Book recommendations

For me, fearful avoidant attachment is trauma based. I don't know if it is the same for you and others here, but I feel like it really could be. In that case, what has tremendously helped me understand myself is Pete Walker's book on CPTSD and The Body Keeps the Score by Bessel van der Kolk. Also, I haven't started it yet but I randomly opened it up and happened to land on a page that talked about disorganized attachment: Healing the Fragmented Selves of Trauma Survivors by Janina Fisher.

I haven't read the Attached book, but I suggest to anyone who does that they read the review of the book on Amazon by Anna K.

it's been a while since i've posted but i thought to chime in and agree with epicgum about the review. i've been dating someone who admits being an ex-avoidant, and has worked on himself pre-meeting me, and we've been an incredible pair so far. he has worked on his own issues and i've worked on mine, to the extent that when we first got together, he almost felt anxious and i felt avoidant. we've gone past that and are in the process of establishing security through time and repeated experiences.

i absolutely agree that there is no magical secure - you have to own your issues first and foremost, and then commit to being secure WITHIN and AS a person so that you can BE the magical secure that'll attract the like. This whole "find a secure" business is a good idea, but the success of this strategy is underpinned by your own security and also working with someone else to heal actively. A true secure might also find it difficult to understand where your issues are coming from and unless self-aware and enlightened, might not have the mechanisms to help you during the healing phase. It is more likely that they do not trigger your insecurities.

the books that are often recommended present a great introductory reading to those who seek to understand and induce self awareness, acceptance, and acknowledgement of the issues and history behind it that lead to the unravelling of unhealthy patterns. I think we need new books like what epicgum suggested - new tools that focus on the future and developing new ways of relating, behaving, thinking and feeling, rather than continuing to sound the drums of insecure attachment!

I see what you mean. In this case, language is too limited to accurately reflect the reality of having an insecure attachment style. You only sort of get it conceptually/categorically or on an abstract level. Just reading about being Fearful Avoidant doesn't really click for me until I am conscious of the experience within myself. So if it's so limited and horoscope-like even when reading about yourself, imagine reading about other attachment styles as you try to figure out a partner. Point being, rather than reading and thinking about me + the other person, I have to actively be changing my inner landscape, taking new action, and then judging the dynamic by what follows. Is the other person receptive to the changes? Do they respond differently now?

Which brings me to this: what stood out the most to me about the last part of the review is the idea that insecurely attached people seek security with people who trigger their insecurity, and the key is to establish security with that person. E.g. if I'm triggered by people who impose on me because I imagine they want to hurt me and my reaction is to withdraw, the solution isn't necessarily to find an unimposing person who doesn't trigger me, but rather to try breaking the pattern by 1) saying something about it by telling them how I feel or 2) setting a boundary. If the person reacts badly, this affirms my insecurity. BUT, their reaction is theirs alone -- heck, it may even be a trigger for them when someone sets a certain boundary because it means they're not getting a need met and the only way they know how to do it is by being "imposing". What's more, maybe I've misunderstood them and their assertive tone is perceived as aggressive by me. So it is so much more complicated than simply, here's a DA, and here's an AP... they're a mess and should stay away from each other.

Well said. Old solutions are too simplistic in my view.

Also a good point. Come to think of it, couldn't it be possible that the avoidants who are frequently talked about on these boards are just "not that into you"? And that it just wasn't the right time at all? Not meant to be... if you believe in that kind of thing.

Maybe some of these people aren't even avoidant. They just have other issues. One can be emotionally unavailable or a general jerk without being full blown DA or FA.

i also want to add a personal thought here, that is tangential to the discussion but directly addresses what is said about "horoscope feel" and the "identity-nature" of attachment styles.

in the early days, being able to identify clearly the style and its corresponding history and behaviors was really important because it gave me a framework of thinking and some structure to go about working on myself. it then became an identity - I am a AP, or am I a FA? However, as time passes, i'm finding this identity to be limiting, pointless, and unhelpful. I do not wish to continue saying "as an AP/DA/FA/earned-secure, I xxx", because all that does is to reinforce the insecure nature, regardless of whether it is now or in the past. In other words, saying things like "as an ex-AP or as an earned secure" indicates that the identity of being an insecure while no longer active is still very much present in the current identity, because these labels hinge on the memory of being an insecure once. This carries the identity or the identified insecurity forward into the future, and KEEPS IT ALIVE. I think it is one thing to provide context (I was once anxious in my romantic relationships) but another thing to flag it like an identity (I am an ex-AP) to justify one's newfound sense of self. I find the latter to be indicative of a plateau in personal growth as well as detrimental to creating a new narrative for the self.

The names of the attachment styles are simply that- terms that separate the different styles of relating. For the sake of brevity and simplicity people label themselves, and others. I see it as shorthand. It describes their style of attachment, not who they are. There are countless factors that contribute to a person's makeup. Attachment style is only one, and is clearly not a static condition if one becomes aware and chooses to change it.

While it may be true that those with anxious attachment and avoidant attachment are drawn to each other, that does not imply that they necessarily ought to continue together. I could also assert that alcoholics who drink beer are naturally drawn together. They will continue to be drawn together and a natural fit as long as they both remain in the alcohol habit. If one should decide to improve his health and gain sobriety, he then is best assisted and supported in his personal growth by finding new associates, who share his goal of sobriety. The alcoholic he leaves behind can naturally find another alcoholic to share his patterns with, and pass time and perhaps grow weary of the lifestyle. He can either remain in his habits or improve them, and he can either try to do that in the alcoholic environment and try to persuade those around him to his way of thinking, or he can choose the path most likely to support his mental, physical, and emotional health, and find sober comrades.

It's that simple to me, it's really not about attachment style it is about personal awareness and ambition and effort to improve mental, physical, and emotional health (as well as spiritual health if one is so inclined). If two people opt to do that together they can. Very often, two people do not share that deep desire or inclination and a relationship ends, releasing each party to find their own level alone or with someone else.

What qualifies a person for a label here is their thinking and behavior. What changes that is personal effort on one's own issues, not partner choice. Mostly I see people here encouraged to work on their own issues. It is fairly common for a person's partner choice to advance toward secure as they advance toward secure themselves.

And so,, I think that it isn't a matter of finding a magical secure partner. Maybe that's shorthand for saying "Become more secure in your attachment style and become a healthier partner, and you will choose a partner more suitable for you who is able to reciprocate and participate in a more secure relationship that isn't founded on a dysfunctional dynamic."

Alcoholics need not improve themselves with codependents just because they are attracted to each other either! People who both want to improve their relationship together can do that- those that don't won't have much luck. It's pretty simple, in my mind.

Absolutely, there is a way out. Human consciousness is capable of evolving out of many limited states- evolution is a thing in the microcosm and the macrocosm, do we need more proof of that? I'd like to encourage you mrob , although it seems, if I am reading it right, that you already have faith in the process.

As someone who has gone from a very dismissive style (life long) to a not so dismissive and pretty secure style, I can attest to the effectiveness of recognition and concerted effort to change and grow. I don't fit the DA "box" in many ways- so many assumptions about these styles are made, particularly by those with opposing styles. I've overcome a lot of maladaptive patterns in my life, not just an attachment style.

I happen to think that it is a lack of understanding and open mindedness and a fundamentally short sighted view, to think that avoidants in particular cannot and do not change and evolve. Even studies are limited; how many studies have we seen that were convincing and scientifically supported, which were then toppled by an evolved understanding, new questions, and new studies? Humans are complex. The factors influencing a particular individual or couple are infinite. We can make generalizations, and they can be useful. However, my experience is that life itself is a bit of a miracle and the creative potential for problem solving in the whole human experience, is VAST.

We live in a world of constant advancement. It makes no sense that the humans who inhabit it cannot advance. It's just absurd to me.