Attachment Theory

[AttackFormation]

Well also just functional sex is something I’m not interested in. I like those feelings of being intimate and connected with a woman. So intimacy is a very different concept than sex. They are not the same.

This. I'd rather have no sex than have sex where the vehicle is still rolling but the engine is off. The negative feelings of that (which I haven't been in yet and have no desire to find myself in) would not be worth the so-called "sex". I've dumped women to cause my own dry spell too because I would rather have no sex than have negative sex. Choose your self esteem and emotional enjoyment first and avoiding a dry spell second.

 

[Ranger]

And the man stands by and lets that happen. It takes two to make a fvcked up relationship. The woman is not without fault, but neither is the man, for choosing a woman poorly, being in denial when that becomes obvious, and devaluing himself in his mind so much that he thinks he cannot do any better.

Morals never trump biology. Vows never trump biology. Ever. A woman may subject herself to sex to keep her man but that is not the same as desire.
All women are a poor choice for a relationship for any man not completely out of the feminine imperative.

 

[BeExcellent]

There is some jadedness in the more recent responses. Sex rationing? Becomes absolute when a woman is secure? Oh God how terribly sad.

I've never rationed sex. I need it and love it. In fact, it is the security of the attachment that allows me to open up fully and be fully sexually expressive. In my marriage I wanted it as much or more than he did. The whole time, even when things were very tough in the relationship. It built a deep intimacy & attachment. So that is what I look for and desire in relationship.

Women dumb enough to ration sex are idiots. Women who date someone for whom they have no desire are stupid. But as men you guys have to tease out the women who have genuine desire for you. That is the rewarding subset for LTR.

Flawed as my guy is? We desire each other. Deeply. That desire has increased over time...not decreased. We fit well otherwise in personality and background...but desire is always the glue. You cannot have a deep sexual relationship without it. I am a woman who knows her own desire nature. I hold out for men I desire. Otherwise why waste time?

I'll leave opportunistic dating for the gold diggers, floozies & opportunists.

Men who date me feel valued. They feel desired...but I am also somewhat aloof so they never feel suffocated. Relationships have to have enough space to breathe. Few people get that...and that space is what creates sexual tension & desire.

Ration sex? That is for dumb women who do not understand the nature of a masculine male. I've never done that & never will

 

[ohrein]

because people don't change.

As someone who has changed dramatically, you are wrong. People often don't change, but they are very capable of it.

Regarding attachment styles specifically, people can change. The literature shows that over years if an anxious/avoidant pair bonds with a secure person, they slowly change styles to become secure.

You can’t lump people in a group. Glad this is just a theory

Psychology deals in groups and in spectrums. Think bell curves, most of the time. This data matters, but it is not all or nothing.

Shouldn't a secure attachment person be repulsed by a fearful avoidant, or is this a polarity issue of opposites attract? Or is this not really relevant to attraction?

It depends on the extremity of it. They will certainly struggle to bond with them when that person is being avoidant. But it depends to what extent. Do they just get moody and distant for a couple of days before coming back? Can they communicate at all? It's always degrees. I'm anxious attachment style but I have control over it. Being aware helps dramatically.

Once having definitively obtaining a man...biologically her sexual anxiety is gone. She is now secure. He gets cucked no matter what kind of woman he is with. I’m the last guy to tell another man what to do or to not have a relationship. As long as he knows before hand that there is no upside for him.
Once a man is rationed sex, his biology will actually create problems of scarcity and her badger will surface. No matter what type she is.

No one definitively obtains a partner. My girl knows I will leave for a multitude of things. She knows I won't tolerate disrespect. She knows even a whiff of infidelity and she's gone. She see's me interact with other women and knows I could replace her. Rollo talks directly about this. The problem with most relationships is that most men don't understand they can and should walk away under certain conditions. Instead, they think they will never find another woman or need to fix their current one.

A man who has options and respect is never owned. It's not going to be an intense arousal like the first time people hook up, when all the neurochemicals are lighting your brain on fire, although sometimes it's like that. But I've been with my girl a year and she's the one who initiates sex with me. She's the one who starts conversations about how important sex is in a relationship if we haven't had it for a few days. She knows I don't need it as regularly as she does. I don't know if that can be maintained for life, but if you're staying in shape and doing what you should, I can't see why not.

 

[longtail]

It's interesting food for thought. My guy is fearful avoidant but matured to a place where he sees it and recognizes and is working to remedy it.

I was originally anxious attachment but have healed into secure/anxious.

I'm not low self esteem by any stretch. I am not afraid of things in my relationship, and the interaction appears to have a healing effect on my guy.

We all must keep our own counsel on what works in our own relationships. Mine is in a very good place just now.

Sometimes you need a person whose broken places support and complement your own.

This is the type of new age woo woo bullsh1t theorizing women are always attracted to.

 

[Billtx49]

This is the type of new age woo woo bullsh1t theorizing women are always attracted to.

I see her posting as a description of a high quality woman involved in a relationship …

 

[Ranger]

There is some jadedness in the more recent responses. Sex rationing? Becomes absolute when a woman is secure? Oh God how terribly sad.

I've never rationed sex. I need it and love it. In fact, it is the security of the attachment that allows me to open up fully and be fully sexually expressive. In my marriage I wanted it as much or more than he did. The whole time, even when things were very tough in the relationship. It built a deep intimacy & attachment. So that is what I look for and desire in relationship.

Women dumb enough to ration sex are idiots. Women who date someone for whom they have no desire are stupid. But as men you guys have to tease out the women who have genuine desire for you. That is the rewarding subset for LTR.

Flawed as my guy is? We desire each other. Deeply. That desire has increased over time...not decreased. We fit well otherwise in personality and background...but desire is always the glue. You cannot have a deep sexual relationship without it. I am a woman who knows her own desire nature. I hold out for men I desire. Otherwise why waste time?

I'll leave opportunistic dating for the gold diggers, floozies & opportunists.

Men who date me feel valued. They feel desired...but I am also somewhat aloof so they never feel suffocated. Relationships have to have enough space to breathe. Few people get that...and that space is what creates sexual tension & desire.

Ration sex? That is for dumb women who do not understand the nature of a masculine male. I've never done that & never will

Lol I’m not jaded in the least. Women are awesome and very interesting. I’m just intellectually astute.
Relationships (LTR/Mariage) serve a woman way more than a man. This is not rocket science.

I don’t have a biological urge to be protected and snuggled up in the fairy tail bliss. I would much rather face something dangerous like a Cape buffalo or something.

 

[Ranger]

No one definitively obtains a partner. My girl knows I will leave for a multitude of things. She knows I won't tolerate disrespect. She knows even a whiff of infidelity and she's gone. She see's me interact with other women and knows I could replace her. Rollo talks directly about this. The problem with most relationships is that most men don't understand they can and should walk away under certain conditions. Instead, they think they will never find another woman or need to fix their current one.

A man who has options and respect is never owned. It's not going to be an intense arousal like the first time people hook up, when all the neurochemicals are lighting your brain on fire, although sometimes it's like that. But I've been with my girl a year and she's the one who initiates sex with me. She's the one who starts conversations about how important sex is in a relationship if we haven't had it for a few days. She knows I don't need it as regularly as she does. I don't know if that can be maintained for life, but if you're staying in shape and doing what you should, I can't see why not.

A man who has options. Duh. Since when do men with options get cucked.
That was out there. Save it for the broken hearts. Lol

 

[BeExcellent]

Lol I’m not jaded in the least. Women are awesome and very interesting. I’m just intellectually astute.
Relationships (LTR/Mariage) serve a woman way more than a man. This is not rocket science.

I don’t have a biological urge to be protected and snuggled up in the fairy tail bliss. I would much rather face something dangerous like a Cape buffalo or something.

Interesting. So go hunt Cape Buffalo and safari and whatever else. You have a tendency to portray the so called "female imperative" as an absolutist. That is misleading to patently false. You have your values and priorities, I have mine (which are not driven by biology...certainly not now as I have concluded child bearing and child rearing...) and further I am not driven by resource acquisition either.

Other men here have their value systems. Some are absolutists as you are, others recognize the nuance of the individual.

When you remove the biology need surrounding child bearing & rearing...and you remove the need for resources, there is a freedom to pick a partner because of desire nature, intelligence, humor, compatibility and companionship. That freedom is rooted in authenticity. I choose from a real place. I love men & was raised by a strong leader of men whose respect I had to earn in adulthood. No princess syndrome here. That wasn't tolerated by my father...however he expected his daughters to pair with solid men who were capable of the traditional family dynamic where the man provided and the woman raised the kids. That was the vastly prevailing relationship model throughout my extended family...but I digress.

Attachment Theory is an interesting lens through which to view our relationships and therefore ourselves. If I further my own understanding of myself, and my partner does similarly then it seems to me the evolution has the potential to benefit the relationship.

I think better relationships are a good thing. Better self awareness & partner awareness contributes to better relationships.

And it's tough these days because traditional roles and models have eroded. That means there is more freedom and less security than before. That is a double edged sword that must be respected and wielded carefully.

 

[Ranger]

Interesting. So go hunt Cape Buffalo and safari and whatever else. You have a tendency to portray the so called "female imperative" as an absolutist. That is misleading to patently false. You have your values and priorities, I have mine (which are not driven by biology...certainly not now as I have concluded child bearing and child rearing...) and further I am not driven by resource acquisition either.

Other men here have their value systems. Some are absolutists as you are, others recognize the nuance of the individual.

When you remove the biology need surrounding child bearing & rearing...and you remove the need for resources, there is a freedom to pick a partner because of desire nature, intelligence, humor, compatibility and companionship. That freedom is rooted in authenticity. I choose from a real place. I love men & was raised by a strong leader of men whose respect I had to earn in adulthood. No princess syndrome here. That wasn't tolerated by my father...however he expected his daughters to pair with solid men who were capable of the traditional family dynamic where the man provided and the woman raised the kids. That was the vastly prevailing relationship model throughout my extended family...but I digress.

Attachment Theory is an interesting lens through which to view our relationships and therefore ourselves. If I further my own understanding of myself, and my partner does similarly then it seems to me the evolution has the potential to benefit the relationship.

I think better relationships are a good thing. Better self awareness & partner awareness contributes to better relationships.

And it's tough these days because traditional roles and models have eroded. That means there is more freedom and less security than before. That is a double edged sword that must be respected and wielded carefully.

The feminine imperative is the cause of the eroding family. It’s a drive to return to the primitive paradigm. Fewer breeders and lots of cucks to milk.
That would be an understanding of the Hunter/gather survival strategy for those that might be confused. Women outside the breeding age are already past. They really aren’t in the equation. They are just pissed and lonely.

 

[longtail]

The feminine imperative is the cause of the eroding family. It’s a drive to return to the primitive paradigm. Fewer breeders and lots of cucks to milk.
That would be an understanding of the Hunter/gather survival strategy for those that might be confused. Women outside the breeding age are already past. They really aren’t in the equation. They are just pissed and lonely.

Just what is the purpose of women past child rearing age anyway? Once they've raised their children they have no place in society aside from homemaking: cooking and cleaning.

Engaging in a pseudo-intellectual debate with these creatures is pointless. You might as well turn a mop upside down and get into an argument with that instead.

 

[Ranger]

Just what is the purpose of women past child rearing age anyway? Once they've raised their children they have no place in society aside from homemaking: cooking and cleaning.

Engaging in a pseudo-intellectual debate with these creatures is pointless. You might as well turn a mop upside down and get into an argument with that instead.

They are a collective and think in the same paradigm. The self interest will never go away.
It’s like a computer program that won’t quit.
As spaz would say...they can’t think outside the feminine imperative. It’s not in them.

 

[BeExcellent]

Women outside the breeding age are already past. They really aren’t in the equation. They are just pissed and lonely.

Hmmmm. How is it then that I am neither pissed nor lonely? That must truly bug you. It doesn't follow your narrative.

Those who resort to insult do so because they have no other recourse, because they lack the mental bandwidth to do so and they also lack the ability to acknowledge (not necessarily agree with - simply acknowledge - ) a viewpoint beyond their own.

Ironically that may be seen as an insult...but I've no need to call names here. I think the content and its practical application is self evident.

Why...lets discard all the people we personally deem useless. Next time you are in Washington DC I would suggest a visit to the Holocost Museum. For that is where such a belief system leads...degree by degree.

My BF and I went this past fall.

It is a sobering experience and one every human being should see, especially important for those who do not fathom the value in some large group of their fellow human beings

 

[Ranger]

Hmmmm. How is it then that I am neither pissed nor lonely? That must truly bug you. It doesn't follow your narrative.

Those who resort to insult do so because they have no other recourse, because they lack the mental bandwidth to do so and they also lack the ability to acknowledge (not necessarily agree with - simply acknowledge - ) a viewpoint beyond their own.

Ironically that may be seen as an insult...but I've no need to call names here. I think the content and its practical application is self evident.

Why...lets discard all the people we personally deem useless. Next time you are in Washington DC I would suggest a visit to the Holocost Museum. For that is where such a belief system leads...degree by degree.

My BF and I went this past fall.

It is a sobering experience and one every human being should see, especially important for those who do not fathom the value in some large group of their fellow human beings

You saw insult where there was none. I never said anyone was worthless.
I said they women outside of breeding age weren’t part of the equation. I used the word women as a gender group.
This is what I meant when I said the feminine imperative collective paradigm. You took it to mean you. As if I was talking about you when in fact I was talking about women as a gender group. Men don’t think that way. We as men are each separate and independent entities.
Then there are men that are completely indifferent to a woman turning it around.

When any woman says “Men are this or that.” I never apply it to me as an individual. Though we gether as groups dedicated to a common purpose, or an endeavor that we as individuals want to be part of, we individuate. That’s our wiring. We are always under pressure to perform in whatever we do as individuals.

Understand that you do not have this capacity. You are a group think gender. Pretending that you (you personally) aren’t is rather cute at times.

I liked the holocost museum. I still prefer the Air and Space museum. Especially the WWI biplanes like the spad 13 and the Fokker D7.
Now that was flying.

 

[Bible_Belt]

Why...lets discard all the people we personally deem useless.

Hurling Day!

 

[Music_czar]

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)
.

Keep in mind it always takes two to tango.. so even if you have a relationship these days where one person has a secure attachment style and ends up with someone who has an avoidant style.. well you can imagine how that turns out.

I think most guys who come here after a messed up relationship are mainly codependent types who were raised in a very good family background that encouraged them to “stick through thick and thin” when they got older as this is how their own parents were. Problem is, a lot of guys are ending up with millennial generation women who come from broken homes (ie daddy issue girls).

That would explain why a lot of men are left so confused when they first come here.. because they start off their relationships with an alpha or DGAF attitude and end up being torn to bits after a few years because their woman’s deeply entrenched psychological self defence mechanisms start to kick in.

So to have a marriage work out today you’d have to have two people come from a secure attachment style.. which is becoming increasingly rare these days due to the increase in divorce/broken families. And even if one partner is secure, they can be made insecure if they have been exposed to an avoidant style relationship for long enough.

 

[BeExcellent]

Agree with everything you said. This part in particular, it's not even just in one relationship but an accumulation of dating these types of ppl...I recall my core attachment style and when I trust a woman I fall back into that style but with most women I am just waiting for the other shoe to drop by pure attrition. It almost feels like I adopted BPD abandonment issues in adulthood, like it's contagious.

I used to believe that. I don't disagree really. But I think we can reach a point where we set aside our accumulated baggage and allow ourselves to take the inherent risk of loving someone, even though we might get hurt. At this juncture in my life it's an interesting experience and experiment. If we break up...I'll be fine...if we continue to grow together, the journey deepens. I actually sense a greater strength in myself to move on if things disintegrate than he exhibits. Kind of a paradox there really.

In my view part of the emotional maturation process.

And no I wasn't entirely referring to your post, Ranger, as insulting...and I don't think my content indicates that I have "gender groupthink". But I do find some of your language over broad. We disagree. No biggie.

The Air & Space Museum is wonderful. My father-in-law flew the F105 and successfully completed 2 tours in that ride. And the rocket and aircraft exhibits are amazing. I love the P51.

 

[Spaz]

You saw insult where there was none. I never said anyone was worthless.

It's only an insult if it's true.

If there's no basis to it then it's easily brushed aside.

Now if I were to call an extremely fat man as a fattie, and if he feels insulted it's because he's in denial, non-acceptance attitude and wanting his laziness to be overlooked.

However if the fat man were to see this as something other then an insult but as an incentive for him to do whatever he takes to reduce his weight for his own benefit then it is he who greatly benefits.

Different mindset produces different results.

 

[Spaz]

Sorry to be so contrary, BE, but It all sounds like bullsh!t to me, made up to sell books.

Other than not being molested - I had a pedo jr high teacher, but he liked rich boys - I had as fvcked up of a childhood as anyone, but I never went through adult life making excuses for myself because of it. Sure, one's upbringing influences who you are, but that is different than holding yourself to a lower standard because mommy didn't hug you enough. Such behavior is bothersome enough in women, but in males it is the antithesis of manliness. Personal responsibility and accountability is the answer, not whiny excuse-making. If you are unhappy with your relationships in life, or any other aspect of life for that matter, that is because you fvcked up and made mistakes. Everyone does; you learn and move on. But blaming it on your childhood is a cop out and a barrier to self growth.

Agree.

I'll expand on BB's post to generate some discussion.

Core values (childhood) + How you think (Knowledge) + How you do things = Behaviour/Frame/Results.


A man's core values (childhood) will have little to no impact when his knowledge increases (how he thinks) that will influence his behaviour (how he does things).

It is only when a man has little knowledge that his core values (childhood) has primacy over his behaviour (how he does things).

Does anyone dispute my assertion?

I will gladly debate this so we can come to a conclusion in this thread.

 

[Spaz]

Well I'm waiting for a good debate ...any takers?