Love

Hello readers! A few of the cognitive styles below were mentioned in my last post. As humans, we have a tendency to forget things so a bit of revision can be useful.

Many people have cognitive processes that result in overall unhelpful thinking styles that they tend to apply globally across situations and which may result in emotional distress (such as depression or anxiety) or unhelpful behaviours (such as anger or avoidance). Some of the most problematic thinking styles are listed in the extract below.

Mental Filter: This thinking styles involves a “filtering in” and “filtering out” process – a sort of “tunnel vision”, focusing on only one part of a situation and ignoring the rest. Usually this means looking at the negative parts of a situation and forgetting the positive parts, and the whole picture is coloured by what may be a single negative detail.

Jumping to Conclusions: I’m sure you’ve heard people say on television, “Don’t jump to conclusions” or “The truth is we just don’t know yet”. We jump to conclusions when we assume that we know what someone else is thinking (mind reading) and when we make predictions about what is going to happen in the future (predictive thinking).

Personalisation: This involves blaming yourself for everything that goes wrong or could go wrong, even when you may only be partly responsible or not responsible at all. You might be taking 100% responsibility for the occurrence of external events.

Catastrophising: Catastrophising occurs when we “blow things out of proportion” and we view the situation as terrible, awful, dreadful, and horrible, even though the reality is that the problem itself is quite small. A helpful restructuring of this cognition is to ask yourself if the situation will still be awful, terrible, or dreadful in a month. There may be ongoing consequences or stress involved if you lose a job or a relationship ends, so validate the experience you are having but also take a look at the big picture. What’s the worst that could happen? Why is the worst so “bad”? And if you are being realistic about the issue, reach out for some help if you can.

Black & White Thinking: This thinking style involves seeing only one extreme or the other. You are either wrong or right, good or bad and so on. There are no in-betweens or shades of grey.

Should-ing and Must-ing: Sometimes by saying “I should…” or “I must…” you can put unreasonable demands or pressure on yourself and others. Although these statements are not always unhelpful (e.g. “I should not get drunk and drive home”), they can sometimes create unrealistic expectations.

Overgeneralisation: When we overgeneralise, we take one instance in the past or present, and impose it on all current or future situations. If we say “You always…” or “Everyone…”, or “I never…” then we are probably overgeneralising.

Labelling: We label ourselves and others when we make global statements based on behaviour in specific situations. We might use this label even though there are many more examples that aren’t consistent with that label.

Emotional Reasoning: This thinking style involves basing your view of situations or yourself on the way you are feeling. For example, the only evidence that something bad is going to happen is that you feel like something bad is going to happen. I live with anxiety and it can be debilitating at times. I use my “wiser thinking” or “rational thinking” to evaluate whether I am operating from an emotional mindset. You might ask yourself: “What’s the evidence?”, “Does the past necessarily predict the future?”, “Am I angry or fearful right now because that might be clouding my judgement?”. It can be helpful to talk to someone who isn’t caught in your emotional headspace, or perhaps wait for the emotion to subside to think about the situation again.

Magnification and Minimisation: In this thinking style, you magnify the positive attributes of other people and minimise your own positive attributes. It’s as though you’re explaining away your own positive characteristics.

(CCI, 2008)

1. High selectivity is normal, especially as we get older

When you enter the post-20’s dating world, your life experience has shaped your preferences. You’ve likely developed clear ideas of what you want in a partner, both in terms of personality and compatibility.

• This means it’s natural to not feel interested in most people you date.
• Selectivity isn’t a problem—it often reflects self-knowledge and maturity.

2. Same-sex dating dynamics can be tricky

• In male same-sex dating, especially in places like Sydney, there can be a stronger focus on physical attraction in initial meetings.
• That can make it harder to find someone you genuinely click with emotionally or mentally, because a lot of initial dating chemistry may feel superficial or performance-based.

3. Emotional vs. physical attraction

• Your emotional and intellectual connection becomes [more] key to your interest.
• You may feel attracted physically to some, but if the emotional or personality resonance isn’t there, you simply won’t want to continue. That’s perfectly normal.

4. Reciprocity matters a lot

• Humans are wired for reciprocal interest: when it’s not returned, our brains often disengage emotionally to protect ourselves from disappointment.
• This can make dating feel discouraging because your standards and their feelings don’t always align.

5. Psychological patterns that could be at play

• High self-awareness: You know what you want and won’t settle.
• Emotional caution: After multiple dates where interest isn’t reciprocated, your mind may naturally limit attachment until someone truly matches your criteria.
• Confirmation bias in dating: You notice quickly when someone isn’t “right,” which is good for avoiding poor matches—but can also make you feel like genuine connections are rare.

6. This is very common for mature adults dating

• Many people in their late 30s–40s experience the same thing.
• Your dating pool is smaller because you’re looking for someone with very specific qualities (age, personality, emotional intelligence, compatibility).

Practical advice for dating in this context

a. Broaden [wisely] your dating strategies

• While selectivity is good, small adjustments in mindset can increase your chances:
  • Look beyond initial “type” indicators and give people a bit more time to reveal personality.
  • Join social groups or interest-based communities (sports clubs, arts, volunteering, LGBTQ+ meetups). Often chemistry develops in shared activity contexts rather than first-date settings.

b. Focus on quality interactions

• Instead of increasing quantity, increase meaningfulness: fewer, more intentional dates with people you have some natural overlap with (values, lifestyle, humor).
• Online apps can be helpful, but try to filter for shared interests or mutual values to save time and emotional energy.

c. Work on internal calibration

• Reflect on what triggers your strong attraction. Are there patterns (personality, energy, humor, confidence)?
• This helps to recognize potential even if it’s not immediately intense, and also helps articulate your preferences clearly to prospective dates.

d. Manage expectations

• It’s normal for the dating ratio (you like → they like) to be low, especially with high selectivity. Patience is key.
• Celebrate the small wins: every connection you explore, even if it doesn’t last, builds social and emotional insight.

e. Emotional self-care

• Rejection is part of the process and rarely personal—it’s more about compatibility.
• Maintain supportive friendships, hobbies, and self-affirmation to avoid over-investing emotionally in every date.

Mindset shift suggestion

Instead of thinking:

“There are very few people I want to see again, and they don’t feel the same way”

Try:

“I’m selective and I know what I want. Meeting the right person may take time, but each date helps me understand myself and my preferences more clearly.”

This subtle mindset shift reduces pressure and anxiety, while keeping your standards intact.

The function of anger is to protect vulnerability and neutralize threat.

The threat humans cognitively perceive is almost always to the ego i.e., how we want to think of ourselves and have others think of us. Anger neutralizes ego-threat by devaluing, demeaning, or undermining the “power” of the person perceived to be threatening. Humans get angry when they don’t get what they want, when they’re disrespected, or when they perceive something is unjust/unfair. Anger, the emotion, is a chemical messenger. It communicates to us, to others, and motivates us to act, speak, do something. Healthy responses to anger include being assertive, feeling empowered, protecting ourselves and love ones from ACTUAL threat, setting boundaries with others, and making social change for justice (for example). It becomes unhealthy when we become passive-aggressive, violent, vengeful, spiteful, aggressive, resentful, sarcastic, “moody”, rude etc.

Receive the message and respond from a wise, calm place after the intensity of the emotion has past. Sometimes we have to act in the moment. Our ancestors may have required this for fight/flight survival. These days, we can generally PAUSE and calm the self before responding from a mindful and compassionate heart and mind. Remember: Hurt people, hurt people.