@jo7iah: Made this quick quick. #FYP #Relationships #Intentions #Respect

EpiphanySystemof17 :

So im sure theres niche situations once in a while where what youre saying here appljes, but in a general sense this really sounds like weaponizing therapy talk. Firstly, emotional co-regulation in a relationship is healthy and normal, and is a BIG part of bonding (which is why it feels uncomfortable for avoidant types). So like with your first example, pushing your partner to open up, you say the intention is framed as good but isnt actually as good as it seems because youre making your partner feel unsafe and just soothing your own insecurities. But the reality of the matter is that in most cases those insecurities arose in the first place from the lack of opening up, and the partner refusing to open up is causing issues in the relationship that the "pusher" is attempting to address. It is normal and healthy to be uncomfortable with these kinds of conversations, and the co-regulation of that discomfort is what leads to healthy bonding. Without discomfort there is no growth, and not all discomfort is a bad thing.

Seeker’s Life :

“Intentions” is the absolute keyword here in this entire conversation, because that is often based on self-assumed and self-fulfilling engagement. The concept of good intentions being insufficient in relationships definitely applies when it comes to situations involving perception and suggestion of truth that may or may not be true because the experience is entirely subjective and the approach to conflict resolution or relational disagreement is personal. But when it comes to fundamentally-objective, factually-based, situationally-focused situations that are definitively true based on conclusive and evidential facts, the concept of good intentions (on these bases) that identify inconsistencies, challenge notions, and encourage productivity being insufficient absolutely does not apply. This is what the core difference is that people must understand and why it is always better to tether ourselves to concrete facts with evidence and not just idealistic impressions without examination. Facts beat out feelings, regardless of attachment style. Either style would probably like to diminish facts to express their feelings as paramount. But through situational awareness reliant on facts, accountability is demanded and does not allow for flipping the script to avoid it. And in the case of seeking validation and approval among others when accountability to facts is avoided by those who are currently around, that is not a flaw. That is a virtue. It is entirely based on a commitment to connecting with those who embrace honorable values as opposed to those who embrace obscuring the truth as something valuable.

lambswing2 :

I believe I understand what you're saying, especially reading the comments and reading your responses to the comments. However, the language you use, especially the beginning of your video, It's almost like you are accusing the person who has had their boundaries stepped on as now being the "aggressor".You said, pressuring your partner? That's, in my opinion, intense. I'm not saying that the recipient of the conversation doesn't feel pressured. But that doesn't mean objectively that the person trying to have the conversation with their partner was pressuring them. This is not said to invalidate feelings, If they feel pressured genuinely, but as some people stated in the comments there are avoidant people. And I'll throw in narcissistic people who weaponize those statements. Oh, I feel pressured. You're pressuring me to do X. When in objective reality, the person that that person has at some points violated is just trying to understand what happened. And it doesn't mean that they're deregulated, confusion doesn't mean deregulation, upset doesn't mean deregulation to that extent. Sometimes it could mean genuinely, hey, this is something i'm concerned about. I have boundaries and i'm now communicating that to you. and you won't know, unless I communicate it. That's where your message gets confusing for me. it does seem like you're accusing the individual that's trying to have a conversation with this potentially avoidant and or narcissistic person of being problematic because they're not, by your standard, internally regulating. you stated that that person is trying to project on their partner,That they are struggling. I'd say thats just not the case. I think especially if you're trying to participate in a healthy dynamic, you're trying to communicate that 'you' are the one that's struggling. the expectation is that your partner has basic consideration and respect for you. And cares about how you feel. So it affect would have that conversation with you. Not solely on your terms. but something agreed upon by both of you. But if that person is consistently avoiding having a conversation then it's functionally manifested into disrespect.

Liz :

I have had a debate with a partner if a “good deed” is always a good deed despite how the recipient receives it or feels about it. I think impact matters but he thinks only intent matters.

sawtoothwave :

If you such deep understanding of the human psyche, you should know when to step back, or not engage at all before what you are describing happens. This is in my view a very eloquent way of saying: I’m not taking any responsibility for my actions.

C :

When someone else’s happiness is your happiness that is love. That’s the quote I go by

forgetmenots :

exactly, if you arent an avoidant and you start to develop care towards one, as long as you balance the care you give to them with the care you give to yourself it can work, it depends on your own needs and wants out of it- if you own needs and wants arent something the avoidant is capable of/ willing to meet then it will just fizzle out, it would require a level of overcompensation for it to continue

Duttyfoote :

Omg this was too true to my lived experience

olivi-uuuuhhhh :

gagged me with this one 😳 but like, ty!

peace :

Boy I've been following you for a while and every time you describe me. 😭. You've really helped me to heal Thank you so much.

ToyotaRolla90 :

People wonder why I distance myself and this is why‼️💯🎯🗣👏🏾

OneKay :

It’s wild how I realized this last night and saw this video today. Completely true.

thespiritanalyst :

I’d love a video on how you personally get triggered and how that looks like. 🥰✨

Jay :

Now I call this emotional intelligence👏

_phoenix_ :

blknmz :

Wonderfully articulated

Philip :

deep 🤔.

heavenshotel_ :

oh you explained them so well.

derekaw :

I was doing this, I knew I was the anxious person but I did not see how far that went. Working on this has helped my relationship. I am no longer looking for emotional regulation from them.

FRIENDS OF KITO :

The truth I never thought I needed

Annabell_Iron :

Also this guys videos are helping me manage in a situation I probably should leave. I like how he explains different approaches but does not frame them as wrong or right necessarily

mendi :

I needed this

artichokedeb :

I mostly agree with your insights, but I think you’re lacking a little bit of middle ground. There are situations in which is OK to express neglect, and that doesn’t mean you can’t regulate yourself internally. Of course, if the neglect becomes a pattern your work is to leave, but it seems like you erode all emotional accountability sometimes from the second party. There are gray areas to these stories, but I get the conflict and always appreciate your raw pov.