Confronting a person with boundary confusion

[changing]

There was a spate of these self-styled gurus a couple of decades back, but the basic move has been put on women (and men) since the beginning of time. Sometimes doctors, priests, elders and others use this tactic- some people even set up their own religions so that they can "teach", "purify" and "enlighten" others. Using email to groom potential disciples though is new to me (probably won't catch on- doesn't appear to be an effective method to worm one's way into someone's affections, but you never know- the pet rock was profitable for a time). The part about about the "Snake" kills me!!! Oh, LORDY- SO HILARIOUS!!!

Gaining Strength, Paul picked the wrong target! Maybe you can write a comedy screenplay about this (Cohen Brothers?)

Next time you go out with a man that you genuinely like, poof! the memory of this will fade into the ether, like magic!

Love,

Changing

[lighter]

 The last book he showed me was one with "couples" exercises with illustrations of a male and female hugging and "breathing."  I didn't really respond and haven't yet.  It actually sort of irritated me because I have repeatedly made it clear that I was not interested in having any kind of a romantic invovlement. 

   I bet'cha 50 bucks he isn't showing that 'couples breathing' book to men.   

Esp those he'sa asked out on a date......

and been turned down by, lol.

What say you, GS?

::slapping knee::

I just crack myself up, lol.

::ahem::

Don't let anyone talk you into cuddling up to this guy.... you can breath just fine on your own.

Trust your gut (read that as creep meter) and don't let him take up too much of your time.

[BonesMS]

Scientology???????

If he threw THAT at me while attempting to manipulate me to do what he wants....I would RUN, as FAST as possible, AWAY from him!!!!!!!  To me, that is a RED FLAG!!!

Bones

[Gaining Strength]

Okay - here's what I wrote back.  I'll entertain any Monday morning quaterback comments.  This has actually turned from utter frustration to a form of entertainment thanks to this group of fun loving characters.  Now Authentic I suspect you are going to be saying I told you so when I get his response but I just couldn't help it - I had to say something. 

Paul,

...  I have to take issue with some points on your e-mail.  I'll address one
here.  You wrote, "Barriers and boundries are for protection from harm.
Frequently however barriers and boundries serve to protect ourselves from what
is good as well as what is bad. It is then, that we should carefully question
ouselves as to what we are protecting ourselves from. If we are protecting
ourselves from physical harm or finaincial ruin we are justified, however if we
are trying to protect
ourselves from emotional harm, then we are misplaced in our efforts. Emotional
harm is only in the mind and is a result of our own delusions about what is
right."
 
Here is my problem.  I don't have the interest nor the inclination to get
involved.  The "couples" exercises are not something that interest me.  My
boundary is set but according to your logic the only legitimate boundary is as
protection from physical or financial harm because emotional harm is a delusion. 
Therefore - the only reasonable response is - yeah let's go for it.  Well my
answer is, "No. That's not for me."  I find your reasoning about boundaries,
manipulative.  I suspect you aren't aware of it but I ran it by a couple of
friends who saw your words manipulative as well.
 
I like you, I've enjoyed our conversations but I'm not interested in getting
involved.  I have too much on my plate.  I am reserving all of my time and
energy for my son and my work.  Part of the interior work I have done in recent
years has been specifically about boundaries.  This is a particularly
significant issue for me and I simply disagree with you unequivocally about
"emotional harm."  Your e-mail is a red flag for me and I must politely bur
firmly decline your offer.
 
I have enjoyed our conversations about our mutual interests and I admire much
about you, but I have no interests in anything tantric nor in any kind of
couples' exercises.  We've actually crossed a point of interest and comfort for
me.  It happened some time ago but I couldn't quite put my finger on it until
now.  I'm glad I can articulate it and be clear.


That's what I said.  I'm sorry but not really surprised that the concept of this friendship is illusory.  I really appreciate your help in getting it clear about what bothered me.  It is really no loss and just a blip on the scale of disappointment.  It's just too bad.  A friendship could have been nice.  But that poor old snake is going to have to remain dormant for a while I guess.

The good news for me is that my antennae are working.  That is very good news.  It gives me a little confidence to consider venturing out into this world. Thanks - GS

Bones - HE didn't say scientology.  Hops thought I might say it to HIM!! And just for the reaction you described.  Too bad poor old Katie Holmes didn't see that red flag! LOL

[lighter]

  But that poor old snake is going to have to remain dormant for a while I guess.

Heh..... remain dormant, lol. 

It was certainly fun to watch you get clear on your feelings then act on them.....

the best!

[Gaining Strength]

Thanks lighter.  The responses moved me from frustrated to LOL.  I love that new perspective.

[teartracks]

GS,

Lord I wish I could write like you.   You explained your position (no pun intended) so well to him.  I'm glad you're able to see the humorous side of this exchange.   

tt

[Certain Hope]

This is the line that makes me angry:
"if we are trying to protect
ourselves from emotional harm, then we are misplaced in our efforts. Emotional
harm is only in the mind and is a result of our own delusions about what is
right."

That's the manipulation that is outrageous.  It reminds me of a svengali, cult leader type line.

Dear GS,

Me, too!!

As you've written, "I do get why I'm angry now - once again the guy just isn't listening to me and is generating a logic for which a NO is b/c of something wrong with me "delusions about what is right" - DELUSIONAL!!!  No wonder I'm angry.  He foresaw my objection to his pursuit - boundary violation - and argued that my objection was DELUSIONAL.  Boy have I experienced too much of that kind of stuff in my life."

Exactly. There's something too calculated in that for comfort. I'm very interested to hear how he responds to your reply!

Hope

[Gaining Strength]

Lord I wish I could write like you.

Wow Teartracks - that is so nice of you.  I did know I could write particularly well.  Thanks for saying that.

I think the tantric thingy or couple's exercise, whatever, could be replaced with a lot of things that "friends" ask us to do...

I don't think this negates the friendship, however.

Yes Bean I agree with both points.

I'm very interested to hear how he responds to your reply!

I am too Certain Hope.  I've had a sinking feeling that I got too caught up in the fun on this thread and resonded too harshly.  You and Bean and Teartracks help me feel better about it though.  This has really been a good experience for me.  I feel like a teenager with a group of friends to turn to to help me figure out a boy problem.  It was fun to laugh and talk like kids.  I missed out on that as a teenager and this was fun to do with my friends here.  Thanks to all - Gaining Strength

[changing]

Dear GS -

You are a very nice person- you were not too harsh!!! I am proud of you. Please write that movie or a pamphlet or something to expose this type of madness (not everyone is as wise as you are). Besides, it could be hilarious!

Hugs,

Changing

[Certain Hope]

Dear GS,

Please re-read your reply to this dormant snake and highlite the portions where you were harsh.... ?

I see you thanking him repeatedly, assuring him that you like him, reaffirming that you appreciate him... but I'm missing the harsh part.

Love,
Hope

[Bella_French]

Okay - here's what I wrote back.  I'll entertain any Monday morning quaterback comments.  This has actually turned from utter frustration to a form of entertainment thanks to this group of fun loving characters.  Now Authentic I suspect you are going to be saying I told you so when I get his response but I just couldn't help it - I had to say something. 

Paul,

...  I have to take issue with some points on your e-mail.  I'll address one
here.  You wrote, "Barriers and boundries are for protection from harm.
Frequently however barriers and boundries serve to protect ourselves from what
is good as well as what is bad. It is then, that we should carefully question
ouselves as to what we are protecting ourselves from. If we are protecting
ourselves from physical harm or finaincial ruin we are justified, however if we
are trying to protect
ourselves from emotional harm, then we are misplaced in our efforts. Emotional
harm is only in the mind and is a result of our own delusions about what is
right."
 
Here is my problem.  I don't have the interest nor the inclination to get
involved.  The "couples" exercises are not something that interest me.  My
boundary is set but according to your logic the only legitimate boundary is as
protection from physical or financial harm because emotional harm is a delusion. 
Therefore - the only reasonable response is - yeah let's go for it.  Well my
answer is, "No. That's not for me."  I find your reasoning about boundaries,
manipulative.  I suspect you aren't aware of it but I ran it by a couple of
friends who saw your words manipulative as well.
 
I like you, I've enjoyed our conversations but I'm not interested in getting
involved.  I have too much on my plate.  I am reserving all of my time and
energy for my son and my work.  Part of the interior work I have done in recent
years has been specifically about boundaries.  This is a particularly
significant issue for me and I simply disagree with you unequivocally about
"emotional harm."  Your e-mail is a red flag for me and I must politely bur
firmly decline your offer.
 
I have enjoyed our conversations about our mutual interests and I admire much
about you, but I have no interests in anything tantric nor in any kind of
couples' exercises.  We've actually crossed a point of interest and comfort for
me.  It happened some time ago but I couldn't quite put my finger on it until
now.  I'm glad I can articulate it and be clear.


That's what I said.  I'm sorry but not really surprised that the concept of this friendship is illusory.  I really appreciate your help in getting it clear about what bothered me.  It is really no loss and just a blip on the scale of disappointment.  It's just too bad.  A friendship could have been nice.  But that poor old snake is going to have to remain dormant for a while I guess.

The good news for me is that my antennae are working.  That is very good news.  It gives me a little confidence to consider venturing out into this world. Thanks - GS

Bones - HE didn't say scientology.  Hops thought I might say it to HIM!! And just for the reaction you described.  Too bad poor old Katie Holmes didn't see that red flag! LOL

Gaining Strength, That was a very good letter in so many ways. Firstly, it was beautifully written; I agree that you have a gift for writing. In terms of the content, I felt that it cut through a lot of his `meandering' and went straight to the point, which is the issue of you wanting a different level of closeness to what he wants. You wrote it  in an intelligent and graceful manner, and I can't see anything that was harsh. You are very good at your `I feel' statements. You called him out on some manipulative behaviour, which you conceded may not be conscious (not that it matters!) and  you expressed that in a manner that was `direct' but not mean.

Mostly, you spent a lot of time explaining your original position, and it was kind of you to do that, because he probably should have listened to you in the first place and backed off a little out of sensitivity, instead of `educating' you as to why your boundaries are faulty.

Honestly, I think you've done a lot of explaining regarding what you want, and hes done a lot of explaining regarding what he wants, and there is a difference of opinion between you. Honestly tantric sex shouldn't be a deal breaker in a legitimate friendship, but it could be depending on how he handles differences of opinion and how much he wants things his way.

I don't think its really worth arguing this any more. Why should you have to? But if he tries to argue about this again, I'd suggest that you just say `I don't want to argue about this as you know my position'. If he's any sort of friend he'll back off.

I really wish you luck with this. I now its nice to have smart, interesting, male friends who you can talk to. I guess you're bout to find out if he is manipulator or a firend, and that is scarey. But I feel that you've gone about it in te right way.

X Bella

[Gaining Strength]

Okay - here's what seemed harsh to me - now I'm weighing it harsh or direct.

I find your reasoning about boundaries, manipulative.
I'm not interested in getting involved.
Your e-mail is a red flag for me

I think I was worried that the tone was harsh but now that I see it through your eyes Certain Hope and Bella I see it more as direct.  I felt that I had not been direct in the past.  I had not responded to other introductions to similar topics in a passive sort of way.

at the beginning of his e-mail he wrote, "When you were looking at the breath book, you asked me what hugging had to
do with breathing."  I did indeed but I said it with a lightly caustic tone and closed the book and handed it back to him.  My (indirect) meaning was, "You said 'breathing' but you meant 'hugging'. I'm not interested."  I clearly was not direct enough.  Perhaps direct is not as easy for me as I thought.

I got a reply and here are three points from his message:

My words are offered only for contemplation and I am aware that I am not perfect. However the meaning conveyed was apparently not what I had intended.
 Here is a quote: " Shared exercise is only a small part of the totality of the practices."

Ruiz  mentions that we are "hurt emotionally" by the actions of others because we choose to be.

I only wish to have partners interested in exploring the mind and body, through
yoga, martial arts and other physical and mental training.
 
And my reply:
I think this is an area of confusion as I would say I am interested in the above
as well.  Nonetheless that does not mean that everything that fits these
catagories is a go for me.  My problem is that the breathing exercises you
suggested crossed a line for me.  I am a little disappointed that that line
seems vague to you.
 
In particular I have loved the Ruiz material and the ensuing discussions.  I
have an interest in yoga and martial arts but not in any practice that I
wouldn't find in any public center around town.
*************

Thanks for walking through this with me.  I feel much more comfortable about my reaction and responses.  It has been a great help to have supportive feedback.

[Certain Hope]

Dear GS,

Thank you! I so understand the struggle to be direct and yet gentle, to convey facts clearly without stirring the emotional pot and to avoid giving offense where at all possible.
The fact is, when another person wants something that you're not prepared to give her/him, that's a tough row to hoe.
Often, I stilll think.. it'd be so much easier if folks would just take a hint... like your somewhat caustic tone and closing of the book when he first presented it to you. But now I see that's a throwback to my former days of expecting others to read my mind/heart when I didn't even really know why something about them disturbed me, let alone have a clue of how to convey that!
Reviewing these things here with you, by your willingness to share all this, is helping alot.


About this latest from him:   "My words are offered only for contemplation and I am aware that I am not perfect. However the meaning conveyed was apparently not what I had intended."

Instant reaction from me = warning bells, flashing lights, and sirens.
His statement could be a direct quote from npd-ex in response to my saying something like what you've told this guy - simple as "I am not interested."

Implications? "You are unrealistically demanding that he be perfect, when we all know how troubled YOU are."  Phooey.
More implications: "You were supposed to be bowled over by my warning that only a troubled person would have a problem with my suggestion. Apparently my intended manipulations of your psyche failed. Shucks."   

And more:  "I can't hurt you emotionally unless you let me, so if you get hurt, that's your problem."

And finally:  "Clearly you do not meet my requirements in a partner, as you have not realized my highly enlightened state of being, you poor, poor thang. Anyone who can't see the benefits of association with me in this is certainly substandard.  You NEED ME!!!!!"

Oh, pardon me, but BARFO!

Love,
Hope



 

[Overcomer]

I have to admit I am laughing at all these responses-do it with a man-go to the scientology Church!  It is so funny.  This guy seems a bit nerdy with his over the top rationales like you becoming a serial killer if you do not huh him!