That’s easy to say, but not so easy to do, because in truth, it asks and requires a lot of you. Going back to what I said earlier, you need to know yourself fully. You need to know who you are, and I don’t mean personally, but on a level that transcends your idea of yourself. Only then can you be grounded in your Self, and authentically demonstrate to the other person that it is a safe thing to do.

You need to be able to create, maintain, recognize, and honor boundaries, both your own as well as others’. If you take the active voice to show and teach the other person what is acceptable, and what is not, you demonstrate that it is okay to be forthright about those things, and it invites the other person to do the same. Many people grew up in an environment where boundaries were not allowed, nor recognized, nor honored, so the experience of being shown that boundaries are not just acceptable, but are encouraged and required, may be a novel experience for them.

What have I learned from my experiences? First and foremost, this approach works. Second, you need to be willing and able to meet someone where they are. You can invite them along, but whether they join you or not is outside of your control. Also, if and when the other person reveals what to you is a red flag, either through what they say, or how they behave, do not ignore it. Which is not to say to immediately come to a judgment, but through investigation you need to find out exactly what informs the expression which gave you cause to worry. If at any point they are not willing to go further, despite your invitation, you must be willing and able to accept that and move on. Whatever you do, do not settle.

I’ve also learned this...sometimes when you offer someone a thing they have never had, but have hoped for, and dreamed about, for longer than they can remember, you just might witness the singularly unique event of a human being in bloom. Which is to say they recognize in you someone who is safe and inviting, and they open like a flower, and who they are comes pouring out. What is that thing you offer? It is the gift of emotional and psychological safety, freedom from being judged for their person, and the understanding that it is okay to be themselves, authentically, because part of what you have offered them is unconditional acceptance for who they are. Not for what they do, not for their actions, but for who they are, for their being.

In the human experience, that is the rarest of gifts, and priceless, but I’m sure you already know that.

slant said:
I think one of the best ways to diffuse defensiveness is to understand what's causing it.
Click to expand...

And better yet is not giving them reason to become defensive.

slant said:
Most of us "test" other people as they get closer on an unconscious level to make sure that they will not hurt us and that they are worthy of our trust. One of the biggest tests is to see how somebody might react to you showing an uncomfortable feeling- be it anger or strong upset- to see if they will try to resolve the issue or if they react and don't see beneath it.
Click to expand...

My sense and opinion is that if a person is operating in this way, and not mindful of it, they aren’t suited to be in a healthy relationship to begin with. When a person engages in behaviors for which they know not the what or the why, you would be a fool to enter into a relationship with them. In like kind, they would be ill-advised to enter into a relationship with you if you were engaging in such behaviors, and not mindful of them.

Going back once again to the idea of knowing yourself fully, you have no need to do this, because your choices and actions are deliberate, and have purpose, and come from your self-awareness and mindfulness. This, in combination with nonviolent communication, means you can simply ask if you want to know. The truth will out soon enough regardless.

Being a reasonable and mature adult necessitates your willingness and ability to accept 100% responsibility for what you do. When you act based on things you are not consciously aware of, you are unable to take responsibility for those actions. This inevitably results in someone, and likely both, getting hurt.

slant said:
The only thing I would push back on is that "narcissists" aren't actually a type of person but a set of behavior and typically the reason for the behavior, ironically, is the fear of getting close to somebody and getting hurt by it so the person might try to entrap somebody in a relationship or friendship using manipulation because on a fundamental level they do not believe they are worthy of love and that their only shot at being loved is to do this to make somebody stay, which, sadly, prevents them from ever being loved the way they want.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. Having experienced this in a relationship, it is something that I will never forget. But that was back when I didn't think a couple of red flags in the beginning were anything to really worry about. Yep, I sat down to a hearty plate of consequences.

slant said:
So when you find this is happening you can realize you are just dealing with an insecure person who has learned unhealthy coping mechanisms. I
Click to expand...

That’s one way to look at it, but I would never use the word “just” in reference to a narcissist. Sometimes those unhealthy coping mechanisms include what can only be described as grievous violence.

slant said:
I personally have had narcissistic behavior but it's not out of the desire to hurt others or because I think I'm better- it's actually the opposite, that I feel threatened so I lash out. It's not healthy but it's also not something that is inherent in a person's personality.
Click to expand...

Not in all cases, but there is clinical evidence to suggest that certain of the disorders of personality, e.g., narcissism and borderline personality disorder, may have a basis in early childhood development, such that the nature of the pathology presented is a function of the developmental time period in which a significant and particular trauma occurs.

In that sense, the adult presentation is not an actual part of their personality. The reason for their pathology is much, much deeper than that, and involves changes and damage to the neurology, the neuroendocrinology, and the development and formation of the child’s sense of self.

slant said:
It is a pattern of behavior that can be changed if the person gains awareness of their inner self and decides they do not want to behave that way anymore.
Click to expand...

For those who learned it as a behavior, it is possible, but quite unlikely given the awareness required. To be aware of their inner self is their greatest fear, and so will be avoided at all costs.

Of those people, only a rare few will be able to make the change on account of their exceptional abilities and gifts, their desire and will to change, and the resources available to them.

Those with the deeper, neuropsychological reason for their presentation...they cannot be fixed, much less change in a significant way, because theirs is not a problem of software, but one of firmware and hardware. No amount of new code will change the traces on the motherboard.

April said:
They don't like too much intensity or passion.
Click to expand...

Is it even possible to have too much of those things? And I’m thinking of the positive sense of those, of course...the negative sense is at least drama, and it only gets worse from there.

slant said:
You can still be vulnerable like a child in a relationship and be responsible for yourself like an adult.
Click to expand...

Truer words never said, and perhaps none more important.

Cheers,
Ian
 
I think us INFJs can only get really close with people who we can feel we can open up to. That’s why we love animals as we know they won’t judge us and they can sense our sincere and caring nature.
When I was in early teens at school I was in an emotional crisis. I really struggled to mix at school and felt anxious and alone. I had no friends, I went home at lunchtime as I lived near the school. This phased passed gradually, if it had been in recent times I would have been diagnosed with social anxiety and mild depression probably but it didn’t exist in the 80s. I was just told to ‘come out of my shell’.

I never let anyone close who I can’t open up to. It’s funny how INFJ ms are social chameleons but can be the most open with people. A seeming contradiction but not really. We seeks social harmony via Fe but also we want authenticity. Our chameleon ‘mask’ is to fit in, not to hide or confuse or externalise our insecurities. As has been said we are like onions with many layers. Trouble is a lot think we are like wet lettuces
 
 
I think INFJs are the type with the greatest ability to have both great sensitivity and the ability to also be very logical and detached when we have to be. I think this gives us the edge in being able to handle another person opening up to us. I know I am very hard to shock and am not easily upset by another’s confessions.

We are probably also the type which craves deep connections the most. Contrast us with our opposite ISTJs who in my experience are romantically naive and shallow as anything. They are very open minded but it’s more because they are quite cold and rational than because they have depth of character.

The depth an INFJ craves is going to be hard for most other types to also crave and/or appreciate imo. We want spiritual soulmates who would do anything for each other.
 
Lol you really have too high of opinion on INFJs.

Don't get me wrong, it's one of my favorite types, but it has major blind-spots too. I am living with one.

I wouldn't say INFJs crave more depth in relationships than any other INxx type.
 
Well which type is most likely to give their own life for another? That must say something.
 
Wyote said:
INTJ
Click to expand...
To be fair, I think my rhetorical question was too ill defined to have much clarity of meaning.
On a person level, as an INFJ I have never felt anyone I encountered was capable of loving as much as me. This is my subjective opinion of course and is limited by my own perceptions.

In terms of cog functions, we might think F dominants have the deepest feelings but I’m not so sure. Ni gives depth and possibly when combined with Fe auxiliary is imo capable of great depth of feeling, possibly more so than F dominants, because a lack of perception limits feeling. I also think Fe is inherently deeper than Fi because love of self is a more basic instinct than love of others.
 
David Nelson said:
I also think Fe is inherently deeper than Fi because love of self is a more basic instinct than love of others.
Click to expand...

I'm on board with you but I don't really agree with this. They are different kinds of depth.
 
Wyote said:
I'm on board with you but I don't really agree with this. They are different kinds of depth.
Click to expand...
I suppose we can also question what we mean by depth. If we think of social animals like dogs, they exude more Fe than Fi, whereas cats are more Fi than Fe.
This is all conjectural and interesting. Self sacrifice depends on several factors. If we don’t value our own lives much, we are more likely to consider it. If we love more, the same for those we love. If we lack depth of perception we might consider self sacrifice before others would. And other factors, like most things it’s complicated.
 
Wyote said:
INTJ
Click to expand...
INTJ are the type most likely to feel lonely so maybe there’s a link there. Maybe someone who releases them from their loneliness will be valued above all things. Also, given Te parent, maybe their relative ‘worldliness’ in comparison to an INFJ could mean they get more stressed out by the world. So are more likely to consider suicide or self sacrifice?
 
David Nelson said:
INTJ are the type most likely to feel lonely so maybe there’s a link there. Maybe someone who releases them from their loneliness will be valued above all things. Also, given Te dominance, maybe their relative ‘worldliness’ in comparison to an INFJ could mean they get more stressed out by the world. So are more likely to consider suicide or self sacrifice?
Click to expand...

While there's some truth here in some sense, I think my original thought about INTJs being more self sacrificing just comes down to them being willing to more readily sacrifice themselves for a complete stranger, whereas INFJs tend to be more self sacrificing for something/someone they are already emotionally invested in.

In any case, having a self sacrificing mentality isn't healthy overall imo.
 
I’m not sure why INTJs would be most likely to sacrifice themselves for a stranger, since they can be pretty cold with people they don’t like or aren’t close to them.

I agree that INFJ sacrifice needs Fe first. We are highly conditional with our affections.

I agree it’s not healthy as a general relational approach, but it’s sometimes needed. I mentioned it at first as a (flawed) attempt to prove INFJs wanted the deepest connections. My Ti child was too simplistic and unexamined.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top