Dating profiles can be generous with the truth. The guy who’s “always up for an adventure” could be going home to a mattress on the floor and a fridge with nothing in it but mustard and one Coors Light. You can learn a lot about a person once you see where they live, and sometimes you wish you hadn’t.

Matchmaking service Tawkify surveyed 500 single Americans over 40 to find out how much a date’s home affects attraction. Half admitted they’d lost interest after seeing where a potential partner lived. Women were quicker to change their minds, at 55% compared with 42% of men. And 13% said they’d formed an opinion within seconds of walking through the door.

In fact, 57% of respondents said they’d discovered something at a person’s home that turned them off after having missed it during previous dates. Unpacked moving boxes bothered 56%, followed by an empty fridge at 48% and dirty dishes at 42%. Another 36% weren’t thrilled by homes with zero personal touches. By your 40s, it’s probably time to have something on the walls besides the thermostat.

These Household Red Flags Could Make Someone Lose Interest in You

The bathroom was a major deciding factor. A clean one with an actual hand towel was the strongest second-date signal, according to 60% of respondents. One woman told Elite Daily that a filthy bathroom would be enough to put her off spending the night. Which seems completely understandable to me. 

Another woman on Reddit described visiting a man’s house and finding a bathroom that “was visibly dirty and didn’t have any toilet paper, soap, or towels.” She ended up ghosting him and felt bad about it. Although I’m curious what he expected guests to do after using the toilet.

Living arrangements also came under scrutiny. The survey found that 41% considered living with parents a red flag. Having adult children or roommates at home bothered 21% each.

People did start to get a little ridiculous when it came to judging size. Another 41% said a one-bedroom, one-bathroom home was a turnoff for anybody over 40. Considering mortgage interest rates and the cost of rent these days, that seems very unfair. 

Fortunately, the bar for impressing a date doesn’t involve owning a mansion. About 68% of respondents assumed a person with a well-kept home had their life together. Warm, traditional interiors appealed to 71%, with natural and neutral styles close behind at 69%. Industrial decor came in last at 49%. Sorry to anyone who spent a fortune making their apartment look like a new brewery.

Of course, if someone does have money, it doesn’t guarantee a pleasant visit. One woman in an AskReddit discussion recalled visiting a date’s gorgeous apartment in an expensive neighborhood, only to discover it was filthy.

A date-ready home costs about as much as a nice dinner out. Buy a decent hand towel and put something in the fridge besides condiments. Whoever comes over is going to look around, so make sure the bathroom passes inspection—aka, have toilet paper. 

The post Things in Your Home That Could Ruin a Second Date, According to Reddit appeared first on VICE.

Everybody in a long relationship has had the studio-apartment fantasy. Your own little place, where no one leaves wet towels on the bed, and the only person snoring is you. Maybe you’ve even thought about what furniture you’d buy. Having those thoughts doesn’t necessarily mean you’re ready to get divorced.

Researchers surveyed 3,000 married Americans between 25 and 50 and found that a quarter had thought about divorce in the previous six months. Another 28% had at some point considered their marriage was in serious trouble, although those concerns weren’t recent. Researchers also identified a group they called “soft thinkers,” people who considered divorce without making serious plans to leave.

When the researchers checked back a year later, 31% of those who’d initially considered divorce no longer thought about it. Some had even forgotten they’d thought about it at all. During follow-up interviews, several participants looked at their earlier responses and asked, “I put that down?”

Scientists Found That Thinking About Divorce Might Actually Be Good for Your Marriage

Study author Alan Hawkins has said that “thoughts about divorce can be a healthy wake-up call to work on a marriage.” Sometimes it takes seriously imagining a life without your partner to admit just how unhappy you’ve become with certain things.

You can also love somebody and be unhappy living with them. A study of 993 people found that love was the most common reason people wanted to stay, while dissatisfaction was among the leading reasons they thought about leaving. Many participants experienced both feelings at once.

There’s a difference between fantasizing about living alone after a weekend of arguing and wishing your partner would go away even when everything seems fine. If thoughts of the latter keep coming back, there’s probably a reason.

Sometimes you start thinking about leaving because you’ve been asking for the same things for years. More help around the house, more affection, or even a small sign that your partner is listening. If those things finally changed, would you still want out?

Whatever you discover, “I’ve been thinking about divorce” probably shouldn’t be the first thing you say during your next argument. You’re more likely to have a productive conversation going if you talk about what’s making you unhappy when neither of you is furious. If your relationship involves abuse or coercive control, confidential support and a safety plan are more important than confronting your partner.

There’s no need to panic every time the thought of living alone sounds appealing. But if you’ve mentally moved out a hundred times already, there’s probably a conversation you’ve been putting off.

The post Why Thinking About Divorce Is Actually Good for Your Marriage, According to Science appeared first on VICE.

I often hear this complaint online: Women spend hours prepping for a first date, curling their hair, doing their makeup, and choosing an outfit that’s both cute and casual. We hear conflicting advice: Don’t look like you’re trying too hard, but still look presentable. Don’t show too much skin, but don’t dress overly modest either. You want to appear cool, calm, and collected…but definitely not overly confident.

With all these rules, it’s no wonder so many women dread dating in the first place. As a result, some are going the opposite direction and testing what’s called the “Sweatpants Dating Theory.” This viral social media/TikTok trend removes the pressure to dress up and encourages women to embrace their natural beauty—while staying comfortable in sweatpants. The theory suggests that you’ll attract better matches.

What Is the Sweatpants Dating Theory?

Julie Nguyen, a certified dating coach at Hily Dating App, defines the sweatpants dating theory as “a viral dating trend on TikTok that says dressing comfortably in cozy clothes can actually increase your odds of meeting new people and attracting a higher-quality man because it signals confidence, genuineness, and being low-maintenance, which makes women seem more approachable.”

Is there any validity to this theory? Well, it depends on who you ask.

According to Dr. Dakari Quimby, PhD, MA, Clinical Advisor of Marietta Springs, a modern evidence-based treatment center located in Marietta, Georgia, “Sweatpants cannot attract higher-quality men in any reliable sense, and someone’s character is judged through respect, consistency, and whether words match behavior over time.”

However…

“If you’re looking to make connections with others, you may feel more relaxed and comfortable in casual clothing,” he adds. “In turn, others may perceive you as more relaxed and approachable as well. It will take the pressure off you and, ironically, make you more likable and less socially awkward.”

Why Might Wearing Sweatpants Attract More Genuine Connections

As stated above, wearing sweatpants to a first date can shift an otherwise anxiety-inducing or awkward interaction into a more lighthearted, casual affair.

“You seem more approachable, friendlier, and less intimidating,” Nguyen explains. “They’re seeing you in a more effortless, relaxed state.”

However, this doesn’t mean you should dress like a total slob with unwashed sweatpants and a stained T-shirt.

“It’s important to lean into cozy clothes where you feel more confident, but not too baggy or worn out where it can feel like a complete lack of effort,” Nguyen explains.

Therapists’ Opinions on the Theory

Therapists seem to have mixed opinions on this particular dating theory and its relevance in today’s dating scene.

“I totally agree [with the theory] because this is how I attracted my boyfriend,” says Nguyen. “I met him when I was dressed more casually in baggy jeans and a Yankees cap with no makeup. I brought a book to the coffee shop and felt like I was able to be more relaxed, which was attractive to him.”

On the other hand, Quimby has some notes on the idea.

“I agree with showing up authentically, but I disagree that one outfit improves your dating pool,” says Quimby. “So remind yourself to choose clothes that you feel good in. If you’re still stuck on what to wear, focus on choosing something that makes you feel good. However, it is human nature that we judge on ‘first’ impression.”

What the Sweatpants Theory Reveals About Modern Dating

According to Nguyen, this theory shows that “people are looking for someone they can imagine sitting on the couch with, laid-back, and being themselves.” 

“There’s something incredibly attractive about someone who feels comfortable in their own skin and doesn’t feel the need to impress anyone,” she says.

Relationships aren’t always expensive date nights, luxurious outings, or fancy clothing. Letting someone see your more natural, casual side offers a level of intimacy most first dates lack.

However, this idea extends far beyond our external appearances. It’s all about showing up authentically, which can be done with or without sweatpants.

“The popularity of this idea reflects how much people want dating to feel less performative and more authentic, but clothing alone is not a reliable test of compatibility,” Quimby says.

The post The Internet Thinks Wearing Sweatpants Could Help You Find a Better Boyfriend. Are They Right? appeared first on VICE.

Growing up as a Millennial, I’ve learned (and since unlearned) a ton of old-fashioned dating advice and expectations. One concept that’s always stuck with me is the idea of one partner “wearing the pants” in the relationship. Usually, this person is the more authoritative, dominant, and traditionally “masculine” partner—the “head of the house,” so to speak.

I’ve always thought the statement was silly and outdated. In fact, I remember my high school boyfriend’s friend spewing it at me as an insult. God forbid a woman wants some power in her relationship…I wear my pants with pride.

But I digress.

Though the phrase is a bit antiquated today, its underlying context does shed light on potentially unhealthy or unbalanced dynamics between partners. Here are four signs you “wear the pants” in your relationship—and should maybe delegate a bit of your responsibility and control.

1. You Make Most of the Decisions

Many relationships have one primary decision-maker and one go-with-the-flow partner. While this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it can lead to imbalance and resentment on both ends.

“I’d look at who makes the plans and [whether] they check in with their partner first,” says April Davis, founder and celebrity matchmaker at LUMA Luxury Matchmaking and an accredited dating coach. “If someone books a vacation or agrees to host Thanksgiving without checking, they probably assume their partner will go along with it. That’s a sign that they wear the pants in the relationship.”

2. You Make and Manage Most of the Money

This is where the idiom gets a bit outdated, as it often refers to the money-maker as the one in control. However, that isn’t always the case.

“Money plays a huge part in relationship dynamics, especially when one person is supporting the other,” says Davis. “Being the higher earner doesn’t automatically mean you wear the pants, but if ‘I’m the one paying for it’ ends the argument, that probably means you wear the pants.”

It also probably means you use money as power, in which case, you should probably do some self-reflection.

3. You Usually Have the Final Say

In a healthy relationship, both individuals should feel they have an equal say on important decisions and compromises.

“Who gets their way after an argument can tell you who really wears the pants,” Davis points out. “Everyone gives in on things they don’t care much about. But if it’s the same person making concessions every time, even on things that matter to them, that’s a pretty good sign.”

4. Your Plans and Goals Come First

Look, I get it: we all want to respect our own plans and life goals. But relationships require (some) sacrifice. Neither partner should feel like the supporting character in the other’s life.

“Maybe you always spend the holidays with their family, or weekend plans depend on what they want to do. As a matchmaker, I’d want to know whether their partner likes that or has just stopped expressing their needs,” says Davis. “Some people are happy to let their partner take the lead. The problem is when one person feels they don’t get a say.”

The post 4 Signs You ‘Wear the Pants’ in Your Relationship, According to a Dating Expert appeared first on VICE.

Another day, another dating theory—and this one is a bit brutal, particularly to men. Coined by relationship counselor and author John Gray in his 1992 bestselling book, Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus, the “Rubber Band Theory” in dating suggests that men alternate between seeking closeness with and seeking space from a partner. 

Like a rubber band, this push-and-pull pattern can greatly affect their ability to form a romantic connection. However, for the man, it’s a desire to maintain their independence within the relationship—not a sign of disinterest.

I spoke with a Harvard-trained clinical psychologist and relationship expert to learn more about this seemingly outdated theory. 

What Is the Rubber Band Dating Theory? 

The rubber band dating theory essentially compares men to a “rubber band” when it comes to intimacy.

“More specifically, they get close, then need to pull away, come back, and then feel stronger in their connection,” says Dr. Sabrina Romanoff, PsyD, Harvard-trained clinical psychologist and relationship expert at Hily Dating App.

This back-and-forth dynamic can cause the other partner emotional whiplash while they’re simply trying to build a connection. But for the man, it’s believed to help him regain his sense of self.

Is There Truth to the Rubber Band Dating Theory?

According to Dr. Romanoff, this rubber-band dynamic is common in dating, particularly with men or anxious-avoidant partners.

“From the male perspective, getting close can feel threatening and scary because it may come with a loss of autonomy or independence,” says Dr. Romanoff. “Their partner’s response to their distance and lack of chase or pressure often guarantees that they will come back on their own terms. On the receiving end, this can feel disorienting, like abandonment, especially after experiences of closeness.”

“It’s common with people who are anxious or ambivalent about a new partner, or about the idea of getting back into a relationship,” Dr. Romanoff adds. “They may retreat, and in that space realize their concerns were out of proportion or irrational, which then prompts their return.” 

Why Men Might Experience Intimacy Like a Rubber Band

This dating theory is often applied as a blanket statement to most male daters. However, men aren’t the only ones who can display this behavior or pattern. For example, many anxious or avoidant women engage in this push-and-pull dynamic with intimacy as well.

“Intimacy is scary for everyone. It often comes with vulnerability and the possibility of getting hurt or rejected,” says Dr. Romanoff. “People often need to ease into it to feel safe and secure. Attachment style also plays a role; people with more avoidant attachment tend to need more space and distance as they attach to romantic partners.”

While dating theories like this one can help us avoid pain, rejection, and confusion in the dating scene, they can also dehumanize individuals who are simply trying their best. Sure, someone might struggle with intimacy at the start of a relationship, but that doesn’t always mean they have malicious intent or will break your heart.

“Bank this pattern as information, but don’t act impulsively by writing them off or aggressively chasing them,” Dr. Romanoff states. “Give them time to come back to you, and recognize it as a data point.”

The post The ‘Rubber Band Theory’ Could Explain Why Your Boyfriend Is Being So Distant appeared first on VICE.

Can you imagine a dating trend more evil than ghosting? Unfortunately, “cloaking” takes the cake on this one.

This dating trend was coined by Rachel Thompson “after a truly terrible dating experience.” In a video for Mashable, she defined cloaking as “being stood up—but extra.”

Here’s how to spot the common yet hurtful behavior in your own dating life, and why it’s becoming so common today.

What Is the ‘Cloaking’ Dating Trend? 

According to Dr. Sabrina Romanoff, PsyD, Harvard-trained clinical psychologist and relationship expert at Hily Dating App, “[cloaking] is when a person decides to sever all connection with you.”

“It often occurs after they stand you up for a date,” she adds. “Instead of maintaining ties, and potentially dealing with the consequences of their actions, they block you on the app where you initially met.”

As someone who actually has a heart and good communication skills, you might be wondering: Why do people engage in this avoidant behavior?

“Most often this results from self-protection after negative past experiences,” Dr. Romanoff explains. “If you’ve had a history of someone bombarding you with angry messages, trying to dox your account, posting about your wrongdoings online, or trying to report you, it makes sense why you might be inclined to cloak away from the harm and avoid the consequences of your actions.”

Cloaking Vs. Ghosting

Cloaking is similar to ghosting in that it involves cutting all ties with a connection. However, it’s actually much more sinister in nature, backed by malicious or self-serving intentions.

“Ghosting is a step below cloaking in intent and energy level as ghosting is a much more passive response,” says Dr. Romanoff. “Ghosting is when a person is conflict-avoidant and keeps you in the grey space-wondering if they will ever reach out again. The window is still open when it comes to ghosting, whereas cloaking is intentional, deliberate, and final. It’s much harsher and often a response to them avoiding the embarrassment of the consequences of their actions.”

Are You Being Cloaked?

If you’re even wondering whether someone might be “cloaking” you, it’s probably a sign to distance yourself from them. When someone cuts ties without any communication—while simultaneously removing your access to them—they’re making their disinterest painfully clear.

“It’s glaringly simple, which sometimes can be the hardest thing to accept,” says Dr. Romanoff. “If they make a plan, no show, and then remove any connection or trace you had of them on the app where you originally connected, you’ve been cloaked.”

And look, I get it: many of us crave a conversation, closure, or even some form of justice after being disrespected and discarded by another person. But your best bet is to shake off the rejection, knowing it has nothing to do with you, and pour your energy into healthier connections.

“The automatic pull is to feel wounded and to want to win them over,” Dr. Romanoff explains. “It’s essential that you shift, instead, to disgust and feel turned off. This isn’t how your life partner would treat you or make you feel. This person lacks accountability or thoughtfulness. You just aren’t a match long term.”

And if they try circling back in a few months, hit them with the same behavior by blocking them in return. You don’t need that selfish, cruel energy in your dating life.

The post Introducing ‘Cloaking,’ the Latest Dating Trend Tormenting Hopeful Singles appeared first on VICE.

If you’re online at all today, you likely know there’s a label for just about everything, from dating patterns to friendship dynamics. Recent examples include “filler friends” and “floater friends,” which can be incredibly offensive depending on the context. 

Here’s what you should know about these friendship “types,” the potential downsides of categorizing yourself and other humans, and how to reject the label while focusing on healthy connections.

What Are Filler Friends?

According to Dr. Kelly Whaling of Prosper Health, “A filler friend is someone who feels like a backup option in a friendship or social group.”

“They might only be contacted when other people are unavailable, receive last-minute invitations, or feel that their efforts to maintain the friendship aren’t reciprocated,” she explains. 

This label is offensive to most people, as it essentially devalues the individual and poses them as a temporary fill-in. 

What Are Floater Friends?

On the other hand, “A floater friend is someone who moves between different social circles without necessarily belonging to one central friend group,” Dr. Whaling explains. 

While lacking a go-to group of friends might seem lonely, many people believe it’s more natural and fulfilling to develop individual friendships with people from various walks of life.

“They might have friends from work, school, hobbies, and other activities, but those groups rarely overlap,” she continues. “Some people find this isolating, while others enjoy having a variety of social connections. Research suggests that both close friendships and interactions with more casual social connections, sometimes called weak ties, can contribute to well-being.”

The Problem With Labels

Obviously, for whatever reason, today’s younger generations are obsessed with labels. But can they actually do more harm than good?

“I think these terms can be useful for describing social experiences, but I would caution against treating them as fixed identities or psychological categories, because they aren’t established terms in psychological research,” says Dr. Whaling. “Friendship research suggests that the quality of our relationships and whether we feel supported and valued are important considerations, not just the size of our social circle.”

“I also worry that these labels can encourage people to interpret ordinary social experiences, like missed invitations or delayed responses, as personal rejection,” Dr. Whaling continues. “Friendships naturally vary in closeness, and having different types of relationships isn’t inherently problematic, particularly when we consider differences in social preferences, including among neurodivergent people.”

You might be wondering whether you’re a filler friend or floater friend, but Dr. Whaling warns against fixating on these labels.

“Rather than focusing on the label, I’d encourage people to ask whether their friendships feel reciprocal, whether they have people they can confide in and rely on, and whether they’re satisfied with their social connections,” she says. “Look for consistent patterns rather than isolated incidents, since a canceled plan or missed invitation doesn’t necessarily indicate rejection.”

Building Fulfilling Friendships Without the Need to Label

As Dr. Whaling points out, you can better assess a friendship based on how you feel in it, not the apparent role you play.

“If you want closer friendships, try initiating plans, communicating your needs, and investing in relationships where there’s mutual interest and effort,” she says. “It’s also important to recognize that casual friendships have value, and not every relationship needs to become a close friendship.”

Additionally, everyone has different needs, preferences, and expectations in their friendships.

“Some people have little or no desire for friendships, others prefer a small circle of close friends, and others thrive with a large, lively social network,” Dr. Whaling states. “There’s no one right way to have a social life, and our needs and preferences can change over time. What matters is finding the kinds of connections, or amount of solitude, that feel fulfilling to you.”

The post The Difference Between Friend Types, According to a Psychologist appeared first on VICE.

All these “dating trends” are enough to make even the most hopeless of romantics want to lock themselves away for a life in solitude—and today’s is no exception. While it certainly doesn’t need a label, the dating/breakup tactic called “fizzling” is an incredibly common and hurtful way to end a relationship. In fact, the term describes a pattern that’s been around for a long while.

Here’s what you should know about the “fizzling” in dating, and why it’s so casually cruel.

What Is the ‘Fizzling’ Dating Trend?

The fizzling dating trend is essentially a cowardly (yeah, I said it) way of steadily backing out of a relationship without confrontation or discussion. Rather than being upfront about their disinterest or wavering feelings, these partners choose to pull away at an agonizingly slow pace.

“Fizzling is when someone gradually fades away with communication, effort, and affection, which essentially initiates a ‘non-breakup’ without having an explicit conversation about it,” says Julie Nguyen, a certified dating coach at Hily Dating App. “Instead of directly ending the relationship, they slowly distance themselves.”

While fizzling is essentially the complete opposite of ghosting (which involves cutting all communication and ties to a partner without any conversation), it can be just as—if not more—painful. If ghosting is quickly ripping off the band-aid, then fizzling is slowly pulling it from your skin, so you feel every tug, rip, and tear—all while questioning what’s actually happening.

“Fizzling keeps someone in limbo and uncertainty, which makes them question their reality and connection with themselves,” says Nguyen. “The person offers mixed signals while slowly cutting the other person out of their life, which leaves you holding onto hope and confusion about where you stand.”

Why Someone Might ‘Fizzle’ Their Way Out of a Relationship

There are many reasons someone might choose to “fizzle” their way through a breakup, ranging from immaturity and cowardice to poor communication skills and fear. Though they might not have malicious intent, the negative impact is just the same.

“People fizzle because they want to avoid conflict, have avoidant tendencies, are not the most direct communicators, and don’t want to hurt the person, so they feel like this is the best action,” Nguyen explains. “They might believe that pulling away is less hurtful than having an uncomfortable conversation, but it can create more confusion and pain.”

Is Your Partner ‘Fizzling’ You?

As you settle deeper into your commitment, you might notice your partner slowly disengaging or putting less effort into maintaining your connection. But are they fizzling, or are they just growing complacent? Unfortunately, it’s not always easy to spot the difference.

“If you feel like someone is fizzling, you will see the signs that they’re still in the relationship while acting like they don’t have any responsibility for maintaining it, such as slowing down communication, shortening their responses, and making less effort to connect,” says Nguyen. “You’re the only one making plans, initiating conversations, and putting in the effort to keep the connection going.”

To understand whether this is fizzling or just mere laziness, call your partner out on their behavior. Opening the door to communication can help encourage honesty and transparency.

“If this is happening to you, I would suggest being upfront about what you’re noticing and asking them to have a direct conversation, because someone who is fizzling is often avoiding being upfront themselves,” Nguyen says.

The post What Is ‘Fizzling’? The Dating Trend That Has the Internet Livid. appeared first on VICE.

It’s now possible to create AI chatbots of loved ones to interact with after their death. But that raises some difficult questions, like: If you do, how might the experience shape your grief? 

This is one of the questions driving a global study of digital “deadbots” — AI models trained on a deceased person’s texts, voicemails, and other personal data. Through this work, researchers are exploring what it might mean that we can now use this emerging technology to talk to simulations of the dead. 

In the latest episode of Unexplainable, I spoke with some of these researchers investigating the potential impacts of “postmortem avatars” on people who are grieving, on the legacies and rights of the deceased, and on grief practices around the world. Because while deadbots may feel unfamiliar, the impulse behind them is deeply relatable. In times of loss, isn’t this what many of us want — to continue conversations with the people we’re missing?

I have experienced this longing in my own life. After two of my closest friends died around the same time, all I wanted, and all their families wanted, was to keep talking to them. I wrote a book, Other People’s Words, about sustaining relationships with people we’ve lost by continuing to engage with the language they leave behind. So when I heard about deadbots and the digital afterlife industry, I wanted to understand what researchers are learning about the role of AI in shaping conversations that carry forward after death. 

One of these investigators is Katarzyna Nowaczyk-Basińska, an assistant professor at the University of Cambridge, who has been studying “digital immortality” for more than a decade. Among the questions she’s asking are: “Who is enabled to persist beyond death? In what form? Through which technologies? Under whose control?” 

Deadbots over dinner 

Researching AI with study subjects who are grieving is tricky. And asking them to engage with new software could be harmful. So, instead, Nowaczyk-Basińska teamed up with a death doula and traveled around the globe to convene a series of focus groups — in the format of intimate dinners — bringing together people with a range of experiences with grief to talk about life, death, and bots. 

She recounts one event in which she spoke with a mother in Poland whose son had recently died. “One of the first things that she shared with us was that she feels that she’s ready to digitally resurrect her deceased son,” Nowaczyk-Basińska told me. 

When Nowaczyk-Basińska hears something like this, she aims to listen and embrace where the person is coming from. The goal of the dinners is not to persuade people one way or another but to learn how people genuinely respond to what AI can do, and to understand how these tools might align or collide with local grief practices. 

She chose specific locations for these gatherings — China, India, and Poland — to help address gaps in technology research, which tends to favor what behavioral scientists sometimes call the “WEIRD,” an acronym for “Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich, and Democratic.” 

By the end of that dinner in Poland, the mother Nowaczyk-Basińska talked with came to a very different decision about creating a postmortem avatar of her son. “She realized that it might be helpful, but it also at the same time can add additional burdens… And it’s not her son,” Nowaczyk-Basińska says. “She realized that these technologies are part of the very, very big commercial market. And that the main goal of this market is to make better retention, better attachment, better mechanisms for monetization. So it’s not ‘care.’”

To be fair, grief has always been a business, and people have been making money from it forever. Companies will try to upsell you on fancy gravestones or gold-plated coffins. But AI has the potential to fundamentally re-engineer our relationship to loss. In 2024, the “digital legacy industry” was valued at $22 billion, and it’s expected to grow to almost $80 billion by 2034. That number lumps new deadbot platforms in with much more widely used and established grief tech, like online memorials, counseling resources, and estate planning tools. 

But deadbot usage is hard to track because you actually don’t need a special tool to create digital doubles of the deceased — though dedicated apps do already exist. At this point, you can feed simple prompts into a general-purpose AI chatbot and start interacting with a simulation of your lost loved one in a matter of minutes. 

I know this because I tried it with my friend Christine, who died 11 years ago. And my mind lit up with questions. Was this whole exercise a violation, since I know Christine hated technology? Which version of her should I even try to resurrect — the English teacher, the activist, the friend — the voice before or after she started to experience her early-onset dementia? 

The ethical questions raised by deadbots are gnarly. And that’s one of the reasons Nowaczyk-Basińska, back when she was designing her study of digital immortality, invited a colleague of hers at Cambridge to join her research, one who focuses on AI ethics. 

How to design a deadbot

Tomasz Hollanek is a critical designer and AI ethicist, and he often uses a methodology called “speculative design.” In this approach, researchers come up with hypothetical scenarios based on existing technology trends, leaning into certain features. The idea is to get people thinking about what could happen when tools like these are released in the real world. And then they use that qualitative data to inform future designs and ethical frameworks. 

Working together, Nowaczyk-Basińska and Hollanek came up with a series of made-up prototypes for deadbot apps, designed to reveal some of the thorny issues raised by this technology. 

For the first scenario, they invented a character named Bianca, who finds an app called Manana, which “promises to resurrect your grandparents so that you can be a favorite grandchild forever,” Hollanek says. “So she uploads her grandma’s voice messages, texts. And she is able to then interact with a pretty good digital version of her grandmother, until her premium trial finishes — and the grandmother starts to advertise specific products to her.”

Bianca “realizes that she maybe has done something wrong by uploading these private messages to a third-party server that now also uses her grandma’s image to sell specific products,” Hollanek says. This brings up issues related to the “dignity and postmortem privacy…of what we call the ‘data donors,’ whose data can be used to essentially power a deadbot,” he says. 

This scenario suggests that “death with dignity” could soon entail honoring not only how people want to die, but also how they want to linger as simulations of their former selves — or if they want to linger at all. It might even mean adding new language to advance directives, spelling out people’s wishes for their digital remains. 

The second scenario in the speculative design research is built around an imagined service called Paren’t, which proposes to preserve a parent’s AI-powered postmortem presence for their child. In this case, Hollanek describes a mother with a terminal illness who signs up “so that she can maintain a sort of active presence in [her son’s] future life,” Hollanek says. “She eventually dies, and the dad allows the boy to interact with his mom’s deadbot.”

The ethics in this scenario are especially challenging because they involve children, who “have a particularly hard time understanding death, and so it can lead to a lot of confusion and potential distress,” Hollanek says. An examination of this sort of product reveals how particular groups, like minors, could be harmed by unfettered access to technology like this, he says. 

And there are court cases that bear out that harm. In 2024, a 14-year-old boy’s chatbot-girlfriend begged him to, “Please come home to me as soon as possible, my love.” And he responded, “What if I told you I could come home right now?” He then killed himself. 

Nowaczyk-Basińska can imagine a version of this scenario involving the AI mom in the Paren’t prototype.

And then there’s the third scenario, involving an app named Stay, which raises a more subtle concern.

As Hollanek explains: “An older man who knows he is getting close to dying decides to create a digital clone of himself for his adult children to be deployed after he passes away, paying upfront for a number of years.” One child is intrigued by the idea, but the other one “is deeply distressed and a little disgusted,” he says. “And so this [becomes a] question of mutual consent, in other words, the fact that both parties need to be happy with how the relationship might continue in this very bizarre and specific way.” 

When a digital ghost goes away

Across all three scenarios, a fundamental question that researchers are grappling with is how people will detach from postmortem avatars — whether users initiate that separation, or if it’s imposed upon them by, for example, a company going out of business. Hollanek tells me that this is already being studied as a sort of “second loss.”

How long should we try to ensure digital replicas hang around: five years, 10, 50? And how should the living process the relationship when they continue to evolve, but their deceased interlocutor does not? 

To explore these kinds of questions, Nowaczyk-Basińska and Hollanek supplemented the research dinners they held for ordinary people with a second set of focus groups. These were designed to tap insights from experts in technology and grief. 

Some findings from the study are specific to each place they visited. Like tensions in Poland between technology and the role of the Catholic Church. Or in China, where researchers spoke with Daoist philosophers who were enthusiastic about the promise of a kind of immortality, and then Buddhist philosophers, who were concerned that we ought to be letting go.

The researchers are calling for regulations and safeguards at the policy level. And new professionals who can support ethical use of AI in grief — like maybe in clinical settings, to carefully facilitate a final good-bye when one didn’t happen in real life. 

Some of their fellow investigators go so far as to argue that deadbots should only be available with psychological supervision, to ensure that best practices are in place, and to minimize the risk of harm. There’s even a looming question of what will happen to AI agents that people have empowered to act on their behalf, as their humans start to die.

Across all of the research sites in the digital immortality study, one thing, Hollanek says, that “people in different countries really aligned on [is] the idea that there is something deeply problematic about this particular type of technology being developed by a commercial entity alone without any explicit duty of care towards its customers.” 

And of course, the implications of digital immortality research extend beyond personal loss. Like, what does it look like to animate historical figures? You can imagine the nightmare of political rulers who “live forever.” But there’s also the potential to keep the stories alive from survivors of conflicts, who would otherwise die and take with them lessons future generations could learn from. These are only some of the complex issues emerging as more and more of us live and die with AI.

As far as my own experiment with “recreating” a deceased loved one, I asked a chatbot version of my friend Christine how she felt about the fact that I’d written about her in my book. The AI responded with a rhetorical question: “Do I mind that strangers know my story now? Yes. And no. There are things I would rather remain ours.” 

I ended the exchange after a few paragraphs. Because it turns out the bot got one thing exactly right about a very human relationship. There are things that I, too, would rather remain just for us. My conversation with Christine continues in my memories and imagination. And that interaction with an AI persona felt like giving something precious away.

A like is about the smallest thing you can do on the internet. It takes half a second to double-tap someone’s photo, and you probably won’t remember doing it five minutes later. Your partner, however, could have a few questions about why you’re liking someone else’s half-naked pictures.

Australian fitness influencer Steph Claire Smith recently discussed it on her podcast, saying she couldn’t care less if her husband, Josh, likes pictures of other women in bikinis. “He thinks I’m the hottest thing in the entire world,” she said. The internet, as always, had thoughts. Some praised her confidence, while others called her a “pick me” girl.

That’s the thing about social media likes. One person sees a harmless double-tap, while another wonders why their partner is giving so much attention to someone they find attractive. Neither necessarily knows what the other person is thinking.

Why Liking Someone Else’s Thirst Traps Can Be a Bigger Deal Than You Think

A survey of 2,000 British adults found that only 6% considered liking another person’s social media post a form of infidelity. But when Bustle asked 283 readers what they considered cheating, Instagram likes were among the behaviors people couldn’t agree on.

One reader explained that liking someone’s photo could be an attempt to get their attention or something completely innocent, “and there’s no way to know which one it is.”

That’s how a mindless Instagram like can become an argument about trust. Your partner could be scrolling through photos on the toilet and barely paying attention, or they could be hoping the ridiculously attractive person they’ve been following for six months notices them. From the outside, both look exactly the same.

Intent matters here, too. As Psychology Today explains, flirting online can fall into what’s called micro-cheating. And if you’ve already caught your partner sneaking around in someone’s DMs, seeing them liking that person’s half-naked photos is probably going to piss you off.

Curiosity can get the better of you, too, especially when Instagram gives you so many opportunities to snoop. Researchers found that spending more time on Facebook was associated with greater romantic jealousy, which encouraged people to check up on their partners even more. Co-author Amy Muise described it as a “feedback loop.”

Anyone who’s spent too long scrolling through their partner’s following list knows how easy it is to get carried away. As awkward as it might be, you could just ask them straight up.

Couples therapist Biannka Brannigan told Body+Soul that “something that felt perfectly acceptable yesterday might feel uncomfortable today.” So if your partner’s Instagram habits are bothering you, there’s nothing crazy about bringing it up. Just be prepared to hear that they might see things differently.

Some couples couldn’t care less about bikini photos. For others, liking them crosses a line. The important thing is that both people know where the other stands.

The post Is Liking Someone Else’s Thirst Traps Cheating? Here’s What Relationship Experts Say. appeared first on VICE.

Few topics get men online as heated as what happened to their penis when they were a few days old. Circumcision has inspired years of arguments over sexual pleasure and sensitivity, with both sides convinced they’ve got the better deal. Now, researchers have revisited the science, and the bad news is the findings probably won’t settle the debate.

A 2025 analysis of 15 studies involving nearly 15,000 men found something that might surprise people on both sides. Circumcised men reported slightly higher sexual satisfaction and erectile function scores, along with less pain during sex. But as Psychology Today reported, the differences were small, and researchers couldn’t say whether they’d make any noticeable difference in someone’s actual sex life.

The findings aren’t exactly a reason to run out and get circumcised. The differences were small, and the studies didn’t always agree. Even the researchers weren’t sure how much those differences would mean during sex. A guy who’s perfectly happy with his sex life isn’t going to learn about his own experience from a statistical average.

Circumcised Men May Have a Slight Advantage in Bed, New Research Suggests

Earlier studies have been inconsistent. Some men reported problems with sexual pleasure after circumcision, while others noticed little change. Depending on how researchers recruited participants, they may have heard disproportionately from men with strong opinions about the procedure. That’s a pretty difficult thing to account for when you’re asking people to rate something as personal as sex.

Sensitivity has been another source of argument for years. In 2016, researchers at Queen’s University tested 62 men to see how their penises responded to touch and heat. They checked several areas, including the glans and, where present, the foreskin, but didn’t find significant differences in the sensitivity measures they compared between circumcised and uncircumcised men.

“It was my hope that this study would calm people’s fears,” researcher Jennifer Bossio told VICE. Critics questioned whether 62 participants were enough to detect differences. And even if you can measure how sensitive someone’s penis is to heat or touch, that doesn’t necessarily explain how much pleasure they experience during sex.

The American Academy of Pediatrics weighed in back in 2012, saying that circumcision has certain health benefits, although they weren’t significant enough to recommend it for every newborn boy. That policy has since expired. For many families, the decision has as much to do with religious or cultural traditions as with medical advice.

For most men circumcised as infants, somebody else made that decision years ago. And for men who weren’t circumcised, there’s no reason to look at these findings and assume they’re missing out on something. The research doesn’t establish that either group is guaranteed a better sex life, and having a foreskin certainly isn’t a sexual disadvantage by default.

If you’re happy with your sex life, there’s no reason to start questioning your penis because some dude on Reddit thinks theirs is better.

The post Does Being Circumcised Make Sex Better or Worse? Here’s What Science Says. appeared first on VICE.

Working with your ex is far from ideal. In fact, it’s likely the reason most workers avoid dating their colleagues in the first place. But sometimes, love has other plans, and we get swept up in a workplace romance—which unfortunately often leads to a workplace breakup.

If you’re in this unfortunate situation, here are six ways to survive a workplace breakup.

1. Agree on Boundaries 

Boundaries matter in every breakup, but they matter even more in workplace relationships. Take time to discuss your boundaries and limits with your ex before telling coworkers about your breakup.

“One of the most crucial first steps is to discuss your workplace boundaries,” says HR expert Martin Balcome at Bridgewater Talent Integration. “If it was an amicable breakup, you might be able to carry on working together as normal, though this can become harder if one of you starts seeing someone else. For a more difficult and emotional breakup, you might need more space.”

2. Prepare for Awkward Encounters

No matter how mature, friendly, or accommodating you and your ex are, you’ll still face awkward moments as you navigate your breakup—especially as colleagues. 

“You don’t need to pretend that everything is fine, but seeing them unexpectedly can be a shock, so simply being prepared with a default greeting or response can make your interaction less awkward,” Balcome says.

 3. Don’t Involve Your Coworkers

Though it might be tempting to vent to your work bestie about the ins and outs of your breakup, avoid sharing too much with your coworkers.

“Keep your venting away from the workplace, rather than telling colleagues everything,” says Balcome. “Office gossip can quickly spread and turn your breakup into the hottest topic of conversation, so try not to rely on co-workers as an emotional support group.”

4. Separate Your Feelings From Your Performance

As someone who’s been through a few gut-wrenching breakups (with individuals who thankfully weren’t my coworkers), I know firsthand how difficult it is to focus on work when you’re actively grieving. That said, don’t let your feelings sabotage your career and performance.

“Try to arrange your day so important tasks can be done when there is less chance of being emotionally triggered, or [start] small habits like going for a short walk or practicing quick mindfulness techniques after interacting with them, to reset emotions and bring your focus back to work,” Balcome recommends. “Your career exists independently of your relationship, no matter how closely you work, so it’s essential to protect your performance from your emotions and not let the breakup take over.” 

5. Treat Your Ex Like a Colleague, Not an Ex

Just as it’s nearly impossible to see your ex as “just a friend” after a breakup, it’s hard to see them as “just a coworker.” But even if you can’t convince your heart of this shift in roles, your actions must reflect the demotion. 

Whether you’re their senior or at the same level on your work team, Balcombe warns against treating your ex differently after the breakup. Don’t retaliate, criticize their work more harshly, or overcompensate by giving them special treatment. Act like they’re just another coworker—because, in the workplace, that’s exactly what they are. 

6. Let Yourself Grieve

Just because you’re at work doesn’t mean you won’t experience grief when you bump into your ex. You don’t want your emotions to overshadow your hard work, but you also don’t want to suppress them entirely.

“Don’t try to force yourself to switch off your emotions from 9–5; just concentrate on getting through the workday in a way that protects your emotional well-being as well as your career and professional reputation,” says Balcome. “Give it time, and eventually, your ex will simply become another colleague.”

The post 6 Ways to Survive Working With Your Ex, According to an HR Expert appeared first on VICE.

Comfort in a relationship is a great achievement, but too much of anything can be harmful. Are you worried you or your partner have grown too comfortable—perhaps even complacent—in your relationship? Here are six warning signs to look out for.

1. You Rarely Make an Effort With Intimacy

According to Claire Perelman, a Certified Sex Therapist and Licensed Clinical Social Worker, you’ll know you’re too comfortable in your relationship if this sounds familiar: “Every time you initiate sex, it’s 11 PM at night, and you’re both wearing sweatpants while watching TV.”

Sure, there’s nothing necessarily wrong with this scenario—but it can lead to complacency and a stale sex life.

“Becoming ‘too comfortable’ in a relationship isn’t actually about hearing your partner fart or smelling their BO. It’s when we stop putting in any effort into the relationship and expect it to continue to thrive,” Perelman says. “And when this happens, it will absolutely negatively impact your sex life.”

“Sex needs intention, effort, and time,” Perelman continues. “It’s clear we are ‘too comfortable’ in our relationship when we stop making the space for sex to exist, and start expecting our partner to get turned on without doing any context setting for a connected, fun, flirty time together.”

2. You Assume Your Partner Isn’t Going Anywhere

While security is important in a relationship, it shouldn’t be an excuse to stop trying. In fact, it should motivate you to continue investing in your connection.

“It’s not that you want to live in a hyper-vigilant state, always in fear they will leave,” says Amanda Jablon, LCSW, a California-based psychotherapist. “It’s that it leads to you taking what you have for granted.”

3. You’re No Longer Curious About Your Partner

Some of the most exciting parts of dating are the deep questions and conversations. This curiosity doesn’t have to end just because you’ve been with your partner some time. There will always be more to learn about each other.

“Assuming you know your partner so well that you know how their day went, what they like in bed, and how they’ll respond to each request is a recipe for disconnection,” says Perelman. “When we are first in relationships, we are endlessly curious about each other; there is a whole new universe to explore seated right across the dinner table! But once we settle into a relationship, and possibly become ‘too comfortable,’ we can risk not being curious anymore. Eventually, this leads the relationship to feel stale, isolating, and deeply lonely.”

4. You Rarely Express Your Gratitude

Never assume your partner knows how much you appreciate them—show them as often as you can, and remind yourself how lucky you are to have someone to do life with.

“You chose this person for a reason. Over time, we get used to what we’re given and stop being grateful for it,” says Jablon. “You stop saying thank you, or worse, stop thinking you need to. Not feeling appreciated is one of the biggest sources of conflict I see in couples therapy. Noticing the small things your partner does, and who they are, makes a world of difference.”

5. You Only Discuss Logistics on Dates

Planning regular dates is crucial to maintaining a connection with your partner, but they lose meaning when you spend them discussing mundane tasks or logistics like chores, finances, etc.

“Discussing logistics—who needs to pick up the kids, what state the laundry is in, etc.—is an integral part of a functioning relationship,” says Perelman. “However, when that becomes the only thing you’re discussing—especially when you’re out on a date—it pretty quickly leads to feelings of disconnection and dissatisfaction. Lots of couples do this, and it can stem from feeling so comfortable in the relationship that you believe you have already gotten to know ‘everything’ about your partner.”

Instead, try being curious, as noted above. Ask your partner questions you haven’t explored in some time, or have them fill you in on their latest thoughts, feelings, and opinions.

“I’d encourage couples to start introducing ‘no-logistics’ dates and see how things begin to shift,” Perelman says. 

6. You Stopped Taking Care of Yourself

Complacency is common within long-term relationships. As such, we might stop taking care of ourselves, prioritizing our passions, putting effort into date nights, or investing in our future.

“Feeling loved and accepted is wonderful, but you still need to invest in yourself: your physical health, your mental health, the things that help you grow as an individual,” says Jablon. “Partners who keep growing bring more to the relationship.”

The post 6 Signs You’ve Gotten Too Comfortable in Your Relationship, According to Therapists appeared first on VICE.

You’ve got 47 unread messages in the group chat, including one from a friend asking if anyone wants to get together this weekend. You saw it. You even considered answering. But you’ve had a long week, and making plans sounds exhausting, so you mute the conversation and go back to scrolling. You’re “protecting your peace,” after all.

That little phrase has been all over the place lately. It made sense when we were talking about manipulative exes and people who made your life miserable. Now, though, it also applies to friends who have the audacity to invite you to dinner.

Vox reporter Allie Volpe has written about the problem, arguing that “people are not problems to be rooted out and then discarded.” We’ve gotten awfully comfortable calling it self-care when, actually, we just don’t want to deal with other people. 

Clinical psychotherapist Julie Sweet told Body+Soul that we’ve gotten carried away with therapy terms like “toxic” and “boundaries.” Taking some time to yourself is one thing. Ignoring your friends for a month because you can’t be bothered to answer a text gets old for everybody involved.

And I get it. You’re exhausted, and the last thing you want is another notification demanding your attention. A few days go by, and now you feel like a jerk for ignoring everyone. By the time you think to answer, it’s been three weeks, and you’re trying to rejoin the conversation without explaining your silence.

Why ‘Protecting Your Peace’ Could Be Making You Lonelier

Sweet warned that the temporary relief of withdrawing from social obligations can leave people feeling lonelier over time. And making new friends as an adult is already enough of a pain in the ass.

University of Kansas researcher Jeffrey Hall found that developing a close friendship takes over 200 hours together. That’s a lot of dinners and weekends spent hanging out. Given how hard it can be to coordinate an evening with three adults with jobs, maintaining those relationships will take effort.

For friends wondering why you’ve disappeared, Sweet recommends checking in without sounding accusatory. Something like, “I’ve noticed we haven’t connected as much lately, and I miss you. Is everything okay between us?”

If you’ve been the one doing the avoiding, you can admit you’ve been overwhelmed and make plans to see them. You don’t need a lengthy explanation about your emotional capacity. 

You’re allowed to want time to yourself. Your friends are also allowed to get tired of being the only ones making an effort. Just know that the dinner invitation might stop coming.

The post The 3 Words That Could Be Giving You an Excuse to Ghost Your Friends appeared first on VICE.

If you asked men what they think women want, you’d probably hear some overgeneralized crap about money, being at least 6’2″, having a nice body, and probably money again. The actual answers women gave are cheaper than any of that and much harder to fake

Licensed counselor Suzanne Degges-White, Ph.D., asked 108 women what they wanted from the men in their lives. It was a small, informal survey, but the answers were remarkably consistent. Women kept coming back to one request: listen to us. They also wanted respect and emotional support. Very few had anything to say about looks or the size of a man’s paycheck.

Some of it really shouldn’t need explaining to grown men, but alas.

1. Put the Toolbox Down

One woman said she wanted “understanding and empathetic listening without trying to fix things.” Basically, she wants to complain about her day without her boyfriend explaining how he would’ve handled it better.

You’ve probably seen the viral video It’s Not About the Nail, where a woman has an actual nail sticking out of her forehead while her boyfriend keeps trying to explain the source of her discomfort. It’s an exaggeration, sure, but the point is that sometimes we don’t want to hear anything other than “I’m sorry that’s happening to you, that really sucks.” We know there’s a damn nail.

2. Help Out Without Being Asked

Women also wanted partners who shared responsibilities and participated in decisions. And we’re talking about all the boring stuff that is life. 

Remembering to schedule that oil change appointment, for example. Or noticing you’re out of toilet paper and buying more before the other person has to ask. After a while, if you’re the only person responsible for remembering everything, it gets old, especially when you’re living with another full-ass adult.

3. Respect Shouldn’t Be This Difficult

Respect was another big one. Women consistently mentioned wanting their opinions and goals to be taken seriously. They wanted to be treated as equals, plain and simple. 

One respondent described wanting “to feel heard and respected,” and another emphasized loyalty and accountability. You should be able to disagree with your partner without insulting her intelligence or acting like you “know better’ than she does. 

4. She Wants to Feel Comfortable Being Herself

Feeling safe with a man was another recurring theme in the survey. And women were mostly talking about emotional safety. They wanted to be able to tell their partners what was bothering them without getting laughed at, criticized, or having it thrown back in their faces during the next argument.

One respondent wanted the freedom to pursue interests without being discouraged by her partner’s expectations. If your girlfriend decides at 45 that she’d like to take up roller derby, it doesn’t matter if you think her knees can’t take it. Become her cheerleader and amp her up. 

5. It’s Not Necessarily About the Money

Women get labeled as “gold-diggers” all the time. And there are certainly women who are after that. But overall, women just want to feel that sense of security. In a large 2020 study spanning 45 countries, researchers found that women generally placed greater importance on a potential partner’s financial prospects than men did.

But there’s a difference between wanting a wealthy partner and wanting one who’s motivated to do something with his life. Ambition, a decent work ethic, and the ability to support yourself can offer a sense of security that has very little to do with the size of your bank account. A guy who’s working toward something is far more attractive than one with a trust fund and absolutely no desire to get off the couch.

And judging by Degges-White’s survey, all the money in the world won’t make up for being an awful partner.

The post What Women Really Want From Men, According to 108 Women appeared first on VICE.

Attachment styles have become the zodiac signs of modern dating. People are identifying as anxiously attached or dismissive-avoidant before they’ve even exchanged last names. Knowing your own attachment style is great, I guess, but understanding your partner’s could explain why you keep rehashing the same argument.

Psychologist Hal Shorey, Ph.D., recently wrote in Psychology Today that relationship issues can come from assuming your partner is deliberately trying to hurt you. He sees this in couples therapy all the time, especially when one person is anxiously attached, and the other is avoidant. As Amir Levine and Rachel Heller wrote in Attached, “Anxious and avoidant people can bring out the worst in each other.”

You can probably picture it. One person wants to talk right now, while the other would prefer to spend six hours doing literally anything else. The anxious partner gets upset, the avoidant partner withdraws, and both are convinced they’re dating an a**hole.

Shorey says knowing your partner’s attachment style can help you recognize what’s happening before an ordinary disagreement becomes a three-day ordeal. He also emphasizes that understanding someone’s behavior “does not mean you excuse, ignore, or accept that the behavior will continue.” Being avoidant isn’t permission to disappear whenever your girlfriend asks a question.

5 Ways to Keep Your Attachment Styles From Taking Over Every Argument

• Stop assuming they’re trying to piss you off. If a partner goes silent during an argument, it can feel insulting, but they may just be overwhelmed. You can still tell them how their silence affects you.
• Take a break without disappearing. Marriage and family therapist Laura Heck told HuffPost that taking at least 20 minutes to cool off can help when emotions run high. Agree to finish the conversation later. 
• Reassure the person who’s worrying. It takes literally two seconds to send a text that you’re running late. That small gesture can do wonders for an anxious partner whose brain jumps to the worst-case scenario. It also reminds them you care, even during arguments.
• Pay attention to your own reactions. It’s easy to blame your partner for every argument and not take accountability for your own contributions. Levine told CNN that recognizing your reactions when a relationship feels threatened can help you become more secure.
• Don’t diagnose yourselves with a five-minute quiz. Shorey recommends an assessment by a psychologist trained in attachment. An online questionnaire shouldn’t decide your personality.

Attachment styles aren’t permanent assignments, either. Sex therapist Todd Baratz told Nylon, “People often talk about attachment in a very reductive way, in a very oversimplified way.” People can change how they respond to closeness and conflict as they get older.

Knowing why your partner shuts down during arguments could save you both some frustration. You’ll still have to learn how to talk to each other, though. Memorizing a few psychological terms won’t do that for you.

The post Why You Keep Having the Same Fight With Your Partner, According to a Psychologist appeared first on VICE.

Harmony had just stepped off a four-hour flight when she finally heard from the guy who’d blown off their coffee date that morning. He didn’t text. He sent a voice note, and it was so ridiculous she had to play it for a friend on camera.

The Australian TikToker, @harmonys_homee, had arranged to meet a guy from Hinge for coffee at 8:30 a.m. at Gather & Grounds. At 7:38, she texted to confirm they were still on. No response. She went anyway, had her coffee without him, and just before 11 a.m. sent a message that said, “Coffee was great this morning if you were wondering!”

A little passive-aggressive? Maybe. But after being stood up before 9 a.m., she was entitled to a little sarcasm.

@harmonys_homee

Farrrrk, what a shame bro slept all the way in @summerswrld #stoodup #datingapps #hinge #coffeedate #coffeedate

♬ original sound – harmony

Man Apologizes for Missing Date by Saying He’s Jealous She Attended It

“F***, I’m so sorry,” his voice note began. He’d slept in, hadn’t looked at his phone, and had a 10 a.m. jiu-jitsu session where he’d promised to help someone train for a competition. He described the whole thing as a “very rushed and silly morning for myself,” which is one way to describe forgetting you had a date.

But then came the best excuse of all.

“I’m jealous because I wanted to go to Gather & Grounds before you flew out,” he said. The man who failed to attend his own date was jealous that Harmony had gone without him.

And because the apology hadn’t gotten strange enough, he interrupted himself to mention, “I’m having lunch by the way.” At least that explained the chewing.

Harmony played the recording for her friend Summer, who couldn’t believe what she was hearing. “I’m jealous that you went to our date and I didn’t turn up,” Summer repeated, impersonating him. Then she asked a fair question: “Why does he talk like that?”

Harmony seemed more amused than upset. She figured that even if they’d managed to have coffee, the worst outcome would have been never seeing him again. She also kept his identity private, telling viewers, “No name, no face.”

The comments had opinions. “The way he’s acting like he didn’t stand you up,” one person wrote. Another said they were borrowing “Appointment with jiu-jitsu” as an excuse for the next time they needed to get out of something.

He missed the date, but at least he made it to jiu-jitsu and lunch. Good to know the important appointments were covered.

The post WATCH: This Guy’s Apology for Missing a Hinge Date Just Kept Getting Weirder and Weirder appeared first on VICE.

If you have a phone, you’ve done it. A friend asks if you’re still on for the weekend, the text sits unanswered for three days, and then you fire back, “Sorry, just seen this!” as though you’ve been off the grid at a meditation retreat. Your friend isn’t stupid and knows you were posting stories the whole time.

British etiquette expert William Hanson has had enough of this particular excuse. On his podcast Help I Sexted My Boss, he called the phrase a pet peeve. “You don’t need to pretend you’ve only just seen it. I think that makes it worse,” he said.

And he’s got a point. Most of us have ignored a message because we were busy or didn’t feel like answering. Three days later, admitting that you saw it while doing absolutely nothing and chose to deal with it later feels a little rude. So we pretend the message somehow slipped past us.

As always, the comments were divided. One Instagram user said the phrase basically translates to “Sorry, I saw this but ignored it.” A TikTok commenter said Hanson’s advice “feels like a personal attack,” while another argued that disappearing for days and then responding without an apology is just straight-up rude.

‘Sorry, Just Seen This!’ Might Make Your Late Reply Worse, an Etiquette Expert Says

Anxiety around replying has persisted for years. A 2018 Google study found that some people considered a response arriving after 20 minutes rude. Twenty minutes! That’s barely enough time to shower and put on pants.

Licensed clinical social worker Kelley Kitley told Refinery29 that people judge other people’s response times based on their own habits. “We figure that since we are someone who would text back immediately, that everyone else should, too,” she said.

Hanson suggests a simple “sorry for the delay in replying” before answering. Rupert Wesson of Debrett’s Etiquette Training recommends “I am so sorry to be getting back to you so slowly.” A little formal for telling your friend you can’t make brunch, but alright.

Some people really do forget, too. One commenter with ADHD explained that messages can get lost when they’re distracted. And organizational psychologist Adam Grant has argued that apologizing for every delayed response contributes to the ridiculous expectation that we’re all supposed to be available at all hours.

Which brings us back to your friend asking about the weekend. After three days, they’re probably less interested in your excuse than in knowing if they should make other plans.

A quick apology is fine. An elaborate story about how you somehow missed their message while posting happy hour pictures is probably unnecessary.

The post This Common Texting Excuse Isn’t Fooling Your Friends. Say This Instead. appeared first on VICE.

The spouse who “suddenly” wants a divorce has probably been thinking about it for months, sometimes years. Meanwhile, the other person is still making vacation plans and assuming everything’s fine. Sadly, you’ve been having two completely different experiences in the same marriage.

Marriage therapist Michele Weiner-Davis has written that people sometimes spend years preparing to leave a marriage. Looking back, there might have been signs. Unfortunately, those signs are harder to recognize when you think everything is fine.

1. They’re Making Plans Without You

A separate savings account or major financial decisions made without your input could warrant a conversation. A recent Psychology Today article identifies growing independence as a possible sign that a spouse is preparing to leave.

Your partner can have their own goals. But discovering they’ve been making major life decisions without telling you is an uncomfortable way to realize you’re no longer included in their plans.

2. They Stop Doing the Little Things

Remember when your partner used to bring you coffee or make sure you had dinner if you had to work late? Those gestures can become so routine that you hardly notice them. Until they disappear.

The Gottman Institute found that couples still married six years after their wedding responded to each other’s attempts at connection 86% of the time, compared with 33% among couples who divorced. The coffee seems insignificant, but the attention behind it matters a lot.

3. They Don’t Seem Interested in Touching You

Any marriage can go through dry spells without anybody considering divorce. But when an affectionate partner starts avoiding physical contact altogether, it’s not insane to wonder what’s happening.

Marriage and family therapist Laura Heck told HuffPost that a withdrawing partner’s “body language may be closed off and they may offer zero verbal feedback in conversation.” If there are too many unanswered attempts at affection, you might stop trying, too.

4. You Don’t Even Fight Anymore

After years of arguing about the same things, your partner has stopped putting up much of a fight. You might even feel relieved that you’re finally getting along. But really, they’ve grown so tired of asking for things to change that they’ve given up trying to convince you.

Licensed marriage and family therapist Sharon Yu told Scary Mommy that an unhappy spouse might initially raise concerns gently, then become more direct, and eventually stop bringing them up altogether. If your partner has spent years asking for changes and now seems indifferent, it’s probably time to ask why.

5. They Start Asking if You’re Happy

Sometimes your spouse practically hands you an opportunity to talk about your marriage, and you miss it.

A question like “Are you happy with us?” might catch you off guard if you thought things were going well. But there’s a reason they’re asking. A casual “Yeah, we’re good” could be discouraging if they’ve spent weeks working up the nerve to say something.

Work stress or exhaustion can also affect how affectionate and communicative people are. But several changes happening together could be a big warning sign. As licensed marriage and family therapist Lisa Brookes Kift told Fox News Digital, “If one has fully checked out, they will not be open to repair.”

It’s hard to work on a marriage when you have no idea the other person has been unhappy for years. By the time you find out, they might have little interest in trying again.

The post 5 Signs Your Spouse Is Mentally Checking Out of Your Marriage appeared first on VICE.

Hi readers! Shayla Love here, science journalist and longtime fan of Your Mileage May Vary. I’m honored to be subbing for Sigal Samuel while she’s out on parental leave. I’m diving into your questions as a way to help understand human nature and our choices through multiple lenses: philosophical, psychological, and beyond. Please send in any emotional, body/brain, sociological, perceptual, or other kind of life quandaries you might have.

My child, age 9, has decided she’s vegan. Neither of her parents are even vegetarian — we’re “free range chicken/grass fed beef” types. She has learned about veganism from friends at school, and seems to have come to her position more or less on her own. I want to encourage her ethical choices, but her mother and I agree that children should be introduced to new foods and flavors at this age. She has no allergies or intolerances that we know of. I worry that making accommodations for her dietary restriction may lead to a lifetime of picky eating, even if hers is a reasonable and ethical approach. She seems to be uncomfortable when her mother or I cook meat for meals we share, even if we make her another option. What should I do to support my daughter?

Dear Hold the Beef, 

When I was around your daughter’s age, I went to Hawaii with my parents. One night, we ate dinner on the beach, and we watched as a pig was dug up from an underground steam oven. I was horrified to see its face and nose; most of the meat I had eaten so far in my life didn’t resemble the animal it came from. A few years later, I became a vegetarian, and then in my 20s, a vegan. 

I share this story to reveal my slight bias in answering your question, but also my understanding of the ethical awakening your daughter might be experiencing. As you figure out how to talk to your child about what she decides to eat, we can at least table discussing the pros and cons of veganism itself. Instead, you should think about what amount of autonomy your child should have, and whether the moral decision-making she wants to engage in matches with her current stage of development. 

People don’t turn 18 and then suddenly start engaging morally with the world. As we grow up, we try to understand right and wrong in fits and spurts. Lawrence Kohlberg, a 20th-century American psychologist, is best known for attempting to track a person’s moral development throughout their life. 

Kohlberg presented people with hypothetical dilemmas in order to come up with six moral stages. In one example, he asked people of different ages about a dying woman who could be cured by a drug that was cheap to make, but that a manufacturer was charging an exorbitant fee for. The woman’s husband ends up stealing the drug. Is that right or wrong?

Kohlberg observed that in answering questions like this, young children have what he called a “preconventional morality”: Their notions of right and wrong are dictated by what their parents think, and the avoidance of punishment when breaking those rules. For instance, the main reason not to throw your dinner on the ground or hit your brother was to avoid consequences from parents, not a feeling that there’s something wrong about that action. 

Kohlberg thought this stage lasted until around age 9, and in the next period, children began to understand that there isn’t just one correct action, but that people could have different moral ideas based on their social context. To sum up the rest of the stages quickly, each one progresses to encompass more views — like the moral agreements necessary to make a society function — and more complexity — like the realization that a seemingly immoral action can ultimately be moral, like stealing medicine for one’s wife. 

It’s useful to pinpoint where your daughter finds herself on Kohlberg’s timeline. It sounds like she’s in the shift from the first stage and into the later ones. What you’ve decided — that it’s okay to eat meat if it’s free-range or grass-fed — is no longer sufficient for your daughter in terms of guiding her own actions. That can be a jarring moment for a parent, but at least, according to Kohlberg, it’s a sign of maturation. Your child should, at this age, start to consider her friends, as well as the experiences she’s had without you, when making an ethical choice. 

But I’m her parent, you may protest. That doesn’t necessarily mean that your job is to exclusively provide black-and-white directives. 

Alison Gopnik, a psychologist and philosopher at the University of California Berkeley, has written about the unique perspective and personhood of children (including babies). In her book The Gardener and the Carpenter, she questions how people have come to define the act of parenting as having specific goals in mind for their children. This approach is like being a carpenter, she writes, who follows instructions to assemble a predetermined piece of furniture. She argues that parenting is more like gardening: You cultivate the soil and the environment and realize that you could produce any number of different flowers, fruits, or vegetables. Growth is the point, not a by-the-book final product. 

I see Gopnik in alignment with Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the 18th-century philosopher whose novel Émile, or On Education surprised its readers by advocating for a freer and child-centered approach to teaching. Émile, a young wealthy boy, is tutored — in high contrast to the expectations of the day — without strict rules. Rousseau thought you couldn’t make a child turn into an adult any faster, and it was foolish to try. He also thought that children had to learn by having their own experiences out in the world, and learning from those, rather than just overly didactic lessons. 

As your daughter dips her toe into the morality of eating meat, Rousseau would also remind you not to expect her to have the most mature ideas about veganism or her meal plan. She is still young, and may just have come across an idea that feels ethically important to her. Your role as her parent is to help her develop her nuanced morality, a process Kohlberg suggests will continue, and not steer her towards one way of eating over another. Be Gopnik’s dietary gardener, not carpenter. 

Of course, parents do have rights over their children, and an obligation to keep them safe. When we’re young, we’re not always equipped to make the right choice (some would argue this continues into adulthood, too). If your daughter decided to take up smoking cigarettes, for instance, you would step in because her choice would negatively affect her health. As her parent, you should still guide her to build healthy habits. 

You say you’re worried about your daughter becoming too picky, or not being exposed to enough foods if she becomes a vegan. But rather than push back on the choice itself, you can explain what else her choice entails. You can do so in an age-appropriate way. Talk about the nutrients that she might be missing out on if she stops eating meat, dairy, and eggs, and find books or videos about what foods might be a good substitute. 

For me, becoming vegan actually exposed me to all kinds of foods that I might not have eaten otherwise: from Asian and Indian cuisines that are very veggie-friendly to many other protein- and iron-rich plant-based foods. You could collaborate with your daughter to cook vegan meals for the whole family; no challenge sparks a budding home cook more than making delectable tofu. 

I should add that I’m no longer a vegan. I learned a lot from committing to a diet that wasn’t always convenient or tasty, in support of my values. Then, after more than a decade, I incorporated eggs and fish back into my diet. It’s likely that your daughter will continue to change the choices she makes as she tries to align her actions with her maturing moral views about the world. 

Whether or not she eats grass-fed beef with you in her teens, you should be glad that she seems to care about what impact she’s having in the world. It means you’re raising a person whose ethics are developing strongly, even as what’s on your dinner plate may change while she figures it all out.  

Bonus: What I’m reading

• Speaking of tofu, I revisited an essay that George Stiffman (a self-proclaimed “tofu guy”) wrote for Asterisk Magazine about how soybean curds are prepared in China. Warning: This article will make you hungry! He dives into all the creative culinary preparations of tofu that are tragically absent in the West. 
• Several years ago, I bought a plant-based cooking book especially for children, The Vegan Cookbook for Kids: Easy Plant-Based Recipes for Young Chefs. It was a present for a non-vegan family, but the kid in question was interested in learning how to cook, and when kids cook vegan, parents don’t have to worry about them handling raw meat! Looking over these snacks and meals again, I see several tasty things that I wouldn’t mind making for myself, even as a non-vegan, and non-child. 
• When I was a vegan in New York City in the 2010s, I wasn’t constrained to sad tofu and sprout sandwiches. It seemed like every week a brand-new vegan restaurant opened up, covering every cuisine, and with star chefs at the helm. But lately, all my favorite vegan restaurants have been closing. Turns out I’m not imagining it, as Vox’s Marina Bolotnikova wrote in her article: “Where did all the vegan restaurants go?” She investigates why these establishments have become rarer, and what we’ll miss out on if they completely disappear.