Understanding Attraction: The Role of Pleasing Others in Relationships

[honestrosewater]

I have theory. It just came to me, and I'd like some opinions.

I've been trying to figure out what actually in practice attracts me to certain people. (In theory, I am entirely logical, but alas, theory != practice.) I seem to respond to or pursue people who seem like they are not quite pleased with me but perhaps could be convinced or who are at least not overly impressed with me. I don't think I want to be that way.

The reason that I think I might behave that way is simply that I like to please people. So when I seem to have failed to please someone, I pursue them in order to correct this. And when someone seems pleased, I am not as interested in them.

What do you think? Does that make sense? Would that explain some of the stereotypical-woman behavior, e.g., why nice guys finish last and women go after bad boys?

I am not suggesting anything about the accuracy or application of such stereotypes, by the bye. And I might not really act that way typically. I haven't considered a very large sample yet.

 

[moose]

What brings you more pleasure at the end?
-Doing a physics problem which seemed difficult at first glance but was easily answered.

or

-Doing a physics problem which takes a long amount of time and is incredibly hard to figure out, however after a while you finally get it.I think it's the same concept. I'm glad someone else is awake and on their computer! I'm in the middle of writing a research paper. It's due today, and I started at 1am...

 

[Astronuc]

I've been trying to figure out what actually in practice attracts me to certain people. (In theory, I am entirely logical, but alas, theory != practice.) I seem to respond to or pursue people who seem like they are not quite pleased with me but perhaps could be convinced or who are at least not overly impressed with me. I don't think I want to be that way.

Well - don't be that way. And the theory is probably reasonable.

The reason that I think I might behave that way is simply that I like to please people. So when I seem to have failed to please someone, I pursue them in order to correct this. And when someone seems pleased, I am not as interested in them.

Then the question is - why? I don't think we exist to please other people.

If one is aware of a problem, then ostensibly one can change one's thinking and behavior.

What do you think? Does that make sense? Would that explain some of the stereotypical-woman behavior, e.g., why nice guys finish last and women go after bad boys?

I have seen such behavior, and have often wondered why people get trapped (or seemingly) in that situation. It seems people settle into certain patterns of behavior, perhaps because there is a certain level of comfort, or less anxiety with the routine.

It's not restricted to women, because I've seen such behavior in men.


Edit (adding a thought): I was wondering about the motivation behind "pursuing people who seem like they are not quite pleased with one". Does it have to do with trying to overcome the negative feelings of disappointing another person? Seems a bit of complex psychology.

 

[radou]

I seem to respond to or pursue people who seem like they are not quite pleased with me but perhaps could be convinced or who are at least not overly impressed with me. I don't think I want to be that way.

The reason that I think I might behave that way is simply that I like to please people. So when I seem to have failed to please someone, I pursue them in order to correct this. And when someone seems pleased, I am not as interested in them.

I'd say it's a more or less typical pattern of behavior - one frequently uses to crave for certain goals; once they are reached/accomplished, the individual loses interest in them. I'm far from an expert in psychology, but it simply sounds so familiar.

Btw, an example from your life (if possible) would definitely help.

 

[loseyourname]

Are you actually attracted to bad boys? To confirm that this is a case of nice guys finishing last, we'd need to know that. The simple fact that someone isn't pleased by you doesn't make him bad. It sounds more like you want a guy that is relatively inaccessible, greatly dimishing the chances that a real relationship will ever come of it, thus limiting the amount of work and committment you'll need to dedicate, because in reality, it's the guys that are pleased by you that are going to make you work. Those are the guys with whom you can build a life, and that's tough stuff. These guys you just try in vain to make happy, going through the motions, in the back of your head realizing on some level it's pointless and will end soon. You're playing out a hackneyed script, familiar and easy, requiring no creativity or imagination, no artistry. Many artists seem to go through such an early period, where they are not ready yet to take chances, to put anything of their own selves into their work, and they just paint by numbers, producing work that could have been produced by a hundred other artists. Many never progress past that stage. The great ones, however, find their own voice and navigate their own way through the world. They blaze paths they are not familiar with. Love is an art, and needs to be practiced in the same way.

 

[Smurf]

You should read in search of lost time. it'll explain everything. Of course, if might be too late by the time you finish...

 

[berkeman]

Interesting questions honestrosewater... To be honest, I was fairly baffled by your post. I wanted to respond with my thoughts, but couldn't think of how to respond to what you were saying. And then I checked your profile, and realized that my confusion was a Venus/Mars thing! Whew, I feel better now.

Anyway, from my (guy's) perspective, I don't "pursue" others, and I don't really notice others "pursuing" me, for the most part. I'm a fairly independent and self-sufficient person, and I try to be fair and honest and open and helpful to others.

Looking around me, I see a lot of others who are like-minded and similar in terms of leadership and accomplishment, and they are generally good people to be around and work and play with. I think we ended up near each other because of our similar approaches to life, and our understanding of each other's approaches to life. When I'm standing shoulder-to-shoulder with a firefighter on one side and an ER nurse on the other during one of our CERT drills (in the dark, in a smoky tower, etc.), and then debriefing and maybe socializing later, what drew us together was not pursuing each other's friendship or companionship, it was similar interests of like-minded individuals.

 

[turbo]

It's hard to say what motivates people to want to please others or "measure up" to their standards somehow. Frankly, some people's standards (especially in people of your age group) are not particularly well thought-out or mature and are based more on self-interest and peer pressure than on any desire for a rich two-way relationship with mutual respect and reciprocal treatment. I had acquaintances in college and after (I wouldn't call them friends, so much) that would pursue women that were popular, pretty, well-to-do, etc, whom I often found to be shallow, spoiled, self-absorbed, etc. Those guys had never progressed beyond an adolescent mentality regarding relationships. Interestingly, some young women found these guys fascinating, though they would not have been so pleased to hear what these guys said about them to their friends.

You're pretty and you're smart and you're introspective. The first quality will break the ice easily with many guys, and the second and third will endear you to the "keepers" if they have the intelligence and depth to appreciate you. My advice is not to seek to please men that seem aloof or disdainful or are cultivating a "bad-boy" image. You're dealing with someone displaying immaturity, a lack of self-respect, and a desire to make his mark by flexing the ol' testosterone.

 

[chroot]

Most people are attracted to people whom they're not quite sure they can get.

On one end of the spectrum, people who seem too easy to obtain as partners are often rejected. Throwing yourself at someone's feet rarely has the desired result.

On the other end of the spectrum, healthy people don't even attempt to court people they know aren't reasonable choices for partners. For example, healthy people don't get fixated on celebrities, teachers, parents' best friends, etc.

So, it's human nature to go after people who are in the middle -- people who present a challenge, yet are ultimately obtainable. In your particular case, the "challenge" is to please the person in some way. I think it's just human nature, and nothing to worry about.

- Warren

 

[marlon]

I seem to respond to or pursue people who seem like they are not quite pleased with me but perhaps could be convinced or who are at least not overly impressed with me. I don't think I want to be that way.

That's normal, IMO. I think you like "the challenge".

"Nobody wants the glory without the war".

How 'bout that last sentence hmm ?

I can imagine how you will be remembered at your funeral :

"honestrosewater, who did not want the glory without the war"

The reason that I think I might behave that way is simply that I like to please people.

I don't think so, really you just do not want an easy victory. I say this is a manifestation of pure intelligence because only stupid lazy dorks want to have things easily.

So when I seem to have failed to please someone, I pursue them in order to correct this. And when someone seems pleased, I am not as interested in them.

That just makes you look pathetic and desperate.

What do you think? Does that make sense? Would that explain some of the stereotypical-woman behavior, e.g., why nice guys finish last and women go after bad boys?

Women that chase bad boys do so because they lack personality, guts, self esteem and intelligence.

marlon

 

[Crosson]

only stupid lazy dorks want to have things easily

That sounds very jaded, to only enjoy challenges. If you find enjoyment in the things-in-themselves, then of course you would rather them come about easily.

Women that chase bad boys do so because they lack personality, guts, self esteem and intelligence.

That statement is overly harsh are general, for such a programmed behavior. Consider all the non-"bad boys" who say "I love you" and don't mean it (they think they love her, they think the are themselves squeaky clean) and this comes out in their actions (senseless anger, blame, control, domination).

 

[honestrosewater]

Thanks for the advice and insights, everybody. The reason I'm thinking about this is to try to understand and correct it -- and possibly help anyone else. I don't necessarily approve of all of my behavior. My brain does lots of things without running them by me first (thankfully), and I suppose it's at least possible that even I, er, miscalculated somewhere.

Right now, I am seeking an explanation for my symptoms:

• drained
• empty
• lost
• not quite wrong or wronged
• for the longest moments, incredibly, almost unbearably, sad

I am a Stoic -- I don't get sad -- especially not as result of the actions of other people. I so know better. I am completely confounded, in every sense. I mean, I'm well on my way to being perfectly super, older, and wiser, I'm sure, but there's this massive "what just happened?" void sucking me in. Hah, did I just say "a massive void"? Hm, anyway...

Are you actually attracted to bad boys? To confirm that this is a case of nice guys finishing last, we'd need to know that. The simple fact that someone isn't pleased by you doesn't make him bad.

I agree of course, and no, I'm not attracted to "bad boys". I was just trying to think of where else the same thing might be at work. I am well aware of what I value, I have habituated great control over my actions and reactions, and I think that I can judge well enough my compatibility with others.

After further consideration, I was a little off. I'm not even necessarily attracted to a person with the properties that I have in mind -- I am in fact decidedly not attracted to some of them at all. It's just that they are the ones who end up getting my time and energy.

moose gave me an idea for an analogy. Their limitations granted, imagine that you have earned the following grades on some group of similar assignments: A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, ..., F-. You can redo one assignment. Which do you choose?

I am changing as I think about this, but my initial response is B+, no contest. I mean, I'm so close to an A. And then I would make time later to look over the Fs just to see what went so wrong there.

That's another thing: feedback. I crave feedback, especially the kind that would allow me to improve. I also give time and energy to people who seem to have some negative criticism of me, mostly because it would disagree with my own self-assessments. I approve of this in moderation already.

loseyourname is also right about having to work harder to keep the A, but my analogy quickly falls apart there. I'm not afraid of someone who challenges me -- that is what I would expect. But it wouldn't be so much testing to see if the other could measure up but more like compelling each other to grow because we want each other to flourish.

Does it have to do with trying to overcome the negative feelings of disappointing another person?

Avoiding disappointing people certainly motivates me at times. I don't like to disappoint people. On first reflection, I wouldn't say that it's a problem for me, but the more I think about it, that might be part of it. I am inclined to say that it's more trying to earn something positive rather than trying to correct something negative, you know? But perhaps the difference exists only between perspectives.

turbo actually mentioned the exact word I was thinking: aloof. But there's a bit more. And Astronuc is right that there does exist the potential for something very much like a trap. I think it's the improving the B+ to a B++ and, with a little more work, to a B+++, and with a little more work, to a B++++, literally ad nauseam. Or, if you were some kind of performer, it's someone coming to see your show every night and sitting in the front row but never clapping... and then asking you to dinner afterwards, but when you ask what they thought of the show, always giving a reply that leaves you still not knowing whether they liked it or not.

I think it's when this happens with someone who I do like enough to want to try to "get things right with" that I'm totally %#@^&!. I think that might be what just happened. And then they immediately give an A+ to the very next person they meet. Haha, okay, I'm going to shut up before I say too much. Hah.

Anyway, I might sound quite neurotic, but... meh. I quite like myself. :)

The funny thing is that I still want to know what questions I missed. ! I changed all of the answers that I wasn't quite sure about. I'm not sure I should have done that. Sigh. I might never know. The knowledge is not accessible to me. I know. I will accept it.

Here's to breaking vicious cycles.

 

[Astronuc]

I quite like myself. :)

and that is very important.

 

[berkeman]

Right now, I am seeking an explanation for my symptoms:

• drained
• empty
• lost
• not quite wrong or wronged
• for the longest moments, incredibly, almost unbearably, sad

I am a Stoic -- I don't get sad -- especially not as result of the actions of other people. I so know better. I am completely confounded, in every sense. I mean, I'm well on my way to being perfectly super, older, and wiser, I'm sure, but there's this massive "what just happened?" void sucking me in. Hah, did I just say "a massive void"? Hm, anyway...

I'm of no help on the relationships thing, but I'd like to share one *very* important thing that I figured out during my undergrad years.

I was highly motivated to do well in my EE coursework, and worked very hard at it, and put a lot of pressure on myself to do well. By about the 3rd year, I found that sometimes when I was alone, I was getting very sad and stressed (and even crying sometimes) about how difficult life had become. This went on for some time, but then a little voice in the back of my head would say quietly during these episodes, "You're enjoying this. You're enjoying feeling this bad."

To which I would say loudly to myself, "That's ridiculous! How can I be getting pleasure out of feeling bad?" And I'd go on with feeling bad for a spell. But over the next few months, the quiet little voice would talk a little louder each time, and a little longer and more convincing, and pretty soon I was starting to realize that the voice (me, after all) was right. I had gotten to the point where I was actually getting a pleasure out of feeling that bad and sorry for myself -- I'm sure there were endorphins and such even involved.

So I gradually started telling myself "Don't get pleasure out of feeling bad. Feeling bad is bad -- fix whatever is making you feel bad." And son of a gun it worked! Over the following months, the number and frequency of these feel-bad sessions dropped dramatically, and went away entirely. What a relief!

So now when I see people who are feeling depressed over something or otherwise down, I look to see if they are actually getting a little pleasure or entertainment out of being down. Often, the signs are there. When it's someone that I care about, I'll share my story of how I was lucky enough to figure out how to pull myself back up out of the depression back in undergrad, and try to help them understand how important it is to not let yourself fall into the trap of feeling good when you're feeling bad.

And since we're a bit like family here on the PF, I hope maybe this insight is at least of some help to you going forward. Best wishes.

 

[honestrosewater]

And since we're a bit like family here on the PF, I hope maybe this insight is at least of some help to you going forward. Best wishes.

Thanks.

 

[Astronuc]

I crave feedback, especially the kind that would allow me to improve. I also give time and energy to people who seem to have some negative criticism of me, mostly because it would disagree with my own self-assessments. I approve of this in moderation already.

I long ago studied Buddhism and Taosim, among other streams, and took to heart about 'not craving', but rather doing things in moderation or taking the proverbial 'middle way or path'.

It is good to get feedback from others, but be sure it is from an objective person. One should not allow onself to be manipulated.

Also, one should improve oneself on behalf of oneself - not because someone else thinks one should.

Don't dwell on the negative - but simply correct course - and move forward.

One need only do one's best. One is not responsible for others' happiness, in the sense that one cannot make someone else happy or content. Rather one is only responsible for one's happiness.

Certainly one should do right by others - and do right by oneself.

In the end - just be.

 

[rewebster]

I long ago studied Buddhism and Taosim, among other streams, and took to heart about 'not craving', but rather doing things in moderation or taking the proverbial 'middle way or path'.

It is good to get feedback from others, but be sure it is from an objective person. One should not allow onself to be manipulated.

Also, one should improve oneself on behalf of oneself - not because someone else thinks one should.

Don't dwell on the negative - but simply correct course - and move forward.

One need only do one's best. One is not responsible for others' happiness, in the sense that one cannot make someone else happy or content. Rather one is only responsible for one's happiness.

Certainly one should do right by others - and do right by oneself.

In the end - just be.

I totally agree. A lady gave me a copy of "I Ching" back in '71 and it's still one of my favorites reading books (when I haven't misplaced it)

 

[turbo]

If I can chip in here, I would heartily recommend "Be Here Now" by Richard Alpert (Baba Ram Dass). Being centered without being self-centered is valuable.

 

[rewebster]

I haven't read Ram Dass yet----I've heard of him (and the book) many times---one of those "I wonder why I haven't read that yet(s)?"

-------------------------------------
For understanding people's frustration, anger, jealousy, arrogance, selfishness, etc. though, "I Ching" is about the simplest and best for trying to get the basic understanding of it. I still meditate on the 'ideas of it all' everyday.

 

[Astronuc]

If I can chip in here, I would heartily recommend "Be Here Now" by Richard Alpert (Baba Ram Dass). Being centered without being self-centered is valuable.

Ah - that brings back flashbacks. Merry Pranksters and the Magic Bus.

 

[light_bulb]

i skipped over reading this because i really feel it's something like a bag of skittles, pick your favorite flavor. maybe one person likes strawberry another might like blueberry, but unlike a bag of skittles you have many more flavors to choose from.

that makes about as much sense...

 

[honestrosewater]

I am happy with my own brand of Stoicism. I am suspecting now that the whole empty, lost, pangs-of-sadness thing might be caused by not knowing what I did wrong. I supposed the question might assume too much, and I might already have an answer to it in a way. I can't shake the feeling that I have failed at something, but I don't what it was or why I should care.

 

[loseyourname]

After further consideration, I was a little off. I'm not even necessarily attracted to a person with the properties that I have in mind -- I am in fact decidedly not attracted to some of them at all. It's just that they are the ones who end up getting my time and energy.

moose gave me an idea for an analogy. Their limitations granted, imagine that you have earned the following grades on some group of similar assignments: A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, ..., F-. You can redo one assignment. Which do you choose?

I am changing as I think about this, but my initial response is B+, no contest. I mean, I'm so close to an A. And then I would make time later to look over the Fs just to see what went so wrong there.

The thing is, you also end up devoting your time to the people you're not attracted to or not compatible with, at least following the succession of claims here. You might end up with a happy coincidence of a man that you fail to please and whom you find attractive, but you're pursuing the former and not the latter, which is a backwards way of going about things. As berkeman pointed out, you can fool yourself into thinking that you are being driven toward achievement of a goal because that achievement pleases you, but in reality, it might just be simple compulsion and all you're doing is singlemindedly pursuing a misguided end to the detriment of your own happiness.

That's another thing: feedback. I crave feedback, especially the kind that would allow me to improve. I also give time and energy to people who seem to have some negative criticism of me, mostly because it would disagree with my own self-assessments. I approve of this in moderation already.

What are these people causing you to improve upon, though? The way you've described it seems as if you're lacking only in that you don't please them. Your aim of becoming a better person does not overlap with the aim of pleasing any particular person other than yourself. Living up to another person's standards isn't the same as being a better person.

loseyourname is also right about having to work harder to keep the A, but my analogy quickly falls apart there. I'm not afraid of someone who challenges me -- that is what I would expect. But it wouldn't be so much testing to see if the other could measure up but more like compelling each other to grow because we want each other to flourish.

The real point I was trying to get across is that being with someone who really likes you challenges you in a completely different way. If you're hanging around guys that challenge you because they see some deficiency in your person, you fix that deficiency and there you go. The person that loves you for who you are and is pleased regardless of your personality deficiencies (provided he isn't just some pushover being walked all over) provides you with the real danger of having to not only work upon improving your behavior to meet his standards, but of building a real, lasting relationship, something that is many times more difficult. Bettering yourself and maintaining a loving relationship over a long span of time are completely different animals. One gives you that tangible goal that you can lay out a plan for achieving. You do it and you're done. The other requires a perhaps life-long committment to love another person, to remain forever vigilant with no carrot at the end of the rope. It is an end in itself, something that a goal-oriented, analytic person like yourself might have trouble understanding and appreciating.

The only woman that ever dumped me said she did so in part because I thought too highly of her. I believed in her more than she believed in herself and she said that put too much pressure on her to live up to an ideal that she didn't think she actually could. She wanted to believe that when she failed, it was because she honestly wasn't good enough, and not because she simply hadn't done enough, and according to my view of her, that could not be the case. So hey, maybe the person who is pleased by you can provide you with even more of a challenge, and that isn't to change yourself in such a way as to be what you are not right now. The challenge is to be the person that he sees in you, the person that he loves and that he knows is there, the person that you really are but aren't letting yourself be for whatever reason. That's a much more difficult challenge, because when you fail you can't say "well I'm X, and I just can't make myself be X+1." No, in reality, you're already X+1 but your own lack of belief in yourself, your own inhibition, or whatever else might be holding you back, isn't allowing it to show. The former gives you an excuse; the latter does not.

 

[rewebster]

I am happy with my own brand of Stoicism. I am suspecting now that the whole empty, lost, pangs-of-sadness thing might be caused by not knowing what I did wrong. I supposed the question might assume too much, and I might already have an answer to it in a way. I can't shake the feeling that I have failed at something, but I don't what it was or why I should care.

It may not be 'failed at something'---it may be 'missed' or 'didn't finish' something---those are the things that to me are the important ones to find out what they were---like a missing puzzle part or an incomplete idea---those are driving forces that need to be figured out --otherwise, they may hold you back.

------------------------------------------

I know of too many people that keep asking themselves--"why?"--"why did so and so?/why can't I...?"----and they never answer themselves. They keep just asking 'why?' .

Coming up with ANY answer, any answer at all, first, leads, eventually, to a better answer.

 

[honestrosewater]

What are these people causing you to improve upon, though? The way you've described it seems as if you're lacking only in that you don't please them. Your aim of becoming a better person does not overlap with the aim of pleasing any particular person other than yourself. Living up to another person's standards isn't the same as being a better person.

I think this is a very good point that I probably have never fully appreciated before. Thank you.

The other requires a perhaps life-long committment to love another person, to remain forever vigilant with no carrot at the end of the rope. It is an end in itself, something that a goal-oriented, analytic person like yourself might have trouble understanding and appreciating.

I have wanted that and still do. I can love and be logical simultaneously. But I have never known anyone who loved me the way that I loved them. I am still looking.

The challenge is to be the person that he sees in you, the person that he loves and that he knows is there, the person that you really are but aren't letting yourself be for whatever reason. That's a much more difficult challenge, because when you fail you can't say "well I'm X, and I just can't make myself be X+1." No, in reality, you're already X+1 but your own lack of belief in yourself, your own inhibition, or whatever else might be holding you back, isn't allowing it to show. The former gives you an excuse; the latter does not.

Well, the relatively little I have said here is not a complete picture of me and probably not as accurate as I would like either. I was focusing on this one behavior pattern I seem to have. But you see a lot of me sometimes, man of the coast, or whoever you are.

 

[honestrosewater]

Okay, I think I'm much closer to a resolution now. This has been a big help.

I don't think I really did anything wrong. I might have made some mistakes, which I am just now realizing, but I didn't knowingly do anything wrong. It's been a long time, in fact, since I have done anything other than what I decided was the right thing to do, been impulsive or irresponsible, gone against my better judgement, or even been tempted to do so.

I just don't know everything.

And the boy that I liked is a nice boy. (This was 75% about one particular boy.) He just doesn't like me in the way that I thought he did or wanted him to. And I think that he is probably right.

So I'm not sure what the lesson is. Maybe there isn't one. Or maybe it's that you won't know if you don't try, or something like that.

 

[rewebster]

I have wanted that and still do. I can love and be logical simultaneously. But I have never known anyone who loved me the way that I loved them. I am still looking.

Well, if you like Physics, take a correlation from the Pauli Exclusion Principle.


And a 'close' match may be the only option. One person's needs and wants rarely if ever matches all exactly to another's; and, it seems better to have a complimentary reaction, rather than one of opposites attracting (matter/antimatter).

 

[Astronuc]

I don't think I really did anything wrong. I might have made some mistakes, which I am just now realizing, but I didn't knowingly do anything wrong.

And you probably didn't, but it seems like you is worried that you did - like some lingering doubt or uncertainty. Perhaps best to just let it go.

I just don't know everything.

Nobody does.

And the boy that I liked is a nice boy. (This was 75% about one particular boy.) He just doesn't like me in the way that I thought he did or wanted him to. And I think that he is probably right.

This is perhaps one of the biggest difficulties in relationships - wanting someone to like one is a certain way, even if it means changing oneself. It is one thing to improve oneself, but it quite another to change oneself in away to accommodate another's view of what one should be. I would advise against changing oneself to suit another's ideals.

One has to be satisfied or comfortable with oneself.

I have never tried to 'change' my wife, and I would never expect to do so. We do work together in a mutually supporting and reciprocal relationship. We just accept each other, knowing our faults as well as our positive attributes.

So I'm not sure what the lesson is. Maybe there isn't one. Or maybe it's that you won't know if you don't try, or something like that.

Perhaps it is don't change yourself for another - change yourself because you want to change (improve).

The only woman that ever dumped me said she did so in part because I thought too highly of her. I believed in her more than she believed in herself and she said that put too much pressure on her to live up to an ideal that she didn't think she actually could.

Ouch. Not much one can do in that situation. One of my friends ended up divorced because his wife decided she couldn't measure up to his ideal or standard, but he never imposed or expected some ideal or standard about her. He just cared about her and wanted to be her husband. However, she could not feel that he cared about her as she was, and that apparently goes back to her childhood and trying to live up to parental expectations.

 

[EnumaElish]

I have observed the following behavior in certain people I love (and I may have reinforced it knowingly or unknowingly):

If they come to own (especially as a gift) a material object (e.g. a wristwatch) that they really wanted and yearned for, they will "lose" (read: get rid of) it in time. In contrast, they will keep a similar object with minor imperfections -- not quite what they wanted, but close, maybe with one or two aspects that are less than ideal (e.g., the wristwatch "would be perfect" if it was "just a little smaller").

I wonder whether this observation may be related to the behavior that the OP described.