So, is the so called "commitment phobia" a real phobia? Is this feared (specially by women) "condition" actually a pathology? Does it require treatment?
Maybe, if you feel nervous or uncomfortable and can't understand or avoid the emotional distress you are experiencing. But if it is just your philosophical grounds, there is nothing healthier or wiser.
Nevertheless, let's analyze it methodically and try to determine if by being single you are also sick, by looking at the elements found in the description of "phobia" and what is normally considered as "commitment phobic" attitudes which are all about your not surrendering to a way of life based on romantic ideals and limitations to your sexual and affective life.
Since there are endless possibilities of personal "symptoms", rationale and attitude, I will offer my own for this exercise. So, here we go:
What is it that determines my attitude?
1) Is it fear? No. I am not afraid of anything. I am just not doing something that I do not need or desire. It is just plain lack of interest, just like I don't feel like getting a tattoo or playing cricket. Am I cricket phobic?
2) Is it irrational? Definitely not. I have spent a long time - several years, thinking deeply about it, and considering many scientific and philosophical points to get to my conclusions. More rational and examined? Impossible.
3) Is it intense and persistent? Perhaps, but I would rather say "clear and serene", since it is my carefully thought-over attitude and not any kind of accident or seizure.
4) Does it prevent me from doing or enjoying things that I either need or desire? No, absolutely. Actually, it does the opposite.
5) Finally, bonus check: do I have any issues regarding intimacy, affection or sharing my life with others? Not at all. I love that and I do that. I just don't need shackles to believe or prove that I love someone.
So, as we can see, at least in many cases, what is called "commitment phobia" is not a problem and not even a phobia, but just a conscious and sensible option! This term was coined and is used by biased people, with a conservative or just dumb agenda where standard family life and sexual restraint should be absolute rules to be followed by all. It is a derogatory label created to discriminate those who choose freedom and a more natural and spontaneous approach to love and sex. Identifying it with psychological pathology is a clever way to stigmatize alternative life styles and the ones who decide for them, those who see no point in limiting themselves, denying their nature in the name of surreal values and ideals that are base to social conventions that have shown to be unable to meet basic human needs. Ideals dictated by a bourgeois society and everything it stands for: puritanism, capitalism, a social fabric and an economic model dependent on the nuclear family-oriented consumerism, simple-mindedness, comfort, conformity and so on. With this, to our personal sphere, come romantic beliefs and obligations, such as sexual and emotional dependency on a spouse or similar, limitations of libido through mandatory monogamy (serial or full), emotional dishonesty, immaturity disguised as its opposite, possessiveness, all those duties and rituals and everything else we know so well and is labeled as "love" or "commitment".
Well, it is all just too regulated and conditional to be love, IMHO.
This concept according to which not following mainstream behaviour is a form of aberration is just stupid. The fact that some ideas and actions are imposed and accepted by the majority does not make them "normal" or natural. And how do we know that? By observing other human societies who lived or live happily without our paradigms - yes, including romanticism and the so called "commitment". And the "different ones" are not less human, happy or loving than us. Some are actually more!
So are you surprised and relieved for not being a freak of nature, a psychotic who needs treatment and assimilation? Cheers!
Not yet? Make an appointment and we can discuss your case. Free of charge. I am a member of the Doctors Without Dimensional Borders.
No comments:
Post a Comment