The selling of ideals for romantic love is a multibillion-dollar industry. While these ideals contain elements of authentic love, they largely consist of myths, social order politics, and certain either-or thinking patterns known to jam the brain and body?s communication network.
Why the paralyzing effect?
Simply put, they have attributes of belief systems known to jam the reflective thinking processes of the human brain with ? fear.
Only fear can paralyze the otherwise remarkable abilities of the human brain to reflectively think, learn, understand, empathize, thus, help partners form vibrant, mutually enriching couple relationships.
At best,?romanticized ideals, a phenomenon peculiar to the West, form a system of unrealistic expectations that lead single and married partners alike ? to look for love where it cannot be found.
The role of language and the ?power of the pen??
In romanticized love, this either-or thinking belief system tells men and women that they are from different planets, with different purposes, yearnings and emotions, and even worse, that their self-worth depends on how closely they conform to these standards.
It may seem as if persons or events around us cause the upsetting feelings we feel. Events are the triggers, however. Our response depends on our perceptions ? our core beliefs ??what we tell ourselves about events.
Beliefs are life shaping. Our?subconscious mind, the part that runs the body, depends on them to know how to ?interpret? events. More specific to romanticized ideals, it turns to our beliefs to determine what overall emotional state to activate in a given situation ? either?love or fear ? known as the brain?s ?learning? or ?protective? mode.
What we believe about an event tells our brain how to handle it, meaning whether to remain in a ?learning? mode (parasympathetic nervous system) or to activate the body?s ?protective? mode (sympathetic nervous system), also called the ?fight or flee? response.
In essence, for centuries philosophy, religion, and other political institutions have worked together, wittingly or unwittingly, to interpret physical differences between men and women into laws that legalized ideals for dominance, might makes right, survival of the fittest, and hierarchical values in general.
In a nutshell, no matter how you slice it, a value system that emphasizes hierarchy imposes a worldview in which human relationships are experienced from one of two places, either: a top-dog or an under-dog position.
With hierarchical values in mind, the power of the pen, and a careful use of language, have played powerful roles in crafting ?masculine? and ?feminine? ideals. In turn, we?ve been conditioned to use these either-or ?shoulds? and dichotomous labels to judge ourselves, our partner, and men and women in general, for example, as either:
- Rational or irrational
- Powerful or powerless
- Strong or weak
- Emotional or emotionally detached
- Dependent or independent
- Deserving or undeserving
- Perfect or flawed
- Loved or unloved
It?s limiting to assume the emotional states men and women ?should? express when, in truth, all of these attributes are normal states in human experience. These labels, however, effectively turn male and female relations into a competition for dominance, especially in the minds of men (who are warned that their ?worth? depends on this).
In the words of Charles Darwin,??It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.?
Examples of these either-or beliefs?
Either-or thinking patterns form of a view of life, self and partner, that is black-and-white. They are a ?should? way of thinking about what ?has to? happen ? or else. They are what we use to continuously judge (shame) ourselves (i.e., self-talk), or those around us, as either deserving or undeserving of love. They are also based on ?might makes right? ideals that form the basis for what constitutes?bullying behaviors, regardless whether those victimized are young or old, male or female, at home or work.
In the case of romanticized ideals, these beliefs:
- Emphasize obedience to authority and win-lose competitions.
- Define power in ?zero-sum? and ?power-over? terms.
- Associate the ability to exert ?power over? with status, strength, men, authority.
- View battles,?differences and power imbalances between men and women as inevitable.
- Define ?listening to? or ?respecting? the other as ?doing what told,? in short, obedience.
- Teach that love, self-worth, acceptance, respect are earned based on performance.
- Judge performance on the basis of conformity to external expectations or standards.
- View mistakes as defects, failures or willful disrespect or disobedience.
- Control behavior with external rewards and punishments.
- Legitimize use of physical violence, force and/or emotional manipulation tactics (fear, shame, guilt).
- Teach us to judge self and others by making comparisons.
- Associate emotions of vulnerability with weakness, emotionality, women, children, etc.
- Associate emotions of anger with strength, power to make things happen, men, authority, status.
- Relegate emotions of caring, nurturance, love, affection, etc., to secondary status.
In contrast, partnership values define ?power? as a choice. Power is as power does, and power can be a conscious choice to enrich life, work cooperatively together, empower the best in life and one another. When men and women are free to respond in caring ways that release oxytocin into their bloodstream, they feel ?safe? with one another, thus, safe enough to give and receive love.
Why the relationship between men and women matters?
According to Riane Eisler?s seminal work, The Chalice and the Blade, how a society structures relations between men and women is a critical component that forms the basis for all aspects of society, family, school, church, government, politics and so on.
Hierarchical values are associated with either-or thinking patterns that, like all forms of group-think or thought control:
- Impose contradictory demands on the brain that can ? and do ? cause men and women to relate to one another, without their conscious awareness, primarily out of fear.
- Activate the brain?s ?fight or flee? system during problem solving ? thus, when they most need their reflective thinking skills, they are not available;?they react defensively instead.
- Interfere with the formation of emotional intimacy in the couple relationship, as well as each partner?s personal growth and well-being.
- Train the brain to adopt limiting thinking patterns that require men and women, in different ways, to shut down their awareness of what they each emotionally need, and have the power to realize, as human beings, and that is ? to meaningfully connect and feel valued in relation to one another.
Noting the brain is a relationship organ, this type of relating keeps the brain in survival mode and blocks partners from fulfilling key strivings in life.
Romanticized ideals leave men and women at cross-purposes, holding onto static images of themselves.
- Once the power struggle phase starts, they start to form ?enemy? images of one another in their heads, each blaming the other for their unfulfilled expectations.
- Whether they express disappointments openly or silently, their thinking forms inner pools of resentment.
- Each is unaware that their suffering and addictive relating patterns are a direct result of the limiting beliefs they hold.
- To cope, they stay in comfort zones entirely of their own making ? and when they try to achieve their goals, these negative images and pre-conditioned comfort zones always block their well-intended efforts.
- These limiting images, thoughts and beliefs make life seem like an ordeal; meanwhile, futile attempts to get the love and relationship they want are about as effective as taking a shower wearing a raincoat.
Defensive strategies, by design, rely on the use of force and tools of emotional manipulation (words and nonverbal gestures) that instill fear, shame as guilt to ?influence? the other to love, respect or value us as persons.
How likely is it that partners are going to get the the other to resonate with love for them with the use of fear, shame or guilt?
In contrast successful couples, on the other hand, continually breakthrough barriers to consciously get comfortable with the uncomfortable, not by using the old control methods of force or emotional manipulation, but by replacing fear-based beliefs and images they have of themselves, one another, and their relationship with life-enriching ones.
What makes either-or thinking harmful?
Hierarchical relationships, by definition, are a defense against emotional intimacy. Notably, we are well designed to handle stress; it is how we think about an event that intensifies our stress to dangerous levels. For example:
- Either-or thinking is useful to us in crisis situations, such as seeing a snake on our path or waking up on a work day to find our alarm clock didn?t ring.
- The hormones released in crisis situations, such as the stress hormone cortisol or adrenaline, help us deal more effectively with the situation at hand; in this case, we can avoid a snake bite or the risk of losing a job.
- Our body is not designed to live in constant fear or alert mode, however; the sympathetic nervous system does not have time to make repairs and restore balance in the energies of the body.
- As a result, overtime the stress of this type of thinking on the body wears down its systems and can cause illness.
While hierarchy may work in military structures for the purpose of defense, in human brain and body terms, either-or thinking keeps the brain?s ?fight or flee? system on alert, thus, it promotes unhealthy conditions for the physical body as well as for an intimate relationship. Studies show bullying produces chronic stress, elevations in the body?s cortisol response, and lifelong physical and physiological effects.
It?s simply not how the brain, ?a relationship organ? based on the latest neuroscience findings, is designed to work.
Either-or thinking versus both-and thinking?
Life, and relationship issues, cannot be solved by either-or, or black-and-white thinking.?As paradoxical beings, we are both-and rather than either-or.
- We strive to be uniquely us, yet we yearn to experience our oneness.
- We yearn to be recognized as unique individuals, yet we also yearn for a shared connection.
- We aspire to be recognized for our unique contributions and abilities, yet our hearts are warmed when someone gives us a helping hand.
- We are insatiably curious, wanting to learn all about the world around us, yet the most valuable lessons, wisdom, or solutions to problems lie within.
Equally important, we cannot understand our self, our partner and life in rigid black and white terms.
- We are blocked from our ?brain?s amazing capacity for both-and possibility thinking by fear-based either-or thinking.
- We are strongest when we find balance in connecting to both our capacity for strength and resiliency yet also to our ability to empathically feel pain, our fears, our vulnerability without reacting defensively.
- Similarly, we are not either dependent or independent, we have the need to experience both of these attributes in balance.
Humans are paradoxical beings.
To understand issues in our life and relationships, we rely on reflective thinking processes, a process of both-and possibility thinking.
What is power in one situation, for example, lifting heavy objects, is not power in another, for example, facing a fear of rejection or loss of self.
Life is about finding balance, not unlike walking a tightrope, a process that grows us personally and relationally.
If you find yourself replaying old scripts in your life or love relationship, or repeating the same lines and the same outcome of not getting what you want, there is hope. Thanks to the plasticity of your brain, it?s never too late to learn how to break free from this downward spiral.
The answers to the questions of what it means to be a man or a woman, what it means to be emotionally or sexually intimate should not imprison ? and rather personally free ? both sexes to relate in humanizing ways.
You can connect to the miracle making resources inside you, identify the limiting beliefs that ?blocks? that govern your behavior ? then?replace these fears with new thoughts, attitudes, beliefs and images.
Relationship consultant, author, licensed marriage and family therapist, Dr. Athena Staik shows clients how to break free of anxiety, addictions, and other emotional blocks, to awaken radiantly healthy lives and relationships. Dr. Staik is currently in private practice in Northern VA, and writing her book, Safe Enough to Love?: Breaking Free of Addictive Love in Couple Relationships. To contact Dr. Staik for information, an appointment or workshop, visit www.drstaik.com, or visit on her Facebook fan page DrAthenaStaik
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
????Last reviewed: 12 Jun 2011
?
Source: http://blogs.psychcentral.com/relationships/2011/06/the-neuroscience-of-romanticized-love-%E2%80%93-part-2-either-or-thinking/
osmosis ai driving directions news 12 duke university fable 3 stevie nicks
?Copyright 1997-
Vampire: The Masquerade ? Bloodlines Reviews 
Copyright ?2010. the Associated Press. Produced by NewsOK.com all rights reserved. this material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ?