A friend recommended this book. While i have heard of attachment theory, i have never read it so clearly explained before now. This book gave me some serious food for thought about my own attachment styles. I would recommend this book for anyone who is or plans to be in a relationship, even if not a polyamorous nor romantic relationship. I was very interested to read about the different types of emotional regulation, and recognized the patterns described, both in myself and in others whom i know. This will take time to digest and integrate, and i am sure it will affect how i think about relationships in the future. Great result, for a book!
Below are notes with my comments in square brackets.
Literature on polyamory has come a long way since The Ethical Slut and Polyamory: The New Love Without Limits were first published in '97.
Options began to proliferate in the late 2000's, with books like Opening Up and many lesser-known titles. ... this wave of polyamory practice presumed the centrality of a primary couple and popularized a hierarchical model in which primary partners were to have rights and safety that secondary or casual partners were not granted to the same degree.
Then, in 2014, my co-author and I published More Than Two, attempting to distill the last decade's worth of debate into an instruction manual that promised a non-hierarchical, more egalitarian way of thinking about polyamorous relationships.
I watched, fascinated, as Fern firmly drew connections between attachment theory and ethical polyamory with grace, style, and wit.
Fern's intervention is a ground-breaking development in the trajectory of writing about ethical polyamory and relationships. The tools provided here will be helpful for those who are practicing ethical polyamory; they will also help those who are monogamous, who also navigate dating, communicating needs, and making decisions about commitment. Polysecure expands on the existing literature in a significant--perhaps even paradigm-shifting way.
Fern is uniquely qualified to write this book. She is a psychotherapist who is nonmonogamous and works with nonmonogamous people and families. She holds a masters in conflict analysis and resolution.
Compersion: The state of happiness, joy, or pleasure that comes from delighting in other people's happiness. In nonmonogamy, this term is more specifically used to refer to the positive feelings experienced when your lover is having a positive experience with one of their other lovers.
Consensual Nonmonogamy (CNM): The practice of having multiple sex and/or romantic partners at the same time, where all people involved are aware of this relationship arrangement and consent to it.
Metamour: Two people who share a partner, but are not romantically or sexually involved with each other.
Monogamy: The practice of having one sex or romantic partner at a time.
Mononormativity: This term was coined by Pieper and Baver to refer to the socially dominant assumptions regarding the naturalness and normalcy of monogamy, where political, popular, and psychological narratives typically present monogamy as the superior, most naturally, or morally correct way to do relationships.
Polysaturated: The point at which the thought of another relationship leaves one feeling more exhausted than excited. When a polyamorous person has as many significant and insignificant others as they think that they can handle at a given time.
Attachment theory was developed in the 1960s by British psychologist John Bowlby, but in the past several years, it has expanded its reach outside of the academic and therapeutic spheres, becoming more popularized in general public discourse regarding personal healing, parenting, dating, marriages, and relationships.
Part 1 covers an overview of attachment theory and trauma.
Part 2 looks at the interaction of nonmonogamy and attachment theory.
Part 3 switches modes into a more practical look at what you and your partners can do to cultivate secure attachment in attachment-based polyamorous relationships.
Healthy attachment is a deep bond and an enduring emotional closeness that connects people to one another across space and time. As human infants, we are born into this world with an attachment system that wires us to expect connection with others.
When an infant feels fear, distress, or discomfort, there attachment system is activated. This prompts them to quickly turn towards their caretakers or use proximity-seeking behaviors such as crying, reaching for, calling out or, later, crawling and following their attachment figure. All these behaviors are attempts to restore feelings of safety, and in many cases to restore actual safety, too. If the child receives the support, reassurance, and comfort they need from their caretaker, their nervous system then returns to a state of calm homeostasis. Infants and children who can't yet fully regulate their own emotional states depend on their caretakers to coregulate for them... As children, we want to know that our attachment figures are nearby and accessible. We need to know that they will provide us with a safe haven to turn to when we need them, which then gives us a secure base from which we can explore our environment. When our attachment needs are being met, this system enables us to feel comfortable and free to explore ourselves, others, and the world around us.
If their caretakers are able to meet most of their needs enough of the time, children usually have a secure attachment. But if they experience their parents as inconsistent, in accessible, unresponsive, or even threatening and dangerous, they adapt by developing more insecure attachment styles.
As children, when we feel afraid, threatened, or in need, and seeking closeness with our parents is NOT a viable option because they're not available or because turning towards them doesn't make things better, we learn to rely more on ourselves. We become more self-reliant and we minimize our attachment needs. When we deactivate our attachment systems, we suppress our attachment-based longings--not because we don't still want closeness and connection, but in order to adapt and survive. [This is the deactivation strategy. Another strategy is hyperactivation.]
Both of these strategies can also occur simultaneously, meaning a child may experience both hyperactivation and deactivation, or may vacillate between the two survival strategies.
When children experience secure interactions with the adults in their lives and function from a secure attachment style, they also tend to have better self-esteem, be more resilient to trauma, have stronger social skills, concentrate better, enjoy play, and have solid overall emotional health. Through these nourishing experiences, a child develops a sense of safety and trust. They take in the messages that the world is a friendly place and that they can ask for what they want because the people in their lives care and are willing to help.
People with a secure attachment style experience a healthy sense of self [we matter] and see themselves and their partner in a positive light [we are worthy of love]. Their interpersonal experiences are deeply informed by their knowledge that they can ask for what they need and people will typically listen and willingly respond. It's empowering to know that our actions are effective. As adults, this helps us be more flexible when our partners can't meet our needs.
Bowlby conceived of the parent-child attachment relationship as having four essential features:
Two additional changes in adult attachment compared to parent-child attachment include:
For securely attached people, "dependency" is not a dirty word, but a fact of life that can be experienced without losing or compromising the self.
... securely functioning adults are also comfortable with their independence and personal autonomy. They may miss their partners when they're not together, but inside they feel fundamentally alright with themselves when they're alone. In other words, securely attached people experience "relational object constancy," which is the ability to trust in and maintain an emotional bond with people even during physical or emotional separation.
Another important aspect of secure attachment is that, when distressed, a person can both emotionally regulate on their own, and can also co-regulate and receive support from their partners. People functioning from a secure attachment style are better able to take care of their own needs as well as ask their partners to help out.
Attachment theory is not about parent blaming. Disruptions in attachment can occur for various reasons outside of the attachment figure's control...
Your attachment styles are survival adaptations to your environment and since they were learned, they can also be unlearned.
Attachment styles are not rigid identities to take on.
You might relate to more than one style.
Your attachment style is not an excuse for abuse.
In adulthood, having a deactivated attachment system includes not only minimizing one's own bids for care and attention, but also having a diminished ability to pick up on and register attachment cues from others.
Part of this deactivating and distancing adaptation is the dissociation from lived experience.
Statements that someone with a dismissive attachment style might make:
Hyperactivating the attachment system ramps up the desire for a caretaker, amplifying the child's attention bids as a way to capture a parent's attention.
When used to characterized an adult, anxious attachment is called preoccupied. People with this attachment style demonstrate an intense focus and heightened concern about the level of closeness in their relationships. The partner of someone with a preoccupied attachment style may then feel like this constant tracking of relational mis-attunements and mistakes is controlling of them.
A person with a preoccupied style can be uncomfortable, even terrified, of being alone.
From their partner's perspective, the needs of the person with the preoccupied attachment style may seem insatiable.
Similar to people with a dismissive attachment adaptation, people with the preoccupied adaptation also have difficulty identifying and describing their own emotions. Someone with a preoccupied style has more awareness of both their feelings and their partner's feelings, but they still struggle with differentiating and communicating their feelings and with managing their emotional responses in healthy ways. Also, although they're more aware of their partner's feelings, they're not necessarily reading those feelings accurately.
Statements that someone with a preoccupied attachment style might make:
Children with a disorganized attachment style have attachment system that seems to be hyperactivated and deactivated at the same time. ... they seem to lack a coherent organization of which strategy to employ, often vacillating between the anxious and avoidant insecure attachment styles.
The disorganized attachment style is most commonly associated with trauma and it typically arises when a while experiences their attachment figure as scary, threatening, or dangerous.
The predominant factor leading to this style in childhood is having parents who are suffering from their own unresolved trauma or losses. When a parent has a history of unresolved trauma, they are more easily overwhelmed by life's demands and emotionally flooded by their child's emotional states. Unable to regulate their own emotions, parents with a history of unhealed trauma, neglect, or abuse--might then act out, lash out, or completely tune out in ways that are scary to the child. Research has shown that approximately 20 to 40% of the general population has some degree of a disorganized attachment style, and approximately 80% of children who have experienced abuse develop a disorganized attachment style...
In adulthood, the disorganized attachment style is referred to as fearful-avoidant. People with this style of attachment experience a clashing fear of either being too close or too far away from their partners. People with this style are easily overwhelmed by their feelings or are subject to what I call emotional flare-ups, where their intense emotional states can take over, disrupting their ability to function and, at times, taking others down with them.
When trauma occurs, there is a rupture with the foundational relationship a person has with their self. This severed internal relationship with the self needs to be restored so that the person can go on to trust and value themselves, as well as begin to trust others again. When this type of healing has yet to occur, people functioning from the fearful-avoidant attachment style will tend to see themselves as broken and unworthy and will expect that others are untrustworthy or will only hurt them in the end.
low avoidance
|
secure | preoccupied
|
low anxiety ------------------+----------------- high anxiety
|
dismissive | fearful
|
high avoidance
Another way to conceive of the attachment dimensions is not through their "dysfunctions," but through their strengths and desires.
<-- isolation <-- autonomy | connection --> fusion -->
This figure shows how the drives for agency and communion can go beyond their healthier manifestations and turn into either self-alienation or self-abandonment.
To navigate our relationships from a place of health and wholeness, we need to learn how to manage these seemingly contradictory drives.
Our boundaries are the ways we protect ourselves physically, mentally, and emotionally.
Healthy Boundaries: Being connected and protected.
Porous Boundaries: Being connected but not protected.
Rigid Boundaries: Being protected but not connected.
According to Solomon, when our boundaries are porous on the input, we are "absorbing," and when they are too porous on the output, we are "intruding." When our boundaries are too open from the outside in, we are being too wide open. When our boundaries are too open from the inside out, we become intrusive to others, trying to inhabit their skin or meddling too much in their business. Intruding also includes crossing or ignoring other people's boundaries, especially when those lines have been articulated.
When our boundaries are rigid on the input, we are "blocking" and when they are too rigid on the output we are "restraining." When our boundaries are too rigid from the inside out we are obstructing input from others, whether that is their love, attention, feedback, or reassurance. When our boundaries are too rigid from the inside out, we restrain ourselves from expressing what is true for us, internally.
The word trauma comes from the Greek word "wound," which was initially used to refer to physical injuries. The definition has since expanded to further encompass psychological and spiritual wounds as well.
Complex and relational trauma are terms used to describe the experience of multiple traumatic events that are ongoing, such as abuse or neglect, and that are interpersonal in nature.
Some trauma experts have begun to further simplify the definition of trauma, framing it as the experience of broken connection.
... trauma and attachment wounds are not just an individual or relational experience. They also stem from the world we are in, where injustice and power imbalances have been unaddressed, all shaping and informing our experiences.
Attachment unfolds over multiple levels of human experience. When referring to different levels of experience, I am pointing to the different dimensions or aspects of our human experience: self, relationships, home, local communities and culture, societal, and the globe or collective. These different levels may seem separate and different from one another, yet they are all interconnected...
The current literature on attachment predominantly focuses on the self and relational levels.
Research and literature on attachment have provided undeniable evidence about how relationships with our parents and lovers shape our attachment style, but the impact of siblings is not as commonly discussed, despite being just as important to our attachment style.
Friendships that function as a primary attachment can also leave a painful mark on one's heart and a significant attachment disturbance when there is betrayal, dishonesty, ghosting, or drama that ends in the loss of friendship.
Today the local culture and communities level also include virtual culture and online communities. We can physically be in our homes but have our minds and hearts somewhere else completely, in the virtual world.
School culture is another important aspect of this level, since most children spend the majority of their waking hours in the classroom, cafeterias, and schoolyard.
The earth is alive. It is where we come from, it is what nourishes life, and it is where we will return to. If we are going to talk about attachment relationships it would be remiss not to mention our original mother: Mother Earth.
Perel reminds us that there is plenty of evidence that the monogamous model doesn't necessarily work, with many people endorsing a "proclaimed monogamy," while actually performing "clandestine nonmonogamy."
When comparing people in monogamous relationships to people in CNM relationships, researches have found that CNM relationships have similar levels of commitment, longevity, satisfaction, passion, and love as monogamous relationships do. Additionally, despite what people might presume, CNM relationships also have been found to have greater levels of trust and lower levels of jealousy than monogamous ones.
Instead of expecting one partner to meet all of their needs, people engaged in CNM felt that a major advantage of being nonmonogamous was the ability to have their different needs met by more than one person, as well as being able to experience a variety of nonsexual activities that one relationship may not fulfill. The other notable relational benefit to people in CNM relationships was personal growth--people reported feeling that being nonmonogamous afforded them increased freedom from restriction, self and sexual expression, and the ability to grow and develop. The authors of this research state that people in monogamous relationships may also experience such benefits, but these... were mostly highlighted by people in CNM relationships, offering some potentially interesting insight into their motivations for participating in CNM.
[The author also discusses lifestyle versus orientation. Lifestyle is a choice and may change over time. Orientation is not a choice and is part of who a person essentially is. Nonmonogamy can be either.]
Attachment research and resources for CNM relationships are scarce. It is safe to say that the field of attachment theory is highly mononormative. The overwhelming majority of research conducted to understand adult romantic attachment is undertaken with monogamous couples, and advice about how to establish a secure attachment either assumes monogamy or outright prescribes monogamy as a necessary precondition for establishing safety and security.
Differences in motivation and experiences are to be expected and are not inherently a problem, but some behaviors such as casual sex, one-night stands, sex outside of marriage, multiple sexual partners, partaking in bondage, voyeurism, exhibitionism, and even sexting are all associated with insecure attachment. The problem gets even bigger when people take these research findings a step further and conclude that since these sexual behaviors are the types of behaviors that nonmonogamous people participate in, then nonmonogamy must in and of itself be an expression of insecure attachment. ... many of my clients have unfortunately heard previous therapists equate being CNM with attachment insecurity and pathologize them for their lifestyle and sexuality. In such cases it is important to distinguish between the intentions behind specific sexual behaviors instead of just looking at the sex act itself.
When we start to dig into the current research on CNM and attachment, we find the research is extremely limited. The good news is that what little research has been done thus far demonstrates that people in CNM relationships are just as likely to be securely attached as people in monogamous relationships. (No difference in attachment anxiety levels, and lower in attachment avoidance than people in monogamous relationships were). This suggests that people in CNM relationships exhibit characteristics of secure attachment, maybe even more so than people in monogamous relationships.
Similar to how a child can be securely attached to one parent, while simultaneously insecurely attached to another parent, polyamorous adults can have different attachment styles with different romantic partners that are independent of each other.
When it comes to advice on how to cultivate secure attachment in nonmonogamous relationships, the literature is practically non-existent.
Regarding Stan Tatkin's Psychobiological Approach to Couple Therapy (PACT). The PACT method is well-researched and has been designed to help adult romantic relationships securely function.
... secure attachment is an embodied expression built upon how we consistently respond and attune to each other, not something that gets created through structure and hierarchy. Relationship structure does not guarantee emotional security.
The takeaway message here is not to abolish all relationship hierarchies or shared bank accounts, but instead for people to procure secure attachment from their relationship experiences instead of their relationship structures. Allow your direct experience with a partner to be the vehicle to secure attachment instead of having certain relationship concepts, narratives, or structures be the vehicle.
As CNM individuals and couples began to seek my counsel, I began to notice two different camps: those who were mostly thriving and those who seemed to be barely surviving. For those who were thriving, our work was often short-term.
I call these people who thrive with their multiple partners polysecure. This is the state of being both securely attached to multiple romantic partners and having enough internal security to be able to navigate the structural relational insecurity inherent to nonmonogamy, as well as the increased complexity and uncertainty that occurs when having multiple partners and metamours. More succinctly, being polysecure is having secure attachment with yourself and your multiple partners.
To me, telling people who are struggling with the transition from monogamy to CNM to go back to monogamy because CNM is too difficult would be like telling the new parents of an infant who are struggling without sleep or personal time that maybe they should just send the kid back, since they didn't have any of these issues before the child arrived. This analogy may seem ridiculous because you literally can't send the kid back, but that can be exactly what it can feel like for people who have made the transition out of monogamy into CNM, especially for people who experience CNM not as a lifestyle choice but as who they fundamentally are.
Unlike the built-in security that can ostensibly come from being monogamous, CNM is a relationship structure that is inherently insecure.
This form of relationship can bring up levels of uncertainty that many people are not yet equipped for, especially when they don't have enough internal secure attachment.
In CNM, it is not necessary for all our relationships to be attachment-based. There is a difference between being in a secure connection with someone and having a securely attached relationship. Secure connections are with people or partners who we don't have daily or regular contact with, but with whom we know that when we reach out it will feel as if a moment hasn't passed. We are secure in the bond that we have with such people, and this bond might be immensely meaningful, special, and important to us, but it's not necessarily a relationship that requires us to invest regular maintenance and attention. In CNM, these might be the partners we refer to as comets, satellites, or casual. They're the people we see at special events a few times a year or our less-involved long-distance relationships. Securely attached relationships are based on consistency and reliability. These are the people who are there for each other in responsive and attuned ways more times than not. They are our "go-to" people who have our back and to whom we can turn when we feel hurt or threatened and/or need support, comfort, or reassurance. They're the people we're excited to share our latest discoveries with.
Some people prefer not to define their relationships, preferring to explore and experience them without labels or traditional expectations. As long as this level of ambiguity or relational fluidity is a match for everyone involved, it can be a very liberating and satisfying way to relate with others. But when someone casts a partner in the role of attachment figure, but that person is unable or unwilling to play the part, much pain, frustration, disappointment, heartache, and attachment anxiety ensues.
Ideally, any type of relationship, regardless of how involved or not, is ethical, respectful, has open communication, and is considerate of everyone involved. But when we are in attachment-based relationships more is required, so the rest of this book will center on people who are (or want to be) in polyamorous attachment-based relationships.
The antecedent to being polysecure with your partners is first getting clear about whether you want to be attachment figures for each other.
In monogamy, usually at some point people have the commitment conversation in hopes of better defining their relationship, but exactly what that means to each person and all of the assumptions and expectations that each person is carrying are often left minimally discussed, if they are articulated at all. In nonmonogamy, unspoken expectations and assumptions typically don't bode very well, and intentional discussions about exactly what we're doing and why we are together are important for everyone involved to feel safe and secure.
For us to feel safe and secure in our relationships, we need to know that our partners want to be there for us and will be to the best of their ability, and so some level of commitment to being in a relationship together is important.
Commitment can be expressed in many ways. Traditionally it is solidified through marriage, owning property, having kids, or wearing certain types of jewelry, but legal, domestic, or ornamental undertakings are not the only ways to show dedication. In a 2018 talk on solo polyamory at the Boulder Nonmonogamy Talk Series, Kim Keane offered the following ways that people practicing nonmonogamy can demonstrate commitment to their partners:
In each of your relationships that are already attachment-based, or for the relationships that you would like to become more attachment-based, discuss the following questions with your partners.
In each of your relationships that are attachment-based or for the relationships that you would like to become more attachment-based, ask yourself:
When safety is established with our attachment figures and we have an internalized felt sense that we can turn towards them and lean on them when needed, we are freed up to securely turn away from them and engage in the world, whether with them by our side or on our own. A secure base provides the platform from which we can move out in the larger world, explore, and take risks. This exploration facilitates our sense of personal competence and healthy autonomy. Secure base partners will not only support our explorations, but will also offer guidance when solicited and lovingly call us on our shit. They function as a compassionate mirror for our blind spots and all the ways we may be fooling ourselves...
In simple terms, I see being a safe haven as serving the role of accepting and being with me as I am, and a secure base as supporting me to grow beyond who I am.
Examples of things you and your partner can do to be secure bases for each other:
In each of your relationships that are attachment-based, or for the relationships that you would like to become more attachment-based, ask yourself:
... To me, this demonstrates the importance of how we do not always have to turn to our partners to meet our safe haven or secure base needs, especially when our pre-established relationship dynamics are working well. We can focus on cultivating a more secure attachment with ourselves, which is one of the pillars of being polysecure.
... the acronym HEARTS, which I use to encapsulate the different ingredients, skills, capacities, and ways of being required for secure functioning in multiple attachment-based partnerships.
H: Here (being here and present with me)
E: Expressed Delight
A: Attunement
R: Rituals and Routines
T: Turning Towards After Conflict
S: Secure Attachment With Self
When we experience our partners as being here with us, it results in positive beliefs that our partners care about us, we matter to them, and we are worthy of their love and attention. Conversely, when our partners are unavailable, unresponsive, or mentally elsewhere, attachment insecurity can arise, feeding the fears and doubts that we are not valued, loved, or worthy.
Attachment is an embodied experience, and it is first through being present with ourselves in our own bodies and present with our loved ones that the rest of the attachment-based skills and capacities of the HEART of being polysecure can be developed and expressed.
Things to try:
When you are struggling with being present because you are in conflict with another partner or have other life stressors going on, the next best thing you can do is just name what is tugging at your presence. You do not necessarily have to go fully into what is distracting you... but being able to name where you are at and what is preventing you from being fully present (instead of trying to pretend that you're fine when you're clearly not) is another way of being present with where you are in that moment. It may not be ideal, but it is honest and partners will typically appreciate this.
As best as you can, clearly communicate when you will be unavailable...
The next thing that you can do to nurture more polysecurity with your partners is offer expressed delight. Brown and Elliot describe expressed delight as one of the foundational elements of secure attachment. When a parent shows pleasure not just in the things that their child does, but in who their child is, a positive sense and healthy self-esteem are fostered in the child. As adults, expressed delight is also needed to promote secure attachment and a healthy sense of self within the relationship. When our partners are able to articulate the ways that we are special and valuable to them, our interpersonal self-worth is supported. When we express the ways that we appreciate and are grateful for our partners, we create a culture of positivity in our relationships that allows mutual vulnerability, authenticity, and joy to flourish. We can express the delight we have for our partners through our words, our actions, our touch, as well as just the look in our eyes.
Our attachment bonds are emotional bonds, and being able to emotionally tune into and connect with our partners is at the core of feeling safe and secure together. Attunement is a state of resonance with our partners and the act of turning towards them in an attempt to understand the fullness of their perspective and experience. Attunement is meeting your partner with curiosity, wanting to understand their feelings and needs. It is the feeling of being seen, understood, and "gotten" by the other.
There are certain challenges with attunement that can surface in attachment-based relationships. They include how to stay attuned to your partner when they are upset with you and how to stay attuned if you get triggered by them.
Our attachment system is comforted by routine and regularity.
The routines that we can rely on and look forward to are an important part of secure functioning in our CNM attachment-based relationships.
It is also important to create rituals and routines that honor the transitional moments when you and your partners are parting or reuniting. Our attachment systems are very sensitive to comings and goings. Abrupt departures and sudden arrivals can all be jarring to the nervous system, and hellos or goodbyes left unacknowledged can be disconnective.
In any relationship, ruptures are inevitable. What matters is not that we have ruptures, but how we repair them. Conflicts left unrepaired can leave lasting effects on our sense of trust, safety, and security.
[Happy couples] are able to learn from what went wrong and see that repairing the relationship is more important than the problem itself. ... how skillful the repair attempt was did not necessarily predict how effective the repair was. Repairs didn't have to be perfectly executed as much as they had to be genuine. ... resilience after conflict was related to how much a couple was making regular "deposits into their emotional bank account."
Things to try:
Check out The Five Languages of Apology by Gary Chapman [1]
Check out the R.A.D.A.R. relationship check-in method as developed by the Multiamory podcast crew to support regular check-ins and conflict management
... the establishment of a secure relationship with oneself is needed to fully embody healthy attachment with others, so much so that it requires its own chapter.
When we have experienced attachment insecurely with caregivers--whether in childhood, in our adult relationships, or as disruptions in any of the levels discussed in the nested model of attachment and trauma--our primary relationship with ourself can become severed and the development of certain capacities and skills can become compromised.
Internal attachment healing is needed for the HEART of secure functioning to become possible and then take root in our relationships. YOU are the source of your happiness, love, courage, emotional regulation, and purpose, and the sooner that you can release your partner from being the source of these experiences the better for everyone involved (metamours included).
Knowing how to stand securely on your own two feet and how to be your own safe haven and secure base is fundamental to building your internal secure attachment. I would say this to anyone practicing monogamy, but it is even more imperative in nonmonogamous relationships. In polyamory, we need the internal security of being anchored in our inner strength and inner nurturer to navigate a relationship structure that is considered less secure. You must be a priority in your own life. Secure attachment with yourself means being aware of your feelings and desires, as well as being able to tend to your own needs and knowing how to advocate for them in relationships.
Those of us who [have attachment insecurity] can still develop earned secure attachment. At the self level, one way to develop earned secure attachment is through making sense of our story.
According to Daniel Siegel, we can make sense of our attachment history by creating a coherent narrative of our past experiences. By telling the stories that have been previously unspoken, we allow ourselves to feel what has been unfelt and bring love to what has seemed unlovable. When we are able to describe our painful past experiences and craft them into a narrative that makes sense to us, healing occurs and our brains can literally be rewired for more secure functioning. [No, not literally. Our brains don't have wires.]
When crafting the stories of your insecurely attached past, it is important not only to be able to describe and allow the feelings associated with what you've gone through, but also develop an appreciation for the attachment survival adaptations that you took on. Your attachment adaptations are what worked best in the environment that you were embedded in, and it is important to recognize the power and wisdom in the different styles that you constructed. As we give voice to our past, accept and allow our pain, and even appreciate the ways we were shaped from this, we are better able to take responsibility for the ways that we still need to grow and show up differently for ourselves and in our relationships.
The HEART of secure functioning is not just for your relationships with partners, but it can be directly applied to your relationship with yourself.
In order to create internal security, we must first inhabit our own being. We must fully occupy our bodies, which are the storehouse of our feelings, needs, pains, desires, and longings.
Being our own safe haven and secure base requires that we first have the capacity to be with ourself. To sit, to listen, to be available to whatever arises within us. Life occurs in the present moment and our healing needs the fullness of our attention in the here and now to take place. Through embodiment, we can learn how to tolerate the uncomfortable feelings and sensations that might be necessary to move through in order to heal. We can also learn to allow positive sensations and feelings that might have been previously exiled.
When applying the attachment need of expressed delight to yourself, we are talking about an inner sense of joy, appreciation, and pleasure in your own being and existence. ... as adults, our positive sense of self cannot be solely contingent on the expressed delight of those around us. We need to cultivate expressed delight for ourselves in order to maintain a positive sense of worth and healthy appreciation for who and how we are that is sustainable and resilient.
I am talking about the importance of positive self-talk and being kind and loving to yourself in ways that you would probably treat a friend, but so frequently forget when it comes to your relationship with yourself.
Even a small shift in the way you talk to yourself has significant physical and mental health benefits and can influence your ability to regulate your feelings, thoughts, and behavior under stress. [Positive self-talk] is about having an inner dialogue that is forgiving, understanding, flexible, and holds a larger, often more realistic perspective than the negative, defeated, or abusive self-talk that we often tolerate as the inner status quo. Expressed delight for yourself would mean being able to see your strengths, positive attributes, qualities, and ways of being that you can be proud of and grateful for, as well as seeing where there is still room for self-improvement. When we delight in our children or our partners, we don't necessarily see them as perfect. In fact, we usually them them with all their amazing, difficult, and quirky qualities and choose to take delight in their fullness, contradictions and all. Can you do this for yourself?
The inner critic and shameful parts of us can have a prominent impact through the ways they shape and history our view of self, other, and world, and when in the driver's seat these parts can wreak much havoc, but they are not the totality of who we are. Just as our attachment styles are not the fullness of who we are, these parts are also just an aspect of ourselves that can be healed and transformed.
Things to try:
Check out Rick Hanson's "Hardwiring Happiness" or Joe Dispenza's "Becoming Supernatural," which both focus on how to create positive changes within your inner landscape.
When we are able to tune in and tend to our needs from the inside first, we may still seek outward support, comfort, and guidance from our partners, but our fundamental well-being and sense of being OK are not dependent on it.
When applied to the self, attunement is our ability to turn inward in order to become receptive and aware of our interior world. Self-attunement is the inner inquiry into what you are feeling, needing, thinking, and experiencing. Self-attunement facilitates self-knowing, which furthers our ability to self-regulate and soothe our own physiological and emotional states, as well as respond appropriately to our environment.
People with more attachment anxiety tend to seek outward regulation from others... Seeking this external regulation from others is often at the exclusion of their own self-regulation and their own sense of self.
People functioning from a dismissive attachment style steer clear of trying to emotionally regulate with others because, in many ways, they don't even see it as a possibility. The co-regulation that a child needs and would experience with an attachment figure was not available to them, so they learned to take care of themselves by disengaging from others and taking space to regulate. From the outside, it may look like people with avoidant attachment are able to self-regulate well since they are comfortable on their own, but usually they are not self-attuning and self-soothing as much as they are autoregulating--that is, partaking in activities that are more about zoning out or tuning out in order to dissociate from their internal states than tuning into and intentionally working with their internal states.
Auto-Regulation (It just happens)
[Sounds like it has some overlap with the autism spectrum.]
External Regulation (You do it)
Interactive Regulation (We do it)
Self-Regulation (I do it)
[Some autoregulation behaviors can also be examples of self-regulating when they are intentional.]
When focusing on establishing a more secure relationship with yourself, one of the most influential routines we can implement is what I refer to as self-alignment practices. Many of us already have a sense of the parts of us that we might refer to as our better self or higher self, or what I refer to as my secure self or aligned self (this is the part of me that is aligned with my better skills, values, visions, and morals).
How we treat ourselves when we have made a mistake, when there is an internal battle between different parts of ourselves, or when we have fallen short of our own standards, ethics, or expectations, is imperative in building a stronger inner security foundation.
One important aspect in working with your inner critic and being able to reduce the impact of its harsh ways is learning how to translate its message.
Just as we want to speak for our parts [inner critic] instead of from them, we also want to learn how to respond to our triggers instead of reacting from them. Understanding and inquiring into your triggers can be a powerful way to heal past pain and transform outdated beliefs or stories that you might still be stuck in.
Things to try:
author: Fern, Jessica
detail: https://thornapplepress.ca/polysecure/
title: Polysecure