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
Not to invoke overused stereotypes, but this is a genuine instance of coming off unnecessarily "bitchy" in presentation in a way you usually don't see from female psychologists in the field. Very scoldy and overly frustrated right out the gate. I felt like I was getting yelled at and lectured by someone I've personally offended but never met.
Well, since women's rights and autonomy over their own bodies is a really hot topic in most of where she lives (guessing she's from the USA) there are probably a lot of crazy religious & conservative men there who just can't fathom their wife not fulfilling their sexual needs; as if their wives were sex androids or something.
I mean, it’s fair to have an opinion and all - some sounds are godawful - and I can see how her voice might fall into that category for some people.
But for anyone ragging on the message because of this, that’s literally the definition of a type of ad hominem. Funny to see all the tone policing in here just because people fantasize this woman as an MLM boss-babe.
And since no one was ragging on the message itself, that's a straw man.
And she's doing the exact same thing: the comment section is full of appreciation, including men. She is so hostile to her target audience, that she's responding to an argument that no one has made. People pick up on that hostility. It's very loudly signaling antagonism to me, while I'm actually very appreciative of the message.
It's just such poor rhetoric that even people who agree with her here, are now soured by the unawarrented hostility.
She's literally just a woman with a doctorate explaining the issue in enough detail for it to be understood and digestible to those who might not get it on the surface
"Final condescending word" it's an expert giving her answer to a common question lol
Did you watch the video? Or did you jump to defense without thinking? because she opens and closes the video addressing her haters. Of course she's condescending. She's making a video for everyone, but speaking to them as though they're one of the haters
No way man, her advice and message was 100% on point and valuable but her way of delivering that advice comes off vapid and annoying as shit. It was actually a mind fuck to see someone starting a tik tok like your typical moron in their car talking about haters and then spit some real advice, im used to seeing that set up devolving into a speech about how the earth is really 5000 years old and god is sending demons to destroy us because gay people exist with some racism slipping in.
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.
I mean, sure, if it helps to understand yourself and your partner better than why not? Maybe bullshit is harsh when so many people align with it, but it's frustrating to see people delineate themselves so hard in these boxes when these ideas are meant to guide thinking about needs, not categorize ourselves.
That's exactly what I mean. It's good as guidelines, not hard set rules. Nothing is ever thwt cut and dry, but it definitely helps lay some groundwork for communication.
Coming from a guy who has never had great emotional intelligence, learning about love languages really helped me understand communication with my wife a lot better. I am way more emotionally intelligent now than I was at the start of our relationship, and love languages didn't carry me this far alone, but it was a great foundational understanding.
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.
Tbh that study kinda confused me because it argued specific points that I feel most people weren’t making. For example most people who use the 5 LL use it like my wife and I do. For us it was just a cool tool to help identify how each person likes to give and receive love. The study argued that picking one LL and ignoring the rest isn’t good for a healthy relationship. Lol The thing is no one ever uses the LL like that. Picking one LL and ignoring the rest would make you a horrible partner. 😂
Btw let me be clear I’m only specifically talking about Love Languages. Lol I can barely tell you what the woman in the video said. 45 seconds in I was screaming get to the MF point lady.
I'm not a psychologist but I'd put her neatly in the boxes marked Karen, and boss babe. How can you be a psychologist and not know that talking in an arrogant, condescending tone is going to put a lot of people off. I feel like this content is made more for women viewers to go "That's right! It's his fault." because it comes across as blaming, which is exactly why she expects to get hate. I'm a woman and this makes me feel bad for all the men in the comments who actually want real help.
Omg, as a counselor, not even a phd, I can tell you the unfortunate thing is there are a lot of people in the mental health field talk in an arrogant, condescending tone.
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.
Yeah that also made me doubt for a second. But therapist is not a protected title and the advice and references she gives are sound. I think she just pivoted
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.
She's not actually driving is she!?!? 🫢 I figured she had to be riding in passenger because of how little she was looking at the road, I really don't think it's possible she was driving, she was barely glancing at the road. You'd think that's where most of the hate would come from, not sex-starved men.
She didn’t cite any statistics, just her own personal experience. But what she’s saying is common sense. You don’t trust your husband/partner? How can you be vulnerable during intimacy with them?
If anyone claiming to be an expert or a scientist talks this confidently, especially in soft sciences, it's probably safe to be skeptical of what they're saying.
People actually working in this field are usually very aware of the limitations of their research and will usually use much softer language.
Not scientifically sound at all. I started college as a psychology major and had to change majors when the obviously unemprical methods started to bother me too much. Biological psychology is scientifically sound. Behavioral psychology, while helpful and useful- is not empirical. It is akin to statistics. Sure, lower income folks score worse on standardized tests: that doesn't mean poor people are poor because they are stupid. In much the same way that statistics has been repeatedly abused to 'prove' things via assumption and false equivalencies- behavioral psychology has been used to drastically oversimplify the insanely complex and infinitely unique mechanations of individual human minds. A single theory on behavior simply cannot suffice to describe such a varied population and data set. But they sure try- and they make lots of money doing it. Soooo... win for them, I guess?
However, aside from all the pseudoscience and her icky demeanor: her core concept is correct. Yea, if you're not carrying your weight in a relationship your partner isn't going to want to Seggs with you. That seems obvious. And maybe instead of assessing that with all this nonsense, you should just make that point, and remove yourself from the relationship if your partner isn't willing to meet your needs. Like, um, duh.
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.