Both pursuer and avoider styles are rooted in early attachment insecurity. They each carry inherent biases that complicate relationships through-out life. Here I want to comment on the pursuer style.
Commonly, the pursuer is viewed by both in the relationship, as the one most knowledgeable about emotional connection and attachment. Sometimes they are viewed as the “expert” in matters of emotion and connection. And, because they swim in emotional waters far more than their avoiding partner, this is partially true. However, because the pursuer adaptation commonly forms in an early history of childhood abandonment and chaotic family life (oftentimes traumatic), their pursuing attitude can leave them emotionally dysregulated and vulnerably exposed. They are typically the “carrier of closeness” in the relationship, but the form of closeness that they habitually seek is actually a “compensatory over-closeness” rather than the closeness of secure attachment.
This is a situation where the pursuers emotional seeking of the other Is “fused” rather than differentiated. That is, “the emotional seeking of the other” is dominated by “compelling inner need” for exact “tune-in” from the other. At these times, the pursuer ends up in protest towards their avoidant partner when sufficient attunement is missing. (Of course, this then activates the avoiders distancing defenses and a negative cycle ensues, wherein the pursuer ends up getting less than they had before the cycle). There is a problem however with the pursuers seeking of contact, and that is, even when they get close to the contact they seek, these good moments do not necessarily instill in them an experience of secure attachment going forward. In order for that to happen a deeper form of healing has to happen for them with their avoidant partner.
There is a complicated problem in all of this, that only gets resolved through persistent “eft unpacking” of the negative cycle. The problem is… the pursuer, and oftentimes the avoider, both assume that “the fused picture of relational contact” is the healthy form of close attachment that somehow the relationship needs to arrive at. But, it is not! And this gives both in the marriage the wrong idea of what they are striving towards. It creates a dysfunctional vision to guide the couple.
This confusion lives in both pursuer and avoider in different ways. For the avoider, the buy-into of the fused/over-close vision of connection commonly leaves them retaining a despairing conclusion that they will never measure up to how a relationship is supposed to be. For the pursuer, the persistent seeking of fusion closeness leaves them feeling chronically anxious that somehow what they seek with their partner never lasts.
Understanding how precarious things can come to feel for couples in the middle of disappointment/conflict/rupture I wanted to offer some informed understandings for couples to hold onto during these most terrible of moments.
First, I want to say, that it is highly likely, that the hard place you find yourselves in at this moment in time, is not an objective proof of fatal incompatibilities in your marriage, but rather is a particularly intense expression of “the negative cycle;” not evidence of inherent badness, but rather reflections of a particularly “bad dance” between you, filled with missteps, leaving you both demoralized and defended.
Second, I also understand that the “bad moments” can feel all the more bad in contrast to the hopefulness engendered by the therapy. There is a way that successful moments of reconnection brought about by the therapy can leave each in the marriage more vulnerable and less self-protected, resulting less defended hurting during the inevitable moments of let-down between therapy sessions.
Third, it is my impression that most couple’s therapies, at the start or the middle of treatment, depend as much upon the repairing of already occurring negative cycles, as opposed to the absolute reduction of the number of negative cycles to begin with. This highlights that the acquisition of the skill to repair is central to the success of eft treatment; this allows two persons to relax and not be so frightened of the next misstep to come… knowing that they have the skill to get back onto course with each other when the inevitable disconnections occur.
Forth, to continue with an aspect of the repair process, there are those terrible “push come to shove” moments that so many of us come to in marital therapy, moments when “we’ve had it” and we cross over the line and declare to our partner… “were done,” the negative cycle to end all negative cycles. In fact, these are generally not actual endings, but they do raise the specter of truly ending. This is a moment of existential choice, where one of several things can happen… but three possible outcomes stand out! (to be continued) An actual ending. Or the relationship can continue to limp along with added injury and insecurity. Or, one or both partners can shift out of projective blaming, drop down into the hurt vulnerable feelings underneath the negative cycle… and share.
Again, speaking abstractly, all interactions in a marriage are, at some level, about communication. Even marital fights, are a certain form of communication. In this vein, marital therapy is about trying to “decode” what is, at heart, being communicated; and helping the couple to discern the underlying message that each in the marriage is expressing about the partnership… and making that clear to all. This is always where marital therapy must start and end… a conversation based upon the couples underlying emotional truth.
However, it is my experience, that most couples who come into marital therapy do not have clarity about the underlying truth in the marriage. Although the couple may think they know whats going on in the relationship, in fact, they often have a great deal of confusion discerning the negative reactive cycles in marriage… versus the underlying emotional truths that truly drive the attachment relationship. Our task as therapists is to help the couple come to a deep recognition/understanding of how the negative cycles work, and to learn to communicate with each other from the core, “more true feelings”, underneath. This, of course, requires the growth of trust and safety over the course of the therapy. It is the creation of safety in the relationship that enables the the couple to by-pass the the tendency to respond with the defensive negative cycle… and talk to each other from the deeper underlying feelings of core attachment and vulnerability. And this is the place where the marriage starts to be each partner’s safest refuge in the world.
Speaking abstractly, each pattern of “being in the world” is a habit of seeking nourishment of that which is desired… and a habit of defense protecting against that which is feared. Habits are deeply ingrained automatic ways of behaving. Changes in marital therapy (and individual therapy) involve shifts to relating in new ways. And to relate in new ways with our primary partner means taking in offerings from them that we have long ago learned to ignore or diminish. Even when we consciously come to want to shift in this or that crucial way we still run into our unconscious habits that resist valuing, and often cannot even see… what our partner has to offer.
Most of us have had significant attachment wounding in our early lives. Hence, we bring to our adult primary attachments a certain amount of insecure expectations, to which we respond to with either pursuing or avoiding modes of defending. Most of us have never learned how to talk about these feelings, one person to another. Our romantic attachments leave us feeling so youngly vulnerable, we commonly function from the expectation that mutual attunement should just work out on its own. In essence, we commonly function from a kind of self-other fusion when it comes to our primary attachments. Hence when attunement fails or disappoints, we are caught without sufficient differentiation to be able to be able to actually communicate about our differences, rather, we just react.
