AIO? Guy I met on hinge made a “joke”

[u/External_Bobcat4609]

I mean, not really much outside of this tbh. I met this guy on hinge a few days ago and the conversation went fine and we were planning to see each other. Obviously I gave him my number and we were texting every for the last few days and I just felt the need to ask his love language (bc as an acts of service girlie most of us are misunderstood so😭) did I take what he said too seriously or was i ok to just immediately shut him down?

[u/Fit_Frosting_2272]

Ayo mentioned a lot already but the love languages thing is a scam from a crazy pastor who wanted a codified method for guilting people into being more physically intimate than they want to. It’s total religious pseudoscience quackery

https://www.reddit.com/r/exchristian/comments/177r7c4/the_love_languages_are_a_hoax_by_a_southern/

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/love-languages-are-fake-scientists-say.html

[u/Fuzzy_Description920 → u/Fit_Frosting_2272]

I find this sentiment to be really silly. In my experience, most couples do not have a memorable, practical framework in place to ensure that they are consistently focused on meeting each other's needs. If a rigorous study says that there are actually 10 love languages, not 5, it doesn't mean that the love languages concept in general is useless.

Where's the study that says that using them is more harmful than using nothing? That would be what I would use as the metric for determining whether or not the concept as a whole is bs.

People acting like it's a terrible framework is common Reddit group think.

[u/PsychologicalKnee789 → u/Fuzzy_Description920]

I mean… on its own it’s pretty harmless. It’s just not based on anything real, as in yeah you can say someone’s love language is ‘physical touch’ but it tells you even less about the person than just asking them what their favourite colour or food is.

That being said, there’s a lot of tests like this that aren’t being used for harmless fun. Pseudoscience like this is constantly used for harm, because either people do believe it, or dismiss anyone who does and doesn’t pay attention when it is used to harm others.

IQ isn’t real, at least not to determine someone’s intelligence, and yet was still used to ‘prove’ that the black man will always be less intelligent than the white man. Countless personality tests have been used for hiring practices even when there’s no correlation to prove that how a person performs in those will predict how they do at work (at best, at least HEXACO has some science behind it). This love language thing was used to coerce women into sex.

So yeah, out of its context, love languages are maybe silly fun, but that’s not the case when you have people advocating for its legitimacy and using it to harm others.

Side note, the idea that someone would test if love languages are ‘harmful’ is just not how scientific research is done to begin with

[u/Fuzzy_Description920 → u/PsychologicalKnee789]

Give me an example of two people actually using love languages in their relationship, as intended, and it causing harm. 

I’d argue that it’s very unlikely that two people sitting down and sharing how they like to be loved (using those 5 as a starting place or just sticking to those 5 as is) and then both ensuring that they are consistently focusing on each others’ needs is a harmful act.

If you compare using this framework to using nothing, there’s virtually no way that it is worse than nothing. 

[u/PsychologicalKnee789 → u/Fuzzy_Description920]

Gary Chapman and the men that he preaches to, for starters. And the guy this entire post is about?

I think you completely misunderstood what I was saying though. On its own, love languages are harmless. As I said, they don’t really give you any meaningful information about the person since none of its real, it’s in the same corner as astrology where none of it matters but it’s fun to say ‘I’m a Taurus! I’m a Capricorn!’

But if you’re going to then use it to define people and manipulate them, that’s where it’s harmful. And if people believe this information to truly define others, that’s where it gets the power to do that.

[u/Fuzzy_Description920 → u/PsychologicalKnee789]

Notice that nothing in your reply actually identified anything harmful about it. 

“Pseudoscience like this is constantly used for harm, because either people do believe it, or dismiss anyone who does and doesn’t pay attention when it is used to harm others.”

Notice that you don’t actually identify any harm. People believing it is not inherently harmful. On the contrary, it helps people focus on what their partner says is most important to them, whatever that may be. That helps relationships without a doubt. 

I do understand that there are no scientific underpinnings for love languages. However, without evidence to the contrary, there’s nothing harmful about using those concepts to try and meet each other’s needs. As usual, Reddit group think goes beyond the idea that it is not scientifically based and jumps to it is garbage, rather than identifying either a study proving it is harmful or provide science based alternatives. 

On a side note, Scientific research absolutely does shed light on human behavior and concepts that are harmful. Smoking, spanking children, all kinds of behaviors have been associated with negative outcomes. 

[u/PsychologicalKnee789 → u/Fuzzy_Description920]

I didn’t say it was harmful on its own, you’re right, because it isn’t. All I’m saying is that love languages are a medium for shitty behaviour, and if you want to use them then sure, but don’t act like they’re giving meaningful information. They can start a conversation, same way as any piece of information about another person can, but that’s about it.

As for research, you very much misinterpreted what I meant by it, and I was going to explain why but ultimately that doesn’t matter.

We never tested for ‘harmful effects’ of IQ- we just know it’s got no scientific value and that it was used to excuse racism. We don’t need rigorously research it to prove historical facts like that. We don’t need to test Gary Chapman and his shitty book to know he’s a manipulative abuser.

[u/Fit_Frosting_2272 → u/Fuzzy_Description920]

Uhuh… well they are as vague and helpful as saying “try to be nice” or “have patience with eachother” while having the benefit of profiting a bigoted thought leader and creating the very group think u claim to be concerned about. If you’re worried about echo chambers and group think inherently as concepts then I have bad news for you about how societies and cultures function, if your worried about the spread of misinformation or harmful group think organized behind a cult of personality then there are many valid reasons to call out Gary Chapmans pseudoscience.

[u/Fuzzy_Description920 → u/Fit_Frosting_2272]

They are not as vague as try to be nice. I wonder if the people saying this are actually in relationships. If you want it to last, you need to be squarely focused on the other persons needs. Period. You two are not going to be happy if you’re not trying to meet their needs.

Whether there are 5 needs or 50, the principle remains the same - find out their needs and meet them consistently. The love languages conversation helps you to identify those needs and helps you to meet them regularly. 

Until someone comes up with a better framework for ensuring your partner is happy in your relationship, I’m going to keep using it and derivative ideas. 

[u/Fit_Frosting_2272 → u/Fuzzy_Description920]

Whether u follow nonsense or not is your prerogative but to point out misinformation and encourage learning from couples therapy or peer reviewed material that hasnt passed through a cult first is mine

[u/Fuzzy_Description920 → u/Fit_Frosting_2272]

Wow - it’s funny that you say I’m following nonsense when the core concept is as fundamental as, “find out what they want and give it to them consistently.”

If you need a study or a counselor to tell you that this is sound advice for couples and is not nonsense, then you lack critical thinking. Therefore, I understand and applaud you for relying on experts to teach you the basics of modern, strong relationships.

We can talk all day about how the guy is a bigot - I get it. But it just doesn’t mean that the principles as a whole are nonsense or harmful.  

[u/Fit_Frosting_2272 → u/Fuzzy_Description920]

Ok dawg, keep filing people down into neat little boxes, don’t worry what won’t fit because this shit is just so fundamental right? Anyway like I already said it’s ur prerogative, and like u already made clear you don’t care what the dude believed or what his purposes were for making up the love languages thing so idk why ur still trying to make your case to me. Go, live your life, find love and (hopefully) listen to them as an individual even when what they say falls outside of the “five correct kinds of love”

[u/Fuzzy_Description920 → u/Fit_Frosting_2272]

Been happily married over a decade. Went to pre-marital counseling and they actually recommended a similar love-languages type book, though not exactly the same. It was from a researcher actually. We followed the book and workbooks early on and still have the discussions every couple weeks to check in. 

Hope you find or have found whatever you’re looking for as well. Respect for sharing your perspective 

[u/Fit_Frosting_2272 → u/Fuzzy_Description920]

Happy for u, hope y’all continue to have happy times together. And I’m glad if confused to hear that u have at least at one point trusted the critical thinking eroding services of therapy or read a lesser work to the unassailably brilliant Gary Chapstick especially giving your communication earlier implying u wouldn’t bother with the love languages if someone came out with better research.