Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Did you know love languages have no sociological rigor and were developed by a Baptist preacher to teach women how to behave for their husbands. Essentially by calling physical touch (sex) a love language its designed to promote the coercive giving of sex from a partner.
Go read the original book and its case studies. It’s rough.
Essentially there is no evidence to support the concept of love languages as published.
https://www.psychiatrist.com/news/st...ove-languages/
Paper refuting love languages
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10....37214231217663
So it’s a lot like an any of the personality tests, probably right in some way that you could derive learning from but also nonsense with no empirical basis.
But really we shouldn’t use the concept of love languages given its problematic origin. |
The best part about love languages was flipping them and laughing our assess off.
Acts of service - Acts of disservice
Gifts - Theft
Physical touch - Physical abuse
Words of affirmation - Words of condescension
Quality time - Crappy time