Life Lessons, Chapter 4: Lonely Wolves

Are you a lonely wolf or part of the pack? Do you prefer distance or proximity? While we tend to lean towards one or the other, we usually need both to develop healthy relationships. Every relationship – be it platonic or romantic, is in constant movement between the two opposites: One is the proximity and binding force between the two people, the other is aimed at granting the independence and autonomy of the individuals. We need love, security and recognition. We need someone we can trust. Someone who is there for us when we are upset. Someone to share life’s fun moments with. We need family and friends, open ears and protective arms. Humans are social animals. However, we also need privacy, time for ourselves and freedom. We also need distance. One force tightens, the other loosens. Between these two poles, relations oscillate back and forth. How they are distributed is determined – as so much in our life – by our childhood. 

A dance between two extremes

The two opposing forces, proximity and distance, are usually shifted slightly between the partners. While one partner is more focused on the binding nature of the relationship and thus tends to bond, the other has the urge for autonomy and tends to let go. The more one partner lets go, the more the other tries to steer through increased bonding. She has not responded to my text message, perhaps I should send another one. – Wow, he needs attention all the time, he keeps sending me messages. Which role each person takes over the course of the relationship is usually unconsciously defined in the first moments of the learning process and often maintained over the duration of an entire relationship. Of course, this does not mean that one partner only bonds and the other only lets go, only that one force is more pronounced than the other.

Attachment theory

How much closeness we can tolerate is decided during childhood. John Bowlby, the British pioneer of attachment research and the Canadian psychologist Mary Ainsworth proposed the theory that human beings have an innate need to have a close relationship with others. How this works can be observed in the first year of a human’s life. Up to the sixth week, the newborn can change their reference person as often as necessary. After that, the bond to mother, father and siblings strengthens bit by bit. As soon as the baby can stand and walk, it can decide for itself how much proximity or distance it wants. Either it clings to someone or it finds everyone annoying and walks the world alone. How it deals with attachments depends on the sensitivity of the reference person: How fast the person recognises and fulfills the baby’s wants and needs.

In 1969 Mary Ainsworth made an experiment. She got mothers to accompany their babies into a room with toys. After some time they were joined by a strange woman and the mother briefly left the room. Then the baby and the strange woman were completely left alone. A camera recorded while the now famous three types of bonds were forming. A fourth one was later added by American psychologist Mary Main.

1. Secure attachment

Children in this category got irritated when the mother left the room and expressed their feelings clearly. Some of them cried, but let themselves be comforted by the stranger, played with her, explored the room and toys and soothed themselves. As soon as the mother returned to the room, their mood changed back to happy. Being securely attached means having a reference person that immediately recognises what their offspring requires and reacts promptly. The baby relies on the fact that it is not left alone. And in case of emergency someone is always there to help.

A secure attachment enables children to move independently and confidently in their environment, learn social behavior, and later to enter into stable relationships with other people.

2. Anxious-avoidant attachment

These babies were not really fazed by the fact that their mothers had left the room. They continued playing alone, went on discovery trips throughout the room and were neither angry nor frightened. What initially suggests a stable personality of the child, is in fact a negative indication. Further investigations revealed that the cortisol levels in their saliva, from one can read someone’s stress level were significantly higher than that of securely attached children. Plus, their pulse was racing. Anger and despair are no unknown demons to these babies. When the mother returned to the room, she was ignored and the children were instead looking for closeness in the strange woman. The child does not show its needs, it has probably learned that the reference person does not adequately respond to them. An anxious-avoidant attachment means the babies accept that they cannot rely upon their reference person; they expect their wishes to be denied, believe that they have no right to love and support.

In further development, this experience may lead to the child not being able to deal well with frustration and negative emotions and to not develop a positive self-image. Anxious-avoidant characters probably have often been rejected and therefore tend to avoid relationships.

3. Anxious-ambivalent attachment

These children are dependent on their reference person. When the mother leaves the room, fear and anxiety reign. The strange woman, the toys, the space; everything is scary and frightening. The situation is new and unpredictable for them. Even when the mother is in the room, the babies look frightened and insecure. Hence, the children are already stressed before their mothers leave the room. One moment, the child appears aggressive and annoyed at the reference person; while it is looking for contact and closeness in the next. An anxious-ambivalent attachment therefore means that the reference person is most likely unreliable; the child does not know what the reference person wants and therefore is unable to adapt. Not knowing whether the reference person is there or not. The baby does not even think of being curious because it is stressed and scared and cannot concentrate at all.

This leads to problems with distance in later relationships. Anxious-ambivalent children try to adapt and become dependent on the partner.

4. Disorganised or disoriented attachment

These children react very differently. Some of them yell at the mother as she is leaving the room, but remove themselves from her when she returns. Some are rocking nervously or go into their shell. Disorganised / disoriented attached means that the babies do not develop an attachment strategy, for example, if the reference person that is supposed to offer protection is simultaneously seen as a threat. The reason for this behavior is usually a serious attachment disorder, triggered by a trauma of the child or elementary distresses of the parents.

Somewhere in the middle

Proximity and distance are thus products bearing the stamp of one’s reference person. If you were allowed to act independently in all security as a child, you can later tolerate proximity well, but also demand space when you need it. If you grew up with separation and rejection, you will develop either an extreme amount of closeness or an extreme need for distance. In one case, you rope other people in and seek out those that are so close to you that you almost stand behind them. In the other case, you remove yourself from everything, out of fear, to be disappointed and abandoned. Both have their faults. With too much proximity you can chase your fellow human beings wonderfully away. Clingy people often orientate themselves so much on others, that at some point they are no longer themselves. However, if you remove yourself too much from your environment, you will become lonely. A scientific study has shown that solitude can even be counted as a cause of death. It shortens life expectancy as much as being obese or smoking.

Healthy relationships oscillate between proximity and distance. In functioning relationships, proximity and distance always resemble each other, provided the time component is included. This strength game makes a relationship come alive and is part of the paired dynamics, which can also challenge us again and again. In order to continue the relationship, we have to grow personally and leave our comfort zone. If this counterbalancing of the two opposing forces takes place again and again in a healthy way, it not only allows for personal growth, but also for real co-evolution at the partner level. For every change in one partner needs a change in the other so that the relationship can continue to function. That is why it often leads to problems if only one of the two partners is interested in personal growth and the other wants everything to remain as it is. Then it can happen that the evolving partner is "outgrowing" the other. If, however, both develop in the same form, the growth of the one can give the impetus for the growth of the other. Then the relationship can be reconciled by losing and regaining equilibrium on a higher level.

The solution

Even if you have had bad experiences with others so far, you can learn to trust them again. And that is exactly what it is all about. You have to trust. To give others the distance they need. And to allow the proximity, which you need yourself. However, trust does not just magically appear, it takes time to build up. First you have to fade out the negative experiences from the past and recall the positive ones. In this way, you can decide in each situation whether you want to give trust or not. And if so, how much. Sometimes it will go well, sometimes not. Such is life. You don’t need to put your whole life into someone else’s hands straight away, but at the same time you also don’t have to prepared for the worst for no reason. Expectations determine our actions. Looked at closely, life is very complicated. But so it is from the distance.

---