Fake engagement

It’s a strange quirk of human nature that we are so good at faking it. It means that we can have whole conversations with other people, and not really tell them what’s going on for us. An English person can talk extensively about the weather, and not be really talking about anything at all. The subject of conversation can be a tool to prevent any conversation happening at all.

This is particularly true of avoidant relationships. A couple can get married and live for years without really knowing each other in depth. For some, this is a blessing. They may not require themselves to be known by a partner. In fact, in marriages between the sexes, it’s common for men and women to use preconceptions about the other sex to restrict interaction and conversation. He or she won’t understand. It’s better to share with my friends.

Fake engagement is vaguely functional, in that it enables a ground of exploration, where full disclosure does not happen until everyone’s sure of their security. In international affairs, there is a lot of pre-work done by diplomats and information gatherers before two leaders can have a relationship that is seen to work. In private relationships, too, intermediaries get used as go-betweens, to enable exploration without commitment.

Where do we get real engagement, then? With ourselves, perhaps, if we meditate, or write, or pray. Even then, honesty is difficult. We assume we can be honest with ourselves, and yet self-deception is as much a part of our psychological makeup as perception. Convenience extends its ugly arms to hugging us with our own untruths.

Perhaps we can find real engagement in intense relationships where the boundaries break down? The problem of this is that such relationships are often unsustainable. Intensity breeds need, and need breeds arguments over resources. Wrangles start over why enough time or physical presence is not being given, until recriminations begin, and the relationship grows cold. Some are lucky enough to have a very close long term relationship with someone they are in love with, and trust implicitly. But this is rarer than we think. More commonly, we are those diplomats in constant pre-conversation, ironing out the way for deals and agreements to be made.

Those in search of true engagement might look at therapy as an option. A good therapist doesn’t have skin in the game, so to speak. They will listen, explore, and contribute with empathy, kindness and a sharing spirit. Where an original parent might have missed something, a good therapist can provide some kind of restitution or relearning. Where family and friends are being experienced as difficult, uncooperative, unkind or unsatisfactory, a good therapist can provide a shelter within which to explore the whys and wherefores, without unnecessary judgement or criticism.

Authenticity is not a clearly defined term, but it is suggestive of a worthy therapeutic goal – to be able to live in self-awareness; to be able both to satisfy one’s own needs, and at the same time be flexible to other people’s needs. Ironically, when the time comes to separate from your therapist, you may be aware of saying goodbye to the one person who has seen you and interacted with you as you are, without disguise or holding back. Strangely, this kind of professional help, once experienced, can enable greater depth in all one’s relationships, because we have developed our own emotional confidence and competence, and do not need to be so blindly or fearfully distant in our relating.