@43b4uck3verybody

First of all, psychology itself is a steaming pile of diarrhea, and evo psych is just another turd in the same toilet. Future historians will look at psychology the way we look at alchemy and marvel that a culture that put men on the Moon and sent a probe past the edge of the solar system considered it to be a legitimate science.

That said, I’m not quite as hostile to the term, “Emotionally unavailable” as @Typo-MAGAshiv is. It’s certainly not a term I would have come up with, but I understand what it means, and that meaning reflects how some people are.

I’ll even concede that using the term “Emotionally unavailable” for men makes about as much sense as using the term, “cis” to describe straight people. Do we really need a linguistic modifier for normal masculine behavior? Sadly: I think we might. Why? The reason I don’t reject its use is that sixty years of feminism has created a generation of men who are so beat-down and brainwashed that normal masculinity is the exception rather than the rule.

(The “Attachment style” language is on much shakier ground.)

I won’t flog the subject any more (barrels of ink have already been spilled), except to reiterate that society punishes men who don’t keep our emotions on a very short leash. For all its promises of freeing everybody, feminism hasn’t lessened the contempt women feel for men who freely express their emotions.

@43b4uck3verybody

emotionally unavailable

attachment style

Blue pilled terms and total garbage.

Anyway, your theory is nothing new. It's been discussed and beaten to death all over the manosphere.

Here is one place I discussed it, with links to previous discussions. My particular case was grief at the loss of my father. This is hardly unique.

Rollo discusses it in his podcasts occasionally, as does Rian Stone.

The Married Red Pill subreddit is chock-full of men discussing this among other things.

I'm keeping this short for now, as my coffee hasn't kicked in yet, and I need to get ready for work.

However, I'll link you to a few other places where this is discussed:

www.trp.red/feed/status/154527

www.trp.red/feed/status/154563

www.trp.red/feed/status/159660

Just use the search features at this and other forums. Lots of men with LTR experience discuss this.

Can someone validate my theory on why women prefer emotionally unavailable men or chime in with their thoughts?

From an evolutionary psychology perspective, there is an explanation behind why men choose to be emotionally unavailable & hide emotions. Women are attracted only to emotional strengths of men. So when men showcase emotions and show any sign of weakness, women are turned off and thus they are unable to procreate & pass those genes onto the next generation. An adaptive mechanism employed by men is to become emotionally unavailable, which is actually shown to drive women crazy in lust for a man. It is well known that to repair an insecure attachment style takes several years of therapy, if not a whole life's worth of work (which may not even work out). Women believe they can repair a "broken" man and are attracted to the chaotic environment, the submissive relationship, and the lottery-style intermittent reinforcement of intimacy given by emotionally unavailable men. Thus, men with insecurity and apparent "emotional weaknesses" have a method of still getting women (indeed perhaps more women than the normal man), and at the same time a method of healing themselves through the therapeutic benefits of regular sex with women and allowing a woman to try to "heal" them.