I wrote in my last article about stonewalling, that nefarious process (and pattern) of shutting down a partner’s communication either aggressively, or passive aggressively, the effect of which is to leave the “stonewalled” partner feeling voiceless, alone, dismissed, negated as a person.
Many sociopathic personalities stonewall, but many stonewallers aren’t sociopaths, so how do you tell the difference? What are some signs that your partner’s stonewalling is an aspect of his “sociopathy” versus, say, his high “conflict-avoidant” personality?
Clearly some individuals are terrible at dealing with communication in general and conflict in particular. Their stonewalling may be mainly avoidant. Their wish to “deny” that trouble is afoot, their deep discomfort with emotional sensitivity and vulnerability, their high levels of defensiveness, their sense of incompetence and even hopelessness to contribute to the resolution of differences and meet confrontation effectively, may cause them to retreat, shut down, or “stonewall,” less from an attitude of indifference, disinterest and dismissiveness than from anxiety and fear.
Some individuals “freeze” in the face of perceived conflict and take “flight” literally in closing the communication hatches. Their intent may be less to hurt you than to protect themselves, and even you, fearing as they do that danger could ensue from an engagement of your concerns.
This is still stonewalling, and its effect is still perfidious, make no mistake. But its origins may come from a less malign place.
While stonewalling, then, can arise from less malign motives, sometimes, too often, it expresses serious pathological aggression, passive-aggression, hostility, contempt and callousness.
Clearly when “stonewalling” is accompanied by cold indifference—any form of cold indifference—to the stonewalled party’s wounded response to being “shut down,” this is a sign of serious insensitivity.
To state it differently: when the stonewaller, as a pattern, shows contempt towards the stonewalled party’s disturbed reaction to his stonewalling, this alerts us that we are dealing with a deficiently sensitive individual who almost certainly can be located high up on the narcissistic continuum, if not in the range of the “sociopath.”
This isn’t to say that the non-sociopathic stonewaller will react with sensitivity to your experience of his stonewalling. That’s a bit oxymoronic—if he were particularly sensitive to his stonewalling, by definition he wouldn’t be a stonewaller. But his reaction will typically express discomfort with the impact his stonewalling has on you.
He won’t, for instance, like the more sociopathic stonewaller, characteristically lash out at you with blatant hostility and nasty, hurtful, degrading accusations in response to your complaints of his stonewalling. He won’t typically blame you.
More likely he’ll shirk away, convey a perhaps somewhat sincere sense of helplessness to offer up anything more than the inadequate silence he’s offering up, as if to say, “What can I say? I have nothing to say. I’m not trying to hurt you. I just don’t want to, or can’t, deal with this. Leave me alone. Give me a break. I’m sorry you’re so exasperated and hurt. That’s the way it is.”
You will feel shut down, but you will feel shut down by someone who can’t deal, who himself seems, and perhaps is, in a sense, paralysed and helpless to deal responsibly, thoughtfully, engagingly.
In contrast, you will have a different feeling with the more sociopathic stonewaller. When he shuts down your communication, you will feel yourself—I can’t stress this enough—the object of his contempt.
You will feel palpably, viscerally, his indifference to the impact his stonewalling has on you; his indifference will feel as traumatizing as the stonewalling itself, leaving you, in effect, doubly traumatized by the interaction.
There is a sense of shock—that is, his emotional indifference, his callousness, his devaluation of your emotional experience will feel “shocking.”
As I suggested, you are likely to feel his scorn, his scoffing; are at high risk to endure his insulting, degrading comments, along the lines you are making trouble, talk too much, always looking for problems, don’t know when to “shut up,” always have to “over-analyse” everything; that you are mental, miserable; but the key thing that will accompany these, and similarly patronizing remarks, will be, as I keep emphasizing, the “contempt” for your experience that will be dripping shamelessly from his mouth.
These are some of the red flags to heed that you aren’t dealing merely with an incompetent communicator who stonewalls, which is bad enough, but with a seriously, hostilely disturbed communicator from whom you need protection, and most likely, escape.
(This article is copyrighted © 2012 by Steve Becker, LCSW. My use of male gender pronouns is for convenience’s sake only, not to suggest that females aren’t capable of the behaviors and attitudes discussed.)
G1S:
Oooops, sorry, I didn’t realize we were talking about withholding? I don’t know…but I do know that spath definitely has done the withholding on me and stonewalling, too 🙁
No, no, no, Louise. I think we were discussing both.
I was just trying to explain how I saw them differ.
G1S,
stonewalling can be disguised as social ineptness.
My spath, after being particularly callous that day, said, “Do you think I’m thoughtless?”
I know another one who pretends to be selfish. In itself, being selfish is bad enough. The truth is though that his selfishness is a disguise for a very well thought out attack on other peoples’ self-esteem. He is not selfish because being selfish makes him feel better, he is selfish because seeing other people hurt makes him feel better.
They are tricky and conniving. We don’t have to take anything at face value. In time, if we stay out of denial, we can see the truth.
I have a friend who was attacked by a female spath who pretended to be “a bit thoughtless” just to have an excuse for her predatory behaviors. As it so happened, I heard through the grapevine from another spath that this was her plan all along. If it wasn’t for that, we wouldn’t ever have imagined that it was all an act.
It blows the mind. Who thinks like this?
Let me get your take on this, LF. What about the guy who poo-pooes your concerns; who blows them off like you’re being silly; who makes you feel like you’re way off base and shames you for being sooooo ridiculious?
One year Xhub bought me a beautiful Valentines Day card…it was nice, but I already knew there was trouble afloat…just a nagging feeling, but the card helped me set all that aside, until I found a box of childrens valentines…you know the one’s…the one’s we pass out in school…I asked, “who are these for” already knowing he had a harem of teen-age girls that liked to hang around his office. He admitted they were for the girls, but when I acted like I thought it was really inappropriate, he scoffed at me. How very silly I was to think it meant anything at all. Two years later he had one pregnant and was thinking of leaving me in Pa, and bringing another to Fl. with him.
Is that stonewalling? And what responsibility did I have in buying it, even though I knew there was something NOT RIGHT about it?
Kim,
excellent question.
It brings up the premise of “stonewalling part 2” that there are some stonewallers who are just avoiding conflict.
Yes, sometimes we can use stonewalling to avoid an aggressive personality intent on creating conflict. So we need to ask ourselves, “am I being so aggressive as to create a defensive tactic in my partner?”
Yes, they want us to think we are the aggressive, paranoids who are jealous. Once we know the tactics, though, it is enough. We know when we are being f’ed with. no need to wonder.
This is why I use the “rope method”, so there will be no doubt.
I put up with the bullshit and let them have all the rope they need to prove what they are. Why play games? let them play and just watch.
Frankly, you did the only thing you could do. You gave him rope so you could watch. You were at a disadvantage, you didn’t know how to judge. Then you learned.
Have you ever seen the movie “Doubt”? Awesome movie.
When Meryl Streep is asked how she knew without doubt, her answer was, “Experience.” Experience is the key because they are all the same.
Skylar, That’s true. That’s whatI did. I detached and went about my life, but now I kind of blame myself…it’s sick, I know, and I’m sure it was all a punishment for me not worshipping him anymore, and staying put and being his adoring audience…I was getting well and finding myself and he had to sabatouge it…but, the self doubt still lingers…
I have a different take on the movie “doubt”. I think it’s point is to leave the audience in doubt. There is no real evidence that the preist molested any body only circumstantial…and the old nun could be seen as bitter and self-serving…we never really know, but are left to decide for ourselves who is guilty and of what. Jusrt my take.
Yes, Kim,
you are right about Doubt. That’s what you are supposed to be left thinking.. unless… you have had the experience too.
Then you know because there is a pattern.
When she bluffed him and told him that she knew, that’s when he backed down and went away. All spaths slither away when unmasked. It turned out that she didn’t have any evidence, but she knew in her heart so she could bluff him and she was right.
The young nun asked her how she knew. Experience.
That’s how I know too. They are all the same. Just as infants are all the same.
Kim, don’t blame yourself. He would have abused you the same no matter what. It was always his intent to abuse you. In his mind you deserved it for being innocent. They hate innocence because it has so much power.
Doubt…love that movie.
But, skylar, she planted seeds of doubt. Remember his sermon about that..in the beginning of the movie, before there was even any suspicion of anything…this complicates everything because the whole movie revolves around this idea of planting seeds of doubt against another and getting joy from watching it flourish….and that’s evil.
OxD, I believe that your approach to toxic relationships or associations is very healthy and wise. There is NO reason to attempt to FORCE any relationship to grow when it clearly is a one-sided effort. I have no problem walking away from people who are “problematic,” either.
Life is entirely too short to waste time with people who are DRAINING and GREEDY. They want, they take, they dramatize, and they engage in their crazymaking. Who has time for that, and who really wants to expend the energy to sort it all out?