Avoidants Secretly Hope You Do THIS When They Stonewall

Summary

This video delves into the concept of stonewalling, a behavior often seen in individuals with avoidant attachment styles. It explains how avoidants use stonewalling as a defense mechanism when they feel their independence is threatened, rooted in childhood experiences of emotional neglect. The video explores the triggers that lead to stonewalling and emphasizes the importance of patience, empathy, and gradual change in fostering communication. By understanding and responding to avoidants' hidden desires and fears, a secure attachment can eventually replace the insecure one, leading to healthier relationships.

Takeaways

• 🧱 Avoidants use stonewalling as a defense mechanism when they feel overwhelmed or their independence is threatened.
• 🚪 Avoidants hold secret hopes that their partners will open certain 'doors' to address their core wounds.
• ⚡ The threshold for triggering stonewalling varies among avoidants, depending on how aggressive a partner is in pursuing commitment.
• 🌊 Avoidants often grew up in environments where they had to rely on themselves, resulting in the self-soothing behavior of stonewalling.
• 💔 Stonewalling is not about a lack of desire for commitment—avoidants actually do want connection but fear it due to their core wound.
• 🐸 The boiling frog metaphor illustrates that avoidants are more likely to respond negatively to sudden changes rather than gradual shifts.
• 📚 Avoidants are often drawn to anxious partners, creating a destructive push-pull dynamic, as seen in 'Wuthering Heights.'
• 🔄 Attachment styles are fluid and can change over time with different relationships, personal growth, and secure interactions.
• 🧠 Secure responses involve giving avoidants space when they pull back, rather than attempting to solve the issue immediately.
• 🎯 Tactical empathy, understanding and vocalizing an avoidant's fears, is key to breaking down their emotional barriers and opening communication.

Q & A

What is stonewalling, according to the script?

Stonewalling is when someone withdraws from an interaction, shuts down, and closes themselves off because they feel overwhelmed or physiologically flooded.

What triggers stonewalling in avoidant individuals?

Stonewalling is typically triggered when avoidant individuals feel their independence is being threatened, such as when they are asked to commit to deeper levels of a relationship (e.g., going on a date, marriage, or having children).

How does the 'core wound' concept explain avoidant behavior?

The core wound of avoidants is a deep-seated desire to maintain their independence. When they feel this independence is threatened, they respond with stonewalling as a defense mechanism.

What is the significance of early childhood in the development of avoidant attachment?

Avoidant attachment often develops from early childhood experiences where the caregiver failed to provide consistent safety and emotional regulation. This leads the child to develop self-reliance as a coping strategy, which later manifests as avoidance in adulthood.

Why is the 'boiling frog' metaphor used in the context of avoidant behavior?

The 'boiling frog' metaphor illustrates how avoidants react to sudden, intense changes but may not notice or respond as dramatically to gradual changes. It's used to explain why avoidants can handle slow progress in a relationship but react defensively to rapid shifts.

Do avoidants actually desire commitment?

Yes, avoidants do want connection and commitment, but their core wound and fear of losing independence cause them to push people away. They use stonewalling as a defense mechanism, though deep down they seek intimacy.

How does the anxious-avoidant dynamic mirror the relationship between Heathcliff and Catherine in 'Wuthering Heights'?

Heathcliff represents an anxious attachment style, constantly seeking reassurance and fearing abandonment, while Catherine is an avoidant, maintaining emotional distance. Their dynamic showcases the destructive push-pull tension common between anxious and avoidant partners.

Can attachment styles change over time?

Yes, attachment styles are fluid. Relationships, experiences, and personal growth can lead insecure attachment styles (e.g., anxious or avoidant) to become more secure over time, especially when interacting with secure partners.

What is the 'Space Formula' used for when dealing with stonewalling?

The 'Space Formula' helps determine how much space to give an avoidant based on factors like the severity of stonewalling, past patterns, their comfort level with space, communication attempts, and the emotional climate.

What is tactical empathy, and how can it be applied to avoidants?

Tactical empathy is recognizing and vocalizing another person's perspective, allowing for better communication. In dealing with avoidants, it involves acknowledging their fears and concerns in a respectful way, which can help create a safe environment for dialogue.

Outlines

00:00

🔒 Understanding Avoidant Stonewalling: A Deeper Dive

The speaker explains the concept of stonewalling in avoidant individuals, emphasizing how it’s often triggered when avoidants feel their independence is threatened. Stonewalling is misunderstood, as many believe it's about emotional withdrawal, but it actually stems from deep-seated fears related to independence. Trigger points, such as relationship milestones, can vary between avoidants. These behaviors originate from early childhood attachment issues where avoidants learn to rely on themselves for emotional regulation, leading to lifelong habits like stonewalling.

05:01

🐸 The Boiling Frog Parable: Gradual vs. Sudden Change for Avoidants

Using the boiling frog metaphor, the speaker illustrates how avoidants respond to gradual versus sudden changes in a relationship. Avoidants might react quickly to sudden demands for commitment, but gradual progression often goes unnoticed. Despite stonewalling, avoidants do desire connection and commitment, though their instinct is to self-soothe. The key is to approach these individuals with patience and gradual communication rather than pushing for immediate solutions, aligning with Dr. John Gottman's concept of focusing on dialogue instead of conflict resolution.

10:02

❤️ Heathcliff and Catherine: The Anxious-Avoidant Trap

The speaker compares avoidants to Catherine and anxious individuals to Heathcliff from 'Wuthering Heights.' The dynamic between anxious and avoidant attachment styles creates a destructive cycle where one person pursues (anxious) while the other retreats (avoidant). Catherine’s emotional distance stems from her fear of societal judgment and desire for independence, while Heathcliff's emotional dependence drives his obsessive behavior. This toxic push-pull is a common issue in anxious-avoidant pairings, highlighting the challenges of attachment styles and their fluidity.

15:04

🧠 Secure Attachment: The Key to Handling Avoidant Stonewalling

The speaker introduces the idea that attachment styles are fluid, explaining that insecure attachments can evolve into secure ones through relationships. The anxious response to stonewalling is often to pursue, but a secure individual would pull back and give space. Using the 'KISS method' (Keep it Simple), they recommend mirroring a secure attachment by responding to stonewalling with space, not immediate problem-solving. The speaker also presents the 'SPACE formula,' a detailed method to calculate the amount of space to give an avoidant individual based on various factors.

🗣️ Tactical Empathy: Breaking Down Avoidant Walls

The speaker introduces tactical empathy, a concept from hostage negotiator Chris Voss. By labeling and acknowledging the avoidant’s emotions—like their fear of losing independence—you can build rapport and break down their emotional defenses. Instead of confronting stonewalling head-on, the approach involves using empathy to validate the avoidant's feelings, making them feel understood. This gradual, respectful acknowledgment of their concerns creates a foundation for healthier communication and a deeper connection, paving the way for long-term change.

Keywords

💡Stonewalling

Stonewalling refers to a communication breakdown where one person withdraws from an interaction, shutting down emotionally and mentally. In the video, it is explained as a defense mechanism used by avoidants to manage overwhelming feelings or perceived threats to their independence. This behavior is a key focus of the discussion, as the video explores why it occurs and how to respond to it.

💡Avoidant Attachment

Avoidant attachment is a type of insecure attachment style where individuals prioritize their independence and self-sufficiency, often avoiding emotional closeness. The video highlights how avoidants use stonewalling to protect themselves when they feel their independence is being threatened, stemming from their early experiences of emotional neglect.

💡Core Wound

The core wound is a deep-seated emotional injury, often rooted in childhood, that shapes avoidants' fear of losing independence. The video explains that avoidants' stonewalling behaviors are triggered when situations threaten their autonomy, revealing the importance of understanding and addressing this core wound in relationships.

💡Trigger Points

Trigger points are specific situations that provoke avoidants into stonewalling, such as discussions about commitment or emotional closeness. These points vary for different individuals, depending on their tolerance for emotional stress. The video outlines several examples, like marriage proposals or meeting parents, that may push an avoidant into defensive behaviors.

💡Choppy Waters

Choppy waters is a metaphor used to describe the emotionally turbulent environment that avoidants are accustomed to. In the video, the analogy explains how avoidants develop self-reliant coping strategies due to a lack of emotional support from caregivers, leading them to navigate life independently and resist emotional closeness.

💡Boiling Frog Metaphor

The boiling frog metaphor illustrates how gradual changes go unnoticed by avoidants until the emotional intensity becomes overwhelming. The video uses this metaphor to explain why avoidants may tolerate gradual increases in emotional closeness but react strongly to sudden changes, helping viewers understand avoidants' sensitivity to shifts in relational dynamics.

💡Tactical Empathy

Tactical empathy is the deliberate effort to understand and acknowledge another person's feelings to build trust and influence. In the video, the concept is introduced as a technique for dealing with avoidants by validating their concerns about independence, thus creating a safe space for dialogue and reducing their need to stonewall.

💡Labeling

Labeling is a communication strategy where one identifies and verbalizes another person’s emotions, helping them feel understood. The video suggests using labeling with avoidants to disarm their defenses and foster connection, as it shows the avoidant that their emotions are recognized without judgment.

💡Secure Attachment

Secure attachment refers to a healthy attachment style where individuals feel comfortable with emotional closeness and independence. The video contrasts this with insecure attachment styles like avoidant or anxious, emphasizing that secure individuals can help insecure partners, such as avoidants, develop healthier relational patterns through consistent and patient interactions.

💡Dreams within Conflict Approach

The Dreams within Conflict approach, popularized by Dr. John Gottman, is about understanding the underlying hopes and dreams behind conflicts rather than trying to solve them directly. The video references this approach as a way to handle stonewalling, suggesting that creating an environment of understanding and dialogue is more effective than forcing solutions.

Highlights

Stonewalling is a common response for avoidants when they feel overwhelmed or their independence is threatened.

Avoidants often hold secret hopes behind their stonewalling, expecting certain responses that people typically miss.

Every avoidant has a unique threshold for when they engage in stonewalling, which varies depending on their past experiences and triggers.

Attachment theory plays a key role: stonewalling is rooted in deep-seated attachment wounds formed during early childhood, often due to inconsistent caregiving.

Avoidants often develop self-soothing habits from childhood, which carry into adulthood and manifest as stonewalling.

Triggers for stonewalling range from simple requests, like going on a date, to larger commitments such as buying a house or having children.

Avoidants do want commitment and connection, despite their stonewalling behavior, which is a defense mechanism to maintain emotional control.

Sudden changes are more likely to trigger stonewalling than gradual, incremental changes.

Anxious partners often intensify the dynamic of stonewalling by constantly seeking reassurance, leading to a destructive relationship cycle.

Avoidants are frequently drawn to anxious partners, as seen in the classic dynamic of Heathcliff and Catherine from 'Wuthering Heights.'

Attachment styles are fluid, and relationships have the potential to shift insecure attachments into secure ones through dialogue and emotional understanding.

The key to managing an avoidant's stonewalling is to respond like a secure attachment, providing space when needed but also maintaining communication.

The 'space formula' can help determine how much space to give an avoidant based on the severity of the stonewalling and past behaviors.

Tactical empathy, a concept used in hostage negotiation, is an effective way to communicate with an avoidant and open channels for dialogue.

By acknowledging an avoidant’s hidden feelings calmly and respectfully, their defenses can lower, creating a space for gradual change and connection.

Transcripts

something insane is happening right now

there's this thing that avoidance do

called stonewalling and everyone seems

to disagree on how to handle it but

they're missing the point because deep

inside almost all avoidance hold a

series of secret hopes think of these

like doors they're hoping you open in

response to their stonewalling and

you're not going to believe what's

behind them but let's back up first

there's a fundamental misunderstanding

that people have about stonewalling and

it's not the definition pretty much

everyone agrees that stonewalling is

about someone withdrawing from an

interaction shutting down and closing

themselves off because they are feeling

overwhelmed or physiologically flooded

but what people seem to miss out on is

what actually triggers the stonewalling

and there is Nuance to this but to

understand that Nuance we need to open

the first door and look at what's behind

it a deeper understanding of their core

wound all right to be honest with you

I've talked about the core wound concept

hundreds of times on this YouTube

channel but that's that's not the

interesting part here yes all avoidance

Harbor a deep-seated desire to maintain

their independence this is their core

wound and generally what happens is when

they enter a situation when they feel

their independence is being threatened

well that's what ultimately causes them

to engage in stonewalling like Behavior

so what do these situations look like

well it can range from you asking them

to go on a date you asking them for a

romantic relationship introducing them

to your parents going ring shopping

getting married buying a house together

having children this is a list of what I

like to call trigger points now here's

where that Nuance comes into play why is

it that some avoidance are okay until

you get to about here while other

avoidants get triggered let's say here

every single avoidant has a different

threshold for when they get triggered

and that tells me something there's a

difference between memorizing a fact and

actually understanding it here's the

Nuance a few months ago I had the

pleasure of interviewing Erica Kazar

she's a licensed clinical social worker

who's done a lot of work studying how

attachments are formed in early

childhood to a lot of stress very early

by separating this incredibly vulnerable

fragile little person from the their

go-to person in the world who makes them

feel safe so Safety and Security isn't

internalized till about the age of three

at about the age of three 85% of our

right brain is developed that is the

part of our brain that makes us feel

safe no matter what is going on in our

life it helps us to manage stress it

helps us to manage our emotions so

emotional regulation isn't internalized

till after the age of three and only if

a mother or primary attachment figure

regulates that baby's emotions from

moment to moment in that first three

years but the thing that really stuck

out to me about my interview with her

was her analogy about the ocean babies

are

born uh it's like being on a sailboat in

the Atlantic what mothers do is they

bring babies back to the Caribbean it's

not this because that would be strange

and depressed it's like this all right

so someone with an avoidant attachment

style has likely never experienced calm

Caribbean Waters they're used to these

insanely choppy Waters and from a young

age since they couldn't rely on their

caregivers to bring them to the

Caribbean they've come up with their own

coping strategies and it's likely that

the most common coping strategy that

they've come up with is that they've had

to learn to rely on themselves I know

the hate for avoidance out there is real

one look at the comment section of one

of my YouTube videos proves that and I'm

not excusing their behavior yes they

need help but let's walk a mile in their

shoes for a moment you're in avoidant

you're traveling these treacherous

choppy Waters and the only way you've

learned to navigate them is by learning

not to rely on others but to self soothe

and you practice this Behavior

repeatedly until it becomes an ingrained

habit that carries all the way from

childhood to adulthood manifesting as

you guest it stonewalling so now that we

have a deeper understanding of the core

wound let's go back and look look at

those trigger points again now like I

said every single avoidant has a

different threshold before they engage

in stonewalling like behavior and I

think that threshold will depend on when

they consider the waters to start

getting treacherous generally the choppy

Waters will be dictated by how

aggressive the avoidance partner is in

pursuing a deeper commitment the less

aggressive and more patient the less

likely the core wound is to get

triggered but I'm getting ahead of

myself here we're going to have to peek

behind door number number two now of an

avoidance secret desires an evil Chef

steals a frog from a peaceful Pond he

has a restaurant to run and frog stew is

his most popular dish he decides he's

going to boil this frog so he fills up a

cooking pot with water cranks up the

heat to Max and drops the frog in

there's just one problem the boiling

water is so hot that upon entering the

cooking pot the Frog jumps out so the

chef tries a different approach he fills

the pot up with cold water and drops the

frog in and the Frog is fine with that

slowly but surely though the chef turns

the heat up the temperature in the

cooking pot slowly Rises the frog

doesn't notice a few minutes go by the

cooking Potter is hotter now the frog

doesn't notice a few more minutes go by

and pretty soon the frog has boiled

alive none the wiser frog stew for

everyone un un fortunately this Parable

isn't scientifically true no matter what

a frog is going to detect the boiling

water and jump out of the pot but it

does give us an amazing metaphor to help

us understand why avoidance react

quickly to Sudden Change but not gradual

changes let's go back to that silly

trigger point graphic now the answer to

why some avoidance react with

stonewalling here as opposed to here

might simply be that they detected the

boiling water but do avoidant want to

get cooked do they want a commitment

well yeah they actually do everyone

always looks at the negative aspects of

stonewalling the natural assumption is

that if an avoidant stonewalls they want

nothing to do with you but that's

actually not true with a deeper

understanding of how their core wound

actually operates it's clear that

stonewalling is nothing more than a

defense mechanism they use to self sooth

whether they are aware of it or not it's

their way of handling perceived choppy

water but at their core they do want

connection they do want commitment it's

just they don't let anyone close enough

to give it to them but perhaps the way

to approach it is with that boiling frog

mentality this is Dr John godman many

consider him to be the dominant

Authority on marriage stability I really

like what he had to say about unsolvable

problems like stonewalling and our

experience is that 86% of couples who

attend this workshop with this dreams

within conflict approach are able to

come to a much deeper understanding and

remember the goal is not solving the

conflict it's dialogue so that you're no

longer gridlock but you can talk about

this and you can have a sense of humor

about it and you can be affectionate

with one another and creative too many

people look for solutions to

stonewalling how do I get my avoidant

partner my avoidant friend my avoidant

parent to stop stonewalling me but that

approach isn't really the right way to

boil the frog gotman is right the goal

shouldn't be to make an avoidant stop

stonewalling that's not what the

avoidant wants you're not going to undo

a lifetimes worth of embedded practice

instead the goal should be about

creating an environment where the

avoidant feels safe and understood

allowing for gradual change it's about

opening channels of communication

without forcing immediate solution now

the million-dollar question of course is

well how do you do that well let's look

behind the next door have you ever read

Emily bronte's withering Heights the

novel follows a complex relationship

between two characters heathcliffe and

Catherine now throughout their story

their relationship is passionate toxic

and ultimately destructive yet despite

it all they are inexorably drawn to each

other like magnets withering Heights

perfectly illustrates one of the main

challenges that I see see with avoidance

they're almost always drawn to anxious

partners and that's a problem because

this pairing together is naturally

destructive let's go back to heathcliffe

and Catherine so heathcliffe is someone

who I would describe as having an

anxious attachment throughout the story

he exhibits an intense emotional

dependence on Catherine often displaying

obsessive Tendencies his need for her

approval in love drives much of his

behavior heathcliff's fear of

Abandonment is evid in his reactions to

Catherine's decisions and actions

particularly when she chooses to marry

Edgar Linton his intense jealousy and

vengefulness stem from this deep-seated

fear oh God it is unutterable I cannot

live without my life I cannot live

without my soul now throughout the novel

there are multiple instances where

heathcliffe is needing constant

reassurance of Catherine's love and

loyalty even when it manifests in

unhealthy and destructive ways

and then of course we have Catherine

someone who is a clear avoidant

attachment she often maintains an

emotional distance from Heathcliff

particularly when societal expectations

and her desire for social status come

into play her decision to marry Edgar

Linton despite her deep connection with

heathcliffe highlights this avoidance

she also struggles with the intimacy

that her relationship with Heathcliff

demands her need to be seen as proper

and her fear of societal judgment create

a barrier between them now it's also

notable that Catherine's desire to be

independent and maintain control over

her life often leads her to push

Heathcliff away even though she

acknowledges their deep bond she's got

this famous line in the book whatever

our souls are made of his and mine are

the same and to me this indicates an

awareness of their connection but her

actions often contradict this

understanding now this entire Dynamic

really showcases the pushpull between

the anxious and avoidant pairing you've

got heathcliff's Pursuit and Catherine's

Retreat essentially creating a cycle of

passion and pain that defines their

relationship something needs to change

about 3 years ago I was conversing with

Tara Spears a marriage and family

therapist I wanted her to audit some of

the things that I had written on my

website to ensure that the way I had

attachment theory conceptualized was

accurate she gave a great critique of my

work via email attachment styles are

formed in relationships maintained in

relationships and reformed in

relationships one does not change their

attachment Style on their own you see

the most amazing part about attachment

theory that I've fallen in love with is

the thing no one really talks about the

fact that it's fluid just because

Catherine is avoidant or Heathcliff is

anxious doesn't mean they'll always be

that way other relationships experience

es personal growth can theoretically

contribute to turn an insecure

attachment into a secure one you've got

three potential insecure attachment

Styles anxious fearful avoidant now

pretty much anytime these insecure

attachments interact with one another

it's a disaster yet when any of these

three insecure attachments interact with

a secure attachment there's a real

chance that insecure attachment can

slowly become more secure it's sort of

like this battle plays out the insecure

attachment collides with the secure one

and a battle of wills Begins the

insecure one starts to become more

secure or the secure one starts to

become more insecure and that's really

my core belief for how to handle an

avoidant who stone walls it's about

asking yourself how would a secure

individual respond and to answer that

well we have to look behind the final

door I'm a big believer in the kiss

method keep it simple stupid stupid

here's the Mantra I tend to give to my

clients when they pull back you pull

back someone who is stonewalling you is

telling you with that action that they

aren't interested in solving a problem

or talking right now the anxious

response to that is to try to fix the

problem right away it's to do the

opposite of pulling back the secure

response is to give them space after all

you have better things to do with your

time remember our goal isn't necessarily

to fix fix or cure the avoidant right

away it's just to get to a place where

there can be a dialogue and once that

dialogue is established then you boil

your frog then the secure attachment

starts winning the battle over the

insecure one the stonewalling becomes

less and less frequent but there is such

a thing as giving an avoidant too much

space as this lovely comment pointed out

it's been 2 months since I've heard from

him that is painful indeed it is so how

much space is too much space well I

suppose you could always use the space

formula which stands for S the severity

of stonewalling P the previous patterns

a the avoidance Comfort level C

communication attempts in E emotional

climate now basically how an avoidant

responds during each of these phases

tells you how much space you should be

giving them it's a formula that works

together for example with the severity

of stonewalling if it's m you usually

want to wait 1 to 2 days if it's

moderate 3 to 5 days if it's severe a

week or more you also want to account

for their previous patterns if the stone

Walling has been frequent you usually

want to add one to two days if it's rare

subtract one or two days if the

avoidance Comfort level is low then

subtract a day if it's moderate well

there should be no change or if it's a

high need for space add a day if in your

communication attempts there's been an

immediate response subtract one day if

there's a delayed response there should

be no change and if there's no response

add one day and if the emotional climate

is calm and understanding subtract a day

if it's neutral no change and if it's

tense or confrontational at a day but

let's do an example calculation here

let's say the severity of stonewalling

has been moderate so let's say our

Baseline is 4 days let's say the

previous patterns has been pretty

frequent stonewalling so you're going to

want to add two days let's also say your

avoidance Comfort level they need a a

lot of space let's just put it that way

at a day let's say there's been no

response when you've tried to

communicate with them at a day and the

emotional climate is neutral which is

zero days so the ideal space you should

give that avoidant is 8 days but here's

where it gets tricky and here's where

everyone messes up after giving the

avoidance space you need to start

bonding with them but you need to start

bonding with them in a very unique way

this is Chris Voss before he retired he

used to be the lead International

kidnapping negotiator for the Federal

Bureau of Investigation as well as the

FBI's hostage negotiation representative

for the National Security Council of

Hostage working group he wrote this book

never split the difference on page 51 he

writes empathy is the ability to

recognize the perspective of a

counterpart and the vocalization of that

recognition a few passages later he

writes One Step Beyond that is tactical

empathy it is understanding the feelings

and mindset of another in the moment and

also hearing what is behind those

feelings so you increase your influence

in all the moments that follow or as

Voss so lovingly says it's emotional

intelligence on steroids so Voss coins

this term tactical empathy and uses it

in the field to great effect he also

coins this term called labeling Voss is

on the 27th floor of a building in

Harlem standing outside of a locked door

with Three Fugitives now internally VOS

knows two things about these fugitives

they don't want to get killed and they

don't want to go to jail so Vos decides

he's going to employ a little tactical

empathy in the sweltering apartment

building hallway he simply talks to the

fugitives locked behind the door saying

the same thing over and over again it

seems like you worry that if you open

the door we'll come in with guns blazing

it looks like you don't want to go back

to jail in the book Voss goes on to

write we didn't just put ourselves in

the fugitive's shoes we spotted their

feelings turned them into words and then

very calmly and respectfully repeated

their emotions back to them the result

well after 6 hours of doing that the

fugitives simply open the door and turn

themselves in that is the power of

tactical empathy and that is the power

of labeling your counterparts emotions

and reciting it back to them it's like a

magic trick like you can read someone's

mind like you understand them better

than anyone now imagine applying this

concept to your avoidant you use

tactical empathy and labeling to

understand their surface level concerns

like the fact that they're worried about

losing their independence for instance

you might say I'm not sure we should

spend too much time together I don't

want to overcrowd you now by calmly and

respectfully acknowledging these hidden

feelings that avoidance have you stand

out from the crowd you essentially

create a space where they feel more

understood less t

their walls begin to crumble and that my

friends is the perfect foundation for

boiling a frog