The title alone reframes the whole dynamic — it’s not that they’re inconsistent, it’s that closeness itself is the trigger. Which means the usual advice to “just be more consistent and reassuring” can actually backfire, since more closeness is exactly what sends them into retreat.
The porcupine image is perfect. What you're describing is the pursue-withdraw loop in its purest form, where the avoidant reads closeness as a demand and distance as regulation. We mapped that cycle from both sides, since neither person is the villain in it: https://twogle.com/blog/pursue-withdraw-loop. The "pre-editing" observation is sharp. (Founder of Twogle here.)
It's interesting because I don't think most people wake up one day and decide to hide parts of themselves. It happens gradually. One conversation goes badly, then another, and before long you're having two conversations every time... the one in your head and the one out loud.
The title alone reframes the whole dynamic — it’s not that they’re inconsistent, it’s that closeness itself is the trigger. Which means the usual advice to “just be more consistent and reassuring” can actually backfire, since more closeness is exactly what sends them into retreat.
The porcupine image is perfect. What you're describing is the pursue-withdraw loop in its purest form, where the avoidant reads closeness as a demand and distance as regulation. We mapped that cycle from both sides, since neither person is the villain in it: https://twogle.com/blog/pursue-withdraw-loop. The "pre-editing" observation is sharp. (Founder of Twogle here.)
It's interesting because I don't think most people wake up one day and decide to hide parts of themselves. It happens gradually. One conversation goes badly, then another, and before long you're having two conversations every time... the one in your head and the one out loud.