Originally Posted by Vinccenzo
It isn't anything but selfish to serve only you when people you claim to care about ask for.you to be there for them. It's not enlightened. It's not evolved. It's being a fair weather lover.
I think you are way, way off-base and out of line when you say this.
Quite often, the most loving and supportive thing we can do for others is let them stand on their own two feet and not coddle them.
To assert that it "isn't anything but selfish" when a person says they need their spouse for comfort but the spouse cannot necessarily be there for them in the way they want, is ridiculously judgmental and almost primitive, frankly. How do you
know that the "needy" person wouldn't have been better off solving his problem on his own, and that that would have been the best way their spouse could have been there for them? You weren't in the situation Cleo described and you obviously operate differently, so to make such a blanket statement rather surprises me.
Here's something I learned a long time ago, about when a person is sad or hurting and crying - most people automatically want to put their arms around them and comfort them with "there, there." However, in many cases, doing so actually short-circuits their experience of their own feelings. It is usually more beneficial to allow space for people to feel what they feel and not dissipate the energy with contact or interference until they have reached a place of having ridden the waves of emotions. Otherwise they stay stuck.
I think the shift from couple-centric thinking to autonomy probably has something to do with being more aware of and recognizing what people really
need -- versus what they say they need -- without attaching unnecessary sentimentality to one's "role" in the relationship.