Love vs Sex 192

Insecurity

There was a child named Insecurity. That child grew and evolved into an over-nurturer in relationships that allowed such while withdrawing from all others that did not. Occasionally, the child would lash out violently and ferociously when it felt attacked or over-dominated by others. Such an offensive was primarily directed at these attackers and over-dominators because they threatened to reinforce or potentiate the inherent psychological feeling of insecurity within the child.

The feelings of inadequacy the child had always felt morphed as it entered adulthood into a subconscious visceral belief that it was unworthy of any love that might be bestowed upon it by another. Insecurity, now an adult, was confused and tormented. It was unable to perceive and acknowledge that the root of its persistent vague anxiety and unease was its own inability to love itself. Consciously, the mind of insecurity resisted this reality. Instead of facing itself again in greater introspection and the possibility of witnessing even more of its own imperfections, its fear drove it to rewrite and repackage the perception and even mere hints of the perception as an external threat embodied specifically in an external enemy. Despite these tendencies of its psyche, Insecurity still desired union and love. And though desperate in its effort at times, its unions failed repeatedly. Some of the failing was natural because union requires an alignment of energy that is not always present between people. But other failings were tragic and not due to a malalignment of energy.

Those tragic failings collapsed into unnecessary heartache and the emptiness of wasted love because of Insecurities inability to love itself. Because Insecurity did not believe it was possible to love itself, it could not believe, no matter how hard it tried, that any other person could love it genuinely either. So, after whatever period of grace time existed in a relationship, Insecurity would begin to “know” the “real truth” present in the others heart. Insecurity would “know” what the other really meant, what they really thought, what they really desired. In the relationships of proper energy alignment, this was, of course, false, but Insecurity could never accept that truth.

For Insecurity to feel positive, normal if you will, about any relationship, it had to over-dominate the relationship and again, this required intricate rewriting and masterful doublethink on its own behalf. Insecurity had to simultaneously believe itself to always be the “victim” and nurturer in the relationship. The solution was for Insecurity to become a passive-aggressive bully. Thus, Insecurity exerted its overbearing control by smothering, isolating, and skeptically questioning/condemning anything remotely suggestive of the slightest independence or critique from its partner. By doing this, Insecurity mandated endless and excessive unequivocal praise, attention, and glorification from its partner for it to accept that its partner truly loved it. And despite all of the obvious indications of love related to the rest of reality, Insecurity would falter and pick and prod when its excessive demand for theatrical tricks failed to be satiated. The facts of love became more and more irrelevant to Insecurity because of the independent nature of such facts as its obsession with tricks and submission became more compulsively desired for their demonstration of dependent prostration. Insecurity found partial satiation in the gentle and polite subjugation of another though it could not find peace in accepting the offering of independent love.

This eventually lead Insecurity to push its partners who were capable of union and love away from itself, for beings capable of true love cannot and will not subjugate themselves in a bastardized form or pseudo-union of that force. Weaker creatures of false love might comply to such demands by Insecurity, but those of a pure heart and desire know the madness of such compromise; it damns Insecurity into an infinite cycle of stagnation, addictive distraction, and non-love.

There are those who understand Insecurity. There are those who lived its same existence and somehow eventually escaped its chains.  There are those trying with all of their might to reach and touch and speak a piercing epiphanic truth to Insecurity at the constant risk of their own stability. There are those who love “Insecurity” no matter how hard Insecurity fights to deny such objective truth, but in the end, the fate of Insecurity depends on nothing but Insecurity’s own choice to deny or accept the realm of reality.

Cribb          2016

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s