I don’t quite get it. Is the problem that you miss being pursued by younger people?
All the good men are already taken, the ones who are still available are single for a reason.
If you’re still looking for good men at 35 you’re also single for a reason
Thanks.
I mean there’s plenty of reasons to be single at 35 that aren’t necessarily a knock against you as a potential partner. Long term partner cheated on you, long term partner died, long term partner grew apart, active duty in the military for 18 years, maybe the person threw themselves into work and was too focused on work to date or maybe they were caring for a declining family member and too busy to date, or maybe they were going through shit and they’re finally ready to date again after a lot of time healing and climbing out. You get the picture
Not necessarily. If she was an anxious attached style she’d be more likely to fall for avoidant men. She could either:
- Now recognize the red flags of avoidants and not subject herself to that.
- Be unaware of the red flags of avoidants and keep making the same mistake
- Recently left a long term relationship as an secure individual and discover how many avoidants really exist.
Of course you are right, she could be avoidant to, in which case hopefully she’ll learn sooner rather than later that fearing intimacy and vulnerability is detrimental, and that healthy codependency is actually a thing. But it’s not easy for them to do so.
I don’t like to think that everyone is incapable of finding someone, people just need to figure out why. Pointing out “single for a reason” seems counterproductive and a bit disrespectful.
I think “single for a reason” is what all that attachment theory shit is trying to help contextualize. It specifically sets the context as “single for a fixable reason” if you have the courage and humility to do the work.
Is living in the forest because I’m afraid of the federal government a “fixable” reason?
Sorry you’re so incurably single you’ve latched onto dating advice thats as accurate as horoscopes.
Like I hope it gets better for you but… yikes.
It’s not dating advice, it’s attachment theory.
So stop treating it like dating advice you weirdo.
Ok, I’m confused - can you quote the lines that werr dating advice? In no case was I advising anyone do anything, I was sharing the information I have learned on attachment theory. Providing possible insight. That’s not advice, that’s processing thought.
No. No it does not.
No kidding. I’m apparently the only person who has ever had an amicable divorce where we just realized we weren’t compatible and never felt the need to bash each other. The post-divorce crowd can be pretty dire. They should mandate a certain number of therapy sessions before you can sign up for a dating app.
what i don’t get is why people married people they knew were awful people, or awful for them.
anytime someone lies, cheats, or steals from me (or shows any disrespect, like verbal/physical abuse) i dump their ass.
My ex was a chill stoner with a good work ethic when we got together and we had many good years, then he lost job after job, stopped looking, got radicalized reading Stormfront, then eventually physically abusive. I could not convince him to seek help, since he got so paranoid.
People change, sometimes you change in opposing directions.
that isn’t change, that’s failure to take responsibility for yourself. which makes for a shitty person, and a shitty partner.
hence why most radicalized people are shitty human beings. de-radicalizing requires people to realize they are responsible for their choices, and that the world is not some external force oppressing them.
From what I’ve learned, it has a lot to do with attachment styles.
My ex is avoidant, with some pretty narcissistic traits (love bombing, then refusal to even hug because it’s too much).
I was/am anxious, or as the couples counselor told me “clingy.”
In our one-on-ones, she summarized up a book we had been assigned (which my ex didn’t read lol) that it was a statistic thing. 50% of people are secure style - they meet, and tend to stay together cause it just works. ~25% are anxious, and they do ok together and work fine with secure. ~25% are avoidant, and unfortunately, unless they work towards secure attachments, are pretty much always in and out of relationships. There’s a small amount of “disorganized” that has both insecure styles, but they tend towards secure over time.
The result is that the older you get, the dating pool shrinks. There will always been avoidant people available though. Secure style people are great at recognizing avoidant and typically don’t put up with their bullshit for long. Anxious attachment though end up with avoidants and it becomes a terrible thing, the anxious will do anything to stay, causing the avoidant to do things out of the relationship more.
If you could guess one common thing amongst avoidants that finally ends the relationship, what would it be? If you said cheating, you’d be completely right. It’s really hard to end amicably after that.
Incels are on the rise, both genders. Where do they fit in your 100%? We’re seeing the birth of hikkikomori culture.
If I had to guess based on my understanding of attachment theory, it could be the anxious attachment, the avoidant, or the disorganized (which has traits of both, and is rare). In any case it’s clearly the insecure attachment styles.
Based on the “incel” description itself though, I don’t think you have enough information to guess either. An individual hokkikomori is clearly more avoidant than anything though, as they don’t seek or hold relationships with others as valuable.
Holy shit go live your life. You’re not a cell on a spreadsheet about attachment theory.
Wait I’m confused - you asked where they fit in the 100%. I gave you my best guess.
What does that have to do with spreadsheets?
What do incels and Excel have in common?
They both wrongly assume somethings a date when it’s not!
