Are You Secure, Anxious, or Avoidant? Attachment Theory Explains It All.

Three years ago, my clients urged me to read “Attached” by Amir Levine and Rachel HellerThey said it changed their entire outlook and understanding of relationships.

I read it. They were right. In fact, attachment theory is enjoying a bit of a renaissance, having first been conceived and validated 50 years ago to explain human behavior based on your upbringing, and now being applied to things like, well…dating.

I was so blown away by the book that I rang the authors and asked if I could teach (with credit) their material in my Love U coaching course and I was delighted they said yes.

Attachment theory is relatively simple. Per a recent New York Times article, “By the end of our first year, we have stamped on our baby brains a pretty indelible template of how we think relationships work, based on how our parents or other primary caregivers treat us. From an evolutionary standpoint, this makes sense, because we need to figure out early on how to survive in our immediate environment.

“If you’re securely attached, that’s great, because you have the expectation that if you are distressed you will be able to turn to someone for help and feel you can be there for others,” said Miriam Steele, the co-director of the Center for Attachment Research at the New School for Social Research in New York.

Most of this imprinting stems from childhood and continues, unconsciously, to run your romantic life.

It’s not so great if you are one of the 40 percent to 50 percent of babies who, a meta-analysis of research indicates, are insecurely attached because their early experiences were suboptimal (their caregivers were distracted, overbearing, dismissive, unreliable, absent or perhaps threatening). “Then you have to earn your security,” Dr. Steele said, by later forming secure attachments that help you override your flawed internal working model.

In short, about half of children are considered secure and are able to form healthy, intimate bonds as adults. The other half – having experienced, say, verbally abusive mothers or absent alcoholic fathers – sees intimacy thru a different lens.

Anxious people crave love but are hypersensitive about minor relationship issues and are constantly insecure that their relationships are in jeopardy. This is exacerbated by the fact that they usually choose avoidant partners.

Avoidant people claim to want intimacy, but don’t act consistently. They run hot and cold. They fear losing their freedom. They find fault with others. They believe they are loving but have the inability to make their partners feel safe.

Most of this imprinting stems from childhood and continues, unconsciously, to run your romantic life. Secure people usually partner up in healthy marriages, while anxious and avoidant people are like magnets for each other, activating each others’ attachment styles. If you’ve ever seen a woman who is always freaking out about when her boyfriend last texted, she’s likely anxious. And if you’ve ever seen a man who fears commitment and acts consistently inconsistent, he’s likely avoidant.

Click here to read “Yes, it’s your parents fault,” from the New York Times.

Click here to get “Attached” by Amir Levine and Rachel Heller.

And please, in the comments section below, share what you think your attachment style is based on what you’ve read here today.

Join our conversation (86 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.

Comments:

  1. 1
    Stacy2

    I have read the book and done the tests presented in it, on myself and my partner(s). This is what i have to say about it. It’s a neat framework but that’s about it. I don’t think you can squarely put everyone in one of these three buckets, and the tests they have are in my experience inadequate.

    Personally, I read it when I was just coming out of a bad marriage and while in a rebound relationship. If you applied this book’s theory to my marriage, we’d be a classic avoidant/anxious couple (with me being avoidant). My ex would freely admit that he had abandonment issues and he’d freak out if i didn’t text him while on business trip, send me a barrage of angry texts, which in turn would cause me to freak out and want to pull away from him even more, and on and on we’d go blaming each other for “crazy” behavior. Pretty clear huh?

    Except… then I got in a rebound relationship and suddenly found the roles reversed. Now i was feeling anxious and freaked out at times, feeling like i never knew where i stood or where it was going, over analyzing texts and freaking out if he didn’t respond right away, etc. Having a very fresh memory of how my ex was coming off, i’d contain my impulses to act on these feelings, but of course that relationship also ended (and not so well). The kicker? The rebound guy tested as “secure” on the book’s test, but of course turned out o be anything but.

    The morale here is that pop psychology is what it is – pop psychology and should not be taken so seriously as to guide one’s life. A good read for sure, but completely inadequate as far as explaining the complexities of human relationships and feelings.

    1. 1.1
      KK

      “The kicker? The rebound guy tested as “secure” on the book’s test, but of course turned out o be anything but.”

      That’s because he probably was secure. If you went from an anxious type to a secure type and aren’t secure yet yourself, it makes sense you might turn into the anxious one.

      1. 1.1.1
        Stacy2

        Well, no it wouldn’t make sense if you believed the theory that this imprinting occurred in early childhood. Bigger picture I agree – i can feel secure, anxious or avoidant in relationships depending on the partner i am with. But this isn’t my innate quality. It’s a relationship dynamic. And once you get to this realization, it’s sort of a duh! statement – not much of a theory, right? Yeah some people can make you feel secure and some people can make you feel anxious. And than the latter can turn around and make somebody else feel secure. Just don’t stay with the ones who don’t make you feel secure,that’s my take on it.

    2. 1.2
      Marika

      Stacy2,

      I’m sorry to keep correcting you, but you often make statements about your opinions as if they’re facts, which are simply untrue. Attachment theory isn’t ‘pop psychology’. Put it into Google scholar. It has a long history in psychology and is backed by much empirical research. You can also be a combination of anxious – avoidant (perhaps the book didn’t explain that), which it sounds like you may be. If you read up on it more, you may find that resonating.

      If you don’t like it, that’s fine and a different story, but it’s definitely not pop psychology.

      1. 1.2.1
        AMT

        Thanks, Marika, I was just going to say something similar. Check out the work of John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth for the original studies. Sometimes this stuff does get over-simplified by the media, so it can be good to read the actual reports.

    3. 1.3
      Roxanne

      I feel the same way stacey. There were moments in the significant relationships where I was the one avoidant. I was the one anxious. and I was the one secure. First relationship I was secure he was anxious then I turned avoidant. 2nd relationship I was anxious all the way through. third relationship I was avoidant turned anxious. Last relationship I was secure and we hit a conflict about possibility of long distance and whether to stay together I turned avoidant then when he cheated turned anxious lol. So to me it was just all a hot mess lol. Now how we both reacted to circumstance and each other determine whether I was avoidant, anxious, secure in my opinion. Overall it doesn’t matter. I am currently just working on being secure from beginning to the end whether that end means happily together or broken up lol.

  2. 2
    Karl R

    I found this interesting (from the NY Times article linked above)…

    “It’s worth noting that just as people in the insecure categories can become more secure when they form close relationships with secure people, secure people can become less so if paired with people who are insecure.”

    That resonates strongly with my experiences. If I dated someone who acted inconsistently and I didn’t know where we stood from one day to the next, then I certainly felt anxious (even though I would resist acting on that feeling). If I dated someone who was constantly acting insecure about where things stood, I’d respond by running as fast as possible in the other direction.

    Whenever I was in a reasonably secure relationship, I felt relaxed and secure.

     

    Perhaps being secure/anxious/avoidant has less to do with how we feel and act, but more to do with what we’re willing to tolerate.

    1. 2.1
      KK

      Karl R,

      I second everything you said. 100%.

    2. 2.2
      ScottH

      I thought secure people were more inclined to stay secure.  They know their value and are not rattled by people who value them.  They are also very loyal and tend to stay in bad situations longer than they should.

      Secure people probably are willing to tolerate less bad behavior because their self-esteem and self-respect will not allow them to tolerate much crap.

      1. 2.2.1
        Evan Marc Katz

        Bingo, Scott. Secure people have a low tolerance for both anxious AND avoidant behavior. If you’re blinded by love, you can become anxious with the wrong partner, but you won’t accept it for long. Finally, the critics of the book (Stacy2) are not acknowledging that the authors explicitly state that your attachment style is malleable and prone to change, depending upon who you’re dating. From here, the most successful pairing is secure/secure. Everything else requires “work,” which I’m not a fan of when it comes to relationships.

        1. ScottH

          I love Attached and the whole theory.  This is from Levine/Heller’s Website.  I’ve noticed different positions on people changing their attachment style.  Some experts say that it is less plastic than Levine/Heller say.  I’m not sure what is right.

          “Can people’s attachment styles change? That is, can you really “change him or her”?

          The short answer is “yes”. The longer answer is—”But not necessarily when you most desperately want to.” People’s attachment styles change over time. Research shows that one in four people will change their attachment style over a four-year period. Change occurs mostly when you get into a relationship that really shakes your beliefs about love. If, for example, you expect people to let you down or reject you once they get to know “the real” you and you meet someone who’s supportive and loving no matter what—over time, you’ll probably become more secure. So, yes, if you’re secure and dating someone anxious or avoidant, you have a good chance of “changing” them.

          It’s much more tricky if you are anxious and want to change someone avoidant (or vice versa). What usually happens in these relationships is that you exacerbate each other’s tendencies. In this case, you’ll need to work together to get on track. It takes two for this particular tango so make sure your partner wants to change.”

          also:   “The book highlights the impact that attachment can have not just on our emotional well-being but our physical health. How can attachment impact us physically and why does it work this way?

          If you’re in a good relationship, you’ve really lucked out—not just emotionally, but also health-wise. That’s yet another reason to find the right match. People in good relationships have been found to live longer, healthier lives. If they get a cut, it heals faster; if they have high blood pressure, their blood pressure actually goes down in the presence of their partner. It works this way because we are connected to our partner on both a psychological and a physiological level. Our attachment circuitry (the wiring in our brain that ensures we remain connected to our loved ones) is linked to our autonomic nervous system—the system that governs our breathing, sleep, hunger, heart rate, blood pressure and other functions that are outside of our control. If we’re in a good relationship, we experience a calm security like no other. That’s why, in ATTACHED, we really try to drive the message home that “your wellbeing is his/her wellbeing.””

        2. Are you kidding me?

          So what does that (Everything else requires “work,” which I’m not a fan of when it comes to relationships.” mean for those of us who are anxious/avoident? Are you saying you’re only here for the 50% of the population that is secure? If so, please make that a disclaimer on your site.

        3. Evan Marc Katz

          No. It means I’m secure, I married secure, and strongly feel you should be secure and marry secure as well. No disclaimer or apology necessary.

        4. Karl R

          Are You Kidding Me asked (of Evan):

          “Are you saying you’re only here for the 50% of the population that is secure?”

          Evan gives a fair amount of advice for both Anxious and Avoidant people. It’s not labeled, but if you go through Evan’s archives, you can start to pick out which articles apply to people like that.

           

          (Click here) for an example of advice to an Avoidant person.

          (Click here) for an example of advice for Anxious people.

        5. ScottH

          Evan said “strongly feel you should be secure ”

          Isn’t that like saying that you strongly feel that someone should be more intelligent?  Yes, we can change our attachment style and probably can’t change our innate intelligence but changing attachment styles takes work and if we are not a secure, then it will take work, a LOT of work.  So for us, it’s either work, or no relationship but it should be the kind of work you want to do, not the gut wrenching hard labor put up with the crazy shit kind of work.  Or, like telling someone that they should lose weight to be more attractive to more people?  Losing weight takes work.  I think your position is a bit overstated.

      2. 2.2.2
        KK

        ScottH,

        I agree with you as well. But I think this statement is a little trickier:  “They know their value and are not rattled by people who value them”. In a relationship, that’s true, but not necessarily in the getting to know you phase. If someone comes on too strong or you’re not yet sure of your level of interest, you’re more than likely going to bolt. Not because you’re avoidant, but because of the whole IJNTIY thing. 

        1. Emily, the original

          KK,

          If someone comes on too strong or you’re not yet sure of your level of interest, you’re more than likely going to bolt. Not because you’re avoidant, but because of the whole IJNTIY thing.

          A lot of times the person who bolts will be labeled a commitphobe by the party who came on too strong. Funny how quickly that commitphobe will commit to the right person.

        2. Adrian

          Hi Emily,

          I was thinking the same thing!

          It reminds me of a story this woman at work was telling me a few weeks ago about how when she was 16 she acted very neurotic and clingy with her then 19 year old boyfriend. After one particularly crazy event/action by her; he dumped her.

          So for years she said that she and her friends all just told themselves that he was just a player and he just wanted to use her for sex and since she did not have sex with him he dumped her.

          Now at age 35 she was looking back on her teenage self with embarrassment and enlightenment. So concluded her story by saying that now she to would have quickly ran away from a relationship with someone like her teenage self.

          …   …   …

          The point of my story is that I am now wondering just how many people who have ambivalent/anxious or avoidant attachment styles in dating blamed the cause of their breakups and being single on the opposite sex being players, womanizers, crazy b*tches, commitment phoebes, emotionally unavailable, users, etc.

          Funny how it always seems to be the other person’s fault that the relationship failed and that all men or all women just__. So it is hard for them to find a good partner.

        3. Emily, the original

          Hi Adrian,

          Now at age 35 she was looking back on her teenage self with embarrassment and enlightenment.

          We all have one of those stories! Heck, maybe some of us weren’t even teenagers when we got too clingy with someone. We have young adult stories like that or middle-adged stories where we acted like morons! (Not you, though. You’re still a youngster.  🙂  )

        4. KK

          Emily,

          I remember Oprah Winfrey talking about some guy dumping her (when she was in her 20’s, I believe) and her begging him not to. As he drove off, she ran down the street after him, crying, trying to grab hold of his bumper. Lol. I doubt our silly stories can top that.

        5. Emily, the original

          KK,

          The 20s are just not a decade many of us ever want to remember! They were 50 Emilys ago!   🙂

    3. 2.3
      Stacy2

      To me, it seems like relationship chemistry is a lot like materials chemistry. You can mix an acid with an alkaline and get a harmless salt and water. But if you mix the same acid or the same aklaline with something else, you may get poisonous gas. Same with people. You can put to individuals together and receive a toxic relationship, but put them with other partners and it works differently. The people are the same. The pairing is different. It’s not about the individual as much as it is about the right pairing. YMMV.

    4. 2.4
      Roxanne

      “Perhaps being secure/anxious/avoidant has less to do with how we feel and act, but more to do with what we’re willing to tolerate.” karl I think it does have a lot to do with what we are willing to tolerate. but I do think it is revealed on how we act/respond which I believe is a reflection of what we are willing to tolerate.

  3. 3
    ScottH

    I love the Attached book and it answered the questions I’ve had for so long.  I often wondered why I had difficulty with certain situations while some of my friends did not.  They seemed to easily brush it off when people treated them badly yet I internalized it and suffered for far too long.  Attachment theory explains it very well.  I also think that secure and avoidant people tend to do better professionally and I observe that in my company (a very very large one so lots of samples to observe).  I can also see the attachment styles in my kids and see it as a reflection of parenting quality.  It seems that attachment styles tend to get passed down generationally.

    There’s another book that dovetails with Attached.  It’s by Jeb Kinnison- Bad Boyfriends, Using Attachment Theory to Avoid Mr/Mrs Wrong.  One of the most important things from that book is that in mid-life dating, there is a very disproportionately large number of avoidant people (as most of us have discovered empirically).  He shows a graph of the percentage of secures, anxious, and avoidants in the dating pool as a function of age.

    When in a difficult situation, I try to think to myself:  What Would a Secure Person do?  That tends to shift my thinking from my old reactive brain to my thinking brain.

    1. 3.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      That’s right, Scott. And a big part of my coaching philosophy is the same: “What would a confident woman do here? Do that!”

    2. 3.2
      Marika

      Thanks ScottH, that makes so much sense! I could never understand the phenomena of ghosting by people in their 30s and 40s with good jobs and kids etc. I thought it was only something immature kids would do. I may not be the most secure person who ever lived, but the concept of completely cutting someone off with no final message blew my mind. But with a high number of avoidant people in the dating pool, it’s no longer so surprising!

      1. 3.2.1
        KK

        People ghost when they’re not interested and want to avoid an uncomfortable conversation. I’m not defending it. I’m just saying there’s no way to infer they’re “avoidant” simply because they’ve chosen to avoid you instead of coming right out and saying they’re not interested.

        1. Marika

          Not sure about that, KK. To me that’s the very definition of avoidant, to the extreme. If you can’t send a simple text to say you’re not interested, that’s in no way secure behaviour.

          I should clarify, I’m not talking about people who drop out of chatting online, that happens, I’m talking about people who you’ve met, sometimes more than once, who disappear without a trace and stop responding to messages. I can’t imagine a person with a secure attachment doing that.

        2. KK

          Marika,

          I have a friend that just turned 50; divorced several years, and looking for a relationship. He’s a great guy. A while back, I had asked him how his (first) date with a new woman had gone. He said he wasn’t interested and implied he had ghosted her. So I told him that I thought that was kinda crappy. He then told me about the first woman he went out with after his divorce. On date three, she seemed a little distant so he asked what was wrong. She told him she had bailed her son out of jail earlier that day. Long story short, she had a grown son living with her that was in and out of jail, didn’t respect her, etc. He decided this was not someone he wanted to get involved with so he called her the next day and tried to explain why he didn’t think they were a good match. She cursed him, accused him of leading her on, etc. He said that after that experience, he decided he would no longer subject himself to the possibility of that happening again and if he’s only gone out with someone once or even a few times, he ghosts if he isnt interested. No remorse.

          I don’t necessarily agree with it 100% but I completely understand why he does what he does and where he’s coming from. There is nothing about this man that would make me describe him as an avoidant attachment type. He wants to “avoid” conflict with a practical stranger, yes, but that’s not the way he shows up in relationships. Two different things. Dates vs relationships.

    3. 3.3
      Adrian

      Hi Scott (or anyone willing to answer),

      I see a lot of material on explaining the attachment styles but have you found anything that teaches how to improve or change your attachment style?

      How to move from avoidant or anxious to secure?

      In all your reading have you found any helpful tip besides the repacked learning to love yourself. Not to downplay self-love but I am looking for actual steps I can take.

      1. 3.3.1
        ScottH

        Adrian- that is an excellent question and one that I’ve asked myself many times over the years.  In fact, I recently told a friend about something that happened between me and another person and asked her what a secure person would do because I didn’t know.

        But yours is a serious question and deserves a serious answer.  I believe the reason we are not secure is because we were raised by caretakers who did not adequately fulfill our needs when we needed them fulfilled.  Basically they were incompetent  caretakers (not bad people, they just didn’t know how to do it- and I’ll admit to being one of those caretakers with regard to my kids).  From the book, Getting to Commitment pp 55-56, “some people were very fortunate.  They have wonderful childhoods surrounded by loving caregivers and peers….when they think about the past, they don’t feel haunted.  Instead, they feel very supported by consistent memories of loving connections.  Many more of us, however, have backgrounds that include at least a few ghosts….”  It’s these ghosts and the lack of of loving memories that make us anxious or avoidant, IMO.

        I recently thought of an idea on how to shift from insecure to more secure.  The current method of treatment is to tell people how to recognize bad behavior and how they should respond.  This is basically what Evan and others do (and Evan does it quite well since he is obviously a secure person).  So we are all walking around with imprints in our minds from things that happened to us long ago that we might or might not be able to consciously recall.  The problem is that we have bad imprints and secure people have good imprints from memories of being loved.  So the question is, how do we get good imprints into our minds so as to shift our style to be more secure.  So my idea, and I think Evan could produce this as a product, is to SHOW people with video what secure people do when exposed to certain negative treatment from bad people.  I think that seeing it will be much more effective than telling people.  And if people watch these scenes over and over, the imprints will become more and more indelible in their minds.  It’s like grafting healthy memories into peoples’ minds.  We can re-program people to be more secure.  There are various ways that you can teach people- you can tell them, show them, or do it with them.  Telling them is the least effective way of teaching so let’s show them.

        The other thing that they suggest in the Attached book is to identify a friend who is secure (my secure friend is Dave) and when you are confronted with a situation, you ask yourself, what would Dave do, and do that.  I’ve done that and it’s not quite so effective (for me) because basically I’m an anxious wuss and knowing what Dave would do only makes me jealous that he’s secure and I’m not.  I once asked him about his childhood and if his memories were that of being loved and supported and the answer was “yes.”  My primary caregiver was deprived as a child and wasn’t effective at fulfilling my needs because she was preoccupied (still) with getting her needs fulfilled.

        I have also found it very helpful to understand how the mind works, specifically Freud’s id, ego, superego model.  I’ve been able to recognize when my id is in control and to try to control it and I’ve been able to recognize in my mind how the 3 parts of my mind negotiate with each other.  if you can do that you can see when your insecurities are being activated.  It’s pretty fascinating stuff.

        So that is my long winded amateur psychologist answer to your question.  Take it for what it’s worth.  Emphasis is on amateur but I do spend my work days figuring out how stuff works and how to fix things so thinking about how the human psyche works i find to be quite fascinating.

        Cheers.

        1. ScottH

          Oh, and one more thing.  I once read something about Freud’s work and one thing that really caught my attention was the statement that “there is causation for all human behavior” and that really makes sense to me.  The question is, what is the causation for your behavior?

          Oh, and another one more thing:  changing your style is changing who you are and that is so not easy.  You have to be really sick and tired of the status quo to make such a fundamental change.  Have you had enough of how you are?

          over and out….. for now.

        2. ScottH

          ok, yet another one more thing.  read this:  http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/steven-kalas/when-enough-enough-its-time-start-changing

        3. Lucie

          I really appreciated this reply. I am also wondering how I could become more secure. I am in a pretty “safe” relationship now, as it started off being pretty detached. Maybe why I am able to feel secure, as my love is something that grew, as opposed to something that hit me in the face like a pile of bricks. However, I was in some instances the very anxious or the very avoidant person. I would like to develop myself to naturally be more secure, or at least to be less reactive in situations where my anxious and avoidant parts come out. I really support your idea of “example” videos, as seeing and hearing the situations in motion is in my opinion a superior form of communicating the subtleties at play in human interaction than simply writing. I’m looking forward to reading and seeing more models of what it means to be like the truly secure people, so I can model :).

  4. 4
    GoWiththeFlow

    Let me start by answering Evan’s question at the end o the post:

    I read Attached and did the tests.  They said my attachment style was secure, BUT I did answer yes to many of the questions that indicate an anxious attachment style.

    While the checklists and descriptions of the attachment styles are very helpful, the real meat of the book deals with how this plays out in life.  That your attachment style can shift.  An anxious person in an LTR with someone who is secure can “learn by example” from their partner and become more secure.  On the flip side, is the example they have in the book of the research assistant who completely went bonkers-anxious when “triggered” by a relationship with an avoidant partner.

    I can see where this scenario played out in my past.  In particular I had one entanglement with a sociopath (people with personality disorders or mental illness are essentially avoidant attachers) and it triggered anxious behavior in me that in turn, made his behavior more avoidant.  It was a downward spiral, to the point where I felt miserable and was ashamed of how I was acting.  I didn’t recognize myself.  In the end, even though I felt powerless to stop the anxiety and negative emotions, the relationship ended when I made a very deliberate and unemotional decision to get off the crazy train.  Good bye, I wish you well, but please don’t contact me anymore and I won’t contact you.  About two months after that, I entered into what turned out to be one of the best, low drama relationships I ever had.  Since then I’ve had instances with relationships where I started to feel anxious or off center while my partner pulled away, but I got out before getting sucked down the vortex of crazy.  So I believe that while I can attach securely, I can slide into anxious behavior if certain things are triggered in me.

    When I read Attached, it was an expansion on parent-child attachment theory that I had first learned in college and med school, and then later on when going through the adoption process.  It is very helpful to understand the concepts and how they apply to you and how you interact with the world.  But sometimes, since we are talking about a process that happens in infancy (and likely starts in-utero) people can feel that it is what it is and that things are set in stone.  It’s important to keep in mind that we do have agency in life and if we make a conscious effort we can modify an attachment style and behavior that causes us distress or pain.

  5. 5
    Tron Swanson

    Thanks for bringing this up, Evan. It’s very interesting.

    I don’t have much experience with relationships or monogamy–if you added up all the time I’ve spent in relationships, well, it’d amount to maybe a year at the most–so I’d assume that I’m avoidant. On the other hand, I wasn’t the one that ended my relationships; I wanted to try to make them work.

    1. 5.1
      Adrian

      Hello Tron Swanson,

      Just so that you are clear.

      A person can have a avoidant attachment dating style and still want to make the relationship work.

      Remember fear of being alone is the reason why they are avoidant.

      All the attachment style indicates is how they handle their relationships not their willingness to have one.

  6. 6
    Diana

    I score highly as a “secure”… and my last couple of relationships clearly reflect that style. It hasn’t always been the case, though; in two (really uncomfortable) instances, I visited the far ends of the attachment continuum.

    After ending a long marriage, I found myself rebounding with a narcissist… who cheated multiple times. (Yes, *fantastic* combo… not.) My response–unsurprisingly–was to move toward the “anxious” end of the spectrum, which manifested not as clingy/needy, but rather, as unhappy/confrontational. (And yes, it took me far longer than it should have to realize not only that I could–but that I *should*–walk away.

    Months later–in the midst of a successful year of online dating–I found myself (briefly) dating a super-needy guy, whose behavior I can only describe as “neurotic”… which–you guessed it–pushed me to the opposite pole, all the way to “avoidant”. (Fortunately, I extricated myself very quickly from this one.)

    BOTH ends of the scale–“anxious” and “avoidant”–were incredibly uncomfortable to me. Now, having read “Attached” *after* both of those experiences, I’m certainly more keyed-in to what to look for and steer clear of, thank goodness. Definitely another tool in the toolbox. 🙂

  7. 7
    Marika

    KK

    Interesting. Obviously I don’t know your friend. I’m sure not everyone who’s ever ghosted in their lives is avoidant (everyone has a bad day). Let’s look at what you said, though. After one bad experience, your friend routinely ghosts with no remorse. Sounds pretty avoidant to me. He’s developed a very avoidant coping strategy to deal with something that tends to happen occasionally in dating, because of one difficult experience. Now he’d rather ghost than be polite (even though that initial experience indicates he is generally a polite person)…

    I had something similar happen to me when I started dating after my divorce. I’m sure many people have. What is it that separates us, who’ve been through that experience (which I agree is highly uncomfortable) but don’t ghost, and him? I’m saying an avoidant style is a strong possibility. Or else, as he’s not from the texting generation, he thinks you have to call.

    Do you really think people are one way in dating and a completely different way in relationships? I’m not sure about that. I think people can be very different with friends than in relationships, but I think a conflict avoidant person in dating is likely conflict avoidant in relationships. I could be wrong, though, of course.

    1. 7.1
      ScottH

      The amateur psychologist (AP) in me believes that whatever attachment style you are, you are that way in all of your life dealings- romantic relationships, friendships, workships, childrearing, random encounters with strangers.  It’s just the way your mind processes inputs.

      The AP in me also thinks that commitmentphobes ghost but not all who ghost are CP’s.  KK’s friend broke one of Evan’s golden rules- punishing someone for another’s sins.  If he got bitched out by someone, he should have hung up on her.  If the next person bitches him out, he should hang up on her too.  Maybe most women will react like the first one but a secure person will not be rattled by it.  A secure person will recognize that the offender is crazy and it has nothing to do with him.

      I think most people who read Evan are anxious, maybe with a few token avoidants and even fewer secures.  Secure people don’t read these kinds of blogs- they don’t need to.  I took the test and came in at secure and anxious.  I do some things that secure people do and I do some things that secure people would not do. A friend of mine thinks I’m avoidant.   I think the scales tip in the direction of anxious for me.  I also think it’s really hard to see yourself objectively.

      1. 7.1.1
        KK

        ScottH,

        “The amateur psychologist (AP) in me believes that whatever attachment style you are, you are that way in all of your life dealings- romantic relationships, friendships, workships, childrearing, random encounters with strangers.  It’s just the way your mind processes inputs”.

        Random encounters with strangers? Really? Do you treat everyone exactly the same? Let’s say you meet a friend out to watch a game. While there, you meet several new guys and you hit it off with one in particular, so you invite him to watch the next game at your place. Does that make you a bad guy because you didn’t invite everyone? Does that say anything about your attachment style? I don’t think it does. There’s nothing wrong with preference. That’s how we form all of our relationships, outside of family.

        There’s a little Vietnamese place my friends and I frequent. We always ask for a particular waitress. She’s very likeable. Always very sweet and engaging in addition to doing her job well, and in return we tip her generously. I don’t do that with everyone. I tip the standard 15 – 20% with everyone else, unless they do something above and beyond what would normally be expected.

        My point is, I don’t think we treat all strangers the same. I think we give some people preferential treatment. Likewise, you might choose to avoid someone who seems a little shady.

        1. ScottH

          KK- you miss my point (or I failed to articulate it accurately).  My point was that if you are Anxious, you approach all interactions as an anxious person.   I never said or meant to imply that you treat all people the same way.  How you actually react will depend on how your attachment style and theirs interact, how your attachment style processes their input to you.  I’ve seen people react in wildly different ways to the exact same input.

      2. 7.1.2
        Katie

        Yeah, I agree with your second paragraph about avoiding assumptions and mass generalizations 🙂

        I disagree that there are more anxious types here though. Speaking as a secure and happy” type I think most people here are more secure and happy too – But still looking to improve our understanding of men and relationships.

      3. 7.1.3
        Adrian

        Hi ScottH,

        I actually laughed out loud when you said,

        I think most people who read Evan are anxious, maybe with a few token avoidants and even fewer secures.  Secure people don’t read these kinds of blogs- they don’t need to.

        Of course I disagree about the part that assumes that secure people don’t NEED to read these kinds of blogs.

        But what made me laugh was the fact that you stated that “most” of Evan’s readers are anxious or avoidant, because when I read the comments mostly everyone stated that they are secure.

        Ha! It reminds me of the conversation on the post a few weeks ago when Stacy mentioned how strange it was that it seemed that almost all commenters look (according to themselves) 10 years younger, or make over $100,000, or though they are single everyone apparently always have a line wrapped around the corner of the opposite sex trying to date them, and of course how no one that comments is lower than a 7 in looks (according to their own self reporting).

        I think we are just blessed on this site to only attract commenters who are in the top 5% of everything including attachment styles (^_^).

        …   …   …

        But in all honesty I still really love our little community of regular commenters here, 99% of the time when they say something about themselves I believe it… except for maybe one commenter who stories range from the outlandishly mean and divisive to the heart-breakingly vunerable.

        But that’s our little family here and it wouldn’t be the same without all their different personalities.

        1. ScottH

          Adrian- yes, people tend to be extremely revisionistic/liberal/generous when assessing themselves.   I remember reading somewhere that 25% of the population thought they were in the top 5% of some particular category.  That was hilarious.  (Of course only 5% of the population can be in the top 5% of something.)

          Evan has said it before that happily married people don’t read blogs about relationships.  They don’t need to.  Of course some will as there is always a statistical distribution, but most don’t.

          And I really do look 10 years younger than my age.  I swear it!!!  Just don’t ask my kids.

      4. 7.1.4
        Karl R

        ScottH said:

        “I think most people who read Evan are anxious, maybe with a few token avoidants and even fewer secures.  Secure people don’t read these kinds of blogs- they don’t need to.”

        There’s still a lot of excellent information here for Secure people.

        One of the things I found very useful was getting women’s perspective. Three that come to mind were Selena, A-L and one of the Helens (the one who had been married for 20+ years). They sounded like the kind of women I wanted to date. Therefore, their posts were like being able to read some of the thoughts of my potential dates.

         

        Even for Secure people, this website serves as a substitute for experience. I’ve been exposed to ideas, information and experiences that I wouldn’t have otherwise collected on my path to getting married.

        Even better, this website provided a sounding board for “What is normal?” My experiences provided too small of a sample size. What is a normal length of time between getting a woman’s phone number and calling her for a date? What is a normal response rate online? What’s a reasonable length of time to give a relationship to see if it’s going to work out? Is ghosting normal?

         

        On the other hand, some of the biggest insights pertain to helping Anxious people act more Secure (like Mirroring).

         

        Secure / Anxious / Avoidant Demographics:

        Most people who visit the website and read the blog never post. That makes it nearly impossible to tell what they’re like.

        I’m not sure if Anxious people represent the bulk of the readers. There certainly have been some memorable threads revolving around Anxious types. (Also memorable responses as Evan and other readers pulled out their clue-by-fours.)

         

    2. 7.2
      KK

      Marika,

      I get it. It’s rude. I just think there’s a huge leap between, “Eh, I’d really rather not deal with telling this person I’m not interested”, and labeling a stranger as having an avoidant attachment style, because it makes you (generic you) feel better about being rejected.

      And, yes, there is a difference between a handful of dates and a relationship. You can’t have an “attachment style” with someone you’re not attached to.

      1. 7.2.1
        Tom10

        @ KK
        “I get it. It’s rude [ghosting]. I just think there’s a huge leap between, “Eh, I’d really rather not deal with telling this person I’m not interested”, and labeling a stranger as having an avoidant attachment style, because it makes you (generic you) feel better about being rejected”.
         
        Apart from being rude it also avoids having to tell the person you’re ghosting their flaws so as not to hurt their feelings.
         
        I mean, how do you tell someone that the reason you don’t want to see them anymore is because they’re not pretty enough/too boring/no good at sex/too miserly etc?
         
        Of course, you could tell a white lie to save their feelings, but is that not as morally dubious as ghosting itself?
         
        Ultimately, whether it’s rude or not doesn’t really matter as every individual will have different opinion on what constitutes rude behavior. What matters is learning how to cultivate justified expectations (i.e. just because you’ve been on a few dates doesn’t mean much and/or that you’re owed an explanation really).
         
        All that said, I’m a definite avoidant, therefore someone would be correct to label me as such if/when I ghost them! Lol.

        1. Callie

          Why do you have to tell them why? There is totally no reason to do that. In fact there might not even be a “why”. Not wanting to continue dating someone for any reason is reason enough. Even if the reason is as silly as “It’s Wednesday”.

          A brief, “It was lovely spending time with you, but I don’t think this is going to work out, I’m sorry” is all that’s needed. If the person rants or raves or deserves an explanation then sure, ignore from that point on.

        2. Callie

          Sorry that should be “thinks they deserve an explanation”.

        3. Buck25

          Tom, I don’t know on the ghosting issue. To me, it depends on the circumstances, and to some extent on the woman involved. If it’s after one or two dates, I have no problem just not calling back. I have no problem with a woman doing it to me under like circumstances. Usually it’s fairly obvious you just didn’t really click anyway. The alternative is a simple text along the lines of “enjoyed meeting and talking with you, but don’t think we’re the best match for each other; best of luck in your search”. Whether that’s better or not is in the eye of the beholder, I think.

          The end of something more than that, especially if it’s been exclusive, is another matter, and there, I think it needs to be done in person, even if it’s about as much fun as a root canal (as it usually is). I think about the only exception is if you’re dealing with someone really batshit crazy, and even then I think it needs to be done in a phone call. Breaking up with a text message, like ghosting at that point,  just feels a little gutless to me. I mean, come one, we’re not adolescents, are we?

        4. Tom10

          @ Callie and Shaukat.

           

          Point taken, thanks. For some reason I’ve always assumed that if I sent that message someone would automatically reply with “why?”. Which would then lead to either the painful truth or a white lie. Maybe I need to give people more credit and assume they’ll be just fine.

        5. ScottH

          A breakup conversation is a much more humane way of ending things, even if it’s over the phone.  A few months back, I was given an explanation of why she broke up with me and I came to realize that it was more about her than about my flaws.  I thought to myself, “she threw me away for those petty reasons?!?!  Thank god she spared me.”

          OTOH, after a 4 month relationship, a gf tried to breakup over text and then she gave me ridiculous reasons when I called and never really gave me closure.  I know that we’re not supposed to need reasons why they broke up with us but it sure does help with moving on.

          Ghosting and breakup by texting after getting to know someone is simply for the cowards, in my humble anxious opinion.

        6. KK

          ScottH,

          “A few months back, I was given an explanation of why she broke up with me and I came to realize that it was more about her than about my flaws.  I thought to myself, “she threw me away for those petty reasons?!?!  Thank god she spared me.”

          This explains beautifully why no matter how or what you say, it won’t be taken well by the one being rejected. I doubt you had warm, fuzzy feelings towards her for being honest with you. So you complain about people who ghost, you complain about people who give you an explanation, you complain about people who let you know via text vs phone or in person. Got it. Rejection sucks for everyone. I think that we kid ourselves when we say it would’ve been so much better if they had only done xyz. No, it wouldn’t. The end result is the same.

        7. Emily, the original

          Tom10,

          All that said, I’m a definite avoidant, therefore someone would be correct to label me as such if/when I ghost them! Lol.

          I’m an avoidant, too, but I don’t ghost people. If someone reaches out to me, even after one date, it takes almost no effort on my part to send a quick text.

        8. Tom10

          @ Emily, the original
          I’m an avoidant, too, but I don’t ghost people. If someone reaches out to me, even after one date, it takes almost no effort on my part to send a quick text.
           
          Well actually if a woman reaches out after a date I will reply to her.
           
          At that stage in the dating process though (for me) it’s usually the guy doing the asking out/pursuing. In which case, I simply don’t ask her out her again. That’s reasonable though Emily isn’t it?
           
          Texting her to tell her I won’t ask her for a second date seems ludicrous! Lol. 

        9. Evan Marc Katz

          I think it’s good practice, young Tom, to let someone know that you’re not going to see them again. “Hey, it was nice meeting you. Didn’t feel the connection necessary to pursue a relationship, but you seem like a great catch and I’m sure you’re going to make some guy really happy one day. Best of luck in your search.” It’s classy and any woman who gets angry that you did that? Well, it says a lot more about her than it does about you. Always be the bigger and better person. Don’t be the guy who ghosts and then gets surprised that women think the worst of men.

        10. Emily, the original

          Tom10,

          At that stage in the dating process though (for me) it’s usually the guy doing the asking out/pursuing. In which case, I simply don’t ask her out her again. That’s reasonable though Emily isn’t it?

          Yes

          Texting her to tell her I won’t ask her for a second date seems ludicrous! Lol.

          Agreed. But if you’ve gone out several times, then, yes, whether or not she reaches out to you, a quick text as Evan suggested is the right thing to do. There is, after all, a human being on the other side of the dating aisle.

        11. Tom10

          @ Evan
          “I think it’s good practice, young Tom, to let someone know that you’re not going to see them again”
           
          After one date Evan?
           
          But what if she doesn’t want to see me again either? It’s almost asking for her to reply with “get over yourself, I didn’t want to see you either!”
           
           
          That just seems very presumptuous to me…

        12. Evan Marc Katz

          What can I say? I always presumed I was getting a second date – and think it’s better yo be polite. It’s not mandatory. It’s not common. That’s why it has value.

        13. GoWiththeFlow

          I agree with Evan, it’s a classy thing to do to send a quick text.  I’ve received a few of these the last 6 months, and it allows you to turn the page and move on and not wonder whether he will call or not.

          During this same time period (while I was in Love U) I also committed myself to letting a man know if I had decided I didn’t want to pursue anything.  I received one somewhat odd response back, but other than that, it’s been polite.

          If you live in a small community or have a social network where you cross paths with people you have gone out with, or people you may want to date cross paths with your former dates, showing a simple courtesy like texting a brief “thank you but not feeling the connection” message may get you a recommendation.  I know that I have passed contact info of past dates to single women friends of mine when I think they will be a good match and my interaction with the man was positive.  The more people that have a good impression of us the better!

        14. CaliforniaGirl

          I was once on a three great dates with a guy, multiple phone and text conversations in between, after the last date and after making out in a car, he asked me to text him when I get home, it was late and he asked me to do the same after two previous dates. He never replied and never contacted me again. It was painful and unexpected. A simple text back that he is not interested anymore would be so much better. I did it few times and every time guys were pleasantly surprised and received it great and wished me good luck too.

  8. 8
    Shaukat

    I mean, how do you tell someone that the reason you don’t want to see them anymore is because they’re not pretty enough/too boring/no good at sex/too miserly etc?

    Tom, there’s no need to go into that kind of intimate detail. All one has to do is send a short text (if they’re contacted by the person again) stating something along the lines of, ‘I had a nice time, but I just didn’t feel much of a spark/connection/chemistry,’ etc. That conveys how you honestly feel while avoiding the messy specifics. I’ve received messages like that while dating and I can tell you that I always appreciate them and prefer it to being ghosted. Of course, I’ve ghosted dates myself so I’m certainly not judging people who do so, nor am I jumping to the conclusion that people who ghost are avoidant. We don’t know enough about a person  after 1 ,2 or even 3 dates to draw that conclusion. I also agree with you that it’s important to remain detached and internalize the belief that no one is owed anything in the initial stages.

  9. 9
    Marika

    ScottH et al

    Thank you Scott! I was beginning to think it was a cultural thing – wow these guys are all pretty relaxed about ghosting..

    Look, if you have a bad or so-so first date and no one contacts anyone after it, different story (mutual ghosting?😀). But please, someone explain to me how a secure, well-adjusted person gets a message after a date from someone who’s clearly interested, and happily justifies not responding because they want to avoid a potentially awkward discussion? Particularly if they do it routinely. Again, maybe it’s a cultural thing, but that to me goes beyond normal “no-expectations first few dates behaviour”. That seems clinically avoidant (to me).

    1. 9.1
      KK

      Marika,

      “But please, someone explain to me how a secure, well-adjusted person gets a message after a date from someone who’s clearly interested, and happily justifies not responding because they want to avoid a potentially awkward discussion?”

      Have you ever had a really awful date? Maybe he got so drunk he could barely walk. Maybe you felt like the cat in Pepé La Pue. Do you really OWE him an explanation? Not in my book. If he’s that clueless, no explanation is going to help him and it’s certainly not my job to do so. Next…

      1. 9.1.1
        Marika

        Of course I’ve had bad dates..

        No explanation needed. A quick, polite, one liner to say thanks but no thanks (not in so many words).

        A person can be rude or inappropriate on a date. That’s their choice. That doesn’t justify you being rude back by completely ignoring the person if they try to contact you. Sorry, but in the age of texting, this is a no-brainer.

        Stop putting bad dating karma out there and justifying it you avoiders!! (kidding, sort of ;))

    2. 9.2
      Tom10

      @ Marika #9
      “But please, someone explain to me how a secure, well-adjusted person gets a message after a date from someone who’s clearly interested, and happily justifies not responding because they want to avoid a potentially awkward discussion?”
       
      I think it comes back to justified expectations. You seem to think that after a few dates you’re in some sort of a relationship and therefore owed an explanation. Why?
       
      In my book neither party owes the other anything until they’re, um, in a relationship. Therefore, the onus is on you to ensure you’re not reading more into the situation than there actually is. That way you’ll move on with a smile when the other person ghosts.
       
      After someone gets burned a few times at this point they usually learn.

      1. 9.2.1
        Marika

        Thank you Tom10 as a self-proclaimed definite avoidant, I think you’ve confirmed what I said from the start.

        1. Tom10

          @ Marika
           
          Touché 🙁
           
           
          (although KK made the same point, and she’s secure). 

      2. 9.2.2
        Callie

        I don’t owe the cashier a smile as they ring up my groceries. I don’t owe the person behind me to hold the door open for them. I don’t owe the person who dropped their glove to pick it up and return it to them. But I do it because it’s a nice thing to do and acknowledges that other people are human.

        No you aren’t in a relationship with someone, but presumably by the time you get to a first date you’ve spoken a few words, found something you liked about each other and decided to give it a go. Likely you are a little bit excited about the prospect. You’ve invested at least some energy in the other person. Why not be kind and send a line if it just isn’t working for you just so they understand you respect them enough to tell them the truth and don’t want to waste their time? Why not just let them off the hook from wondering if they should get in touch or not, if you are playing games or not etc? Obviously you are under no obligation, but again, it’s a nice thing to do.

        (obviously if the other person WAS a horrible person at the date, or toxic, or in any way makes you feel unsafe, you needn’t send such a message. But for the majority of people, I guess I just don’t see what’s so bad about being a little kind?)

  10. 10
    Karl R

    Tom10 said:

    “In my book neither party owes the other anything until they’re, um, in a relationship.”

    I wouldn’t say that the courtesy is “owed”, but it’s still a courtesy, even if it’s not yet a relationship.

    Back in 2008 a woman ghosted on me at the six week point. It wasn’t a committed relationship (though I initially thought it had some potential to become one). After three days without a reply, I assumed that things were over. After five days, I was certain. However, I held off on dating until the two week mark, because I’d feel a bit like a cad if it turned out that she was in a coma somewhere. (By the end of the first week, that would have been about the only excuse I would have found acceptable.)

     

    I don’t think I was “owed” a terrific explanation. I would have preferred that my time wasn’t wasted.

    1. 10.1
      Tom10

      @ Karl R #10
      “Back in 2008 a woman ghosted on me at the six week point. It wasn’t a committed relationship”
       
      Well dating for six weeks is quite different to “a so-so first date” (Marika #9).
       
      I suppose it comes down to a what point is it courteous to proffer/expect an explanation.
      This point will vary with each individual.
       
      Therefore, is the most *effective* strategy to keep one’s options open, assuming no expectations, until commitment is declared?

  11. 11
    Marika

    Just quietly, peeps, American dating culture sounds brutal

    Tom10, you misread what I said about a so-so first date…I mentioned that at that point I would understand if both parties ‘mutually ghosted’. But if people are routinely having multiple dates with people, kissing them, romancing them etc., and thinking it’s the other person’s problem if they expect the common courtesy of a 2 line text if they don’t want to continue to date them rather than radio silence, well that’s pretty sad (IMHO).

    Clearly any of you who think this is fine won’t be convinced (I tried!), but I’m a strong believer in what goes around comes around, so hopefully this lack of courtesy doesn’t come back to bite you.

    1. 11.1
      Tom10

      @ Marika # 11
      “hopefully this lack of courtesy doesn’t come back to bite you.”
       
      It already has…many times lol. 🙁
       
      But I don’t interpret it as a lack of courtesy so I don’t get upset when I get “bitten”; I just roll with the punches 😉

    2. 11.2
      DinaStrange

      Reading this, i came to a conclusion that we are all slightly insane. However, before we had such things as morals and selfless behavior. Now everybody wants an easy way, and this applies to both men and women.

       

       

      Marika, american dating culture IS brutal. Similar to corporate world, the psychopaths thrive and honest and decent people get the short end of the stick. How not to go insane – nobody knows. A lot of people come from damaged or broken homes…not having good examples of happy, healthy relationships (guilty myself) so they have no idea how and what is a good relationship. So they try their best and fail. I don’t know what’s the salvation, but i guess its within. But its a very hard salvation, it requires walking away the minute you feel uncomfortable and not giving another chance.

      1. 11.2.1
        henriette

        Where is dating culture NOT brutal?  I live in Canada now, but have spent much of my adult life in Europe and the USA; I’ve found it brutal, everywhere.

  12. 12
    citizenElle

    #TeamAvoidant

    I wonder if there are more avoidant males than females or if it’s a more even split. Thank you for the article. Interesting read.

  13. 13
    Mariette

    I’ve been diagnosed with fearful attachment (it’s not mentioned above but is covered widely on the net) and had therapy to help me with it. Evan’s website etc also helps as it focuses on raising your self esteem in addition to resolving relationship problems.  I echo what he says, we can all learn to be secure,  but you have to be committed to changing.  It’s certainly not easy but is achievable even if takes years to do so.

  14. 14
    Noquay

    My upbringing was pretty awful and, as a young woman I realized this and read everything I could on damaged families, abused children so I could heal and never, ever, follow in the family footsteps. I would say I run somewhere between avoidant and secure as to attachment style. I have had few true relationships yet they were quality and of long duration. Yep, there have been crap first dates, attempts at forming rship s that didn’t work out; everyone has these. Regardless of our attachment style, if someone treats us in a way we find unfathomable because we’ve never encountered the behavior before,we will tend to be somewhat anxious or avoidant but only towards that person. There was a comment early on about a rebounder and a person enabling  her troubled son. Those things will elicit strange or avoidant behaviors from us because we either haven’t encountered those behaviors before or we find them alarming and don’t know how to deal with them. Reading blogs such as this one helps us learn how to recognize and deal with baffling behaviors we have yet to encounter.  I too, to my regret, have ghosted. In both cases, it was very early on, after one date/no dates because the individuals involved raised a ton of red flags, had poor boundaries, highly chaotic, immature, and irresponsible lifestyles. Both demanded explanations, knew where I lived /worked and tried to stalk me. Again, not proud of ghosting  yet didn’t know what else to do at the time.

  15. 15
    EenieMeeniee

    I’m anxious attached and my recent ex of 2 years was avoidant. You can guess how that turned out. Months later and I am still healing. I found the book very helpful.

  16. 16
    Leis

    I’m coming in a bit late but I’ve just downloaded attached to listen to on my way to work. I’m only a couple of chapters in but am not sure this book applies to me even though the attachment styles make a lot of sense.

    I’m wondering if I’m anxious and avoidant, I can only ever really fall for men who are avoidant/unavailable themselves which suggests to me that I am trying to avoid real intimacy. Sure I get incredibly anxious in these relationships but with a normal, secure guy I’m just bored.  This is what I need to overcome!

    1. 16.1
      ScottH

      How can you say that you’re not sure it applies to you.  Based on your second pp, it sure seems to explain your behavior.  Not to mention that attachment theory applies to EVERYONE.

    2. 16.2
      Emily, the original

      Leis,

      Sure I get incredibly anxious in these relationships but with a normal, secure guy I’m just bored.

      How can you tell if the guy is secure? It’s easy to tell an anxious man (he besieges you with attention and communication) and an avoidant man (he doles out crumbs and things never really go anywhere unless you do all the work). But what does a secure man do differently?

    1. 17.1
      Emily, the original

      Hi ScottH,

      I read the article you posted. The main point I took away was how very different a long-term relationship is in terms of what it provides versus a short-term one.

  17. 18
    Kayleen

    Absolutely makes sense. I have been operating in the Anxious mind set for the majority of my life.

     

    I am ready to create a new story and new beliefs about being Secure and Loved!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *