Several people have written to me lately expressing concern because they haven’t heard from me for so long. Note that they think a month is a long time for me. It’s all relative. I suspect that there are other people who don’t think anything about it.
Anyway, here’s a quick update so anyone who is prone to worry won’t do that and so everyone will know the most significant things that have taken my time, attention, and energy over the past month.
First, I was called to work in “Comanche Moon,” the prequel to “Lonesome Dove.” It will be a miniseries (3 episodes, I think) on CBS and will be shown this fall (I’ve heard November). Between May 11 and this past Friday, June 2, I’ve worked 14 days on the film, 11 of them between 10 and 14 hours per day (which is usual in the film industry). Many days I’d get home, download e-mail and immediately fall into bed so I could sleep a few hours before I had to get up to make it to early morning (as early as 4:30 and usually around 5:30) calls. I have lots of interesting stories to tell. I’ll be writing more soon in my acting blog if you’d like to read about them. I’ll let you know when those entries are posted.
On weekdays I wasn’t working in the film, I substitute taught – until the school year ended on May 25. Imagine being a substitute teacher on the last day of school with 8th graders. They were bouncing off the walls and beyond ready to not be there any longer.
Early in May I learned that my apartment mate and his partner were planning to move in together the first of June, so I had to move, too. Consequently, I spent a lot of time looking for a place, packing, and, as my former wife would have said, schlepping all my stuff out of my old place and into my new one. The end of May was especially joyous when I worked in the film all day and then moved afterwards and, finally on May 31, put the last load in my car at 4 a.m. before I went to the set.
On top of all of that, my trigeminal neuralgia has returned. So, unfortunately, it was just in remission rather than healed. Fortunately, however, it isn’t as severe as it was the previous episodes. Nevertheless, it has interfered with living my life normally. It seems to be worst, for some reason, during the night. Consequently, it’s been waking me up and keeping me awake quite a bit. I’ve been losing a lot of sleep, as you can probably imagine.
There’s more, but this is enough for now. I’m sure you must get the idea why I haven’t been writing more lately.
Namaste,
Michael
Sunday, June 04, 2006
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
This is intimacy
For many years I’ve shared my thoughts, feelings, and experiences with people, first via photocopied letters and newsletters and more recently, since I’ve become computer-enabled, via e-mail, journals, and blogs. From the beginning I’ve received some appreciative responses, some negative feedback, and enormous silence (no reply at all). Nevertheless, I’ve continued to write and to send my self-revelations on a more-or-less regular basis to family members, current friends, former friends, former lovers, people I’d like to get to know better, and anyone else who shows interest in reading them.
Lots of people have thought that my doing this is rather strange. I just put myself out there with no assurance of self-protection, reciprocity, or interest on the part of the reader. “Why?” I’ve been asked on many occasions. My reply has always been some form of, “because I want to provide all of you the opportunity to know who I really am; then you have the opportunity to either read what I say and to know me or not, as you choose.”
This morning I read something that I’d like to share with you. It is absolutely on target.
In his book Passionate Marriage, David Schnarch says there are “two ‘types’ of intimacy:
“Other-validated intimacy involves the expectation of acceptance, empathy, validation, or reciprocal disclosure. … This is what is often mistaken for intimacy per se. …
“Self-validated intimacy relies on a person maintaining his or her own sense of identity and self-worth when disclosing, with no expectation of acceptance or reciprocity. … One’s capacity for self-validated intimacy is directly related to one’s level of differentiation; that is, one’s ability to maintain a clear sense of oneself when loved ones are pressuring for conforming and sameness. Self-validated intimacy is the tangible product of one’s ‘relationship with oneself.’ …
“Other-validated intimacy ‘sounds’ like this: ‘I’ll tell you about myself, but only if you then tell me about yourself. … I’ll go first and then you’ll be obligated to disclose – it’s only fair. And if I go first, you have to make me feel secure. I need to be able to trust you!’
“Self-validated intimacy … sounds quite different: ‘I don’t expect you to agree with me; you weren’t put on the face of the earth to validate and reinforce me. But I want you to love me – and you can’t really do that if you don’t know me. I don’t want your rejection – but I must face that possibility if I’m ever to feel accepted or secure with you. It’s time to show myself to you and confront my separateness and mortality. One day when we are no longer together on this earth, I want to know you knew me.’ …
“If you are willing and able to show yourself ‘as you are’ and call things as you see them – unilaterally – [others are] less likely to silence you because you’re not asking for anything in return – only the chance to say what you feel. Such a relationship can remain intimate even in times of conflict – like when one of you wants less intimacy than the other. [People] who aren’t dependent on each other’s validation to feel okay about themselves fuel their [relationships] with their unique strengths rather than their mutual weaknesses.”
Yes, without knowing the concept, I have been practicing self-validating intimacy. Restating one of Schnarch’s statements so that it more accurately fits me, “I want to know that you at least have the opportunity to really know me.” It is my gift, both to you and to myself. If you appreciate it, I am blessed. If you aren’t interested, I regret it. Either way, I’ve at least taken a unilateral step, a self-validated step, in developing intimacy with you.
Some people believe, as Schnarch points out, that intimacy is necessarily reciprocal and obligatory. “If I reveal myself to you, then you must reveal yourself to me in similar measure. If I comment about your message, then you must comment about mine.” I don’t share that belief. I reveal myself to you because I want to be known intimately. If you feel moved to reveal yourself to me, I’m pleased, and I admit, our relationship becomes deeper and more immediate. If you don’t, then you are less intimate with me and our relationship is less intimate as a whole, but I am still intimate with you.
One of the objections that some people have had to my journal/letters (and now blogs) is that they aren’t written personally to them. This is, of course, true. I am revealing myself intimately, but not personally with anyone. However, what I write in my open messages are things that I want everyone to know. They are things that I don’t want to repeat over and over again with each of the people I know. So, they are, in part, a major timesaving method. I also do write personally to some of my friends (and possible future friends). I have the advantage of being able to talk to them about things that are more personal to them, knowing that they also have the information from and foundation provided by my journal/blogs. I can focus on what’s most important with this specific person without repeating what I’ve already said to other people.
One of my great disappointments is that I don’t have more time available to develop friendships with people. (I’ll write sometime about my difficulties with prioritizing and time management. This is a big part of the problem.) Consequently, I write generally to a lot of people, and I write personally to (and comment about the blogs of) some people more than others. I feel deep regret that I don’t even write to the people I feel closest with often enough. Right now more than a few people come to mind who I want to write to personally and it’s been too long. I’m sure some of you know who you are. There are also several people I’ve met online who I’d like to become closer with personally. I haven’t taken the time to do that yet. I feel sad that I’m not doing as much as I’d like to be closer with these people. I’m going to do something to change that. In the meantime, at least everyone has my blog/journal messages.
Namaste,
Michael
Lots of people have thought that my doing this is rather strange. I just put myself out there with no assurance of self-protection, reciprocity, or interest on the part of the reader. “Why?” I’ve been asked on many occasions. My reply has always been some form of, “because I want to provide all of you the opportunity to know who I really am; then you have the opportunity to either read what I say and to know me or not, as you choose.”
This morning I read something that I’d like to share with you. It is absolutely on target.
In his book Passionate Marriage, David Schnarch says there are “two ‘types’ of intimacy:
“Other-validated intimacy involves the expectation of acceptance, empathy, validation, or reciprocal disclosure. … This is what is often mistaken for intimacy per se. …
“Self-validated intimacy relies on a person maintaining his or her own sense of identity and self-worth when disclosing, with no expectation of acceptance or reciprocity. … One’s capacity for self-validated intimacy is directly related to one’s level of differentiation; that is, one’s ability to maintain a clear sense of oneself when loved ones are pressuring for conforming and sameness. Self-validated intimacy is the tangible product of one’s ‘relationship with oneself.’ …
“Other-validated intimacy ‘sounds’ like this: ‘I’ll tell you about myself, but only if you then tell me about yourself. … I’ll go first and then you’ll be obligated to disclose – it’s only fair. And if I go first, you have to make me feel secure. I need to be able to trust you!’
“Self-validated intimacy … sounds quite different: ‘I don’t expect you to agree with me; you weren’t put on the face of the earth to validate and reinforce me. But I want you to love me – and you can’t really do that if you don’t know me. I don’t want your rejection – but I must face that possibility if I’m ever to feel accepted or secure with you. It’s time to show myself to you and confront my separateness and mortality. One day when we are no longer together on this earth, I want to know you knew me.’ …
“If you are willing and able to show yourself ‘as you are’ and call things as you see them – unilaterally – [others are] less likely to silence you because you’re not asking for anything in return – only the chance to say what you feel. Such a relationship can remain intimate even in times of conflict – like when one of you wants less intimacy than the other. [People] who aren’t dependent on each other’s validation to feel okay about themselves fuel their [relationships] with their unique strengths rather than their mutual weaknesses.”
Yes, without knowing the concept, I have been practicing self-validating intimacy. Restating one of Schnarch’s statements so that it more accurately fits me, “I want to know that you at least have the opportunity to really know me.” It is my gift, both to you and to myself. If you appreciate it, I am blessed. If you aren’t interested, I regret it. Either way, I’ve at least taken a unilateral step, a self-validated step, in developing intimacy with you.
Some people believe, as Schnarch points out, that intimacy is necessarily reciprocal and obligatory. “If I reveal myself to you, then you must reveal yourself to me in similar measure. If I comment about your message, then you must comment about mine.” I don’t share that belief. I reveal myself to you because I want to be known intimately. If you feel moved to reveal yourself to me, I’m pleased, and I admit, our relationship becomes deeper and more immediate. If you don’t, then you are less intimate with me and our relationship is less intimate as a whole, but I am still intimate with you.
One of the objections that some people have had to my journal/letters (and now blogs) is that they aren’t written personally to them. This is, of course, true. I am revealing myself intimately, but not personally with anyone. However, what I write in my open messages are things that I want everyone to know. They are things that I don’t want to repeat over and over again with each of the people I know. So, they are, in part, a major timesaving method. I also do write personally to some of my friends (and possible future friends). I have the advantage of being able to talk to them about things that are more personal to them, knowing that they also have the information from and foundation provided by my journal/blogs. I can focus on what’s most important with this specific person without repeating what I’ve already said to other people.
One of my great disappointments is that I don’t have more time available to develop friendships with people. (I’ll write sometime about my difficulties with prioritizing and time management. This is a big part of the problem.) Consequently, I write generally to a lot of people, and I write personally to (and comment about the blogs of) some people more than others. I feel deep regret that I don’t even write to the people I feel closest with often enough. Right now more than a few people come to mind who I want to write to personally and it’s been too long. I’m sure some of you know who you are. There are also several people I’ve met online who I’d like to become closer with personally. I haven’t taken the time to do that yet. I feel sad that I’m not doing as much as I’d like to be closer with these people. I’m going to do something to change that. In the meantime, at least everyone has my blog/journal messages.
Namaste,
Michael
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
More about friendship
I’ve been continuing to delve into what I consider the core of friendship since I wrote my last blog entry (the one called “Are you my friend?”). I appreciate the people I know (or am getting to know) who have helped me with that and the authors who have written things I’ve found valuable.
Here are 10 more characteristics of what I mean by friendship, stated as how I intend to act with friends:
1. I do my best not to have too many standards for my friends to live up to. Any of you who is my friend is my friend no matter what – even if you don’t consider me to be your friend – except in the most unusual of cases. For example, I rarely hear anything from some of the people I consider my closest friends – and I haven’t since I left the Seattle area. Nevertheless, I trust that when I visit wherever they are, we will still be close. I’ll remember to write soon about what my boundaries are – what would lead me to choose to let go of a friendship.
2. I do my best to give my friends the benefit of the doubt. If, for example, I don’t hear from someone for a long time, I assume there must be a good reason for that from their point of view. And I do my best not to take it personally. If, for another example, a friend snaps at me (or does anything else occasionally that’s a way I don’t appreciate being treated), I do my best to wonder what’s going on with her/him and to be supportive instead of judging him/her for it or taking it personally.
3. Relevant to the example in #1, I will continue to be a friend to my friends even through times of separation. In one case a friend and I went a number of years without contact of any kind. I considered that person to be my friend all through our time of separation. Then we got in touch and picked up our friendship as if there had been no lapse in our contact.
4. I do my best to accept my friends as they are and not to demand that they change to suit me. I have friends of different religions, different political persuasions, and other different (than mine) ways of thinking. I have friends who choose different ways of being in the world than I do. I have friends who don’t give me the attention I wish they would. And I have friends who act in many other ways that I would prefer be other than they are. None of that matters. They’re still my friends. I appreciate about them whatever I possibly can and accept the rest. (Of course, there are limits to what people can do without my letting go of the friendship. As I said, I’ll write soon about my boundaries. As a preview, though, they’re all pretty serious things – things like intentionally hurting people and being a racist.)
5. I want to emphasize one of the things that I mentioned in the previous item. One friend suggested that she believes that friendship needs to be mutual, if not equal. I don’t share that belief. I have friends who don’t consider me to be their friend and who don’t act in any way that I would consider friendly (though I don’t mean they act in unfriendly ways, either). Nevertheless, they are my friends, and I will be there for them if it’s ever needed. I continue to communicate with them as I would with any friend who reciprocates. If they ask me to stop communicating, I do, but I still hold them in my heart. If they ever change their minds and want to be closer again, I’ll celebrate that.
6. If I prefer that a friend changes in any way, I do my best to make a request rather than a demand. (Requests are questions and will take no for an answer; demands are, well, demands and won’t take no for an answer.) I also don’t just assume that they’ll know that they “should” change. For example, if I want a friend to call me because I’ve been making all the calls, I’ll ask her/him to call me next time. I won’t demand that he/she calls me, and I won’t assume that any real friend would know that she/he “should” make the next call.
7. I never make threats to terminate a relationship unless I’ve requested changes, I’ve communicated with the friend about the issue quite a bit (whether she/he will communicate about it or not), it’s a violation of a boundary, and I’m very serious about it. Once again, look forward to my post about boundaries. However, I may back off on how close I am with a particular friend in less serious cases. In those cases, I’m still open to becoming closer again if things change in a way that works for both of us.
8. I do my best to never use any of what John Gottman, Ph.D., calls “the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse” (behaviors that predict failure of a relationship when used consistently) and certainly not to use them more than occasionally. They are criticism (attacking a person as opposed to complaining about a behavior), contempt, defensiveness, and stonewalling (refusing to communicate or avoiding communicating).
9. I do my best not to project onto my friends. In other words, I do my best not to imagine or assume anything about them or to think I know what’s right for them. Instead, I ask them.
10. I do my best not to make agreements I don’t fully intend to keep and to keep agreements once I’ve made them. If I can’t keep an agreement, I do my best to acknowledge it and renegotiate as quickly as possible. This refers to agreements I’ve actually made, not to assumed agreements. I don’t make agreements without clearly stating them as agreements.
I’ve stated a lot of these as “I do my best to” because I admit that occasionally I go unconscious (I don’t mean “pass out”) and violate them. However, it’s my intention to do them whenever I’m able to be aware enough to do them. I’m not perfect yet and may never be.
I also acknowledge that I don’t always meet all the criteria of friendship I listed in my previous post on friendship with all of my friends. In fact, I don’t meet all of them with anyone all the time. I didn’t mean them as ways to judge myself or anyone else.
This could end up being a series that goes on for a very long time. I think I have a lot to write about friendship. It’s an important issue for me and one I’ve experienced a lot of frustration and disappointment with through my life. I’m also very aware that it’s an area in which I want to make some changes. More about that later.
Namaste,
Michael
Here are 10 more characteristics of what I mean by friendship, stated as how I intend to act with friends:
1. I do my best not to have too many standards for my friends to live up to. Any of you who is my friend is my friend no matter what – even if you don’t consider me to be your friend – except in the most unusual of cases. For example, I rarely hear anything from some of the people I consider my closest friends – and I haven’t since I left the Seattle area. Nevertheless, I trust that when I visit wherever they are, we will still be close. I’ll remember to write soon about what my boundaries are – what would lead me to choose to let go of a friendship.
2. I do my best to give my friends the benefit of the doubt. If, for example, I don’t hear from someone for a long time, I assume there must be a good reason for that from their point of view. And I do my best not to take it personally. If, for another example, a friend snaps at me (or does anything else occasionally that’s a way I don’t appreciate being treated), I do my best to wonder what’s going on with her/him and to be supportive instead of judging him/her for it or taking it personally.
3. Relevant to the example in #1, I will continue to be a friend to my friends even through times of separation. In one case a friend and I went a number of years without contact of any kind. I considered that person to be my friend all through our time of separation. Then we got in touch and picked up our friendship as if there had been no lapse in our contact.
4. I do my best to accept my friends as they are and not to demand that they change to suit me. I have friends of different religions, different political persuasions, and other different (than mine) ways of thinking. I have friends who choose different ways of being in the world than I do. I have friends who don’t give me the attention I wish they would. And I have friends who act in many other ways that I would prefer be other than they are. None of that matters. They’re still my friends. I appreciate about them whatever I possibly can and accept the rest. (Of course, there are limits to what people can do without my letting go of the friendship. As I said, I’ll write soon about my boundaries. As a preview, though, they’re all pretty serious things – things like intentionally hurting people and being a racist.)
5. I want to emphasize one of the things that I mentioned in the previous item. One friend suggested that she believes that friendship needs to be mutual, if not equal. I don’t share that belief. I have friends who don’t consider me to be their friend and who don’t act in any way that I would consider friendly (though I don’t mean they act in unfriendly ways, either). Nevertheless, they are my friends, and I will be there for them if it’s ever needed. I continue to communicate with them as I would with any friend who reciprocates. If they ask me to stop communicating, I do, but I still hold them in my heart. If they ever change their minds and want to be closer again, I’ll celebrate that.
6. If I prefer that a friend changes in any way, I do my best to make a request rather than a demand. (Requests are questions and will take no for an answer; demands are, well, demands and won’t take no for an answer.) I also don’t just assume that they’ll know that they “should” change. For example, if I want a friend to call me because I’ve been making all the calls, I’ll ask her/him to call me next time. I won’t demand that he/she calls me, and I won’t assume that any real friend would know that she/he “should” make the next call.
7. I never make threats to terminate a relationship unless I’ve requested changes, I’ve communicated with the friend about the issue quite a bit (whether she/he will communicate about it or not), it’s a violation of a boundary, and I’m very serious about it. Once again, look forward to my post about boundaries. However, I may back off on how close I am with a particular friend in less serious cases. In those cases, I’m still open to becoming closer again if things change in a way that works for both of us.
8. I do my best to never use any of what John Gottman, Ph.D., calls “the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse” (behaviors that predict failure of a relationship when used consistently) and certainly not to use them more than occasionally. They are criticism (attacking a person as opposed to complaining about a behavior), contempt, defensiveness, and stonewalling (refusing to communicate or avoiding communicating).
9. I do my best not to project onto my friends. In other words, I do my best not to imagine or assume anything about them or to think I know what’s right for them. Instead, I ask them.
10. I do my best not to make agreements I don’t fully intend to keep and to keep agreements once I’ve made them. If I can’t keep an agreement, I do my best to acknowledge it and renegotiate as quickly as possible. This refers to agreements I’ve actually made, not to assumed agreements. I don’t make agreements without clearly stating them as agreements.
I’ve stated a lot of these as “I do my best to” because I admit that occasionally I go unconscious (I don’t mean “pass out”) and violate them. However, it’s my intention to do them whenever I’m able to be aware enough to do them. I’m not perfect yet and may never be.
I also acknowledge that I don’t always meet all the criteria of friendship I listed in my previous post on friendship with all of my friends. In fact, I don’t meet all of them with anyone all the time. I didn’t mean them as ways to judge myself or anyone else.
This could end up being a series that goes on for a very long time. I think I have a lot to write about friendship. It’s an important issue for me and one I’ve experienced a lot of frustration and disappointment with through my life. I’m also very aware that it’s an area in which I want to make some changes. More about that later.
Namaste,
Michael
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Who are my friends?
Who are my friends? Who are your friends? Am I your friend? Are you mine?
Even more to the point, what is a friend?
For many years I’ve chuckled to myself about how loosely some people use the term “friend.” For example, I think of an entertainer who called to the stage “my good friend” whoever. Yet I knew that the likelihood was that they rarely, if ever, spent time together other than professionally – if that. And I think of all the fraternity “brothers,” some of whom didn’t like each other and were incredibly judgmental about each other.
Now we have the internet and burgeoning opportunities to make “friends.” Instant messengers all have friend or buddy lists. Sites like Yahoo 360, Care 2, Live Journal, and My Space all have friend lists. We have our friends from our online groups. We have the friends we’ve met through online dating sites. And so on and on. Some of us have huge numbers of people we’ve met in any number of ways online whom we call friends.
But are these people really our friends? Or is the term just being used loosely?
For that matter, how many of the people we know in person are really our friends?
And does this issue make any difference at all? Am I just quibbling about semantics (as I’ve been accused of many times when I explore the meanings of words)?
It became a meaningful issue to me recently when I had some occasions to invite people to treat me like a friend. Some did. I felt pleased. Some didn’t. I felt disappointed. One, in particular, who claimed to be my friend actually treated me more like an enemy. I felt stunned and hurt.
So, at that moment, I began to care very much what a friend really is and who my friends really are.
Besides, as many of you know, I do like to explore the meanings of words. I admit that. I don’t believe there is any such thing as JUST semantics. Our ability to communicate depends in part on the meaning of words and on our sharing, or at least understanding, each other’s meanings.
And, furthermore, the meaning we give to the words we use gives an enormous insight into our worldview and how we structure our reality. In other words, I believe it’s a doorway to truly knowing each other at depth. How we use the word “friend” certainly is an example of that.
So, I’d like to give you an insight into my worldview by telling you how I use the term “friend.”
In my opinion, there are at least 4 types (or levels) of friendship. The types aren’t really discrete, but are more like points along a continuum. They are:
1. Friendly strangers: These are people we don’t really know, but who treat us in friendly ways. An example for me is the man I’d never seen before who pointed out to me that one of my tires was almost flat and offered to help me change it.
2. Acquaintances: These are people we’ve met in some way (in person or online) but with whom we’ve had little in-depth conversation. We probably haven’t spent much (if any) social time with acquaintances. We probably don’t know much beyond surface-level information about our acquaintances. Many of our online friends are, in my terminology, acquaintances.
3. Friends: These are the people we know more, who we’re more involved with, and who we can rely on to be part of our support system.
4. Close friends: These are the people who are in our lives a lot. We know quite a bit about each other, some of it information that not many people know. Their being part of our support system isn’t even at question; they’re on our side without a doubt.
Furthermore, as I use the term “friend,” I may be your friend even if you aren’t mine, or vice versa. Friendship isn’t necessarily mutual. Similarly, one of us can be a closer friend to the other than the other is to the first. There are quite a few people in my life who I consider friends and treat that way who don’t return similar treatment. I don’t know what some of them think and feel about me, to be honest. I’m still their friend no matter what. I’m open with them, and they can rely on me as part of their support system. Most of my former romantic partners are in this category.
That’s usually the way it is for me with friends. Once someone is a friend (including the very close kind of friendship involved in being my romantic partner), I rarely ever stop thinking of him or her as my friend and treating her or him that way. It takes a lot, repeated over time (or something very antagonistic), for me to let go of friendships. Forms of relationships may change, degrees of closeness may change, but, for me at least, the content, the friendship, remains. I’ve noticed that a lot of people don’t seem to understand this – or to agree with it.
Following are some of the characteristics I believe define friendships and determine how close of a friend a person is (that is, at which level, or point along the continuum, they are). Degree of friendship depends on how all of these factors add up. Note that this description is a work in progress and that I may add to it or delete something from it as my awareness expands.
1. The amount of time we choose to spend together and the number of shared experiences we choose to have together. Usually I’m closer with someone I spend many evenings with than with someone I only spend an occasional evening with (assuming they both live in Santa Fe). Similarly, how often I talk with someone about social and personal topics in person, on the phone, via IM, or via e-mail exchange is a measure of how close I feel to the person as a friend.
If someone even registers on my friendship scale (as a friend or more; in some cases even as an acquaintance I feel friendly toward), I send him or her my winter holiday greeting – or I would if I knew where to send it. If I don’t make at least that much effort at contact (or if I wouldn’t if I knew how), then I wouldn’t call the person a friend. (This, of course, assumes that I send a holiday greeting at all – and I haven’t every year.)
2. The more other holiday greetings I send a person and whether or not I send her or him a birthday greeting (if I know his or her birth date) are less-than-perfect indicators of how close I feel to her or him.
3. Whether I invite the person to parties or social gatherings I might have (which are rare), whether they come if invited, whether they invite me to theirs, and whether I go to theirs (which is a big deal considering I’m an introvert and not real fond of parties) are all indicators of how close I feel to someone.
4. Here’s one that’s very telling: If a person visits Santa Fe, how do I respond? The closer I feel, the more I’ll go out of my way to spend time with her or him and the more likely I’ll provide a place for him or her to stay (or help her or him to find a place to stay). With close friends, I may even issue invitations to visit. Similarly, the closer we are, the more likely I‘ll hope he or she might do those things with me if I visit wherever she or he lives.
5. The closer we are as friends, the more we’ll be open and self-revealing with each other. In other words, the more emotional intimacy there will be in our relationship. Of course, I tend to be pretty open and self-revealing with everyone, so this isn’t as significant for me as it is for some people. It is a sign of my inviting friendship with acquaintances and closer friendship with friends, though. However, there are still things I’ll tell people I’m closer with that I won’t tell others.
6. Because we’ve been more open with each other, the closer we are, the more secrets we know about each other. Real friends keep those secrets sacred no matter what. Actually, honorable people will keep secrets, no matter how close they are to the person with the secret. But the closer we are, the more I’ll trust someone to keep my secrets. One of the reasons I always feel like I’m the friend of someone I’ve ever been really close with is because I know some significant secrets about that person and will always keep those secrets safe for him or her. I hope she or he will do the same for me.
7. The closer we are with each other, the more likely we are to read each other’s blogs, journals, or group messages and to reply to them or comment on them. I choose whose blog entries to read based on how close I feel with that person – or how close I’d like to feel with him or her.
8. The closer we are as friends, the more we can count on each other’s emotional support. We can count on the other person to be on our side, to be our ally, to encourage us rather than to discourage us regarding our self-exploration, growth, awakening, relationships, goals, dreams, intentions, desires, and spiritual mission. They will be genuinely on our side. In other words, they’ll give us the feedback and the encouragement that’s truly in our best interests rather than what we might want to hear that isn’t really in our best interests. For example, a real friend will participate in an intervention with someone who is actively alcoholic rather than letting her or him continue to wreck lives with his or her drinking. A false friend might say, “Oh, you don’t have a problem. Here, have another drink.”
9. The more we’re friends with each other, the more we’ll accept and honor each other’s messages no matter what they are. I may not agree with what he or she says. I may not reply. But I don’t object to receiving them. I’ll allow that person to communicate anything he or she wants to communicate – jokes, anecdotes, political messages, petitions, or whatever. If it’s important to the person to send those messages to me, the more we’re really friends, the more I’ll respect that.
10. Real friends deal with differences directly, honestly, respectfully, and gently rather than by avoiding, triangulating (going to a third person hoping that person will confront the one we have the complaint about), or using attacks (criticism, contempt, blaming, etc.). Enemies will try to hurt the person they have complaints about – for example, get the person thrown out of a group, expose sensitive secrets that will hurt him or her, or hit her or him.
11. The closer we are as friends, the more likely we are to help each other whenever it’s truly needed. I would get up out of bed in the middle of the night to go help a close friend whose car has broken down. I would loan or give a friend money when it’s needed and there’s a good reason for his or her needing it.
12. When we’re with each other in person, the closer we are as friends, the more I’ll touch – hugs, brief touches in passing, arms around each other, etc. I admit that I’m gender-biased about touching. I touch my women friends a lot more and in a lot more different ways than I do my men friends. And I’m not talking about sexual touching. (And my real friends won’t judge me harshly for that.)
So, there you have it. What do you think? What would you add? What would you delete? What would you modify? As I said before, I may modify this statement as I become more aware and learn more.
And now, given what I’ve written, or using your own definition if you prefer, am I your friend?
This is the first in a series that I’ll be writing on friendship. My next post in the series will be about what kinds of values and interests I look for in friends. Later I’ll be writing posts specifically about some of my friends – who they are and why they’re my friends – and about some of the people I’d like to be closer with as friends.
Namaste,
Michael
Even more to the point, what is a friend?
For many years I’ve chuckled to myself about how loosely some people use the term “friend.” For example, I think of an entertainer who called to the stage “my good friend” whoever. Yet I knew that the likelihood was that they rarely, if ever, spent time together other than professionally – if that. And I think of all the fraternity “brothers,” some of whom didn’t like each other and were incredibly judgmental about each other.
Now we have the internet and burgeoning opportunities to make “friends.” Instant messengers all have friend or buddy lists. Sites like Yahoo 360, Care 2, Live Journal, and My Space all have friend lists. We have our friends from our online groups. We have the friends we’ve met through online dating sites. And so on and on. Some of us have huge numbers of people we’ve met in any number of ways online whom we call friends.
But are these people really our friends? Or is the term just being used loosely?
For that matter, how many of the people we know in person are really our friends?
And does this issue make any difference at all? Am I just quibbling about semantics (as I’ve been accused of many times when I explore the meanings of words)?
It became a meaningful issue to me recently when I had some occasions to invite people to treat me like a friend. Some did. I felt pleased. Some didn’t. I felt disappointed. One, in particular, who claimed to be my friend actually treated me more like an enemy. I felt stunned and hurt.
So, at that moment, I began to care very much what a friend really is and who my friends really are.
Besides, as many of you know, I do like to explore the meanings of words. I admit that. I don’t believe there is any such thing as JUST semantics. Our ability to communicate depends in part on the meaning of words and on our sharing, or at least understanding, each other’s meanings.
And, furthermore, the meaning we give to the words we use gives an enormous insight into our worldview and how we structure our reality. In other words, I believe it’s a doorway to truly knowing each other at depth. How we use the word “friend” certainly is an example of that.
So, I’d like to give you an insight into my worldview by telling you how I use the term “friend.”
In my opinion, there are at least 4 types (or levels) of friendship. The types aren’t really discrete, but are more like points along a continuum. They are:
1. Friendly strangers: These are people we don’t really know, but who treat us in friendly ways. An example for me is the man I’d never seen before who pointed out to me that one of my tires was almost flat and offered to help me change it.
2. Acquaintances: These are people we’ve met in some way (in person or online) but with whom we’ve had little in-depth conversation. We probably haven’t spent much (if any) social time with acquaintances. We probably don’t know much beyond surface-level information about our acquaintances. Many of our online friends are, in my terminology, acquaintances.
3. Friends: These are the people we know more, who we’re more involved with, and who we can rely on to be part of our support system.
4. Close friends: These are the people who are in our lives a lot. We know quite a bit about each other, some of it information that not many people know. Their being part of our support system isn’t even at question; they’re on our side without a doubt.
Furthermore, as I use the term “friend,” I may be your friend even if you aren’t mine, or vice versa. Friendship isn’t necessarily mutual. Similarly, one of us can be a closer friend to the other than the other is to the first. There are quite a few people in my life who I consider friends and treat that way who don’t return similar treatment. I don’t know what some of them think and feel about me, to be honest. I’m still their friend no matter what. I’m open with them, and they can rely on me as part of their support system. Most of my former romantic partners are in this category.
That’s usually the way it is for me with friends. Once someone is a friend (including the very close kind of friendship involved in being my romantic partner), I rarely ever stop thinking of him or her as my friend and treating her or him that way. It takes a lot, repeated over time (or something very antagonistic), for me to let go of friendships. Forms of relationships may change, degrees of closeness may change, but, for me at least, the content, the friendship, remains. I’ve noticed that a lot of people don’t seem to understand this – or to agree with it.
Following are some of the characteristics I believe define friendships and determine how close of a friend a person is (that is, at which level, or point along the continuum, they are). Degree of friendship depends on how all of these factors add up. Note that this description is a work in progress and that I may add to it or delete something from it as my awareness expands.
1. The amount of time we choose to spend together and the number of shared experiences we choose to have together. Usually I’m closer with someone I spend many evenings with than with someone I only spend an occasional evening with (assuming they both live in Santa Fe). Similarly, how often I talk with someone about social and personal topics in person, on the phone, via IM, or via e-mail exchange is a measure of how close I feel to the person as a friend.
If someone even registers on my friendship scale (as a friend or more; in some cases even as an acquaintance I feel friendly toward), I send him or her my winter holiday greeting – or I would if I knew where to send it. If I don’t make at least that much effort at contact (or if I wouldn’t if I knew how), then I wouldn’t call the person a friend. (This, of course, assumes that I send a holiday greeting at all – and I haven’t every year.)
2. The more other holiday greetings I send a person and whether or not I send her or him a birthday greeting (if I know his or her birth date) are less-than-perfect indicators of how close I feel to her or him.
3. Whether I invite the person to parties or social gatherings I might have (which are rare), whether they come if invited, whether they invite me to theirs, and whether I go to theirs (which is a big deal considering I’m an introvert and not real fond of parties) are all indicators of how close I feel to someone.
4. Here’s one that’s very telling: If a person visits Santa Fe, how do I respond? The closer I feel, the more I’ll go out of my way to spend time with her or him and the more likely I’ll provide a place for him or her to stay (or help her or him to find a place to stay). With close friends, I may even issue invitations to visit. Similarly, the closer we are, the more likely I‘ll hope he or she might do those things with me if I visit wherever she or he lives.
5. The closer we are as friends, the more we’ll be open and self-revealing with each other. In other words, the more emotional intimacy there will be in our relationship. Of course, I tend to be pretty open and self-revealing with everyone, so this isn’t as significant for me as it is for some people. It is a sign of my inviting friendship with acquaintances and closer friendship with friends, though. However, there are still things I’ll tell people I’m closer with that I won’t tell others.
6. Because we’ve been more open with each other, the closer we are, the more secrets we know about each other. Real friends keep those secrets sacred no matter what. Actually, honorable people will keep secrets, no matter how close they are to the person with the secret. But the closer we are, the more I’ll trust someone to keep my secrets. One of the reasons I always feel like I’m the friend of someone I’ve ever been really close with is because I know some significant secrets about that person and will always keep those secrets safe for him or her. I hope she or he will do the same for me.
7. The closer we are with each other, the more likely we are to read each other’s blogs, journals, or group messages and to reply to them or comment on them. I choose whose blog entries to read based on how close I feel with that person – or how close I’d like to feel with him or her.
8. The closer we are as friends, the more we can count on each other’s emotional support. We can count on the other person to be on our side, to be our ally, to encourage us rather than to discourage us regarding our self-exploration, growth, awakening, relationships, goals, dreams, intentions, desires, and spiritual mission. They will be genuinely on our side. In other words, they’ll give us the feedback and the encouragement that’s truly in our best interests rather than what we might want to hear that isn’t really in our best interests. For example, a real friend will participate in an intervention with someone who is actively alcoholic rather than letting her or him continue to wreck lives with his or her drinking. A false friend might say, “Oh, you don’t have a problem. Here, have another drink.”
9. The more we’re friends with each other, the more we’ll accept and honor each other’s messages no matter what they are. I may not agree with what he or she says. I may not reply. But I don’t object to receiving them. I’ll allow that person to communicate anything he or she wants to communicate – jokes, anecdotes, political messages, petitions, or whatever. If it’s important to the person to send those messages to me, the more we’re really friends, the more I’ll respect that.
10. Real friends deal with differences directly, honestly, respectfully, and gently rather than by avoiding, triangulating (going to a third person hoping that person will confront the one we have the complaint about), or using attacks (criticism, contempt, blaming, etc.). Enemies will try to hurt the person they have complaints about – for example, get the person thrown out of a group, expose sensitive secrets that will hurt him or her, or hit her or him.
11. The closer we are as friends, the more likely we are to help each other whenever it’s truly needed. I would get up out of bed in the middle of the night to go help a close friend whose car has broken down. I would loan or give a friend money when it’s needed and there’s a good reason for his or her needing it.
12. When we’re with each other in person, the closer we are as friends, the more I’ll touch – hugs, brief touches in passing, arms around each other, etc. I admit that I’m gender-biased about touching. I touch my women friends a lot more and in a lot more different ways than I do my men friends. And I’m not talking about sexual touching. (And my real friends won’t judge me harshly for that.)
So, there you have it. What do you think? What would you add? What would you delete? What would you modify? As I said before, I may modify this statement as I become more aware and learn more.
And now, given what I’ve written, or using your own definition if you prefer, am I your friend?
This is the first in a series that I’ll be writing on friendship. My next post in the series will be about what kinds of values and interests I look for in friends. Later I’ll be writing posts specifically about some of my friends – who they are and why they’re my friends – and about some of the people I’d like to be closer with as friends.
Namaste,
Michael
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Fear or love
I think it was a mistake to tell you awhile back that I rarely post things other people have written. I’m discovering that that rule boxes me in too much.
Here’s something that I like a lot from Rhonda Britten’s book Fearless Loving. I’ll tell you more about what it means to me in another post.
Fear tells you to hide your true self.
Love tells you to stand up and shine.
Fear wants perfection.
Love is perfect despite appearances.
Fear tells you being right is the way to stay safe.
Love knows safety is an illusion.
Fear argues for your limitations.
Love takes a stand for your greatness.
Fear wants more.
Love knows there is always enough.
Fear thinks pain is a weakness.
Love sees pain as an opening.
Fear wants guarantees.
Love wouldn’t ask for guarantees.
Fear tells you to protect yourself.
Love tells you to be vulnerable.
Fear wants to know why.
Love wants to know how.
Fear wants to confine.
Love wants to let go.
Fear wants to hold on.
Love wants to surrender.
Fear wants to be wanted.
Love knows it is wanted.
Fear judges.
Love accepts.
Fear tells you to sacrifice.
Love tells you it’s a gift.
What do you think? Does this speak to you? Are you noticing any insights? Or do you think this is complete balderdash?
Namaste,
Michael
Here’s something that I like a lot from Rhonda Britten’s book Fearless Loving. I’ll tell you more about what it means to me in another post.
Fear tells you to hide your true self.
Love tells you to stand up and shine.
Fear wants perfection.
Love is perfect despite appearances.
Fear tells you being right is the way to stay safe.
Love knows safety is an illusion.
Fear argues for your limitations.
Love takes a stand for your greatness.
Fear wants more.
Love knows there is always enough.
Fear thinks pain is a weakness.
Love sees pain as an opening.
Fear wants guarantees.
Love wouldn’t ask for guarantees.
Fear tells you to protect yourself.
Love tells you to be vulnerable.
Fear wants to know why.
Love wants to know how.
Fear wants to confine.
Love wants to let go.
Fear wants to hold on.
Love wants to surrender.
Fear wants to be wanted.
Love knows it is wanted.
Fear judges.
Love accepts.
Fear tells you to sacrifice.
Love tells you it’s a gift.
What do you think? Does this speak to you? Are you noticing any insights? Or do you think this is complete balderdash?
Namaste,
Michael
Monday, April 10, 2006
Substratum
I’ve developed a new field of investigation: psycho-archaeology. We who are psycho-archaeologists do archaeological digs into the depths of our consciousness.
I recently began doing a major dig into whatever is going on with me with relationships. My first publication of the results was my treatise to A about what I did to sabotage my relationship with her.
Simultaneously I was doing another large dig into those pits of depression I’ve been falling into off and on much of my life.
And guess what. I found that just a few layers down, there was the same substratum that underlay both issues. In fact, I’ve discovered that that substratum underlies every problem, every issue, every struggle, every frustration I’ve ever had in life.
OK, I know, I’ve slipped from archaeological metaphor into geological metaphor. So, I’m not perfect. Drop me a letter grade on my essay if you want. Though it feels more like a master’s thesis right now. I’ve been trying to write this for days, and it keeps getting deeper and more complex every time I think about it.
Anyway, what I’ve found and experienced is that the substratum that underlies all painful issues in my life is resistance to feeling fear, emptiness, and loneliness (as shorthand, I’ll refer to them from now on as f/e/l) and a huge cache of those feelings sitting there inside me, waiting to be restimulated. I now understand that EVERYTHING else that hasn’t worked in my relationships and in the rest of my life has been a consequence of my trying to protect myself from feeling overwhelmed by f/e/l. Sometimes, much to my consternation, what I’ve done to protect myself from those feelings has actually fed them and increased them, the opposite of what I wanted.
I acknowledge that I am responsible for having those feelings inside. I wasn’t responsible for the conditions and events that instilled them in the first place (when I was a child), but I am responsible for not having done since then what it takes to heal them and not be so influenced by them. Consequently, I’m also responsible for the negative effects they’ve had on much of my life, including probably all of my romantic relationships.
I’ve come to realize that there are 2 problems at the root of why f/e/l have run my life so much:
I don’t have enough people in my life who love me unconditionally so that I can fill myself up with love instead of f/e/l. (See Greg Baer, Real Love) I believe this is a temporary solution, but one that will work if I keep those people around so I can re-fill whenever needed.
I haven’t done the work to develop a strong and effective enough inner loving adult who will take care of my wounded inner child and who can bring through God’s love to me so that I don’t need to get it from the outside. (See Margaret Paul, Do I Have to Give Up Me to Be Loved by God?) I believe this is the long-term, ultimate solution.
Because I need to do this spiritual healing work, I have repeatedly attracted people and situations into my life that have called me to do the healing by reminding me of the wounds (of the f/e/l). I also believe that my spiritual guides and teachers have cooperated in this by helping to set my life up so that I’d have to learn what I’ve needed to learn. So, as results of my f/e/l and my attempts to protect myself from them, I’ve consistently repeated some patterns of thinking and behaving that have sabotaged many aspects of my life. Among them have been attempting to control, hanging on tightly to what didn’t work for me, withholding (not being open), blaming, acting like a victim, and avoiding (what Greg Baer calls running and some others call hiding).
One manifestation of the avoiding I’ve done is that I’ve run away from relationships (all kinds of them, not just romantic ones) because getting involved has brought up the fear of getting hurt. Part of that avoiding has been sabotaging relationships I did start. It seems that I’ve preferred to run from relationships than to be hurt by them. Yes, that’s true in at least many cases. As soon as it looks to me like I may be rejected (thus bringing up f/e/l), I start to run away (thus causing myself f/e/l). Apparently being in charge of it seems like a better option than being a victim of it. So, I avoid what I want most – loving relationships.
Sometimes I feel like the guy who bought a dog and named her Go Away. Then he’d call to her: “Come here, Go Away.” (Thanks to Trish for this joke.)
I’ve also discovered a wide variety of other “creative” ways that I’ve avoided feeling f/e/l. One of them is by becoming depressed. As you probably know, I’ve been paying close attention to the dynamics of the depression I experience. I’ve concluded that, at least in part, it’s a way of protecting myself against f/e/l, which feels much worse to me than depression does. F/e/l begins to come up, and I’ve protected myself from it by depressing myself. It’s also a form of being a victim. If I’m depressed, then I’ve believed that I have a “good” reason for not doing whatever I fear. So, I don’t think that any of the other explanations for depression are relevant. I think I’ve just been avoiding f/e/l.
That’s exactly what Margie Paul (Do I Have to Give Up Me to Be Loved by God?) suggests about depression. It’s a consequence of trying to protect myself from feelings rather than having the intention to learn about loving when the feelings arise. Margie says it will turn out differently, that I won’t fall into depression if I’ll choose differently, if I’ll choose the path of learning about loving when those feelings arise.
Is it really this simple? (Not easy – simple.) It may be. I’m willing to find out. I’m choosing to believe that it is.
I have to admit that knowing this and remembering it when I begin to get depressed really does spoil a “good” depression. Oh, well….
So, I’m on my way. I have the foundation (the substratum) identified. Now I just need to stay conscious and to choose the other path, the path of learning to love myself, my feelings, and other people whenever f/e/l arise instead of choosing to protect myself.
Not easy, but simple.
Namaste,
Michael
I recently began doing a major dig into whatever is going on with me with relationships. My first publication of the results was my treatise to A about what I did to sabotage my relationship with her.
Simultaneously I was doing another large dig into those pits of depression I’ve been falling into off and on much of my life.
And guess what. I found that just a few layers down, there was the same substratum that underlay both issues. In fact, I’ve discovered that that substratum underlies every problem, every issue, every struggle, every frustration I’ve ever had in life.
OK, I know, I’ve slipped from archaeological metaphor into geological metaphor. So, I’m not perfect. Drop me a letter grade on my essay if you want. Though it feels more like a master’s thesis right now. I’ve been trying to write this for days, and it keeps getting deeper and more complex every time I think about it.
Anyway, what I’ve found and experienced is that the substratum that underlies all painful issues in my life is resistance to feeling fear, emptiness, and loneliness (as shorthand, I’ll refer to them from now on as f/e/l) and a huge cache of those feelings sitting there inside me, waiting to be restimulated. I now understand that EVERYTHING else that hasn’t worked in my relationships and in the rest of my life has been a consequence of my trying to protect myself from feeling overwhelmed by f/e/l. Sometimes, much to my consternation, what I’ve done to protect myself from those feelings has actually fed them and increased them, the opposite of what I wanted.
I acknowledge that I am responsible for having those feelings inside. I wasn’t responsible for the conditions and events that instilled them in the first place (when I was a child), but I am responsible for not having done since then what it takes to heal them and not be so influenced by them. Consequently, I’m also responsible for the negative effects they’ve had on much of my life, including probably all of my romantic relationships.
I’ve come to realize that there are 2 problems at the root of why f/e/l have run my life so much:
I don’t have enough people in my life who love me unconditionally so that I can fill myself up with love instead of f/e/l. (See Greg Baer, Real Love) I believe this is a temporary solution, but one that will work if I keep those people around so I can re-fill whenever needed.
I haven’t done the work to develop a strong and effective enough inner loving adult who will take care of my wounded inner child and who can bring through God’s love to me so that I don’t need to get it from the outside. (See Margaret Paul, Do I Have to Give Up Me to Be Loved by God?) I believe this is the long-term, ultimate solution.
Because I need to do this spiritual healing work, I have repeatedly attracted people and situations into my life that have called me to do the healing by reminding me of the wounds (of the f/e/l). I also believe that my spiritual guides and teachers have cooperated in this by helping to set my life up so that I’d have to learn what I’ve needed to learn. So, as results of my f/e/l and my attempts to protect myself from them, I’ve consistently repeated some patterns of thinking and behaving that have sabotaged many aspects of my life. Among them have been attempting to control, hanging on tightly to what didn’t work for me, withholding (not being open), blaming, acting like a victim, and avoiding (what Greg Baer calls running and some others call hiding).
One manifestation of the avoiding I’ve done is that I’ve run away from relationships (all kinds of them, not just romantic ones) because getting involved has brought up the fear of getting hurt. Part of that avoiding has been sabotaging relationships I did start. It seems that I’ve preferred to run from relationships than to be hurt by them. Yes, that’s true in at least many cases. As soon as it looks to me like I may be rejected (thus bringing up f/e/l), I start to run away (thus causing myself f/e/l). Apparently being in charge of it seems like a better option than being a victim of it. So, I avoid what I want most – loving relationships.
Sometimes I feel like the guy who bought a dog and named her Go Away. Then he’d call to her: “Come here, Go Away.” (Thanks to Trish for this joke.)
I’ve also discovered a wide variety of other “creative” ways that I’ve avoided feeling f/e/l. One of them is by becoming depressed. As you probably know, I’ve been paying close attention to the dynamics of the depression I experience. I’ve concluded that, at least in part, it’s a way of protecting myself against f/e/l, which feels much worse to me than depression does. F/e/l begins to come up, and I’ve protected myself from it by depressing myself. It’s also a form of being a victim. If I’m depressed, then I’ve believed that I have a “good” reason for not doing whatever I fear. So, I don’t think that any of the other explanations for depression are relevant. I think I’ve just been avoiding f/e/l.
That’s exactly what Margie Paul (Do I Have to Give Up Me to Be Loved by God?) suggests about depression. It’s a consequence of trying to protect myself from feelings rather than having the intention to learn about loving when the feelings arise. Margie says it will turn out differently, that I won’t fall into depression if I’ll choose differently, if I’ll choose the path of learning about loving when those feelings arise.
Is it really this simple? (Not easy – simple.) It may be. I’m willing to find out. I’m choosing to believe that it is.
I have to admit that knowing this and remembering it when I begin to get depressed really does spoil a “good” depression. Oh, well….
So, I’m on my way. I have the foundation (the substratum) identified. Now I just need to stay conscious and to choose the other path, the path of learning to love myself, my feelings, and other people whenever f/e/l arise instead of choosing to protect myself.
Not easy, but simple.
Namaste,
Michael
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
