Comment

Comment on I've heard it clears up again after the first wave of divorces

peopleproblems@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

Ok, I’m confused - can you quote the lines that we’re dating advice? In no case was I advising anyone do anything, I was sharing the information I have learned on attachment theory. Providing possible insight. That’s not advice, that’s processing thought.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Cypher@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Not necessarily. If she was an anxious gemini she’d be more likely to fall for leo men. She could either:

Now recognize the red flags of scorpio and not subject herself to that.

Be unaware of the red flags of cancer and keep making the same mistake

Recently left a long term relationship as an secure individual and discover how many gemini really exist.

Of course you are right, she could be gemni, in which case hopefully she’ll learn sooner rather than later that fearing intimacy and vulnerability is detrimental, and that healthy codependency is actually a thing. But it’s not easy for them to do so.

I don’t like to think that everyone is incapable of finding someone, people just need to figure out why. Pointing out “single for a reason” seems counterproductive and a bit disrespectful.
source
- peopleproblems@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  All you did was substitute the attachment titles for astrology signs.
  
  Attachment theory has a long history of study in psychology, and astrology is just bullshit.
  
  source
  - Cypher@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    And you don’t realise that you’re applying it in an armchair psychologist fashion that has as much value as astrology?
    
    Reason is lost on some people.
    
    source
  - Cypher@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    www.abc.net.au/news/health/…/104279024
    
    But the idea, for example, that your relationship is doomed if you’re with an insecure person is “nonsense,” Professor Karantzas says.
    
    "I flatly refute that, that is idiocy at its finest.
    
    source