aurum

The Case for Neediness

27 posts in this topic

6 hours ago, Nahm said:

I need a mansion, a few million dollars, at least a dozen Playboy bunnies, my own island, and an endless supply of 5meo, and for basically everyone to just get this and comply already. Not getting any younger here people.  

Reminds me of this song:

The other, needy, side of Nahm xD


Have faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18.10.2021 at 5:01 AM, soos_mite_ah said:

Also, another thing that I want to add is that hyper-independence is often times a trauma response that happens to people whose needs have been ignored for so long that they cope with minimizing their needs or refusing to ask for help. In a lot of these situation, these people end up making an identity out of not being needy to where they end up neglecting their emotional, social, and mental needs.

I think some people can also run into this problem in spiritual circles in the way some people can get attached to detachment as a way to bypass suffering. Because it feels like it would be easier to detach from a need than to be vulnerable and ask for help outside of yourself. 

Wow, how do you know this in such detail?


"Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Loving Radiance said:

Wow, how do you know this in such detail?

Direct experience, observation, and therapy 


I'm just here man.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@soos_mite_ah Fuck yes, what a banger combination.

Tbh, I felt totally exposed when I read it :ph34r:


"Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have many non-duality disclaimers in this post. haha

However; none of this makes sense through the lens of non-duality. Ultimately, because relationships are a dualistic symbol of separation.  A relationship implies we are separate. And that we, as separate things, are joining.

Relationships are the mind's attempt to connect what has never been broken.

How can you join something that has never been divided?

But through the lens of duality, where the mind has divided reality into separate parts, what you are saying is 100% on point.

And I also love Teal Swan's work on relationships. One of things she said in a recent Workshop is along the lines of "there is no difference between loving yourself and loving another person" because there is no separation.

Therefore, if you meet the needs of another person, you are meeting the needs of yourself.

There is no difference.

So when you are saying "They are so needy!!" ; you are also saying "I am so needy!!!"

Because there is no separation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a great deal of this issue has to do with feeling needy in a way that is somehow...
1) making too much of an issue of it somehow, and not fully enough coming to terms with need (or the lack of it). Like a lot of it is the conflict you have within about yourself about "need" and your relationship to the idea of getting hurt, and whether it is truly worth it or not. Whether you are "safe enough" to be vulnerable despite the risk. Whether you can and should avoid it, or not, etc.

There is something very powerful as well about "needing" or wanting someone or something, and laying all of your cards on the table, and having a certain amount of peace, confidence, and non-apologetic quality about it... without somehow being too weird, cloying, or obsessive about it.
At least not at the wrong time, and not in inappropriate ways. But the former tends to make the latter not so.

There is the question also of figuring out the right amount of detachment and space another person needs.

I think this factors hugely into the amount of time I've spent with my own partner over the years, and that I ended up with him.

He was always very clear and upfront about what he wanted: me. But it was never... weird or offputting.
It's usually pretty clear when someone is trying very hard to stuff you into their woman-shaped hole in their heart, and so they get lots of ideas about you. In a way, the more it is this way, the less it has much to do with anything about reality or you in particular, particularly in the ways that you don't match up to those convert expectations, desires, ideas, and ideals. If someone sees you clearly enough, but they still want and accept you and you feel understood/ empathized with enough (but not.. "judged"), doesn't this mean that there is something here that is real?

In this particular way especially, I think he's stronger than me emotionally speaking, because this "vulnerability" never came from a place of naiveness. Both of us have been profoundly disappointed by caregivers and people early in our lives, so there's an eyes wide open quality to it.
I'm the one who has vacillated more all over the place in terms of being uncertain about who and what I want, what is real in relationships between people, and what does and can last and is worthwhile. But in an odd way, we balanced each other out here. I need/ needed someone to be sure of me and to stick to that and to adapt to me in a sense.. but not to totally lose themselves even if I really don't make it easy, even if I have tried to make myself easier to deal with quite a lot. (And vice versa is true too.) Sometimes I have thought that it is intrinsically not fair to be on his side of the equation: but also, he chose it. At times, I have reminded him of this.
But there is this notion: the person who is the surest about what they want, what they envision, they tend to get it. So I guess he "won", for whatever that means to him, truly.
It just so happens that I also want/ wanted whatever is "real".

But I don't really like being needed much just for its own sake; that's how you end up with someone who just expects you to take care of them. You need some kind of fair balance of energy/ effort here between two people, however it works out. Not necessarily "equal" (whatever that means), but mutually desirable.

Edited by modmyth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post @aurum.

It seems that in relationships it's not so much the level of needs that need to be met on either side, but if each partner is able or willing to service (for want of a better word) their loved one's needs. There's kind of a three-way neediness going on. There are your own needs and whether they're serviced by your partner, there is your partner's needs and if you are able to service them, and then there is underlying (perhaps social) expectation that your partner service certain needs that you could well meet yourself. So there are needs you can't meet by yourself, and needs you can but don't. As another layer there are other needs coming out of expectation, which are at a higher level: for example the need for a partner to be a high flyer or socially capable or have X quality. Most of my relationships I would say have failed because the neediness of expectations haven't been met in the long run (from both sides).

I'm not sure if commitment is neediness, although it can come out of neediness, because you may have needs that can't be met without being committed to someone. I think most needs are recurring and so being committed helps with that. It's a reassurance that my needs will continue to be satisfied and that you just won't run off whenever you feel unwilling to meet my needs for whatever reason. Whether a relationship is fundamentally coming out of neediness, that seems a bit more fuzzy. I think at a higher level people are drawn towards unity and completion, so there's a spiritual aspect to being in a relationship - although that way of thinking about a relationship could be too difficult to align with for most - there's a sense that two people become one entity or system, with it's own emergent needs.

Edited by LastThursday

Consiousness is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now