Jekyll/Hyde

[jay]

A few realizations, today, largely unrelated.

For some combination of reasons, I've been depressed, almost despondent at times, since we got back Friday evening. And this has spun off my usual depression-parasitic reactions... increased insecurity, defiance, self-putdowns, clingyness. Strangely, my spirits were hugely lifted in a Krispy Kreme shop tonight when the counter guy handed me a warm doughnut... "you look like you could use this." Not on my waistline, perhaps, but that little act of kindness brought me out of a funk. Thankfully, my down periods rarely persist for more than a few days, and soon I'll be back at work (which tends to drag me out of a hole).

At work I feel in charge of myself, competent, capable and I have a track record of accomplishments. Self-confidence. I know my value, and can measure my past impact in a couple of fields. And I enjoy it -- I feel passionately about what I do, and learn. All of those things collude to bring me up and make me fully-functional again.

Personally or socially... I feel adrift, incompetent, and fairly unattractive. Like I have no accomplishments, and nothing much to offer personally. Left idle at home, or without positive external social reinforcement, I'll tend to damp down and gnaw on myself. And I'm not fishing for compliments here... I'm stating my mindset, whether or not it matches reality. One reason that I avoid planning a social calendar during the workweek is that subconsciously I associate it with this mindset. Brian-the-scientist doesn't want to think about turning back into Brian-the-geek, come Friday evening, or the possibilities for failure and rejection therein. Kind of a Jekyll/Hyde flip... and at the same time, I feel internally compelled to go out and find friends and be social. I can't just hide away until Monday morning.

Another realization, coming out of a 2-hour-long chat with my dear friend EA, is that my courting behaviors, manners, and attitudes are much closer to what girls are apparently taught than boys. I wait for the other person to make the first move. I dislike pursuing... I worry about harrassing or annoying women if I show much interest. I'd much rather wait until someone shows some signs of interest, then reciprocate. All of my five past-and-present sweeties kissed me first, probably after running out of patience (wry smile). patgreene claims that I moved first, but she's wrong ;-).

The same thing is true of casual touching... even with partners or close friends. I don't want to seem forward, or make the other person uncomfortable. I almost never reach for anyone. If someone takes my hand, fine, then I can safely assume that that level of touch is welcomed from then onward. But if I touch a woman who doesn't want my touch, I'm a bad person, a boor.

Even in the bedroom... I'm reluctant to be demanding or to impose anything on my partners... so I don't approach my partners unless they first seem interested themselves. Even if I'm really frustrated, myself. Unless I'm running out of time on an LDR visit... (reminisce).

Inculcated belief structure: approaching is aggressive. Aggression is bad...

EA's response was that she was confused, that these are things that women are often taught in this culture... and teasingly asked me what gender I was born ;-).

Comments

[who-is-she.livejournal.com]

"But... if one asks for something, and it is granted, one is then in that person's debt. If it isn't granted, then there are negative feelings on both sides. Neither of those are good outcomes. "

From this sentence... I feel expectations and I feel obligations. I think I don't make these kind of connections that you do... with 'debts'... and 'negative feelings'.

for instance: My June visit to Akien and Dawn's -- a friend of theirs asked if he could kiss me. I said "No, but I would like to give you a hug". So.. I didn't 'grant him what he asked for'. I don't believe there were any negative feelings. AND the reason I didn't kiss him was ENTIRELY my reason (that's my boundary with people I don't know well), not anything about him that was lacking. That interaction felt very pleasant, and through our negotiation we were able to find a level of connection that was comfortable to both of us.

"If someone doesn't want to be touched by me in a hot tub, say, but then gladly accepts the same touch from someone else, then it *is* mostly about me. I saw that firsthand recently...
so to speak ;-). "

ah-HA! no.. it STILL isn't about you! If you and me and Akien and Dawn were all in a hot tub..... it would be true that I would be accepting more touch from them than I would from you. Is that becuase ITS ALL ABOUT YOU?? Nope. It's becuase my boundaries (ME ME ME, not YOU) are based on how well I know someone. And I know them way better than I know you.

You can't assume that you know why people make the decisions they do. I totally understand the "it's all about me" mindset... as I have spent a lot of time there myself. I also appreciate your sincere sensitivity to wanting to be a good guy, not invade people's space or ask for things that are inappropriate. I guess I'm just feeling sad......that you seem to make a connection:

others' reluctance to invite or initiate or participate with you
is correlated with
how well you squelch your inner assertiveness or dominating energy.

Have you considered:
There may be those out there that would REVEL in your dominant, aggressive energy... given that you worked out your boundaries in advance. I really encourage you to work on that..(the role playing stuff... even LDRs can help with that..) becuase I believe that you might heave a real sigh of relief if YOU were able to express that part of you as well.

just my 2 cents.
:)

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

There may be those out there that would REVEL in your dominant, aggressive energy... given that you worked out your boundaries in advance.

Yes. What she said, Brian. At the risk of this being TMI, I will say that one of the things I value in a partner (especially a sexual partner) is the ability to dominate me with my permission, and within established boundaries. I am a strong person, and it takes a very strong person to truly "meet" me in this realm. It's not the ONLY thing I value (far from it), but it is an attractive quality for me. (NB: This alone could very well explain the lack of "spark" we discussed.) I'm CERTAIN that I'm not the only woman for whom this is so.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

You've already become for me somewhat of a test case in our casual interactions... I've already been more assertive and persistent there than with others. Baby steps... on the other hand, this means that once I work out how to be the same person socially that I am in other realms, you'll undoubtedly find me irresistable (given my other stellar qualities) ;^).

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

*LOL* Yes, I suppose that's possible! That should give you plenty of incentive, hmmm?

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes! (giggle)

Although changing in ways to specifically please you (or other friends or partners) might certainly be tempting, it's not a good long-term strategy... ultimately, for changes to "stick" they will have to be internally motivated, I think.

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

I'm certainly not suggesting that you change to please ME, or any other person outside of yourself. You're right, that won't work longterm. But if you succeed in making this changes that you are discussing, it is possible that they will have the RESULT of shifting things in this way, no matter what the original motivation was.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

I'm certainly happy to discuss beneficial side-effects... (bats eyelashes).

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Is that because ITS ALL ABOUT YOU?? Nope. It's because my boundaries (ME ME ME, not YOU) are based on how well I know someone.

This is eye-opening... You're right, I haven't accounted for changing personal boundaries or moods in my models of other people's behavior. I.e., different levels of acceptance or comfort, depending on *their* internal state at some given time. I've used a static model... either always accepting, or always rejecting, much more binary. And then the accept/reject decision would be theirs, according to how they saw me. And irrevocable afterwards, so choosing the best time and situation was critical. Maybe I'm not giving others enough credit...

If you and me and Akien and Dawn were all in a hot tub..... it would be true that I would be accepting more touch from them than I would from you.
In my usual social mindset, if I were in that hot tub situation, and if I wanted to offer a backrub, I'd probably politely hold back, possibly with the wistful-staring that dawnd mentioned. If I dared to risk offending you by *asking* you if you'd like one -- but then you nicely declined, because of your own internal boundaries about accepting touch from people you don't know as well -- then it is true that I'd then typically assume that it was about me, that you found the prospect of a backrub from me unpleasant, and I would probably afterward maintain even more distance (and not ask you again, even after we knew each other better, since I would already know the likely outcome). A static personal-response model, again...

If I used a dynamic model, I'd have to ask more frequently, since answers might change from time to time according to *your* internal views and boundaries. Which means in turn that I'd have to be comfortable that I wasn't unduly offending or bothering you by asking...

others' reluctance to invite or initiate or participate with you is correlated with how well you squelch your inner assertiveness or dominating energy.

Again, on the mark. In social space, I expect people to flee if I unleash that assertiveness or energy. So I try to suppress it and maintain a polite, considerate, low-key interface with others, hoping that that will allow me to hang out with them. But I'm much more likely to let that slip online than in-person.

There may be those out there that would REVEL in your dominant, aggressive energy... given that you worked out your boundaries in advance.

Hmmm... no, that hadn't occurred to me before this thread. It seems so alien (if I put myself in their place, I'd push back reflexively against someone else's aggressive energy) that it requires a large cognitive leap for me. I'm undoubtedly guilty of projecting my own highly-control-averse response on to those around me, and consequently denying them that energy from me (because I would expect a defensive reaction).

you might heave a real sigh of relief if YOU were able to express that

Probably... it would be a relief to be less personally squelched, less carefully-filtered, and more expressive and relaxed in social spaces. And to let others tell me their boundaries, instead of feeling like I need to carefully figure them out on my own, and to assume that anything in-bounds is OK.

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

...I haven't accounted for changing personal boundaries or moods in my models of other people's behavior. ...I've used a static model... more binary. And then the accept/reject decision would be theirs, according to how they saw me. And irrevocable afterwards, so choosing the best time and situation was critical. Maybe I'm not giving others enough credit...

I think you may not be. We are all mutable creatures. As a recovering B&W thinker myself, I know how hard it is to start seeing--and BEHAVING--in shades of grey. But it's worth it, not to be locked into these immutable places anymore.


Probably... it would be a relief to be less personally squelched, less carefully-filtered, and more expressive and relaxed in social spaces. And to let others tell me their boundaries, instead of feeling like I need to carefully figure them out on my own, and to assume that anything in-bounds is OK.

Try it some time. I think you may like it. When you DO try it, you might want to start with a small group, and let them know that you're trying an experiment. That way, if you do something totally out of character for you, they won't be all weirded out. But I suspect that folks won't really notice, other than to notice that you're suddenly easier to be around.

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

for instance: My June visit to Akien and Dawn's -- a friend of theirs asked if he could kiss me. I said "No, but I would like to give you a hug". So.. I didn't 'grant him what he asked for'. I don't believe there were any negative feelings. AND the reason I didn't kiss him was ENTIRELY my reason (that's my boundary with people I don't know well), not anything about him that was lacking. That interaction felt very pleasant, and through our negotiation we were able to find a level of connection that was comfortable to both of us.

And a lovely connection it was. I daresay it is an assertive introduction method, mustering the moxie to offer to introduce myself with a kiss. And I didn't take it at all personally that you declined, and I don't believe that we spent any attention on communicating what the boundary/headspace/preference/environmental background was for why you chose to decline my offer. But we did share a happy connection that I've been grateful for in the months since.

There'd definitely been no perception of rejection or lacking on my part from the encounter, and it hadn't occurred to me to think specifically on that particular exchange since. It was only in reading this comment today that I was reminded that we'd shared that particular negotiation result. I remember instead that we shared a happy bit of time, space, and connection - some of it actively with one another, and lots of it merely in comfortable proximity sharing the feeling of that day's community.

[who-is-she.livejournal.com]

(smile)
*waves*
Hi there!
nice to see you again.
!!!!
I'm glad you felt completely positive about our interaction. I did too.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Did you talk about your boundaries, after declining the kiss?

[who-is-she.livejournal.com]

no, in fact, we didn't.

I believe the most that Bryan has ever heard about my boundaries is what he read in the course of viewing this thread.

Am I right, Bryan?

It was just a perfect exchange, which akienm witnessed, and later congratulated me on practicing my boundaries with such skill. (grin)

Much as you may find it difficult to approach people and initiate contact... it is equally frightening for me to have someone initiate contact... and know that I will have to decline... for whatever reason. I am petrified of hurting that person. That bikerscum was so gracious and obviously unfluttered about my declining the kiss, made the experience much more positive for me too.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Your boundaries are much better-defined than mine, in some ways... I'd also be petrified of hurting someone by having to turn them down. So I try to never turn anyone down... if someone comparably approached me, I would have kissed them -- even given that it was against my policies, and I was uncomfortable, even if they had horrible garlic-breath -- rather than risk hurting the other person.

That isn't saying that you didn't do very well in practicing your boundaries -- you did -- but that in your place, I think that I wouldn't have done nearly as well :-).

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

I'd also be petrified of hurting someone by having to turn them down. So I try to never turn anyone down... if someone comparably approached me, I would have kissed them -- even given that it was against my policies, and I was uncomfortable, even if they had horrible garlic-breath -- rather than risk hurting the other person.

Wow. Brian, have you considered how many different ways you are inviting unhappiness on yourself by choosing this approach?

Coming immediately to mind:
* compromising your own policies on how you interact with people, and having to live with yourself for choosing to do so.
* compromising your boundaries to comply with someone else's request - seemingly inviting feeling coerced, and having to live with yourself for choosing to do so.
* accepting your own discomfort for reluctance to perceiving imposing the above situations on others that may make requests of you
* (and this one inferred) reluctance to ask for what you want for fear of rejection, and if not rejection, fear of coerced compliance for want to not hurt your feelings (expecting people to have the same reactions you've described here).

All stemming from your choice to try and not decline requests.

And what gains does this approach have?
Is what you're getting out of it worth the borrowed upset?

[who-is-she.livejournal.com]

well, maybe you need some friends to help you practice them.

After all, if you HAVE policies... you owe it to yourself
and your loved ones to adhere to them.....
others WILL respect you for it, you know.

and, if you have policies but dont adhere to them,
generally ( I speak from experience) it will be confusing to
ohters.. and end up causing you grief in the long run.

A good thing for you to honestly consider.
You seem very able to honestly consider.....so, what is it
that prevents you from adhering?
what do you think would happen if you said "no" to
a request?

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

Perfectly right. And a very interesting exercise in reviewing that negotiation from a months-later perspective and only now gaining the behind the scenes detailed boundary mapping.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

an assertive introduction method, mustering the moxie to offer to introduce myself with a kiss.

Hmmm... true. If I'd been nearby, I would have winced, averted my gaze, and probably avoided making eye contact with either of you for the remainder of the evening.

I don't believe that we spent any attention on communicating what the boundary/headspace/preference/environmental background was

Without communications, then... how would you have known to not take it as a personal reflection?

And then there's the receptivity-gauge... a woman that was OK with that assertive introduction method would conversely probably miss out on me altogether, as I'd figure that anyone whose boundaries were that permissive probably wouldn't work out as a friend or relationship prospect. And then I'd stay at a distance from her...

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

I don't believe that we spent any attention on communicating what the boundary/headspace/preference/environmental background was

Without communications, then... how would you have known to not take it as a personal reflection?

First off - I wouldn't describe this as a case of going without communication - just that it did get any active attention, and went without explicit verbal communication.

It was a casual request where I didn't have my self worth wrapped up in somebody else's response. Despite declining my request we continued to get along well and were enjoying one another's company, and did include an explicit invitation to continue in and around her personal space. So - the particular why's of declining the kiss weren't necessary to continuing our interaction, nor were they a crippling blow to my ego.

I think that's the key right there - that I didn't let it hit me as an ego damaging affront. Because, obviously, for whatever reason, there is some part of any reaction to me that is a personal reflection on me.

And then there's the receptivity-gauge... a woman that was OK with that assertive introduction method would conversely probably miss out on me altogether, as I'd figure that anyone whose boundaries were that permissive probably wouldn't work out as a friend or relationship prospect. And then I'd stay at a distance from her...</cite And that too I find to be an interesting projection - since I have seen similar levels of permissive boundaries at one time or another in most of our common lj friends. I point this out because it seems that there must be some genuine friends of yours in that list. So in at least some cases (most of the ones I've seen) your suspicion that it "probably wouldn't work out" appears incorrect. Maybe that premise needs reworked? Perhaps an opportunity to note that the motto "embrace the power of AND!" applies quite broadly, and could help decouple the notion that someone who appreciates my approach to socializing wouldn't automatically be a bad match for yours?

on formatting

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

okay, so bold&italic vs just italic is not the way to distinguish nested comments in lj replies. Guess it will be colors instead in future.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't describe this as a case of going without communication

But it sounds like you and who_is_she didn't communicate beforehand about boundaries, nor did she explain her comfort levels afterward (until her LJ comment). You, Dawn, and she all seem to advocate *asking* more often, and defining boundaries explicitly -- but this sounds like an example where boundaries were never actually discussed, before or afterward. And without that knowledge, how could you know for certain that it wasn't a personal rejection?

I didn't let it hit me as an ego damaging affront
That's great... I don't see how it works, but it is good that you can dodge the impacts yourself.

your suspicion that it "probably wouldn't work out" appears incorrect.

Perhaps... but I haven't ever seen that level of permissiveness with strangers evident in our common friends, myself. Maybe they have their own Jekyll/Hyde transformations, and I only get to see them when they're being well-behaved (chuckle). So there's been nothing in my experience to contradict that suspicion, at least not thus far.

decouple the notion that someone who appreciates my approach to socializing wouldn't automatically be a bad match for yours?

If I tried your approach, I'd expect a woman to freak-out or slap me ;-). If she doesn't do so, then I conclude that she must not have well-defined personal boundaries, or else she already knows the person trying to kiss her.

Some personal context, here: I've kissed far less than 20 people, lifetime, including relatives. Including simple pecks.

So kissing is proportionately a big deal for me. The people who I've kissed thus far have generally had (or acquired) ongoing ties or commitments to me of some sort... so to me, introducing oneself with a kiss is similar to saying, "Hi, I'm Brian, and can I be your life-partner?" ... and actually meaning it. Or I'd regard it as certainly equivalent to "wanna-f&^k" as an introductory line...

Given that, anyone who is comfortable with kisses-on-introduction is going to give/receive wildly-confused signals to/from me... anything's possible, but it would require patience, lots of communication, and probably patches of drama before I could work out a mutual understanding with someone that was comfortable with your socializing style.

[karenbynight.livejournal.com]

You, Dawn, and she all seem to advocate *asking* more often, and defining boundaries explicitly -- but this sounds like an example where boundaries were never actually discussed, before or afterward. And without that knowledge, how could you know for certain that it wasn't a personal rejection?

First of all, the boundary was discussed; from the sounds of it, it was negotiated quite well. It's just the reasons behind it that weren't discussed.

In any case, you don't. But if nothing else, Brian, you act like a scientist or engineer and figure the odds. :-) Someone's possible reasons for not being interested in a specific social interaction are myriad: headache; bad day leading to feeling anti-social; feeling disconnected, over-stimulated, tired, or lazy; the body part in question itches :-) ; they had a bad experience with that kind of social interaction just yesterday and are still trying to figure out what went wrong; personal policy; they missed the cue or were distracted.

The reasons that don't reduce to "they just don't like me" are both more numerous and much more likely than those that do.

Not to put to fine a point on it, but assuming that you are being personally rejected in most social interactions that don't go the way you'd hoped is exactly as arrogant as assuming that everybody wants you.

If I tried your approach, I'd expect a woman to freak-out or slap me ;-). If she doesn't do so, then I conclude that she must not have well-defined personal boundaries, or else she already knows the person trying to kiss her.

Are all boundaries that don't match yours not "well-defined", or just this one? I hug complete strangers who ask me for hugs; if you don't, does that mean that the boundary I've just explicitly stated is not well-defined?

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

from the sounds of it, it was negotiated quite well. It's just the reasons behind it that weren't discussed.

Agreed, it sounds like there clearly was a negotiation. I was more concerned with the before-and-after parts, and how one wouldn't take it personally absent a discussion afterwards.

[list of possible reasons for not interacting in some context]
Maybe it reflects *my* lack of boundaries (smile), but in all of those (except missing the cue/distraction, which I can't help) I will force myself to interact, rather than risk having the other person feel that I'm snubbing them. I'll put on a brave face and try to struggle through, even if I feel uncomfortable or physically ill.

is exactly as arrogant as assuming that everybody wants you
Negatively-arrogant? I can't imagine assuming that everybody wants me (yeah, right! LOL), but the converse seems reasonable.

all boundaries that don't match yours not "well-defined", or just this one?

Bad choice of terms on my part. If someone is open to initial kissing by strangers, then from my viewpoint potentially-anything-goes with that person, and it is hard to guess appropriate behavior around them. Public handshakes or A-frame hugs are socially supported in the mainstream, and so are reasonably-safe defaults.

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

[First paragraph cite cut for length]

I don't believe that I even could quantify all of the subtle interactive markers that go into my building a rapport with someone. I don't take active explicit note of each. And even if I could enumerate a significant number of them - it would take volumes to describe their situation meanings, how those are derived, and what information from comes from their interaction. Likewise, I also couldn't likely quantify each of the interactive markers that gets negotiated in an introduction to a new person.

Some that come immediately to mind though include how far each of our person-space boundaries extend and their mutual management. Appropriate frequency and intensity of eye contact. Comfort around hand waving gestures. Tone and volume of voice. Choices in diction. Appropriate topics of conversation. These are things are generally not formally negotiated. I'll even go so far as to include a hot-button item in this list and suggest that some physical touch fall here. What portion of the time do you explicitly ask to define boundaries about salutary handshaking? Or following up about comfort levels afterward?

So, sometimes, some people do (prefer to) formally explicitly cover these points. Similarly, while for many folks there are interactions that are generally formally and explicitly negotiated, there are times places and people for whom they are not.

The advocacy to ask more questions and to carefully define boundaries I think is best applied to circumstances where one is not comfortable with their confidence level for a given set of interpreted boundary markers.

In this circumstance, through our interaction up to that point, and our mutual observation of one another's interaction with others, we each had some confidence in our relative comfort with one another. There was a point that was sufficiently uncertain that I both felt it appropriate to ask and not offensive to ask. We checked and went from there. This is not particularly different than that social dance around establishing salutary hug bounds with a new person.

And without that knowledge, how could you know for certain that it wasn't a personal rejection?

It's something that I take as an article of faith.

Without checking in, do you take it as a personal rejection when you ring someone's phone and it goes to voicemail? Why or not? When and how might that vary?

Do you find it necessary to explicitly check back and let people know that you weren't snubbing them when you find that you missed their call? Or is continued interaction sufficiently implicit?

Given that, anyone who is comfortable with kisses-on-introduction is going to give/receive wildly-confused signals to/from me... anything's possible, but it would require patience, lots of communication, and probably patches of drama before I could work out a mutual understanding with someone that was comfortable with your socializing style.

I think you're thinking in immutable absolutes again. Is it not possible, or even likely that someone who is sometimes, with some people comfortably permissive to a level you aren't in other situations perfectly content, more compatible with and even desirous of yours?

Different times, places, people, attitudes, alignment of the planets, day of the week, or health of the family pet each may play a part in how one sets their boundaries with any given other person, and needn't imply consistency of placement from person to person, or even moment to moment.

And again, I submit that there are people with whom you appear to have ongoing social relationships with, that you seem to consider among your friends that also sometimes have this other level of boundary comfort that you hold up as incompatible.

Even if you haven't been witness to the particular moments, take for a moment it as given - does this information actually change the previous interactions that you've had with these people? Do you think less of your relationship with each of your friends as you consider if they too might be one of those people? What about if you were witness to such an interaction.

[princeofwands.livejournal.com]

And lastly,

it would require patience, lots of communication, and probably patches of drama

What relationships don't?