The talk on HDs thread got me thinking about fusion and differentiation. I've got a bunch of ideas bumping around in my head and thought I would dump them out here rather than lock up HDs thread. Please feel free to comment or even better add some your own thoughts.
There seems to be a general feeling of differentiation as being the opposite fusion I'm not sure that this is exactly true. In my mind " fusion " is being stuck at a particular stage of development. Previous to a child individuating from it's mother their state is not on of fusion it's something else I'll call it Immersion.
This Immersion is a natural stage in a relationship an inability to transcend this stage would be fusion. There is nothing wrong with Immersion its just a stage.
I think much in the same way when we first couple we can enter a state that some people call limerence. This would be an adult Immersion in another. This is probably just a stage of development of that relationship and only turns into fusion when the individualization of the two individuals doesn't take place.
This may also take place in parent & child relationships and can see it only as far as from the POV of a child of my parents. I have no children as of yet.
I believe that fusion is disfunction in the relm of Immersion or in the communion of a relationship. Of being stuck at that stage of development not that that stage is unhealthy.
I know that individualization can unhealthy manifestations as well but am unsure of what to label them but I think that alienation would come first. A difficulty in connecting with others or other. I need to think about this a bit more in particular as I think this is where I have the most personal work to do.
I think that there are three stages (at least) Immersion, individualization and something else that I don't have a name for but is much like how I want to see differentiation and how I had interpreted it in my mind.
This third stage is not solely emerson and individualization but includes them both in healthy ways. This would enabling one to access to both. One could experiences the emerson into communion and the (awareness or consciousness?) of being an individual in healthy ways.
Imagine two small circles labeled "emerson / communion" and another labeled "individualization / agency" surrounded by a larger circle. This would be how I would make a visual representation of it.
A development would travel from emerson, individualization to this third stage along the way there will be problems and points where one will get stuck. I don't think you can skip from Emerson to this third stage without going through individualization.
This third stage very well may be differentiation I'm not really sure. The more I try to pin it down in my mind it seems as though there needs to be a some kind of differentiation within differentiation as to where individualization fits in. I probably should reread Passionate Marriage as I'm sure it's in there.
My main thought is maybe it's the individualization that feels cold as the positive aspects of emerson have not been integrated yet.
Shoot. More spellin problems. Immersion not emerson.
If I could fix the post but this set I would fix it up. This set up seems not to have that feature. You'll just have to bear with my handicap and I'll just have to hope my ideas still can get across. I really do think I would be better off posting pictures sometimes.
Glad to see you started a new thread. I was typing this one but didn’t want to clutter HD’s either since it will lock up soon.
OK, in response to some other comments on differentiation feeling cold, here is why I think it can be, at least to me. When I think of compassion, empathy, sympathy, I think of a two way street, one where I give those things but I also EXPECT to receive. Giving is altruistic and out of concern for the other, but the getting is always somewhere in the back of my mind, and I think in the back of everyone’s mind.
Take lil for example (not meaning to pick on you lil). She has given and given, tried to see her bf in a positive light, understand his pain, empathize with him, yet she receives very little back. That one way flow is souring the relationship and could eventually doom it (I assume). Altruism is a requirement for an R, but so is the knowledge that you will ALSO receive. So IMO, this kind of selfishness is very much a part of the equation. You have to watch out for yourself.
Now that says to me that my feelings are very important in maintaining the connection in the R. I cannot maintain a relationship without feeling this connection. I need to know that my partner is not only reception to receiving my altruism, but that she is also ready to give me her altruism, for my own selfish needs. I want to feel that I have some degree of connection and influence over her, that I can call up her altruism if I need it, as a security blanket of sorts, and I want to know that she will come to me to provide a security blanket for her. It comforts me to know that she has a need for me and that I can provide for that need (a la Dieda).
One way to explain why I think this is important to me is to take the extreme opposite as example. Say my W is a cyborg (only theoretically speaking, ignoring any real life similarities, LOL!). Like a computer, her actions are all intellectual and determined strictly by decision. She gives me empathy and stays with me because she so chooses. No other reason than that, which is exactly the goal of differentiation, right? You do what you want because you choose to, not because you have to, are obligated to, are shamed to, etc.
But with my past, I have been conditioned to learn that the decision of today will not be the decision of tomorrow. My mother would be all sweet and kind one day, doing things for me, showing concern, and then the next day she could be ticked off over something, go into a rage, then decide to cut off whatever support she had offered earlier. Her decision, though emotionally fueled, was still a decision. She could choose to turn on or off support on a whim, and so any relationship with her purely out of choice was dangerous. Although I allowed myself to make an emotional connection with her, she did not respect the sanctity of that connection and used it as a weapon against me.
Ironically the one thing that did hold us together was the emotional bond, the same thing that drove her to take such crazy actions/reactions in the first place. The tie of the emotional connection is what kept us coming back together even when the relationship had been severed. The emotional tug or the fusion was the one thing I COULD count on, even though the timing of when we reconciled was uncertain. Fusion brought a level of certainty.
So in a relationship now, the absence of this emotional bond feels unsafe. I do not trust the free will of the other person to always choose to be with me, especially my W. She has used the emotional connection as a weapon, just as my mother did. But I know there is an emotional tug, a certain amount of fusion that will endure through many arguments before it weakens beyond repair. I can count on that fusion to hold the relationship together to a certain degree, barring a more “healthy” arrangement.
Maybe someday we will be more developed to where there is no fusion and we are both comfortable knowing that we both stay in the M out of choice and that choice will remain in place well into the future, thereby giving certainty to overcome fears of abandonment. But as I have stated before, I doubt I will ever get there and I have NEVER seen anyone who is really differentiated. I think everyone has an emotional connection that strongly influences and usually overrides our choice to stay or go. Only until that emotional connection has wither and died will the decision to leave a bad R rise to the top and turn into action. I’ve never seen anyone do this in any other way.
There seems to be a general feeling of differentiation as being the opposite fusion I'm not sure that this is exactly true.
Martelo,
Actually I think that differentiation IS the opposite of fusion/enmeshment. Just not in the obvious way.
The opposite of BEING fused is not simply to separate yourself from the person you are "fused" with. That artificial separation is simply the other side of the coin called "fusion/enmeshment."
If you are differentiated, then you don't NEED to create artificial separations to maintain your sense of self. Differentiation allows you to get very close to people without losing who you are.
So fusion/enmeshment to me is not knowing yourself and not knowing how to have self worth based on your own self knowledge so that you REQUIRE others to "make" you feel good about yourself. Differentiation to me is knowing yourself and knowing how to have self worth based on your own self knowledge so you DON'T REQUIRE others to "make" you feel good about yourself. (For me, it is a corollary that a differentiated person will CHOOSE to surround themselves with others that are good for them and that genuinely like and respect them. The difference is that they do it because they desire it and not because they NEED it.)
See how with my definition and understanding I can see fusion and differentiation as direct opposites?
Burgbud said on Hdog's thread something to the effect of compassion and differentiation being mutually exclusive to each other?? at least that how I thought it read.
It bothered me a bit because from what I know I think the MORE differentiated you are, the MORE compassionate you can really be. To me a fused/enmeshed person cannot really be compassionate.
A BIG first step in being able to be truly compassionate is to be compassionate to YOURSELF. If you cannot show compassion to yourself, then how do you show it to others?? How can you show compassion towards yourself? The process of differentiation is about really KNOWING yourself. When you know who you are and respect yourself and care for yourself, then you know that, even when you do make mistakes as we ALL do, you ARE still a worthy person. So you can have compassion for your mistakes because you understand that they are MISTAKES and not a reflection of yourself as a BAD person.
This idea to me ties into the idea of shame issues. My XH had serious shame issues and fusion issues that neither of us understood until well after he left me. I posted some info about Shame a few months ago and can link to that thread if you are interested.
Lil has posted this list from her therapist a few times but I think it bears reposting routinely. Thanks again Lil because I think this is a great list and VERY helpful.
Poorly differentiated people:
Pressure others (important others) to accommodate them regardless of that it costs. “If you love me, you will_______! I can’t survive if you don’t do what I want you to. I can’t survive if I do what YOU want.”
Give in (sell out) because of fear of rejection.
Have to leave relationships emotionally or physically in order to resist the pressure to conform (give up themselves).
Accuse others of trying to control them when others resist being controlled.
Monitor how much they disclose about themselves so as to please others or avoid conflict.
Have families where it’s true that “When Dad/Mom is unhappy, ain’t NOBODY happy!”
Have chronic anxiety that is easily stirred up and difficult to calm down.
Take things personally, are on the defensive much of the time. Are easily “hurt” by others, feel “guilty” for having their own needs, feelings, interests, or opinions that are not shared by their important other(S).
Feel responsible for others’ lives and happiness, and for solving their problems.
Feel rejected when important others disagree with them.
Need to control someone else’s behavior or feelings in order for them to manage themselves. In other words, they need someone to do X before they can do/feel Y.
Rely on external activities or substances that are often labeled “addictive” in order to manage their feelings.
The interesting thing about the qualities of good differentiation below is that you may very well react with surprise that it’s not only OKAY to be some of these ways, but it’s actually pretty healthy, for example not solving other people’s problems, or stay calm when a loved one is “losing it.” Well differentiated people:
Value their self-respect above all else. This is another way of saying they have integrity or that they live by their values.
Manage their own feelings, calm themselves, and then choose how they respond to others rather than reacting out of anxiety.
Confront themselves instead of blaming others for their own circumstances or consequences of their own choices.
Recognize that "it's not about me" when someone near and dear "loses it" or becomes anxious. They don't personalize others' behavior.
Validate themselves rather than rely on others to do it for them all the time.
Refuse to sell themselves out of betray their values in order to maintain a relationship.
Refuse to project their own conflicts onto their partners, and refuse to allow others to project theirs onto them. They fight their own battles within themselves where the fight belongs.
Know the difference between themselves and others: what is me and what is not me.
Take responsibility for themselves. They do not take responsibility for others’ choices or consequences.
Have their feelings rather than their feelings having them.
Have deeply connected relationships, since they can tolerate closeness without undue anxiety about fusing or distancing.
Support the emotional growth of others toward greater differentiation by their refusal to participate in fused behaviors.
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
Martelo is going to regret having both of us on his thread with our long posts
Your comments are interesting to me and I have some sincere questions about them so please bear with me because I am asking in order to understand and not to be contrary. (Okay a little contrary ) )
Giving is altruistic and out of concern for the other, but the getting is always somewhere in the back of my mind, and I think in the back of everyone’s mind.
This sentence confused me a bit. First you say giving is altruistic (selfless) but then you say it's not (selfish - getting is ALWAYS in the back of of the mind). So which is it for you - selfless or selfish? And do you believe that everyone thinks like you?
Then the statement that it is in the back of everyone's mind is not true for ME. I can't believe that I am the only one that feels that way either! NOW it's true that I get something out of giving. I get peace of mind that I am doing the right thing, that I am caring for someone, that I am acting true to the person I most want to be, etc. BUT I do NOT do things to get something in return from OTHERS.
It comforts me to know that she has a need for me and that I can provide for that need (a la Dieda).
How does that sentence have anything to do with Dieda?
Also you don't seem to be comforted by your wife's NEED to talk to you about her work issues. Her need is to talk to you and you could provide for that need by listening to her. Instead that need of hers irritates you and "makes" you resent her. I'm curious as to why you resent that need especially given the statement you just made above. Which needs of her do you like providing for?
There is some disconnect between your earlier comments about disliking your wife's need to complain AND your statement that you are comforted by being needed. I am just curious whether you see it as a disconnect.
But with my past, I have been conditioned to learn that the decision of today will not be the decision of tomorrow. My mother would be all sweet and kind one day, doing things for me, showing concern, and then the next day she could be ticked off over something, go into a rage, then decide to cut off whatever support she had offered earlier. Her decision, though emotionally fueled, was still a decision. She could choose to turn on or off support on a whim, and so any relationship with her purely out of choice was dangerous.
Do you believe that your mom really made a choice? Do you believe she was conscious enough of herself to be emotionally deciding to be in a rage? I just wonder if her actual "choice" was more about choosing not control herself. I don't remember reading much about her before so it's hard for me to know much from the little you wrote here.
Ironically the one thing that did hold us together was the emotional bond, the same thing that drove her to take such crazy actions/reactions in the first place. The tie of the emotional connection is what kept us coming back together even when the relationship had been severed. The emotional tug or the fusion was the one thing I COULD count on, even though the timing of when we reconciled was uncertain. Fusion brought a level of certainty.
This sounds so much like the stories of abuse I have heard of. One counselor I read wrote about a 7 year old girl in the hospital for having her fingers tips severely burned. The 7 year old could not stop screaming and crying for her mother and couldn't be consoled by any one else. Can you guess who it was that purposely burned her finger tips?
I have NEVER seen anyone who is really differentiated.
Interesting. I am and my best friends are all differentiated. Plenty of others that I know and have met have seemed pretty differentiated also. Now of course I can't say that we are perfectly differentiated but then again most fused people are "perfectly" fused. I'm talking about the overall general tendency of people. (To be clear, it is like calling someone smart. That doesn't mean that they NEVER do something stupid or make a mistake. It just means that overall they are smart. (However you want to define it - I.Q., common sense, etc.))
I can better understand how the idea of being fused (however unpleasantly, cruelly and potentially abusively) can seem so much better to you than the idea being differentiated. Your description about your mom and your relationship with her definitely seems like the framework for other relationships (especially with women). You don't seem to have an emotional foundation on which to believe and trust that women can be strong and nurturing and caring. That is something that no one deserves to have to grow up without and unfortunately I am learning (from the boards and from conversations with friends) that it is much more common that I have ever realized.
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
Take lil for example (not meaning to pick on you lil). She has given and given, tried to see her bf in a positive light, understand his pain, empathize with him, yet she receives very little back. That one way flow is souring the relationship and could eventually doom it (I assume).
I don't mind you using me as an example, but the situation is no longer this way. Since my bf has been going to this fabulous AA group, he has undergone tremendous changes. He no longer snaps at me or bites my head off. He has become so much kinder, the civility level has gone way up. He's really quite a joy to be around these days. He's growing and he knows it and feels it. We can spend a three-day weekend at my house and just really enjoy being together. And as I've come to see and accept things about myself that I really didn't want to, my discontent has basically melted away and I feel really happy. I'm making a point of NOT analyzing it a lot, but just enjoying each day, letting things unfold as they will. I know that he loves me and I feel that he loves me. And the relationship is not perfect but it's very very good.
But, to reiterate, I don't mind you using that example from the past.
Fearless I can see in the model you give how the two concepts are opposite and I agree with what you're saying.
I think mostly what I have a problem with is the idea that has been touched on already and that is that fusion and differentiation are absolutes. I think that the original idea of differentiation was that there is a scale of differentiation not an either or proposition. This may have been abandoned for something more like the list of you posted as it probably has allot more practical application than a scale.
It just seems to me that if you're not at the top or the bottom of the scale it's going to be allot more confusing if the map your working from only has two points.
First you say giving is altruistic (selfless) but then you say it's not (selfish - getting is ALWAYS in the back of of the mind). So which is it for you - selfless or selfish?
What I mean is that for ME to give freely, I need to have some element of altruism, at least on a conscious level. Subconsciously I think we ALL expect something back in return, whether that is see the happiness in the other person, feeling appreciated by the other, or simply expecting something in return. If the latter, then I agree with you that the giving was not purely altruistic.
And do you believe that everyone thinks like you?
Don’t know.
Then the statement that it is in the back of everyone's mind is not true for ME. I can't believe that I am the only one that feels that way either! NOW it's true that I get something out of giving. I get peace of mind that I am doing the right thing, that I am caring for someone, that I am acting true to the person I most want to be, etc. BUT I do NOT do things to get something in return from OTHERS.
I don’t believe this is even for you. Sure you might give in the short run without expecting return, but I’m willing to bet that even you will grow tired at some point of giving and giving and never getting anything in return. If what you say is true, why did you ever D?
How does that sentence have anything to do with Dieda?
Dieda says the man's purpose is to gain success in order to share those gifts with his woman, who in turn inspires him to succeed and provide more. It has everythingto do with Dieda.
Also you don't seem to be comforted by your wife's NEED to talk to you about her work issues. Her need is to talk to you and you could provide for that need by listening to her. Instead that need of hers irritates you and "makes" you resent her.
I think you take this a little to the extreme. She has lately been trying to talk to me more about her work, as her way of opening more communication. I listen to her and discuss things with her. But at some point I have enough. She on the other hand can and will talk for hours about something. It really is more like gossip than a true discussion of work issues. Work issues I can handle. Gossip is just gossip, and it is sometimes dangerous as well.
What I think I resent more is trying to listen to her to stay engaged in something I have little interest in to do my part in helping her to open communications between us. But what she talks about is really not about us. The real meaty stuff that I think should be shared between couples is not discussed. Sometimes I bring it up separately, but she rarely if ever does. So her conversations have an air of being forced or disingenuous.
I'm curious as to why you resent that need especially given the statement you just made above. Which needs of her do you like providing for?
Not talking about work. Part of the problem is that she does not know what her needs are. I have asked her what makes her happy, just as we have done on this board. After telling her to exclude dependence on other people (such as seeing the kids happy) she could not answer the question. She does not like gifts. She does not like PT. She does not like QT. She likes AOS, but things like me helping to clean house, rather than a more intimate or personal type of service. I think she likes WOA, which is where the talk comes in. I don’t think it is compliments in particular (which seems to make her uncomfortable), rather I think she likes knowing that she is included and accepted though WOA.
There is some disconnect between your earlier comments about disliking your wife's need to complain AND your statement that you are comforted by being needed. I am just curious whether you see it as a disconnect.
No. These are my needs. Where is the disconnect in that?
Do you believe that your mom really made a choice? Do you believe she was conscious enough of herself to be emotionally deciding to be in a rage? I just wonder if her actual "choice" was more about choosing not control herself. I don't remember reading much about her before so it's hard for me to know much from the little you wrote here.
My mother’s family is from Hiroshima. They lived close to downtown, and when the bomb dropped they lost everything. Fortunately everyone survived. She was about 10 at the time and had been evacuate to the country. She came back to town to try and find her family and had to search through the piles of destructions and dying bodies to find her parents. She recalls seeing the people with flesh burned off, calling for water. Needless to say she has just a little bit of trauma in her background.
Add to that a childhood raise by a nanny without the care she wanted from her mother and you have the recipe for all sorts of issues. I know now whether she had a choice or not. Back then I had no clue. All I knew is that she would get really ticked off and blow up. There were also problems with my dad and lots of fights between them. Could she have controlled herself more? Sure, but I don’t know how much better I nor anyone else could have coped with her history. All I know is that I had to deal with it.
This sounds so much like the stories of abuse I have heard of. One counselor I read wrote about a 7 year old girl in the hospital for having her fingers tips severely burned. The 7 year old could not stop screaming and crying for her mother and couldn't be consoled by any one else. Can you guess who it was that purposely burned her finger tips?
My mother would get frustrated when she was trying to teach us math, or when we three boys were fighting too much, but mostly she got angry with my dad. She was never physically abusive to us. She was also very protective of us.
Interesting. I am and my best friends are all differentiated.
I don’t know how to judge whether someone is differentiated or not. I also strongly suspect that some can be very differentiated in one situation and not in another. Also, this idea of differentiation does not apply very well to friendships. When I speak of differentiated people, I am speaking STRICTLY about LTR relationships, husbands and wives. When it comes to my friends, I could say that I am perfectly differentiated too.
) )