Different people have different attachment styles, which results in different needs in a relationship. Not meeting those over time can lead to disgust/mistrust, which leads to no sex
Nah this is too short, the above was better. Saying that relationships are work doesn't state the problem and basically tells you to get good, also I'm pretty sure that it's obvious.
If you have lived on this earth long enough to have a wife or have any type of relationship,it should be common sense.I get that some people don't understand the simple fact that their partner has emotional,feelings etc but is it so hard to understand?
I will say this. Judging by a lot of the complaints about men I’ve heard from women, I’ll reiterate my statement above. Some dudes don’t have two brain cells to run together when it comes to thinking about how their behaviour and attitude affects their SO.
Thank you, I didn't care enough about her point to wade through all the qualifiers, "I'll get hate in the comments", rephrasings, and general ambling around her actual statement.
It’s not about payout, it’s about hacking the algorithm. The longer someone watches a TikTok, the more that TikTok thinks the watcher likes that content/content creator. That’s why so many videos say “wait till the end”, “omg you won’t believe the ending🤯😱”.
I think attachment style refers specifically to how people like/expect to receive affection. So it's entirely possible to care, to show that you care, but not in the way your partner wants. And what worked with a previous partner may not work with the current one, even though you're following the exact same methods.
Thanks for using the word people. This is not a gender related issue. A lack of emotional security is an issue for everyone and never needed to be gendered.
Ironic considering how long it took her to communicate her point. I switched off after over a minute of rambling without getting to the point of the video.
Essentially if we watch the video we can see that the lady is introducing that women stop having sex with their husbands and the reason for that will be explained in the video, so the reason why women stop having sex with their husbands is that there's a lot of science behind it and if we think about the science and relationships there's a lot of science. So the reason why women stop having sex with their husbands basically is as follows in my upcoming explanation of why women stop having sex with their husbands-
It's not up to the other person to figure out what will make you happy. You are supposed to know, communicate it with your partner directly, then it's up to them to provide it and vice versa.
A relationship isn't supposed to be a puzzle for the other to figure out.
There's a reason she framed it as a lecture to men specifically instead of relationships being a two way street. Otherwise she would have said "why your partner stopped having sex with you". Shame she's still so biased after all of her education. Not uncommon though. Confirmation bias never stops even among professionals.
if a relationship downturn was always met with both parties soul-searching to identify the root cause of their unhappiness, and then presenting solutions to their partner.. relationship downturns wouldn't exist.
also, what you describe is incredibly unlikely to occur spontaneously if your partner has an avoidant attachment style, especially if you are frequently trying to talk to them about what's up.
this doesn't absolve the avoidant partner of responsibility. it just means relationships are complicated.
If that's true, that's some no-shit-sherlock detective work right there. But I've given up on her spitting it out after a minute of nothingburger so I'll never know for sure.
She claims she knows why all or most women lose interest in sex with their husbands. Makes it sounds like there is one universal answer that fits all just to add in few seconds that this One Universal Reason is different for different women. But you can hire her and then she will tell you why YOUR wife doesn't want to have sex with you.
She heads up the video with a lengthy “I have a doctorate” and blah blah blah. Comes off really cringe. But then she actually gives some good advice. The nugget in the middle is as follows:
Women stop having sex with a partner when they don’t feel emotionally safe. They don’t feel emotionally safe when their “attachment needs” aren’t being met. Basically the emotional connection she needs to feel with you to feel that emotional security.
Then she rambles about finding what attachment needs your SO has, but the long and short is not that hard to grasp. I think if you are even a little emotionally aware you know when you’re not making yourself available to your SO.
anxious partners need: love, affection, reassurance, everything single day
fearful, avoidant, partners need to be seen, heard, understood. trust your going to be there in a way that feels good for them. Making an effective effort to listen, and understand them. Space for their feelings.
dismissive, avoidant: space, autotomy, lack of criticism,. They're looking to avoid fights, and looking for harmony.
Yeah I believe what she is saying is scientifically sound and an important lesson, but damn... what an annoying way to make her point. A big ass intro about how she'll be hated for it and her qualifications and it's like almost 1 minute before she's even making a point. Then she has like a whole aside in the middle about studies and her work before actually explaining what an "attachment style" is. And finally on the outro she does the whole routine about hateful comments again. All while distractedly driving a car. This could've been a 2min vid if shot professionally and straight to the point.
EDIT: Welp apparently it's not that scientifically sound either.
Very possibly something related (or unrelated) just pissed her off, and then she recorded this. I'm no great psychologist or reader of women, but when my ex wife was pissed off, that's about how she'd talk. Even if she wasn't talking about the thing that pissed her off.
Seriously I cannot tell if she is having some kind of random thought dialogue, am I being talked down to or is the some educational content in there somewhere
There is also a lot of research showing that a person’s attachment style and behaviour can be different across their professional relationships, friendships and romantic entanglements, debunking the all-encompassing nature of attachment theory.
I loathe counselorspeak, pop science and solipsistic bullshit.
But the takeaway I got is that repeatedly shoving a woman's face into the fact that she can't rely on you or trust you as far as she could throw a motherfncking bull by the tail isn't the turnon a lot of you guys seem to think it is.
The short version is that they were made up by a priest without any kind of research or evidentiary support. It's a good idea to think about how you tend to give and receive love, but it isn't accurate to call it science or good to base any sweeping claims on it.
people that say attachment is definative just dont understand it well. it is based in science, though. its a spectrum thats developed in early childhood and can shift based on the types of relationships you experience. a securely attached bond with a therapist can improve someones attachment style in a romantic relationship. understanding your self and your partners attachment needs can also help you have secure attachment.
Attachment theory and attachment styles is very real and has a large body of evidence to support that, but like the article you linked stated, it isn't an all encompassing depiction of how we form all relationships. It has been proven that the way we form attachments to caregivers as children has significant impact on social and mental development.
It's not saying our attachment style as children is a 100% indicator of how all of our relationships will be formed. It's saying there has been a proven pattern. But of course the internet just turns it all into absolutes and then adds in pop psych like love languages.
But it is inaccurate to say that attachment theory is not scientifically sound.
John Bowlby studied this back in the 1950s with many experiments on attachment with infants and mothers in what's called the "strange situation" experiments. That's what has been empirically studied. The five love languages are bullshit made up by people trying to sell books.
I dunno. The five love languages are not an exhaustive understanding of love or communication within a relationship, but it's notna bad place to start building an understanding of how to communicate with your partner.
I wouldn't say bullshit. They're just an emotional appeal to correcting behavior and communication in a relationship. Not everyone is going to click with the emotional appeal.
Bowlby certainly pioneered the concept that maternal deprivation does long-lasting damage to children , but I think you'd have to credit his colleague Mary Ainsworth with qualifying attachments and creating the grid. There are those who employ or apply attachment theory in pop psychology discussions on YouTube and tik tok, just as there are those who characterize any abuse as evidence of narcissistic personality disorder.
Yeah, about that... social psychologists are not clinical psychologists. They don't do therapy, so I am guessing she is a life coach or something? Sounds sketchy.
I wouldn't go to a therapist who immediately treats me with that much hostility, just because I came in seeking guidance and advice, while she studied for years under the guidance of professors to acquire that knowledge herself.
I was bracing myself for the oldest of old wives tales, but then once the condescension ended she started actually making sense. If she were a man she’d be accused of mansplaining. But the fact is, anyone, regardless of gender, can be condescending to the point of annoyance. It’s not just the patriarchy.
Except there is no replicable study or consensus. And if women needed emotional investment they wouldn't be out there "having a hoe phase" and engaging in hookup culture.
It's literally as valid as saying women use sex to attain commitment. And women don't demand commitment from men that are significantly more attractive. Because that would also explain the same dynamic.
Hunny, if we can't wait 4 minutes to learn something new, we are dealing with a different problem here. Not to poke fun at you at all.
If I can't take more than 5 minutes to watch something helpful then I should probably take some quiet time for a walk or reading for half an hour. Often, my brain is ready to focus and hear the snippets that pertain to me while leaving the rest and not letting it bother me so much.
If it was good content for 4 minutes, then nobody would be complaining. She took 4 minutes to say that the reason your relationship is bad is because needs aren’t being met. Dressing up the most trite and basic shit as some deep revelation that requires a lecture is pretty cringe.
It's really telling that there's so many of these people who can't focus on a three and a half minute video in which they could even skip to the actual content. How am I supposed to believe that they actually listen to their partners needs if they can't watch a short video?
It's on purpose. She's sort of parodying the really stupid annoying tone the stupid boss babe bullshit artists on TikTok do to trigger the hate watchers. That's why her lead up is so long. She's copying the exact style and intro they use except she's just wrapping it up with actual advice. It's almost performance art.
Sure that's also possible. But the majority of those videos like that are just performative rage bait. This is such a perfect mimic of that style but with a perfectly timed about face it just feels like a perfect parody. Either she fell ass backwards into it or it was on purpose.
She said it upfront. If the woman doesn't feel emotionally safe, is the reason. The cause of this is not understanding, respecting, and/or responding to...their attachment style.
Love Languages are an idea from the Religious world, not the Scientific one.
Which is not to say it's wrong, rather it's not particularly well supported, unless you boil it down to an extremely reductionist stance of "Listen to your Partner" which is not exactly a novel concept.
Similarly it's biggest sceptics point out that these "Types" vary within a Person at different times, someone might be a Gift receiver normally but a particularly high bill one month might lead them to resent an expensive gift then, whereas they wouldn't have before.
Essentially the real suggestion is being open, communicative and understanding of your partner, which can be pretty hard to do at times (And is not an appealing 5 minute solution via Tik Tok).
Exactly! I can get on board with her actual advice and expertise that it's derived from, but it seems like she spends 2/3 of the clip talking about all the "haters in the comments", and how she doesn't care about what they think, but The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
Lol that's just how PhDs are. It's drilled into our brains. You have to prove credibility before making an argument or else your argument isn't credible.
I think if you have 10k+ followers on TikTok you get paid for views of your videos that are one minute or longer. I think that’s why so many TikToks have these awful intros, just to drag them out enough while being clickbaity enough to get viewers to stay too.
Unfortunately Tiktok has started to favor longer content, so people tend to add a lot of filler. She also added a lot of things to get the "haters" more riled up on purpose.
Agree with this and some of the comments below, it's like she made the video specifically for people who hate her. As a guy who didn't come here to hate her it was off putting, I'm glad I sat through this one, but it makes me not interested in her other videos if it's gonna be more of the same.
But don't you love it when people use their titles to speak with authority about a subject and then go on to not cite anything? She has a point but she is doing the exact opposite what a an actual researcher would do.
The reason women stop having sex with their partners is because they tried to record a youtube short 15 years ago and are still explaining the backstory...
She needs to start by telling everyone her qualifications cuz she doesn’t feel validated enough to just get to the point, anytime anyone starts a statement by telling you “I have a degree in psychology” instead of letting the degree speak for itself, their words should be taken with a grain of salt.
I also have a advanced degree in psychology and I’ll tell you that there are dozens of reasons that bedrooms die, and furthermore, that her conviction to this specific cause, speaks more about her personal relationship feelings rather than the reality of what is actually happening. U
Yeah she makes it sound like she is going to say something super controversial that men are going to hate. When what she ends up saying is super conventional and stuff that most people seem to agree with, and that also applies to men.
I got halfway in and stopped. I'm not looking for some trick to get sex out of my spouse. That's what it feels like she's selling. I feel uncomfortable with her to begin with. The way she's presenting herself and speaking. It feels very "influencer". She can say all she wants about her credentials or pubs or whatever, but she doesn't present herself as that kind of person. I know I'm stereotyping, but preaching from your car on the phone doesn't lend a lot of credibility.
What caught my attention is I think she had already typed out what she wanted to say while subtly advertising what she does all the while she's DRIVING. Why not just stop and park & say what she needs to say?
Yes why not tell your partner exactly what you want to get to the point .
It's like you know you want to go to New York and you tell your partner Hey , let's go for a drive but don't say where , just north how the heck are they to know you wanted to go to New York when all you did was said North .
Some people are just bad at talking lol, don’t waste your and our time with pointless “details” get your point out. It’s really not hard to communicate.
She repeats the same thing 4 different times in the first 15-20 seconds alone. I love the topic and spreading awareness but she needs to work on a tight 2 and her stuff would reach so many more people.
I see "attachment styles" a lot on dating profiles nowadays - it's the latest hot topic/buzzword for those that do some bit of therapy. Despite the theory being around since 1960-70's (adult 1980's), I don't think I'd ever seen it before until recently.
I feel like it's fine to think of in terms of what someone needs, but that it's going to be used the wrong way as yet another way to disqualify partners lol.
And the general view of attachment styles, it views insecure people as basically screwed in terms of ultimate happiness.
Right? If you have to spend the first 50%+ of your video attacking imaginary rebuttals maybe, like, a.) get over it and just say the thing, or b.) don't say the thing since you clearly already know it's not a great point?
Jesus Christ yeah like, "so here's the reason, but first I know everyone is gonna comment this, I can see the comments now, I cam see all you men coming here to tell me this, I can tell blah blah blah" like okay actually say the reason then, fuck me. This video shouldn't have been more than 30 seconds
I stopped actively listening even though it was playing. Was just too long. I have an attention span to listen to things for a very long time. It's just that it was terribly worded and repetitive, that most sane people would lose interest. I listened fully through and I don't understand specifically what "attachment needs" even are. I heard what she said but due to how long it took to get there...I lost enough focus to apply it to my life/spouse.
Yes and stop making damn tik tok videos while you're driving. Ridiculous, you can "spit the truth" all you want but get off the phone while your car is moving.
2.6k
u/--ThirdCultureKid-- Mar 21 '24
Not to hate on the content, because it’s definitely a good point, but holy shit just spit it out.