Part IV: Polyamory, Monogamy and other types of bonds explained: Why do we stay in dysfunctional relationships—the internal blueprint cycle of Clinging to the Good or Fixating on the Bad.
Understand the Difference Between Hope and Reality. Object Relations Theory: The splitting of the Ego, the internalized “bad”/“good” objects in our mind.
Table of contents:
The aim of this five-part newsletter is to provide a thorough understanding of how we relate to ourselves first, how our self-concept influences and favors outcomes according to how we expect others to value our presence, how relationships form, and why, regardless of our attachment style, even if it is secure, we must learn to develop the skills and abilities to acknowledge, negotiate, and request from those around us, as well as understand how reciprocity and giving back are essential in all relationships.
Part I: Read here.
Our biology, why we pair bond, the neurochemistry, and hormone systems
What is an attachment style
What is Polyamory/Monogamy
Monogamy, non-monogamy, polyamory, and other types of bonds
Part II: Read here
Healing the Attachment Style.
The Path of Individuation
Denial as a Defense Mechanism
Understanding How Trauma Works
How to resolve trauma (and why)
GriefPart III: Read here
Sadness/Tears
Self-verification theory/ self-concept/ self-esteem
Boundaries: Healthy, porous, and rigid
Compatibility and incompatibility
Differences and sameness importance
Symbiosis and Autonomy
Part IV (this newsletter)
Object Relations Theory:
The splitting of the ego/ the “bad” object, and the “good” object in our mind—why do we stay in dysfunctional relationships
The Self's Growth: Accepting the Good and the Bad
Carl Rogers: Actual Self, Ideal Self, and Self Actualization
Part V: Read here
Infidelity and betrayal
Inviting and unpacking the shadow of the third
Jealousy and envy
Part VI ( last part newsletter)
Shame and guilt
The universal need to belong
Individuation
Conclusions
*References
I'd like to start by briefly provide you a better understanding of the differences between Object Relation Theory and the Attachment Theory.
In short - Attachment theory explains the way we form bonds.
(Read all about this here)
Our caregiver is responsible for ensuring our safety, regulating our emotions, feeding us, and meeting our needs as infants.
We rely on them to mirror us so that we can develop a sense of self.
We establish a sense of security by locking eyes with our caregiver.
The child expects relationships to work by creating a pattern.
The child possibly develop a "secure" bond, feeling safe and loved, depending on how the caregiver responds.
Alternatively, they could develop a "insecure" bond, feeling anxious or unsure about being loved or safe.
We carry these patterns with us as we grow and they shape how we connect with different people: friends, partners, colleagues, and others.
The attachment style is the way we learn what to expect from relationships based on how people treated us in our first relationship. (read full post)
If we felt loved and safe, we are likely to trust others later, self-regulate better, and avoid co-dependency.
However, if we didn't feel loved and safe, we might struggle with trust, feel anxious, and find a partner with whom we will repeat this wound and confirm our self-concept (as shown by the self-verification theory I wrote about it here).
Object relation theory
This is a psychoanalytic concept that originated with the work of Melanie Klein, who was influenced by Sigmund Freud’s ideas.
Unlike Freud, her work involved studying and observing children, providing crucial psychological insights into how our primary caregivers shape the way we perceive and interact with others throughout our lives.
The theory of Object Relations refer to people (caregivers) or parts of people (mother’s breast) that are important to infants emotional life. These “objects” are internalized, in a form of emotional mental representations of others that influence interactions and relationships.
Please bear with me; it will make sense in the end.:)
"Splitting" (mind separate "all good" or "all bad" in categories) is a defense mechanism that occurs in children when they struggle to integrate people's complex, conflictual, and contradictory qualities into a single, coherent whole.
The capacity to understand things as a whole distinguishes our adult mind from our child mind.
As adults, we've learned to separate from others, integrate, and deal with reality. This “black and white” thinking can persist into adulthood if we haven’t fully integrated or updated our conflicting perceptions of others.
We may remain trapped in this internal conflict, making it difficult to see the reality of relationships, situations or people, it is possible that part of our emotional experience got stuck at a young age.
When faced with triggers that are familiar to our emotional past, we tend to regress and feel regressed. There are maybe times when we can't really tell the difference between being in our adult self or our child self.
Depending on how one perceives at a given time, one can also alternate between viewing someone as entirely good or bad.
Recognizing both positive and negative traits in others can feel too vulnerable, leading us to cling to the potential or hope we see in them (one of the reasons we fall in love so quickly), rather than accepting the full complexity of who they are and how does that really makes us feel.
As a child, you may have struggle to understand why someone who loves you may also hurt or disappoint you.
Children mentally split this inconsistent caregiver into two parts: the "good" part and the "bad" part to cope with these hot and cold attitudes.
In adult relationships, perhaps you find yourself in a situation where your partner treats you poorly at times.
However, you could continue to stay in the relationship because you secretly hope to see more of their "good" side, which will ultimately lead to their love, recognition, and your recognition as a good person as well.
You hope they can improve, just as you hoped your caregiver would show more "good" when you were a vulnerable child.
Key Differences
Object Relations Theory: Focuses more on the mental "boxes" or memories we carry about people and how these affect our self-image and relationships.
Attachment Theory: Focuses on how the bonds we form with caregivers as children shape our expectations and behavior in relationships throughout our lives.
A person's psychic defense mechanism is as follows:Projection: casting one's feelings, often negative feelings, onto someone else.
Introjection: internalizing the traits and behaviors of others and ultimately trying to make a good object always present.
Splitting: compartmentalizing all situations/objects into the roles of good or bad.
Ego “Split”: This concept is related but focuses more on how the individual's self-concept (or ego) becomes divided. The ego can split into parts that hold different, often contradictory, self-images or emotions.
Object relation theory
The Dual Trap: Clinging to the Good or Fixating on the Bad
Have you ever held onto the hope that someone will change despite repeated disappointments?
Seeing the Good in others
Sometimes people find themselves in unfulfilling relationships because they focus only on the good/positive aspects of their partner or friends, no matter how brief.
Holding onto those memories of good times or when there was some love and some kindness is a coping mechanism.
This kind of hope transforms into a powerful force, leading people to believe that with enough time and effort, the good will eventually outweigh the bad.
Thinking that change is just around the corner can be convincing to stay by downplaying or constantly making sense of their partner's negative behaviors.
Inconsistent caregivers often contribute to this mindset development.
As children we learn to cherish the moments of kindness and hope for more, even in the face of disappointment.
We learn to carry this pattern into adulthood, where staying in a relationship, even when it is causing harm, transform into a constant desire to see the good in the other.
I am not saying that the good in others isn't important; we become blindsided when we focus only on the potential of the relationship and fail to see the reality of it, or how we are feeling in the relationships.
Fixating on the Bad
We sometimes used magnifying glasses to see shortcoming, making it difficult to see the good in the other. We desperately want the other person to be responsible for how we feel, so we stay in the relationship, frustrated and resentful of the partner, counting every flaw and mistake.
Fixating on the negative aspects, or flaws, can be a recurring pattern that can be traced back to early experiences.
If a caregiver was critical/ inconsistent, a child may have learned to focus on the negative to avoid disappointment.
We translate this as adult in the tendency to focus on a partner's shortcomings, reinforcing (recreating) the sense of being trapped in a relationship that feels unchangeable and unhappy, just as we felt as a child.
All of this process of making sense of someone's behavior is driven by our early experiences of trying to reconcile the dual aspects of those we depended on, a cycle of longing for the positive while enduring the negative.
This can dual trap us in a loop of unrealistic expectations, where we repeatedly forgive, overlook, or minimize the negative behavior or efforts of others toward us, making our mission to not acknowledge their good intentions.
Examples:
Relationship patterns: repeating the past
Monica's mother was both critical and loving, resulting in repetitive relationship patterns.
Monica, as a child, couldn't reconcile her mother's two sides and mentally divided them into “good mom” and “bad mom”.
Monica now finds herself in relationships with partners who are similarly inconsistent. Sometimes harsh and sometimes loving.
Despite being aware of the relationship's unhealthy nature, Monica persists, subconsciously attempting to transform her partner into a more positive version, much like she did with her mother.
This traps her in a cycle of "repairing" the relationship in the hopes of healing her mother's wounds.Internalized Criticism:
Alex grew up with a father who was constantly disappointed with him, no matter how hard he tried.
In order to cope with criticism, Alex internalized his father's voice, forming a "bad object" voice in his mind that constantly undermines his self-esteem and makes him feel inadequate.
This internal critic, which developed in response to his father's behavior, is still so loud that he is unable to enjoy success or take risks.Trusting others:
Elena had a caregiver who was unpredictable, sometimes attentive, sometimes neglectful. To cope with this, Elena had to categorize her caregiver as either "trustworthy" or "untrustworthy" in her mind.
Fast forward: in adult relationships, she has difficulty trusting people fully.
She oscillates between seeing someone as completely trustworthy and then suddenly doubting their good intentions, feeling vulnerable, as she did as a child.
This response stems from the "split" she experienced during her childhood.
This feeling of not being able to trust marks all relationships as unstable.Repeating the cycle- parenting
Emil's mother was both nurturing and overly controlling, leading him to split her into two distinct roles: "nurturing" and "controlling."
Emil, as a father, discovers himself to be overly protective and controlling with his children.
He wants to be more nurturing, but losing control makes his anxiety rise.
He has internalized the "controlling mother" into his parenting approach. Unresolved feelings about his mother affect how he parents his own children; instead of providing balanced care, he replicates the controlling behavior, passing the similar issues to the next generation.Career Choices: Seeking Approval
Ana’s father was emotionally distant, showing affection only when she excelled academically. She had internalized a “good object” that equates achievement with love and approval.
As an adult, Ana's drive to succeed in her career often comes at the cost of her personal well-being.
She constantly seeks promotions and works long hours, not necessarily because she loves her work but because she’s still chasing the feeling of approval that she only got from her father when she did well.
This internalized need for approval (love) still influences her life choices, career, and habits, leading her to experience burnout, stress, and dissatisfaction in reality. This unresolved need to please is an internalized version of her father's.Clinging to relationships—fear of abandonment.
Robert experienced his parents' divorce as a child. He internalized the event as a "bad object," linking love to abandonment. As an adult, he is terrified of being abandoned by his partner.
Find himself smothering his partner by staying, being overly clingy, and dependent on relationships.
Avoiding being alone originates from his childhood experiences, making it difficult for him to maintain a balanced relationship.
His partners are overwhelmed by his neediness, resulting in the very abandonment he fears, perpetuating the cycle.Difficulty setting boundaries: overly involved and available to others.
Maria's parents were extremely demanding, constantly expecting her to meet their emotional needs. She internalized this experience as a "bad object" for which she felt responsible for the needs and emotions of others.
As an adult, she struggles to set boundaries and becomes overly involved in other people's problems, which causes guilt if she says no. This inability to set boundaries causes burnout and resentment because she prioritizes the needs of others over her own.
This is a direct result of her early experiences with her parents; she internalized the belief that she must always be available to others.
These examples demonstrate how internalized "objects" from childhood can have a lasting impact for our adult lives, influencing our relationships, self-esteem, career choices, and overall mental health. Recognizing these patterns is the first step toward self-healing and healthier relationships with others.
The Self's Growth: Accepting the Good and the Bad
Recognizing patterns and breaking free from them is a process of self-actualization and learning to see the bigger picture.
Accepting that everyone has both negative and positive traits allows for a more realistic and balanced perspective on relationships.
Accepting others as they are is a gift we can give, just as accepting responsibility for our own minds and how our behavior affects others.
True freedom comes from making conscious choices that serve our present selves.
It also arises from understanding how a situation makes you feel and acting in a way that supports your mental, physical, and emotional well-being.
This is not an easy task; accepting full responsibility for our actions and lives involves self-awareness and maturity.
We live in a conditioning society; we are influenced by our past experiences and our own flaws; we are hesitant to face uncomfortable truths about ourselves and instead expect others to change.
Acting on our own needs requires us to be present, to block out the noise of external expectations, social pressure, and our own fears, and it is easy to lose sight of our true needs when we are also trying to meet the needs of others, or when we are simply unsure of our own desires.
We don't know everything about ourselves, which is FINE; learning is a process that continues throughout our lives.
You have the right to change your mind.
Only we can determine what is best for our well-being.
No one is capable of fully understanding our internal experience or what truly sustains us, gives us joy.
Finding and acting on our needs is a very personal journey that requires self-reflection, honesty, and courage to stay on track, which may mean that we do not always align with what others expect or want from us.
Observing yourself/ relationship patterns can help you understand how your mind works:
Idealization/devaluation.
Idealizing certain people at the beginning of a relationship can be a sign of projection if you later become disillusioned or disappointed. This pattern can reveal how you really perceive others, whether they are all positive or all negative.
Reflecting on early relationships can reveal parental influence and how it shaped your perspectives on trust, love, and security.
Was there consistent care, or a mix of neglect and criticism?
This can help you find answers about how you interact with others as an adult.
Staying or returning to unhealthy relationships could be an unconscious attempt to resolve childhood conflict with caregivers.
Internal voices or feelings guide your perception of yourself and your worth?Critical internalized voices can be a representations of others from early relationships, when you rely heavily on external validation or feel overly reliant on others to prove your worth.
If you constantly switch between feeling good and bad about yourself with little in between, this can be caused by an inability to integrate positive and negative aspects of your personality.
When we blame others for our feelings and unresolved issues, we give away our power.
One of the most important aspects of relationships is how we handle conflict. Withdrawing or becoming overly accommodating may reflect how you learned to deal with difficult emotions in early relationships.
Not recognizing roles in relationships can indicate (Transference) that you are treating your partners as if they are your parents or the other way around (you may be parenting your partner), that you require unconditional support from them, or that you rely on them to regulate your emotions.
Mixing roles (lover/parent/friend/confident) in adult relationships can be confusing.
We can improve ourselves, make small changes, seek new perspectives, feel better, and make the most of what we have right now.
Carl Rogers: Actual Self, Ideal Self, and Self Actualization
“Self–actualization is the process of achieving one's full potential as a person.
The term "potential" refers to the capability to become something in the future.
To "actualize" potential means to make it a reality.”
“Carl Rogers theorized that all people strive for self-actualization and that, in order to do so, they must be in a state of congruence. 1
This means that self-actualization occurs when an individual's "ideal self" (an idealized version of oneself) is congruent (in harmony) with their actual behavior (self-image or actual version of oneself).
In other words, self-actualization occurs when an individual is propelled toward a state of alignment between their real and ideal selves.As stated, this will in turn create a healthy self-esteem and self-worth, leading to a healthy, productive life.
Rogers defines a fully functioning person as one who is self-actualizing, actively exploring their potential and abilities, and experiencing a match between their real and ideal selves.
He also proposed that people use denial and distortion as coping mechanisms in order to avoid the anxiety and distress that arise when their real and ideal selves are not sufficiently aligned.
In other words, because people prefer to see themselves in ways that conform to their self-image, they may employ defense mechanisms such as denial or distortion to feel less threatened by some of their perceived undesirable feelings.
This is because a person whose self-concept is inconsistent with their true feelings and experiences will defend themselves when confronted with the truth.
Denial is the refusal of reality. 2
It occurs when a person avoids acknowledging and resolving internal conflict in order to avoid anxiety.
Distortion is the process of altering the facts surrounding a conflict in order to create less or no anxiety.The more one uses these defenses, the wider the disparity between the ideal and real self becomes.
According to Carl Rogers, this can result in psychosis, a state in which a person's identity is shattered.The terms "real self" and "ideal self" are used to refer to specific domains of a person's personality.
One's self image or who one actually is, is the real self definition, while who one wishes to be is the ideal self definition.
When one's perceptions of their real and ideal selves are nearly identical, they are said to be congruent.
The degree to which the two selves are compatible is proportional to the degree of mental peace. The more incongruence there is, the greater the anxiety and distress.
A brief summary of the Object Relation Theory
The ability to see a person as a whole requires moving beyond the fragmented, simplistic view of someone.
This mature perspective on a person as a complete and integrated individual enables us to recognize others' identities as consistent and stable over time, regardless of changes in behavior, mood, or circumstances.
Accepting others does not imply that you approve of their behavior; people can have both positive and negative traits at the same time, and you are not required to absorb their emotions or accept responsibility for their actions.
An emotional boundary is when you empathize with someone else's struggles with or celebrate them without losing your sense of self; maintaining your own emotional space allows you to meet others rather than blend with them.
When you genuinely care about someone, you must maintain healthy boundaries. Healthy means you can address harmful behavior that crosses your boundaries in a respectful manner without compromising your own well-being.
Understanding why someone is acting out but not accepting mistreatment is a healthy boundary.
Seeing both the good and the bad makes relationships more conflictual because we are not blocking each other's realities or projecting our fantasies onto the other.
Setting boundaries allows us to maintain our sense of self and interdependence while connecting with others in a healthy way.
When you can value someone and yet realize they might not always meet all of your desires and needs, you are experiencing mature love.
Recognizing each other without idealization or devaluation strengthens connections.
In essence, seeing people as a whole means acknowledging their humanity, both good and bad, while determining your tolerance for their traits and actions, as well as how you act in their presence and how nurturing, warm, or creative they are in your life.
Your emotional health and ability to set boundaries for yourself and others are excellent indicators of how your reality works.
All we have is now, we can always start from here.
Until next time:
Par V (future newsletter)
Infidelity
Jealousy and envy
Shame and guilt
How do you establish a relationship base, rules, and transactions
If you enjoyed my post and found value in my writings, you can
Offer me a COFFEE :) ☕
You did it again! great overview of this complex topic. 🌸 💗🙏
The more we integrate and heal our own immature aspects, the more successful we become in attracting compatible relationships. That's my own (admittedly limited) experience.
So deep! This series is a novel! Wow. I have already read it twice. So much here! Looking back I recognize myself in the examples and give myself a big hug. It’s a journey. Never a map yet to understand these concepts is very comforting. Thanks for the time and efforts here. This is beyond good 🙏❤️