Trauma Bonding: Why We Become Attached to the People Who Hurt Us
Oct 11, 2026 · 30 min · 9 segments
- Speakers
- NigroHost
- Show signals
- SuitabilitySafeBiasNot politicalAudience≈3k followers
Oct 11, 2026 · 30 min · 9 segments
And I wanted to focus today on the whole paradox of trauma bonding, because it is a, that's really in pop psychology and a lot of times on social media, but I wanted to approach it today from more of a scientist practitioner model.
And I guess the question is like, why do we sometimes become emotionally attached to the very people we hurt us? And why does an individual in a relationship that's characterized by betrayal and humiliation, emotional abuse, manipulation, why do they stay? And before going on, I want to explain that trauma bonding is not simply two people connecting because they have experienced trauma.
It's not synonymous with a difficult relationship.
The whole concept of trauma bonding is... is based in the work of Donald Dutton and Susan Painter.
And what they looked at was emotional attachments that develop in abusive relationships, especially when there's a power differential.
and intermittent patterns of reinforcement.
I'll talk about that in a little bit.
And one of the, I think, most important ideas from their work is they found that abusive behavior, it actually doesn't weaken the emotional attachment.
It actually, in many ways, it maintains it.
That doesn't mean that abuse creates love, and it doesn't mean that people somehow desire mistreatment.
I think sometimes people believe they deserve mistreatment.
I think it also means that human learning and attachment and emotional regulation really operate in ways that complicate our expectations.
So if you think of, like, a fictional character, Sarah.
So she starts dating someone who's attentive and affectionate and charismatic and, you know, emotionally expressive.
And, you know, during the early stages... of the relationship.
Like nobody like this ever understood me before.
Uh, her partner communicates frequently, um, expresses admiration, talks about the future, uh, makes her feel uniquely important.
Um, and over time his behavior begins to change.
He starts to become critical.
Um, questions or judgment, um, accuser of being disloyal.
Um, and, And eventually he starts alternating between emotional withdrawal and intense affection.
And, you know, after, say, a contentious period, hurtful argument, he apologizes, and then he cries, and he tells Sarah, I've never loved anybody weirdly before, promises things will change, you know, for a period, they do, Sarah's like, oh my god, okay, that was just a small bump, and she starts to think that our relationship has been recalibrated, and then eventually, Criticism, intimidation, return, and the cycle repeats.
And then what happens over time is Sarah finds herself preoccupied with her partner's emotional state.
You know, she's hypersensitive to his facial expressions and sensitive to his reactions.
And I wanted to focus today on the whole paradox of trauma bonding, because it is a, that's really in pop psychology and a lot of times on social media, but I wanted to approach it today from more of a scientist practitioner model.
And I guess the question is like, why do we sometimes become emotionally attached to the very people we hurt us? And why does an individual in a relationship that's characterized by betrayal and humiliation, emotional abuse, manipulation, why do they stay? And before going on, I want to explain that trauma bonding is not simply two people connecting because they have experienced trauma.
It's not synonymous with a difficult relationship.
The whole concept of trauma bonding is... is based in the work of Donald Dutton and Susan Painter.
And what they looked at was emotional attachments that develop in abusive relationships, especially when there's a power differential.
and intermittent patterns of reinforcement.
I'll talk about that in a little bit.
And one of the, I think, most important ideas from their work is they found that abusive behavior, it actually doesn't weaken the emotional attachment.
It actually, in many ways, it maintains it.
That doesn't mean that abuse creates love, and it doesn't mean that people somehow desire mistreatment.
I think sometimes people believe they deserve mistreatment.
I think it also means that human learning and attachment and emotional regulation really operate in ways that complicate our expectations.
So if you think of, like, a fictional character, Sarah.
So she starts dating someone who's attentive and affectionate and charismatic and, you know, emotionally expressive.
And, you know, during the early stages... of the relationship.
Like nobody like this ever understood me before.
Uh, her partner communicates frequently, um, expresses admiration, talks about the future, uh, makes her feel uniquely important.
Um, and over time his behavior begins to change.
He starts to become critical.
Um, questions or judgment, um, accuser of being disloyal.
Um, and, And eventually he starts alternating between emotional withdrawal and intense affection.
And, you know, after, say, a contentious period, hurtful argument, he apologizes, and then he cries, and he tells Sarah, I've never loved anybody weirdly before, promises things will change, you know, for a period, they do, Sarah's like, oh my god, okay, that was just a small bump, and she starts to think that our relationship has been recalibrated, and then eventually, Criticism, intimidation, return, and the cycle repeats.
And then what happens over time is Sarah finds herself preoccupied with her partner's emotional state.
You know, she's hypersensitive to his facial expressions and sensitive to his reactions.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.
