Intimacy and its Discontents

Freedom and love are inseparable. We long for love to liberate us, yet we use it to hide. It has the power to reveal but also to deceive, to awaken but also to lull us into comfort. It can make us feel seen, yet just as easily cloud our vision. Rather than sharpening, it can soften, distorting what is real until we mistake illusion for transformation. Love fractures most painfully when it is built on lack—when it is not rooted in reality but in the desperate attempt to fill an absence. To love freely is not to bind another to our needs, nor to seek shelter in their presence, but to hold them fully in the weight of their being, without distortion or possession. As Simone Weil writes, “To love purely is to consent to distance; it is to adore the distance between ourselves and that which we love” (p.115)

And yet, no matter how much love there is, eventually, it will break. Everything, even love, must come to an end. And here, too, we resist. We stretch its dying form, trying to preserve it beyond its life, as if suffering through its demise would give it meaning. We fear the finality of loss, so we numb ourselves—with distractions, compromise, work, spiritual or tangible substances—anything to avoid the truth that not everything is meant to last. But a love that ends is just as real as one that endures. The truest devotion is not in clinging, but in allowing it to be what it is and then letting go when the time comes.

To love freely is not to hold on but to hold fully—to meet another without distortion, without projection, without using them as a shield against our own fears. And yet, we betray ourselves daily. We say we want love, but when it comes, we run. We crave closeness, yet fear the unknown that comes with it. We teeter on the brink of desire, only to reverse course, retreating into what is familiar, what is allowed, what is safe. Mistaking capitulation for love, we comfort ourselves with illusions of certainty.

For love to be free, it requires vulnerable courage—the willingness not just to want, but to will. Wanting is passive; willing demands clarity. To will properly, we must first remove illusion—to see where we have traded autonomy for comfort, where we have accepted invisible chains in exchange for safety. The force that oppresses us is not always external. It is thought’s hegemony, the silent shaping of our needs and ambitions, the gentle hand of a world that rewards conformity and calls it wisdom.

The struggle for freedom is not against fate, but against blindness. Not against limits, but against the fear that causes us to accept them too easily. The path to self-determination is not about acquiring more, achieving more, or securing more, but about seeing—cutting away what is false and unnecessary. It is a descent, not an ascent—a stripping away, a surrender to what is raw, real, and essential.

We are born, as Weil says, “wrong side upward” (p.81). To reestablish order, we must undo what is unnatural in us—the illusions, the false selves, the need to possess rather than to see. Only then can what is higher in us rise.

And in that process of undoing, something shifts. We see that the freedom to love was never something to be earned; it had always been there, hidden in plain sight, waiting for us to summon the courage to claim it. The will to love, too, was never something to be won—it had always been freely given. In stepping into the invisible, we reveal what has been visible all along. Freedom, love, and will are not things to attain but truths to recognize, already alive in the space between what we cling to and what we are willing to let go.

References:

Weil, S. (1997). Gravity and grace (A. Wills, Trans.; G. Thibon, Intro.; T. R. Nevin, Ed.). University of Nebraska Press. (Original work published 1947)

Turning Heartbreak into Healing: Aristotle's Wisdom in Couple Therapy

"Love is the measure of faith" - Pope Francis

When it comes to love and relationships, Aristotle's timeless wisdom is relevant today, particularly in the context of couples therapy. Aristotle thought that true love and friendship are founded on "reciprocated goodwill." But it's not enough to simply treat each other kindly; the source of that kindness is equally important. According to Aristotle, the deepest, most meaningful relationships are those in which both partners sincerely love each other for who they are, rather than what they can gain from the connection. His argument was that this type of affection can only exist between individuals who are similar in morality and genuinely want the best for one another.

These concepts are extremely important in marital therapy. A lot of couples seek therapy when they experience feelings of disconnection, hurt, or frustration. They may believe that the love they once had has vanished, or that their relationship has become more about convenience or habit than genuine connection. The wisdom of Aristotle may open couples to the fact that there is a strong correlation between the nature of love they share and the depth of that love.

We might say that the psychological distress that troubled couples experience is the result of investing energy into a relationship that may lack meaning and depth. These are the disappointments that result from relationships in which love is conditional, totally reliant on what each individual can provide rather than a deep, mutual respect for each other's genuine selves.

Helping couples transform these "worthless tragedies" into "worthwhile tragedies" is one way therapy can facilitate healing. In this case, a good tragedy is the emotional pain that comes from loving and committing to each other deeply, even though their lives continue to pose challenges. It's the pain of working through differences, growing together, and facing life's challenges together—knowing that the bond you share is real and lasting.

In therapy, couples might examine if their love is based on goodness and mutual kindness or on superficial elements. This exploration has the potential to be life-changing. When couples begin to focus on fully understanding and loving each other for who they are, shifting their attention from what they can get to what they can give, their relationship can transform from fragile to resilient.

Relationships aren't immune to heartbreak; problems in life are inevitable. Still, couples can make the most of the challenges they encounter as a unit by cultivating a love rooted in Aristotle's principles of honesty and true generosity. These "worthwhile tragedies" are the challenges that, in the end, enrich a relationship, enhancing the bond between partners and allowing them to grow both individually and together.

Couple therapy is more than just problem solving; it is also about guiding couples to build a relationship that is strong enough to withstand life's storms. Relationships can become more meaningful and resilient by learning and using Aristotle's advice. The inevitable heartaches and hardships of life can then be transformed into opportunities for growth, bringing depth to the love they share.

Couples who focus on developing a relationship based on mutual respect, virtue, and genuine kindness can transform life's unavoidable difficulties into times of profound connection and understanding. Finally, these worthwhile tragedies make love beautiful and enduring.

To Date or Not to Date?

I recently wrote a piece for Psychology Today on dating during COVID-19. I provided four questions to ask yourself to figure out your boundaries around dating during a global pandemic—starting with the question of whether or not you should be dating at all. 

While many outlets are trying to untangle guidelines around safely getting to know new people—from video dates to socially distanced meetings—it’s important to start with this question. Dating during a pandemic can raise the stakes and make dating feel more intense. Just one reason is that many new partners are becoming monogamous immediately to lower risks of transmission. Some people may like the new focus and clarity. Simultaneously, negative outcomes like ghosting can feel more hurtful when we’re spending most of our time at home near our phones, unable to seek as much in-person support or distraction as we normally would. 

Whether or not you decide to date, it’s important to focus on grounding yourself and taking care of yourself on a daily basis. Grounding may look like meditation, yoga, journaling, or speaking with friends who make you feel supported and confident. Taking care of yourself means both focusing on physical care (getting enough sleep, exercising, eating healthily), and finding pleasure in whatever forms work for you (taking nature walks, watching horror movies, making art). With self-care as your primary goal, you’ll be more likely to handle whatever emotions come your way in dating or not-dating.

Image Source: Glen Anthony on Unsplash

Codependency: Who do You Think is in Control?

In my last two blogs, I spoke about the relationship between codependency and certain unrealistic patterns of thinking – or cognitive distortions. I defined “codependency” as a bond between someone addicted to a substance, or who engages in dysfunctional behaviors – whom I will call the taker -- and their counterpart, the codependent, who enables the taker’s dysfunctional or addictive behavior. 

To recap: last time I wrote about “blaming,” where both parties place blame for the dysfunctional behavior on someone other than the one who is really responsible for those behaviors. In many cases, the person blamed by both people is the codependent, rather than the taker who is taking the actions. In this blog, we’ll look at another cognitive distortion -- a “cousin” of blaming: The Control Fallacy.

There are two sides to the control fallacy: the External Control Fallacy and the Internal Control Fallacy.

The external control fallacy operates when either party believes their problematic behaviors are caused entirely by external forces beyond their control. They think they are a victim of happenstance or of someone else’s actions and that they have no agency over the matter. They thus excuse their own negative behaviors – take no responsibility for them – and rationalize continuing to act in a way that would require a lot of effort to stop. 

The addict or taker who is perpetually late for work might hold the subway system accountable. “It’s not my fault I’m late. The trains are terrible!”. If they are reprimanded by their boss for doing a bad job on a project, they might shirk responsibility by claiming: “I can’t help it if the quality of the work is poor; my boss demanded I work overtime on it!” This unrealistic pattern of thinking, or cognitive distortion, is the addict’s or taker’s way of enabling themselves to continue the behavior. 

The codependent can also fall prey to the external control fallacy, which can lead to their own kind of enabling behaviors. For example, when the codependent co-opts their counterpart’s unrealistic external control fallacy -- that the dysfunctional behavior is due to an outside force – the codependent also excuses the behavior and promotes its continuation. “I need to keep paying his student loan bills. It’s not his fault he spends so much on clothing. He has to look professional for his job!”    

You also see the internal control fallacy in the codependent when they mistakenly think they somehow control and are responsible for the feelings of their counterpart. That belief very often will extend to practically everyone the codependent deals with. They think that the happiness, pain, displeasure, etc. of others exists because of something they are doing. “You’re unhappy. I must have done something to upset you!” If they are giving a party they might believe they are responsible for their guests’ enjoyment or even boredom at the event. “If I had only put up more decorations, people would have had a better time.” When taken to the extreme, the codependent feels that their way of being or even their existence has the power to “make” someone feel or act the way they do.

If you relate to these thoughts and thought patterns, psychotherapy with a mindfulness approach might be really helpful. Psychotherapy can help you examine your thoughts and behaviors, and look at where they might have actually served you in the past. With your therapist, you can identify distorted or mistaken beliefs and ways of thinking that currently lead to unhealthy behaviors with negative consequences.

With the help of exercises designed to promote mindfulness, you can become more aware of your current reality and learn to tolerate it by practicing staying in the present moment. You can then begin to develop acceptance of what actually is. You will have the tools to replace the distorted thought patterns you have identified with and start to create more realistic and functional ones. You can then find your way to more healthy relationships – with others…and yourself! Stay tuned for my next blog where we’ll look at the cognitive distortion of the Fallacy of Change. Until then!

Codependency: How Are You Thinking?

I work with several clients who say they are codependent or in a codependent relationship. Codependency is defined in a variety of ways by different experts, and plays out differently for different people. Many speak of codependency in close relationships between someone addicted to a substance or behavior and their counterpart (the codependent) who “enables” their addictive behavior. However, a parallel dynamic can also operate in relationships between a codependent person, "the giver" and a non-substance-abusing partner, "the taker", who might possess such qualities as neediness, immaturity, or entitlement or be under-functioning or emotionally troubled.

The codependent, sometimes labeled the giver might try to fix their counterpart, care-take them, compensate for their irresponsible behaviors, protect them from the negative consequences of their actions, etc. These acts of  “caring”, often involve making extreme sacrifices for the taker. The codependent enables their partner, rather than allow them to learn to take responsibility for themselves. The codependent’s sense of self: their mood, self-esteem, feelings of well-being, and subsequently their actions, are often contingent on the taker’s current emotional state, words, or behaviors. The codependent believes that their brand of loving and caring is a good thing, even though others can see how unhealthy it is for both parties. 

What’s going on for the codependent that keeps them in this dysfunctional pattern? Here are some ideas to consider:

What they are thinking: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, or CBT, is based on the premise that our thoughts, or cognitions, determine our feelings and behaviors. CBT posits that we all possess, and repeat to ourselves, a default set of automatic thoughts, which can cause problems for us when they are not appropriate to the situation at hand. CBT identifies irrational or exaggerated patterns of thinking – or cognitive distortions. These are not the thoughts themselves, but ways of thinking that that cause people to perceive reality inaccurately. There are at least three cognitive distortions common in codependent relationships:

1. Blaming

2. Control Fallacy  

3. Fallacy of Change

I’ll explain these distortions in depth in subsequent blogs, but here’s an overview to get you thinking:

1. Blaming: When people engage in Blaming, they either blame the other person for their emotional distress and any subsequent actions, or they blame themselves for their partner’s dysfunctional behavior and emotional upset.

2. Control Fallacy: There are two sides to the Control Fallacy:

   A. External Control Fallacy operates when either party believes their problematic behaviors are caused entirely by external forces beyond their control. 

   B. Internal Control Fallacy, is when a codependent might think they are responsible for and can even control their partner’s negative feelings.

   3. Fallacy of Change: A codependent who believes in the Fallacy of Change thinks they are able to change their partner to be who they want them to be and act how they want them to act if they just figure out how to do it. They employ all sorts of indirect and aggressive strategies to change their partner and because their attempts are based on a fallacy, they fail.

In Summary, if you can relate to any of these thought patterns -- if you see codependency in your relationship with someone --  know that this can be a painful situation and at times can feel beyond repair. The good news is that it is not a done deal. You can start by slowing down and increasing awareness of the dynamic you’re entangled in. An example of a practice that helps to increase awareness of your thoughts is mindfulness.

Mindfulness practice and psychotherapy combined can be a way to get in touch with difficult, uncomfortable feelings and make space to accept things as they are rather than viewing reality with a skewed perspective of what’s going on. t’s important to first understand and become more aware of our problematic thought patterns. Once aware, we have the potential to correct those thought patterns, so that feelings and behaviors can change. When one partner’s behaviors change, the other partner can’t help but adjust, and the potential for a new kind of relationship is born.

Stay tuned for my next blog where we’ll take a closer look at Blaming. Until then!