| INTP Discussion Forum > People and Psychology > INTPs and Dismissing-Avoidant Relationship Styles? |
| Posted by: icedcooly Apr 7 2004, 12:42 AM |
| I just did a test on Tickle.com called "Are You A Secure Lover?", and my results said I had a dismissing avoidant attachment style; not the nicest label, but the description is pretty accurate: People with a dismissing avoidant attachment style tend to be very independent and self-reliant. They can be attractive because they pose an intriguing challenge. Attachment style begins in infancy with the interactions we have with our parents or primary caregivers. Through these early relationships we begin to understand the dynamics and patterns of close relationships and we carry this perspective into our adult relationships. Psychologists call your attachment style Dismissing Avoidant. You're not someone who is easy to get close to. You tend to keep people at a distance and in a romantic relationship you're not entirely comfortable with emotional intimacy or commitment. Potential partners may feel that you are a bit mysterious and are a challenge worth pursuing. 21% of those who have taken our test share this style of attachment. Would any of the other INTPs here say they had the same type of attachment style? Obviously, you can't take these online tests (particularly most of the sponsered tests from Pedigree dog chow or whatever) too seriously, but this was in their Premium tests section at least. |
| Posted by: CosmicDust Apr 7 2004, 03:27 AM |
| Sounds like me. My attachment style is hardly any. Like London forces that hold liquid nitrogen together - very loose. And I've never really done the intimacy thing. |
| Posted by: Odyssey Apr 7 2004, 03:44 AM |
| Odyssey, you tend to gravitate toward romantic partners who have a Dismissing Avoidant attachment style. People with a dismissing avoidant attachment style tend to be very independent and self-reliant. They can be attractive because they pose an intriguing challenge. Attachment style begins in infancy with the interactions we have with our parents or primary caregivers. Through these early relationships we begin to understand the dynamics and patterns of close relationships and we carry this perspective into our adult relationships. Psychologists call your attachment style Secure. You tend to be an open and trusting romantic partner. You find it relatively easy to get close to people, and are generally comfortable depending on others. 10% of those who have taken our test share this style of attachment. *blush* True. (Why do I always like challenges in all areas of my life? At least it's not boring... haha) ~Odyssey |
| Posted by: SleepingSatellite Apr 13 2004, 02:40 AM |
| Hmmm... sounds like me very much. I like my independence. Even when I'm in a relationship, as I am right now (with another INTP, who gets it, fortunately) I still don't feel the need to be all over someone 24/7. I still have my own interests and things to pursue... Of course, there's people who get it and think it's weird to be any other way, then there's people who have accused me of being an emotionally-devoid ice queen. Then there's tests like that who probably come somewhere in the middle... |
| Posted by: giftedmadness Apr 25 2004, 08:40 PM |
| I just read a book that deals with this issue. It doesn't correlate their advice with MBriggs, but Avoidance is one of the toxic types of behavior described. Here is the book: Toxic Relationships and How to Change Them : Health and Holiness in Everyday Life by Clinton McLemore (Author) |
| Posted by: Division56 Apr 25 2004, 08:47 PM |
| I'm with the avoidant style. Personally, I think giving yourself over completely to another person is disgusting and a recipie for disaster. I can't stand those happy, loud, soul-mate type couples. Sadly, it brings me great joy to see them break up. I know it's schadenfreude, but I love it anyway. |
| Posted by: misspadfoot Apr 26 2004, 12:18 AM |
| Can someone give a link to that test? I can't find it. Although I don't know if I need to take the test to know I'll get the Dismissing Avoidant result. |
| Posted by: INTrPosr Apr 26 2004, 02:22 AM |
| Yikes!! That is definately me in romantic and platonic relationships. I really believed that I was open emotionally and interdependent, until my son hit me with a brutal bit of honesty. I HATE DEPENDENCY and find it as a form of weakness. I also detest mindless followers. Jack |
| Posted by: misspadfoot Apr 26 2004, 03:53 AM |
| Never mind, I found the test. I did get dismissing avoidant style for both me and the people I'm attracted to. I'm surprised that 21% of people got that result, though. It seems like something that only I-T- types would get, and there's no way 21% of people are I-T-. Personally, I think they give it (dismissing avoidant) a much worse name than it deserves. It's called independence! I'm not going to compromise myself just so that someone else will like me better. I also agree with Jack - dependency is a form of weakness. I take the same approach to religion. To quote Billy Joel, one of my favorite singers (anyone want to take a guess at his type? I'd say INFP or ENFP), "As an atheist... you decide first of all that will not ask Daddy - meaning God in all of his imagined forms - for a helping hand when you're in a jam." That's my take on religion: I perceive it as a sort of weakness. Anywho, back to relationships: I've never had a really satisfying one in my life; the only romantic relationship I've ever been in was with an ES?P guy that was way too outgoing and not cerebral enough for me. If/when I do have a good romantic relationship, I somehow picture myself with an INTJ, though I don't know why. |
| Posted by: Division56 Apr 26 2004, 04:01 AM |
| Miranda and possibly Samantha in Sex and the City are both that type. I think people find it harder to swallow in a woman than a man. Comments? |
| Posted by: misspadfoot Apr 26 2004, 09:16 PM |
| Well, it makes sense, doesn't it? Nobody expects that in a girl. Girls are supposed to be more emotional than guys. 70% of males are Ts and 70% of females are Fs. So meeting a woman who's not that interested in emotional relationships is unsettling for most people. The Emode test says dismissing avoidant partners are attractive because they pose a challenge. That's only a small part of it for me. The more important thing is that another dismissing avoidant person would understand my need to be emotionally independent. The weird thing is, I don't really "feel" too much at all. There seems to be some kind of psychobabble common among therapists (my parents took me to see a few, it wasn't my idea!) that the more aloof and distant someone is on the outside, the more his or her inner self is a tumultuous whirlwind of emotions, the more he or she really wants to get close to people but can't make him- or herself trust them, the more likely it is that he or she has been "hurt before" and is "protecting him/herself." It's all BS if you ask me! If I were to enter into a relationship right now, I would want it to center around companionship and interesting conversation, not emotional support. I don't understand the point of consciously making an effort to "build a relationship" by spending more time together than necessary in an attempt to get closer. Let things proceed at their own pace. I guess that's part of the reason why I see myself with an INTJ as a potential long-term partner. Not that other types wouldn't work, but INTJs seem to be the type I'm most drawn to. |
| Posted by: Strephonade Jun 17 2004, 09:47 PM |
| All of this sounds quite familiar--I am an extremely independent person, and don't really 'feel' the need to attach myself to others at all. This has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with a person, like them or dislike them. Not that agreeing or disagreeing with a person would make it more likely that I would like or dislike them, either. More often than not, I find that I do not necessarily agree with a person's view at all, but still, it is interesting to become acquainted. It's more in the potential for things to discuss, and in greater depth. Finding those people who can help you to unlock more of life's big mysteries is not always an easy task. Given the choice between finding the answer to a really interesting puzzle and going out to coffee, I'll probably choose the former, rather than the latter. Unless we're going to talk about the puzzle over coffee. Then I might make an exception.  Man is after all, a social creature by nature.  The more one tries to analyze my relationships with people though, the more complicated it seems to get--like trying to observe the behavior of quantum particles. The very act of observing them can change their behavior. It becomes difficult to see whether what you are looking at is the effect of a particle (or more particles), or the effect of the observing. |
| Posted by: nobarcode Jun 17 2004, 10:48 PM |
| Fearful Avoidant relationship attachment style. You tend to have mixed feelings about relationships. A part of you may want to have a close, loving relationship, but another part of you may be somewhat uncomfortable with commitment. It's also likely that you are afraid others will let you down or abandon you. Although you tend to be open to relationships, you may not easily reveal the true you, and potential partners are likely to be intrigued about discovering the person you are deep down. I'm not even gunna start... |
| Posted by: Jkrs Jun 18 2004, 08:41 AM |
| Theory (addressing misspadfoots' point): As opposed to the 'emotionally distant' person being afraid of emotional relationships, they might derive whatever emotional maintinance is needed from the act/process of having an intelligent conversation. It seems plausible from where I stand, as not only are the people involved outwardly recognising the others existance (basic social maintenance, and one reason the practice of shunning someone works so well), they're showing an interest in one anothers' most important feature - their minds. Also: 21% of the general popualtion probably isn't I-T, but 21% of the test takers may well be. Or the test is just biased. I fit the description in the initial post reasonably well (likely better if it's adjusted in tune to the theory above), as does my INTJ significant other. Neither of us consider it to be a problem. |
| Posted by: Horger Jul 5 2004, 02:27 PM |
| That sounds alot like me. I have trouble showing emotions to pretty much anyone. |
| Posted by: Amy Jul 5 2004, 11:02 PM | ||
Once again I'm feeling like an outsider here. When I'm in a relationship I want it to center more around emotional support than intellectual pursuits. I look more at values and personality characteristics such as being nice, trustworthy, emotionally stable, open toward me, secure with what they want, etc. I don't think I could be in a relationship with someone who was what I considered stupid, but it isn't necessary for me to have someone who likes having "deep intellectual conversations". That's what friends are for, and those people don't necessarily make good romantic partners. |
| Posted by: Iyalmej Jul 6 2004, 12:11 AM |
| I think I merge into the "emotional" part. It's VERY hard to get to really know me, and even harder to be with me as a partner, in truth, out of the two relationships I have had, both of them have been "what the hell, let's see what happens"-kind of things,and only the first one has really made me feel "something". Of course, I am still avoidant and dislike clingy people, or people who want to go too fast, but in all other areas, I am still not really keen on expressin my emotions to strangers, or to most of my friends now that I really think about it. Some people might say I am way too selective, or maybe I believe that there is really someone just fit to a person, out there in the world. Whatever the reasonings, that sounds like me, right there, heh  |