Lizzie and I were talking about something entirely different, when Clyde butted in, as he always does, with a sharp right turn. Want to see what the orang has to say while I hijack Lizzie’s blog for the day?
Right Turn, Clyde!
Humans say some really revealing things if you take the time to listen. For example, have you ever heard?
You only want what you want.”
While this seems like a completely needless thing to say, its context can make it mean something entirely different.
On the surface, it means if we do not express desire for something, we do not want it; those with Spartan lifestyles use it to express their penchant for keeping very little, specifically only those things which are functional or specific to their environments.
Others use the adage to mean the one we got was not exactly the one we wanted. It is a way to complain about a gift given with the best intentions or to the best of the ability of the giver. In short, it is a snide comment made by an ingrate. No, this is not an extension of ITTTC; this is the receiver being dishonest with the giver.
Recently, this adage surfaced on an emotional level. The user expressed it as an exclusionary statement in a different way. Normally, it would translate to You are not my type. Instead, it meant I do not want you, but I do not want you with just anyone.
Confused? So was Clyde. How about a touch more background.
Stalker, our pet name for the adage-user, told Target You are not my type, even as a friend. One would normally take this rejection and move on. Target did; Stalker did not. What did Stalker do?
- Put Target’s house under surveillance (Stalker plus friends)
- Appeared where Target’s children would be
- Surveyed homes of Target’s friends
- Electronic observation of Target’s social media
- Friending of Target’s friends
The last one is the scariest because the effort was to recruit Target’s friends to move Target in the direction Stalker wanted Target to go, specifically, away from certain people of whom Stalker did not approve.
We often want for our friends, and especially our exes, they be happy in whatever relationship augments or replaces the one one we have/had. The largest part of that desire is knowing they will not reappear in our lives because they are content with someone else.
Occasionally, we fantasize our exes would find the one person who is so like them they could be conjoined twins, separated at birth; ergo, they can finally see what living with themselves was like. Like all fantasies, it is merely a dream.
What just desserts would be better than Target finding someone who was the same type? Stalker decided what would be better would be to dissuade anyone and everyone seeking to friend (or more) Target until Stalker found an acceptable (only in Stalker’s mind) suitor.
Stalker is not taking the typical stance which is outlined in three chapters of the Stalkers’ Guide to Being a Complete Douche:
If I cannot have you, no one will.”
Instead, Stalker is attempting to put Target into a relationship where Stalker has control or can ensure Target stays in a relationship where the circumstances are not optimal under any measure beyond the (twisted) one in Stalker’s estimation.
It is enough to make an ape wonder.
Why would anyone want to control the life of a person in whom one does not have enough interest to have a relationship? What is there about rejection which makes us try the impossible to circumvent it?
Hashtags: #rejection #psychology #stalkers via @TheM3Blog
Thank you for sharing The M3 Blog and Running Naked With Scissors with hashtags.
If you would like Clyde to take a turn at your blog, click his image. Thank you for taking a few moments with Lizzie, me and Clyde.