Archive for the ‘Hooking Up’ Category

What’s Killing Our Relationships? Fear of Dependancy.

Saturday, May 22nd, 2010

Everyone seems obsessed with relationships these days. When men and women share their relationship stories with me I see one big epidemic in our culture — fear of dependancy.

For instance, last night I was at a dinner party and when word got around that I am the Ph.D. who studies relationships, an inevitable mini group-therapy session broke out. The stories abounded about our curious relationship landscape. And alcohol-fueled questions popped out that amounted to “why am I like this?”

With few social rules forcing people into traditional relationships, many people are beginning to understand that their relationship style whether it be dominated by promiscuity, serial monogamy, an emotionally avoidant marriage, or preference for solitude, lies on them. With few family and friends forcing us into a legal, heterosexual, monogamous union, we are free to live out who we are. And that’s the problem. Many of us do not want to live out our “natural” attachment style and actually long for a closeness that will help us feel secure. Or we long for a relationship that will help us procreate and create healthy offspring.

Time and time again at these ad hoc therapy sessions, I find myself explaining “fear of dependancy.” Because, in my opinion, that’s what most relationship strife boils down to. In order to have a healthy relationship, we have to trust someone, we have to trust love and believe it will be consistent. And partners have to learn to depend on each other. All these beliefs about love are programmed in infancy and early life.

So when pop-psyche writers like myself identify someone as being comittment-phobic or a bad-boy or a cougar, we are actually looking at a behavior that is the outcome of a mistrust of love. A fear of being dependent on another.

For some reason, our culture places great value on independence. It’s one unfortunate downside of capitalism. My suspicion is that large, intertwined family systems are a threat to commerce and politics. But too much independence is a killer of romantic relationships. A healthy relationship is also not a kind of co-dependence where no one can remember who’s problem is whose. Instead, a mutually supportive relationship involves interdependence, where partners takes turns leaning on each other. And like that game of trust where one closes his eyes and falls back into the arms of a trusted friend, are you really convinced that you will always be caught? Because that’s exactly what’s keeping you single or disconnected in your marriage.

When Sex Doesn’t “Click.” A Sign to End A Budding Relationship?

Monday, May 3rd, 2010

A guy friend of mine who happens to be single mentioned that he’s had sex with a few women in the past few months and “nothing clicked.” When I reminded him that sex should never be the START of a relationship (the mixture of physical intimacy, budding emotional intimacy and fear can be completely toxic) he argued that if the sex isn’t “good” than it’s a sign the relationship will never work.

I beg to differ.

What is sex, after all, but an exchange of physical care, mixed with a longing for love, or an expression of love itself? Sex without an emotional connection is certainly possible and some people have stand alone sex in order to avoid intimacy. But for anyone looking for a real-world, mutually supportive relationship, early sex is always a sloppy mix of hope, hunger, and fear. Could this be “the one”? Will she/he like me enough? Can I perform? etc.

Waiting to have sex while building a little emotional intimacy can be protective in a number of ways. Delaying sex can establish good communication, trust, and a friendship that can weather the awkwardness of the “first-time.” Waiting to have sex can also screen out those who aren’t looking to create an emotional relationship — that includes bad-boys and girls who disassociate. I’m always amazed when I hear men tell me a dating story where they are out on a date and really beginning to open up to a woman about some emotional issue and the woman dismisses them and instead responds with, “Honey, I just want to f— your brains out.” Those stories confirm for me that sexual equality has arrived, coupled with its downside.

Finally, it’s important to consider that sexual attraction also has great psychological underpinnings. For instance, if we believe deep down that we are unlovable we may be specifically aroused by those who can’t offer emotional love. It’s our brain’s funny way of sticking to what’s familiar. Abuse and inconsistent love experienced as a child can create an attachment style geared toward abusive and inconsistent love relationships. We know we once survived unhappiness? Why risk the uncharted waters of a happy, consistent, supportive relationship?

Sometimes one’s arousal orientation — our attraction to a certain personality style or way of relating — is exactly the thing that brings us pain. The objects of our desire, while bringing us a “hot” physical experience are specifically attractive exactly because they fulfill out worst nightmares. For many people an intense sexual attraction should be a cue that this potential partner is bad for them. Intense lust is often a red flag for those who have an anxious or ambivalent attachment disorder.

Anyone who has experienced healthy, long-term monogamy knows that once the relationship becomes a multi-leveled partnership the sexual aspect of the relationship becomes far less important than the other ways a relationship feeds us — with trust, encouragement, consistency, and care. Relationships are an exchange of mutual care. Sexual attraction is part of phase-one construction that helps us secure a bond. But if we do not trust love, or deep-down feel unlovable, then our libido will be wired for pain. In that case, it is our journey to learn to use mind over heart. To think through our attractions and make different, often scary, choices instead of being led down a path of hormones toward a familiar pain. The key to happiness is our ability intellectually process our emotional life and make behavioral changes that may feel uncomfortable at first, but represent progress.

So can “bad” sex turn into “good” sex? Of course it can. Sexual incompatibility may be a case of nerves, inexperience, or a leap into those uncharted emotional waters. The solution is talk, trust, and gentle exploration. And, if you can’t talk about sex with someone then you shouldn’t be having sex with them.


Is “Sex Addiction” Just An Excuse for Bad Morals?

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010

First Tiger Woods. Now Jesse James. Mr. Sandra Bullock has reportedly entered treatment for sex addiction after four mistresses have come forward alleging affairs with him.  There has been a lot of attention in the media lately about sex addiction as a possible diagnosis with a disease model. Most of the stories stem from Tiger Woods stay at an in-treatment facility that specializes in something called sex addiction. The problem is that sex addiction is not a clinical diagnosis. The bible for psychotherapists, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, does not list sexual addiction anywhere.

There’s no doubt that sexual attraction and orgasm alter brain chemistry. And one can crave the rush of hormones and endorphins that tend to accompany a sexual conquest. While “sex addiction” may not be a formal mental illness, the behavior certainly mimics substance addiction in that the preoccupation with obtaining the next “high” can debilitise lives. Any chronic behavior that negatively affects ones personal relationships or professional life it is considered a disorder.

So, are Tiger and the 3-5% of men and women who claim to have a sex addiction, hiding behind a simple character flaw? The answer is a bit complicated. Yes, and No. Certainly “sex addicts” appear to be attempting to put a sympathetic label on their dysfunctional behavior (who wouldn’t?) but even if sex addiction is considered only a character flaw, what is that? Simply a lapse in sound judgment? If so, could they just stop?

The thing that sets bad moral character apart from a physiological disorder is the degree of craving, the inability to stop, and the ensuing damage to one’s personal and professional life. If all these ducks are in order, this is a mental illness in my book.

Want to find out if you or someone you know has a sex addiction? Click here.

Why Men Stray More than Women (And How to Prevent Cheating)

Friday, February 26th, 2010

It is estimated that 65% of divorces occur  because of an extra-marital affair. And, despite the sexual revolution and the reduction of the “double standard,” more men still cheat than women. Now science shows us why this gender imbalance might exist.

First, there could be a genetic link. Swedish researchers recently identified an “infidelity gene,” which is present in four of 10 men. This gene can explain why some men are more prone to stormy relationships and bond less to their wives or girlfriends. However, it’s important to remember that biology is not destiny. People born with genetic predispositions to say, heart disease or obesity, make lifestyle adjustments that compensate for the negative gene.

Secondly, men may find it easier to cheat because they feel less guilt than woman. A Spanish study recently revealed that the interpersonal sensitivity of men (especially those aged between 25-33) is low compared to women. This clearly could affect a man’s ability to empathize with his partner. The study also showed that men feel less intense guilt and this difference is particularly stark in the 40-50-year-old age group, a group particularly vulnerable to the mid-life crisis affair.

Finally, more men fear emotional intimacy more than do women. Believe it or not, some men find lovers so they can  avoid any real intimacy. Emotional closeness and the expression of vulnerability that goes with it scares many men, so they distance themselves from their wives by cheating on them. At the same time,  they don’t get too emotionally involved with their lovers. This kind of “watering down of the milk” feels safer to some men.

As always, my solution to bullet-proof relationships is to grow a bond through emotional intimacy. To make a relationship  rock-solid, one must move a step or two closer to the bone, and hone some relationship skills. Compassion can be learned. Fair-fighting is a skill. And stonewalling is a killer of all connection. Intimacy is not easy nor painfree. Extreme emotional intimacy and mutual care may involve squeamish feelings of shame, the forced expression of awkward words, an ability to see the ugly in others and still love them, and worse,  the ability to glaringly see the ugly in ourselves and still feel lovable. But the pay-back is pure kryptonite. An I’ve-got-your-back-if-you’ve-got-mine emotional contract that can make your relationship affair-proof.


Is Sexual Freedom a New Trap?

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

booksPerhaps the Victorians had it right. The flesh is weak but the mind is strong. Or is it? I am reading a fabulous novel called “The Crimson Petal and the White.” The book was written in recent years but is set in Victorian England and the male author, Michel Faber, has a surprisingly good grasp on both male and female psychology and sexuality. (Note: It is a hefty work of 800 pages but the well-written snippets of porn will keep you glued while the story unfolds.)

I’m telling you about this novel because one of the huge themes concerns secrets and miscommunications in adult relationships. In Victorian England, whether the man-of-the-house is tangling with his wife or his prostitute, he does not communicate much at all and his women are expected to pay attention to the smallest of nuances to interpret his moods and his needs.

Not a whole lot has changed today. While we are a country of people who fiercely defend their freedom of speech, crucial words are often void from our most intimate relationships. And that is the very place where they are so vital to our survival. I suspect that fear of being rejected for our honesty may be the obvious factor in our communication flaws. But the underpinnings of wordless love have as much to do with unconscious motivations and carnal urges.

What I mean by unconscious motivations are the early life conflicts that we continue to march into in adult life as we attempt to process what was done to us as tender children. The men whose infidelity may be a complex bid for the love of their distant father whose own infidelities created secret male bonds. The woman who becomes aroused by men who can’t love and resemble an uncaring mother of dim memory. The many complicated webs of our psyche are as varied as there are faces. We each possess a unique (and constantly shaping) blueprint for love and sexual interaction.

As for carnal urges, this is where the Victorian sexual repression makes some sense in light of our current battles over our sexual freedom. The Victorians knowingly or unknowingly knew that exposing of any sexual material, be it a naked ankle or a forbidden word, could create a terrible struggle between animal instincts and mental strength. The flesh is weak, as they used to say. Today, as I pump weights at the gym and my ipod uploads my brain with the suggestive pleading lyrics of Nelly Furtado and Timbaland negotiating a hook up in “Promiscuous Girl,” I wonder about all the real promiscuous boys and girls out there. 200px-NellyPromiscuousWhen they hear lyrics that say, “Chivalry is dead but you’re still kind of cute,” do they really feel free and powerful? Is the lack of chivalry (defined by princeton.edu as “courtesy towards women”) helped women feel more equal?

Obviously not, because the song’s female voice also draws a line in the sexual negotiation by saying, “I’m a big girl. I can handle myself. But if I get lonely, I’m a need your help. Pay attention to me, I don’t talk for my health.”

Sexual taboos may have disappeared, but basic biology has not changed. Women are wired to connect. Being in relationships make us stronger. Men are wired to mate and provide for and protect offspring. But the sexual revolution seems to have made many men and women deny their own biology. Women tell me they “don’t get too attached” it’s not worth it. Men do not associate sex with a relationship or even a relationship with parenthood. I overheard one grown man in my hotel lobby yesterday advise another, “You don’t have to get married to have children.”

So here we are. Women acting like men and getting hurt and emotionally shut down. Men behaving like animals instead of the chivalrous men of Victorian England. The pendulum may have swung to it’s fullest extend. It will never swing back all the way, however. As the women in “The Crimson Petal and the White” show us, repression in deed and word is a killer for women. The hero’s wife literally goes mad and his prostitute spends her private time writing a violent novel about gruesome murders of men.

When the pendulum swings back to center the answer will not only be words and communication. It will be a strong mind that exercises boundaries and grows a deep capacity for empathy and understanding for the other gender. No one will win if we hide our souls or ignore our biology, especially the children who inevitably pop out of many non-chivalrous unions. Feel yourself first. Then think. Then talk about it. Then have sex.

It’s Complicated. The Shape of Relationships today.

Saturday, November 21st, 2009

images

Not so long ago there were two groups of people: single people who wanted to find the right mate and married people who may or may not have been working on their relationship. Today, virtually every American, no matter their age is in one of three relationship stages: 1. finding and building a relationship, 2. maintaining a relationship, or 3. destroying one. Look at these stats:

• 50% of first marriages divorce

• Up to 80% of second marriages divorce

• Sexual taboos have all but disappeared

• 40% of American babies are born out of wedlock

• More women than men are in the workforce

• Less than 30% of children have one stay-at-home parent

• Hooking up is replacing dating

• It is estimated that instead of til-death-do-us-part, we’ll have three long-term relationships in our lives

Today there is a shopping mall of relationship choices. Some couples marry. Some live together. Some do neither and still maintain committed relationships.  Others live without any kind of commitments yet children pop out of these unions. It is a relationship revolution where rules have yet to be established. It is a place where sexting, hooking up, and expensive white weddings walk side by side.  It is a place where divorce has become a rite of passage, where cougar women enjoy their sexual freedoms, divorced men scramble to figure out what went wrong and young adults try to make sense of their parent’s relationship model. The relationship revolution is affecting everyone.

There are no rules anymore in courting and mating. When a high-school girl has a “friend with benefits” and believes oral sex isn’t sex, when a college student brings a Facebook hookup to her grandmother’s birthday, and when more than half of all American babies are born out of wed-lock, clearly, Dorothy, we are not in Kansas anymore.

No longer til-death-do-us-part, it is estimated that most people have at least three long-term relationships in their lifespan.  Thus the shape of the family has changed. Families are married, unmarried, separated, divorced, blended, and gender roles are fluid. The lack of rules means that romance, marriage and family are a whole new ball game.

And single life is no longer a short rite of passage; it’s an important consumer demographic. For the first time in history, the majority of adult Americans are now unmarried. There’s even a magazine devoted to the lifestyles of those who have made a commitment to be single. It includes ads for commitment rings to purchase for oneself.

But has love changed? In some ways it has. Once a home for the heart, relationships have become a mess of mistrust. A holding tank for insecurity. A place where people tally up each side of contributions and ask too often, “What has he done for me lately?” Too often people wonder what their relationship is doing for them, rather than what they themselves have done for their relationship.

So what’s the answer to this complicated landscape. I think the winners of this paradigm shift will be the people who acquire the sharpest emotional intimacy skills. Like emotional intelligence was in the 1990’s, emotional intimacy (i.e. using empathy, compassion, and honesty to navigate conflict) is the hot skill for the survival of our species. Statistically speaking, children of a long-term committed relationship do better on all levels. The winners of the no-rules relationship revolution will be the people who make their own rules and their own game — where the champion is the relationship itself.

Love & Las Vegas (They use the same reward system)

Tuesday, November 3rd, 2009

imagesTo your brain, there are many similarities between gambling and love. They are both an exciting chemical high with a mixture of hope, profits, and potential for loss. Both love and Las Vegas can be intoxicating. But there is another secret way that gambling resembles certain kinds of love attachment — both are based on a behavioral learning theory called random interval reward system.

Learning theorists like Pavlov (and his dog,) Watson, and Skinner spent their professional lives attempting to figure out what motivates animal and human behavior. One of the things that was discovered is that the most effective way to get an organism (that’s you) addicted to a behavior was to administer the reward in a random way. The recipient of the reward doesn’t know when or what is coming but the very the fact that it is random and pleasurable makes them glued to the behavior. This is the basic principle behind a slot machine. Say you were given a consistent, small reward with every fifth pull of the level. You would probably quickly become bored and move on. And if the reward was exactly one-dollar each time, even though it was given at random intervals, still you would eventually become bored.

The secret is the varying size of the reward and varying the interval rate. If on the tenth pull, for instance, you received a nice pay off, your brain would have “learned” to survive ten pulls. To keep you going, a series of small payoffs might come quickly. In this example, the machine knows that you will continue to deposit money for at least ten pulls if it has rewarded you at least once in that manner. Believe me, the owners of Vegas casinos have calculated all these odds years ago, and they know how to set the random intervals to keep the player addicted to popping in coins. Surprise, surprise, the house always wins.

So what has this got to do with love and courtship? Well, imagine that every contact, compliment, or even intimate glance from a lover is perceived by your brain as a positive reward. Now imagine that it is given in a random way. I like to call this the “Bad Boy Success Formula.” Bad Boys are particularly good at using the random interval reward system. And bad Boys are very seductive to women. It’s because a Bad Boy’s fear of emotional intimacy causes him to dash in and out of a woman’s life in what feels like a random way. In actuality, his pattern of advance/retreat is a reflection of how much emotional intimacy he can tolerate, but who’s looking below the surface when you’re staring at the phone wondering why he hasn’t called?

Each time a Bad Boy feels it is safe to return to a woman, their object is usually to obtain physical intimacy. Since sex is their goal they are particularly savvy at coming on with compliments and making their target feel like a queen — all rewards that women thrive on. Bad Boys are also the very best apologizers I have even met. The apology is part of their schtick to wedge back in your door. Sometimes their words of contrition resemble a kind of emotional intimacy so chicks fall for it, again and again.

But Bad Boys aside, the very uncertainty of a growing relationship with it’s emotional highs coupled with feelings of insecurity, can cause a kind of attachment based on a reward system. Something to think about as you date. Are you getting bored with the nice guys or consistent gals who are on time and available? Maybe that’s because your brain has tasted the pain and excitement of a random interval reward relationship. It might be time to sit back, take a deep breath, and look a little closer at the consistent one. The ultimate pay out might be much greater.

Survive This Dating Trend! The LDR (Long Distance Relationship)

Saturday, October 31st, 2009

217294Many blog readers email me with questions about a common trend in love, the long distance relationship. Far from being a new convention, the LDR has exploded in numbers thanks to internet dating and our capitalistic pressure to chase money and jobs around the country, and indeed the globe. But can it ever really work? Can long distance love eventually become a cozy same-city nest? Can a stay-at-home relationship survive a stint abroad?

The answer is a bit complicated. In general the very dynamics that create and sustain a long distance relationship are different from those of a consistent stay-at-home relationship. LDR’s are marked by plenty of autonomous alone time and peppered with a series of “honeymoons” in various hook-up cities. Stay-at-home love is more often about the daily work of love and life. And the players tend to be different. If you’ve read some of my past blogs about the psychological theory called “Attachment Theory” you’ve probably guessed already that emotionally avoidant individuals might really dig an LDR, while more anxious or preoccupied folks like to have a shorter tether.

So, the big question I get asked a lot is what to do if one morphs into the other. And, how to make an LDR come home to roost. My advice: Be prepared for plenty of conflict. All change is painful. Emotional change has it’s own particular brand of sting. But emotional change, when it brings self awareness and/or a new level of compassion, is ultimately good.

First, consider the clauses that the original unconscious contract contained. We all make silent contracts in every relationship. For instance, all my girlfriends know without me having to say it, that they’ll be rescheduled on my calendar if a work obligation comes up. And, most of them also have signed on with their blessings that a great guy comes first. Girlfriends are a supportive bunch and, above all, we want happiness for each other. We’ve never discussed this, but I know it’s true. It has played out in the past.

And what might be in the silent contract of romantic love? Usually it’s about the amount of contact, the kind of contact (email, voice, face-to-face), and the content of the contact. What I mean is, how much commentary about emotions is contained in the communication. Some partners can handle, and even crave, a lot of honest, authentic talk about feelings, and many, many others would prefer to have a root canal.

In the long distance love contract the clauses about contact are very easy to adhere to. If one partner prefers less contact he or she becomes literally unavailable, on a different time zone, with phones turned off. Period. You can’t argue with that kind of communication boundary. In stay-at-home love, it’s a little harder to duck and cover. There he is, walking in the door, ready for love and the F-word (feelings.) If a long distance relationship is filled with strict communication boundaries, the shift to a day-to-day relationship may be extremely challenging.

And what about a stay-at-home relationship that is about to undergo a transition that involves distance? First, know this. relationships are affected by environmental stimuli. And environment affects our perception of ourselves and our partner potential. For instance, let’s say you live in a small town and your guy is one of the best looking, smartest dudes on main street. Then your job takes you to New York. While you may have firm plans for your boyfriend to follow you out within a year, something happens that you were unprepared for. Suddenly your guy looks like chump change beside the crowds of hunky, capitalists on Wall Street. Or, he takes a semester in London and finds that a Kate Moss clone with a comely accent, is more attractive than his high school sweetheart. Take a deep breath people. I’m not saying that all relationships as so superficial. But many are.

And that’s my point. How do you avoid becoming superficial? By getting below the surface. Yes, I’m back on Dr. Walsh’s soapbox. The real glue of every relationship, both LDR’s and the stay-at-home kind, is the degree of emotional attachment. When we have compassion for our partners, when we trust that they have our back no matter what, when we really feel seen and loved, and when we can love our partners even with their vulnerabilities, we have the glue of real love. Real attachment. That will be the thing that weathers the storms of temptation, distance, and challenging communication. Trust. To trust and be trust-worthy. Work on yourself and the world will line up in accordance with your ethics. I ask you today to be brave and begin to create a real attachment.


Our Secret Obsession — Relationships?

Thursday, October 29th, 2009

857apinktopBefore I had even completed my Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology, I had written two dating and relationship books. When I attempted to shop the titles in the TV world, I was told by more than one television executive that the wave of relationship shows had crested. That was in 2005. Poor darlings. They forgot to look out for the sunami that followed. Today relationship news dominates the web, TV, radio, and publishing. So, why are we so crazed to seek out information about love? Two reasons really.

The first is instability. Love, marriage, and relationships are changing at a fast clip. And this is scary. When the divorce rate for first marriages is over 50% and as high as 80% for second marriages, when nearly 40% of American children are born out of wedlock, and when hook-ups have replaced courtship, it’s time to stop and think. There is so much instability in relationships today that we are scrambling to know more, to understand why, and to stop the bloodshed known as heart break. I mean, sixty years ago when our grandparents married they may have unknowingly signed up for a bumpy road, a little repression, a few lost dreams, but they sure didn’t live with a daily fear that on any given day their partner would just quit! This is terrifying.

The second piece is isolation. Our modern culture is losing it’s safety net of community support, as families chase jobs around the globe away from extended family and move away from traditional church communities and fail to develop true intimate friend networks, we feel isolated. And that means we put an enormous amount of pressure on our primary love relationship to do the work of all our emotional support. Yikes! I’d love to say that I could be that for a guy, but really, it’s not humanly possible to be all things to one person. And then when love crumbles, the very isolation that made us cling to our partner, now makes us feel terribly sad and alone. It’s a vicious cycle.

So what’s the answer? To learn to grow a backbone and a bit of alligator skin and tread back into the world of intimacy — everywhere. Not just in our love relationship (although it’s paramount to survival there.) Learning to love and trust, and feel lovable and trust-worthy is the work of intimacy. I encourage you to start today.

Remind yourself how lovable you are and then reach out to share your unconditional kindness and compassion with someone else. And the key word there, folks, is UNCONDITIONALLY. Don’t expect anything back except feelings of pride and respect for yourself. Do this and you’ll see. Things will start to change. Really. Trust me on this.

What’s Your Attachment Style? Here’s a Quiz

Thursday, October 22nd, 2009

2dIn the last few days, I have been explaining the roots of a psychological theory called “Attachment Theory.” If you haven’t been following this series, I suggest you read a few blogs back to prepare yourself for the following test. As a reminder, today’s attachment researchers find it helpful to look at the proportion of anxiety and avoidance that we may experience in relation to emotional intimacy.  Allow yourself about twenty minutes in total and grab a calculator because scoring is a bit timely. Once you obtain your score, look at the diagram to the left. Estimate where on each vertical and horizontal scale you might fall. Tomorrow, I’ll explain what your score could mean. Enjoy your internal exploration.

The Experiences in Close Relationships-Revised (ECR-R) Questionnaire

Fraley, Waller, and Brennan (2000)

The statements below concern how you feel in emotionally intimate relationships. Answer the questions in terms of how you generally experience relationships, not just in what is happening in a current relationship. Respond to each statement by giving a number from 1 through 7 to indicate how much you agree or disagree with the statement. 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. At the end of the survey, you will find some slightly complicated scoring instructions. Trust me. You can get through this. Use a calculator.

1. It’s not difficult for me to get close to my partner.

2. I often worry that my partner will not want to stay with me.

3. I often worry that my partner doesn’t really love me.

4. It helps to turn to my romantic partner in times of need.

5. I often wish that my partner’s feelings for me were as strong as my feelings for him or her.

6. I worry a lot about my relationships.

7. I feel comfortable depending on romantic partners.

8. When I show my feelings for romantic partners, I’m afraid they will not feel the same about me.

9.  I rarely worry about my partner leaving me.

10. My partner only seems to notice me when I’m angry.

11. I feel comfortable depending on romantic partners.

12. I do not often worry about being abandoned.

13. My romantic partner makes me doubt myself.

14. I find that my partner(s) don’t want to get as close as I would like.

15. I’m afraid that I will lose my partner’s love.

16. My desire to be very close sometimes scares people away.

17. I worry that I won’t measure up to other people.

18. I find it easy to depend on romantic partners.

19. I prefer not to show a partner how I feel deep down.

20. I feel comfortable sharing my private thoughts and feelings with my partner.

21. I worry that romantic partners won’t care about me as much as I care about them.

22. I find it difficult to allow myself to depend on romantic partners.

23. I’m afraid that once a romantic partner gets to know me, he or she won’t like who I really am.

24. I am very comfortable being close to romantic partners.

25. I don’t feel comfortable opening up to romantic partners.

26. I prefer not to be too close to romantic partners.

27. I get uncomfortable when a romantic partner wants to be very close.

28. I find it relatively easy to get close to my partner.

29. I usually discuss my problems and concerns with my partner.

30. I tell my partner just about everything.

31. Sometimes romantic partners change their feelings about me for no apparent reason.

32. When my partner is out of sight, I worry that he or she might become interested in someone else.

33. I am nervous when partners get too close to me.

34. It’s easy for me to be affectionate with my partner.

35. It makes me mad that I don’t get the affection and support I need from my partner.

36. My partner really understands me and my needs.

Scoring:

1. Some answers need to be reverse scored like this: 1=7, 2=6, 3=5, 4=4, 5=3, 6=2, 7=1. Take all the numerical answers to the following questions and give them a new, reversed score: 1, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 18, 20, 24, 28, 29, 30, 34, 36.

2. Take the scores to all the following question numbers and average them.  These are the questions you should average: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 23, 31, 32, 35. In case you’re rusty on third grade math, that means add them all together and divide by the number of answers, in this case, 16. This is your score for attachment-related anxiety. It can range from 1 through 7. The higher the number, the more anxious you are about relationships.

3. Take the scores to the following questions and average them: 1, 4, 7, 11, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36). This score indicates you attachment related avoidance. The higher the score, the more you avoid intimacy in relationships.