Maybe It’s Attachment, Not “Mixed Signals”

I was vacuuming my house the other day when an old Justin Bieber song came on my phone: “What Do You Mean?”. Before anyone judges my former music choices too harshly, just stay with me for a second.

As I listened to the lyrics, I suddenly realized the song is basically describing attachment dynamics. And, yes, this is pretty much how my brain works on a regular day-to-day basis even when I’m not sitting in the therapist chair. These are the kinds of random thoughts and curiosities I end up having while doing completely ordinary things like vacuuming my living room.

The lyrics from the song go: “What do you mean? When you nod your head yes, but you wanna say no…”

And immediately, I thought about how many times throughout my life both personally and professionally I’ve heard some variation of: “Why can’t people just say what they want?”. If I’m being honest, as a woman dating primarily cisgender heterosexual men throughout much of my early life, I probably heard an even more gendered version of it:
“Why can’t women just say what they actually want?”

I’ve heard frustration around this dynamic in relationships, friendships, therapy sessions, social media conversations, and probably every corner of the internet where people discuss dating. One person says they want space, distance, or to be left alone… and then later feels hurt when the other person respects exactly what they asked for. For a long time, I think these moments have been flattened into conversations about gender. Women are “confusing.” Men are “emotionally unavailable.” One person is “too needy,” another is “too detached.” But the older I get and the more clinical language I gain for these patterns, the less I think this is fundamentally about gender and the more I think it’s about attachment. Because often, when someone says “go away” while secretly hoping the other person will move closer, ask what’s wrong, or reassure them, it isn’t manipulation in the way people often frame it. More often, it’s a nervous system caught between two competing truths: “I desperately want connection right now.” and “Connection also feels unsafe.” So the system does both; it pushes and pulls at the same time. One part longs for closeness while another part fears vulnerability, rejection, abandonment, dependence, or being “too much.” That internal conflict can create communication that feels contradictory from the outside but makes perfect sense internally.

And importantly, this dynamic is not exclusive to women, heterosexual relationships, or any one kind of partnership. I’ve seen it across genders, sexualities, identities, and relationship structures. The packaging may differ depending on someone’s lived experiences or social conditioning, but the underlying attachment wounds are often remarkably similar. That said, socialization absolutely shapes how these patterns show up. Many people, especially those raised to prioritize others’ comfort over their own needs, learn early on that direct vulnerability can feel unsafe, embarrassing, dramatic, needy, or likely to lead to rejection. So instead of saying: “I need reassurance right now,” the need comes out sideways through withdrawal, irritation, shutting down, distancing, testing, or saying “I’m fine” when they clearly are not. Meanwhile, someone with a more literal communication style or a different attachment blueprint may hear the words exactly as spoken and respond accordingly. Then both people end up hurt. One person feels abandoned because the emotional need underneath the words wasn’t recognized. The other feels confused or frustrated because they responded to the explicit request that was communicated. Both walk away feeling misunderstood, often believing the other person is the problem.

What fascinates me is how quickly these moments get labeled as toxicity, manipulation, “red flags,” or even personality disorders before we pause to consider attachment and nervous system protection. Of course, healthier communication matters. Part of healing is learning to communicate needs more directly and securely. Ideally, someone can eventually say: “A part of me wants to withdraw right now, but another part actually wants comfort.” Or:
“I honestly don’t fully know what I need yet, but I know I don’t want disconnection.”

But many people were never taught that it was safe to have needs in the first place. A lot of adults are trying to navigate intimacy with nervous systems that learned long ago that vulnerability could lead to shame, criticism, inconsistency, abandonment, or emotional danger. When you look at these dynamics through that lens, they stop looking like people intentionally trying to confuse each other and start looking more like protective strategies that no longer work very well.

I think many relationships are not struggling because one person is “too emotional” and the other is “emotionally unavailable.” I think a lot of people are simply speaking different attachment dialects while desperately trying to find safety with each other. And that’s a much more compassionate conversation than reducing complex nervous systems down to stereotypes about gender, sexuality, or who is supposedly “the difficult one.”

Clinicians at Whole Hearted Healing are exceptionally skilled at applying this compassionate, attachment-system-first, lens to the work that we do. If you can relate to any piece of this blog, feel free to shoot us a message using the “Contact” tab on this site so we can connect further and help you more deeply understand your attachment patterns!