You're more than welcome to make choices about how you think about your own situations. You can say to yourself that somebody reacting in a perfectly reasonable way after an alarming ordeal is doing things... to you... that you're being treated as though you've done wrong. You can alternatively choose to think that your significant other simplex exists. That he is reacting to an ordeal in an understandable but an unwanted way, rather than doing things -to you-.
The latter allows room for empathy and a meaningful connection to be made. That's not to say you're going to somehow force a significant other into working through his own thoughts and feelings in a reasonable manner. But you need empathy and meaningful connections for conflict resolution. Period. This way of thinking is the acceptance that your SO's behavior is something from within himself, behavior you can understand, his responsibility, and not brought out from you or directed to you.
While the former internalizes the behavior of somebody else. Rather than recognizing that somebody else is simply having a difficult time, you internalize that struggle and believe their struggle is done -to you- rather than recognizing the person you love is simply struggling by himself. This way of thinking is the anti-thesis of empathy, and it dismantles meaningful connections while manufacturing further conflict.
Imagine an elderly women soiling herself during a moment of embarrassment at an assisted living facility. The staff there might say things to themselves such as, "Damnit. This lady is ruining my day. Why does she always have to make my job harder?" (The former way of thinking.) Other staff members might also say to themselves, "Well, I suppose anyone in that position may understandably be going through a rough time. She didn't do this to me just to ruin my day, she is just struggling." (The latter way of thinking.)
That is what my comment means.
If they hadn't done this, do you know how often this supposedly grown man would have checked OP's messages?
No, I don't know. And neither do you.
If he lets his past define him, whatever.
Exactly. We all carry with us an internal narrative of our lives. This narrative causes our thoughts and feelings but not external things like places, people, and events. If you have the complete inability to reach deep down within yourself to recognize what it might be like for somebody you care for in this position, then you cannot foster a meaningful connection with him or her - And neither could the OP. But do not sit there presuming to understand exactly what goes on inside the mind of somebody else. I can reasonably tell you that you aren't a mind-reader.
Paul jumping to conclusions and immediately telling OP he didn't want to see or talk to her made this impossible.
Nobody can change that but Paul. Choosing to get angry and yell dismantled any opportunity for conflict resolution. The former way of thinking dismantled any meaningful connection.
ya... because this is how relationships work... he doesn't get to project his insecurities onto her in lieu of dealing with his own problems...
What are you even talking about? Do you have any concept at all about what projecting means? If someone recognizes things about themselves they hate, such as rudeness, then they can project that out and into the world by accusing others of rudeness.
Did you fuck Paul? No?
Then how do you know he's cheating left and right while projecting that onto his spouse? You don't know if he's cheating.
To project his insecurities... Is to accuse his spouse of being insecure.