A: We have this notion that it’s really romantic for a couple to say “I love you” pronto: “The moment he/she sat down at the bus stop next to me, I just knew!” In reality, “love at first sight” tends to come with some issues, such as the failure to weed out any insta-beloveds who kiss like big-lipped fish.
Your desire to go all blurtypants on the guy likewise seems romantic — until you consider the psychological mechanics behind it. Chances are, you’re in a state of psychological tension — all fired up with suspense at how the guy will respond — and only by telling him will you finally get relief. (It’s basically the emotional version of really, really needing to pee.)
Research on sex differences in “parental investment” by evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers suggests that it’s probably a bad idea for you, as a woman, to go first with the ILY. Trivers explains that in species like ours, in which females get stuck with the burden of parental care (should sex lead to the creation of toddlers), they evolved to vet males for ability and willingness to invest — more than that initial teaspoonful of sperm, that is. Men coevolved to expect this — to expect to have to prove themselves to women to get sex. In short, men chase; women choose.
Sure, there are couples out there in which the woman chased and things ended up just fine. But those evolved differences in male and female psychology are still driving us — even now, in our world of smartphones, facial recognition software, and, before long, family vacations in flying minivans.
In other words, you’re taking a risk by tossing out the ILY first — possibly causing the guy to want you less than if you let him take the lead in ILY blurtations. And hi, feminists! I can hear the flicking of your lighters as you ready your pitchforks and hay. But the way I see it, what should be feminist is acknowledging what seems to be the optimal approach for women per research on human psychology.
Despite the risks, you may decide to be that rebel gazelle that chases the lion. If so, why not go all the way? Pull out your man’s chair for him in restaurants. Put your jacket over his shoulders on a cold night. And be the one who goes downstairs with the baseball bat when there’s a weird noise at 3 a.m. As he cowers in bed, reassure him: “Baby, you just stay there in your nightie... I got this.”
The benefits of exorcise
My fiancee dumped me three months ago. I was devastated, but I’ve come to realize that we shouldn’t be together. Now she keeps pressing for us to meet, saying there’s stuff she needs to “process.” I was finally starting to get over her, but should I just go?
— Torn
Getting together with your ex-fiancee after you’ve finally started to move on is like being just out of rehab and reconnecting with a friend: “What could be the harm? A nice pastrami on rye with my old heroin dealer!”
Your brain, like an air-conditioned Miami mansion, is “expensive” to run, so it tries to go on autopilot (basically nonthink mode) whenever possible. When you repeatedly take a certain action — like turning to a certain person for love, attention, and comforting -- that action becomes more and more automatic. On a neural level, this plays out with a bunch of individual brain cells (neurons) that “wire together,” as neuroscientist Carla Shatz puts it.
This happens after individual neurons each fire off a chemical messenger — a neurotransmitter — that another neuron catches and absorbs. The more a person repeats the same action — and the more a group of neurons does the same fire-off-and-catch sequence — the faster they get at it. Eventually, these neurons become what I like to describe as a “thinkpack” — conserving mental energy through bypassing the conscious thought department and robotically defaulting to whatever action worked for the person in the past.
Right now, the last thing you need is to stall your recovery process — the weakening over time of those entrenched neural pathways — by getting the band (Ramon and The Neurons) back together. If you feel bad about saying no to seeing her, consider how she’s prioritizing her need to “process” over your continued recovery. Aww...how loving! (“It’s not you; it’s me — and how my crappy new insurance no longer covers therapy.”)
Having it small
I met somebody online, and we have a real connection, but he is agoraphobic and hasn’t really left his bedroom for 10 years. I have a job and a life, so it’s hard to keep up with his barrage of messages. However, it seems unfair to bail on dating him just because he has this condition. What causes agoraphobia? Is it treatable?
— Wondering
It can be really romantic to spend the entire weekend in bed with a man — but only when you don’t have to spend every other day of the month there, too.
The term “agoraphobia” starts with “agora,” the word for the ancient Greek version of a ginormous open-air shopping mall and outdoor auditorium. However, agoraphobia is not simply a fear of big open spaces. Agoraphobics also fear (and avoid) unfamiliar environments and situations that leave them feeling their safety is beyond their control — like being in a crowd of strangers with little room to move. (To an agoraphobic, a free pass to Coachella is like a coupon for a free hour of electric shocks at a CIA black site.)
Additionally, the “my duvet is my continent!” lifestyle (in severe cases of agoraphobia) can develop out of a fear of having these dreaded situations trigger a panic attack. Evolutionary psychologist and psychiatrist Randolph Nesse explains that panic, a form of fear, appears to be an “adaptive” reaction — meaning one that evolved to protect us -- driving us to flee from “life-threatening danger.” It does this by kicking off a “coordinated pattern” of changes in the body, emotions, and behavior.
In the body, panic causes your adrenaline to surge, ramping up your energy. Your lung capacity increases, and your blood flow gets redirected — away from your brain and to your arms and legs, so you can kickbox somebody into submission or (if you got a D in ninja school) run for your life.
Mentally, panic turns you “Aaah! Lemme outta here!”-centric. As Nesse explains it, “the mind becomes focused on finding escape routes. If none are obvious, anxiety rises quickly,” and there’s an “overwhelming” motivation to seek shelter in protective places and be near protective people (like “trusted relatives”).
If you’re staring down a lion or an angry mob, this response will help you survive. And Nesse notes that “mild ‘normal’ agoraphobia seems” to be a reaction akin to “fear of leaving the home range in territorial animals, a situation fraught with danger in the wild.” However, Nesse explains that extreme agoraphobia — like that experienced by your friend — seems to be an over-functioning of a survival mechanism, an excessive response leading to the avoidance of not just meaningful danger but the stuff of normal day-to-day life.
But there is hope for agoraphobics — from research on anxiety disorders. Clinical psychologist Michelle Craske reports that the mind and body can often be successfully retrained through a form of cognitive behavioral therapy. It’s called exposure therapy, and it involves a therapist gradually and repeatedly exposing a patient to something they’re irrationally afraid of (like spiders, social rejection, or leaving their bedroom).
These experiences can eventually lead the patient to see that their fear is unfounded and — in time — to react more rationally, both consciously and in their subconscious physical reactions. So, for example, going to the grocery store would eventually give rise to the bodily reactions of any other tedious to-do list item — as opposed to the adrenalized reactions that go with being chased down the cereal aisle by a guy with a bloody ax.
The thing is, this is a long process — often rife with setbacks — and you aren’t this guy’s doctor. As for your notion that it’s unfair to nix a relationship with him because of his condition, you seem to be conflating sticking by a person you love -- that “in sickness and in health” marriage vows thing -- with doing it for a person you hope to love.
You may also be falling prey to the “sunk cost fallacy.” This is a cognitive bias — an error in reasoning — that leads us to irrationally decide to continue an endeavor based on how much we’ve already invested (in, say, time and energy). But that prior investment is gone. The rational way to assess whether to continue is to see what we’d get out of any future investment.
In other words, you should only consider this guy a viable prospect for a boyfriend if you’re willing to sign on for the day-to-day reality -- a relationship that takes place entirely in his bedroom, save for the occasional exotic vacation to the living room: “Uh, when you get a chance, two more pina coladas...Mom.”
•
(c.) 2018, Amy Alkon, all rights reserved. Got a problem? Write Amy Alkon, 171 Pier Ave, #280, Santa Monica, CA 90405, or e-mail
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
(advicegoddess.com). Weekly radio show: blogtalkradio.com/amyalkon
