Relationship Anarchy: Trust is better

Trust is better than suspicion — but what happens when it's already broken? We break down the principle and answer your live questions on rebuilding trust.

Resource mentioned: Dr. Ellen Langer on the Rich Roll Podcast

Work with Ro: I work with people who want to explore the patterns, relationships, and internal narratives that shape their lives - whether they’re looking for a focused piece of work or a longer process of change. My practice blends Transactional Analysis psychotherapy with integrative coaching, leaving room for both emotional depth and practical clarity. Get in touch via www.romoed.com.

Work with E: Already trained in working with queer and non-monogamous folks? LMBA helps coaches and healers grow a private practice that feels authentic and aligned. Blending inner work on your own nervous system and values with the practical business skills to build your client base. If you're ready to help more people who need exactly what you offer, enroll now at lovemasterycert.com. Next cohort starts September 2nd, 202

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Elizabeth: If we treat people like they need to prove something, then number one, we've created a hierarchy in the relationship too, because that's a power dynamic. Like, you now have to prove something to me is a power dynamic, which creates a hierarchy.

And it also boxes people in for how they can be. Like, if someone always treats you like you need to prove something, then you're either always needing to prove something, or you're trying to find ways to escape that. So you're actually not even able to act authentically. And so when you assume that someone isn't trustworthy, then they almost have no option but to prove you right in some ways.

Welcome to All the Love, the podcast where we deep dive into all things queer and non-monogamous relationships. 

Ro: We're E and Ro, longtime practitioners in coaching, therapy, and education, with a focus on supporting humans in said relationships. 

Elizabeth: Every quarter, we pick a theme and host a series of live podcast recordings.

Ro: And here's one we made earlier. 

Elizabeth: Hope that it speaks to you. All the love. 

Ro: All the love. 

Elizabeth: From E, that's me. 

Ro: And Ro, that's me. Okay, cute. 

Elizabeth: Hello. My name is Elizabeth Cunningham, and I've been working in the field of gender, sexuality, and relationships since 2008. My background is in political science and women gender and sexuality studies.

So basically I have degrees in how structural power dynamics impact gender and sexuality. I worked in a domestic violence center for three years after I graduated. And- did community education and outreach, teaching people about what domestic violence is, why it happens, how you can get out of it.

I then determined to switch my focus to being more in the preventative side of care. And so I started training as a transformational life coach. I chose that modality because it was the one that really helped me the most, as a lot of healers and educators most often choose the modality that worked best for them.

That is true about me, too. I started my private practice in 2017, working mainly with polyamorous folks. And then I expanded that to more queer folks in these past five, six years. And I also identify as polyamorous and queer.

I've been out as polyamorous for 15 years now. I am the L in the LGBTQIA+ alphabet mafia and the other thing that I do as far as, like, my resume is concerned is that I created the training and certification and business development for queer and polyamorous folks who want to become coaches. So if you want to become a trained and certified coach and then have me help you build your practice I created an entire program for that, so if you're interested, then let me know.

But yeah the... I think the most important thing, though to know about me is that really all of this work I do is inside of self-expression and people being able to be fully self-expressed in who they are and how they love, and having their relationships get to be fully self-expressed.

I've never understood why relationships have red tape. It's never made any sense to me whatsoever. So it makes total sense that I do what I do. Literally since I was, like, five years old, I'm like, "I don't understand why you just can't tell people that you love them. That makes no sense to me." Mm-hmm. I don't understand that if you wanna kiss someone, that you can't just, like, figure out if they wanna kiss you too.

Like, what's all this red tape we have to go through? So ridiculous. So that's also one of the other reasons why relationship anarchy really speaks to me as well. It is one lens that you can look through to really examine and feel fully free in yourself and self-expressed in your relationships.

Ro: Mm-hmm. You're a relationship anarchist at heart. And a very impressive person. Every time I listen to your intro, I'm like, "Oh, wow, you've done so much stuff and for so long. It's incredible." So,

Elizabeth: Hello. Just to be clear, I think about that when you... I'm like, whenever you tell your bi- I've heard your bio so many times, and every single time I'm like, "Ro is so amazing.

She's so fucking cool and smart." Anyway, 

Ro: Well, I don't know how to take that. Thank you. I appreciate it, but I'm like, "Really?" Okay. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. 

Ro: You should listen to yourself. So I, yeah, I mean, my intro, what I've tended to say the last few days, I'll maybe add also some stuff based on what I'm hearing from you, 'cause I'm like, "Oh, I never tell people about my education or anything."

But doesn't feel relevant, I suppose, but I'll tell you anyway. Hello. I am Ro Moed. I am a writer on the topic of relationship anarchy and polyamory in relationships. I'm also a relationship coach since 2021. And I'm also a transactional analysis psychotherapist in training, working on that post-grad degree, four years in the making, one more year to go.

I work with individuals and couples, and I am the Q, I guess, in the LGBTQIA plus acronym. And the plus, I suppose. And my practice tends to focus on working with people who are polyamorous and relationship anarchist, but what that tends to mean is I get a lot of clients who are also queer, who are also kinky, who are neurodivergent, who are gender questioning.

Many things overlap with those two labels I find very often. And my background is, before I was a coach, I was an educator. I was working in adult education for 10 years, and also worked as a teacher trainer. So I'm really passionate about disseminating information in a way that people can actually receive it and apply it to their lives.

For completeness's sake, my degree was English literature.

But having said that, English literature I actually think is all about the study of human existence and what it's like to be a person. So I think I've always had a fascination for how humans are and what drives us, and how do you get from one point in someone's story to a more progressed, hopefully happier point in their story.

Yeah. So sort of relevant tangentially. Being micro- It's all 

Elizabeth: connected. You know? It's all connected. 

Ro: Yeah. Working on that master's of science, and hopefully that will be the one that I brag about in a year's time. 

Elizabeth: There you go. 

Ro: So, trust is better is the principle that we're working on today. Shall I go ahead and read it?

Elizabeth: Absolutely. Let's dive in. Without further ado, as they say. 

Ro: Choosing to assume that your partner does not wish you harm leads you down a much more positive path than a distrustful approach, where you need to be constantly validated by the other person to trust that they are there with you in the relationship.

Sometimes people have so much going on inside themselves that there's just no energy left to reach out and care for others. Create the kind of relationship where withdrawing is both supported and quickly forgiven, and give people lots of chances to talk, explain, see you, and be responsible in the relationship.

Remember your core values and to take care of yourself, though. A slightly larger principle this time. There's a few things to talk about within it. I'm sure we'll probably have similar points. Did you have any sort of opening statements you wanted to make about this? 

Elizabeth: I think my only opening statement with this is that this is just easier said than done, you know?

And if I were coaching someone if we were like, "Oh, I really wanna work on trust and giving people the benefit of the doubt, or trusting myself," or, exploring that, right? Then we would start with where do you not trust and what has led to that lack of trust?

But it's also just the understanding that, I think we've said this in every single episode, but this is just a process. It's a process. It's a practice. It isn't necessarily something to get right. It is something to continually learn about yourself and learn about others and learn about relationships inside of.

So there's not, like, a way or a place to get to, to be like, "Oh, check. Done this." But rather this is a way to think about and operate and check in with yourself on. 

Ro: Yeah, you don't just get to a place where you have trust, and that's good. You're done now. Right. Trust, trust secured regardless of the circumstances.

I do think it's something that you build towards and that you can be set back on your path towards trust as well by things going wrong in relationships. But I think it's kind of a guiding principle, a thing you're aiming towards or that you're sort of holding in mind, is how I'm reading it.

... And I don't think that this principle is saying to trust blindly or to ignore harm when it occurs in a relationship, but if you, like, begin from an assumption of goodwill, then it generally will create a healthier atmosphere in your relationship instead of if you were to begin from a place of suspicion, where it's like, "I'm automatically suspicious and you need to prove yourself for me to get trust."

It's like start from a place of trust, and then see what happens after that. That's how I'm reading it. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. No, that's how I'm reading it, too. And also to be in partnership, right? Like, you know, Ro and I have led programs around communication where we talk about being on the same team as your partner.

Or with relationship anarchy, we're really talking about any relationship, although this bullet point specifically says partner.

Ro: Yeah ... 

Elizabeth: But it's like, if someone is your teammate, if you're on the same team, if you're doing this together, then that would beg for the assumption of trust, the assumption of goodwill.

And when we talk about, like, conflict resolution in relationships it's talking about like you as the relationship unit, whether that be, like, you and another person or you and multiple people versus the problem at hand, and not you versus the other person. Like, that's not going to solve the problem, right?

Ro: Mm-hmm. 

Elizabeth: And then, like you said, not ignoring red flags or warning signs, or not, like, brushing things under the rug if things come up, but starting from that base of we're on the same team.

Ro: Mm-hmm. It's making me wonder now, actually, this is not in the notes that I wrote today. I'm thinking, why did they put this in the manifesto a- as if it contrasts with good practice for traditional relationships, too? Does the culture around traditional relationships tell us you don't start from a place of trust?

Like, I don't know if that's the case. I just suddenly had that thought. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. Well, I don't know. And I feel a little embarrassed to admit this, especially since we're doing this series I'm now thinking, like, maybe I should have done a little bit more research about this.

But I haven't actually looked at the... 'Cause I know that Andie Nordgren has come back to some of these things and had her own critique about it. 

And I actually don't know what her critique is, and so I'd be curious if that is maybe part of her own critique because, yeah, inside of this manifesto, it's about how we're looking at relationships differently, Mm-hmm

than, like, traditionally. Although I do think that if and again, I'm not sure the point of view that she was coming from in writing this necessarily but I do see in the cultural zeitgeist of how we treat relationships that we often do come from a place of assumed suspicion rather than trust.

So just in a general sense, this is a breakaway from our current as practiced behavior in relationships. So just as a general relationship practice, I think that it's important to talk about. And even if it's not necessarily, like, the most relationship anarchy thing in this manifesto that it is a break inside of cultural assumption around how we operate in relationships and what we assume in relationships.

Ro: Mm-hmm. I think that's probably true. Now that we're talking about it, I feel, yes, that is correct. I can see that because the norm, as I perceive it, is to say to a new partner, for example, that you need to prove to me that I am safe with you. You need to prove through self-sacrifice maybe, or through hierarchy, through spending less time with your friends because those are, like, not real relationships compared to ours, you know, that kind of hierarchical thinking is really common, and it all seems to center around proving that somebody finds you valuable and proving that you matter to them. And w- I think what this point is saying is that you need to come from a starting position of assuming someone's not trying to hurt you and assuming they think you're valuable, and looking for the ways in which they show you that, as opposed to putting this tall order on them that they need to prove it to you through self-sacrifice or through the sacrifice of other relationships.

Mm-hmm. I also notice how this distrust is often very self-fulfilling in our culture. You know, people... Oh, you're smiling- Yeah ... 'cause you wrote the same thing. 

Elizabeth: No, I'm smiling because I'm agreeing with you. 

Ro: Yeah ... if someone's always being treated as if they're potentially guilty or deceptive, or that they're about to abandon you, then the relationship starts to feel tense.

They start to feel like they're being surveilled, and it can be brittle and easy to break that trust. And if you treat someone like they've already done something wrong, then they're either going to comply and adapt and kowtow and try and make things better for you, which is probably not healthy for them.

There's probably some overextension going on their side. Or they're gonna rebel and be like, "No, fuck you. Stop expecting the worst from me. I've literally done nothing yet," you know? 

Elizabeth: Right. 

Ro: And it's, it exists in the culture of icks and red flags, and, like, the way that people are constantly looking for something to immediately cast someone as either a good person or a bad person.

Elizabeth: Right. Which insert my tangent about duality and how binary thinking is also very detrimental for relationships as well. Which can apply to this, you know, trusting versus not trusting someone, and looking at that as, like, a black and white or a binary rather than looking at it as more of a spectrum.

And looking for nuance and in this bullet point, giving people the benefit of the doubt. also inside of relationships and especially in how we- like what we believe gives our actions and our words, right? And how we communicate. And how we behave and how we communicate then sets a precedent for how other people can be around us.

So if you just... And I apologize if this is, like, too much iterating on what you just said, because you said it really well. But if we treat people like they need to prove something, then number one, we've created a hierarchy in the relationship too, because that's a power dynamic. Like, you now have to prove something to me is a power dynamic, which creates a hierarchy.

And it also boxes people in for how they can be. Like, if someone always treats you like you need to prove something, then you're either always needing to prove something, or you're trying to find ways to escape that. So you're actually not even able to act authentically. And so when you assume that someone isn't trustworthy, then they almost have no option but to prove you right in some ways.

Ro: Mm-hmm. 

Elizabeth: And this is not to... I feel like whenever I bring up topics like this, whenever I frame it in that way the immediate response from some people is like, you know, "Well, that can fall into, like, victim blaming or something like that." And that's not what I'm saying here. I'm not saying that you are now making someone act a certain way.

But I am saying that you are creating the conditions for them to not have very many options. So how we be does impact how other people get to be around us. And so being aware of that impact is what I'm talking about. So it's not about fault or blame, or that other people don't have choice, or that you're making anyone do anything but rather being aware of the impact that you have on someone.

Like, really extreme example is that if you're constantly yelling at someone, you don't really give them an opportunity to be kind with you. You're not opening the space for them to do that. 

Ro: Mm-hmm. 

Elizabeth: Right? And again, this gets very nuanced and especially in certain contexts as well. But inside of the conversation of assuming trust with people then also allows for a space in that relationship for people to fill it.

Ro: Well, in my work with couples, when I'm in a room with two people who are, part of them really fears what the other one will do to them, whether it's, like, hurt them or abandon them, reject them, I sometimes have to slow down and be like, "Okay, so a part of you feels that way, and we'll make room for that.

Is there also a part of you that knows that this person fundamentally doesn't wish you harm?" Like, 'cause if there isn't even a small part of you that knows that, it's very hard to collaborate towards a better solution for the relationship or, like, a better way of relating. And usually people will say yes.

When they don't, it's a whole other thing. But you know, I think that there needs to be, in some part of you, the recognition that if I think someone's dangerous to me, and I always seem to find people dangerous and scary when I'm in close relationships with them, then maybe that's something you are bringing to your connections.

And again, like you said, it's nuanced. That doesn't mean that if you think someone's abusive that they're definitely not abusive. Of course, like, it's possible that they are abusive, but if you always feel like you're being abused in your relationships, even with people where you can acquiesce that's not the case, then that's you.

That's your frame on something. So I think what I take from what you're saying is that every dynamic, every relationship is co-created. You know, whether one person is sort of more the leader in the relationship and sets the pace and the tone more, you are still participating in that. So the person who doesn't trust is setting the tone.

The person who then feels they have to prove them right or wrong agrees to that tone. Everything is co-created, and if we don't accept that there is at least partially some responsibility in relationships to look at how we are being with the other person, then we're kind of putting ourselves in a position where we're powerless, and I don't think there's anything to gain from thinking that we are powerless in relationships.

Not safe ones, obviously. I'm discounting you know. Yeah. Anyway. Yeah. We could go down a whole... It's really hard to talk about this because I don't wanna make generalizations. But slightly switching topic, I mean, it's still related- Yeah ... if that's okay. I think that needing constant reassurance or struggling to trust I, I wanted to speak to the fact that I can empathize with where that comes from.

I don't think that people are actually seeking connection, though, in those moments. Okay, so this is a bit of a hard truth I think for some people to hear. I think when someone needs reassurance and needs to have the other person prove their love and their consistency, and that nothing seems to satisfy that desire for proof, then I think someone is actually seeking relief from their anxiety.

They're saying, "I feel uncertain about my safety, not just in this connection, but in any connection. And in order to help me feel less uncertain and less anxious, I need you to offer me some kind of proof." And it's really understandable for people who have attachment wounds, who have trauma, who have betrayal in their history, or just generally are feeling insecure.

I've definitely been in that position of wanting someone to prove things to me as well, so I'm not above this. And I don't think that the manifesto is mocking the need for that anxiety to be soothed, but it's questioning, does endless validation actually provide the best foundation for trust? And offering reassurance, as I'm sure everyone listening or in the audience today knows, if you offer reassurance to someone, it can soothe them in the short term.

But if they have something underneath that desire for reassurance that isn't resolved, then the reassurance will never stick. That's why you have to keep giving it again and again. So that's where the person asking for re- reassurance or s- or desiring it needs to have a look at, like, what is it in me that leaves me feeling unsafe with other people?

And what's actually gonna make a lasting difference to how I feel in relationships? 

Elizabeth: Mm-hmm. 

Ro: I know there was a lot in that. 

Elizabeth: No I'm pausing because I'm just taking it in. And also that was just really well said and well stated.

and, 

Ro: Yeah. Thank 

Elizabeth: you. And I also, I guess I want to offer, you know, for myself that Yeah, I've also been the person in relationships that needs a lot of reassurance as well. And like, yes, reassurance can be fine. Asking for reassurance is not a bad thing in relationships, but as you pointed out, when you need that reassurance or you're relying on another solely and completely to be that reassurance for you, now you have relinquished your own power and autonomy to another human to have you feel good in relationships.

And that's also not fair, and it's also not doing your own inner work to really get curious about, like, what is this? Why do I feel this way? Why do I feel like I need to be reassured on a fairly consistent basis? And can I offer myself some of that reassurance as well?

Mm-hmm. Or like, again what's deeper here? What is underneath here? Maybe there is a relational wound there or a core wound or some type of trauma that needs to be addressed, right? Because yeah if you need constant reassurance and it's never actually filling your cup, then it sounds like there's something else that's going on.

Ro: There's a hole in your cup. 

Elizabeth: There's a hole in the cup. 

Ro: Yeah. And I think actually it's when people ask for reassurance and it doesn't satisfy, it's because the act of reassurance or the willingness to reassure is what they want. They're not paying attention to the content of what is being offered in the reassurance.

They just wanna know, "If I ask for it, then you're gonna do it." Mm-hmm. So if that's the thing that soothes you, then they're gonna keep asking and you're gonna keep feeling like you have to do it. Reassurance really needs to be asked for only, I think if actually when you hear what you need to hear, something shifts.

Otherwise, you're just engaging in a game with someone else that's never gonna be resolved. 

Elizabeth: Mm-hmm. Yeah. 

Ro: Did you wanna shift to a different topic? 

Elizabeth: Yeah. Well, the next sentence is sometimes people have so much going on inside themselves that there's just no energy left to reach out and care for others.

And for me, this is an example of giving people the benefit of the doubt. You know, you don't know what people are going through. Even when they are someone who is so close and, like, intimate with you, you never know the inner workings of a person, ever.

If you're very close and intimate with that person, you might have a really good idea of what that is. But you just don't know what people are dealing with. And also, you don't know what people are dealing with even from a day-to-day basis. I remember in my yoga teacher training...

Fun fact, I was a yoga teacher for eight years. But in my yoga teacher training, when we were talking about consent in yoga teacher training, and we were talking about, like, even if you have the same person, you teach the same class 6:00 in the morning every single morning, and most of the time it's always the same people who come to that class.

You still ask for consent every single day, because it has been 24 hours since you have seen that person. You have no idea what has happened to them in the past 24 hours, right? Something totally traumatic could have happened to them. Like, something could a wound could have opened up.

They could have, whatever. Their boss yelled at them, now they're more tender. You know, whatever. Whatever it is, you have no idea. Even if you see someone every single day, you have no idea what they're dealing with and what they're going through. And so also giving people the benefit of the doubt inside of, like, being curious about people, and their experience, and what's going on with them, and why they're acting the way that they do even if you see them every single day.

And checking in with them, being like, "Hey, what's going on? How are you doing? Are you into hugs today, are you not into hugs today?" Whatever, like. And then this also reminds me of Dr. Ellen Langer. Who's a mindfulness psychologist and has a couple of really cool interviews on the Rich Roll podcast.

So if you wanna look up Dr. Ellen Langer Rich Roll, there's some really cool conversations that they have had. She's also written several great books. When I say several, I mean, like, eight books about mindfulness in different areas of life. And one of the things that she talks about is mindfulness in relationships.

And being mindful in relationships is considering that you're getting to know your partner all the time.

And getting curious about their experience and who are they today? They were the person they were yesterday, but who are they today? And so, you know, this sentence of, "Sometimes people have so much going on inside themselves that there's just no energy left to reach out and care for others," like, that's just immediately what I think of when I read that.

Ro: Mm-hmm. Yeah. I think being continuously curious about the people that we're with is the way that we don't get bored in long-term relationships. If you think you know everything about someone and exactly how they're gonna react in every situation, then probably that relationship will start to feel pretty sour.

What it was making me think about as well when you were talking about that stuff, is the phrase, "If they wanted to, they would." I have such a strong reaction to that phrase because, like, I know it has a place in some situations, and I know what people mean when they say it. They mean, like, if someone is being completely unavailable, if they're continuously in a patterned kind of way showing you that they don't care, then maybe it's because they don't care, and if they wanted you to feel like they cared, then they would show you that in, in some sort of way.

So I understand it has a value to some extent, but I also think it gets flattened, and people often do perceive somebody's lack of capacity or someone's preoccupation or someone's, you know, being dysregulated or frightened or just depleted in some way, they perceive that as something to do with them.

I think actually, like almost every conflict comes from, at least in part, centering yourself in the narrative of someone else's story incorrectly. 

Elizabeth: Mm-hmm. 

Ro: So whatever they're doing, it must be something to do with me. No, no, No. Like, sometimes they're trying to send you a message, and sometimes you receive a message, and that's fine, and whether someone meant to treat you badly or not, you're allowed to have your own boundaries around what's okay for you and what's not.

But what I'm arguing for is just to approach other people's withdrawal sometimes as something less personalized, like trying not to immediately read into it some really personal, painful story. And I would really encourage everyone to notice the stories that come up most often for you. So I operate from the lens of transactional analysis, and one of the core ideas in transactional analysis is script, that we all have beliefs about ourselves, other people in the world that we form pretty early in life and that stick with us unless we bring them into awareness.

So if you have a script belief, for example, that I'm gonna be abandoned because you had an early experience of abandonment, then you might experience every tiny absence from someone else as abandonment, every quiet moment as abandonment, every slow-to-respond text as abandonment. So if you're noticing yourself feel afraid of abandonment in a lot of different ways and in response to a lot of different things, then just consider what it is that you're bringing to the interaction.

How are you interpreting things in the most hurtful way possible? And not to demand constant availability as proof of love, you know. Especially in relationship anarchy, where we're encouraging people to have multiple important connections and to diversify their connections, not to raise one above all others and neglect your friends as soon as you get into a relationship and that sort of thing.

So especially if you're doing that, then you have to allow room for people to have their own lives and things going on. But just to be clear, that's not saying that you should allow people space when it means that you don't get your fundamental needs met in a relationship. It doesn't mean enabling total irresponsibility and carelessness.

Like supporting withdrawal doesn't mean that you never address if somebody is never there or doesn't respond to you or if it hurts your feelings. Like, you totally can address it, but it just means don't treat every time someone retreats as a mortal offense against- Yeah ... you personally. 

Elizabeth: Yeah.

No, and that's a really good point. And also just to tell one on myself. Taking things personally has been something that I've really had to look at and unpack for myself in relationships. And one of the reasons being is that one of my internal scripts is I've done something wrong.

Ro: Yes, I, me too Yeah.

Is that why we are friends? 

Elizabeth: Probably.

Like, one of my internal scripts is I've done something wrong. I've messed up here. I am the reason why things are not going well, which then has me take things very personally. And center myself, which is not what I'm, like, consciously trying to do. But it is what ends up happening if I'm not aware of it.

 And one of the symptoms of that is that it causes me to be really defensive sometimes, too. Because even though my internal script is I have done something wrong, I also don't want to have done something wrong. And so, so sometimes that causes me to be defensive.

And so knowing this about myself and bringing that to awareness you know, which before it was more unconscious and I've had to kind of uncover that in my own personal work. But now that I know that, it's like, oh, I think that I have done something wrong here. That might not be the case because I think that all the time.

That might not be true, actually. What else could be true here? 

Ro: Spoken like a true coach, you know. Don't make snap judgments. What else could be true? 

Elizabeth: What else could be true? If there were something else true in this situation, what would it be? Oh, maybe I'm not to blame for everything. Maybe that's not actually true.

Ro: No. No, I'm joking. You're definitely not to blame for everything. Actually, I had a, an example of withdrawal yesterday in my life, and it's funny, I didn't even notice it. I sort of clocked it this morning. I was like, "Oh, yeah, that's weird," but, like, it's okay. And I guess, Yeah. I guess the, there's something to learn from that, so I'll share briefly the story.

So I have a partner who I text every day. We might send voice notes every day. We probably have a phone call every day or two. And yesterday he stopped answering my texts at around 3:00 PM. And before we came on to record this podcast, I sent loads of silly selfies with my hair all curly and like, you know, and I was, I guess I was expecting a response, but I also didn't notice that I didn't get one.

So I didn't get a response from him until after I had gone to sleep, and I saw it this morning. So I guess what my point is there is that I wasn't surveilling his behavior so closely. I was just like, this is someone that I trust. This is someone who has been consistent for the six years that I've known them, and today they're busy with something or maybe something's going on, but they'll tell me when it matters, and they know I'm here as well.

So I guess that's an example of how to approach withdrawal from a perspective of, like, look at the wider pattern of someone's behavior as opposed to making an assumption based on what's happening right now. Don't rush to the harshest interpretation. And yeah, just be a bit charitable towards someone.

Sorry if that was a non-sequitur to what you were sharing- No ... but it just what, it made me think of that. I was like, oh yeah, yesterday he didn't text me after a certain time, and I did sort of wonder at one point, hope he's okay. He'll text me if he's not. So,

Elizabeth: Yeah ... 

Ro: so, and if he hadn't acknowledged at all that was strange, then I might have had to say, "You know, I did wonder what was up with you."

But he did immediately, and I think part of what this point in the manifesto is saying is like, give people room to explain and to be accountable and to repair with you. His first message to me was, "I'm sorry that I didn't message yesterday. All is okay. I'll send a voice note as soon as I can."

Elizabeth: Right. 

Ro: And I'm like, "Cool. So we're fine." 

Elizabeth: Yeah. 

Ro: No stress. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. Yeah. Totally. And I think, like for me, this sentence the create the kind of relationship where withdrawing is both supported and quickly forgiven, and give people lots of chances to talk, explain, see you, and be responsible in the relationship.

And then the last sentence of, "Remember your core values and take care of yourself though." So it doesn't mean that just because y- you, you can be forgiving of someone and also know that y'all don't have a workable relationship. Like, and I think this is where in my practice, I see people struggle is, like, they are really understanding.

Like, they are understanding, they are forgiving, they are really compassionate, but then they find themselves in relationships where their needs aren't being met or they're not getting the time or the attention or the love or the affection or, like, the type of relationship structure that they would really like.

And so then they're kind of stuck in this place of, like, forgiving and understanding, and also not getting what they want or need. I'm a huge proponent of being understanding and compassionate and forgiving and letting people be where they're at in life, and also creating workable relationships.

Understanding and forgiveness does not necessarily mean closeness, if that's not workable. Pointing the finger right back at myself, some people have had to adjust their relationship with me because I am not someone who talks to people every single day. And in fact, I am not someone to ta- that talks to people every single f- single week. And in fact, I am not someone who talks to people every single month.

Like, I'm absolutely a person who, like, I have a lot going on, and I also really like my alone time. I really like having my own space and time- ... and processing and whatever, nothingness. I really enjoy that. I love people to the depths of my soul. Like, there are people in my life that I don't even know, it the love that I have for them doesn't even make sense to me.

And- ... I still don't wanna fucking talk to them every single day. You know? 

Ro: Get out of my face. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. 

Ro: Be great 

Elizabeth: over there. 

Ro: I resonate with that as well. I mean, yeah, and I like the, in my relationships, I feel I've built relationships, not just romantic, I'm talking about friendships too, where people know that when I don't respond immediately to stuff, it's absolutely not personal.

And, you know, I have seen people, I know people personally, and I work with people, who feel an urgency to respond to messages, for example, because they think if they don't, then the other person's gonna interpret that in some way. 

Elizabeth: Right. 

Ro: But I think I'm really glad that my friendships, my relationships tend not to go that way.

I tend to have to say one time, "Hey, sorry I didn't answer straight away, I just had a lot going on, but as soon as I can, I will." I just have to say that one time, and then f- for the most part, like, everyone just takes that as truth forevermore. Right. And that's how we respond to each other. You know, we text each other quite often and send voice notes about work, but also about just what's going on in our lives, and I never once think, "Oh, my God, Elizabeth hasn't answered me for two days, she hates me now."

'Cause I know that's not what it means. 

Elizabeth: Right. 

Ro: You know? Yeah. I trust, back to trust, I trust that you care about me. And yet, if somebody continuously overrides your boundaries or minimizes your needs or ignores repeated harm or silences your perception or- ignores your requests or diminishes and criticizes your requests, then something's gone wrong there. In those situations, I wouldn't recommend trust because well, not trust of others. I would recommend trust of yourself in that situation. 

Elizabeth: Yeah, totally. And it is it's trust of yourself and trust of your own integrity and what works for you.

And yeah, this is not t- oh my gosh, I just had three thoughts all at once. This is not unconditional trust. Assumed trust is not unconditional trust. So if someone has shown a pattern of behavior that has it be very reasonable to not trust them, or at least not trust them in this scenario, right?

Like, if someone is always late for things and they keep saying like, "Oh yeah, I'll be there. I'll be there. I'll be there on time. I'll be there on time. I'll show up. I'll be there. I'll da da," and then they keep not doing that, it is completely reasonable to not trust them in the future. Mm-hmm. If someone keeps saying like, "Oh yeah, for sure, I'm gonna do this thing," or, "I'm gonna change this behavior," or, "I'll make sure that I do this," and you keep giving them chances and they keep not showing up in the way that they say that they are going to, it is completely reasonable to not trust that person in this context anymore.

Like, maybe it's not reasonable to withdraw your entire trust from them. Like, if someone is always late in my life, it doesn't mean that I'm gonna stop trusting them in every area of our life, but I am gonna stop trusting them to show up on time, you know? Yeah. Yeah. So like I said at the beginning, it's not black or white.

You know? It's not like you're a trustworthy person or you're not a trustworthy person. It's more about learning trust and learning when to trust, when to not trust, and that you're also not going to get it right all the time. There was something else that I was gonna say about that, but I kinda got carried away with that point.

Ro: That's okay. Well, I- we're gonna, like, have to wrap this part of the- Oh, 

Elizabeth: that's right. Look at the time. Okay. 

Ro: But I, yeah I agree. Like, trust is not the same as being naive. It's not saying just go into every connection allowing anything to happen to you. There are conditions. It's just saying, this principle I believe is saying, that choose not to organize your love around suspicion- Yeah

when, you know, care and conversation a- and accountability are always possible. Leave room for care and conversation and accountability, rather than testing people or making sure that they're living up to your expectations. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. Absolutely. And yeah, and trust yourself, and also forgive yourself for not trusting sometimes, too.

That's the other part of not doing this perfect and not doing it right, is forgiving yourself for the wounds that you have, forgiving yourself for your struggle to trust. Trust is hard. We wouldn't have to talk about it this much if it were super easy.

So give yourself some grace in this journey. 

Ro: Yeah. Absolutely. It is hard. Agreed. So Q's and A's. 

Elizabeth: The Q's and A's. 

Ro: Shall we do Q's and A's? 

Elizabeth: Yes. All right, so we are gonna hop into the Q and A portion of our podcast today. And how Q&A works is you can either unmute yourself if you wanna come on video, you can do that.

If you wanna just unmute yourself and share a question that you have or a comment that you had that we can talk about. You can also put it in the chat as well. And you can put it in the chat to everyone, and then we'll read it. Or if you want to remain more anonymous with your question then you can also DM either myself or Ro, and then we will read it anonymously and discuss it.

So any one of those things works. So yeah. what are your questions or comments about what we talked about today? 

Ro: It's okay also if you disagree with anything that we've said or if you have a concern about anything. Don't feel that you have to be in alignment with us. We're open to any kind of comment as well. 

Elizabeth: Absolutely.

Ro: Doing this podcast process has just made me a lot more forgiving of other people on podcasts, 'cause I realize how often I say things so imperfectly, and I'm like, "Ooh, that's not quite what I meant, but..." So yeah, it's definitely possible that we have said something poorly or inaccurately, and you might have some feelings about that too.

So yeah, that was the rationale behind saying that. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. Well, it's also, I mean, I definitely think creating content in general has helped me be more forgiving of people. I listen back to stuff that I said and it's like, yeah, number one, coulda said it better. Number two, there's so much more underneath that.

Like, I could have taken that point and talked about just that point for another 45 minutes. So just because I said it that way does not mean that I don't have more to say about it, that there isn't more nuance to it, that, you know, whatever it is. So yeah. Ooh, and we have, "I was thinking about how to rebuild trust after it was broken.

My partner/ex has hurt me so badly in the past that we are maybe at a point where it's hard to give each other the benefit of the doubt. For them, they fear hurting me again and have to, quote-unquote, 'prove' that they won't. For me, I feel they want me to prove that I trust them again.

Ro: Whoo. Yeah. You know, I was actually holding onto a story about broken trust, which might be helpful perhaps, So I have a partner who has given me permission to talk about this publicly.

Obviously I'm not gonna name and, like, say where he lives and stuff. So about two, three years into our relationship he had a mental breakdown. He had undiagnosed harm OCD, so he feared that he would hurt someone. Even though he was not at all a danger to anyone, he had these intrusive thoughts that he was dangerous.

And it really did a number on him. He had no idea that he was having intrusive thoughts, he just th- thought that they were thoughts that he had. So he ended up having a breakdown and very abruptly ending our relationship over the phone, which I just never saw coming. I felt completely blindsided 'cause I thought we were good, and there really wasn't anything in our relationship that was bad.

It was in his head he thought, "Well, I love this person and this is one of the most important people to me, so obviously I'm gonna hurt her 'cause I'm a bad person and I hurt people." He's okay now. He's had a lot of therapy and he's worked on it, and he understands OCD, and he has that under control.

But we were not in contact for about four months. He asked me to give him space, and it was so hard, but I did. And in that space I felt all sorts of things. I had to be, like, reckoning with my own scripts coming up, like, "Oh, have I done anything bad? Have I pushed him over the edge? Was I dangerous to him?

Like, what's going on?" I didn't know any of this OCD stuff at the time, I just knew he'd had a breakdown and broken up with me. So it was really tough, but I also knew that he wasn't well and something was up. When we got back in touch, I just remember those first few months after that broken trust being so difficult, but at the same time I thought to myself, "I know that at the core of this person is a very good human being who cares a lot about me."

And I had to choose that trust, but I also definitely held him accountable for the impact. It was a delicate balance 'cause he still wasn't well. But it was a delicate balance between saying, "I understand that you're not well, and I understand that you weren't well and that you had to do it to take care of yourself, and I want you to understand how horrific the last few months have been for me.

Like, can we both have empathy for each other in this process? Can I care about you and what brought you to that decision where you felt there was no other option, and can you also care about me and the impact it had on me, not knowing what was going on, not being allowed to reach out? You know?

And fortunately we were both adult enough to hold both of those realities in mind, and he did have a fear of hurting me again and brought that up. He actually brought that up a lot more than I did. He was always, like, apologizing for the same thing over and over again. I was like, "I actually believed your apology the first time.

You don't have to say it again." So I don't know if any of this is helping you, but I guess what I'm trying to convey is that holding both of the people's experiences in mind and creating space for both of you to feel heard and understood, and if someone breaks your trust, then they do need to show accountability, and how they do that for me is by really reflecting back to you the experience that you had, really showing you that they understand and they witness your experience.

It took me a long time though, by the way, just to say. Like, it was really hard for a long time, and I don't know at what point, but at some point, you know, my nervous system just caught up with what I was hearing and, you know, and things get easier. Give yourself time to settle back in to the trust that you're building.

Anyway, go on. Sorry. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. No, and I, just to, you know, reflect what you shared is, yeah, rebuilding trust is a lot of holding multiple truths at the same time. Especially when there is hurt. And most of the time I feel like when broken trust happens, there's hurt. There's been harm of some kind.

So yeah, being able to hold multiple truths being able to take ownership of your part in it, but also both people being able to take ownership of their parts in it. But also, the other thing that I'm hearing in what you shared, Ro, is the bullet point that we're talking about today, which is this underlying assumption of trust.

Like, underlying assumption of we can trust each other again. This is possible. We both want it. And I think more so than wanting it is the assumption that it can happen, like the assumption of the possibility rather than just the want of it is what I'm also hearing in what you're sharing. But the other thing that I thought of, which was when you were like, "You look like you're thinking about things," was around the conflict completion triangle.

So I actually created this triangle when Ro and I were making our program together around conflict resolution. But the conflict completion triangle is repair, resolve, and reassure.

Repair answers the question, is this problem going to persist? So if something has been repaired, then the answer to that question is no, or most likely no, it's not going to persist. Resolve answers the question, is this conversation complete, or complete for now? Like, it's okay if things get brought up later, but do we feel complete, you know, for now in this iteration of problem-solving?

And then the last one is reassurance, which answers the question, are we okay? Right. So if you haven't answered the questions, is this problem going to persist, is this conversation complete, and are we okay, then usually there's something missing and it feels incomplete. So I just wanted to offer that as a tool to use in moving forward as well. 

Ro: Yeah, well remembered.

We have a comment on this same topic. "What has been helping me with rebuilding trust was keeping a positive score. Like, every time my partner behaved in a way that was trustworthy concerning the issue that broke our trust in the first place, I wrote it down, I talked about it with him, and made it very visible for both of us.

And that list helped a lot when fear crept back in, along with a lot of conversations. And for him, it also worked well because he kept a list when I behaved differently, when I trusted him again, even if it was just a little bit more than the time before." I love that idea. Very practical. If you're someone who has difficulty with holding onto the permanence of things, writing it down can be a way to remind you it did indeed happen.

It did happen even if I don't feel it yet. 

Elizabeth: That is so true.

Ro: The original question asker says that they tried to do something similar, but sometimes not enough on the positive feedback and that they use their shared note on a phone for RADAR, which is a way of doing relationship check-ins for anyone who's listening and who's not familiar.

I can't remember exactly what the acronym stands for right now, but they use that as their relationship journal. So yeah. I mean, I was thinking also just one more thing to add that you get to decide at what point enough is enough as well. Like, my story is not meant to put pressure on you to be okay.

If at the end of the day after months and it's just not okay, that's also an option, as painful as it is. What helped me h- stay connected and keep trying was the knowledge that I really did value having this person in my life. My life was not better without them. And I really wanted to fix it.

So I think if you feel that way, if you feel, "My life is better with this person in it, for sure, and I want to fix it," then keep going. Yeah. And all of that being said, I don't know what happened, so it's- Yeah ... it's all, like, up to you. 

Elizabeth: I think the last thing that I'll say, and then we have another person and so we can answer that.

But the last thing that I'll say on this is also giving yourself space and time to grieve. Because whenever there is a rupture in a relationship, there's grief in that. There was how the relationship was before, the expectations that you had, how it was going, how you thought it was going to go, and now you also have to give yourself time and space to grieve those things.

It's not gonna go the way that you thought it was going to go. It didn't go the way that you thought it was going to go. The future isn't going to look like how you thought it was going to look, at least not right now, right? And so giving yourself some time and space to, to grieve those things is also really important in moving on and being able to create something new.

Ro: Love it. Another question. "I struggle with curiosity concepts around trust. It feels really vulnerable and connects to my trauma experiences relationally, and at the same time, I know healing comes with open-mindedness. Do you have some suggestions on how to invite in partners to trust-building processes without creating blame or evidence-gathering traps that trauma responses can sometimes seek?"

Whoa, that's a big question. 

Elizabeth: That is a really big question. It's like, all right. All right. You wanna- Let's get 

Ro: into it. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. You wanna go? You wanna take it? 

Ro: I need a moment to think, I think, actually. 

Elizabeth: Okay. Well, what I will share is that if you have the ability, accessibility since this does involve trauma, to work with someone who specializes in trauma or relationship trauma.

That would be, in my mind, best case scenario that you could have someone professional who would work with y'all on that. And I know that in my past relationships where it has involved trauma because when you have trauma, it does make it challenging to hold nuance of things.

It makes it challenging to hold multiple points of view. It makes it challenging to not see through the filter of our trauma. And so having that professional involved is a extremely helpful and valuable thing to do 

Ro: Yeah, somebody who isn't personally affected by whatever caused the loss of trust.

I think that can be really helpful. I'm just thinking I'm still kind of stumped by it because it's, it is, it's a vast question and I don't mean... That's no criticism to you for the question. It's a great question. Right. I think thinking about how did I manage to rebuild trust with this partner that I was talking about, I think I was inviting them to build trust with me by telling them what my experience had been.

But I think my kind of trauma is that I will sort of couch everything in nice language anyway. I'll always be so worried about how the words impact the other person and trying to imagine it from their perspective and like trying to make it sound not confrontational or blamey almost to like a negative degree.

You know, sometimes you do need to blame people for their behavior, you know? So saying that, I'm like, "Okay that helped me to not come across blaming because my natural stance is to avoid blame and to assume that other people can't tolerate accountability for what they do to me." But what's the positive takeaway from that if that's not your natural stance?

Maybe to just, yeah, really think before you speak about how the words will land. Will it sound like you're villainizing or will it sound like you're holding accountable? 'Cause those are two different things. "When you did this, I felt this way," as opposed to, "You're a shithead. How could you?" You can hear the power dynamic in that second example, I hope versus the vulnerability and the sharing and the just getting on the same page of the first.

Elizabeth: Mm-hmm ... 

Ro: All of that being said, you know, you're talking about trauma and I think is what I'm reading into it. It feels very vulnerable to trust people who have hurt you. That makes sense. If you've been hurt, then part of you has learned, "Don't let people in too easily, and definitely don't let them back in when they hurt you, because they'll just hurt you again."

So working with the part of you that believes something like that. I'm not putting words in your mouth, 'cause I can't tell you what your exact belief is. But working with the part of you that fears trusting and that fears letting people in, and being with that part of you and reminding them that you're there now, and you're an adult, and you can judge better.

And you've learned stuff since your trauma experiences, and, like, give it all the reassurance that it needs. But all of that being said, like Elizabeth was saying, a professional to support that is probably gonna help if that's available to you. Yeah. And that can be individual therapy, where someone can support you to be with that part of you that it has a difficulty with trust, but also with a sort of mediator or couples therapist who can help regulate the conversation, who can lend you their regulation, because they're not involved in the situation in- as deeply as you are.

Elizabeth: I appreciate everything that you said, Ro. And I think the other thing that I wanna add to this as well is asking yourself the question of what is predictable? What is your predictable behavior?

What is your predictable way of thinking? Left to your own devices, and left to your mind's own devices, and maybe even like the emotions and body sensations that you've you know, experienced as well. And so just like starting to recognize your own patterns of behavior, your own patterns of thinking, so that way you can more easily either in the moment or hindsight be able to clock it. Like the example that I gave with myself from earlier is like, "Oh, I'm doing something wrong," like I'm in the wrong, is like a predictable way that I would come to, you know, trust or conflict in my relationships. And so it's like, "Oh, I can recognize in myself that's actually probably just me."

Most likely. Because that's my pattern. So being able to be aware of and recognize your own patterns can also be helpful in starting to Lift the veil, lift the filters of your responses. Recognizing what filters are at play. 

Ro: Mm-hmm. 

Elizabeth: Yes. Got another comment that says, "IFS approach has been a game changer for me in dealing with relational trauma."

Abso-freaking... I love... For those of you who don't know what IFS is, it's internal family systems. It's another modality of therapy, and it's also coaching modality as well. Basically what it means is that there are parts of you. So then recognizing what parts of you are at play, and then also turning towards those parts and asking them what is their job.

Do they like their job? Do they want to be doing something else? What do they need, right? All of the IFS questions when you discover those parts of yourself, and then being very tender with those parts, and then being able to, you know, communicate that, but also learning how to come from self, and self is another distinction inside of IFS parts work as well.

So being able to recognize when you're in self or recognize when you're being blended with a part. And so you can recognize that through the thoughts that you're having, through the emotions that you're experiencing, or through the body sensations that you're having. So just starting to be more attuned to like, okay, when this part is at play, I'm having these thoughts.

When this part is at play, I'm having these emotions or body sensations. But what does it actually feel like to come from self, and what do I need in any scenario to come back to self? I've done IFS coaching, and so my IFS coach, one of the things that she does to come back to self, especially when she's in conflict with partners, is she goes and meditates for 20 minutes.

And now her partners know that if she says, "I need to go meditate for 20 minutes," she needs that in order to, like, really be in that conversation with them, right? That's become a normal part of her relationships and how conflict gets, you know, solved in her relationships too. 

Ro: Mm-hmm.

I love that. I'm, part of me is just like, fist shake, IFS and transactional analysis have so much crossover, and I feel like- So much, 

Elizabeth: I know. 

Ro: Yeah. I'm like, I, there's a part of me that really, I'm such a, I'm such a simp for transactional analysis, and I want to, like, big it up all the time. But yeah, IFS is for sure very helpful, and, like, has its own stuff as well.

And I can hear in your question, in the way you asked it even, that there is a part of you that wants to be open-minded and let the trust back in. There's also a part of you that is afraid of that. So, someone's saying, "I know, and I love TA." And I'm like, "Yes." But yeah, And I also, I was just thinking one more thing, since we don't have another question immediately that you will never, and this is not just you, question asker, one, general you will never not be hurt by someone in a relationship.

You will never not have your trust broken in some way in a relationship. So knowing that, is this a person that you would like to rebuild trust with or not? 'Cause like I was saying earlier to the other question asker, there are certain points where you can decide it's actually not worth it, my life is not, like, that much better off with this person in it, and I'm okay with letting this go.

But if someone's important, and your life is better with them in it, and you fundamentally, in one part of yourself at know, at least know that they are a good person who wishes you well who has good intentions, who can be accountable, who can learn, who can grow with you, then remember that, that letting go of that relationship doesn't mean that you will start somewhere else and never be not hurt, never be hurt by that person.

Sorry, that's too many negatives. I hope you got what I meant despite all the negatives there. 

Elizabeth: Brilliant. Well, let's take the next couple of minutes to complete our episode today. That was, I mean, so beautiful. Thank you all so much for staying. I know this was an extra long episode today, so thank you for the couple of you that are still or Midwest couple of you that are still here and stayed the entire time.

Of course, it's totally understandable that other people dropped off because this was a longer episode.

Ro: Thank you so much for the lovely feedback- Yeah ... in the comments. 

Elizabeth: Ro, anything that you wanna say to be complete? 

Ro: Happy birthday. Ah! Imagine if I sang that whole awful song at you right now.

No. Ah. Happy birthday, that's what I wanna say. 

Elizabeth: Aw, thank you. Thank you. Oh, yeah. And thank you in the comments for the happy birthdays. I appreciate it. Oh, man. I'm like, whoo, getting red. Getting red. All right. Thank you. 

Ro: And I'm a- You're how old? 21, yeah? 

Elizabeth: Yeah, for sure. 37. I'm 37 today.

3-7. What a 

Ro: good age. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. What a good age. I'm feeling the older that I get, the happier I am that I'm getting older, you know?

Ro: But- I mean, is it a prime number? Yeah, it is, I think, right? So I like prime numbers. I think that's a g- all prime number ages are good ages. That's my view. 

Elizabeth: There you go.

Well, here we are. 37. 37 was my number in softball. 

Ro: Oh, you made it. 

Elizabeth: I know. Fun facts. All right, loves. Beautiful discussion today. I just had the, as always, the most fun in talking about this. To anybody who is still listening to this if anything that we said offended you, we truly apologize.

And if anything that we said you agreed with, awesome, we love that. And if anything that we said you disagree with, great. Awesome. We love that, too. Our purpose is not to be agreed with or disagreed with, but more to just have a discussion and stir up things, so. 

Ro: Oh, yes. 

Elizabeth: Yeah. All right, loves.

We'll talk to you soon. 

Ro: Bye. 

Elizabeth: Bye.

Ro: We hope you enjoyed this episode. 

Elizabeth: If you want to get in touch with us, go to the podcast description. You can share your feedback, suggest themes for future series, and find ways to work with us. 

Ro: If you liked this, leave us a five-star review with a comment. It really helps our sweet little baby of a podcast grow.

Elizabeth: And if you didn't like it, maybe don't leave a review. Just go complain to a friend. 

Ro: Thanks so much for listening. All the love.