Never Let Go
I was engaged in a discussion recently with Dr E. The conversation concerned relationships.
“So, when you end a relationship, tell me how do you feel about it?” he began as he unfolded his notebook and found a fresh page.
“I do not end my relationships,” I replied.
“I see, so they are always ended by the other person are they?” he asked.
“No.”
He waited to see if I was going to say anything else but I remained silent. Come on Dr E, let’s see where you are going with this. You cannot outsmart me. He sat looking at me and I at him.
“Those answers suggest to me then that your relationships do not end.”
Give Dr E enough time and he always gets there.
“Exactly,” I answered.
“I see. We have discussed a number of relationships that you have and have had. With family members, acquaintances, friends and of course lovers. Now, from what you have explained to me I would certainly regard many of those relationships having come to an end, either by your doing or, though admittedly less often, at the hand of the other person.”
“Your concept of a relationship evidently differs from mine.”
“Please, expand on that point.”
“My relationships begin when I determine that they should begin,” I started to speak. Dr E frowned but said nothing. I could tell he wanted me to provide clarity to that assertion and I was happy to oblige.
“When I detect somebody who will prove of use to me then our relationship has already begun. It matters not whether we have spoken in person or even made any kind of contact. The decision that the relationship has begun rests with me.”
Dr E was making notes as I spoke.
” The nature of the relationship is defined by what use that person is to me in providing me with my fuel. If the fuel they provide is strong and potent then I will be spending a lot of time with that person, others less so. I dictate the pace at which the relationship will develop by such criteria that I understand people like you apply to relationships.”
“What criteria are those?” asked Dr E.
“Instances such as familiarity with one another, whether there is a hand shake or a kiss on greeting, the name by which we call one another, whether they can be relied on to provide information, whether they will lend money, whether we go to certain places together and how often, whether we live together, all of these things are what you measure a relationship by.”
“And do you regard those criteria as instances that ought to happen over a particular period of time?”
“No. They are all measurements by which I know people like you determine the nature of the relationship. I use them as markers by which the level of fuel can be influenced, accordingly, I will move them along at a pace which suits my demands for fuel.”
“But not according to anyone else’s input or say a generally accepted norm from society?”
“Well, the other person has to consent to the act, I mean, I haven’t imprisoned anyone in my home. Yet.” I smiled.
“But if they are to provide their consent surely that means the timescale is taken out of your hands?”
“Not at all. I just make them consent in accordance with my timescale,” I said.
“By exerting the influences you have described to me previously?”
“Exactly.”
Dr E remained silent as he continued to write.
“So you determine when the relationship begins and the pace at which it proceeds and this relationship never ends?”
“Yes.”
“But some of the instances of your intimate relationships that you have described to me certainly fit with the concept that they have ended.”
“Not at all. If I have cast someone to one side because, as they always do, they have let me down in some way, then I will not let them walk away. They might think they have been able to do this. Indeed, in certain instances I encourage that train of thought so that the person’s defences remain down and thus they are susceptible to me resurrecting our interaction. Nobody leaves me and I do not leave anybody. They will always serve some kind of purpose, at some point and therefore there may be a pause in our interaction but there is never a cessation.”
“What if the other person decides they no longer wish to interact with you?”
“Why on earth would they think that?” I asked puzzled.
“Well, your treatment of many of them was harsh and unpleasant.”
“But no less than they deserved. People need to know their place and if they step outside of that they must be brought to heel.”
“Why?” asked Dr E.
“Because I gave them everything and each time they repay me by letting me down. That is unfair. Each time I give them the world, I really do doctor and no matter how wonderful I am to them they do not do enough in return and they let their affection become dull or they fail to provide me with the adoration that I deserve. It is wrong and they must be made to see how wrong they are punished for their transgressions.”
“So you maintain a relationship to punish the other person?”
“In part yes, but it is usually because they still prove of use to me and they have their debt to me to repay.”
“I see,” remarked Dr E and he continued with his writing.
“And when do they repay this debt?” he asked.
“That’s the problem doctor, ” I said with a sigh, ” they never do. That is why I never let them go.”
18 thoughts on “Never Let Go”
Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
HG,
When I refused to have sex with the narc. He said, “But, I helped you to get over your grandmother’s death!!” I said , “That was over two years ago!”
Who the hell owes someone sex for an event like that-a death?!!
Peeking into your session, brought sense to this “transaction”. He wasn’t really helping me, he was making sure that I will always be indebted to him.
Now, I’m concerned. He gave me a car 8 days before discarding me and a pair of earrings 2 days before the discard. I guess I will have to “pay” for that! What a f-big set-up!! Almost 60 days of a “modified “ no contact. My emotional thinking is like the most craziest roller coaster!
I feel enslaved! Still hearing his voice!
After reading this, I’m in hate mode! He was always ALWAYS setting me up for his next con, the next door to be open for him!! I’m not giving all the stuff he gave me back! I’m going to have to move out-of-town.
I want love- a real love! HG, why me??!!!
Wow, Leela, he was always setting you up for the next con. It’s a little like having an axe hanging over your head. He’s going to use it at some point (probably). Personally, I’d do my best to give it all back – with interest – although he’d probably still come around at some point to remind you he ‘gave’ you a car even if you handed it back! Narcs are like that. They never forget anything when it suits them. Good luck.
“Delusion. Convince yourself.” Google it.
Meanwhile, this article reminds me that everything is a thought. When I begin to get upset over someone else’s thoughts, I go back to this. They may think I am wrong and they are right, but can we really be sure of reality?
HG. Is this how all n’s think? Could this have been any school talking?
This mindset is applicable to all of our kind.
So! Actually in “our world” we are madly in love at the beginning of the relationship, we have our pink glasses on. Thus, for the narc this means a lot of positive fuel when the partner is madly in love with them. But this honeymoon-phase doesn´t last long: After about a couple of months to a year the pink glasses come off, the people get used to each other. So, for the narc this means the fuel is waning. This is when devaluation begins? Do I understand that correctly? Devaluation begins actually then, when in “our world” the couple gets used to each other, when they are really getting to know each other, seeing now each others flaws and mistakes, seeing each other in a way more realistic way. This is actually when in “our world” real love begins – or not! At this point in time it turns out whether you´re a good match or not. And here the narc realizes that the fuel gets lower and lower – and so: starts the devaluation?
Do I understand that correctly?
It is unclear if you are referring to you being in love with a narcissist or a non-narcissist. I recommend that you obtain “Is it Love?” from the Knowledge Vault.
I compared the love of two non-narcs to the “relationship” of a non-narc and a narc. With two non-narcs the relationship could go on without the pink glasses and they would get to know each others flaws etc. and find out if it´s a real match or not.
Non-narc and narc: After the “honeymoon-phase” the narc starts devaluation because the non-narc is not so much in love anymore he or she took their pink glasses off. So: The fuel wanes.
The narcissist does not start devaluation because the non-narcissist is not so much in love anymore, the empathic victim remains in love. What causes devaluation is the fuel either becomes stale, the fuel is not being provided in as large amounts as it should and/or not as frequently as it ought to be. The empath may not manifest their love in the same way as they once did (what you refer to as the ending of the honeymoon phase) but their love has not altered with regard to its existence and depth (but this causes problems re amount of provision and/or frequency), sometimes the manifestation has not altered (thus it becomes stales) and not has the existence of that love or its depth etc.
Aw! I get it! Thank you for your good explanation, H.G.!
You are welcome.
HG, I have a question for you can an Empath fall completely out of love with the Narcissist that it turns into hatered.
Yes. The addiction remains.
Is this really how your sessions go? That’s a whole other level of “wow” 🤯 No offense meant in any way, I am fascinated (and a little scared) by your train of thought…
Yes, hence why I have written what I have written.
Very intersting reading your sessions with The Doctors HG. It’s so interesting how your kind really thinks and from your perspective I find it very educating .
Good and you are welcome.
“When I detect somebody who will prove of use to me then our relationship has already begun. It matters not whether we have spoken in person or even made any kind of contact. The decision that the relationship has begun rests with me.”
Wow, this really stood out to me.
It’s a bit like taking a fancy to someone, but in a much more sinister fashion.
And the element of control begins before the victim even realizes they’ve been targeted (i.e. the decision that the relationship has begun rests with me).
There is no other way for the narcissist to go except to ensnare their victim after that.
So the onus is on the victim to be aware.
I don’t know about no rest for the narcissist (in terms of gathering fuel), but I’m beginning to see there is no rest for the empath either (in avoiding being a target).
It’s a friggin’ war zone!