[Anhedonic Lake]

I came across this article,based around a book by Gilmore:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



Love shyness is a phrase created by psychologist Brian G. Gilmartin to describe a specific type of severe chronic shyness. According to his definition, published in Shyness & Love: Causes, Consequences, and Treatments (1987), love-shy people find it difficult if not impossible to be assertive in informal situations involving potential romantic or sexual partners. For example, a heterosexual love-shy male will have trouble initiating conversations with women because of strong feelings of anxiety.

In his book, Gilmartin estimates that love-shyness afflicts approximately 1.5% of American males and will prevent about 1.7 million U.S. males from ever marrying or experiencing intimate sexual contact with women.

Gilmartin had seven criteria for each "love-shy man" he included in his study:

He is a virgin.
He rarely goes out socially with women more than just friends.
He has no history of any emotionally close, meaningful relationships of a romantic and/or sexual nature with any member of the opposite sex.
He has suffered and is continuing to suffer emotionally because of a lack of meaningful female companionship.
He becomes extremely anxiety-ridden over so much as the mere thought of asserting himself vis-a-vis a woman in a casual, friendly way.
He is strictly heterosexual in his romantic and erotic orientations.





And the book is available to view free online:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Gilmore focuses on straight males who,he argues, are the most severely affected from this chronic type of shyness due to gender roles-males expected to initiate romantic/sexual contact. His studies have lead him to state that love shy males are highly prone to suicide, over one third considered it seriously, and a life of emotional and physical emptiness resulting in severe depression and schizoid tendencies. Also, he describes the subjects as "male lesbians"-straight men who identify more with the opposiate sex and would rather have been born female,but have no desire to pursue G.R.S. during their life time.

What are your opinions on this? I think it's crippling enough to be categorised as a disorder in it's own right,though it begs the question has Gilmore simply overlooked the possibility that the subjects are in fact afflicted with avoidant personality disorder,a disorder in which love shyness is an integral factor. Regardless, do you think society ignores this issues and that love shy males suffer in silence,much like homosexuals during the eras where it was taboo and not discusssed?

[inscrutable]

It seems like a "diagnosis of the week" type of disorder to me. What would be the difference between this and specific social anxiety? It hardly seems like something that would need its own classification or form of treatment independent of any social phobia in general.

[RedIrish]

Disagree. Not everything is pathological. Not everything is a "disorder". I feel that this has been used and abused for the past decade or so, and it is time for people to get a grip. Sometimes things are just life. Variation is normal, sad is normal, shy is normal. We have to stop this and just get over ourselves.

[Anhedonic Lake]

	Originally Posted by inscrutable To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	It seems like a "diagnosis of the week" type of disorder to me. What would be the difference between this and specific social anxiety? It hardly seems like something that would need its own classification or form of treatment independent of any social phobia in general.

Well, my opinion is that it is a serious and over looked issue but it's a symptom of avoidant personality disorder,rather than a disorder in it's own right. I base this on that fact that AvPD was only distinguised from schizoid pd in DSM-IV. Now Gilmores research was published in 1987 so he would have had little quality knowledge of AvPD.

---------- Post added 12-29-2009 at 06:07 AM ----------

	Originally Posted by RedIrish To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Disagree. Not everything is pathological. Not everything is a "disorder". I feel that this has been used and abused for the past decade or so, and it is time for people to get a grip. Sometimes things are just life. Variation is normal, sad is normal, shy is normal. We have to stop this and just get over ourselves.

Not when it's chronic,pervasive and disorders the subjects life. Then it becomes a disorder.
We all have traits of narcissism but that does'nt mean we have narcissitic personality disorder. It's like comparing macro to micro evolution in terms of scale.

[themuzicman]

I think the problem is that with most guys, considering talking to a pretty woman causes blood to flow from the upper regions of the brain, causing temporary reduced function. (you can guess where that blood flows TO.)

[inscrutable]

	Originally Posted by Anhedonic Lake To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Well, my opinion is that it is a serious and over looked issue but it's a symptom of avoidant personality disorder,rather than a disorder in it's own right. I base this on that fact that AvPD was only distinguised from schizoid pd in DSM-III. Now Gilmores research was published in 1987 so he would have had little quality knowledge of AvPD.

Females can have Avoidant Personality Disorder too, including severe anxiety when interacting with members of the opposite sex. Does that mean that there should be a female version of this, or that women are precluded from having APD? General social anxiety itself is a symptom of APD, and it should be left at that.

[Anhedonic Lake]

	Originally Posted by inscrutable To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Females can have Avoidant Personality Disorder too, including severe anxiety when interacting with members of the opposite sex. Does that mean that there should be a female version of this, or that women are precluded from having APD? General social anxiety itself is a symptom of APD, and it should be left at that.

True, AvPD occurs more or less equally amongs the sexes. Gilmores states that his rationale for focusing on straight males is that love shyness has a more devasting impact on straight males due to gender roles and social expectations.




Love-shyness can be found among people of all ages and of both
sexes. However, research evidence indicates that the problem impacts
far more severely upon males than it does upon females. Women who
remain love-shy throughout lengthy periods of their lives usually adapt
very well and often quite happily to their situations. Spinsters, for exam-
ple, often become highly successful career women. The never-married
woman typically goes through life with fewer mental and physical health
problems than her married sister of the same age. In stark contrast, the
never-married, heterosexually inactive man has long been known to be
vulnerable to all manner of quite serious and often bizarre pathologies.

[admittedheretic]

I can tell this hits to close to home for me because my thought pattern has completely been derailed. I strongly desire an intimate relationship, but I'm still devastated from the freak occurrence where I was part of a great relationship and it ended horribly. I even have irrational fears about presuming romantic interests on the internet that cause me anxiety so I avoid them. The only thing that keeps me going is that the chance that some day I might feel happy like that again. I had not noticed any clues or signs that suggest my past relationship was coming to an end and it was dropped on me out of the blue. The only reason I become so angry and dark was because I cared so much. This had a traumatic effect on me, but I know it only added to the avoidance that was already there.

Gilmartin's theory He suggests several possible biological causes of love-shyness, including low maternal To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. during fetal development, To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. , and To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. .

The reverse about testosterone is true for me and I'm not hypoglycemic. For whatever reasons my nasal passage is constricted which forces me to breathe too much through the mouth at some times. I think its from slight allergies, but I'm not sure.

Crucial factors exacerbating negative development during the love-shy male's childhood are: School To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. . Love-shy boys are vulnerable to bullying from their To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. , due to their shyness and inhibition. Non-conformism to peer group norms also makes the boy a target through no fault of his own. Parental upbringing. Where a child receives primarily negative stimuli from his parents (e.g. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. , To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. , verbal abuse, criticism, 'put-downs', negative comparisons, indifference) this will most likely cause the boy to retreat further and further into his 'shell'. With so many negative stimuli from crucial relationships in one's childhood, the love-shy boy becomes a To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. . He learns to associate these crucial interactions (i.e. with parents, peer group) with hurt feelings and is likely to avoid social interaction. Social isolation becomes a ' To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ' for the love-shy individual as the years go by, and inhibits his chances in interaction with the opposite sex, as well as in other crucial areas of life such as his career.

These without a doubt had a large influence on me, but I think my personal root cause is more embedded in biology.

[shadrag]

I wouldn't call it a disorder IMHO. Just from this forum, one can see it is often the path of the introvert.

[Anhedonic Lake]

	Originally Posted by shadrag To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I wouldn't call it a disorder IMHO. Just from this forum, one can see it is often the path of the introvert.

Introversion does not equate to shyness. Also,notice Gilmore cites it to be chronic and pervasive-and life disordering.

[fkesj24]

It seems to be more complicated term for avoiding women, dating and emotional risks for relationships. While it’s a definite phenomenon, I am not sure it needs its own diagnostic terminology

[shadrag]

	Originally Posted by Anhedonic Lake To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Also,notice Gilmore cites it to be chronic and pervasive-and life disordering.

Well, that's kind of how being an INTJ is
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Vagrant]

I used to think I suffered this. Now I realize that I simply needed to overcome a few necessary hurdles that everybody does. It's a common problem for introverted males that we have a little more trouble in the love department because it is socially expected for us to be initiators.

That said, I don't think it merits a "disorder" status. If said male cannot overcome his trouble, he may be emotionally stunted in worse ways than just "love-shyness." It means that he never had a strong male role model to learn how to properly interact. It could also hint at other problems -- my ESFJ male friend doesn't know how to properly interact with women. He's not shy of them, he can just never get a girlfriend because he had a traumatizing event early in his childhood, and it still effects him.

[Homini Lupus]

I don't see where the "normal" ends and the "pathological" begins. Occasions to seduce a potential mate are not that many, so a distinction between a chronic and non-chronic problem is unclear.
Anxiety is a common condition when dealing with seduction, otherwise they would not be advertising so many products (Viagra, clothes, deodorants...) by using that very fear.

[dead]

Every mental disorder is simply an abnormality in brain structure or function. If someone has schizophrenia, their brain is different than normal in certain measureable ways. If someone is shy around girls, their brain functions slightly abnormally compared to average population. It's just about where you draw the line, but technically many mental disorders are not really illnesses. The way I like to think of it is take the word "disorder" - if the mental process is disorderly. So I suppose shyness would be in the disordered category, but maybe not rare enough, debilitating enough, intense enough, what have you, in order to be considered a disorder. I think that a lot of disorders are simply called that because they're different than the accepted way of thinking, some disorders don't bother the individual at all aside from making him unable to fit in properly. But that's another story.

[Latro]

	Originally Posted by Vagrant To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	If said male cannot overcome his trouble, he may be emotionally stunted in worse ways than just "love-shyness."

As I recall this is actually part of what love shyness actually is.

[ZincLysine]

I know someone who's been diagnosed with these and is recieving therapy. He literally gets crippled by them. Just overly shy or a disorder, it seriously affects the quality of his life. I used to drag him out with me on nights out. He'd literally cling to me. I did try encourage him to make friends and meet people. Often opening for him or introing him to my friends. But he'd suddenly freeze up and go into panic, be hyperventalating etc. He's been getting therapy for 2 years now, but he barely leaves his room these days. He's 22 and never even kissed a girl. Before he was diagnosed, I used to think he just suffered from an abnormal number of self-limiting beliefs. He's been diagnosed, and I'm am no expert, so I'm not the judge.

[L30]

I read Gilmartin's book and I know a few people who might fit his love-shyness concept. But in most cases it just merges with general social phobia disorders.

[thod]

	a heterosexual love-shy male will have trouble initiating conversations with women because of strong feelings of anxiety.

I believe every male experiences this. Asking for a date is stressful. More so if he considers her out of his league since rejection is almost certain.

[Lurch]

	Originally Posted by Anhedonic Lake To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I came across this article,based around a book by Gilmore: ... .... Also, he describes the subjects as "male lesbians"-straight men who identify more with the opposiate sex and would rather have been born female,but have no desire to pursue G.R.S. during their life time. ....

This part didn't make sense to me; if the subject is anxious around women, how can he identify more with the opposite sex rather than with other men?

[Causa Mortis]

	Originally Posted by Lurch To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	This part didn't make sense to me; if the subject is anxious around women, how can he identify more with the opposite sex rather than with other men?

Because they're not invested in the outcome of any interaction with men.

[zibber]

	Originally Posted by Anhedonic Lake To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	notice Gilmore cites it to be chronic and pervasive-and life disordering.

Chronic/pervasive. Nobody is shy on the weekends, then mr. super picker upper on a weekday.

Life disordering. This is the idea of a dis-order or dys-functionality. Few people "have" it, so those that do will suffer in practice. It's the same with rare MBTI types and a whole laundry list of other quirks or non-quirks.

Why are you so hell bent on having this be some kind of official illness? It's just deviance from the standard.

(In any case: there are plenty of shy people to go around. You can't cure "shyness" because it is just how someone is; I feel it is best to make sure everyone accepts who they are and acts accordingly.)

[thod]

Doctors have to make a reputation for themselves. The easiest way is to identify a common trait and label it a disorder. If one were to consider all the newfangled mental disorders as such then there would not be a sane man on the planet.

[admittedheretic]

The OP put "disorder" in quotations for a reason fellas.

What other word would you suggest she have used?

I can't think of anything that wouldn't eventually lead some of you to making the same "it's just deviance" claim. Now I know your intentions are well, but these comments aren't relevenant nor needed in a thread like this. If someone is obviously bummed out about being "broken" then sure your words might be comforting, but for the sake of conversion it's just a label! Yes it has several definitions with associated connotations, but the word is used for the sake of consistency. The people in the medical fields call it that and so does most of the literature so don't be so quick to assume someone who even mentions the word is self loathing.


Abnormal traits inherently lead to problems with functioning in society. That doesn't mean everyone who has the traits needs "help" but those who do need help have been better served because isolating the traits and labeling them have led to greater understanding. That is the bottom line and I think questioning whether or not they should be recognized as such labels medically is absurd and a conclusion only reached through ignorance.