Attachment Theory in Infants & Adult Love Relationships

Comments 4 Standard

My psychology instructor is going to know more about me than most of my friends/lovers ever have by the end of this semester, lol.

Okay, if you’ve not taken a basic psychology class, there are three types of attachment styles to primary caregivers shown by infants according to John Bowlby, whose theory was tested by Mary Ainsworth. Which means babies show one of three reactions to being separated from mommy/daddy:

  1. Secure: The baby is disturbed when the parent leaves, but easily comforted upon return. (Mommy leaves baby alone in strange laboratory, baby cries. Mommy comes back and soothes baby and everything is fine.)
  2. Anxious Resistant: The baby cries when Daddy leaves, and is inconsolable when Daddy tries to comfort baby. It’s as if baby is trying to punish Daddy!
  3. Anxious Avoidant: Baby doesn’t care much when mommy leaves, and gets interested in something else when she comes back. “Do what you want, it doesn’t affect me either way,” says baby.
  4. Disorganized – No consistent pattern.

So these theory has been widely accepted, and a theory has been built on top this theory – the way we learned to interact with our early caregivers is the way we later attach to our objects of affection, according to Haven and Shaver – see, babies are happy, comfortable and playful with their parents, and lovers are happy, comfortable and playful with their lovers, both connections are primary – it makes sense that they are related.

  1. Secure: My partner will be there for me when needed, and I can trust them – they can expect the same from me as well.
  2. Anxious Resistant: Do you love me as much as I love you? Are you sure? You can trust me and I’ll be here…You don’t love me. You would know what I’m thinking if you loved me, clearly you have no idea.Love me? Do you like that person better than me? It’s because of x/y/z, isn’t it? YOU MONSTER. *heavy drug use ensues*
  3. Anxious Avoidant: Um, I love you? Is love even a thing? Because every time this word gets tossed around, things go badly for me. *narrows eyes* What are you yelling about? I made eye contact with someone? What? I knew it, I’m better off alone. *disappears into narcotic haze *

I’m number three, and seem to almost exclusively date number two – ladies, there are way more men out there that just want to be loved, held, and treated well than most of you seem to think. #2 can be abusive from my experience – not nearly always, but my theory is almost all abusive men have this attachment style…They punish “Mommy” for a perceived slight. (Note: definitely NOT saying all anxious-resistant men are abusive, but from my experience and female friend’s experience…)

#2 all seem to go for me and my ilk, females who are as comfortable with heavy emotional displays as John Wayne was…although I crave touch emotional understanding, and being accepted in a relationship. Any relationship that has worked for a long time features this component.

Sex, material goods, etc. don’t interest me so much as someone who can deal with the fact that I *gasp* have EMOTIONS  – and can reliably accept and extra points if you can analyze them and make them sound logical. Also, I don’t get jealous – I leave. Try to present a threat to make me clingy =”Okay, apparently you like her more. Good luck.” Pretty much, my best friend needs to teach a course on interacting with me, because everybody else gets confused and tries some kind of craziness or they try to fix me -nope.

On the other hand, I date people whose worst fear is being deserted, and CONSISTENTLY desert them. I am a special kind of asshole. I’m abstaining from damaging more people, so ….that’s good, I guess.

4 thoughts on “Attachment Theory in Infants & Adult Love Relationships

  1. I am the total mix and I don’t think it is good haha. I hope that researchers will come up with new ideas because these theories are outdated and criticized (which doesn’t mean that they are not true!!).

    Liked by 1 person

    • Oh no! There is a attachment style called “disorganized”, which is a mixture – it’s on Wikipedia, but not my textbook. It’s surprising how much old research is still used and taught in psychology – I have a brand new textbook with sixty year old studies and research in it!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Yes I know 😀 Funny…the instructors demand us to read and explore scholarly articles from the last 5 years but when it comes to textbooks, we have a lot older ones 😀

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s