|
|
Post by happyidiot on Jan 1, 2019 0:41:03 GMT
"Shit test" often tends to be used by straight men in reference to women, but any gender can do them and they are a common part of social interaction. It's a type of test that you administer to someone, and it doesn't necessarily have to be intentional/conscious. The main purpose of the test is to see how the other person reacts. These can be performed on someone who you are, for example, deciding if you want to go on a date with, to decide if you are interested in them, or on someone you're already dating, sometimes just to see if they will prove their devotion to you. They can be questions, statements or actions.
Do you think that AP people do these kind of tests more than other styles?
Many protest behaviors seem to fit the definition of a shit test, but I'm not sure if they all do or not...
I'm curious if someone who gives out shit tests more than average is likely to be AP...?
EDIT: Adding this excerpt of my post below so anyone looking just at this original post sees it:
Ok, I clearly didn't do a good job of explaining what I think shit testing is. Absolutely everyone does it to some degree. It's not something terrible and malicious. People do it unconsciously. I guess it's problematic that there isn't a universally accepted definition and that the term is often used in certain settings, like among pickup artists. By doing something "to see how someone reacts" I did not mean to do something bad to make them squirm for fun or something like that. Just that you are subconsciously gathering information based on their response and the "best" response might not always be easy to gauge. Upon reading some of the different definitions out there I decided it's probably not productive to continue the thread since we may have very different understandings of what the term means.
|
|
|
|
Post by faithopelove on Jan 1, 2019 6:22:46 GMT
"Shit test" often tends to be used by straight men in reference to women, but any gender can do them and they are a common part of social interaction. It's a type of test that you administer to someone, and it doesn't necessarily have to be intentional/conscious. The main purpose of the test is to see how the other person reacts. These can be performed on someone who you are, for example, deciding if you want to go on a date with, to decide if you are interested in them, or on someone you're already dating, sometimes just to see if they will prove their devotion to you. They can be questions, statements or actions. Do you think that AP people do these kind of tests more than other styles? Many protest behaviors seem to fit the definition of a shit test, but I'm not sure if they all do or not... I'm curious if someone who gives out shit tests more than average is likely to be AP...? As an AP I can absolutely, positively tell you that my behavior is def not a sh*t test! The exact opposite- the AP nervous system gets hijacked and we feel a loss of control. I feel no one will meet my needs so I suppress them until I finally explode. I feel without the noise my needs won’t be met. AP have a fear of abandonment, so real or perceived threats will cause us to be hyper sensitive and overreact to our worst fear coming true- abandonment. After protest behavior or losing it, I’m always regretful and ashamed. I don’t orchestrate tests. My desire is truly to be direct and open; however, my insecurities get in the way at times. Working on all of this and improving but it takes a lot of self awareness and self-control and shift to an internal focus. The “show” you’re speaking of is the AP desire to reconnect thereby soothing their nervous system. You shouldn’t even take it too personally bc it has less to do with you and more to do with the AP...unless the partner is actually pulling away, then that contributes to the feelings of abandonment and triggers a response. |
|
|
|
Post by sissyk on Jan 1, 2019 15:24:38 GMT
I dont think APs are brave enough to make it a regular practice.  That said, I think you can learn tons about a person's character by how they react to conflict and mess. Avoiding them to keep the peace can be mollifying but you don't get a full sense of the person. |
|
|
|
Post by leavethelighton on Jan 2, 2019 15:20:39 GMT
Why would someone do that unless they had a personality disorder (narcissism, sadism, etc?)
I think most protest behaviors either reflect unmet life or partnership needs or inner child issues (like maybe subconsciously seeing how conditional someone's love is). But-- not just to see their reaction.
|
|
|
|
Post by faithopelove on Jan 3, 2019 5:37:27 GMT
Why would someone do that unless they had a personality disorder (narcissism, sadism, etc?) I think most protest behaviors either reflect unmet life or partnership needs or inner child issues (like maybe subconsciously seeing how conditional someone's love is). But-- not just to see their reaction. I agree with you, but there are suspicious and distrustful people who test others just to gauge their reaction- probably more common than we’d like to think. I’ve heard this testing discussed by others as a routine practice. |
|
|
|
Post by gummydrop on Jan 4, 2019 5:23:35 GMT
Avoidants regularly push boundaries in an attempt to prove to themselves that people don't really love them. Sad but true.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyidiot on Jan 4, 2019 19:15:01 GMT
Ok, I clearly didn't do a good job of explaining what I think shit testing is. Absolutely everyone does it to some degree. It's not something terrible and malicious. People do it unconsciously. I guess it's problematic that there isn't a universally accepted definition and that the term is often used in certain settings, like among pickup artists. By doing something "to see how someone reacts" I did not mean to do something bad to make them squirm for fun or something like that. Just that you are subconsciously gathering information based on their response and the "best" response might not always be easy to gauge. Upon reading some of the different definitions out there I decided it's probably not productive to continue the thread since we may have very different understandings of what the term means. gummydrop That's a good point, but I think all insecurely attached people do that, it's not specific to avoidants. APs certainly think that no one can really love them, that's why they get so freaked out about abandonment, while doing things that actually drive people away. |
|
|
|
Post by faithopelove on Jan 5, 2019 2:27:31 GMT
Ok, I clearly didn't do a good job of explaining what I think shit testing is. Absolutely everyone does it to some degree. It's not something terrible and malicious. People do it unconsciously. I guess it's problematic that there isn't a universally accepted definition and that the term is often used in certain settings, like among pickup artists. By doing something "to see how someone reacts" I did not mean to do something bad to make them squirm for fun or something like that. Just that you are subconsciously gathering information based on their response and the "best" response might not always be easy to gauge. Upon reading some of the different definitions out there I decided it's probably not productive to continue the thread since we may have very different understandings of what the term means. gummydrop That's a good point, but I think all insecurely attached people do that, it's not specific to avoidants. APs certainly think that no one can really love them, that's why they get so freaked out about abandonment, while doing things that actually drive people away. Yes, AP do fear abandonment. That’s probably why it’s the last reason I’d put a partner to the test. AP accommodate and try to hold on. |
|
|
|
Post by happyidiot on Jan 8, 2019 1:58:03 GMT
Yes, AP do fear abandonment. That’s probably why it’s the last reason I’d put a partner to the test. AP accommodate and try to hold on. There are many common AP thoughts and behaviors that are not accommodating. Picking fights, threatening to leave (but are really hoping the other person will stop them), trying to make someone jealous, withdrawing/sulking, blowing up the other person's phone, ignoring phonecalls or claiming to have plans when they don't (they just do this for very different reasons than an avoidant, it's more about manipulation than avoidance for the AP) and so on... |
|
|
|
Post by faithopelove on Jan 8, 2019 2:32:08 GMT
Yes, AP do fear abandonment. That’s probably why it’s the last reason I’d put a partner to the test. AP accommodate and try to hold on. There are many common AP thoughts and behaviors that are not accommodating. Picking fights, threatening to leave (but are really hoping the other person will stop them), trying to make someone jealous, withdrawing/sulking, blowing up the other person's phone, ignoring phonecalls or claiming to have plans when they don't (they just do this for very different reasons than an avoidant, it's more about manipulation than avoidance for the AP) and so on... Sure, behaviors aren’t accommodating when the AP nervous system is triggered. Before I was working on secure and when my nervous system was activated I did things such as blowing up a phone in attempt to reconnect. That was my hallmark. Awareness is key as I’ve stopped these behaviors even with a triggering DA. I say AP accommodate, in spite of protest behavior, because at the end of the day most AP do try to salvage the relationship and make it work. Even though they can get in their own way like any insecure... |
|
raco
Junior Member
Posts: 81 
|
Post by raco on Jan 17, 2019 14:05:30 GMT
I'm curious if someone who gives out shit tests more than average is likely to be AP...? I'd say that someone who gives out shit tests more than average is likely to be a secure attractive girl. Shit tests are used to make sure that the person you're interested in is really what he/she seems to be. The more picky you are, the more likely you are to use shit tests. Because if you're not picky at all, then why go to such lengths to make sure that the person you're dating is really the right person for you? APs are probably the least picky of all (that's why they often stay with abusive partners even when it's obvious they should run away). So I'd be surprised if they used shit tests more than average. Example of a shit test: a girl is interested in a seemingly cool and secure guy. But she's used to date guys who pretend to be cool and secure to seduce her. So she tries to put the guy in an uncomfortable situation, in which it will be difficult for him to pretend he's secure if he's not. For example, if the guy expresses some political views, the girl could say "Oh my god, you really think this? I'm going home, no way I'll stay any longer with someone who thinks this way". In reality, she doesn't care what the guy thinks. She just wants to see if he will reply "Well, that's what I think. You can leave if you want" (secure guy) or "Wait, it's not what I meant, please come back, let me explain to you, please!" (insecure guy). An avoidant trying to prove to himself that nobody loves him is not shit testing, because he's not trying to make sure that he's found the right partner. Something you do to push people away is not a shit test. A shit test can be a defense mechanism, but a defense mechanism is not necessarily a shit test. |
|
|
|
Post by stayhappy on Jan 17, 2019 14:24:18 GMT
I'm curious if someone who gives out shit tests more than average is likely to be AP...? I'd say that someone who gives out shit tests more than average is likely to be a secure attractive girl. Shit tests are used to make sure that the person you're interested in is really what he/she seems to be. The more picky you are, the more likely you are to use shit tests. Because if you're not picky at all, then why go to such lengths to make sure that the person you're dating is really the right person for you? APs are probably the least picky of all (that's why they often stay with abusive partners even when it's obvious they should run away). So I'd be surprised if they used shit tests more than average. Example of a shit test: a girl is interested in a seemingly cool and secure guy. But she's used to date guys who pretend to be cool and secure to seduce her. So she tries to put the guy in an uncomfortable situation, in which it will be difficult for him to pretend he's secure if he's not. For example, if the guy expresses some political views, the girl could say "Oh my god, you really think this? I'm going home, no way I'll stay any longer with someone who thinks this way". In reality, she doesn't care what the guy thinks. She just wants to see if he will reply "Well, that's what I think. You can leave if you want" (secure guy) or "Wait, it's not what I meant, please come back, let me explain to you, please!" (insecure guy). An avoidant trying to prove to himself that nobody loves him is not shit testing, because he's not trying to make sure that he's found the right partner. Something you do to push people away is not a shit test. A shit test can be a defense mechanism, but a defense mechanism is not necessarily a shit test. It’s definitily not a secure thing! |
|
|
|
Post by 8675309 on Jan 17, 2019 15:15:20 GMT
raco "I'd say that someone who gives out shit tests more than average is likely to be a secure attractive girl." Thats interesting as Im one of those and would never think to do something like that! LOL. I can pick on an AP guy quickly without having to 'test'. They text/message too much right from the get go/want to see each other a lot quickly. Secures dont do that.
Ive never dated an AP guy, we dont get that far, they already turned me off.
My FA/DA guy acts secure when hes around then just goes avoidant. I know he shit tests me but not just to shit test, I know its the attachment trauma. I dont take it personal anymore, I did before I understood attachment. I understand him now.
|
|
raco
Junior Member
Posts: 81
|
Post by raco on Jan 17, 2019 16:24:47 GMT
I can pick on an AP guy quickly without having to 'test'. They text/message too much right from the get go/want to see each other a lot quickly. Secures dont do that. It's not enough to rule out APs. Attractive girls usually want to rule out the bottom 90% of secure guys, too. They are usually very picky, because they have plenty of choice. You need special tests to assess who is really super secure. No excessive texting is not enough. Also, some AP can behave like secures for a while. Dating coaches are very popular, and one of their most common advice is "no contact for one week after the first date". Precisely to send the message "I'm not needy". Shit tests exist because it's not always easy to know for sure who is really secure, and to what extent. And as the dating coaches say, shit tests are often done unconsciously (they teach how to identify them and how to react to them, of course). |
|
|
|
Post by stayhappy on Jan 17, 2019 16:36:42 GMT
That for me is playing games. I have no need, time or the creativity to test someone’s interest on me. I can pick up if someone is insecure when they are controlling, need to much validation or when them seem indifferent but fail to do that all the time.
|
|
That said, I think you can learn tons about a person's character by how they react to conflict and mess. Avoiding them to keep the peace can be mollifying but you don't get a full sense of the person.
