Amelia Lichtenberg 1/14/25 Amelia Lichtenberg 1/14/25

Listening to Inner Wisdom When it Says Something You Don't Like (Radical Transparency II)

I recently had an experience where an inner truth living within my body/mind/soul finally had enough and let itself out into the world. It was a painful, heart-wrenching experience of deep resistance. Even though I knew that the more I resisted, the more intense the feeling would be. Acceptance may have diffused it, but it didn’t make the process less painful. Sometimes it’s the letting go part that hurts more than the thing that initially caused the pain.

The dance of denial

The first part of this process is what I’m referring to as “the dance of denial.” I frame it like this because long before I finally got to the “acceptance & release” phase, I was in a back-and-forth dialogue with myself. Usually activated by something in my relationships or environments, an inner knowing would swell up in response to these events and force me to confront its message. I would move with it, let it move through me (a bit), and allow myself to feel it. Just when this part of me would feel like I was accepting it, I would push it back aside and return to the other parts of myself that I wanted to focus on.

Like a retaliation, this part would march back to my center and force me to engage with it again, and again, and again. I would continue to excuse its recurring presence with stories about my stresses in grad school impacting other areas of my world, like my capacity to tolerate change, my emotional sensitivity to certain trigger points, etc. We danced this dance for months until finally my Ego collapsed from exhaustion.

Remembering radical acceptance

It took me a while to get to the stage where I could remember what radical acceptance actually is about. It’s not about just “going with the flow” and being okay with any & everything. It’s not about masking my feelings to continue fitting into a narrative that doesn’t work for me. In this case, radical acceptance was about accepting a reality that I felt resistant to because of internalized narratives about what and who I thought I “should” be.

Feeding into an attachment of how I thought my ideals would manifest

I wanted to be “poly enough.” More than anything. I wanted to be easygoing and open to new energies, free-flowing and full of so much love and compersion that it stopped being painful. I wanted so much to be enlightened and strong enough to “handle it.” I tried so hard to fit in to a mold that wasn’t working for me. I learned a lot along the way, though.

It’s hard for me to admit all of this, especially in a blog post, but it also feels good to say what’s been stirring inside for so long.

I still believe in the ideals and values of Relationship Anarchy. So much so that I stuck with relational structures that felt harmful for too long as a means of clinging to my attachment of what those values looked like. That was the real trap. At some point along the way, I stopped being in praxis with these values and started trying to embody a narrative that I assigned to them. The whole point of relationship anarchy (as far as I’m concerned) is that it’s a philosophy from which to build any kind of relationship, not a specific structure or practice itself. I stopped listening to my inner guide and tried to play a role, which took me out of my authentic self-expression and harmed both myself and others along the way.

Becoming Radically transparent with myself

There came a point where I stopped fighting with myself about these stories. I started listening to what my emotional body was telling me when I became activated. I communicated with others around my experiences and my needs. Things got better, and there was a quiet period where things were calm, stable, and secure. Life was continuing on, and repair was happening where it needed to.

Then a change came suddenly and I felt the recently closed wounds re-open. I felt flooded with trauma flashbacks and memories of hurtful experiences. My partner approached me with loving and gentle kindness as this happened. We talked about the rupture - where it came from, why it felt so intense. I had to sit with myself and listen to all the parts within me. I had to hear what they wanted and find where they had common ground. After some time, I found my truths.

Changing priorities

One of the truths that came through was about my general life priorities. I realized I was moving into a space where the time spent on relationships and relational processing felt consuming to other areas. As I’m moving toward the end of grad school, moving into a lifelong career, I want to focus my priorities on these areas and on my creative pursuits.

Any healthy relationship takes a lot of time and work. Healthy non-monogamous relationships take even more time and energy. I realized that part of my frustration was from how much time and energy processing these aspects of both myself and my relational sphere took away from other parts of my life. Rather than spend as much time co-processing relational ruptures and changes with my partner, or co-processing our feelings about other relationships, I want to spend that time collaborating on creative projects and supporting each others’ dreams and aspirations.

My relational priority has always been for a partnership that allows for authentic relating and autonomy. For me, that could take any form. In some relationships, I chose to continue in non-monogamous structures at the detriment of the connection because of what I felt I needed in that time. Now I feel that I want to invest in the connection with my partner more than in maintaining a non-monogamous lifestyle. I think we could work through these complications in non-monogamy, but I realized my priority was to heal my relational wounds through other means. Mainly, through building a trusting and committed bond with someone, which felt too difficult with so much possible change and instability in the air.

the direction of my inner growth

While I value the ways that non-monogamy forced me to accept change and relinquish control, I also began to realize that my personal growth trajectory was not working with this structure. As a neurospicy person with a history of environmental instability, I really struggle with change. For the majority of my adult life, I have been striving for stillness.

As someone who grew up with a chaotic divorce custody schedule, part of my healing journey as an adult is about building a stable, grounded life and home. I’ve known this for a while, but it took me time and a stable partnership to realize how non-monogamous relationship structures continued to stunt this part of my growth process. I had to sit with this one a while because I feared that by admitting this, I was engaging in conflict avoidance. I decided that this wasn’t the case because my need is for consistency, and this is just too difficult in polyamory (for me).

I just had to admit that the constant changes that come with a fluid relationship structure were not supporting my need for a slow, still home and life.

my body felt calm when i asked if it wanted this

To me, the biggest indicator that I was making the right choice was that all the alarm bells in my body started to quiet when I asked if it wanted this change. It didn’t mean that there wouldn’t be conflict, or that things wouldn’t be difficult, but that this particular series of activations would not be as much a part of the healing process.

It felt like my body was thanking me for finally choosing to not overstimulate it to a harmful degree. I tell this kind of stuff to my clients all the time, but it has been so hard to take my own advice here. Listening to my emotional body’s wisdom, I finally decided to make life a little easier for myself.

It doesn’t have to be this hard all the time. It’s okay to take a step back.

Finding new balance with my new truth

I don’t regret the years I spent trying to make non-monogamous structures work for me. Through those experiences, I learned a lot about myself, my strengths and weaknesses, my trigger points. I learned how to communicate equitably and accept when things are out of my control. I also learned how to let go of my desire to control, at least to some significant degree. These lessons have served my growth in so many ways, including in my growth toward building a more authentic and equitable relationship with myself.

The point of my journey into relationship anarchy and conscious relating has always been to deconstruct my assumptions about relationships. That includes new assumptions that show up.

In coming into alignment within myself about my need to move towards a less overwhelming relationship structure, I also asked myself (and my partner) how we could find balance between a monogamous relationship and our non-traditional values and ideals. We found that our wants, needs, and priorities were aligned, so developing new agreements that reflected these felt easy. We agreed to allow space for checking in about our relationship structure over time, after certain milestones, etc. We also gave ourselves permission to continue to choose this new relationship structure when we reach those check-in points.

The work is never done. Just because we changed our relationship to a more structured, less complicated form does not mean we have solved all our issues. We still have ruptures and repair work to do. Now it just feels like we have more space to work with. We created a structure that feels supportive to both of our needs, which can help us both feel supported in exploring vulnerability and interpersonal healing in a different way.

I still feel emotionally raw from all the changes. It’s taking a while to settle into my body. Still, I feel that good things are on the horizon, and the next layer of my inner work can begin.

Thank you for reading!

— Emily Lichtenberg

Amelia Lichtenberg 5/18/24 Amelia Lichtenberg 5/18/24

Healing Trauma Through Growth-Fostering Relationships

A/N: I found this piece waiting in my drafts from April 2023. I touched it up a bit, but the events which inspired this original piece are now over 1 year old (though I left the recent-past tense in the piece). I may revisit this concept with a reflection piece, as I still see how these general thoughts I had are still so true and relevant to how I experience my current relational landscape, which is much different than the one illustrated below.

Enjoy the read!

Today I realized something important. No matter what partner, my anxieties around deception and abandonment show up at some point. I know these reactions are informed by my trauma history, and while I’ve come a long way in processing these feelings and experiences, there are moments where they still affect me very strongly. I can’t tell if this will ever fully dissipate, but something I noticed is that there are some relationships where this part of myself becomes a source of stress and disconnection, and others where it’s a non-issue and is worked through as quickly as it arises.

I began to wonder, why is this such a big issue with some partners and not with others? I concluded it came down to the dynamic within each individual relationship, and how all parties interact with each other in that space. In writing this article, I came to understand that it is more complicated than simply ‘chemistry.’ Communication compatibility, the structures placed within a relationship, the trauma histories, and how all parties respond to the each other all inform how the trauma-brain parts of myself interface in relationships and what happens when activation occurs.

To understand my experiences better, I decided to examine this recent series of moments from the relational-cultural counseling theory.

Relational-cultural Theory

Relational-cultural theory (RCT) believes that our experiences and identities are shaped by our relationships. Healing occurs when healthy, secure relationships are built, and trauma accumulates when we isolate ourselves from authentic connections. Authenticity is cultivated through affirming experiences in relationships. When we are not accepted in our relationships, we hide our authentic selves.

I recently made the choice to dissolve a cohabiting, core partnership in favor of developing a new structure with this beloved. In rewriting our relationship intentions and readjusting our landscapes to incorporate new partners, I felt my trauma surface in the face of changing dynamics and priorities. When I’ve shared my insecurities in the past, it led to communication breakdown, stress, and distance. Over time, this caused me to feel like there was something wrong with me, and I began to hide parts of my authentic self to maintain peace in our dynamic.

There is a concept in RCT called the central relational paradox which states that chronic disconnection can lead to condemned isolation, or a sense that one isn’t worthy of human connection (Duffey & Somody, 2011). Although people desire authentic connection, trauma causes folks to develop protective habits that further ensure isolation. I did this in my cohabiting relationship by hiding my authentic feelings and withdrawing.

This part of my recent relational history is why I have struggled so much in the last year to write these articles. Finding authentic words felt impossible because I wasn’t embodying them. It is also why I felt a deep sense of dread when my trauma responses began to emerge in a new dynamic.

Response Art: Being Held by My Team (2024)

RCT is a perspective which takes the focus off the individual and puts experiences and behaviors into a broader social context. Reflecting on my recent experiences from this lens, I see why when I shared my feelings with this newer partner, they responded in a way where I felt accepted. I didn’t feel like I was ‘wrong,’ or that my feelings were shameful, and they dissipated as instantly as they arose. Nuances in communication styles and trauma histories made all the difference when engaging in the same conversation with two different partners.

Healing occurs through growth-fostering relationships. Some characteristics of a growth-fostering relationship are:

· Mutuality

· Prioritizing each other’s growth and the relationship

· Authentic communication

· Radical acceptance

· Expansion of thought, feeling, and understanding

Along with complicated trauma histories, there were power differentials in my previous relationship which impeded our ability to achieve mutuality. In my experience, without this sense of mutuality it is impossible to step into a space of expansion, radical acceptance, and authentic communication. This served as a detriment in the vulnerable moments. The effect of these power differentials became apparent after we re-configured our relationship structure and were able to establish mutuality.

Using Relationship Anarchy & ENM to Heal Relational Trauma

We heal through being engaged in authentic relationships. We can build structures to foster these kinds of dynamics by fostering relational resilience, which includes the following shifts:

· Individual ‘control over’ —> supported vulnerability

· One-directional needs for support —> mutual empathetic involvement

· Separate self-esteem —> relational confidence

· ‘Power over’ dynamics —> empowerment through encouragement of mutual growth & constructive conflict

· Finding meaning in self-centered/self-consciousness —> creating meaning in expansive relational awareness (Duffey & Somody, 2011)

I began my journey into ENM and RA with intentions to heal relational trauma from my upbringing and early adult life. By cultivating a lifestyle where my relationship structures are based on intentional, mutual agreements which are subject to change, I have developed a foundation of relational healing to lean on in hard times. The struggles I faced over the last year in my cohabiting relationship stemmed from being unable to fully embody these values in that relationship. When we deconstructed and reconstructed our relationship, we were able to move toward relational resilience practices with each other and maintain a deep closeness in our new relationship.

The relationship with my new beloved has the benefit of the wisdom and experience I gained from my last experience. By weaving in agreements to mitigate the same power differentials that occurred, we are setting a structure that very intentionally fosters mutuality. From this mutuality, we work toward healing each other through compersion and inviting authentic communication. Having similar neurodivergence and communication styles make building and maintaining these structures easier.

I notice this growth-fostering relationship creates a feedback loop in my other relationships. With increased relational confidence built from experiences of security and acceptance, I can interface with other beloveds in a way that embodies radical transparency, radical acceptance, and from a community-based mindset.

My trauma responses still show up in both dynamics from time-to-time, and I imagine they will continue to do so as I heal, but the level to which they are enflamed or diminished, and the impact they have on myself and my connections vary based on the connection and structures in place. There is only so much that ‘compatibility’ can do for a dynamic, and we are all accountable to ourselves to meet others in our lives in a space to co-create growth-fostering relationships.

—Emily Lichtenberg

resources

Duffey, T., & Somody, C. (2011). The role of relational-cultural theory in mental health counseling. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 33(3), 223-242.

Relational-Cultural Theory: Fostering Healthy Coexistence Through a Relational Lens

APA: Relational Cultural Therapy Sample

A Relational-Cultural Framework: Emphasizing Relational Dynamics and Multicultural Skill Development (NBCC)

Amelia Lichtenberg 7/10/23 Amelia Lichtenberg 7/10/23

Burnouts leading to Breakups: Getting Caught in the Web of Dysregulation

The past few months have been such a struggle for me: moving, full-time grad school, full-time job, complicated relationship dynamics. It’s no wonder I found myself caught in a web of dysregulation. My dysfunction looks like social over-functioning, losing control of my filters, and feeling like it’s impossible to slow down. When I get into this state it can have some harsh impacts on my relationships with others, and recently it has….

I use writing these blog posts as one strategy of processing my experiences. I am someone who thinks and communicates much more clearly through written word than verbal, even with myself. I’ve been struggling to write about my experiences over the last year because I hold expectations around what I ‘should’ be writing about, how my personal commentary about Relationship Anarchy and authentic relating ‘should’ come across, and what sort of vibe I ‘ought’ to portray for those reading. Also, this has been a very confusing time for me with the start of grad school and the way my program asks me to deeply reflect on and question myself all the time.

This piece is a little different. This time, I’m not here to give advice or insight. I’m here to share an experience where my cycle of over-functioning gifted me with hard lessons to sit with. This piece is a reflection of me sitting with these lessons.

I’m exposing myself for the flawed individual that I am. I don’t have it all together, and this process isn’t complete… but then again, is it ever?

What happened?

I lost my sense of intention in important relationships, and I took my beloveds for granted. I leaned on them for more support than I leaned on myself for, and essentially asked them to bear the weight of my stress and anxiety with me. I especially did this to my core partner. I didn’t mean to do this. It happened because I found myself activated from old trauma, struggling with a lot of big adjustments (as a neurodiverse person who struggles with the smallest adjustment), and I forgot to take moments to breathe and check in with myself.

Essentially, I hit severe burnout, and I stayed there for about 2 months.

This looked like me falling into reactive patterns regarding a metamour, expressing self-negativity, bringing my partners into the fold of my mental back-and-forth between my desire to be in ethically non-monogamous, intentional relationships and retreating to monogamy out of fear, insecurity, and activation. It looked like me calling my core partner almost daily to process my stress when they had other things going on. It looked like me using them as a distraction from sitting with my own discomfort and addressing my burnout.

What a mess, right?

I try to hold myself with some compassion around this, though. When school and work lives demand so much intense output, it’s hard to shut one’s brain off in personal time. When there’s no personal time, it’s hard to process and re-regulate before interfacing with others. This cycle put strain on my core partner to the point where a rift formed. They chose to take back space for themself, and I don’t blame them for their choice.

“Don’t Forget Me After the Sun Sets” 2018

I’m grieving so much from this turn of events. Not only the loss of a beautiful relationship that had so much potential, but to see in hindsight all the ways I could’ve made a different choice. Instead of jumping into reactivity, I could’ve taken a moment to slow down and use mindfulness to re-contextualize the situation. I could’ve asked for more time to process something. I could’ve been writing for Love is the Action and reminding myself of all that I believe in relationally through that simple practice.

How to move forward?

The consequences are hard to sit with. The lessons are humbling. What I find the hardest part of this all is to accept myself for all of these choices I made with deep love, compassion, and understanding. Whenever I am in conflict, I try my best to learn from my mistakes and grow. I reframe the situation in a way that allows me to foster acceptance and gratitude. This time it has been really hard.

Instead of saying to myself: “I regret every time I made a sarcastic comment about waiting for them to leave me,” (which, let’s be real, I totally do regret), I’m trying to say “I am grateful for this deep lesson the consequences of my choice is gifting me.” Instead of falling victim to the stress of my life, I’m using this experience as a wake-up call to shift things around and create more space and time for myself and for spontaneity in my life, something which I’ve learned is extremely important for my mental health.

I’m also recognizing that I’m at a place in my life where things are just harder. I’m putting myself through a rigorous grad school program that demands a lot of introspective and creative reflection and output. I am also working to support myself through it. It makes sense why I’d get caught in the web of my dysfunction, and it’s okay that I did.

It doesn’t make the grief and loss easier, but I am so glad for all the lessons that came from this. The ways to gauge myself and my regulatory state, new ways of communicating boundaries with myself and others, learning what’s important to me and what my personal needs are while being a grad student. This experience finally helped me solidify the morning routine I’ve been trying to nail down for years. These lessons will all serve me greatly when I become an eco-art therapist.

“Pervading Loveliness & Exquisite Jubilation” *2020*

The loss of my core partner means I gain opportunities to practice radical self-reliance. As much as I will miss the beauty of our walks and spontaneous trips to go stargazing, and as much as I grieve for all the plans we made that may not ever come to fruition, I also know that these are still things that I enjoy as an individual. I can continue to enjoy walks, stopping to smell the roses, and talking to all the plants in the old growth forest on my own. The sense of freedom and empowerment that comes from this is so deep, and now when I go to do these things, I will think of them and the ways they re-sparked so many things for me in our time together … and who knows? Maybe someday we will be able to do all these things together again, in whatever context makes sense.

I will hold the lessons with deep gratitude and humility, and vow to never forget them so that next time I cross paths with a connection as rare and valuable as the one I just lost, I will not take it for granted regardless of how crazy my life becomes. Thank you so much, beloved, for the beauty you’ve brought to my life in so many ways.

Thank you for reading.

— Emily Lichtenberg

Amelia Lichtenberg 12/4/22 Amelia Lichtenberg 12/4/22

Existential-Humanism, the RA Counseling Theory

As I’m wrapping up my final few weeks of my first semester of graduate school, I wanted to write a reflection on what I’ve been learning. In my program, our first year is focused on finding our counseling theoretical orientation. Existential-Humanism (EH) is the one that has really lit my fire…

What I love about EH art therapy (EHAT) so much is how well it blends with my pre-existing Relationship Anarchy (RA)- inspired worldview and the Intentional Peer Support (IPS) model I use at work. As part of my final project for my Theories of Counseling course, I decided to write a piece about these intersections.

From Existential Philosophy to Existential Psychotherapy

EH pulls from existential philosophy for its theoretical underpinnings. Specifically, it works with existential phenomenology and considers its historical pioneers to be philosophers such as Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and Heidegger. From my understanding, EH draws predominantly from the ideas of Kierkegaard and Heidegger as its foundation. Kierkegaard believed that angst, or anxiety and dread, was imperative for becoming fully human, and Heidegger believed that living a meaningful and authentic life was the best way for someone to cope with their angst (Story, 2007).

Existential psychotherapy was born from existential philosophy, largely due to the work of Frankl, May, Bugenthal, and Yalom (Story, 2007). Each of these psychotherapists played a significant role in developing the Existential psychotherapy model.

Both existential psychotherapy and EH share an assumption that there are 4 universal concerns of life:

1. Death – angst is a natural part of being aware of our mortality

2. Meaninglessness – life is without meaning until we give it meaning

3. Isolation – we are, in the existential sense, always alone

4. Freedom – the weight of our freedom can create angst

What sets EH apart from existential philosophy/psychotherapy is the added assumption that people are capable of healing and knowing themselves (Moon, 2009; Story, 2007).

The reason I think EH and RA work so well together is because of the strong emphasis on each person finding the meaning of their own life. Through this process of finding meaning, a person can heal and know themselves. When I think about the self-reflection that goes into an RA lifestyle, it feels like a similar process. Finding meaning for one’s life is like identifying one’s core relationship values.

Finding Meaning Through Adversity

EH is largely influenced by the work of Viktor Frankl, who is someone I greatly admire. A Holocaust survivor, Frankl created a school of therapy based off his experiences in the concentration camps, called logotherapy. ‘Logotherapy’ means ‘therapy through meaning,’ and operates from the assumption that finding meaning in one’s life and through one’s struggles is the path to freedom (Frankl, 1962). From my own experiences of growth-through-adversity, I find this worldview deeply moving.

My values and RA-lifestyle are a result of my own process of finding meaning through adversity. Wanting a life filled with authentic connections and intentional relationships came from painful experiences of trying to fit in the status quo and getting burned. Having experienced what it’s like to be disregarded and unseen is what motivates me to do my best to see and regard others in their authentic truth.

‘Finding meaning’ is like the final task of IPS, ‘moving toward.’ After the other tasks of ‘connection,’ ‘worldview,’ and ‘mutuality’ have been explored, a person is encouraged to find what they’re moving towards. This approach emphasizes the need to look forward at what is next, rather than looking backward or ‘away’ from. An example would be instead of saying ‘I want to stop being lazy,’ saying, ‘I want to be more productive.’

The Therapeutic Alliance – Authentic Connection

Bruce Moon, a prominent existential art therapist, uses logotherapy as the foundation for his work and expands upon it with creative action. Something I admire about his therapeutic style is how seemingly hands-off he is. His sessions are organic and fluid. There is no agenda for his clients, and he is a mutual participant in the exchange. In his book Existential Art Therapy: The Canvas Mirror (3rd ed.), he uses several case studies to describe the chapter concepts. He talks about 3 ways to be genuinely attentive with clients: (1) doing with, (2) being open to, and (3) honoring pain.

Doing With

When Moon (2009) talks about how he participates in his art therapy sessions, it sounds like how I hope to conduct mine. He stresses the importance of the art therapist maintaining their own artistic practice, and modeling therapeutic art-making from the moment the client walks into the studio. He often works on his own projects during sessions and invites conversation about his work.

I believe that it’s unethical to ask someone to do something we aren’t willing to do ourselves. The best leaders and guides are those who have gone through the depths of themselves; they are people who pull from their own experiences to provide insight and wisdom to another.

In ‘Relationships are Like Gardens,” relationships are likened to the process of creating and maintaining a garden. We are responsible for tending our own garden and if working in a community garden bed, we work alongside other gardeners. We ask what they’re planting, how their bed is developing and share our experience. We don’t tell them what to plant or how to plant it, and if someone asks our advice, we pull from our experiences of past seasons. Honoring autonomy like this is how I advocate for folks to engage with their relationships, it is how I approach my consultation and peer-support work, and this is the type of therapeutic alliance I plan to model in my practice.

Within the EH model is the belief that meaning and healing can only be found in relationship with others. This truth constantly reveals itself to me with my own struggles, and when I’m engaged with callers on the peer-support line I work with. I hear so many stories about folks feeling ‘stuck’ until a particular call or interaction with another person. Connection brings growth and can guide change or new perspective.

Being Open

Moon’s openness with his clients about the meaning and experience of his own artwork is the kind of Radical Transparency I discuss when writing about RA. I believe a professionally appropriate amount of self-disclosure is imperative to the therapeutic alliance between client and counselor, and I try to embody this in my relationship consultation and peer-support work.

In these relationship dynamics there is always a power differential. Even in my peer-support work, although the IPS model holds ‘mutuality’ as one of its 4 tasks, I am still in the paid position and am the one with the training. Being radically transparent about these dynamics is the first step toward establishing mutuality. In the art therapy setting, following the ‘seldom initiate, always respond’ model can help find balance between sharing too much and too little and allows the client to lead the discussion.

Moon (2009) says that the success of the client’s journey ultimately depends on their willingness to share their story with the counselor. By being open and responding to, the counselor allows space for the client to grow in trust. By allowing for self-disclosure, the power-differential becomes less-so. This model provides non-judgmental acceptance and honors the client’s autonomous self by avoiding agendas.

Honoring Pain

*“The Patriarchy Has Major Side Effects” (2021)*

I think this may be the most important of the three ways to reach authentic connection in EH. Suffering is a universal experience among humans, although it looks and feels different for each person. Those who’ve experienced significant pain (and healed from it) tend to be the most empathetic toward others’ suffering. In order to truly honor another’s pain, one must honor their own pain first.

IPS talks about ‘sitting with the discomfort’ when providing support. This means that when someone comes to us with their pain, we don’t try to diminish it or fix it. We sit with them in it. Moon (2009) talks about a similar process in EHAT, saying that less pain is a side effect of therapy, not the goal. Instead of trying to make the client feel better, the art therapist’s task is to help them understand their pain and discover the meanings of their suffering.

My ‘Theories of Counseling’ professor is an EH therapist. When discussing this part of the process, he said: “I can’t take your pain away, but I’m here with you every step through it,” (J. Rock, existential-humanism, October 18, 2022). To me, this is compassion in its highest form and is what I strive to embody in every relationship I have.

I think about the sometimes-uncomfortable space when honoring another’s autonomy and honoring my boundaries may cause conflict. In rule-based relationship structures, one might hold another accountable for solving their discomfort by forcing them into action or inaction. In RA, each person is held accountable for their feelings, and action falls on each person to do what they need for their wellness and safety in a way that doesn’t impede another’s autonomy. Sometimes that means changing relationship agreements, sometimes it means changing an internal belief. Similarly, in EHAT, the therapist doesn’t take on the client’s pain, but sits with them while they work through it themselves.

EHAT Across Cultures

One of the most beautiful things about EHAT is how adaptable it is across various cultures. Something I’ve noticed in my studies is how most counseling theories are difficult to adapt outside the Western-European ideology.

Although EHAT originates from the ideas of Western-European, cishet men, the open-ended views of this perspective encourage adaptation from other backgrounds. Across different cultures who use EH/EHAT, the methods look very different, but the core beliefs are still the same. There is not one right way to ‘be with’ a client, just as there’s not one specific definition of what ‘suffering’ is or what the meaning of one’s suffering is meant to look like. Embedded in this theory is the idea that everyone must decide these details for themselves.

This may sound very individualistic, and in some ways because of its Western-European roots I think it does, but the emphasis on growth through relationship with others opens these ideas up to collectivist interpretations. EHAT is about the process rather than the techniques, making it very open for adaptation (Story, 2007).

Translating EHAT into my RA work feels like a seamless process given these intersections between the two worldviews. For me, RA is based in Radical Transparency, Radical Acceptance, honoring autonomy, authentic relating, and personal accountability. EHAT bolsters these beliefs by emphasizing mutuality and authenticity in the therapeutic alliance.

EHAT encourages a client-led practice where the therapist responds more than they initiate; the therapist is there to facilitate a process, not implement a program or series of techniques. The word ‘existential,’ can make this orientation seem unappealing to some, but I find it to be the most natural therapeutic orientation I’ve learned about so far.

Helpful Resources:

Frankl, V. E. (1962). Man’s Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy. Boston: Beacon Press.

Mikayla. (2018, September 11). Relationships are like gardens. Medium. https://medium.com/@mmmikayla/relationships-can-be-like-gardens-98827d8dfdfa

Moon, B. L. (2009). Existential Art Therapy: The Canvas Mirror (3rd. ed.). C. C. Thomas.

Story, M. L. (2007). Existential art therapy. Canadian Art Therapy Association Journal, 20(2), 22-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/08322473.2007.11434771

—

Intentional Peer Support (IPS) official website

The short instructional manifesto for relationship anarchy — Andie Nordgren

— written by Emily Lichtenberg

Amelia Lichtenberg 4/8/22 Amelia Lichtenberg 4/8/22

Coming Back to Oneness

CW: C-PTSD mentioned

I had to take time away from non-monogamy in my relationship because my nervous system exploded. It was painful and threw me way off balance, but what was and is even harder for me is the identity crisis that went along with it. I allowed my ego to get attached to the identity of “spokesperson for Ethical Non-Monogamy,” or, as my core partner teasingly calls me, the “Non-Monogamy Expert,” but here I was, triggers flying everywhere, expressing jealousy and insecurity to the point where my core partner asked for us to be monogamous for the time being. It is embarrassing, and it has been hard for me to get back to writing on here because of this cognitive dissonance.

A Reflection on the Importance of the Relationship with Oneself

CW: Mentions of C-PTSD

Related and referenced resources are listed at the bottom of this page!

The last time I wrote an article on here I was just meeting my core partner, and thus I was still operating from a vastly different relational framework than I am today. I thought that I was past a lot of my triggers around possession, codependence and jealousy. Before I began building my partnership this was true, but only as far as I could interface with them in the Solo-Polyamorous (SoPo) framework I was operating from. For me, the vulnerability that comes with cohabitation is a very sensitive area where a lot of my trauma and triggers reside. As I grew into a partnership dynamic with my beloved, and as we grew closer and took steps toward cohabiting I noticed a lot of unresolved trauma and fears began to resurface.

The combination of moving into my partner’s house and him starting to explore a new connection for the first time in our relationship triggered powerful C-PTSD flashbacks and intense trauma responses. Despite obvious signs that my nervous system was on overdrive, I tried to push through and be supportive of his exploration. I wanted to be supportive of his exploration. I also felt that I had to be better than my triggers for anything I say on my platforms to be authentic or meaningful. The self-imposed pressure from this fed into my patterns of shaming and cruel self-speak over whether I was actually “good at non-monogamy,” and I questioned my genuine capacity for compersion. I wondered if the rigid morals of my Catholic upbringing were just too strong to unravel, and if this meant I had to rethink how I presented myself to the world.

Instead of taking time and space to hold myself with compassion during these intense shifts, I ended up hurting myself and the dynamics in my relationships because of my pride. Even when things finally settled down and we mutually decided to take a break from our other connections to focus on settling in together, I disregarded the opportunity to pause and reflect with curiosity and compassion. I began obsessing about making sure I would be ready quickly to go back to our non-monogamous dynamics, so that the next time my partner and his lover were together I could show everyone that I really could be compersionate. I had something to prove, and I had to prove it as soon as possible. This only led to more tension betwith my core partner and less inclination to get back to relating in a non-monogamous framework.

Eventually I hit a breaking point which forced me to finally take a step back from obsessing about how others viewed my relationships and identity. I started to see how I was relating with myself, instead. When I spoke with another beloved about the shifts happening in my core relationship, he calmly told me “nothing would make me happier than to see you take some time for yourself, so that you can reflect on the ways you want to relate with yourself first and foremost.” This struck me.

I began to dive deep into finding ways to rebuild my own sense of a secure self. I recognized that regardless of how many acts and declarations of love, care, and devotion my partner gave me, it is nearly impossible for me to wholeheartedly receive them if I am insecure in my relationship to myself. Amidst the embarrassment and obsessive thoughts, I found it incredibly difficult to remain still and content. I noticed my mind trying to force myself into being ready to try again. Unfortunately, this pushing backfired because my nervous system wasn’t ready yet. I find myself feeling so uncomfortable at the idea of being monogamous after spending so much time discussing RA in a non-monogamous setting, but I ultimately must recognize where my own limitations are now. After all, I’m only human, and that’s okay.

I read on Marie Thouin’s blog that compersion is difficult to cultivate when a person feels deeply insecure in themself or their relationship dynamics, when their mind or body aren’t well taken care of, and during stressful times. Moving in with my partner ignited my C-PTSD triggers around abandonment and home security, and I recognize that I was in full-on flashback mode throughout those initial weeks of the transition. Alongside stress around upcoming my grad school interview, and issues with work, it’s no wonder why I struggled to feel compersion or security in the newly evolving dynamics.

When I began allowing myself to accept where I was at in my process and remind myself that there’s no shame in my trauma history, I noticed that out of everyone involved in the situation I was the only one holding onto it. I was the only one deeming myself incapable of cohabiting and non-monogamy. Changing my focus to how I’m showing up for myself opened me up to see how overstimulated I was. I started to slow down, take time to rest, and lean into the monogamous “settling-in” period my partner requested. I began to uncover roots of where the shame around my identity confusion arose, and I started diving deeper into my EMDR treatment for my C-PTSD, rather than spend my therapy sessions crisis managing each triggering moment in my relationship.

Slowing down helped me realize that unless I can take care of myself and treat myself with kindness and care, it’s impossible for me to show up in any of my relationships (regardless of structure) the way I want to. As I write this reflection, there is still a part of me that is antsy to get back to non-monogamous relating, but slowly it’s becoming about my genuine excitement and passion for connection again, rather than my perfectionist obsessions. There is also a larger part of me that is grateful for this “settling in” time with my core, because my nervous system is still fragile and healing. I am beginning to recognize when I’m more likely to be activated, take appropriate steps to navigate those moments, and I’m learning new strategies to cope with the somatic responses each time.

Right now, the goal for me is to focus on the quality of my relationships regardless of their structure and to let go of positive/negative associates with monogamy and non-monogamy, respectively. I believe that until I truly let go of my attachments to either identity, I will find myself in this same struggle at some point again. The most important thing I’ve come to realize during this time is that regardless of what relationship style I’m actively engaged in I can still share my message about conscious relating and loving openly, the “pillars” of Relationship Anarchy", recognizing that it all starts with our relationship within.

— Written by Amelia Lichtenberg

Helpful/Related Resources:

Amelia Lichtenberg 8/9/21 Amelia Lichtenberg 8/9/21

The Difference Between Boundaries and Rules

Something that comes up in so many discussions I have about Relationship Anarchy is boundaries, rules, and expectations. Honestly, it’s so important that it comes up in any conversation about relationships, regardless of philosophy or style! I find this is especially prevalent in non-monogamous dynamics as there tend to be more navigational requirements around these topics than for monogamous folx.

This week I wanted to dial in and focus on the difference between boundaries and rules. I want to share my definitions of these terms, how I differentiate them from each other, and some areas where I’ve seen these come up in my own relationships and the relationships of those around me.

Please be aware that this is just a reflection of my own experiences, and these definitions and perspectives may not be helpful for everyone. This isn’t a one-size-fits-all kind of thing!

What is a boundary?

The Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of a boundary is:

Noun:

Something that indicates or fixes a limit or extent.

So, what does this look like in relationships?

I like to think of boundaries as structures that help a person stay on the right path. If I am a forest and my beloved wants to explore the forest, then they would likely use a pathway. My boundaries would be the areas where the path and the forest floor meet, indicating where is and isn’t appropriate to walk.

It is also up to me to maintain clear pathways within my forest, so that others know where is and isn’t okay to walk.

De-stigmatizing the concept of boundaries

I hear people focusing on the “limit” aspect of a boundary often. I know I have at some point in my journey with boundaries. In this perspective boundaries are viewed more as walls that stop a direction dead in its tracks. In my experiences, this perspective can create a lot of anxiety toward the mere concept of boundaries, let alone expressing them. Often it is through this perspective where boundaries can be mistaken for rules, as it has a more aggressive tone to it. That aggression can cause unnecessary conflict within a conversation or connection.

Instead of perceiving boundaries as a wall which denies access to something or a part of someone, I see boundaries as the barriers which help us find the best path to take. Rather than focusing on the limiting aspect of the boundary, I choose to see boundaries as helpful guardrails guiding me along the path to deeper, more wholesome connections. This perspective shift helps me to de-stigmatize boundaries and unravel the notion that they are synonymous with rules.

How do I know if this a boundary instead of a rule?

A lot of information I’ve seen on the net talks about boundaries as if they are synonymous with rules. I think this is a harmful way to approach boundaries because it can create controlling dynamics in relationship negotiating. This is especially true for non-monogamous relationships, where there is more communication and navigation of peoples’ needs, wants, limits, and edges required.

Something I emphasize heavily in my own relationships is that Radical Transparency around wants, needs, boundaries and expectations is extremely important. This is so that I can make the most informed decision about how best to engage with the other person, and I want to give them the opportunity to do the same. I also emphasize expressing these truths in a way that preserves the other person’s autonomy.

I make my needs clear, but I do not force the other person to help me meet those needs. Instead, I welcome them to support me meeting my needs in whatever ways they authentically can or want to.

So, how we differentiate between boundaries and rules? Here is a list of a few key traits that identify a boundary:

· The boundary/need expressed serves a self-care/self-maintenance function.

· The person who expresses the boundary takes accountability for fulfilling this need.

· The person expressing the boundary does so in a way that invites autonomy support for the recipient but does not force it.

The emphasis is always on one’s own experiences and actions when discussing a boundary. Boundaries typically express something a person needs to navigate a situation or conversation safely and healthily, and clearly identifying and expressing the boundary is a self-care practice on its own.

Rules, on the other hand, place explicit emphasis on what the other must do to resolve the unmet want or need.

Rules in relationships

The Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of rule is:

Noun:

1. One of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a particular activity or sphere.

2. Control of or dominion over an area or people.

Verb:

1. Exercise ultimate power or authority over (an area and its people)

2. Pronounce authoritatively and legally to be the case

That’s a mouthful, I know.

Something that sticks out to me about this definition is the emphasis on authoritarian interaction styles. The essence of a rule is that one party is asserting a semblance of control over another. Sometimes this is consensual (agreed-upon rules), and sometimes this is not.

Identifying traits of a rule are:

· An abundance of “you statements.” (Ex: “you must check in with me once every hour when you’re on a date”).

· A threat of punishment for the person who does not adhere to the rule.

· The rule places the responsibility of meeting a want or need on the other person, and not on the person with the want/need.

The key trait that I sit with is that rules force the other party to take accountability for the wellness of the person setting the rule. Unlike boundaries, which serve a purpose of self-maintenance, rules can be set for any number of reasons – both healthy and unhealthy ones.

There are certain times when rules do make sense, though. As I mentioned above, there are times when boundaries can lead to the creation of rules in relationships. I see this often in non-monogamous relationships where children, co-habiting, or shared finances are present. Just as with boundaries, I think that the inherently contractual and authoritarian aspect of rules makes them seem more destructive.

When in a relationship where shared assets or children are involved, rules may need to be set to protect both parties and/or the children from potentially serious consequences of not following said rules. These could be things ranging from spending money in a shared bank account to new beloveds meeting children.

As with anything, the rule itself is not inherently a bad thing. It is how rules are discussed and why they are being implemented.

In my own relationships

I try to keep rules to a minimum in my more intimate relationships. I admit this is easier for me than some others because I am not legally married, co-habiting, or co-parenting with any of my beloveds.

Instead of implementing rules in my relationships, I have standards for Radical Transparency and practices I ask my beloveds to participate in for the sake of navigating mental, emotional, and physical health and wellness. For me, supporting my beloveds’ autonomy is one of the most important parts of relating, and I feel that implementing rules is counterproductive.

When I have created rules in past relationships, it has always boiled down to an attempt to curb an insecurity within myself. As I continue discovering new things about my relating self, I find that I tend to focus more on finding the “edge” of my comfort zone where the rule wants to come from and seeing if I can identify unmet wants or needs to communicate instead. Recognizing that my feelings, wants, and needs are my own responsibility encourages me to communicate these things to beloveds in a nonviolent way.

I use Nonviolent Communication (NVC) as a nice framework for inner dialogue about my edges and how those translate into boundaries in relationships. You can use my Finding Your Edges guided meditation as a framework for this reflective process.

— written by Amelia Lichtenberg

Extra Resources:

Multiamory: The Basics of Boundaries (podcast)

Center for Nonviolent Communication

Positive Psychology: How to Set Boundaries: 10 Examples + PDF Worksheets (article)

Polyamory Today: Boundaries vs. Rules: What’s the Difference? (article)

Amelia Lichtenberg 7/26/21 Amelia Lichtenberg 7/26/21

An Introduction to Radical Transparency

RT is a dedicated practice where we allow those in connection with us more insight into our present moment experience. This can mean a beloved, friend, or family member. This can also mean a business colleague or a stranger we have a momentary interaction with. Most importantly, this also means connection with oneself.

For me Radical Transparency (RT) is a core value. It’s so important that I have it as a key facet in my definition of Relationship Anarchy, and it is one of the first things I address with my clients.

When I talk about Radical Transparency I am typically faced with a few prominent questions, mainly:

· What is the difference between RT and just being transparent?

· Doesn’t RT lead to over-sharing? How do you maintain boundaries at the same time?

· What’s the point if no one else is being radically transparent with me, but I am with them?

· Being honest about something ended up with me being hurt in the end, why would I do that again?

All of these are important questions, and this week’s writing addresses all these points.

What is Radical Transparency?

Radical Transparency refers to the practice of openly sharing what is alive for us within any given moment. This practice allows us and our beloveds to know where our/their intentions are and helps foster deeper levels of understanding. - Emily’s definition

What makes this practice radical as opposed to just “being transparent” is that there is a constant engagement with the act of transparency. It’s not just about being honest but about being honest with intention.

For me, practicing RT is a conscious choice. While I tend to be a rather transparent person by nature, I still have moments where my instinct is to hide a facet of my present experience from whomever I am engaging with. This may be hiding a moment of depression from a beloved or being quiet about a personal struggle during a client’s session. Sometimes there is a valid reason for withholding sharing with another, however, I find that how I’m addressing the experience within myself is where the difference really lies.

I understand the idea of “being transparent” as typically referring to how one interacts with the external world, meaning that being transparent refers to how we interact with others. RT, however, emphasizes transparency in all connections in all moments – that means in moments within ourselves as well.

Radical Transparency is not the same as oversharing

RT doesn’t necessarily imply that we are encouraged to overshare our experiences with others, nor does it mean crossing ours or others boundaries within sharing for the sake of “being transparent.”

I will use the example above regarding times when I am struggling with a personal issue during a session with a client to showcase this. As one might anticipate, it would be a boundary violation of the consultant/client relationship for me to openly share my woes during the session. I have a duty to be present with and for my client during our time together.

When something in my personal life is so alive for me that I feel its presence in my sessions, I take note of it within myself. A few minutes before a session begins, I will sit with the aliveness and be radically transparent with myself about my current state of being. RT in this instance is honoring my current state of being, while also being mindful of what boundaries are in place for the coming interaction. I allow myself space in this reflection to assess and decide what I need to successfully transition into the session, and I go from there. Taking this time with myself allows me to show up for my client in the fullest capacity that I may.

Often my clients bring a similar concern or situation from their own life into session and act as a mirror to my own story. I am typically able to see or pick up on patterns and thoughts both in them (and myself) that I might not have caught otherwise. Without directly expressing to them that I have a resonating experience, I can lead the conversation with this in heart. This usually lends itself to a very productive session for both parties.

I consider this a form of RT because I am intentionally not hiding anything about my present experience from the client, but I am also not directly sharing what I am experiencing with words. I am using my experience to inform how I connect with them and stay present with their experience, which makes the moment our experience.

When a client asks me if I’ve experienced the conflict they are discussing, I answer with a more direct type of RT. I will say whether I have or haven’t experienced that conflict, and if they ask for insight into how I navigated it, I will share what insight I believe will be most helpful for them. I can share “yes, this was hard for me, too, and here is how I navigated that,” without oversharing the details of those long, painful nights in between Point A and Point B.

Please note that I am not a licensed therapist and my consulting practice does not adhere to the same boundaries as a licensed psychotherapist. My future therapeutic practice will, however, reflect those boundaries.

I make it a point to iterate to my clients that I believe inner work is a lifelong practice, and that my own journey is ongoing. This allows for interactions to become human-to-human, rather than just consultant-to-client. Boundaries are still in place, but the perceived power dynamic within the interaction is lessened.

Maintaining boundaries while practicing RT

It can be easy to perceive RT as a means for pushing boundaries (this includes oversharing). I want to iterate that truly embodying RT includes a wholehearted understanding and acceptance of our and others’ boundaries.

Part of being radically transparent with oneself includes knowing our boundaries. For me, I can overshare sometimes because of my deeply ingrained people-pleasing trauma responses. The wounded child within me feels the need to explain myself constantly. In being radically transparent with myself about the source of this behavior and with how much information I really want to share, I was able to discover where my sharing boundary is.

With my sharing boundary firmly in my mind and heart, I set out to learn new ways to share my experiences with others that feel authentic to my needs as well. Often I find that the best way to practice RT and maintain my boundary is to accurately name my experience and my intention for sharing. For me this looks like: “I’m experiencing/feeling _____, and I would rather not talk about it. I’m just letting you know, so that you can know where I’m at right now.”

RT does not mean we have to share all of the details of our inner world with another, but it does mean that we dedicate intention to naming our experiences in a moment to those around us to avoid potential miscommunication, and to foster deeper understanding.

Being radically transparent in a non-transparent world

Sometimes I find it disheartening how many people struggle with honesty and transparency in our society. Through my experiences with friends, lovers, and colleagues, I’ve come to the conclusion that these struggles come from a mixture of poor communication skills and a lack of RT practice within the self. This may not be true of everyone, but it helps me lean into deeper compassion in moments where my RT practice is not reciprocated.

I truly believe that the only way to foster more connection based in RT is to be the initiator. How can others discover the true freedom in Radical Transparency if they don’t experience it firsthand? A core part of my practice as a Relationship Anarchist is acknowledging that I have no control over the people in my life. That includes their abilities to meet me in radically transparent spaces.

I find that when being radically transparent with another it can be easy to see when it’s not being reciprocated. I combat this discord with more Radical Transparency. I kindly and compassionately name my experience, and I inquire with genuine curiosity about their perspective. In the event that this does not foster mutual RT, I kindly and transparently assert my boundary and shift in desire.

Sometimes people may come off as not being transparent when they believe they are. There are plenty of potential explanations for this, but the important thing to remember is that if something within a connection doesn’t feel right to you, then it is your duty to be transparent about that experience, rather than attempt to change the other to your liking.

When being radically transparent creates conflict

The final question I receive about RT often revolves around the fear of conflict. As a peacekeeper, I empathize greatly with conflict aversion, however, sometimes conflict is necessary.

I find that practicing RT evades more serious conflicts because you give opportunity to air grievances and discover conflicting desires before they have time to fester. For example, when exploring relationship dynamics with a new beloved, I much prefer to find out early if we are compatible than months down the road. By being radically transparent about feelings and desires right off the bat, it saves me time and energy addressing these things immediately.

In my experiences, having these conversations earlier on also tends to save meaningful relationships – if we can have a transparent dialogue early on and both parties feel seen, heard, and respected afterward, then we now have a stronger foundation for which to build whatever relationship we want. When I am not able to have these transparent dialogues or feel seen/heard after an attempt at RT with someone, I kindly and compassionately move on.

I would also like to say that just because RT makes a moment of conflict easier to navigate, does not mean that the conflict will not hurt. Hurt feelings are extremely valid, and it can be very disappointing to discover the end of a connection due to a transparent conversation. While the hurt can be present and valid, the “ripping of the Band-Aid” tends to be less painful (for less time) than a prolonged betrayal of oneself for the sake of conflict avoidance, and that is why I find practicing RT so valuable.

It’s important to remember that we are only in control of our actions and that the reactions of another person are not a reflection of us. People in our lives are not obligated to accept our truths as theirs, just as we are not obligated to accept others’ truths that don’t resonate with us. Conflict is a natural part of life, but I have found that navigating such spaces with Radical Transparency can ease these moments and foster deeper understanding and compassionate, human-to-human communication.

— written by Emily Lichtenberg

Amelia Lichtenberg 7/12/21 Amelia Lichtenberg 7/12/21

Compersion as a Practice

Compersion is a huge topic amidst Ethically Non-Monogamous (ENM) and polyamorous communities. I often see this referred to as “the opposite of jealousy,” and I notice that many people I talk to in ENM relationship structures aspire to cultivate this response to a potentially activating situation such as a beloved announcing a new potential love interest. In some of these conversations I notice that people believe one is either oriented toward compersion, or oriented toward jealousy. This can create a breeding ground for a lot of self and/or partner shaming, and the difficulties one can face in the process of learning to practice compersion can turn some people away from ENM altogether.

All resources and studies referred to in this piece are located at the bottom of the page!

Due to my deep desire to enjoy my personal emotional landscape, to understand why I struggle in the areas I do, and to attempt to uncover the mysteries of my own struggles with jealousy and compersion, I began diving into my own research and self-exploration of this topic. I studied the Evolutionary Psychology (EP) definition of jealousy, and I researched the proposed functions of jealousy based on EP studies conducted over the last several decades. I explored how Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Complex-Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (C-PTSD) intersect the EP perspectives I read. I recognized that compersion was not necessarily difficult for me, but that the initial mixture of fear, anxiety, and “preparation for loss,” that I labeled as “jealousy,” was actually related to my post-trauma responses and was a symptom and expression of my own C-PTSD.

This revelation allowed me to view compersion with a wider lens. I do not believe that compersion is an “either/or” orientation with jealousy on the other side, but rather that compersion is an ongoing practice which can both assist in navigating alternative relationship structures and perspectives and help a person navigate their own inner/trauma healing journey.

So, how does one get from jealousy-flaring, deep trauma response patterns to joyfully compersionate? Well, there is not one set path, nor is there a “finish line,” to inner-growth and -healing, but there is a formula I found to be helpful along the way. First, it starts with understanding jealousy and a specific trauma response called Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria (RSD), and how they interact. Only after we can understand or identify what we want to heal can we begin the mending process. That is where coming to view compersion as a practice instead of an emotional orientation becomes imperative.

The Evolutionary Functions of Jealousy:

During my reading I learned that jealousy serves as a survival emotion to maintain security within our important relationships. There is a distinct difference between jealousy and envy: envy tends to motivate a person toward acquiring what they are envious of for themselves. An example of this in a non-monogamous relationship could be:

Your beloved tells you about the amazing time they had with their new love interest. You are envious that they are enjoying their new relationship because you also want a fun, new romance. The emotional response to this conversation inspires you to refine your dating app profiles and spend more time looking for a new lover for yourself.

The focus here is on that which is perceived to be lacking. With jealousy, however, the focus tends to be on the perception of access to a person, object, or idea (such as a relationship dynamic), and the response tends toward taking what is desired away from something or someone else. An example of this in a non-monogamous relationship could be:

Your beloved tells you about the amazing time they had with their new love interest. You are jealous because you believe they are more interested in the new relationship than in yours. The emotional response to this conversation inspires you to change your behavior, change the relationship “rules,” or act in a way which pushes or manipulates your beloved to re-emphasizing your relationship.

See the difference?

I believe that what separates those who seem to be naturally inclined toward compersion from those of us who suffer from the visceral pangs of jealousy comes from a mindset difference, meaning that those who are naturally inclined toward compersion naturally have a different way of integrating the physiological trigger into how they respond.

Using Jealousy Triggers in a Healthy Way

While jealousy can be an undesired feeling, there is a healthy way to use and navigate through jealousy! I find it helpful to remember that our emotions can be used as tools to gain deeper insight into what is going on within us and within our existing relationships. Monitoring one’s jealousy triggers and reactions can be used to gauge unmet needs in oneself and one’s relationship dynamics. When these unmet needs are recognized they can be transparently communicated to a beloved.

In my experience, jealousy tends toward hardship when these unmet needs go unrecognized and uncommunicated. As with the example above, it seems the jealous party in this dynamic has an unmet need for connection or a specific type of affection. They choose to operate out of the survival instinct to “grab on” in a way which they believe will allow their need to become fulfilled. This choice can create resentment and lead to more distance in the relationship, whereas transparently communicating something along the lines of: “I feel like I am missing [unmet need], and I would like to know if we can talk about this,” allows the other person room into the conversation so that both parties can work together to meet each others’ needs in an authentic way.

A great communication structure that can help facilitate these kinds of hard conversations is Nonviolent Communication (NVC).

While Radical Transparency is a simple practice, that does not mean it is inherently easy for everyone. In a world where more people are removed from in-person social interactions, people struggle to learn and cultivate healthy communication practices. This becomes more salient when amplified feelings and survival responses are activated.

Detangling Jealousy from a Trauma-Informed Lens

Consider your own psychosomatic experiences of jealousy. For me, my chest tightens, my heartbeat elevates, my breathing becomes labored. These are all symptoms of my fight/flight/freeze response as well. My physical responses to shifts in social dynamics with beloveds can actually induce a panic attack-like state in me.

Due to my own history of social-based C-PTSD and through my own inner work both as a psychology student and in my personal therapy practice, I learned that I suffer from a condition called Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria (RSD) and that this distorts how I view certain moments in my relationships with others. Essentially, this means that I am hyper-sensitive to potential rejection triggers from people around me, and I often times misperceive shifts in my relationship landscapes as rejection.

In my experience, RSD presents itself as a survival strategy which emerges specifically in response due to trauma inflicted by others. I believe that often times emotional responses which are perceived as jealousy are actually moments of RSD activation. I genuinely want my beloveds to feel supported in their explorations of other connections, but I also want to make sure that I will not be abandoned in the process.

This fear and anticipation of abandonment is where my own C-PTSD and RSD intersect.

Using Compersion as a Framework for Self-Regulation

For me, RSD is prevalent in my non-monogamous relationships because of the continued potential rejection triggers that my beloved’s other beloveds can present for me. I notice this tends to be an especially sensitive area within non-hierarchical philosophies like Relationship Anarchy (RA) because of the emphasis on personal freedom, flexible arrangements, and the acknowledgement that change is inevitable.

For me the anxiety and fear of rejection and abandonment stems from a difficulty to navigate these types of changes rather than because of a desire for “exclusivity” or hierarchy with another. I firmly believe in and live by the principles of RA, however, I also recognize that the abuse and maltreatment I have experienced in the past shapes my present-day filters.

A large reason why I practice RA, and why I believe it to be beneficial for people with RSD and other psychosocial trauma filters, is that I am regularly confronted with these fears and triggers. Each time I am faced with a shift in my relationships is an opportunity for me to see where I am in my own healing process, where I need to focus my attention, and also I am able to see how my beloveds continue to show up for me in my process (this informs my own choices in moving forward with various connections).

While straightforward “exposure therapy” does not work for every person, I find that confronting my deepest fears head on helps me see the reality of their size in contrast to how big and scary they seem in my anxiety-ridden fantasies.

Experiencing RSD activation in the face of changing relationship dynamics or introductions of new metamours does not mean a person is inherently oriented toward jealousy, that they are “bad at compersion,” or that they lack the ability to be compersionate. It means that the activated person may have experienced social-based trauma and need trauma-informed navigation for these kinds of adjustments. A little extra practice in Radical Transparency can go a long way in these moments!

When I face these fears and triggers I use these as opportunities to refine my own compersion practice. This does not mean I force myself to feel or react a certain way. Rather than perceiving a trigger as something to avoid, I choose to view these moments as opportunities for deeper self-exploration. I use the idea of compersion as my framework for how I want to guide my self-growth within a moment of activation. I want to be excited for my beloved, I want to celebrate and support shared freedom and autonomy. When I feel out of alignment with my compersion framework, I take the opportunity to lean in with curiosity. It is through these instances that I am able to continuously gauge and assess where I am at in my self-regulation, how I am really doing in my trauma healing process, and discover areas within myself that still need attention and care.

For me, compersion is akin to an aspect of the Buddha-nature: all-loving, and all-accepting. Similarly to the Buddha-nature, compersion is not something I can maintain all the time. Rather than give up or claim that I am “just not wired that way,” I work to remember what being in compersion feels like, and bring myself back to that space with as much patience, grace, and self-compassion as I can.

It is the combination of my intrinsic choice to engage in a growth mindset around my personal healing and the cultivation of safe, trusting, and respectful relationships with beloveds and friends who freely choose to support my process that allows me to participate in RA in this way, and use various moments of change to explore, detangle. and integrate the sources of my own activated responses.

Check out my Guided Meditation for Contacting the Wounded Inner Child to help build healthy inner curiosity & dialogue.

I deeply wish to give those I care for the same liberation which I ask them for, and sometimes my own struggles with RSD present challenges to this genuine desire. I believe many people who suffer from RSD struggle with this same cognitive dissonance, which can become increasingly more difficult if a person is also faced with detangling societal expectations— such as mono-normative relationship structures. There can be so much shame around struggling with non-monogamous relationship structures for many reasons, and especially for people with trauma this sense of shame around intricate navigation can be very tender.

If you, the reader, are someone who struggles with RSD:

A helpful practice can be to name this to your beloved. Often times naming a feeling or experience diffuses its intensity. This can open a doorway to deeper intimacy and trust-building with your beloved, which can result in more compassionate connection and fortifying the healing aspects of your relationship container. Remember that you did not ask to experience RSD, and that your trauma and trauma responses are not your fault. They are, however, your responsibility to work through.

Remember that your beloveds are freely choosing to connect with you because they love and care for you, and they likely want to participate in supporting you along your healing journey however best they can. Radically transparent communication is imperative in times like these, from both ends. You can practice NVC as a structure to use when expressing wants and needs amidst an activated state.

If you, the reader, are someone whose beloved struggles with RSD:

I encourage you to read more about RSD (resources are at the bottom of this article) and become trauma-informed in your speech. Do not pathologize your beloved; educate yourself so that you can deepen your own compassionate communication with them. Trauma survivors struggle to remain balanced when activated, and the non-judgmental help of our beloveds can ease these moments of re-triggering.

Often the most important thing a beloved can do is be patient and accepting of whatever is coming up for the activated individual, not take the response personally, and not make assumptions about the individual’s ideologies or psycho-emotional capacities based on the moment of response. NVC is a great communication tool to use when attempting to communicate authentically with someone who is trauma-activated or when they have come back to a balanced state.

For me, compersion is akin to the proverbial “light at the end of the tunnel.” It’s the ideal which I strive for, and it’s the conclusion I wish all my interactions to end with. Having this goal in mind helps me take steps towards cultivating a deeper practice and greater capacity for its presence, even when I find myself struggling to engage with compersion in a particular moment.

- written by Emily Lichtenberg