It's interesting because the negotiation he talks about at the end sounds like such a fine line vs manipulation or coercion. He's talking about cooperation and goodwill, but "making deals" is not what I thought secure attachment was. But I think that ultimately it has to do with trust, and when he talks about memory there's this idea of we have each other's backs, no matter what - as if to say you love me? Prove it. And we do prove it by doing for others what nobody else would ever do for them. To support their happiness and therefore my own, because we are one unit. But again, it seems like such a fine line. Extremely hard to parse in a way...
Thank you very much for this extremely informative video. Dr. Stan Tatkin is the best in explaining love in attatchment and teaching couples about Negotiating, not compromising. Dr. Ester Perel explains & understands best about the paradox between stability, security, love & desire. “It’s a paradox that we manage.” I wished I had fought harder for my marriage had I understood then. In my failed marriage, we both checked out thinking it’s peace to just keep things cool instead of communicating better & negotiating better. But, then I did not have the understanding and was in a different mindset then.
Dr Tatkin gave such an excellent delineation of western vs eastern attachment concepts. I had been wanting someone to make this distinction for such a long time. Thank you.
Stan never seems to address how how most people today don't get together based on secure functioning, everything is slated towards uncertainty, and instability.
I so needed this info, thank you. Esp interesting to me is how you pointed out that biologically we need relationships but spiritually the self, the one. That point fascinated me because I’ve been isolated so long most likely due to disinformation.
How does the Secure Functioning work in a relationship where one struggles with addiction and the other is all about recovery? Does this fall under values?
I think they call addiction a competing attachment. For attachment to be secure you need to come before the drugs. If you read my comment below it is hard to parse. Like how much sacrifice is too much? A parent child relationship is hierarchical, but a partner relationship is mean to be reciprocal. If one partner feels like they're always losing, then there is no agreement. There's resentment. You can do your own work if you feel like things are never fair (anxious attachment), but there is such a thing as objectivity and I imagine it would be hard for things to be objectively fair with a competing attachment like a drug. Btw, I am not a therapist so listen at own risk.
In one talk, Stan said that secure functioning is not about love but about safety. ruclips.net/video/2d_wA5SfwyE/видео.html (17:00 on ) Here, he said, attachment is love, bond.. if secure attachment= good functioning, not love(safety) = love(attachment)? How so? He's also playing word games. Also, in the other talk, he said couples should be on the same page. Here, he said, being on the same page is a myth. I think his advices should be given more carefully.
It's interesting because the negotiation he talks about at the end sounds like such a fine line vs manipulation or coercion. He's talking about cooperation and goodwill, but "making deals" is not what I thought secure attachment was. But I think that ultimately it has to do with trust, and when he talks about memory there's this idea of we have each other's backs, no matter what - as if to say you love me? Prove it. And we do prove it by doing for others what nobody else would ever do for them. To support their happiness and therefore my own, because we are one unit. But again, it seems like such a fine line. Extremely hard to parse in a way...
Thank you very much for this extremely informative video. Dr. Stan Tatkin is the best in explaining love in attatchment and teaching couples about Negotiating, not compromising.
Dr. Ester Perel explains & understands best about the paradox between stability, security, love & desire. “It’s a paradox that we manage.”
I wished I had fought harder for my marriage had I understood then. In my failed marriage, we both checked out thinking it’s peace to just keep things cool instead of communicating better & negotiating better. But, then I did not have the understanding and was in a different mindset then.
Dr Tatkin gave such an excellent delineation of western vs eastern attachment concepts. I had been wanting someone to make this distinction for such a long time. Thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Stan tatkin = cool. The people he studied with are the pioneers of modern psych. On the shoulders of giants.
principles which encourage deeper and deeper integrity seem to be the best way to do a really healthy dyad.
Stan never seems to address how how most people today don't get together based on secure functioning, everything is slated towards uncertainty, and instability.
Amazing work
I so needed this info, thank you. Esp interesting to me is how you pointed out that biologically we need relationships but spiritually the self, the one. That point fascinated me because I’ve been isolated so long most likely due to disinformation.
How does the Secure Functioning work in a relationship where one struggles with addiction and the other is all about recovery? Does this fall under values?
I think they call addiction a competing attachment. For attachment to be secure you need to come before the drugs. If you read my comment below it is hard to parse. Like how much sacrifice is too much? A parent child relationship is hierarchical, but a partner relationship is mean to be reciprocal. If one partner feels like they're always losing, then there is no agreement. There's resentment. You can do your own work if you feel like things are never fair (anxious attachment), but there is such a thing as objectivity and I imagine it would be hard for things to be objectively fair with a competing attachment like a drug. Btw, I am not a therapist so listen at own risk.
Thank you guys , great learning for me here .
Great talk! Thank you
Glad you enjoyed it!
In one talk, Stan said that secure functioning is not about love but about safety. ruclips.net/video/2d_wA5SfwyE/видео.html (17:00 on ) Here, he said, attachment is love, bond.. if secure attachment= good functioning, not love(safety) = love(attachment)? How so? He's also playing word games. Also, in the other talk, he said couples should be on the same page. Here, he said, being on the same page is a myth. I think his advices should be given more carefully.
Because they are intellectualizing things they have a half understanding of
Listen to his audiobook called your brain on love.