Broke up w/ an HPD but now facing a problem

Stalker, harassment - standard stuff, and I am convinced it's the first words an HPD learns as a baby.... Be careful though, the police will believe her 'story' if she reports you and you will have a restriction order against you - which could make your life very difficult if you see her a lot at college. I know, I've got one. Keep a record of all txt's or emails she sends you, and DO NOT contact her. Good luck....

Or is it that HPDs do get stalked and harassed more than "normal" people? Stalking and harassment is unwanted intrusion and attention and you can be stalked and harassed even if you have a personality disorder. If the HPD person has told you that they do not want any further contact then you have to respect that. I say that as the very existance of this website indicates that people who have come out of a relationship with someone with HPD find it difficult to let go. That people seem to find it so hard to Not Contact the other person is further proof. Perhaps they are stalking and harassing their ex as they simply can't let go.

I am sure there are cases when the HPD person "baits" the other person then cries "stalker", but you can't generalise that to all. There are other cases where they will be being harassed. HPDs seem to have this effect on people that they can't let go. I would imagine this would translate into harassment in some cases.

It is actually widely known in both British and American legal systems that it is incredibly difficult to get court orders/restraining orders against people. They aren't just given out. Solid proof is needed and the police aren't actually stupid.

I find it quite surprising that so many people here readily admit that their ex called them a stalker and yet they still wanted contact with them. I do not understand why you would want contact with someone who sees you like that.

Sofrance - you do have a point and I can see your perspective.

Let me start by saying that not all Nons stalk or harass their HPD partners after a breakup. I didn't stalk my HPD ex, for even a single day after our breakup. I am sure there are other Nons out here who must have had enough self-control.

Coming to the point of stalking, let me present my perspective, which I think you should also evaluate -

1. Nons are not habitual obsessed stalkers:

Nons coming out of a PD relationship are NOT stalkers in general. In any other relationship, they would not have stalked. However, coming out of a PD relationship they become disoriented themselves and hence seek closure or understanding in terms of what happened, ending up contacting their HPD partners. This is why its unfair to classify them as stalkers, since it is not their personality characteristic or permanent habit. People who are stalkers, are a different breed of people. This distinction needs to be very clear. Your post blurs this distinction and makes Nons look like habitual obsessed stalkers, which is not the case.

Just as seeking attention, or lying or manipulating once in a while doesn't make a normal person have a personality disorder, similarly stalking behavior exhibited after a PD relationship doesn't make one a stalker.

This is not to condone or minimize stalking behavior in general. But just to put it in context.

2. Understanding Non behavior:

On the one hand, it is advocated that Nons should understand HPDs and the reasons that led to their behavior. All the destructive and deceitful behavior of HPDs is to be understood in light of their developmental flaws.

And yet, you don't advocate such understanding for Nons? And simply wish to classify their need for closure as stalking? I find this an example of double-standards.

Stalking and harassment is unwanted intrusion and attention and you can be stalked and harassed even if you have a personality disorder.

Sure, but equally unwanted is the abrupt devaluation done by HPDs. Just as the HPD doesn't want to be harassed, the Non doesn't want to be abused and abruptly devaluated. Is the HPDs mental health more important than the Nons?

Now, if we remove the HPD condition and the disorder from the equation, while a Non can be reported to the police for stalking, an HPD should be flogged/ kicked or stoned in public (since there is no legal option) for destroying years of emotional investment and mental health of a Non and taking away years of a Nons life by deceit. Or, maybe a law should be made for such a deceit, so that Nons can go to the police for abrupt devaluation by a person (to hell with the psychologists and their junk rationale).

Will this work for HPDs? I am sure it won't.

So while as a Non I empathize with my HPD for her behavior and abrupt devaluation and in time learn to let go, is it too much to expect, not empathy, but atleast some tolerance of a Nons need for closure and understanding, rather than call it stalking?

But then its too much to ask any tolerance from an HPD, right? Yes, I understand and I can empathize. Such is the unfairness of Cluster B disorders. Nons can only empathize, but any assertion of their needs will be considered unjustifed.

Hope both Nons and HPDs get my perspective. I am simply trying to apply some simple common sense logic to an illogical and unfair disorder (an oxymoron)

I wish I could just call my ex a bad person and not consider her HPD condition. It would have been so much easier. But then we Nons do have a handicap - empathy. And its this empathy when over-used, that keeps us bound to a person with Cluster B disorders, which paradoxically are based on no empathy.

Newtohpd, I am not saying that ALL non's stalk but there are undoubtably some that do. Just as some people cry "stalker" when they are not being stalked.

Stalkers are not a "breed". Its a misconception that a stalker is always a stalker, lurking in the shadowy night and this is a pattern they follow all their lives. Actually the most common type of stalker is a middle aged man, professionally successful and usually educated but socially unsuccessfully who cannot accept the end of a relationship. It is often a one off circumstance (but one which can last for months or years) but it is still stalking. I wonder how many people here fit that criteria....

I believe stalking is classified into several subgroups and this is what is called the "jilted" lover. They cannot accept the relationship is over and want to maintain contact at all costs even if the response is from the person they are stalking is "leave me alone". That still feeds their obsession and the police will not bring proceedings against someone even if you continue to contact them to say "leave me alone". You have to show their contact is repeated and will not stop despite you initially telling them to leave you alone and then totally ignoring them.

You seem to be blaming the person with HPD for the other person's stalking behaviour but because someone treats you in a certain way I do not think you can justify stalking as that person becoming "disorientated" and gives you a right to break the law. Would it be ok then for them to be disorientated and beat that person up? To break into their house?

The difference between someone treating someone badly and being deceitful and someone harassing another is very simple. The latter is against the law. If being treated badly was a license to act however the hell you wanted then we would live in a vigilante society.

I think there is a major difference between someone sending a few texts, phone calls etc at the end of a relationship and unwanted harassment that affects you everyday and goes on for months if not years despite there being no contact from the person they are harassing. That is the type of harassment I am talking about and would strongly indicate that that person is acting in a unstable way which is threatening and frightening to the person they are harassing. It is not up to you as a jilted lover to mete out your own form of puishment for months and months to come. That surely makes you worse than the HPDs people come on here to complain about and who you set yourself up as being morally superior to. No matter how badly you have been treated, by someone who is HPD or notit doesn't give you the right to break the law.

Just my five cents: French legislators (and possibly other EU country) are considering enacting a law against emotional abuse in the same way as physical abuse.

Sofrance -

The difference between someone treating someone badly and being deceitful and someone harassing another is very simple. The latter is against the law. If being treated badly was a license to act however the hell you wanted then we would live in a vigilante society.

So, are you saying that an HPD should use the law as the iron-rod to punish and intimidate someone who is seeking closure and understanding of a deceit and fraud committed by the HPD themselves, just because they know they can misappropriate and distort that behavior of closure seeking as "stalking" by exaggerating it either by creating drama, or spreading lies? And this is perfectly justified in your mind?

I think there is a major difference between someone sending a few texts, phone calls etc at the end of a relationship and unwanted harassment that affects you everyday and goes on for months if not years despite there being no contact from the person they are harassing.

You seem to be blaming the person with HPD for the other person's stalking behaviour but because someone treats you in a certain way I do not think you can justify stalking as that person becoming "disorientated" and gives you a right to break the law. Would it be ok then for them to be disorientated and beat that person up? To break into their house?

How many Nons on this forum have broken the law, while they sought closure? How many broke into a house or beat someone up or did something to damage property or cause physical harm to others? (Assuming we believe their posts either ways)

I see most Nons talk about unable to let go, or call or SMS, for an elongated time. At the most they end up venting on this forum. I haven't seen many on this forum come back and tell us that they actually broke the law.

This is why I am saying that closure seeking behavior from Nons need to be distinctly differentiated from law breaking behavior by stalkers. Such distinction should not be blurred.

Or is it that HPDs do get stalked and harassed more than "normal" people?

I say that as the very existance of this website indicates that people who have come out of a relationship with someone with HPD find it difficult to let go. That people seem to find it so hard to Not Contact the other person is further proof. Perhaps they are stalking and harassing their ex as they simply can't let go.

I am not saying that ALL non's stalk but there are undoubtably some that do.

From the first two quotes it seemed to me that you were talking about a lot more Nons than just a few, as you later say in the 3rd quote.

The very existence of this website is not based on stalkers who harass their HPD partners. It is based on Nons who try their best to understand and let go, even if it takes an elongated length of time.

While it takes time for a Non to let go of a relationship, especially when its with a PD partner which is certainly disorienting, they eventually do. Its is very difficult to come out of any relationship, even a normal one, and typically a "normal" relationship provides a "buffer time-zone" for closure to alleviate this process, which is not available in a PD relationship since it ends abruptly. This is why a Non looks for that closure.

A person with HPD, when they end a relationship abruptly, can't expect the Non partner to suddenly flip the switch without proper closure, and if that doesn't happen, cry "stalking" or "harassment". Any relationship that is worth anything needs buffer time to reach its logical closure. Just because an HPD person doesn't think that way and just flips the switch, doesn't mean that the Non can to do the same, just because the HPD person wills so. Flipping the switch on a relationship is actually harassment and abuse.

This is why I am distinguishing between "closure" seeking behavior and "stalking and harassing". This distinction should not be blurred.

"So, are you saying that an HPD should use the law as the iron-rod to punish and intimidate someone who is seeking closure and understanding of a deceit and fraud committed by the HPD themselves, just because they know they can misappropriate and distort that behavior of closure seeking as "stalking" by exaggerating it either by creating drama, or spreading lies? "

Its not about using the law as punishment. Its about being harassed by someone and wanting that harassment to stop when you have done everything you can yourself to make it stop and it does not. Whatever has happened in a relationship, it does not mean you have to put up with continued unwanted and threatening phone calls, letters, emails. Stalking behaviour usually follows a pattern and once they stop getting their "fix" from the stalking victim they start to harass friends and family of their "victim". This is typical. Why, whatever has happened in a relationship, should you have to put up with that?

How do you make the leap to "creating drama and spreading lies"? You don't know all individual cases.

Most incidents of stalking actually go unreported for a long long time because people are not willing to report it. It is not pleasant to have to sit down with the police and go throw intimate details of your life and wonder if this will just make the stalking worse and what "worse" might actually be. It takes a lot of harassment over a long time to decide "enough is enough", HPD or not. Most people just wait for it to go away and only when it doesn't do they involve the police.

"This is why I am saying that closure seeking behavior from Nons need to be distinctly differentiated from law breaking behavior by stalkers. Such distinction should not be blurred."

No, not true. If seeking closure means that you are committing the offence of harassment then there is no difference. It doesn't make any difference what your motives are. The behaviour is still the same however you justify it and that is the way the law will see it. If you are nasty to me does it mean I have the right to commit a criminal offence against you? No.

Some people may never get "closure", that does not justify them stalking their ex. There is no excuse for that. That is far more sinister than any characteristic of HPD.

Newbie -

Whew!!!!!!!!! Your dialogue with sofrance reminds me of what it was like dating an HP? Are you expecting a self-professed HP to accept or even respect your point of view? Your attempt is noble but futile.

An HP see's no problem in dumping a guy and then expressing indignation over a non's contacts for a reasonable closure because they never valued the non to begin with, so what's the big deal, they wonder?

Scarlett's contribution and dialogue was alway's meaningful and helpful, but this sis is out of the ballpark!

Whatever has happened in a relationship, it does not mean you have to put up with continued unwanted and threatening phone calls, letters, emails.

Oh, are you trying to justify and minimize all the deceit and fraud an HPD does as "Whatever has happened" and expect them not to pay for it at all. No accountability for the relationship? And just because an HPD wants to run away and hide from this fraud, they will call closure seeking as "unwanted and threatening phone calls, letters, emails".

If a relationship partner ends a relationship properly, none of this would happen at all. If a partner doesn't end a relationship properly, this will happen, irrespective of whether one is HPD or not.

Why, whatever has happened in a relationship, should you have to put up with that?

If you enter a relationship, you have a responsibility. Doesn't an HPD want to be held accountable for it? Or an HPD somehow wants to hide their fraud and run away without being held accountable?

How do you make the leap to "creating drama and spreading lies"? You don't know all individual cases.

Hey, did you read my post? I am speaking from posts on this forum and their content. And "creating drama and spreading lies" is repeated in each and every post. I am not talking about anything beyond this forum and so I don't need to know about anything that happens beyond for each individual case, for this discussion. Either we go with this forum and its content as assumptions for this discussion, or this discussion has no valid assumption to be based on, since everything we are discussing is based on the posts on this forum.

No, not true. If seeking closure means that you are committing the offence of harassment then there is no difference. It doesn't make any difference what your motives are. The behaviour is still the same however you justify it and that is the way the law will see it. If you are nasty to me does it mean I have the right to commit a criminal offence against you? No.

Well, if an HPD doesn't want to be held accountable for any part of the relationship and accept its consequences in terms of closure, then they can cry harassment over just about anything. And so in that case, you can classify anything as stalking, including possibly venting anonymously on this forum. What prevents anyone from classifying anything any which way they want?

By the way, a "criminal offence" is always judged by its motive. So, please don't wish away any reference to the motive, while calling anything criminal.

Also, deceit and fraud in a relationship is not merely being nasty. So. please don't minimize that either. It is abuse and harassment.

That is far more sinister than any characteristic of HPD.

... and so that helps justify that HPD deceit and fraud is less sinister than behavior by Nons? Wow.

I will end by saying, that I will have to keep disagreeing with you on this topic Sofrance. So lets just leave it at that. But I see your perspective and thanks for that.

Whew!!!!!!!!! Your dialogue with sofrance reminds me of what it was like dating an HP? Are you expecting a self-professed HP to accept or even respect your point of view? Your attempt is noble but futile.

Jay Mack - Haven't heard from you a long time. Good to hear from you

Well, I have these little discussions with Sofrance sometimes