# Clinginess



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

I've been hearing a lot about clinginess lately; both here in PC and IRL. I really don't understand why so many people hate clinginess so much. "You left your partner because they always wanted you around?" that just doesn't make any sense. When I hear someone complain about clinginess, I don't think to myself, "Hmm. that's weird, they have an odd and different opinion. Oh well, I'll agree to disagree and everything will be just fine." That is how I usually respond, but when I hear somebody talk about clinginess I think "There is something seriously wrong with you! You need help! What kind of sick person gets repulsed when someone who actually cares about them spends their time, energy, and affection on them." 

I understand that everybody needs personal time; even I do, but the fact that I value time alone doesn't mean that I look at disgust at those who would prefer that I spend time with them instead. What is astonishing is the degree of importance people have concerning clinginess. With a lot of people, being clingy is a deal breaker. That would be fine... if these same individuals would also find irresponsibility, unkindness, jealousy, immaturity, and even violence as deal breakers too, but many people would gladly take any one of these qualities or even all of them in a partner before they would even considersomeone who is clingy. Why is that? Another thing that puzzles me is the number of people who feel the way they do regarding clinginess. It's not a situation where a small minority feels this way. It seems like almost everyone hates clinginess more than anything else. Why are there so many of you out there?

What do you think? What are your thoughts about clinginess? I'm just trying to understand where some of you are coming from, because it makes absolutely no sense to me.


----------



## sprinkles (Feb 7, 2010)

To me clinginess is more than just wanting somebody around. It's about whining and pitching fits if you aren't there for every second of your entire life.

It does get old, while other things can possibly be more easily overlooked when the person is not CLINGING to you. >.<

Edit: That was kind of a quick response because this is kind of an annoying issue to me as well.. but anyway.

Even to me, as kind of an insecure person I can get very attached to somebody... it's happened in the few relationships I have had. I can freak out when routines are broken, like I don't see the person when I normally do, and I actually don't like to be alone most of the time, yeah I don't always want to be in the same specific room at all times but I feel better knowing that the person I'm in a relationship in is available..

However, with that said, I don't pester the person about it... I may be able to talk about my insecurity at appropriate times, yes, but I'll not call them 100 times a day or try to make them feel bad for not being there. So I recognize that they may have something to do from time to time and I need to let them be able to do it even though I feel insecure or alone. 

Not to say that I'll let somebody abandon me totally, but I keep my expectations realistic even if my feelings aren't always realistic.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

sprinkles said:


> To me clinginess is more than just wanting somebody around. It's about whining and pitching fits if you aren't there for every second of your entire life.
> 
> It does get old, while other things can possibly be more easily overlooked when the person is not CLINGING to you. >.<


That's really interesting. It's not necessarily about the severity of the problem, but rather how easily the problem can be overlooked. I find that fascinating, and tragic, and a little scary.:shocked:


----------



## WickedQueen (Jun 1, 2009)

Hmmm...

There were few guys in the past that I defined  their actions as clinginess.



They texted me for more than 5 times a day, called me (or just missedcall me) more than 5 times a day.
When I reply the text, they were only talking or asking about non-important things, like what I'm doing, what I'm eating, etc. It's sweet if he did that once in a while. But if he did that every fucking day, he either obsessed with me or he had nothing else to do.
When I call him back and ask why he missedcalled me, he would say "Owh, nothing. So, what are you doing now?" *roll eyes* What I'm doing now? I'm studying, I'm working, I'm doing my home work, I'm CONCENTRATING with my life and your missedcalls annoys me. GET A LIFE!
When I felt annoyed, I ignored his text and missedcall. And then he would get angry with me for ignoring him, accusing many bad things about me, from being disloyal to accusing that I lost interest with him. *roll eyes* It's like he blamed me for his own insecurity. That SUCKS.
When we were having a date, he can't get his hands OFF me in PUBLIC area, which is EMBARRASSING. Dude, BEHAVE!
When he dissatisfied with how I treat him, I then told him he can leave me if he want and find another girl. Then he begged me to come back and being MORE CLINGY than before.

Well, at least that's how I define clinginess. An act resulted from inability to control his/her own emotion/desire, plus depending on his/her partner to cure his/her insecurity and to feel worth it.

Insecure people are sucks.


----------



## sprinkles (Feb 7, 2010)

marked174 said:


> That's really interesting. It's not necessarily about the severity of the problem, but rather how easily the problem can be overlooked. I find that fascinating, and tragic, and a little scary.:shocked:


It depends on what you consider severe too. I think feeling trapped with no escape is pretty severe, like somebody is limiting your freedom for their own ends because they have an expectation from you. It's like being demanding or controlling. Time should be freely given, not demanded.

It also has to do with the fact that it isn't quite as oppressive as abuse for example, so people are more likely to stand up to it, but on the other hand acute scenarios like irresponsibility or unkindness usually aren't always in your face, so there's a time to 'let it slide' when the person is not doing that thing for a while or they are away and it gets off your mind. If they are constantly trying to be with you, there's no time to let it go, it's chronic and in your face and anything like that can wear on a person after a while even if it is minor - like somebody poking you in the same spot 100000 times is probably going to evoke more annoyance than if they just simply hit you once. Poking is not very severe but with often enough frequency it wears on you over time.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

WickedQueen said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> There were few guys in the past that I defined their actions as clinginess.
> 
> ...


 Where does the line get drawn? I would agree that 5 calls a day is a little much and having nothing to say only makes him obnoxious, but the touching in public? Why is that such a terrible transgression? I agree that insecurity sucks, but is it really something worth leaving someone over?


----------



## WickedQueen (Jun 1, 2009)

marked174 said:


> Where does the line get drawn? I would agree that 5 calls a day is a little much and having nothing to say only makes him obnoxious, but the touching in public? Why is that such a terrible transgression?


He kept touching my bras and tried to kissing me all over while we're in public area, like malls, train, etc where many people watching and get awkward by his behavior. I feel like he using me as a sex object and disrespecting my private space.



> I agree that insecurity sucks, but is it really something worth leaving someone over?


The multiply effect of insecurity is imo bad for me. He persistently trying to force me to validate his feelings and depending on me to make him happy. When he think I failed, he will then blamed me for everything. In short description, his insecurity hurts me and kinda like a burden I don't wanna hold. I think everyone is responsible for their own happiness. You shouldn't depend on other to make you happy and then blamed them when you think they didn't try hard enough and they failed. That's just pathetic.

Plus, I have my own life and my own problems to handle. I don't need an insecure mate. So yes, it's something worth it to make me leaving someone.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

sprinkles said:


> It depends on what you consider severe too. I think feeling trapped with no escape is pretty severe, like somebody is limiting your freedom for their own ends because they have an expectation from you. It's like being demanding or controlling. Time should be freely given, not demanded.
> 
> It also has to do with the fact that it isn't quite as oppressive as abuse for example, so people are more likely to stand up to it, but on the other hand acute scenarios like irresponsibility or unkindness usually aren't always in your face, so there's a time to 'let it slide' when the person is not doing that thing for a while or they are away and it gets off your mind. If they are constantly trying to be with you, there's no time to let it go, it's chronic and in your face and anything like that can wear on a person after a while even if it is minor - like somebody poking you in the same spot 100000 times is probably going to evoke more annoyance than if they just simply hit you once. Poking is not very severe but with often enough frequency it wears on you over time.


 Personally, I somewhat agree. A relationship shouldn't have demands, but I do think they should have expectations. I wouldn't demand a girl to spend time with me, but I would expect her to; and I would communicate that to her. Every relationship has expectations. Some people see the expectation of being faithful sexually to there partner as a controlling demand. They feel like they have the right to be with whomever they want, and anyone who has a problem with that is just being insecure. Fortunately, most people don't sympathize with these individuals. So, where is the line? What is a reasonable expectation and what is the trap of an insecure clingy person?


----------



## OmarFW (Apr 8, 2010)

marked174 said:


> I've been hearing a lot about clinginess lately; both here in PC and IRL. I really don't understand why so many people hate clinginess so much. "You left your partner because they always wanted you around?" that just doesn't make any sense. When I hear someone complain about clinginess, I don't think to myself, "Hmm. that's weird, they have an odd and different opinion. Oh well, I'll agree to disagree and everything will be just fine." That is how I usually respond, but when I hear somebody talk about clinginess I think "There is something seriously wrong with you! You need help! What kind of sick person gets repulsed when someone who actually cares about them spends their time, energy, and affection on them."
> 
> I understand that everybody needs personal time; even I do, but the fact that I value time alone doesn't mean that I look at disgust at those who would prefer that I spend time with them instead. What is astonishing is the degree of importance people have concerning clinginess. With a lot of people, being clingy is a deal breaker. That would be fine... if these same individuals would also find irresponsibility, unkindness, jealousy, immaturity, and even violence as deal breakers too, but many people would gladly take any one of these qualities or even all of them in a partner before they would even considersomeone who is clingy. Why is that? Another thing that puzzles me is the number of people who feel the way they do regarding clinginess. It's not a situation where a small minority feels this way. It seems like almost everyone hates clinginess more than anything else. Why are there so many of you out there?
> 
> What do you think? What are your thoughts about clinginess? I'm just trying to understand where some of you are coming from, because it makes absolutely no sense to me.


allow me to explain why clinginess is usually a bad sign and is unhealthy behavior.

infatuations are not connections.

an infatuation is not the love for a person but for the fantasies a person projects onto someone who fits their fantasy template. it can also be the product of someone who believes they HAVE to be with someone in order to be happy.

that is not a healthy form of attraction and it leads to clinginess and stalking/obsession.

if a guy or girl has that much trouble letting go of someone, chances are their attraction to them is just a lie they are telling themselves.

in a real relationship, it doesn't matter how long you stay apart from someone, your connection with them will remain the same.

infatuations end; relationships end; connections don't.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

WickedQueen said:


> He kept touching my bras and tried to kissing me all over while we're in public area, like malls, train, etc where many people watching and get awkward by his behavior. I feel like he using me as a sex object and disrespecting my private space.
> 
> The multiply effect of insecurity is imo bad for me. He persistently trying to force me to validate his feelings and depending on me to make him happy. When he think I failed, he will then blamed me for everything. In short description, his insecurity hurts me and kinda like a burden I don't wanna hold. I think everyone is responsible for their own happiness. You shouldn't depend on other to make you happy and then blamed them when you think they didn't try hard enough and they failed. That's just pathetic.
> 
> Plus, I have my own life and my own problems to handle. I don't need an insecure mate. So yes, it's something worth it to make me leaving someone.


Yeah, I was picturing the "holding hands" kind of public touching:laughing:
I will admit, this guy does sound insecure, and I do think people *should* leave if they are being brought down by the relationship. But one should only leave after communicating the problem with the individual and after giving them the opportunity to solve the problem. It sounds like that's what you did.


----------



## sprinkles (Feb 7, 2010)

marked174 said:


> So, where is the line? What is a reasonable expectation and what is the trap of an insecure clingy person?


Unreasonable expectation. Whatever would annoy you is probably it, if you are a reasonable person. 

Expecting a girl to spend time with you is different than calling her on your way to work, calling her 10 times at work, and twice on your way home. It's especially different if you expect her to answer it every single time you call, and if she doesn't answer it, it will be 50 times instead of 10 and there will be whining and/or yelling if she finally does make the mistake of answering it.

And yes, people do that.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

OmarFW said:


> allow me to explain why clinginess is usually a bad sign and is unhealthy behavior.
> 
> infatuations are not connections.
> 
> ...


 I completely agree. My ex was a very clingy person, and she fit this profile perfectly. I will admit that her behaviour was not healthy, but I certainly wasn't repulsed by it. I felt sorry for her because she chose to have such an unhealthy, misleading, and self destructive attraction for me, but I never complained about it to others. It never bothered me like that; it was her problem, not mine.


----------



## Slider (Nov 17, 2009)

Girls are weird.

That should resolve the discussion.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

sprinkles said:


> Unreasonable expectation. Whatever would annoy you is probably it, if you are a reasonable person.
> 
> Expecting a girl to spend time with you is different than calling her on your way to work, calling her 10 times at work, and twice on your way home. It's especially different if you expect her to answer it every single time you call, and if she doesn't answer it, it will be 50 times instead of 10 and there will be whining and/or yelling if she finally does make the mistake of answering it.
> 
> And yes, people do that.


 I know they do!:laughing:


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

Slider said:


> Girls are weird.
> 
> That should resolve the discussion.


 Because they're clingy? Or because they hate clingy men?


----------



## sprinkles (Feb 7, 2010)

marked174 said:


> I completely agree. My ex was a very clingy person, and she fit this profile perfectly. I will admit that her behaviour was not healthy, but I certainly wasn't repulsed by it. I felt sorry for her because she chose to have such an unhealthy, misleading, and self destructive attraction for me, but I never complained about it to others. It never bothered me like that; it was her problem, not mine.


Then you will probably never understand that it is not a thing about rational justification, which is probably why you wonder how it can be classed above the other things you mentioned earlier. It's about whether it bothers you or not, and it obviously did not bother you in that way, so you do not feel the impact that others may feel.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

sprinkles said:


> Then you will probably never understand that it is not a thing about rational justification, which is probably why you wonder how it can be classed above the other things you mentioned earlier. It's about whether it bothers you or not, and it obviously did not bother you in that way, so you do not feel the impact that others may feel.


 Yeah, but my point is that it *shouldn't* bother people that much. Clingy people aren't nearly as dangerous as vicious people, yet the vicious ones get the second, third, and infinite chances. I sense an incredible problem regarding perspective when this happens. If people can be so sensetive to the impact of clinginess, then why are they so insensitive to the worse things?


----------



## YourMom (Mar 13, 2010)

I like my space. I also make it clear to all the women I sleep with that I have no intentions on being in a relationship. So I find it rather irritating when they get all relationshippy on me, like texting me everyday and stuff. It ain't happening sista!


----------



## Slider (Nov 17, 2009)

marked174 said:


> Because they're clingy? Or because they hate clingy men?


 
"Clingy" is a negative term and a vague generalization.

The onset of a destructive relationship is typically caused by multiple problems, not just "clingy'ness," whatever that is.

Many people like to place the blame on a clingy man or woman as being the reason for a break-up.

Because of this, I've involuntarily created phobias. If I call too much or show a woman too much attention, she might think I'm either desperate, obsessed, or "clingy."

The result is that I no longer call and I no longer text or initiate a conversation unless prompted by a woman.

INFJs, in particular, might be considered to be "clingy," because we always put others before ourselves. I'm always focused on the other person. That's just how I operate.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

Slider said:


> "Clingy" is a negative term and a vague generalization.
> 
> The onset of a destructive relationship is typically caused by multiple problems, not just "clingy'ness," whatever that is.
> 
> ...


I often wonder if this phobia is even more unhealthy than being clingy in the first place. Do people really hate it that much? Is this what they want? Would they be happier if everyone in the world never took a chance on them or even gave them the time of day ever again? Think about it people, because actions have consequences.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

marked174 said:


> I've been hearing a lot about clinginess lately; both here in PC and IRL. I really don't understand why so many people hate clinginess so much. "You left your partner because they always wanted you around?" that just doesn't make any sense. When I hear someone complain about clinginess, I don't think to myself, "Hmm. that's weird, they have an odd and different opinion. Oh well, I'll agree to disagree and everything will be just fine." That is how I usually respond, but when I hear somebody talk about clinginess I think "There is something seriously wrong with you! You need help! What kind of sick person gets repulsed when someone who actually cares about them spends their time, energy, and affection on them."
> 
> I understand that everybody needs personal time; even I do, but the fact that I value time alone doesn't mean that I look at disgust at those who would prefer that I spend time with them instead. What is astonishing is the degree of importance people have concerning clinginess. With a lot of people, being clingy is a deal breaker. That would be fine... if these same individuals would also find irresponsibility, unkindness, jealousy, immaturity, and even violence as deal breakers too, but many people would gladly take any one of these qualities or even all of them in a partner before they would even considersomeone who is clingy. Why is that? Another thing that puzzles me is the number of people who feel the way they do regarding clinginess. It's not a situation where a small minority feels this way. It seems like almost everyone hates clinginess more than anything else. Why are there so many of you out there?
> 
> What do you think? What are your thoughts about clinginess? I'm just trying to understand where some of you are coming from, because it makes absolutely no sense to me.


In a sentence, it's too exhausting. to further elaborate;

Imagine you have goals that you are trying to put into action and someone is always trying to focus the attention away from that to them. Imagine yourself as an introvert, you need time to recuperate from people and spend alone. Imagine having to censor a lot of yourself to please another, you're not being yourself any more. Imagine if you had responsibilities (ie children) and that person is jealous of them ends up compromising one or the other. To me clingy people are trying to fill a hole which they can't find within themselves. If that is the case they aren't taking responsibility for themselves. Who would they expect to take care of them...you guessed it. You. You become responsible for another's happiness foregoing your own...thing is this....you won't ever make them happy. They just need while you give. Then you give until you have nothing left to give. Total exhaustion! Then they move on to someone else and do the same thing over. All of this doesn't mean you never had good times with that person. You may have been happy but really....it isn't healthy.


----------



## Katjie (Apr 17, 2010)

OmarFW said:


> being connected to someone and clinging to them out of love is great, but it can only happen once you've broken down the borders of trust. if you try to cling to someone before that, they'll stay away out of fear.


Nice one. So true.


----------



## Miraji (Mar 12, 2010)

i remember a guy who was into me and this is how was it:
calling me all the time: i have a life for god sake and a job 
txting me at least 20 times a day : loooooooooooooool 
when i tell him im not into him and in love with someone else: he will start crying begging me to talk to him and give him a chance and when he feels there is no chance he will start attacking the other guy and telling me i am prisoner of a love that has never existed and already gone, then he will start talking to my best friends trying to convince them to talk to me and that he loves me


----------



## Miraji (Mar 12, 2010)

WickedQueen said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> There were few guys in the past that I defined  their actions as clinginess.
> 
> ...


you really seem very angry and pissed of


----------



## Miraji (Mar 12, 2010)

OmarFW said:


> being connected to someone and clinging to them out of love is great, but it can only happen once you've broken down the borders of trust. if you try to cling to someone before that, they'll stay away out of fear.


i agree it feels great when you are in love and trust the person you are with 
my current problem with my bf is that he doesnt care which make me really sad though i know he do loves me ..but wont call unless i call him, wont txt me unless i do..if i didnt talk to him he wont even care ..yet in the same time when we are together he will be literary sticking to me like a baby to his mom, touching me, kissing me, hugging me, cuddling me ...etc


----------



## OmarFW (Apr 8, 2010)

Miraji said:


> i agree it feels great when you are in love and trust the person you are with
> my current problem with my bf is that he doesnt care which make me really sad though i know he do loves me ..but wont call unless i call him, wont txt me unless i do..if i didnt talk to him he wont even care ..yet in the same time when we are together he will be literary sticking to me like a baby to his mom, touching me, kissing me, hugging me, cuddling me ...etc


is he an ENFJ?


----------



## Miraji (Mar 12, 2010)

OmarFW said:


> is he an ENFJ?


grrrrr i keep forgetting his type he is an ESTP


----------



## OmarFW (Apr 8, 2010)

sounds like there is some underlying issue for him that comes out when he is away from you. something that may be a product of insecurity on his part. but when you are physically around him, he has no trouble overcoming this problem, whatever it is.

i only think this because i have an ENFJ friend who almost never talks to me but clings all over me whenever i see her in person. it's pretty damn confusing. she also makes plans with me in person and then doesn't stick to them. the way she acts when she's physically around me is completely different than when she is away from me.


----------



## Miraji (Mar 12, 2010)

OmarFW said:


> sounds like there is some underlying issue for him that comes out when he is away from you. something that may be a product of insecurity on his part. but when you are physically around him, he has no trouble overcoming this problem, whatever it is.
> 
> i only think this because i have an ENFJ friend who almost never talks to me but clings all over me whenever i see her in person. it's pretty damn confusing. she also makes plans with me in person and then doesn't stick to them. the way she acts when she's physically around me is completely different than when she is away from me.


I know what you mean he is the same, lol we are getting married in 3 months...and i am soo pissed of because of this i told him the way i feel and how i feel and he promised to change but i dont think he will 

i dont know what problem he has, but i travel a lot and when i am preparing to leave he will not let me go and keep calling me and all of a sudden he cares and wants to take care of me ...but when i am home and its easy to see me and talk to me he doesnt...o i decided to act the way he do with me lol


----------



## Korvyna (Dec 4, 2009)

I always thought that I didn't care much for showing affection when I was in a relationship... But after being with my current bf, I've realized that it wasn't that at all... The problem was that in past relationships I wasn't as into the guy as he was into me... So I felt like he was constantly clinging to me and it actually made me even more distant. With my current bf, we're very in tune with each other, definitely more connected than I've ever been to anyone else, so I don't view it as clinginess at all.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

Katjie said:


> I dunno. I keep having to SHOW people that I am just friendly and I'm not chasing any guys. Some guys seem to have a fear of being chased and it makes me wonder what happened to them?? I am just being a friend and they think I'm trying to do what - I dunno? I don't call them unless we have already planned to go out together and I'm following up on the details/admin of it. I don't message them unless I absolutely have to or I would if I haven't seen them in about 2 months. To me that is being a friend. Someone who cares/ gives a damn! I'm not someone who stands/sits too close and I often flit around talking to different people if there are lots of people.
> 
> I think guys get nervous when I throw comments out about what kind of guy gets my attention. I'm usually joking around and I will say something about liking younger guys (which is partly true but doesn't mean I don't like older guys) and then the young ones will think I'm hitting on them! I put it down to EGOs!!!! What do you think?
> 
> Oh and another one is me saying I like your cologne/deo and they start edging away. To me that's immature. Just because I like the way you smell doesn't mean I like you! haha


I'll be honest, I don't like it when a girl starts "chasing" me. If she can walk into my life and fall in love with me so quickly, then she can leave me and break my heart just as fast. She's gonna have to earn my trust before I get too attached. Oh, and if you did those sort of things with me I wouldn't think you're chasing, I'd think you're awesome!:wink:


----------



## KyojiK (Apr 14, 2010)

Funny, most girls I've dated disliked me for displaying little signs of emotional/physical interactions and I thought I gave them enough. I guess some people hate "clingy" and others want it.

A friend of mine once went out with a girl and I learned they later broke up because the girl claimed he was too obsessive or clingy. I asked my friend what he did and he said he tried asking her on dates once a week, tries to phone her every once in a while, and I thought to myself, "Huh, so girls don't like that?" I, being the one who has no idea how social interactions worked, decided if I ever get together with a girl, I'll leave her with all the space she wants.

So.... various relationships I was in, I decided to do less of what my friend tried to do, like call the girl up only once a week, go out once a month, etc. I don't think I've ever kissed any girl I've gone out with because I thought she would be upset for intruding on her persons. Hell, I didn't even give hugs. I think the only times I ever kissed or hugged any girl was when I wasn't in a relationship with them and only for fun.

Various break ups I had resulted in the girl always complaining to me that I spent more times with my books than I did with her, leaving me with a major scratching on the head. I thought, "I don't get it... my friend gave more, but the girl hated it. I gave less than what he did to a girl, but why do these girls hate me so much?" Girls immediately broke my sense of logic at that point.

After studying relationships between various people, I began to realize all people are different and that their interpretations of clinginess is also different. Some people seem to love being obsessed over and others don't. Even now, I'm still trying to piece together what people look for in a relationship :/


----------



## polaroid sea (Dec 19, 2009)

clingy, whether physical or long-distance, admittedly turns me off. if only because i perceive it as a total infringement upon my time and space, and i'm extremely possessive about my time and space and frankly have shit to DO. i have a pretty difficult time with this because the guys i've synced with most (majority have been ENFJ and ENXP types) have also happened to be really clingy. and i always end up feeling overwhelmed and guilty whenever it reaches the point where i have to tell the person to please curb their enthusiasm.

i've explained my hermit cycles to an ENFJ i care about a great deal, and i'm fortunate that he understands where i'm coming from and respects my need to retreat into my cave periodically. i think there's a clear detectable line between genuine romantic interest/curiosity/demonstrating-said-interest-by-respecting-your-space and standing-on-your-neck-let's-be-TOGETHER-ALL-THE-TIME mania.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

The fundamental aspect of clinginess is not the amount of attention they want, but the way they react to your need/requests for space. If they don't respect that, don't respect _you_, then that's clingy. If they try emotional manipulation to put their needs ahead of yours, then that's clingy. If they negotiate a compromise, that's fine. If they respect your space, then it's not clingy, even if they spend tons of time with you. Some people can take that. To try to judge by amount of time, or "what girls want" or "what guys want" as if there were exact rules or as if either gender is homogeneous is essentially unsound.


----------



## Slider (Nov 17, 2009)

I'm not going to feel guilty or weird for wanting to see someone I like or enjoy spending time with. You people have committment issues. It's not us who have the problem.

In a past relationship, I remember conversations we would have where I would simply say, "Hey, I'd like to see you. I mean, we only see each other about once a week."

Then she would get pissed off and annoyed, because I wanted to plan a day and time when we could see each other. She would then have to use her valuable time to see someone she was actually romatically involved with, which would cause her stress. Why? I have no idea. She was psychotic. 

Like I said, "clinginess" is simply a word sometimes used by people who don't want to take responsibility and face their own demons. If you don't want to take into consideration the feelings and desires of another person, then don't date, don't get married, and live alone for the rest of your life.

But don't get involved with someone and then label them as clingy simply because you are too selfishly absorbed with your own life to share it with another person. That's what it's all about. Sharing. If you don't want to share, then don't try.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

Honestly, I do think that there are insecure people out there that are clingy, but the number of those people pales in comparison to the number of people who just can't handle a loving relationship and choose to brand others as "clingy" rather then choosing to face and conquer their own damaging and devastating personal issues.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

The other problem with clinginess is blaming the other person and pretending they have a mental problem just because they want space. Some people are busy. Some people are extremely introverted. Some people have health issues and are low energy. If you can't take it, find someone you are more compatible with, but to trash someone else just for wanting space? No, For reacting very badly for requests to spend time with them? _There_ you may have an argument, depending upon whether you were asking or nagging. There are extremes on both sides of the spectrum and sometimes deep-rooted problems, but mostly it's just incompatibility and poor communication.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

lirulin said:


> The other problem with clinginess is blaming the other person and pretending they have a mental problem just because they want space. Some people are busy. Some people are extremely introverted. Some people have health issues and are low energy. If you can't take it, find someone you are more compatible with, but to trash someone else just for wanting space? No, For reacting very badly for requests to spend time with them? _There_ you may have an argument, depending upon whether you were asking or nagging. There are extremes on both sides of the spectrum and sometimes deep-rooted problems, but mostly it's just incompatibility and poor communication.


 I respect your opinion, and I think there is some validity to your line of reasoning, but I'm having a little trouble. Why does someone _need_ space? Being too busy, having little energy, and being extremely reclusive (not introverted) are all serious issues. These issues shouldn't be ignored and overlooked, they should be addressed and eliminated. I've had some awesome insights from the posts in this thread. I think insecurity with clinginess has two sides, just like a coin. One can be too possessive, and one can be too reclusive. If a person says that there is clinginess in their relationship, that means that one of them is extremely insecure; every single time. Some people are just too weak to have a healthy relationship, and letting those people go can be a very difficult thing to do.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

marked174 said:


> I respect your opinion, and I think there is some validity to your line of reasoning, but I'm having a little trouble. Why does someone _need_ space? Being too busy, having little energy, and being extremely reclusive (not introverted) are all serious issues. These issues shouldn't be ignored and overlooked, they should be addressed and eliminated. I've had some awesome insights from the posts in this thread. I think insecurity with clinginess has two sides, just like a coin. One can be too possessive, and one can be too reclusive. If a person says that there is clinginess in their relationship, that means that one of them is extremely insecure; every single time. Some people are just too weak to have a healthy relationship, and letting those people go can be a very difficult thing to do.


Too busy is a problem. Busy isn't. If they're ok with it, then it's ok. Same with reclusive. The point is, that in many cases, they're* ok.* And having little energy is an issue, which often can be fixed with_ rest._ Not a night out on the town or long conversations. People need space if they're introverted. Introverts need to be alone. To rest, to regroup. Simply for mental health we need it. To think, to sort through emotions, to do the things we really enjoy, most of which tend to be solitary activities. To live our lives. We *need* this, all to varying degrees, but it is a basic fundamental need just as much as sleep is. We get very scary and worn out an emotional and freaked out if we don't get it. It is horrible and fundamentally _not ok._
There is a tendency to assume that a character trait in another person must be the result of a deep psychological issue that should be fixed, if it so much as inconveniences you (general you, not you you), if it is different from your character. Introverts can do that to extraverts who nag them about going out too much. Extraverts do that to introverts _all the time_ about needing to be alone because introversion is less understood. And it is not correct. Most of the time when extraverts disrespect our boundaries, they genuinely believe that they are doing it "for our own good" and that we "need to get out more." They think we are shy, and can't do things, rather than we genuinely don't want to. And there are enough people that are shy _and_ don't want to, and enough that are shy and actually do kind of want to, sometimes, and there are plenty of introverts who do enjoy going out, just not _all the time_, that the myth persists. Really though, most of the time they're imagining a problem that isn't there - because in their position, if they were acting the same way, there would be a problem.
I like this article

Again, this doesn't ignore that there are messed up people in the world. But mostly, it's best to treat people as it they might be sane, until you have _real_ reason to believe otherwise, other than the fact they like their time alone. Because if that's all you have to go on, it's introversion. Period.


I guess the other thing would be _focus_. When I'm working, I'm 100% focussed on work, but if I'm with you (hypothetical you), then I'm 100% focussed on you. While I've dealt with extraverts who expected 100% _availability_ from me, but barely talked to me when I did show up to events, since other people were there (though flipped out and acted _so_ hurt if I didn't come, and claimed to be thrilled when I did) and I'm left wondering why on earth it's so important I came if you don't hardly interact with me? Like, what's the benefit? Why am I putting so much time and effort into something - a group event which is even worse - if I apparently am invisible? People just expect - and give very different things, that it's best to communicate first before diagnosing each other with mental illnesses.


----------



## Katjie (Apr 17, 2010)

polaroid sea said:


> clingy, whether physical or long-distance, admittedly turns me off. if only because i perceive it as a total infringement upon my time and space, and i'm extremely possessive about my time and space and frankly have shit to DO. i have a pretty difficult time with this because the guys i've synced with most (majority have been ENFJ and ENXP types) have also happened to be really clingy. and i always end up feeling overwhelmed and guilty whenever it reaches the point where i have to tell the person to please curb their enthusiasm.
> 
> i've explained my hermit cycles to an ENFJ i care about a great deal, and i'm fortunate that he understands where i'm coming from and respects my need to retreat into my cave periodically. i think there's a clear detectable line between genuine romantic interest/curiosity/demonstrating-said-interest-by-respecting-your-space and standing-on-your-neck-let's-be-TOGETHER-ALL-THE-TIME mania.


Maybe the "E" types just "need" interaction with people more than "I" types so if you are attracted to your opposite than it's a matter of finding the right one that you don't seem to be having a tug-of-war with i.t.o your perceptions/needs.



marked174 said:


> I'll be honest, I don't like it when a girl starts "chasing" me. If she can walk into my life and fall in love with me so quickly, then she can leave me and break my heart just as fast. She's gonna have to earn my trust before I get too attached. Oh, and if you did those sort of things with me I wouldn't think you're chasing, I'd think you're awesome!:wink:


That makes a lot of sense. And thanks! :laughing:
One thing I've learnt from this thread is to get to know a guy better personally. Ask questions. Find who he really is and what makes him tick so that he can sense that I really like him for who he is and not an image/ideal in my head. I think anyone can get freaked out by feeling like they are being worshipped far beyond their credit - because you know deep down that you will eventually let that person down and that will be tragic.



KyojiK said:


> After studying relationships between various people, I began to realize all people are different and that their interpretations of clinginess is also different. Some people seem to love being obsessed over and others don't. Even now, I'm still trying to piece together what people look for in a relationship :/


Good luck with that. I think it's a matter of getting to know that person you interested in and find out what they want/perceive. It doesn't help to know what everyone wants because people are so different.



Slider said:


> I'm not going to feel guilty or weird for wanting to see someone I like or enjoy spending time with.


That's cool :happy:



marked174 said:


> Honestly, I do think that there are insecure people out there that are clingy, but the number of those people pales in comparison to the number of people who just can't handle a loving relationship and choose to brand others as "clingy" rather then choosing to face and conquer their own damaging and devastating personal issues.


You're probably right. People are scared these days. People do have issues.....

On the other hand there are legitimate reasons.....



lirulin said:


> The other problem with clinginess is blaming the other person and pretending they have a mental problem just because they want space. Some people are busy. Some people are extremely introverted. Some people have health issues and are low energy. If you can't take it, find someone you are more compatible with, but to trash someone else just for wanting space? No, For reacting very badly for requests to spend time with them? _There_ you may have an argument, depending upon whether you were asking or nagging. There are extremes on both sides of the spectrum and sometimes deep-rooted problems, but mostly it's just incompatibility and poor communication.


That's are so true.



marked174 said:


> I respect your opinion, and I think there is some validity to your line of reasoning, but I'm having a little trouble. Why does someone _need_ space? Being too busy, having little energy, and being extremely reclusive (not introverted) are all serious issues. These issues shouldn't be ignored and overlooked, they should be addressed and eliminated. I've had some awesome insights from the posts in this thread. I think insecurity with clinginess has two sides, just like a coin. One can be too possessive, and one can be too reclusive. If a person says that there is clinginess in their relationship, that means that one of them is extremely insecure; every single time. Some people are just too weak to have a healthy relationship, and letting those people go can be a very difficult thing to do.


The first part sounds like you are genuinely wanting to help people deal with their problems but the second part sounds judgmental. To me it seems like most people are insecure, they just express it differently. There may be many other things going on in a person's life that are affecting them. To blame them for everything is quite harsh. We can probably see things in other people easier than they can. We can't always help them overcome those things but can be a friend, a guide or someone who just cares to listen so that they can work through those things themselves. If we are judgmental I don't think we are any help to anyone.

Mother Theresa said, "If you judge people you have no time to love them" <3


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

Katjie said:


> The first part sounds like you are genuinely wanting to help people deal with their problems but the second part sounds judgmental. To me it seems like most people are insecure, they just express it differently. There may be many other things going on in a person's life that are affecting them. To blame them for everything is quite harsh. We can probably see things in other people easier than they can. We can't always help them overcome those things but can be a friend, a guide or someone who just cares to listen so that they can work through those things themselves. If we are judgmental I don't think we are any help to anyone.
> 
> Mother Theresa said, "If you judge people you have no time to love them" <3


 I wasn't trying to come off as judgmental, what are you referring to?


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

marked174 said:


> I wasn't trying to come off as judgmental, what are you referring to?


Well you're saying that being busy, needing space, and having low energy are "problems" that "need to be addressed and eliminated" --- when we're telling you that they are _normal human needs_ that need to be *respected.*

Wanting to help is nice. But if what you're doing is actually completely devaluing their perspective, disrespecting them, denying them the rest and recuperation that would help them, adding extra stressors, and putting a severe strain on their mental health, then is that help? Even if it's done from a place of affection? Affection does not excuse your actions if they are damaging - emotional abuse and stalking also both claim to come from affection and I think we all agree they are deeply disturbing (again, end of spectrum - not saying it's you). You have to be aware of what expressing your affection actually accomplishes, how it affects the other person. And if it's not for the good, blaming them may not be the best solution.

You say you still have a lot of difficulty understanding why people need space. As it stands, it therefore seems unlikely you are competent to judge whether that need is real or pathological. I would say, then, leave that determination up to the person who claims the need. Be there for them when they need your company, and maybe, if they really _are_ lonely - which is less often than you think - they'll open up when they know they can trust you -- but bulldozing over their boundaries in a zealous effort to do them good will get you nowhere.


----------



## The King of Suck (Apr 20, 2010)

Katjie said:


> The first part sounds like you are genuinely wanting to help people deal with their problems but the second part sounds judgmental. To me it seems like most people are insecure, they just express it differently. There may be many other things going on in a person's life that are affecting them. To blame them for everything is quite harsh. We can probably see things in other people easier than they can. We can't always help them overcome those things but can be a friend, a guide or someone who just cares to listen so that they can work through those things themselves. If we are judgmental I don't think we are any help to anyone.
> 
> Mother Theresa said, "If you judge people you have no time to love them" <3


It's great to know that people think like this. I don't think anyone I've come in contact with have this volume of insight.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

lirulin said:


> Well you're saying that being busy, needing space, and having low energy are "problems" that "need to be addressed and eliminated" --- when we're telling you that they are _normal human needs_ that need to be *respected.*
> 
> Wanting to help is nice. But if what you're doing is actually completely devaluing their perspective, disrespecting them, denying them the rest and recuperation that would help them, adding extra stressors, and putting a severe strain on their mental health, then is that help? Even if it's done from a place of affection? Affection does not excuse your actions if they are damaging - emotional abuse and stalking also both claim to come from affection and I think we all agree they are deeply disturbing (again, end of spectrum - not saying it's you). You have to be aware of what expressing your affection actually accomplishes, how it affects the other person. And if it's not for the good, blaming them may not be the best solution.
> 
> You say you still have a lot of difficulty understanding why people need space. As it stands, it therefore seems unlikely you are competent to judge whether that need is real or pathological. I would say, then, leave that determination up to the person who claims the need. Be there for them when they need your company, and maybe, if they really _are_ lonely - which is less often than you think - they'll open up when they know they can trust you -- but bulldozing over their boundaries in a zealous effort to do them good will get you nowhere.


 You speak of "normal human needs" that need to be respected, but your leaving out the "needs" that you don't happen to like. Clingy people claim that they "need" to spend as much time as they can with the people they are involved with. They claim that what they are doing is justifiable and might go so far as to call it love. Should I respect their "normal human needs"? This is the double standard that bothers me. I see no difference between the person who is too weak to be alone and the person too weak not to. It's like the pot calling the kettle black. Your devaluing the perspective of the clingy person, disrespecting their "needs", denying them the affection that would help them, adding extra loneliness, and putting a severe strain on their mental health. You can't have it both ways.
When I say that I'm having difficulting understanding why people need space I'm being gracious, not incompetent. I can understand what is real and what is pathological. People who need space have real pathological problems, just like those that need to be clingy have real pathological problems. Secure people are fulfilled with the relationships that they have, they don't need confirmation or affection to complete them; and secure people find peace and space within themselves, they don't let the outside pressures exhaust them. Insecure people blame others for their problems and demand that everyone "respect their needs". 
I know what people need, they need to believe in themselves. They need to rest in the fact that they are an independent person, and find peace in the fact that they are already loved more than they could ever know. I am not here to judge or condemn, the problems have condemned people already. I just want to find the truth, and share it with others. The truth might be harsh but it does not judge, or condemn, or sentence, or incarcerate. No, the truth shall set us free.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

marked174 said:


> You speak of "normal human needs" that need to be respected, but your leaving out the "needs" that you don't happen to like. Clingy people claim that they "need" to spend as much time as they can with the people they are involved with. They claim that what they are doing is justifiable and might go so far as to call it love. Should I respect their "normal human needs"? This is the double standard that bothers me. I see no difference between the person who is too weak to be alone and the person too weak not to. It's like the pot calling the kettle black. Your devaluing the perspective of the clingy person, disrespecting their "needs", denying them the affection that would help them, adding extra loneliness, and putting a severe strain on their mental health. You can't have it both ways.
> When I say that I'm having difficulting understanding why people need space I'm being gracious, not incompetent. I can understand what is real and what is pathological. People who need space have real pathological problems, just like those that need to be clingy have real pathological problems. Secure people are fulfilled with the relationships that they have, they don't need confirmation or affection to complete them; and secure people find peace and space within themselves, they don't let the outside pressures exhaust them. Insecure people blame others for their problems and demand that everyone "respect their needs".
> I know what people need, they need to believe in themselves. They need to rest in the fact that they are an independent person, and find peace in the fact that they are already loved more than they could ever know. I am not here to judge or condemn, the problems have condemned people already. I just want to find the truth, and share it with others. The truth might be harsh but it does not judge, or condemn, or sentence, or incarcerate. No, the truth shall set us free.


Is the need not the be alone something that can only be filled by that one person? Always? Usually there are _other outlets_ - for being alone, there isn't. That is why there is a lack of balance. Unfortunate, but necessary by the nature of the needs. It is not your fault - but it is certainly not ours either. And we do not need to apologise for it. Constantly. However, most of the introverts I know will drop everything and run if a friend genuinely needs them - at a very bad time, upset, sad, a real emergency. That kind of need, we are so there. But not just anytime they happen to need a person around to distract themselves with. Not just because they only know one way to express affection and refuse to understand that this way exhausts us and pretends we must be pathological for saying so. No introvert should be required to fill an extravert's _every_ social and emotional need at the expense of their own _mental health_. They are simply not _capable._

To be introverted is to need space, by definition. To be introverted is* not* to be pathological. There is _nothing wrong with being introverted_. And _any_ normal person is exhausted by_ excessive_ outside pressures. And a real friend will not put that much pressure on a person. A real friend will respect another person instead of declaring every inconvenient personality trait the result of a mental illness. You clearly do not know what is real and what is pathological if you persist in assuming needing to spend time along is pathological. It is, I reiterate, a normal human need, which some of us have to a much greater degree than others. And no one has any right to demand that someone else give up their life for them.

Let me put it this way: how would you like it if an introvert came to you and said "You must be so sad and unfulfilled living your empty life, going to all these meaningless events talking to these people, I know you must be talking to fill the howling emptiness inside your head, I know you are avoiding something very important because whenever I socialise a lot it is part of a self-destructive spiral, so clearly you are identical to me in every way, and I know there is something deeply pathological in your motives, there is something deeply lacking in your internal life that you fill it up with all of this loud obnoxious chatter to distract yourself from how hopeless it all is. I hope you can spend more time alone, perhaps a psychologist - I want you to be ok, because I _care._ I want to_ help_."
Would you appreciate it?

We value and need very different things. Pathologising each other is useless. Knowing what you are able to deal with in an s.o. is important - clearly you cannot deal with to introverted a person just as I would end up murdering too extraverted a person. Negotiating and compromising is important. _*But it is not a mental illness to enjoy and value being alone and it never will be.*_ There has to be a _great _deal more to it.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

lirulin said:


> Is the need not the be alone something that can only be filled by that one person? Always? Usually there are _other outlets_ - for being alone, there isn't. That is why there is a lack of balance. Unfortunate, but necessary by the nature of the needs. It is not your fault - but it is certainly not ours either. And we do not need to apologise for it. Constantly. However, most of the introverts I know will drop everything and run if a friend genuinely needs them - at a very bad time, upset, sad, a real emergency. That kind of need, we are so there. But not just anytime they happen to need a person around to distract themselves with. Not just because they only know one way to express affection and refuse to understand that this way exhausts us and pretends we must be pathological for saying so. No introvert should be required to fill an extravert's _every_ social and emotional need at the expense of their own _mental health_. They are simply not _capable._
> 
> To be introverted is to need space, by definition. To be introverted is* not* to be pathological. There is _nothing wrong with being introverted_. And _any_ normal person is exhausted by_ excessive_ outside pressures. And a real friend will not put that much pressure on a person. A real friend will respect another person instead of declaring every inconvenient personality trait the result of a mental illness. You clearly do not know what is real and what is pathological if you persist in assuming needing to spend time along is pathological. It is, I reiterate, a normal human need, which some of us have to a much greater degree than others. And no one has any right to demand that someone else give up their life for them.
> 
> ...


 I never once said that being introverted meant that there was something wrong with you. I agree that enjoying and valuing alone time is not wrong, even I do it. My mother is an introvert, and 2 of my brothers are too. None of them _need_ to be alone. They find peace within themselves, they have no problem spending time with others. In my entire life, I have never seen any of them get excessive pressure by constant exposure to extroverts, never. I'm an extrovert and so is my dad, and my brother and sister. Not all introverts demand space.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

marked174 said:


> You speak of "normal human needs" that need to be respected, but your leaving out the "needs" that you don't happen to like. Clingy people claim that they "need" to spend as much time as they can with the people they are involved with. They claim that what they are doing is justifiable and might go so far as to call it love. Should I respect their "normal human needs"? This is the double standard that bothers me. I see no difference between the person who is too weak to be alone and the person too weak not to. It's like the pot calling the kettle black. Your devaluing the perspective of the clingy person, disrespecting their "needs", denying them the affection that would help them, adding extra loneliness, and putting a severe strain on their mental health. You can't have it both ways.
> When I say that I'm having difficulting understanding why people need space I'm being gracious, not incompetent. I can understand what is real and what is pathological. People who need space have real pathological problems, just like those that need to be clingy have real pathological problems. Secure people are fulfilled with the relationships that they have, they don't need confirmation or affection to complete them; and secure people find peace and space within themselves, they don't let the outside pressures exhaust them. Insecure people blame others for their problems and demand that everyone "respect their needs".
> I know what people need, they need to believe in themselves. They need to rest in the fact that they are an independent person, and find peace in the fact that they are already loved more than they could ever know. I am not here to judge or condemn, the problems have condemned people already. I just want to find the truth, and share it with others. The truth might be harsh but it does not judge, or condemn, or sentence, or incarcerate. No, the truth shall set us free.


Is the need not the be alone something that can only be filled by that one person? Always? Usually there are _other outlets_,other friends, other people to talk to - maybe not for the most important things, but at least to gain energy and to cheer up - for being alone, there isn't. That is why there is a lack of balance. Unfortunate, but necessary by the nature of the needs. It is not your fault - but it is certainly not ours either. And we do not need to apologise for it. Constantly. However, most of the introverts I know will drop everything and run if a friend genuinely needs them - at a very bad time, upset, sad, a real emergency, a special occasion. That kind of need, we are so there. But not just anytime the extravert happen to need a person around to distract themselves with. Not just because they only know one way to express affection and refuse to understand that this way exhausts us and pretends we must be pathological for saying so. No introvert should be required to fill an extravert's _every_ social and emotional need at the expense of their own _mental health_. They are simply not _capable._ If by fulfilling someone's need for companionship I would need turn into a train wreck, exhausted, hysterical, an emotional wreck, losing all my other friends because I couldn't keep up with anything, and ill, then they are asking for _too damn much_. No one has a right to expect that much of a person. I will not sacrifice my mental health for someone else's especially when it really isn't necessary. There are always other people to talk to. They may not be your first choice, but I don't think me screaming and crying hysterically is your first choice either. We all make compromises. Like I said, generally we show up when it really matters.

And if someone wishes to express affection for me, then, if they are sane, they wish to do it in a way that genuinely makes me _happy_, instead of shoving something down my throat and trying to force me to enjoy it. Intelligent mature communication between people can help someone channel that energy into something that will be appreciated and not leave me prostrate. I'm not asking them not to express affection, I'm just asking for some time alone, more low-key events, and enough space, time, and energy left to myself that I can still have something to call my own. Hardly unreasonable. They always seem to have plenty of energy left over for themselves after all, why can't I have even a little? - only I haven't as much to begin with, so I can't give away as much without being sucked dry. That's not fair either. That's also no one's fault. It's just a fact people have to respect and cope with. I don't want someone to love me if it's going to make my life a living hell. Love doesn't make up for destroying my sanity and peace of mind. If it were real love they wouldn't want to do that anyway, and wouldn't blame me for the pain that they caused me.

To be introverted is to need space, by definition. To be introverted is* not* to be pathological. There is _nothing wrong with being introverted_. *There is nothing wrong with needing space*. And _any_ normal person is exhausted by_ excessive_ outside pressures. And a real friend will not put that much pressure on a person. A real friend will_ respect_ another person instead of declaring every inconvenient personality trait the result of a mental illness. You clearly do _not_ know what is real and what is pathological if you persist in assuming needing to spend time alone is pathological. It is, I reiterate, a normal human need, which some of us have to a much greater degree than others. And no one has any right to demand that someone else give up their life for them. To be clingy usually isn't pathological either (though I just dealt with a girl where it very clearly was - exceptional case) usually it is just a failure to realise that actually, we enjoy being alone, we are mentally healthy that way, we are ok, and no, you are not helping when you trample us. It is not something that can laughingly be brushed aside for your oh-so-much-more-important desire to chat about whatever was on t.v. last night. Communication problems, often a failure to listen, exacerbated by stereotypes common in popular media, and a lack of respect can account for most of it. Mental problems exist but there's no point diagnosing everyone you meet. If you do that, then you're doing it wrong.

Let me put it this way: how would you like it if an introvert came to you and said "You must be so sad and unfulfilled living your empty life, going to all these meaningless events talking to these people, because I would be, I know you must be talking to fill the howling emptiness inside your head, I know you are avoiding something very important because whenever I socialise a lot it is part of a self-destructive spiral, so clearly you are identical to me in every way, and I know there is something deeply pathological in your motives, there is something deeply lacking in your internal life that you fill it up with all of this loud obnoxious chatter to distract yourself from how hopeless it all is. I hope you can spend more time alone, perhaps a psychologist - I want you to be ok, because I _care._ I want to_ help_."
Would you appreciate it?
It's a fundamental disrespect of one's values and the way one chooses and_ needs_ to live one's life. Cloaked in affection means nothing.

We value and need very different things. Pathologising each other is useless. Knowing what you are able to deal with in an s.o. is important - clearly you cannot deal with to introverted a person just as I would end up murdering too extraverted a person. Negotiating and compromising is important. _*But it is not a mental illness to enjoy and value being alone and it never will be.*_ There has to be a _great _deal more to it.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

marked174 said:


> You speak of "normal human needs" that need to be respected, but your leaving out the "needs" that you don't happen to like. Clingy people claim that they "need" to spend as much time as they can with the people they are involved with. They claim that what they are doing is justifiable and might go so far as to call it love. Should I respect their "normal human needs"? This is the double standard that bothers me. I see no difference between the person who is too weak to be alone and the person too weak not to. It's like the pot calling the kettle black. Your devaluing the perspective of the clingy person, disrespecting their "needs", denying them the affection that would help them, adding extra loneliness, and putting a severe strain on their mental health. You can't have it both ways.
> When I say that I'm having difficulting understanding why people need space I'm being gracious, not incompetent. I can understand what is real and what is pathological. People who need space have real pathological problems, just like those that need to be clingy have real pathological problems. Secure people are fulfilled with the relationships that they have, they don't need confirmation or affection to complete them; and secure people find peace and space within themselves, they don't let the outside pressures exhaust them. Insecure people blame others for their problems and demand that everyone "respect their needs".
> I know what people need, they need to believe in themselves. They need to rest in the fact that they are an independent person, and find peace in the fact that they are already loved more than they could ever know. I am not here to judge or condemn, the problems have condemned people already. I just want to find the truth, and share it with others. The truth might be harsh but it does not judge, or condemn, or sentence, or incarcerate. No, the truth shall set us free.




A person who does have a need to have time alone does not inflict upon another by means of manipulation it is not an impingement on anyone's personal liberties. Clinginess brings about the idea of putting pressure on another person for their own insecurities and going about it in a way which violates personal space, violates another persons right to be themselves. In a court of law this would probably be obvious that the person sitting home alone in their own space is not perpetrating anything. The one who is stalking on the other hand......

The parameters of what is love and affection and what is "clinginess" are different. "Love" in my understanding is wanting what is best for the couple and negotiating what is best for the situation. "Love" is not defined by selfishness and neediness. "Clinginess" on the other hand is wanting to gratify a momentary need for the self, to fill a desire to make sure they are ok. "Clinginess" embodies selfishness and insecurity. Clinginess is all about acts of subterfuge to acheive this. These acts may come about in many forms. As mentioned earlier on in a thread there was the "pitching a fit" if the clingy person doesn't get their way. There are acts of sabotage such as bringing ultimatums to the fore when the other has crucial moments for projects or assignments. By definition clinginess is a negative. It is a form of emotional abuse. 

There really is no argument for clinginess being anything but a sickness under the guise of "love". Clinginess isn't the opposite of needing or wanting alone time. it is a form of emotional abuse because it is associated with unwanted manipulative and maladaptive behaviours.

If you were to google clinginess you will see there are many self help pages on how to stop the behaviours. You will also find that there are many pages on how healthier partners do not like it and will avoid a partner with clingy behaviours. There are no good benefits of clingy behaviours.

Google "alone time" and you will see a multitude of pages which state the positive benefits and how to acheive it. 

Yes devaluing a sick behaviour of a clingy person is actually healthy. The courts would agree when it comes to stalking A counselor would agree for mental health for both in the relationship in terms of the acts of subterfuge which impinge. Love and clinginess are not the same.

If you are to talk about love and affirmation and re-affirmations of love it might be more appropriate to argue the benefits of needs and times alone versus time together within that sphere. Perhaps another thread with this idea? I understand that you are probably thinking under different terminology. It just isn't appropriate to use clinginess as a point of reference when talking about love and wanting affirmations. It is like saying stalking is just making sure your loved one is ok by camping outside their window each night without their consent or knowledge (or for that matter being aware of your existence). *shudders*


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> A person who does have a need to have time alone does not inflict upon another by means of manipulation it is not an impingement on anyone's personal liberties. Clinginess brings about the idea of putting pressure on another person for their own insecurities and going about it in a way which violates personal space, violates another persons right to be themselves. In a court of law this would probably be obvious that the person sitting home alone in their own space is not perpetrating anything. The one who is stalking on the other hand......
> 
> The parameters of what is love and affection and what is "clinginess" are different. "Love" in my understanding is wanting what is best for the couple and negotiating what is best for the situation. "Love" is not defined by selfishness and neediness. "Clinginess" on the other hand is wanting to gratify a momentary need for the self, to fill a desire to make sure they are ok. "Clinginess" embodies selfishness and insecurity. Clinginess is all about acts of subterfuge to acheive this. These acts may come about in many forms. As mentioned earlier on in a thread there was the "pitching a fit" if the clingy person doesn't get their way. There are acts of sabotage such as bringing ultimatums to the fore when the other has crucial moments for projects or assignments. By definition clinginess is a negative. It is a form of emotional abuse.
> 
> ...


 You bring up a good point. I was focussing on the individual and their insecurities. I was pointing out there similarities, but I failed to bring up the differences. Insecurity expressed through reclusion only hurts the individual, but insecurity expressed through clinginess hurts both the individual and their target. Oh, and I wasn't saying that clinginess was an expression of love. Love gives, it doesn't take. In the beginning of the thread, I was talking about people who were labeled clingy when they really shouldn't be. I was talking about people who showed interest at an unattractive level, not an abusive one (I state tis for clarity). Somewhere along the way, we spent more time talking about those who do indeed have a problem. In retrospect, I still think that both expressions of insecurity are harmful, but the expression of abusive clinginess does double damage.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

marked174 said:


> You bring up a good point. I was focussing on the individual and their insecurities. I was pointing out there similarities, but I failed to bring up the differences. Insecurity expressed through reclusion only hurts the individual, but insecurity expressed through clinginess hurts both the individual and their target. Oh, and I wasn't saying that clinginess was an expression of love. Love gives, it doesn't take. In the beginning of the thread, I was talking about people who were labeled clingy when they really shouldn't be. I was talking about people who showed interest at an unattractive level, not an abusive one (I state tis for clarity). Somewhere along the way, we spent more time talking about those who do indeed have a problem. In retrospect, I still think that both expressions of insecurity are harmful, but the expression of abusive clinginess does double damage.


ok....then the problem lies within definition. By definition wanting alone time is not akin to systematic withdrawal of affection....which is the idea I think you were trying to say about unattractive opposite to wanting re-affirmation. 

The contexts cannot be explained by your terminology...just make us poor introverts shudder.

*peeps out window*


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> ok....then the problem lies within definition. By definition wanting alone time is not akin to systematic withdrawal of affection....which is the idea I think you were trying to say about unattractive opposite to wanting re-affirmation.
> 
> The contexts cannot be explained by your terminology...just make us poor introverts shudder.
> 
> *peeps out window*


There is nothing wrong with *wanting *alone time. I think there is something wrong with *needing *it. A person that wants to spend a lot with someone else isn't clingy, it's when he/she needs it that we start to see the problems.
I didn't quite understand that last sentence. lol


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

marked174 said:


> There is nothing wrong with *wanting *alone time. I think there is something wrong with *needing *it. A person that wants to spend a lot with someone else isn't clingy, it's when he/she needs it that we start to see the problems.


OK so we are back to where we started. I am actually finding it insulting/offensive that you refer alone time....not withdrawal of affection...as a behaviour which is associated with romance whatsoever. I suggest you read up about introversion/extroversion. 

Here is a thread on needs vs desire on introversion.


http://personalitycafe.com/intj-forum-scientists/18226-alone-time-need-desire.html

I suggest a thread on romance between extroverts and introverts if you wanted further investigate this. Again the terminology is flawed.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> OK so we are back to where we started. I am actually finding it insulting/offensive that you refer alone time....not withdrawal of affection...as a behaviour which is associated with romance whatsoever. I suggest you read up about introversion/extroversion.
> 
> Here is a thread on needs vs desire on introversion.
> 
> ...


 I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to piss you off. What would you define as a withdrawal of affection? I was a little confused with that.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

marked174 said:


> I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to piss you off. What would you define as a withdrawal of affection? I was a little confused with that.


Withdrawal of affection is simply when you shut off from the other person as a means to punish...to get your way....especially if you know the person is going to freak out somewhat because of it. It is a behaviour that someone who has antisocial characteristics might use. It is totally different to wanting space for health reasons. It could be seen as an equal opposite to a clinging manipulative behaviour to get what they want but for different reasons. Someone who uses the withdrawing is just as controlling. It isn't a need.

Thanks for your apology...geez I felt like I was back in an old relationship there for a minute:crazy:


----------



## Crystall (Mar 30, 2010)

I'm an extrovert so generally being around other people, even counseling/helping them, energizes me. 
To me, clingy people draw energy from me in stead. It's as if they need and depend on my energy, my ideas, my sense of humor, my parties or friends, or what have you, to entertain them/energize them/comfort them. It makes for a very one sided relationship. They are always leaning on me, but what's in it for me? If someone keeps asking me to hang out/talk to them/lend them things, and I keep turning them down, they need to realize that I'm sick of them being my tail, and BACK OFF! The more they ask, the less I want to see them at all.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> Withdrawal of affection is simply when you shut off from the other person as a means to punish...to get your way....especially if you know the person is going to freak out somewhat because of it. It is a behaviour that someone who has antisocial characteristics might use. It is totally different to wanting space for health reasons. It could be seen as an equal opposite to a clinging manipulative behaviour to get what they want but for different reasons. Someone who uses the withdrawing is just as controlling. It isn't a need.
> 
> Thanks for your apology...geez I felt like I was back in an old relationship there for a minute:crazy:


 Oh! yeah, that behaviour really sucks. I wasn't talking about that, but I think that behaviour is really, really bad. Personally, I wouldn't tolerate it. If a girl did that to me, I'd drop her faster then I would if she cheated! 
Yeah, it's not cool being on different wavelengths.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

marked174 said:


> Oh! yeah, that behaviour really sucks. I wasn't talking about that, but I think that behaviour is really, really bad. Personally, I wouldn't tolerate it. If a girl did that to me, I'd drop her faster then I would if she cheated!
> Yeah, it's not cool being on different wavelengths.


So what was it that you meant?

I would dump both the clingy and the withdrawer, in a heartbeat....I have more patience for clingy people strangely enough than the other....they are both unhealthy ways of dealing with emotional issues. At least with the clingy you can see they have feelings....as mixed up as they are...the withdrawer is a player...they may not actually feel much feeling at all but use yours against you instead.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> So what was it that you meant?
> 
> I would dump both the clingy and the withdrawer, in a heartbeat....I have more patience for clingy people strangely enough than the other....they are both unhealthy ways of dealing with emotional issues. At least with the clingy you can see they have feelings....as mixed up as they are...the withdrawer is a player...they may not actually feel much feeling at all but use yours against you instead.


 You're not gonna like it, but I was talking about alone time.:shocked: I still think it's unhealthy to need to be alone, and it's unhealthy to need not to be alone. People should be strong enough to handle both. I'm not saying that they should go without forever. *I guess it's not about needing as much as it's needing right now*. It's kinda like sleep or food. Everybody needs sleep, but that doesn't mean you should get cranky just because you're tired, and sometimes you just need to stay awake; even when you don't want to. I guess it's a matter of discipline, but it's important to keep in mind that it goes both ways.
That being said, I think that needing to be alone or to not be alone (right now) is unhealthy, being clingy, a withdrawer, or a cheater is downright destructive.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

marked174 said:


> You're not gonna like it, but I was talking about alone time.:shocked: I still think it's unhealthy to need to be alone, and it's unhealthy to need not to be alone. People should be strong enough to handle both. I'm not saying that they should go without forever. *I guess it's not about needing as much as it's needing right now*. It's kinda like sleep or food. Everybody needs sleep, but that doesn't mean you should get cranky just because you're tired, and sometimes you just need to stay awake; even when you don't want to. I guess it's a matter of discipline, but it's important to keep in mind that it goes both ways.
> That being said, I think that needing to be alone or to not be alone (right now) is unhealthy, being clingy, a withdrawer, or a cheater is downright destructive.



Of course you don't get the introversion you're a fucking extrovert!
If you ever get into a relationship with an introvert I suggest heavily reading up about it. She/he will dump you if you carry on like this...hell I nearly dumped you a few posts back.:tongue:
If I were to say to you stop going out and stop talking to people you would see that as unhealthy. You would see it as controlling behaviour. That is simply what you are saying to me...only opposite.

It's egocentric and not very useful in a relationship to say I'm right....we live by my rules...yeah, fuck that...LOL


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> Of course you don't get the introversion your a fucking extrovert!
> If you ever get into a relationship with an introvert I suggest heavily reading up about it. She/he will dump you if you carry on like this...hell I nearly dumped you a few posts back.:tongue:
> If I were to say to you stop going out and stop talking to people you would see that as unhealthy. You would see it as controlling behaviour. That is simply what you are saying to me...only opposite.
> 
> It's egocentric and not very useful in a relationship to say I'm right....we live by my rules...yeah, fuck that...LOL


 :shocked: I'm not telling you you shouldn't have alone time. What I'm trying to say is that it's not right to expect others to treat you a certain way as soon as you want them to. I shouldn't expect someone to spend time with me just because I want it, and I shouldn't expect someone to leave me alone just because I want them to. For the purpose of the discussion, I'm basically saying what I think people should do; but if I was in a relationship, I wouldn't. It's not my job to change my SO. It is, however, my responsibility to make sure that I am the best man that I could be. I wouldn't demand that she spend time with me just because I feel like I need it, what she needs comes first. However, I would expect the same treatment from her. If she felt like she has the right to demand alone time whenever she wants, I would probably break things off, and if I feel like I have the right to demand together time whenever I want, then she should break things off with me. Love means putting someone else before yourself. If our "needs" come first, then that means we really don't love one another.
Oh, and I don't believe it. You would never dump me.:happy:


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

marked174 said:


> :shocked: I'm not telling you you shouldn't have alone time. What I'm trying to say is that it's not right to expect others to treat you a certain way as soon as you want them to. I shouldn't expect someone to spend time with me just because I want it, and I shouldn't expect someone to leave me alone just because I want them to. For the purpose of the discussion, I'm basically saying what I think people should do; but if I was in a relationship, I wouldn't. It's not my job to change my SO. It is, however, my responsibility to make sure that I am the best man that I could be. I wouldn't demand that she spend time with me just because I feel like I need it, what she needs comes first. However, I would expect the same treatment from her. If she felt like she has the right to demand alone time whenever she wants, I would probably break things off, and if I feel like I have the right to demand together time whenever I want, then she should break things off with me. Love means putting someone else before yourself. If our "needs" come first, then that means we really don't love one another.
> Oh, and I don't believe it. You would never dump me.:happy:


OK there are things you have probably missed about introversion....the point is...when you need the alone time you simply need the alone time...well particularly for probably the most irritable INTJ...trust me on this....you just really don't want to be around us anyway if we got to the stage where we needed time alone...we don't make sense any more...I physically disintegrate if I am around people for an extended period of time....you can actually see the effects. I get headaches, I'm tired, my immune system starts to break down, it's messy (I actually developed an autoimmune disorder which is triggered by stress just living with an E). It's really just better to trust the judgement of someone who knows themselves and respect them for self responsibility.

I lived with an ENFP for 4 unmitigated disasterous years. He did not understand my boundaries or needing time to myself. He was dumped (since his departure I have only had a couple of relapses with autoimmune disorder rather than all the time with him). I have already been into how totally draining the experience was with him on another thread....rather than go over old ground I would say to you to either get the information on what it means to be introverted or just not go into a relationship with one in the first place. It will save you and her/him a whole lot of pain.


----------



## Katjie (Apr 17, 2010)

marked174 said:


> If a person says that there is clinginess in their relationship, that means that *one of them is extremely insecure; every single time*.* Some people are just too weak to have a healthy relationship*, and letting those people go can be a very difficult thing to do.


You asked what was judgmental and someone else answered for me, lol, but there I highlighted it in bold for you. I just wondered how you could say that with such finality.



marked174 said:


> Your devaluing the perspective of the clingy person, disrespecting their "needs", denying them the affection that would help them, adding extra loneliness, and putting a severe strain on their mental health. You can't have it both ways.


Wooah, I don't think we need to take *that *much responsibility for someone else's mental health.... I once had a wannabe-boyfriend who was all sweet and stuff until I said it wasn't going to work out and he told me he was going to commit suicide and he even told me how. 3 weeks later he was dating another girl. They have been together 6 years now and are engaged (finally - lol!). Imagine if I had fallen for that suicide line and actually gone into that relationship - wouldn't have helped either of us!



marked174 said:


> Secure people are fulfilled with the relationships that they have, they don't need confirmation or affection to complete them; and secure people find peace and space within themselves, they don't let the outside pressures exhaust them. Insecure people blame others for their problems and demand that everyone "respect their needs".


Sounds good. Not sure if anyone is ever that secure though. Maybe some are just more secure and others are just less secure. That kind of insecurity that you are talking about it pretty obvious though and pretty irritating. It sounds like a maturity issue though. I may be be wrong but generally you won't find a lot of older people who are that insecure, except for maybe an alcoholic who didn't spend enough time being sober to actually face their problems and grow up!

By the way, I can see your heart in this conversation. You have a good heart but you are getting misunderstood so easily here when people take some of your comments and blow them up - haha - sorry man!



lirulin said:


> No introvert should be required to fill an extravert's _every_ social and emotional need at the expense of their own _mental health_. They are simply not _capable._


True. Extroverts should know this though. As an extrovert myself what I don't always realise is what the capacity of the introvert is for social interaction. One can't always tell what the other person's limit is and I think it is a dynamic thing anyway. Each introvert may have a different capacity from the next but that may also change from day to day! Ah the mysteries of human nature! Fluid and dynamic, adapting and changing from moment to moment, we could write poetry about it :laughing:



bethdeth said:


> Clinginess brings about the idea of putting pressure on another person for their own insecurities and going about it in a way which violates personal space, violates another persons right to be themselves. In a court of law this would probably be obvious that the person sitting home alone in their own space is not perpetrating anything. The one who is stalking on the other hand......


Yes that is true clinginess. I think that is what marked174 is trying to get at. People often cry "clinginess!" when the behaviour hasn't reached such a level yet and they make a huge fuss about it when there are other (worse) things to worry about. At least, that's what it seems like... who knows? Who can be the judge on someone else's personal and subjective relationship? All you can do is believe that that is how they feel, regardless of whether it is "true" or not. 



bethdeth said:


> The parameters of what is love and affection and what is "clinginess" are different. "Love" in my understanding is wanting what is best for the couple and negotiating what is best for the situation. "Love" is not defined by selfishness and neediness. "Clinginess" on the other hand is wanting to gratify a momentary need for the self, to fill a desire to make sure they are ok. "Clinginess" embodies selfishness and insecurity. Clinginess is all about acts of subterfuge to acheive this. These acts may come about in many forms. As mentioned earlier on in a thread there was the "pitching a fit" if the clingy person doesn't get their way. There are acts of sabotage such as bringing ultimatums to the fore when the other has crucial moments for projects or assignments. By definition clinginess is a negative. It is a form of emotional abuse.
> 
> There really is no argument for clinginess being anything but a sickness under the guise of "love". Clinginess isn't the opposite of needing or wanting alone time. it is a form of emotional abuse because it is associated with unwanted manipulative and maladaptive behaviours.


Sounds spot on.



bethdeth said:


> If you were to google clinginess you will see there are many self help pages on how to stop the behaviours. You will also find that there are many pages on how healthier partners do not like it and will avoid a partner with clingy behaviours. There are no good benefits of clingy behaviours.
> 
> Google "alone time" and you will see a multitude of pages which state the positive benefits and how to acheive it.


True.



bethdeth said:


> If you are to talk about love and affirmation and re-affirmations of love it might be more appropriate to argue the benefits of needs and times alone versus time together within that sphere. Perhaps another thread with this idea? I understand that you are probably thinking under different terminology.


I think that's what the problem really is. We are using the same term (clinginess) to describe different things and so there is a lot of misunderstanding. But maybe clinginess is the thing that is annoying in the average relationship and stalking and emotional abuse/manipulation are the things that require court involvement..?



marked174 said:


> .....insecurity expressed through clinginess hurts both the individual and their target. Oh, and I wasn't saying that clinginess was an expression of love. Love gives, it doesn't take. In the beginning of the thread, I was talking about people who were labeled clingy when they really shouldn't be. I was talking about people who showed interest at an unattractive level, not an abusive one (I state tis for clarity). Somewhere along the way, we spent more time talking about those who do indeed have a problem. In retrospect, I still think that both expressions of insecurity are harmful, but the expression of abusive clinginess does double damage.


True.


----------



## Katjie (Apr 17, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> I lived with an ENFP for 4 unmitigated disasterous years. He did not understand my boundaries or needing time to myself. He was dumped (since his departure I have only had a couple of relapses with autoimmune disorder rather than all the time with him). I have already been into how totally draining the experience was with him on another thread....rather than go over old ground I would say to you to either get the information on what it means to be introverted or just not go into a relationship with one in the first place. It will save you and her/him a whole lot of pain.


Ok the whole part of the conversation (thread) I just read now was interesting. Sounds like you need to be with an introvert but since the subject has been brought up.... the ExFx might probably need you more / requires more of you than an ExTx. The T type should be able to reasonably understand and respect your space/ needs better if you can discuss it and have all these (wonderful - not!) conversations about it. Hehe, just a suggestion, if you ever want some lively energy in your life again :tongue:


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> Of course you don't get the introversion you're a fucking extrovert!
> If you ever get into a relationship with an introvert I suggest heavily reading up about it. She/he will dump you if you carry on like this...hell I nearly dumped you a few posts back.:tongue:
> If I were to say to you stop going out and stop talking to people you would see that as unhealthy. You would see it as controlling behaviour. That is simply what you are saying to me...only opposite.
> 
> It's egocentric and not very useful in a relationship to say I'm right....we live by my rules...yeah, fuck that...LOL


Ditto, a thousand times ditto.

People have a right to themselves. They do not have a right to other people. So yes, you _can_ expect people to leave you alone when you need it, the way you _cannot_ expect people to give you company and attention. To be alone is demanding nothing of anyone else.

That said, most introverts will, as I said before, drop everything and run if you're hurt, really upset, have a special important occasion, etc. when you're a good friend. As long as that doesn't happen, like, every week.


----------



## aakanksha (Dec 27, 2009)

Clinginess is a touchy topic.To me clinginess is not about wanting the other person around all the time, but about not giving the person enough space and wanting to stick to the other person all the time.

I was once with such a guy and I know the cons of it pretty well.It was something like the guy wanted to be with me 24x7.Since, we were not in the same class so everything besides the classes revolved around him.If I wanted to go somewhere he would accompany me and if he had to go somewhere I had to accompany him.And if I didn't comply, all hell broke loose.From sentimental statements to threats of committing suicide.And all of this would increase manifold if I even attempted to call off the relationship.Luckily he went to another place and I could break up with him.

Basically, my point is that it is good to spend a lot of time together, but it completely stifles the life of one person who is being clung too.Their friend circle goes for a toss and life becomes like a vaccum. It is just too stifling. They want to accompany you to meet your friends and your family...even you never invited them.You can't go anywhere without them, because they feel against it.

So, I am firmly against people who cling on.Cmon people, give the other one a breather.


----------



## DarklyValentine (Mar 4, 2010)

Clinginess - 1 dictionary result 

Pronunciation Kling-on-Loch-Ness.

Now that we have looked closer at the word what we have, almost certainly in my noodlely scrambled man mind, is clearly of alien hybrid origins with a splash of scaree monster.

Can you elaborate wicked? as you promised not too ramble on first posts of the day nor talk to oneself.

Oki it becomes unbearable when the clinginess is not wanted and therefore becomes unbearable and sooner or later, resented. 

So your also saying it can be misconstrued by the giver and receiver? Yup

Sometimes compounded,indeed exacerbated, when said clinglness is not returned in equal measure.

Thus given rise to the infamous mythical creature of lore, Kling-on-loch-ness, no doubt with forty tentacles and plethora of sunction cups with the purpose of sucking the very life force from a bod.., so Scottish legend has it.

Now if you flip the coinage of the realm wicked (you’ve none) the opposite interpretation is someone who gives all be it their attention love or whatever that lot call it.

So its called love hate in essence?

Ah a probable paradox then potentially leading to end times.



No doubt 

*
*


----------

