I’m the common denominator for all of my dysfunctional romances

By David McElroy · July 9, 2023

I was in a small social group Friday night and noticed a beautiful woman who I didn’t know. I listened to her and found her intelligent and interesting. I was intrigued enough to ask a friend who she was.

“Oh, that’s [Woman’s Name],” my friend said. “She’s beautiful and brilliant, but she’s also mentally unstable. She’s definitely your kind of woman.”

I laughed, but I couldn’t argue with that. Brilliant, beautiful and mentally unstable seem to be my kryptonite in women.

It’s funny to joke about, but there’s some truth to it. I’ve somehow been in multiple romantic relationships over the last 20 years that could be considered deeply dysfunctional in one way or another. That didn’t mean they weren’t wonderful women. It also doesn’t mean I regret loving them.

Can I conclude from this that “women are crazy”? That’s what a lot of people see when they find themselves in such situations, but that misses the brutal truth. Yes, I’ve gone through a line of women who I believe need some psychological help.

But I’m the one who’s been the common denominator in all the relationships.

I was attracted to whatever might be crazy in them. Their crazy was attracted to something about my crazy. Even if we didn’t realize it at the time, we were attracted to people who were at our own level of psychological and emotional health. They had issues. I had issues. We needed one another because we could understand each other, even if we weren’t conscious of it at the time.

Whatever I’ve consistently attracted into my life doesn’t say anything about women in general. It says something about me. And whatever you’ve consistently attracted into your life says something about you, too.

Your bad choices in romantic relationships don’t mean that “all men are cheating liars” or “all women are psychotic gold-diggers.” Or whatever you might believe by now.

Every day, I see men and women ranting on social media about how all men are this or all women are that. They don’t seem to realize that their experiences aren’t necessarily a reflection of men or of women in general.

Whatever you believe — about either men or women — in this sort of blanket way is a reflection of what you have chosen for yourself.

There are plenty of good men. There are plenty of good women. It’s incredibly short-sighted when you label half the world based on your own experiences — because those experiences have come from your own choices, whether intentional or not.

I used to have a female friend who had a child with a man. Even before the child came along, the man was physically and emotionally abusive. I wasn’t there, but the stories she told me sounded awful. She stuck with him for awhile, though, long after it was obvious she should have left.

As she battled with him over their child — both wanted control — she became bitter about men. She found other women who had experiences with similar men — and she was soon spewing all sorts of anti-man rhetoric. She had let her own poor choices become the filter through which she saw all men.

She didn’t see that her own choices had led her to where she was. Everything was the fault of men. I eventually drifted away from her, because she had become a hateful bore who was bitter at the world.

Many men do the same things, of course.

One of the most common beliefs among ignorant men is that “all women are crazy. It’s just the way they are.” My observation is that the men who think this way tend to be out of touch with their feelings and have made their relationship decisions based on physical attraction, not deeper compatibility.

If you don’t care much about emotions and you don’t pay attention to how you’re treating someone — in the emotional sense — you’re eventually going to elicit an emotional response. A woman is either going to angrily dump you or else explode with anger about why you won’t understand anything beyond good times.

That kind of man doesn’t tend to learn anything, though. He just decides — after going through the cycle a few times — that all woman are crazy. So he eventually learns to put up with “crazy” in order to get what he wants. But he’s disdainful and disrespectful whenever it’s just his buddies around. They tend to have the same personalities, so they all agree. Women are crazy. So they never learn that they need to make different choices in their relationships. Or that they need to show some emotional growth. Or both.

There was a time when I thought I was going to find the perfect woman. Deep down, I probably believed I was the perfect man. Now, I know better — for both of us.

The kind of woman who I’m attracted to is going to have some issues. If she’s attracted to me, it’s certain that she has issues, too, whether she knows it or not.

But one of the things I learned years ago is that no partner is perfect — and no relationship is perfect.

For me, the trick is simply understanding where I’ve come from and what has made me what I am today — and to realize that I require a woman who’s gone through the same sort of emotional trauma and growth.

There will always be something damaged for me at my core, even though I don’t normally show it. The sort of woman who matches me has serious internal damage as well, even if she hasn’t figured that out yet. If either of us expects perfection, nothing’s going to work. But if we’re both honest about who we are — and why we’re attracted to the other — two people with a dysfunctional past can have a very functional relationship with one another.

Take a long look at your relationships over the years. If they’re healthy and functional — as many are — that’s great. You probably have a healthy view of those of that sex. But if you’ve been through a series of wrong men or crazy women, there’s a good chance you have some sort of issue that makes you oddly compatible with them.

When you take responsibility for the choices you’ve made — and get honest with a partner about what needs to be different for each of you — you can create something good and healthy.

But as long as you think the problem is all the men out there — or all the women out there — you’re doomed to keep making the same bad choices.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts