Why Being Needy Is Actually a Dating Superpower

Topics include: attachment theory, anxious attachment, avoidant attachment, secure attachment, emotionally unavailable partners, relationship anxiety, dating psychology, healthy relationships, communication in relationships, emotional needs, relationship advice, psychology of love, relationship patterns, attachment styles, intimacy, dating tips, self-awareness, personal growth

The promised description link: https://unpackwithmehak.com/

Follow the podcast on Instagram: @unpack.with.mehak

For business: unpackwithmehak@gmail.com

Have you ever noticed that you keep ending up with the same person? Different name, different face, but somehow it’s the same relationship every time: someone who doesn’t really consider your needs. And eventually, either you break up, or they do, and you’re left feeling hopeless about the whole thing. Back to square one. Actually, back to square minus one, if I’m being honest.

So why does that happen? Why do we keep being attracted to people who were never going to meet our needs in the first place? Why do we think being low-maintenance is the answer to all of this? Why do we assume we’re the ones pushing people away, instead of considering that maybe they just couldn’t have met our needs no matter how we communicated them? Why is being the cool girl still such a trend, hiding what we need so the relationship can supposedly work? Why do we put so much pressure on ourselves to make sure our partner is comfortable with whatever pace we’re moving at?

That’s what we’re getting into today.

Hi, I’m Mehak Chhabra, your host, and this is Things We Never Say, a podcast about the conversations we avoid, the emotional patterns we repeat, and the things we all feel but rarely say out loud.

I’ve been reading about attachment theory and relationships lately, because I wanted to understand something a lot of us experience: knowing exactly what kind of relationship doesn’t work for us, and then somehow finding ourselves in another version of the same thing. Different person, different circumstances, same emotional experience.

And the more I read, the more interested I got in something we don’t talk about enough when it comes to dating. Neediness has basically become synonymous with being undesirable. We’re told to be independent, don’t text too much, don’t care too much, don’t make yourself too available, give them space, don’t ask for reassurance, don’t expect too much, don’t make them feel like your life revolves around them.

And honestly, there’s some decent advice buried in there. You shouldn’t make another person responsible for your entire emotional life. You shouldn’t abandon your friendships, your work, your identity, just because you’re in a relationship. But somewhere along the way, we took a reasonable idea and pushed it way too far. We started acting like having needs is the problem itself.

Wanting closeness isn’t automatically unhealthy. Wanting reassurance isn’t automatically unhealthy. Neither is wanting consistency, or wanting to know where you actually stand with someone, or wanting your partner to consider you when they’re making decisions. The question was never whether you have needs. It’s what those needs actually are, how you communicate them, and whether the person you’re with is even capable of meeting them. And I think that distinction changes the entire way we approach dating.

What attachment theory actually tells us

Attachment theory started with John Bowlby’s work on our need to form close emotional bonds. The idea is that attachment isn’t some childish thing we’re supposed to grow out of; close relationships actually shape how we experience safety, exploration, and emotional regulation throughout our whole lives. Mary Ainsworth’s work, including the Strange Situation experiment, showed how a caregiver’s availability can affect how willing a child is to go out and explore the world around them.

And I think that secure base idea is especially interesting once you apply it to adult relationships. A secure base doesn’t mean someone does everything for you. It just means you know someone’s there. And that knowledge alone can make it so much easier to go out into the world. Think about the difference between travelling somewhere completely unfamiliar knowing you have someone you can call if things go wrong, versus feeling like you’ve got absolutely nobody to turn to. The destination is exactly the same. You’re the same person. But having that support changes how safe you feel actually exploring.

And that’s where I think we’ve misunderstood independence. We’ve started treating dependence and independence like opposites, but healthy relationships don’t really work that way. Sometimes knowing you can depend on someone is exactly what gives you the freedom to be independent.

There’s some genuinely interesting research on this. In one well-known fMRI study, sixteen married women were exposed to the threat of an electric shock while holding either their husband’s hand, a stranger’s hand, or nobody’s hand at all. The researchers found reduced neural responses to the threat when the women were holding their husbands’ hands, and that effect was even stronger among women who reported higher marital quality.

Now, I don’t think the takeaway here is that your partner needs to hold your hand every single time you’re stressed. What’s actually interesting is what the study represents. A supportive relationship can change how we experience threat. Being connected to someone doesn’t automatically make you weaker, sometimes it just gives your nervous system a little more room to deal with the world.

Which brings me back to neediness. Because maybe the goal was never to become someone who doesn’t need anyone. Maybe it’s to become someone who understands what they need and knows how to actually communicate it, without making another person responsible for everything they feel.

So why do some of us keep choosing people who can’t give us what we need? This is where attachment theory gets interesting. People with more insecure attachment patterns can experience intimacy and threat pretty differently. Someone leaning more anxious might become especially sensitive to signs of rejection or abandonment, while someone leaning more avoidant might feel uncomfortable with too much closeness, almost like intimacy itself feels like a threat to their independence.

I don’t want to turn this into one of those internet videos where we diagnose everyone we’ve ever dated as anxious or avoidant, though. People are more complicated than four boxes, and attachment patterns can genuinely shift across relationships and over time. What I find more useful is looking at the cycle itself.

Picture someone who wants a lot of closeness with someone who tends to pull away the moment intimacy increases. One person moves closer, the other moves away. The first person gets more anxious, so they try harder, which makes the second person feel more pressure, so they create even more distance. And now the first person is even more activated than before. Suddenly both people are behaving in exactly the way that confirms the other’s deepest fear. The person seeking closeness is thinking, see, people leave when I need them. And the person seeking distance is thinking, see, people always want more from me than I can give. And now they’ve built a relationship that confirms both of their existing beliefs.

There’s research on couples that’s found associations between anxious-avoidant pairings and heightened stress responses during conflict, though real relationships are obviously far messier than just matching two attachment labels together. And this is where something really strange can happen. You can start confusing activation with chemistry.

You meet someone inconsistent. They text constantly for three days and then disappear. They tell you they really like you, and then suddenly go distant. Affectionate one week, emotionally unavailable the next. You don’t know where you stand, so you think about them constantly. You check your phone. You replay conversations. You analyse their tone. You wonder if they still like you.

And then they finally give you the reassurance you’ve been waiting for, and suddenly you feel incredible. The anxiety disappears. You feel chosen again. And because that relief is so intense, you might interpret it as passion. You might think, this person drives me crazy because I really love them. But an activated attachment system isn’t necessarily the same thing as romantic chemistry. Sometimes what feels like an incredible connection is really just uncertainty followed by relief. And that distinction matters, because if you’ve spent enough time in relationships where you have to earn closeness, a relationship where someone is simply consistent can feel strangely quiet. You don’t have to decode them. You don’t have to chase reassurance. You don’t have to wonder if they’re pulling away. And you might mistake that calm for a lack of chemistry.

This is also where the whole low-maintenance thing gets interesting. I think a lot of us have learned to perform being low-maintenance. We don’t say we want to see someone because we don’t want to seem clingy. We don’t ask where the relationship is going because we don’t want to seem intense. We don’t ask for reassurance because we don’t want to seem insecure. We don’t say something hurt us because we don’t want to be difficult. We give them space even when what we actually want is closeness. And eventually we get so good at hiding our needs that we stop knowing what our needs even are.

You become completely focused on one question: what will make this person stay? And you stop asking the more important one: is this relationship actually working for me? That’s where I think the cool girl idea becomes genuinely damaging, because you’re so busy trying to make the other person comfortable that you forget to check whether you’re comfortable. Whether they’re okay with the pace. Whether they’re okay with how much you’re seeing each other. Whether they’re okay with commitment, with you wanting more, with your feelings. And meanwhile you’re barely asking yourself what you actually want.

There’s a real difference between giving someone space because you respect their need for independence, and giving someone space because you’re terrified that asking for what you need will make them leave. Those can look identical from the outside. Internally, they’re completely different things. If your partner says, I need some time alone after a hard day, and you understand that’s not a rejection of you, that’s one thing. If they disappear for three days and you convince yourself that asking for communication would make you needy, that’s something else entirely. Healthy independence leaves room for communication. It doesn’t require one person to constantly shrink.

And I think this applies to people who genuinely need a lot of independence too. If you need time alone, that’s okay. If you need more space between seeing your partner, that’s okay. If you need time to process conflict before actually talking about it, that’s okay too. You don’t have to become someone who wants constant closeness just because your partner does. But you do have to communicate it. You can say, I need some time alone after conflict, but I’m not leaving this relationship, I just need a bit of time to process. That one sentence can completely change the experience for the other person, because now they’re not left trying to interpret your silence. You get your space, they get clarity, and both people’s needs actually have room in the relationship. That’s what a healthy relationship should be doing, not making one person’s needs disappear just so the other person can be comfortable.

And if you’re someone who tends to be more anxious, there’s an equally important responsibility on your end. You have to learn your actual needs. Not the needs you think make you look easygoing. Not the needs you think are socially acceptable. Not the needs you think will stop someone from leaving. Your actual needs. Maybe it’s consistency. Maybe it’s regular communication. Maybe it’s affection, or commitment, or someone willing to talk through conflict instead of avoiding it. Maybe you want a relationship where you see each other four times a week. Maybe you want way less than that. None of that automatically makes you needy; it’s just information about the kind of relationship that actually works for you. And if you don’t know what you need, it becomes almost impossible to figure out whether someone else is capable of meeting it.

This is why I think the title of this episode is a little provocative, but I mean it. Being needy can actually be a dating superpower. Not because you should expect your partner to fulfil every emotional need you have. Not because you should demand constant reassurance. Not because your partner should become your therapist, your best friend, your entire social life, and your only source of happiness. That’s not what I’m saying.

What I’m saying is that your needs give you information. If you need consistency and someone is consistently inconsistent, that tells you something. If you need communication and someone refuses to communicate, that tells you something. If you want commitment and someone keeps telling you they don’t want that, that tells you something. If you want affection and someone tells you they’re just not an affectionate person, that tells you something too. The answer isn’t always, how do I become less needy so they’ll stay. Sometimes the better question is, is this actually someone who can give me the relationship I want. And that changes dating completely, because now you’re not trying to convince someone to choose you. You’re trying to figure out whether the two of you actually fit.

And this is where having a life outside your relationship really matters. Your friends matter. Your work matters. Your hobbies matter. Your goals matter. The things that make you feel like yourself, matter. Not because you should pretend you don’t need your partner, but because one person shouldn’t have to carry your entire emotional world. When you have other sources of connection and meaning, someone’s delayed text doesn’t have to become a referendum on your worth. Their bad mood doesn’t automatically become your problem. Their uncertainty doesn’t have to take over your whole day. And you actually have more room to observe the relationship for what it is. Do they show up? Do they communicate? Do their actions match their words? Can they handle a difficult conversation? Do they make space for your needs? Do you feel safe being honest with them? Do you feel like yourself around them? Those questions tell you so much more about compatibility than whether you managed to wait three hours before replying to a text.

And I think there’s one more thing worth saying. Sometimes the person who makes you feel the most anxious really isn’t the person you’re most compatible with. They might be the person who’s activating something you’ve experienced before. And sometimes the person who feels safe doesn’t create that same immediate intensity. That doesn’t mean you should force yourself to date someone you’re not attracted to. It means that when you feel an incredibly intense connection with someone, it’s worth actually paying attention to what that intensity feels like. Is it excitement? Is it uncertainty? Is it attraction? Is it anticipation? Are you genuinely connecting with this person, or are you waiting for them to finally choose you? Because those two things can feel almost identical from the inside.

So I don’t think the goal of dating is to become less needy. I think the goal is to become more honest about your needs. Know them, communicate them, and then actually pay attention to what the other person does with that information. If you’re more secure, communicating your needs helps your partner understand you. If you’re more anxious, it can help you move away from trying to get reassurance indirectly, toward actually asking for what you want. And if you’re more avoidant, it can help you ask for independence without leaving the other person wondering whether you’ve abandoned them. Your attachment pattern doesn’t have to become your destiny, but if you don’t understand your own patterns, you’ll probably keep choosing relationships that confirm exactly what you already believe.

And that’s how you end up looking back at three completely different relationships and realising, I was dating the same person three times. Different face. Different name. Same emotional pattern. Same uncertainty. Same feeling of trying to get someone to give you something they were never really willing or able to give you. And then you walk away thinking, maybe I’m the problem, maybe I’m too much, maybe I ask for too much, maybe I should just become less needy.

But maybe you weren’t too much. Maybe you were just asking the wrong person for the right things. And that distinction can completely change the way you date, because your needs aren’t only things someone else has to fulfil. They’re also information you get to use, to decide who actually belongs in your life.

So if I had to take everything I’ve been reading about attachment and relationships and boil it down to one thing I want you to remember, it’s this. Your needs are information. Don’t hide them so well that you end up choosing someone who only works for the version of you that doesn’t need anything.

And if you’re listening to this thinking about a relationship where you’ve been trying to make yourself smaller, or you’ve noticed that you keep choosing the same kind of person over and over, that’s exactly the kind of pattern I work with through Unpack with Mehak. It’s a conversation where we slow things down, understand what keeps repeating, and figure out what you actually want to do differently. If that sounds useful, you’ll find the link in the description.

Thank you for spending this time with me. This was Things We Never Say, and I’ll see you in the next episode.