Attachment Theory

[BeExcellent]

Been reading up on attachment theory lately. Why? Because attachment theory underlines how individuals relate to one another in close relationships. Here are some interesting findings:

Secure Attachment style: people who are secure in themselves, have healthy foundational relationships (parents, siblings, family etc.) and who welcome intimacy & bonding in close relationships. Product of stable, secure caregiving during childhood, intact family, positive & nuturing childhood environment. This represents about 50% of the population.

I wonder does this correlate to the 50% of 1st marriages that stay together for the duration (figure for first marriages is actually a higher success rate...50% divorce stat includes subsequent marriages with higher percent failure rate - but it all gets averaged together).

Anxious Attachment style: Basically your insecure clingers. They tend to seek relationships but getting close to someone brings out insecurity and clingyness. About 25% of the population suffers from an anxious style, result of volatile family background where there was some nuturing & love but also some dysfunctional dynamics that trigger insecurities. These people are pleasers & doormats for the reward of close relationships.

Avoidant attachment style: There are various subtypes including dismissive avoidant, fearful avoidant and some others. These are people who crave intimacy and close relationships but were grossly neglected, unloved, or abandoned as vulnerable children or by primary close relationships early in life resulting in fear of intimacy, fear of close relationships, lack of emotional development (lack of empathy, narcissism, inability to give or recieve love). These people are emotionally fvcked up by early developmental dysfunction. This affects about 25% of the population....

But that number skews higher in adult singles because avoidant attachment style people are least equipped to bond or build intimacy or maintain close relationships with others. In other words avoidant types are the least likely to pair bond and end up in stable marriages or LTRs.

The good news is people can repair their attachment style if it is dysfunctional with self awareness, maturity and perseverance. But dating an avoidant is no picnic. These are people who avoid intimacy because it isn't safe.

But I wonder how much of what the forum members experience in the dating realm can tie back to dysfunctional attachment styles.

I am dating a fearful avoidant. I am a secure/anxious (about 3-5% of the population). It's very interesting how this stuff applies and how true the behavioral patterns seem to be.

Just thought it might offer some morsels for provocation of thought about ourselves as individuals as well as the people we get into relationships with.

 

[lamath]

Been reading up on attachment theory lately. Why? Because attachment theory defines how individuals relate to one another in close relationships. Here are some interesting findings:

Secure Attachment style: people who are secure in themselves, have healthy foundational relationships (parents, siblings, family etc.) and who welcome intimacy & bonding in close relationships. Product of stable, secure caregiving during childhood, intact family, positive & nuturing childhood environment. This represents about 50% of the population.

I wonder does this correlate to the 50% of 1st marriages that stay together for the duration (figure for first marriages is actually a higher success rate...50% divorce stat includes subsequent marriages with higher percent failure rate - but it all gets averaged together).

Anxious Attachment style: Basically your insecure clingers. They tend to seek relationships but getting close to someone brings out insecurity and clingyness. About 25% of the population suffers from an anxious style, result of volatile family background where there was some nuturing & love but also some dysfunctional dynamics that trigger insecurities. These people are pleasers & doormats for the reward of close relationships.

Avoidant attachment style: There are various subtypes including dismissive avoidant, fearful avoidant and some others. These are people who crave intimacy and close relationships but were grossly neglected, unloved, or abandoned as vulnerable children or by primary close relationships early in life resulting in fear of intimacy, lack of emotional development (lack of empathy, narcissism, inability to give or recieve love). These people are emotionally fvcked up by early developmental dysfunction. This affects about 25% of the population....

But that number skews higher in adult singles because avoidant attachment style people are least equipped to bond or build intimacy or maintain close relationships with others.

The good news is people can repair their attachment style if it is dysfunctional with self awareness, maturity and perseverance. But dating an avoidant is no picnic. These are people who avoid intimacy because it isn't safe.

But I wonder how much of what the forum members experience in the dating realm can tie back to dysfunctional attachment styles.

I am dating a fearful avoidant. I am a secure/anxious (about 3-5% of the population). It's very interesting how this stuff applies and how true the behavioral patterns seem to be.

Just thought it might offer some morsels for provocation of thought about ourselves as individuals as well as the people we get into relationships with.

interesting
Name of the book please

 

[flowtheory]

I’ve read about this before. It is interesting going through past relationships ships and seeing it was simply their attachment style where a lot of our incompatibility stemmed from.
I’m in the ball park of secure attachment. Last two exes were anxious and avoidant. Both very difficult and caused issues where it wasn’t needed.

 

[BeExcellent]

interesting
Name of the book please

Google attachment styles or attachment theory. You'll find tons of information in the psychological literature. I find it fascinating.

Today over lunch my BF commented that he sees a pattern in himself of sabotaging his relationships. He's lobed a number of grenades into our relationship as he gets closer to & more invested in me. But he sees the pattern and recognizes it as destructive and sees where it is rooted in his early life.

So we had a chat about attachment theory today. I wonder how much those types of dynamics affect the dating market because avoidant types are most likely to be single.

 

[BeExcellent]

Your "catch" is NPD/HPD

I know. But he's also what I'm used to dealing with from my childhood with a malignant covert narcissist mother (who the BF is nowhere near that level of dysfunction). He's a textbook narcissist and I've told him so. But he's mild compared to my mom. Does that say awesome things about me? Not really. But I'm not seeking to fix him. It's fascinating. Just wondered what others see and how it relates to their individual experience.

 

[lamath]

i also wonder how long ppl having attachment problem last in relationship on average

 

[zekko]

I bet most guys here have some avoidant in them. I haven't researched this but I'm guessing I'm a mix of secure and avoidant.

I was something of a clinger when I started out dating, but that did not work out well for me, so I purged it. I don't think there's any trace of that left in me. So much so that girls have sometimes even complained that I'm not like that at all, no jealousy, nothing.

 

[Roober]

It all boils down to our childhood. Negative emotions and the inability to communicate them in a loving way is a reflection of the amount of unresolved childhood emotions that someone carries.

It doesn't matter if you have 0, 1, or 2 parents. While 2 parents have a greater chance of success, most parents fail to validate a child's feelings and provide with the resources to successfully communicate lovingly with a partner. There is a bigger emphasis on validating a child's feelings these days, but it is certainly still a minority.

Look at the guys here and you will see an abundance of unresolved childhood trauma.

 

[Focal core]

It all boils down to our childhood. Negative emotions and the inability to communicate them in a loving way is a reflection of the amount of unresolved childhood emotions that someone carries.

It doesn't matter if you have 0, 1, or 2 parents. While 2 parents have a greater chance of success, most parents fail to validate a child's feelings and provide with the resources to successfully communicate lovingly with a partner. There is a bigger emphasis on validating a child's feelings these days, but it is certainly still a minority.

Look at the guys here and you will see an abundance of unresolved childhood trauma.

Very true.

 

[In2theGame]

I bet most guys here have some avoidant in them. I haven't researched this but I'm guessing I'm a mix of secure and avoidant.

I was something of a clinger when I started out dating, but that did not work out well for me, so I purged it. I don't think there's any trace of that left in me. So much so that girls have sometimes even complained that I'm not like that at all, no jealousy, nothing.

l'm the same with that. I've been through a lot of Women to the point I legitimately do not care about attachment. It's not trying to not get attached, its honestly that I don't care about attachment anymore. And yes, Women have complained to me as to why I dont show any emotion or care, I just don't have any left in me.

 

[Focal core]

Google attachment styles or attachment theory. You'll find tons of information in the psychological literature. I find it fascinating.

Today over lunch my BF commented that he sees a pattern in himself of sabotaging his relationships. He's lobed a number of grenades into our relationship as he gets closer to & more invested in me. But he sees the pattern and recognizes it as destructive and sees where it is rooted in his early life.

So we had a chat about attachment theory today. I wonder how much those types of dynamics affect the dating market because avoidant types are most likely to be single.

This is no good, People usually tell you what you need to know about them, right up front. Maybe it's not in the words they say--but if you're paying close attention to their behaviors, there are warning signs you definitely shouldn't ignore.

"gee, isn't it lovely this person is being so open and honest with me, and surely he/she is trustworthy" but they're actually cautioning you about what lies ahead. If you stick around, they presume you've made a well-informed choice, they're off the hook for any emotional responsibility.

This happens a lots of time over and over again.

 

[Augustus_McCrae]

Google attachment styles or attachment theory. You'll find tons of information in the psychological literature. I find it fascinating.

Today over lunch my BF commented that he sees a pattern in himself of sabotaging his relationships. He's lobed a number of grenades into our relationship as he gets closer to & more invested in me. But he sees the pattern and recognizes it as destructive and sees where it is rooted in his early life.

So we had a chat about attachment theory today. I wonder how much those types of dynamics affect the dating market because avoidant types are most likely to be single.

It’s one of the reasons why so many men comment that most of the women they meet have issues and aren’t suitable for a LTR. They are unattached/single for a reason, if they didn’t have issues, they would be in a relationship already.

The other thing you encounter are people who were capable of healthy attachment but got involved with or married the wrong person. Then after years of dealing with someone like that, they finally separate and enter the dating market again. However, even when they don’t realize it, they are now most likely carrying emotional damage caused by their former partner’s attachment issues.

So, it all leads to a bunch of wounded, Fvcked up people out there in the dating market.

And BE, a word of caution: even if he logically realizes his issue, that doesn’t mean he can fix it. So don’t be surprised if those grenades keep dropping.

-Augustus-

 

[zekko]

It doesn't matter if you have 0, 1, or 2 parents. While 2 parents have a greater chance of success, most parents fail to validate a child's feelings and provide with the resources to successfully communicate lovingly with a partner.

My parents were okay, though not particularly demonstrative. My problem was I had difficulty relating to my peers. I was happy as a clam until I had to start school, that brought in years of misery, had a hard time fitting in.

 

[sazc]

Google attachment styles or attachment theory. You'll find tons of information in the psychological literature. I find it fascinating.

Today over lunch my BF commented that he sees a pattern in himself of sabotaging his relationships. He's lobed a number of grenades into our relationship as he gets closer to & more invested in me. But he sees the pattern and recognizes it as destructive and sees where it is rooted in his early life.

So we had a chat about attachment theory today. I wonder how much those types of dynamics affect the dating market because avoidant types are most likely to be single.

BE, proceed with caution in general
Rarely do people change, even if they recognize an unsavory pattern to their behavior.

In general:
The problem is that the unsavory pattern is rooted in their childhood, it was invoked as a protective cloak, and attempting to eliminate the behavior brings up general feelings of discomfort. Since they are uncomfortable, it's easier to revert back to embracing the behavior rather than embracing feeling uncomfortable in the struggle to change the behavior.

This is what it's IMPERATIVE that you find someone you can accept as they come to you - because people don't change.

For me this gets back to having standards and feeling empowered/smart choosing to stay single while I wait for someone who is balanced. Who knows to cherish what two people can have by offering respect to the interaction (no passive relationship threats, no sh1t tests, etc)

Good luck to all

 

[BeTheChange]

Your "catch" is NPD/HPD

It's a spectrum though.

Dismissive avoidant ENTJ.

So guess we are almost opposites. All my LTRs have said my "problem" is I don't show enough affection, too emotionally distant, act like I don't care, etc.

This alone probably wouldn't be a deal breaker, but I also have high standards for myself and those around me (which I'll verbalise) and naturally this comes across as quite critical. Nothing is ever enough. And my LTRs get tired of this after a while. Seems to chip away at the self esteem of the more sensitive women. That and the occasional bursts of anger seem to crush the spirits of the feely types (most plates). Definitely something I need to work on.

 

[sazc]

i also wonder how long ppl having attachment problem last in relationship on average

The entire time

Ppl on these boards talk about " relationship roller coasters", speculating "bpd?" That's attachment patterns in action (maybe 1% bpd)

That's what had always frustrated me about the chatter on these boards, the idea of incel and mgtow - it's not "you" it's "them" but some ppl go mad wondering why THEY can't pull.

Another thing, this idea that a woman starts to rot (or whatever) after 27..... I'm not going to debate that fundamental idea, b/c I know you guys love it, but I will offer a different vantage point. I'm feeling like it's more possible that the normal ones find each other and couple up in their 20s and, by 30, if you are still single, you are left to pick from low hanging fruit that gets more spoiled as the years go by. Men and women

 

[Focal core]

R

The entire time

Ppl on these boards talk about " relationship roller coasters", speculating "bpd?" That's attachment patterns in action (maybe 1% bpd)

That's what had always frustrated me about the chatter on these boards, the idea of incel and mgtow - it's not "you" it's "them" but some ppl go mad wondering why THEY can't pull.

Another thing, this idea that a woman starts to rot (or whatever) after 27..... I'm not going to debate that fundamental idea, b/c I know you guys love it, but I will offer a different vantage point. I'm feeling like it's more possible that the normal ones find each other and couple up in their 20s and, by 30, if you are still single, you are left to pick from low hanging fruit that gets more spoiled as the years go by. Men and women

Really? I wouldnt stuck with a partner that having a problem with me the entire time, thats not normal, we argue and we resolve grow and move to next level, enhancing each other while promoting and supporting growth to one another, i would not stuck to the same emotional roller coaster with one partner waste of my time and resources.

As im doing my personal growth its become even harder to find that person matching my emotional level. Not the last time when im all out reckless man ive never been alone my entire life lol.

 

[sazc]

R
Really? I wouldnt stuck with a partner that having a problem with me the entire time, thats not normal, we argue and we resolve grow and move to next level, enhancing each other while promoting and supporting growth to one another, i would not stuck to the same emotional roller coaster with one partner waste of my time and resources.

As im doing my personal growth its become even harder to find that person matching my emotional level. Not the last time when im all out reckless man ive never been alone my entire life lol.

Agreed. Most likely you wouldn't stick with her because you are the more cognitively mature and stable one.

The thing to be wary about is that, we all tend to pick partners that mirror emotional childhood situations with our primary caregivers, in an effort to validate our role in that situation and possibly fix the other person to correct the situation, and our emotions surrounding it. BE mentioned that.

as a consequence, we are repulsed by people who do not demonstrate this dynamic, and we are drawn to people who do. This is all subconscious, unless people can take a step back and recognize situations for what they really are.

Its all so interesting

 

[Focal core]

Agreed. Most likely you wouldn't stick with her because you are the more cognitively mature and stable one.

The thing to be wary about is that, we all tend to pick partners that mirror emotional childhood situations with our primary caregivers, in an effort to validate our role in that situation and possibly fix the other person to correct the situation, and our emotions surrounding it. BE mentioned that.

as a consequence, we are repulsed by people who do not demonstrate this dynamic, and we are drawn to people who do. This is all subconscious, unless people can take a step back and recognize situations for what they really are.

Its all so interesting

Im out of word ure damn right. Every word of it.

 

[sazc]

Im out of word ure damn right. Every word of it.

Ur not alone, I catch myself doing it too. Step one, be cognitively and presently aware of who you really are and how you operate - always question the health of your choices.