Verified by 
Key points
- A selfish partner often increases a person's experience of anxiety.
- One way to gauge a partner's emotional intelligence is to ask yourself, "Would I do to him, what he did to me?"
- A person who decides to remain with an egocentric partner, may need to establish firm boundaries to protect herself.
- How the partner responds to new boundaries may illuminate his or her emotional health.
It’s painful to be continually hurt by a partner, and equally as confusing to realize he or she is self-centered. Attempting to understand the reasons for a partner’s hurtful or selfish acts may feel more empathic than leaving, yet trusting this partner again often fills a person with anxiety. Living with this conflict causes significant distress.
One way to test whether a partner is emotionally safe is to ask, “Would I do to him, what he did to me?” If the answer is “no,” the partner may be a problem. If a person decides to give a self-serving partner another chance, he or she may try establishing boundaries to protect himself or herself. How the partner reacts to these boundaries is also informative. Assessing the partner’s capacity to truly own a mistake and possess empathy for a person is also essential in determining whether to remain in the relationship.
For example, Lisa and Dave are dating. They attend Dave’s work party together. After eating several servings of shrimp, Dave feels nauseous. He tells Lisa he is going to the restroom. After several minutes, Dave realizes he is too ill to return to the party. He texts Lisa from the bathroom explaining he is sick and needs to go home. Lisa does not respond. Desperate, Dave calls her but Lisa doesn’t pick up. He patiently waits for her to answer, despite feeling terribly uncomfortable, and hopes his boss and colleagues do not enter the bathroom.
After an hour, he cleans himself up and stumbles to the door. He reaches a group of work friends gathered around a table and asks if they have seen Lisa. They relay that Lisa went to a neighboring bar with several people from Dave’s office. Dave realizes Lisa has the car keys and starts to look for her. Clammy and dehydrated, Dave finally locates Lisa two blocks away at a pub with his buddies.
When Dave arrives, Lisa looks annoyed and escorts Dave to the car. After glibly asking if he is okay, she brags about the fun she had. When there is a break in the conversation, Dave communicates to Lisa that he was desperate to get ahold of her. Lisa laughs and says, “I know, but I didn’t want you throwing up in my car, and I was having fun so I made you wait.” She laughs as if she is pleased with herself for manipulating the situation.
Dave is perplexed. He is glad she attended the event with him and relieved she connected with his work friends but is hurt that she refused to help him in his time of need. He, again, conveys this to Lisa who replies, “Sorry, but you shouldn’t have eaten so much shrimp. Don’t be like my ex. He made me leave every party early because he was so jealous. For once, I was having fun.”
Dave, wanting to be understanding and accountable for his own actions, contemplates Lisa’s reasons. They make sense. Dave is tempted to let the incident go and move on, but he stops and asks himself, “Would I ever intentionally neglect Lisa if she was ill and in a vulnerable spot?” He realizes the answer is “no.” Dave can’t imagine doing that to Lisa.
Also, Lisa refuses to sincerely own her selfish behavior and does not feel remorse. Her lack of empathy for Dave is troubling. The deficiency in authentic accountability, remorse, and empathy are three additional cues that Lisa may be emotionally unsafe.
Yet, Dave blames himself for over-eating and feels empathy for Lisa and her past experiences; he dismisses it as a “bad night.” He stays with Lisa but realizes he needs to resurrect several boundaries to protect himself in the future.
The manner in which Lisa responds to the boundaries may provide additional data about her emotional health. For example, if Lisa throws a fit or acts passive-aggressively in response to a boundary, Dave may have confirmation that Lisa is emotionally unintelligent.
Dave’s boundary involves making it clear to Lisa that if he needs to exit a party, he will go. If Lisa does not wish to leave, she is responsible for calling herself an Uber. Lisa agrees, but the following weekend, she lashes out at Dave when he decides to go home early. She complains that he is “selfish” and a “drag.” Dave realizes that Lisa’s self-centered and attacking attitude may be detrimental to his own happiness.
When deciding whether to give a partner a second chance, again it may be important to ask, “Would I do to her what she did to me?” If the answer is “no,” it may be important to gather additional data before advancing the relationship. More cues about the emotional constitution of a partner include his or her ability to own hurtful behavior, feel remorse, and experience empathy. When deciding to move forward with a partner who is questionable, it may be necessary to set up healthy boundaries to avoid being exploited in a similar manner again. How the partner responds to these boundaries is also important information to consider. A partner who disrespects boundaries and acts spiteful may be emotionally immature.
Understanding, good-natured, and forgiving individuals frequently give a destructive partner the benefit of the doubt. They long to believe that the partner’s redeemable qualities outweigh the egocentrism. Although this optimism is valiant, a partner who repeatedly hurts and exploits a loved one may be emotionally abusive. Spending time with this type of partner may be detrimental to a person’s mental health, well-being, and happiness.
