Why Did She Leave Me?

My wife left me…again. Yesterday. Bummer? Not exactly. She has a tendency to leave me every now and then. She loves to go to “her canyons” in UT and hike. Sometimes she has dragged me along or allowed me to travel and hike with her. Once she left me and went to Portugal to hike. She called me up and said, “I am so glad you’re not with me.” After a pause she then said, “I miss you terribly. I wish you were here.” I use this as an illustration of the centrality of paradox, and particularly of paradoxical feelings. See? She was certainly glad that I wasn’t with her, mostly so she could go at her own pace, do her own thing, and be alone. As an introvert she really enjoys her time alone. She particularly enjoys the two days of the week that she doesn’t see me except for early AM and late PM when I go to our Madison office. She is usually seeing clients on those days, but also enjoys puttering around in her garden or green house…again without my intrusion.

This time when she has left me, her destination is not so clear. When she left yesterday morning, she said that she “thought” that she would go to St. Croix, WI, about 4 hours away at the beginning of the Ice Age Trail that goes 1000 miles across Wisconsin. I doubt that she will walk/hike 1000 miles, because she would have to walk back another 1000 miles to get her car. I expect that she will walk or hike for a while and then God knows what she might do. Go north? Go west…maybe to the canyons? Decide to come home? I’m sure she’ll be OK with whatever she does because she is a person who trusts her feelings. Note that her “feelings” are not just an emotional experience but a deeper personal experience that we call “spiritual”. When I tell people about our tendency to “trust our feelings” and “just go west” or something, most people are envious, while others are appalled that we don’t have a plan. Planners are people we call “high boundary” people, who like boundaries, rules, and plans. Low boundary people like spontaneity and freedom. Both are good ways of life. The difficulty comes when a high boundary person is trying to plan what s/he might do with a low boundary person, who would really rather “just go.”

Enough about Deb and me. This blog is about several men I have known who have been “left” in one way or another. You might resonate with one or them.

The woman seeking a divorce after a long marriage

Jane left Jim after 34 years of marriage. She struggled with leaving him for at least two years that I know of (she saw Deb for s while she was trying to figure out what to do about being largely unhappy in her marriage. Jane did what many women do (and perhaps some men as well…but that’s another story): she stayed married far longer than she should have stayed married. In Jane’s case there were several factors, all of which amounted to what other people would think if she got a divorce from Jim. There was the “Christian” disapproval of divorce. (Actually, this was evangelical Christian disapproval. Many mainline Christian churches, as well as Christian denominations have a place for divorce, find it valuable and godly, but not so with many evangelicals despite the fact that there are nearly the same number of evangelicals who get divorced as there are non-evangelicals.) Many evangelicals seek to justify a divorce on so-called biblical grounds, namely a singular statement Jesus seemed to have made that divorce is justified in circumstances of adultery. I knew one woman who got a divorce justifying it on these “grounds” because her husband had been using pornography. She asked a “Baptist” (read, conservative, evangelical) pastor if pornography was, indeed “adultery” and was glad to see that she could divorce “justifiably.” In Jane’s case, she did not seek this artificial reason for divorcing Jim. She is quite introverted by nature and introverts have a distinct tendency to keep most or all of their feelings to themselves.

I think the more important thing about the situation with Jane is that she has never really been happy with her marriage to Jim. They shared a house, raised children, both worked professionally, and went to church faithfully. But from what I learned from Jane, albeit with intuition and conjecture, is that she should have married Jim. Or if she married him, she should have been honest with herself and with Jim that she had made a mistake marrying him. It is possible that 34 years ago the marriage could have ended quickly and found way to survive and thrive. But Jane stayed married, and I think she was never happy with him. Indeed, the two of them are quite different in personality but there seem to have been some deeper issues that Jane was not able to see. Sadly, now her perspective is that the marriage was wrong because Jim did this or that, didn’t do this or that. Indeed, Jim has made some significant mistakes in life as well as with Jane, but these divorce-related, attorney-aggravated attacks on Jim are a rouse. I think…and must say that I “think” Jane has never liked Jim and could never bright herself to admit to it. In a nutshell, Jane has not been honest with Jim about this, and probably has not been honest with herself. The theme of some women (and again, possibly many men, I suppose) not knowing how they feel (unhappy), or unable to express it, or unwilling to act on it.

The woman who “couldn’t do it anymore” and left

Mary and Matt were in a second marriage for both, each have suffered in previous marriages and each having children. They had been married for 15 years when Deb and I began to see them. From what I understand, Mary almost immediately talked about how Mike did this or that, or didn’t do this or that. But Deb is no therapist who allows any client to complain for long, so after the first sessions of complaints, she set the stage for Mary, namely to talk about herself, mature in her self-understanding and emotional awareness, and then to do something. Mike came to see me with the notorious “female hand in the back” syndrome, meaning, “You need to see the therapist.” Indeed, Mike was figuratively pushed into my office but we made a bit of progress, particularly on his tendency towards expressing anger easily, an almost universal phenomenon with the men that I see. I say that men have “A” problems, namely anger, avoidance, addiction, and accommodation. They usually don’t know how to express their deeper feelings, much hear feelings from anyone else. Mike cane for a while, and then Deb insisted that Mary and Mike come to see me together. I did my best, but I couldn’t get Mary beyond doing what so many people do, talk about the other person. I hear something like, “I’ll tell you how I feel. Mike….”
Wait a minute; I thought you were going to tell me how YOU felt, but all you did was talk about Mike and his alleged problems. I didn’t make much progress because it was quite obvious that Mary’s position was that Mike should somehow “change” in some unknown way. It seemed like she was saying, “I married you the way you are; now change.” After a particularly difficult session where Mary came after me with a vengeance because I was attempting to give Mike some hope in the marriage. I talked to Deb about the incident and said to Deb that I was either going to make a direct challenge to Mary or quit marital therapy altogether. Deb pleaded with me to do neither, and then she saw Mary the next day. Deb reminded Mary that therapy was not about the other person but about oneself, and furthermore Deb insisted that Mary “do something.” But Mary said that she didn’t know what to do. Neither did Deb.

That night Mary met Mike at the doorway and said, “I can’t do this anymore” and the proceeded to leave the house and go to their cabin for the night, perhaps permanently. Mary soon called Deb frantically two or three times, sobbing and overwhelmed that she had “fucked up” and didn’t know what to do .A few hours later Mary texted Mike without his response, and then again and again, and then called him. Mike apparently did not think he could talk to Mary expecting that it would be more of the same, namely he was “the problem.” But such was not the case. Somehow, in what we consider to be a “spiritual engagement,” she had found a way to see Mike for who he was, and then saw that she not only loved him, but also liked him. She came home after a sobbing-filled phone call, they talked for hours, and came to see me the next day.

I don’t really know what happened with Mary but her “doing something” turned out to be the right thing, namely doing something. Sometimes you have to move forward so that you can do a 180 and move backward or perhaps to the right or left.

The woman who left the perfect man

I’ve been seeing a 30-something man who has been very successful in business. He is honest, hard—working, expressive although introverted by nature, and generally kind to the people in his life. He has, unfortunately, not been very successful with women including the most recent female relationship, which lasted about nine months. Previously, he has had relationships that lasted a couple of years but never has been able to sustain anything with a woman long enough to establish a real bond and eventually a commitment to a life together. It appears that he has suffered from a phenomenon that I will next discuss, but more importantly, he is a good “catch” for any woman because of the ingredients just noted, like independent success in work, honesty, commitment, and genuine kindness. Guys like this often fail to sustain long-term relationships because they are so attractive to women, often women who are impressed with the guy’s physical appearance, vocational status, or general kindness. Who would leave such a man? This is the question Jack asked me when he came to see me because he was just at the end of this 9-month long relationship with Sidney that she ended, but for reasons that were not clear to him. She spoke of his being great in all areas but then said that “she was not ready to commit” and “needed to find herself.”

What happened to Jack has happened to many men who are good in many ways and “look good” to women. Women are initially attracted to the stability that such men offer, but eventually find the man “not good enough,” probably not exciting enough. Men like Jack are self-made, confident, and usually pretty successful in work but may not be all that some women want. They tend to attract women who they try to “fix”. This “fixing” comes after a few months in the relationship with the woman starts to be true to herself and displays the “deep hole” that I will describe next. I think that Jack couldn’t fix Sidney. More importantly, because of many women’s tendency to overly emotionalize, Jack was less emotional himself. More importantly, Jack is not emotionally mature himself, which means knowing what you feel, valuing what you feel, communicating what you feel, and governing what you feel. This, of course, leads to the man being able to hear and adjust to a woman’s feelings. Jack was good at listening but his tendency to fix Sidney didn’t work. It never does.

The women caused the man to leave

Many men become involved with women who have a “deep hole” in their soul. My previous blog was about deep hole people, whether male or female. Such people tend to be very attractive, often very sexually active, often outgoing, fun-loving, and very engaging. They are, in a nutshell, the bombshell woman that many men are attracted to…unfortunately. I don’t know how they develop this bombshell manner, but I suspect they have learned to “be attractive” to men, whether consciously or unconsciously. So they “get” men, but then they began to display the deep hole phenomenon that starts to deteriorate the relationship with the man. Like Jack, men usually try to “fix” these women, but there can be no successful fixing of the deep hole. It needs to be healed. Deep hole people, whether male or female, tend to be in relationships quickly but not successfully, sometimes going from person to person, often being promiscuous, and usually having some kind of addiction, whether behavioral or chemical. I’ve recently seen two such men and one gay man who was “left” by the deep hole man he was with for a few months.

In one case, the man was somewhat sophisticated in psychological matters and concluded that the proper diagnosis for his former partner was a “personality disorder.” That was probably right, but I don’t like the diagnosis as it speaks of what is wrong with someone rather than what is right, much what can be done about it. The other “left” man simply gave up on his deep hole woman after trying to fix her for years. Both of these men were exhausted, one still exhausted from the end of his relationship a year after it ended. What happened is that these men got so drained by the deep hole women in their lives, that they finally got a grip and ended the relationship. In both cases the woman protested loudly that she loved the guy in her life and promised to be “better,” but it was too late. They had drained the life out of the guy who was trying to fill the empty hole. The gay guy had a similarly deep hole person whom he left because he couldn’t tolerate his lover’s promiscuity anymore. He was driven to leave his lover just as the deep hole women had driven the guys to leave them.

The woman who left because the man couldn’t

Now I get personal. This is me. I am not alone in this category partly because many men really want to leave the women in their lives but can’t seem to do it. I was married for the wrong reason: I wanted to have sex, and at that stage of my life, I couldn’t have sex while unmarried. Perhaps, more importantly, I couldn’t deal with the sadness and hurt my wife displayed when I suggested that we break up…even “for a while.” I caved. My wife was a lovely woman, but I was the one who propped her up in many ways, encouraged her, and helped her make a life. Eventually, I got tired of all the work and began to drift away. I drifted into another woman’s arms, also a good woman, but perhaps also a woman with needs that I couldn’t manage. However wrong it was for me to have an affair, it was the only way I could see of getting out of a marriage to a “good woman,” but someone who was not good for me. You understand, hopefully, that I delete much of the rest of the story for reasons of propriety and privacy of all concerned. So my wife left me because I didn’t leave her. I most certainly shouldn’t have married her, and most certainly should have trusted my feelings in the very first year of our 14-year marriage when I suspected that I shouldn’t have married her. I didn’t trust those feelings and paid an enormous price, the price exacted by the scorned woman. I won’t give the details, but this is now 40 years in the past and no longer are important to me. There are many men who somehow get into a relationship or marriage on shaky grounds, stay in it too long, and end up being left by the women that they don’t really want to be with in the first place. You can’t blame the woman here.

 

My encouragement to men is always to trust their feelings, however murky these feelings are. This is the core of the work I do with men and it is the core of work Deb does with women. It is hard work, but it is valuable work. Many marriages wouldn’t happen, would end quickly, or would be healed with good therapy if the man could be honest with his feelings. We can’t blame the women for our lack of courage, wisdom, and emotional maturity. It’s not up to the woman to do something. And when it happens, it is up to the man to see what he has not seen, not been willing to see, or otherwise ignores. The men that I see in the “left man” syndrome need to look at themselves, not the woman. It’s not her fault.

The Deep Hole Phenomenon

Three is a deep “hole” inside many people. This “deep hole” causes people great distress and often causes other people distress. So, what does it mean to talk about someone’s “deep hole”? It means that this person feels a certain “emptiness” inside that cannot seem to be filled. This deep hole phenomenon has resulted in many diagnoses, many treatments, and many misunderstandings. Instead of talking about these diagnoses, which simply look to label this deep bole with some kind of label, I prefer to first look at what the symptoms of this deep hole are, note how this deep hole affects how people operate in life, how it affects their social and intimate relationships, and what can be done about it. What I am really interested is how people can feel the deep hole inside of them and how they can find a resolution to the deep hole. Equally important is how their friends and families can see this deep hole and find ways to successfully relate to people with deep holes in their psyches. First, allow me to briefly identify the psychiatric terms that are used to describe this phenomenon

The diagnoses used for the deep hole

Borderline personality disorder (BPD). This diagnosis is usually used for such people. Interestingly, BPD was originally called “pseudo-neurotic schizophrenia” because people with BPD can feel and speak quite healthily, quite anxiously, or quite depressed, but there are times when they seem to feel and speak with a nearly delusional thought or feeling.

Depressed, anxious, PTSD, or just “stressed. People with the deep hole I am talking about can be anxious or depressed for sure and often think they suffer from PTSD or feel unduly stressed.

Bipolar. Unfortunately, this disorder is now quite commonly diagnosed and more commonly felt to be what one suffers due to his or her deep hole. Bipolar disorder is in the category of a “thought disorder,” which includes schizophrenia and an involutional depression.

Relational conflict. Understandably, people with this deep hole experience a good deal of distress in their relationships, both toward and from their partners and friends.

Now, let’s proceed to what I consider to be more important matters.

The symptoms of the deep hole

Felt emotional distress. The person does not feel emotionally stable

Lack of clear sense of self:  Granted, “self” is an undefined term. Usually people can’t clearly answer the question of what they want in life and what they can do in life.

Seeking undue amount of approval or attention: This can vary from demanding attention and focusing on what other people are doing to times of complete retreat.

Primary symptom of fear: Perhaps the most central of all symptoms. This includes generalized anxiety, OCD-like symptoms, panic attacks, and unrealistic fears all of which are beyond the range of normal fears such as loud noises.

An “external” “locus of control”: This is related to many other symptoms, such as seeking approval. The idea is that the person sees him/herself as unduly controlled by external events, persons, bad luck, and can include undue awareness of physical symptoms of distress.

Variety of physical symptoms: Very often this includes “everything hurts” as in fibromyalgia, but more commonly an intense awareness of small physical sensations that tend to dominate the individual’s awareness.

Lack of sustained relationships: The individual seems unable to sustain intimate relationships as well as personal, friend-like relationships. Often, the individual seeks more from a relationship that the other person can provide.

General dissatisfaction with work: Many such people say something like, “I don’t know what I want to do when I grow up.” Often, such people are professional but “fell into” their profession rather than choosing a vocation. They tend to find little value in their work.

Narcissism.  I hate to use such a derogatory term, but I use it without judgment and criticism. Narcissism in adults is the results of natural childhood narcissism resolved in childhood. In other words, if someone has not found a way to feel his/her core self and has not felt safe in the world, such a person continues to retain a childlike understanding that s/he should have everything that s/he wants.

The causes of the deep hole

There is much discussion in the psychological community, some believing that there is a genetic component, which is not my perspective. My belief is that there are two primary origins of this phenomenon: neglect and indulgence. Sometimes both. The worst possible combination is neglect followed by indulgence followed by shame. This is a situation where the individual is neglected for some reason, and then the child puts up such a fuss that s/he is indulged to keep him/her quiet, and then because s/he is still so outrageous, s/he is shamed with rhetorical questions like, “What is wrong with you?”

Thus, the individual does not go through the necessary stages of early childhood:

  • First year of life needs of safety, nurturance, and comfort. Quells fear in life.
  • Second year of life needs: exploration and experimentation. Establishes the rudiments of love in life and ultimately joy
  • Years 2-6: limitation. Allows for anger but prevents the undue expression of anger. Learns that s/he can’t have all that s/he wants in life
  • Year 6+: develops a depth understanding of loss in life, and hence develops a good sense of sadness because everything that is love is eventually lost.

Most people with the “deep hole” have a mixture of having failed to establish the basic emotions: fear, joy, anger, and ultimately sadness.

These early years of deprivation and lack of development are rewarded by other circumstances in life that reward undue fear that dominates one’s life, undue expression of anger that damages relationships, or both.

Examples of statements made

Consider the following statements that I have heard from people who display the deep hole phenomenon:

  • It if go to the hospital, it will be all about her. This statement was made by a man who had been married 40 years to his wife who was in the hospital for serious back surgery having suffered painful sciatica.
  • I deserve to be taken care of. This statement was made by a 30-year old woman who I tested as having a 125 IQ but felt that she was unable to work because of her “PTSD, depression, and anxiety” despite the fact that she displayed none of these symptoms.
  • F*** them; I want to continue talking. This statement was made by an individual with whom I had already had more than 60 minutes of therapy, in reference to the other people who were waiting to see me. (Note that the “therapeutic hour” is 50 minutes giving me time to reflect and take notes)
  • I want everything you have. This statement was made to the whole range of “friends” that this individual had in life. A clear reflection of his “deep hole” that he wanted to fill.
  • Even if you gave me more time in this session, I would always want more. This was made by an intelligent, capable woman whom I saw many years ago. It is interesting that she was aware of wanting but not really aware of how she wanted me to fill her deep hole.
  • I need someone to tell me what to do. This statement was made by an intelligent 15-year old who didn’t know how to do much that would constitute responsible, engaging, and meaningful work, play, or conversation.

The repair of the deep hole.

Nothing short of depth psychotherapy. There is no other means of repairing the damage to the individual that occurred early in life. Depth therapy includes understanding of what happened, feeling the sadness of the losses, primarily of feeling sad for not getting what the child wanted, and then the important element of making adjustment in life to get what they get in life followed by making a meaningful contribution to life.

It does appear that some people with a deep hole find a way to adjust satisfactorily to life on their own, or perhaps with a bit of therapy. This phenomenon might be due to the individual’s understanding that life is full of riches and opportunities but not full of what everything that s/he wants

Sadly, most people with a deep hole in their hearts and minds simply find ways to cope with accommodations, usually some form of addiction, chemical or behavioral.

Dealing with people with the deep hole.

  • Respect the individual. People with a deep hole need just as much respect, love, and care as everyone else.
  • Be aware of the danger. People with deep holes do not know that they are dangerous but they truly are because there seems to be no end to what they want. Their emotional hunger can drive you go give more than you want to give. If you do that, you will resent the individual and be shaming.
  • Limit, limit, limit. When we see people with deep holes, we almost immediately start limiting them in some way, e.g. not going over 60 minutes, not seeing them when they want to be seen (all the time), avoiding giving them answers to the questions they ask because their questions are always a form of, “Why can’t I have everything that I want?”
  • Avoid being angry. You can do this by limiting and not giving in…kindly.
  • Trust your feelings. Many time, you will simply not want to be with this person, which will hurt him/her, but is necessary for your own sanity and peace of mind as well as serving the limiting function.
  • All of this is especially hard if the person is a family member. I recommend that people allow themselves the freedom to “love him but not like him,” a distinction that is very hard for some people to make.

Perfect Love Prevents Fear

In one of the later books of the New Testament, the writer and apostle, John, states this:

“There is no fear I love. But perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love” (1 John 4.18, New International Version).

Other versions of this passage adjust words to some degree (The King James version has, “perfect love drives out fear, or casts out fear), but the message is the same. You might find it valuable to read the verses before and after this verse, which includes many words about love: God’s love for us, our love for others, and what the essence of love is. John is often cited as the “love apostle” because of his focus on love. He is the only writer to say, “God is love” although other writers describe God with other characteristics like truth, infinite, even beautiful. My task in this blog is not so much to give a biblical examination or presentation but to note that this idea of love “driving out” fear is interesting at the least. And this idea of love conquering fear (among other things) continues to be a position Deb and I have taken in our work and in our writings. In this blog I will offer my take on how “love drives out fear,” other things that loves “drives out,” what it means to “drive out,” a bit about what love is, and a good bit about what fear is. We think more importantly that perfect love prevents fear. The way we see it, fear is a “love problem.”

Fear is one of four basic emotions

Deb and I have been working with the concept of feelings for decades as well as the subset of feelings, emotions. This may come as a surprise unless you have followed our writings on the subjects. In The Positive Power of Sadness we discussed the centrality of the emotion of sadness. In our more recent I Want to Tell You How I Feel, we present a paradigm of feelings and identify emotion as an expression of feelings. We use the term “feelings” as representing the central core of an individual, sometimes called inner self, core self, or even God inside of me. We propose that feelings are expressed in four ways always in sequence: physical, emotional, cognitive, and active. Thus, emotion is an expression of feelings, and thus emotions are not to be equated with core self. We also proposed in this book that people tend to express their feelings in one of these four ways and may express them in another of these four ways. Yet everyone experiences feelings first physically and so on. The problem with most people is that we have not matured in our understanding, valuing, and expressing our emotions, much less the deeper, spiritual nature of our feelings.

Beyond this understanding of emotions being a subset of feelings, we understand that we have four basic emotions that are all related to love in some way:

  • Joy: the emotion associated with having something I love
  • Sadness: the emotion associated with the immediate losing of something that I love
  • Fear: the emotion associated with the possibility of losing something I love
  • Anger: the emotion associated the past loss of something that I love

In addition to this understanding of the current functioning of emotions, we propose that these four emotions are developed naturally in early childhood, e.g.:

  • Fear is the predominant emotion of an infant 0-12 months old. The infant is fearful or calm, but not angry, joyful, or sad
  • Joy is the predominant emotion of the second year of life. The infant discovers the joy of loving something, e.g. person, place, activity or thing. Ideally, the 1-2 year old is less afraid but still has the intrinsic fear that is accompanied by potential danger because s/he can’t yet really take care of her/himself
  • Anger: the predominate emotion of the toddler years, ages 2-6. Anger develops as a means of defense against the frequent “assaults” that toddlers get because of being restricted. Think of it this way: they got almost all of what they needed the first year life; they got most of what they wanted in the second year of life. But now they can walk, talk, throw, yell, and scream. So, they use these things to attempt to get what they want. They do not normally distinguish between wants and needs.
  • Sadness: this is the last and by far the most important emotion that children develop. Ideally by age 6, they have a rudimentary understanding that they don’t get most of what they want although it will take many more years to truly understand that it is normal and ultimately good for them to not get what they want.
  • Few kids get through these stages ideally.

So, what is the “love problem” associated with fear? It is the emotion associated with being afraid of never getting what I want, or perhaps need. Importantly, an infant does not distinguish between wants and needs. (Unfortunately, many adults have failed to make that distinction as well.) If the infant is not afraid when s/he needs food, comfort, or care, s/he will not survive. Fear is the most basic emotion we have, and as a result, fear is the emotion that the brain churns up when the brain feels there is danger. Why does the brain churn up fear when there doesn’t appear to be anything to be afraid of?

The brain and perceived danger

I have to start by reminding you that the brain is a machine. An incredible machine, mind you, but a machine. The brain doesn’t know anything. It is just like your computer. Your computer doesn’t know anything despite the fact that most people end up talking to (or yelling or swearing at) their computers, which are, like the brain, machines. Your brain knows two things and two things only: safe (or lack thereof), and pleasure (or lack thereof). Your brain doesn’t know people, love, ideas, things, or anything else. Your brain is programed to take care of you, namely providing safety and pleasure. Furthermore, your brain doesn’t know the future or the past, but rather just the present. So, in a manner of speaking, your brain is pretty “stupid” aside from being the most advanced machine in the known universe. So, here’s the picture as the brain sees it: provide safety, and if that’s taken care of, encourage pleasure. The pleasure part of the brain is hormonal, namely endorphins that are essentially happy chemicals (endorphins) that the brain secretes when you are doing something that brings your pleasure. The pleasure orientation that the brain has can lead to addictions but that is not part of our current discussion. I want to focus on the danger orientation that the brain has. So, here’s the picture as the brain sees it when it sees that there is some kind of danger:

  • Your mind thinks of something that is in the future that might be dangerous.
  • Your brain, not knowing the future, thinks there is some present danger
  • Your brain then churns up cortisol, which is the chemical that causes you to be aware, or perhaps hyper aware
  • Your brain churns up cortisol so you can be aware of the immediate danger that the brain thinks exists in the present
  • The brain doesn’t know that you might be thinking of something that might happen in the future, perhaps an hour later or a year later. The brain doesn’t understand the future, so it does whenever it determines that there is danger.
  • You feel some kind of increased vigilance, or perhaps even hypervigilance, which is identified by increased heart rate, increased breathing, and an increased awareness of the problem that is before you.
  • In all this, the brain is protecting you from what it perceives as present danger. It’s doing its job: protecting you. You didn’t ask the brain to do this. It did it all on its own.
  • You feel some kind of anxiety, which is a cognate of fear. The brain has done this for you. You experience it as fear; your brain experiences this as danger and the need to be hyperaware.
  • Think of it this way: you think about an interview that you will have tomorrow. As you think about this interview, you begin to worry that you might know what to say or how to say it. You’re brain hears this message but not the content (because the brain is “stupid” about such things.) The brain thinks something like, “There is a lion coming over the hill and we have to be prepared for fight or flight.) There is no lion, and in fact there is no immediate danger, but your brain doesn’t know that.
  • Your brain sort of “talks” to your mind (because your brain can’t think), and sort of says, “Please mind, figure out how we can protect ourselves from the lion,” even though there is no lion.
  • So you end up thinking more, and the more you think, the more you can’t know what you might say or do, and the more you end up worrying.
  • Sound familiar?

I try to help people understand this mind/brain interaction and get the mind in control of the brain, thus forestalling the brain taking control of the physical process of surviving and getting you to worry. That is also another story that we don’t have time to discuss at the present. Rather, I want to talk about the “love problem” that is at the heart of the fear that the brain churns up.

Fear is a love problem

Fear is the emotion associated with danger. In practical terms, however, we must ask, “What am I afraid of when I experiencing fear (or anxiety or worry). Understanding this phenomenon is central to overcoming 99% of fear and 100% of anxiety and worry. I need to be afraid if I am in genuine danger, like being stabbed by an assailant or being crushed by an 18-wheeler that has moved into my lane, but these things are the 1% of fear that is valuable and life-saving. It is no easy task to overcome the other 99% of fear. Underneath the question, “What am I afraid” of is the more important question, “What do I love that I am afraid of losing?”

There are several categories of things that I love, and hence might be afraid of losing. They are:

  • Property
  • People
  • Social contact
  • Freedom
  • Ideas
  • Self

Normally, we think of losses as having to do with people, like losing a friend for some reason, someone dying or getting divorced. Indeed, these are important losses. But the other elements I have noted could be even more difficult to lose. People that we call “caretakers,” like me, truly love property and the care of property, something that seems materialistic to non-caretakers, but the love of property is quite different from hoarding or acquiring. The loss of freedom for whatever reason, perhaps losing a job or being incarcerated, can be a terrible loss, and all of these losses are related to loving freedom. Likewise, the loss of an idea, perhaps the idea that you could become a lawyer but fail the LSAT, or the idea that you could really change the world in some way…all of these ideas are based on loving something be it abstract.

Of all the things that can be loved that I have noted (and there are certainly more), by far the most important one is love of self. I believe that one naturally loves him/herself at a deep level, but this love of self does not equate with liking oneself, much having someone else like you or love you. The loss of self-liking is frequent, as it should be, for instance, when I simply make a mistake and end up not liking what I did or even my approach to something. You can never lose your love for yourself because it is endemic to being human, but you can lose track of this love if you end up not liking yourself or you have important people not like you. So what does love have to do with fear, and the prevention of fear?

Perfect love prevents fear

Consider that every time you are afraid (or anxious or worried), you are concerned that you might lose something, namely the things mentioned above, like people and ideas. So, the essence of fear is love-based. Think of fear as love-based, and you will be able to conquer fear, and eventually you will be able to prevent fear altogether. There is no good reason to be afraid of losing anything at any time. Fear does not engender effective care, nor does it help you cope with a loss that you might have sometime in the future. Almost all fear is delusional.

What does that mean? Delusional? What am I talking about here? I suggest that most fear is delusional because fear turns into fretting, worrying, and other forms of anxiety. This occurs because of our “stupid” brain that does not understand the difference between immediate danger and future danger. This marvelous machine that we call the brain “thinks” that if it churns up cortisol and creates hypervigilance in you, you will then be protected from the raging lion that is coming over the hill. So when you are anxious about something, you are “delusional” because you have this brain-mind interaction that acts without your knowing it and feeds upon itself. Fear of the unknown and any kind of fear of the future is delusional because this mind-brain interaction sort of “believes” that if I worry enough about the future, I will change the future. You know better than that. I know better than that. But your brain doesn’t know that and then the brain gets your mind to believe that you can change the future by worrying. The only way to get out of this anxiety-based delusional thinking is to conquer fear or prevent fear by facing the love that you have because “perfect love prevents fear” as the biblical reference suggests. So how do I do that?

I face the fact that I have a “love problem,” namely that I love something that I could lose. When I face the fact that I love something and may lose this something, I will feel what we call anticipatory sadness. In other words, I allow myself to feel the potential sadness that I would feel if I lost this something that I love. And the deeper the love, the deeper the sadness. This is not an easy concept to understand, much less utilize in preventing fear and anxiety, but it works if you allow yourself to go with it. By the way, your brain isn’t going to help you in this process, so you have to learn to get your mind (soul, spirit, self) in control of this machine-brain. In order to prevent fear, you need to actually allow yourself to imagine losing the thing you love, e.g.:

  • Losing your life, your freedom, your idea…this is most important
  • Losing people you love, whether permanently or temporarily
  • Losing property, position, or possibility

What I am asking you to do is very hard. And you most certainly don’t want to do it. Of course, you don’t want to do it. Who wants to be sad? Who in their right mind would actually choose to be sad? Your brain certainly doesn’t want you to be sad, so your brain is of no help here. You have to use your mind. You have to imagine losing the thing you love and allow yourself to feel sad. Here’s the crux of this strategy of “perfect love prevents fear”: sadness ends. Fear doesn’t end. If you feel sad, deep enough and long enough, you will no longer feel sad. You will have faced the potential loss, grieved the potential loss, and finished feeling sad about this potential loss. By the way, eventually your brain will get on board with this program and not fight you in the process of anticipatory grief because your brain will learn that sadness is good for you because sadness is a “love problem.”

So be courageous and consider that you would feel sad (not afraid) if you lost:

  • Your property
  • Your life
  • Your spouse
  • Your child
  • Your idea
  • Your plan
  • Your freedom
  • …and anything else that you love.

By the way, remember, perfect love prevents fear and drives out fear. You are not perfect. You do not love anything perfectly. Therein lies the real task: to get better at loving, looking for perfection in loving, which means by the way, that you know that you will most certainly lose everything you love, but in the meantime you can enjoy loving what you have. Love everything with an open hand knowing that you could lose it at any time. Do this and you will find that get better and better at loving…and losing…and loving again.