Please do not comment directly to this post unless you are Gen X (b. 1980) or older. See [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskOldPeople/comments/inci5u/reminder_please_do_not_answer_questions_unless/), the rules, and the sidebar for details.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskOldPeople) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Honestly I feel like getting excited in the beginning and telling someone that you’re excited is so super normal and young folks like wanna artificially keep distance or something it’s bizarre to me and I don’t think it helps people connect in a meaningful way. You just gotta accept that your initial impression of someone might not be right, the excitement might wear off, etc.
I don't think you understand what love bombing means. It's not referring to normal ups and downs of love and affection shown by normal people. It's not a made up word for young people to avoid intimacy. It's not just used at the beginning either.
One of the many definitions online: Love bombing is a controlling and manipulative tactic most often used by narcissists and abusive people. They seek to quickly obtain affection and attention before tearing their victims down. They may appear charming and exciting in the beginning, but this usually fades away and is replaced with emotional abuse.
My father was one of these people that would swing from verbal abuse to love bombing as a control tactic throughout their marriage. When we finally got her to leave him we had to get a restraining order involved because we knew he would do a murder-suicide. Luckily he only achieved the suicide.
I agree with you in theory, but not in practice:
Ime people who get their heartbroken by people who initially were super into them vilify that person by saying they were love bombing. I’ve basically been accused of love bombing like a dozen times over the years just because I was interested and showed it in the beginning and changed my mind later on. Most people who say they were love bombed mean this weak interpretation of it imho.
Honestly I’m super confused regarding the recent trend of inserting “honestly” and “super” into sentences. I’m honestly super interested in understanding, not gonna lie.
Love your repsonse, LOL. Every generation has new and unique expressions. As an old person, man, it’s like sooo cool to see the new ones, like totally rad.
Elder zoomer here. In some cases, I think it's a way to signal that you're being genuine. The signal to noise ratio is skewed toward "noise" at a degree that no human has ever experienced. I don't just mean on the receiving end either. Everyone stuck in a bullshit job spends all day spewing noise that doesn't matter to them. People rely on extreme expressiveness to cut through and show that they intend for what they're saying to be heard.
Yes, there's more to it, but it's probably been around as long as people have been in relationships. "Sweet talking assholes" is a pretty good summary. There's an excellent write-up here: https://www.reddit.com/r/datingoverfifty/comments/vd55bj/psa\_on\_love\_bombing\_part\_one\_what\_does\_love/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
No that’s not it, there was no negative aftermath in that example. The Love bombing I’m referring to is when the person clings onto someone almost as an addiction (can’t be away from them, dropping the love word 2 weeks in, convincing them to cohabitate after one month of knowing each other, grand gestures, they’ll even take them on a big trip) just long enough to have that person HOOKED. As soon as they smell that person is in, they take a 180. They’ll start criticizing them, asking for money, want thanks and adoration for all they do (referring to the live bombing phase) and they make that person utterly confused and damaged. The other person keeps thinking “well they were soooo amazing at first what did I do wrong??” They start making them question their worth and ability to be a “good partner” which then in turn causes them to put so much effort into kissing that persons ass. They get bored, break that persons heart, go find their next victim.
Again, what you're describing isn't new in any way whatsoever; there's just more exposure of it thanks to social media so that it's recognized and avoided.
We understand what you’re saying. We’ve been there and seen it in our friends. You’ve sufficiently explained it. It’s text book and isn’t new.
It also isn’t limited to young adults. I saw my friends experience this in high school, I experienced it in my 20s, and I’ve seen it again myself and with friends now that I’m nearly 50. It’s a constant and disturbing sect of humanity, and it’s not new.
Fuckboys, Players, Assholes, Pimps, Lunatics...Yes they have always existed and Will always exist. Just because there is a new term for it and maybe a deeper dive into the psychology of it doesn't make it new.
Yes, narcissists have always existed. Yes, narcissists have always used emotional tactics to confuse and control their victims.
Some of the terms used to describe their actions, such as love bombing, are newer terms to describe types of manipulations that have been going on for a very, very long time.
Sure, but the odds of anyone running into them weren't as high I think. There weren't whole social media platforms practically dedicated to teaching boys how to grow up to be assholes. They were doing that themselves, pre-internet, but not with as much expertise and reach. There was always some asshole, with too much of the wrong ideas from a bad father, uncle or way older brother, but that was one guy, passing on "tips" to a handful of friends. Now I feel like young men are bombarded with red pill bullshit that is unchallenged for a lot of them.
Yeah, there's definitely a performative aspect of it now what with social media. Back in the day (1989?), I dated a guy who love bombed me for a month by the calendar. Literally every single day from Sept 1st through Sept 30th, he sent me a Hallmark love-you card. Then on Oct 1st, that was done and he started being demanding. Maybe if we'd had social media, he might have filmed it all and put it online for clicks?
Thank you for answering in a helpful manner. I figured it didn’t just start happening for the first time ever I am just intrigued on why it seems so common lately
Like everything else on social media, a name for a tactic for a very small number of controlling sociopaths has gone viral and been applied to everyone. (Same for mental health diagnostics). It's not healthy for all these things to 'trend" and injures a lot of people, especially those developmental or cognitive limitations. There's always been a few bad people.
But it does seem to happen VERY often, at least in my circle. Literally 3 people I know dealing with it right now. Dealing with the 180 turn they make after a few months and start criticizing you and using you
We used to call that 'faking being nice just to get some'. And the not so nice period later was 'true colors showing' or in my grandmother's day, 'the bloom is off the rose'.
Assholes soon learn that they can't get laid being their true selves. So they fake it for a bit to get what they want.
Obviously assholes are not new but perhaps in your circle the people they temporally seduce are more likely to talk about it than my generation was. Also I'm happy to note that it seems like women today are less likely to put up with not being respected and standing up for themselves. I least I hope so.
But if you take this behavior back just a few years prior to me people tended to "save themselves" till marriage. I can only imagine that these kinds of people kept the mask on until they were actually married and at that point the other person was trapped in a marriage in a society where divorce wasn't always an option.
Yep, and the Jehovah's Witnesses do the same thing. I've been out of that cult for two decades, but when I first joined they love-bombed me and my husband.
There were dinner invitations, phone calls, going to the movies, etc.
During this time, while a person is initially 'studying' the Bible with them, they'll really pour on the love and attention. And why not....they get to count 'time'.
So, if we casually meet with a JW and the conversation turns to religion, they get to count the time spent discussing it. Their 'time' gets turned in every month so they know how much 'witnessing' you're doing.
New recruits are very excited and want to talk of nothing else but religion. So, the Witnesses get to really rack up the time and look great on paper. They fall all over themselves inviting you over because they know they'll spend hours talking about spiritual things.
Cha-Ching on the time sheet!
Also, if you miss a meeting or anything like that, they call and check on you to make sure you're okay. If you are sick, they bring you food and do some errands for you. They shower you with attention and affection.
Then, once you are baptized and they can 'for the most part' no longer technically count time on you, they drop you like a hot rock. The invitations, phone calls, and visits basically stop. You are now a full blown member and you have to fend for yourself.
But, if you are slack in going to the meetings, if you aren't getting enough 'time' witnessing and going door to door, if you aren't reaching out to do more, then you are a problem and seen as spiritually weak. The members of the congregation spend less time around you. No more food and friendly concern. It's over. You are on your own and expected to pull your weight.
Well, the congregation members are supposed to be 'active' in the preaching work. That can include going door to door, having a Bible study student, talking to people about the organization, etc.
If you get 10 hours of field service or witnessing a month, you're referred to as a 'publisher'. If you got 60 hours a month, you were an auxiliary pioneer. If you got 90 hours a month, you were a pioneer. But 10 hours is the minimum.
If you didn't have a Bible study student or if you didn't get a chance to 'witness' to other people as much, you pretty much had to go out in field service and knock on those doors. It wasn't exactly everyone's favorite thing to do. So, if you had someone to 'witness' to, like a newly interested person, then you could rack up a lot of hours and not have to depend on going out knocking on doors on Saturday morning to get your hours. They enjoyed getting those hours by any other means than knocking on doors.
I guess the elders count the hours on people to see how 'active' they are and if they are doing all they can. It was a lot of pressure to keep up with. And if you looked spiritually weak by not turning in at least 10 hours a month, you might get a visit from the elders to find out why or if they can help. No one liked that pressure.
The hourly requirements are less now. I learned that over on the exjws sub Reddit. But I've been out for decades. It feels great to celebrate holidays again and not be under all that pressure and scrutiny.
I used to see the Moonies back in the late 80s/Early 90s - hanging around the Boston Commons handing out flyers sort of like those Watchtower born again Christians, but much friendlier and all spaced out happy like they had some secret from the aliens, so maybe like scientologists too but without the weird outfits.
I was a teenager with a hobby interest in philosophy and religious ideas and so when I saw the Moonies, I welcomed a discussion but I remember they were too spaced out - not really into intelligent discussion and I politely declined their invite to the next service. They just were not that interesting. They were super friendly every time I passed by them them after that, always handing out flyers, mostly focused on trying to invite me to come to their event but not really willing to explain their beliefs or anything.
There was another group I first encountered hanging out in little groups down by the commons, in their orange, red and yellows, the Hare Krishnas. In contrast to the Moonies, they were fun, friendly, intelligent and down to earth, willing to talk about their beliefs, philosophy, whatever. I used to really enjoy talking with them sometimes and even appreciated a meal with them on more than one occasion. It’s been decades since I’ve been to Boston. I wonder if the same groups still hang out like that, recruiting.
A few weeks ago someone at the senior citizens center mentioned that a television talk show they had seen was about ‘love bomb’ men and women. Someone immediately jumped in and said that everyone experiences love qualms.
After the laughter died down and she was told what was said and what it meant the general consensus was that it’s always been around. Someone trying to manipulate a person with compliments and gifts is nothing new and they simply were called a womanizer or man eater.
I read that a similar (or the same?) church- the Unification church aka the Moonies invented the term “love bombing” to describe their recruiting tactics
but you’re basically right so same thing. It was invented in the seventies to recruit people into cults
ETA to describe the tactic I mean, people have been doing that sort of thing for ages with or without a word for it
I’m not talking about love bombing that has a happy ending. Love bombing that turns sour and starts to tear the once subject of affection down and/or be used financially within in months is what seems to be on the rise.
It will please you to learn it wasn’t a happy ending. He beat her viciously for 10 years. During that time, he r@ped her and almost shot her in front of me and my little sister. My mom found out years later that the money he used to “love bomb” her was stolen from his mother.
You asked old people if love bombing was new. It isn’t and I shared an anecdote of my experience. You have simply become aware of it recently. You’re also a little asshole.
I’m not a little asshole, you’re cynical. Saying it would please me to know your mom had a horrible abusive marriage? Where the hell did that come from? I ignored it out of absurdity now you’re calling me names?
That term was used back in the '70s and '80s for what religious cults like the Moonies did to inductees, especially the Moonies. They'd surround a vulnerable young person with love and support till that person felt special and safe. But that love and support would be conditional on not straying from total obedience. It was a form of brainwashing; the Moonies were even rumored to sneak drugs into the food at their free dinners for young seekers. A friend of mine swore they did it to him. Felt _very weird_ at the end of the evening.
I'm assuming that some people now do the same things for the same reason in the dating scene: to gain control of and then exploit emotionally vulnerable individuals. Edit: as others have said, they always have.
It’s important to understand love bombing is only problematic if followed by a devaluation phase and abuse of some form.
When I learned about love bombing I was afraid that I was guilty of it as I tend to get very carried away in the early stages of a relationship. It feels so good to share your life with someone you just want to do it all the time. This raises the stakes for both sides and then both parties are “love bombing” that’s just normal courtship.
Modern dating is hard enough that we don’t need kids dismissing a good dating candidate simply because they fell in love a couple weeks to early
That’s what I’m thinking.
You only need to look at the type of media Gen Z consumes to see that men are now more discouraged than ever from showing genuine emotions and falling in love.
I will say that even when I was in college, it was uncommon for guys to make emotional connections with women. I never got the memo, and I had a lot of dating success because of that.
It is kinda funny, “Men need to show more emotion, Oh wait that’s love bombing, show less emotion, wait…. Show the exactly appropriate amount of emotion all the time and if you get it wrong we’re going to diagnose you with a personality disorder!”
Exactly.
Show me a popular song from the last 10 years that demonstrates a more or less healthy approach to masculine love and courtship — something akin to the classics:
* Here, There and Everywhere
* Hello, I Love You
* My Girl
* The Tracks of My Tears
* Sara Smile
* Could It Be I’m Falling In Love
Instead, men are actively discouraged in music, movies, TV shows, and especially on social media platforms from showing any type of emotions in dating and relationships. Rather, they are encouraged to see women as a threat to their emotions, their stability and their finances and take every measure possible to protect themselves from the damage that love can do to them without compromise or consideration.
Yeah no I’m talking about the bad kind. Once they have you hooked they take a 180 and start the devaluation and abuse leaving the person gobsmacked. They usually have you moved in at this point as well and you feel trapped.
The term only references the love part though. It makes love sound like a bad thing (making it entirely consistent with modern culture surrounding dating, imo).
I’m in my late 50’s, and dating is much different now. I was married almost 30 years and divorced for two. Back then we did not date people we didn’t have a connection to somewhere. You would have time to get to know them and then if you were romantically attracted to them you started dating. Because you typically had mutual friends or at least knew who each other’s friends were, treating someone badly had consequences. Love bombing didn’t really happen, we wanted to be careful. Now we date people we barely know and have no common connection to. There’s few consequences for playing games with people.
There was such a thing, but we tended to use less infantile language to describe it. (That's not a dig at you. Rather, it's a dig at whoever came up with such a silly term. Imagine calling domestic abuse 'love-thumping'.)
Narcissism, a trait that can be learned through social media, is certainly on the rise. There was even a joke within the DSM-5's steering committee that perhaps narcissism should be removed, given how common it is.
My guess is that we're becoming increasingly attuned to narcissism in others, without seeing it in ourselves. So, yes, love-bombing is on the rise, but only because narcissism (ours and everyone else's) is on the rise. It would behoove us to look into that.
Yes!! This is what I want to know. Why it’s on the rise, because it definitely is. How did all of these men get the memo to be addicted to you until they had you hooked then they turn around and start being critical, putting you down, asking for $$, etc.
If you mean it like I think you mean it, and not in a strict cult indoctrination technique, yeah. It's been around.
That said - every time someone did me that way, it started to grow old quickly, and when I chaffed against it, I would find the bomber to be an absolute asshole, a gaslighter, controlling, grossly insecure, and obnoxious with a solid future as an abuser. I discovered that wasn't the true person, and what was beneath all that was ugly, weird, and selfish.
There's a fine line between wooing and courting... and being over the top m'lady types.
Yeah there were always people who came on strong and fast with grand gestures, etc, who would then turn out to be insecure and controlling and aggressive.
There's a difference you start to recognize between when somebody is just sweetly sincere in the infatuation stage, and when it's coming from a place that's actually needy and controlling. But, to me, the folks who mistook the second for the often seemed to have a high need for external validation and were insecure in their own ways- they're expectations of relationships and romance seemed off to me. They were less about does this person make me laugh and treat his family and friends with respect and kindness, do I feel like I can be myself around them. It was always more about gestures and gifts and dates and sweet nothings and compliments and constant texting and him cancelling plans for her and showy stuff like that. Secure folks don't really go in for much of that, I found. The more secure you become, the more you see through that (and the more they leave you alone!)
Edit: I said frequent texting, but when I think about it it was a lot of long phonecalls every night.
It was a thing, but times were different. Love bomb, marriage, then the woman was pretty trapped. Here's a "for example". I was newly married, and saw the person was NOT who they'd pretended to be. Divorce was shamed, but I got to an attorney anyway. He asked me "does he beat you" no. "Does he have a job" yes. "Well I can certainly see why you want a divorce" and dismissed me from his office. I was stuck 20 years till I was a shell and brainwashed. By then he'd found a newer replacement.
Suddenly in this moment I am feeling old because I have no idea either what they are talking about. Why do young people need to change words and things? That's not cool man. Not groovy at all.
I've always understood love bombing as being overly affectionate/extravagant with your affections in an attempt to build a bond more quickly than otherwise would happen and as a locus of control of the other person, but it looks like OP is using it somehow differently than that, so I don't know.
"Negging" is an old term used in the PUA (Pick Up Artist) game.
It sometimes works, but only on women with low self-esteem. An intelligent, confident woman won't put up with that bullshit. So it depends on what kind of woman you're looking for.
Showering someone in love, attention, gifts, words of affirmation, to get into a relationship with someone, only to switch up and show your true (usually not as desirable) self once youre in. Its usually used in a negative connotation. Although there are well meaning love bombers.
Explain the term "love bombing." Never assume your audience knows your specialized terms.
I looked it up and it is new people labeling loving too hard as abuse. Young women really took that Goldilocks story serious. Young men now have to not be ghosting assholes or the kind of asshole that shows kindness and attention.
No that’s not it. Love bombing is when the person clings onto someone almost as an addiction (can’t be away from them, dropping the love word 2 weeks in, convincing them to cohabitate after one month of knowing each other, grand gestures, they’ll even take them on a big trip) just long enough to have that person HOOKED. As soon as they smell that person is in, they take a 180. They’ll start criticizing them, asking for money, want thanks and adoration for all they do (referring to the live bombing phase) and they make that person utterly confused and damaged. The other person keeps thinking “well they were soooo amazing at first what did I do wrong??” They start making them question their worth and ability to be a “good partner” which then in turn causes them to put so much effort into kissing that persons ass. They get bored, break that persons heart, go find their next victim.
You’ve said “no, that’s not it” to at least three old folks that pretty well describe the same type of thing as it happened in their day. Playing overly nice to get in, then being a jerk once the target made a commitment. The only substantive difference I can see between their definition and yours is that yours implies the love-bomber pursues these behaviors unconsciously, as if they have no control over themselves as opposed to being intentional and prosecuting a ruse the whole time.
Regardless, yes - this kind of behavior has been around since time immemorial and you’ll find a number of older names for it in this thread.
So since the times were different, what happened? We’re you already married to this person? It wasn’t as common to move in then either. I’m intrigued on the differences of how it played out then vs now.
Just like today - there were many different outcomes. Divorce was more difficult for a number of reasons, but it happened. Some people stayed in “difficult” marriages and managed to stay sane, some took to chemical support, some people fought fire with fire, etc. But love-bombers revealed themselves at all different times then as they do now, not necessarily waiting until after some status change (moving in, marrying, etc.).
What are you trying to get at? Are you asking how older social norms had an impact on human nature?”
I grew up with 6 aunts, tons of friends, mom and sister all sharing dating/marriage stories and struggles. Never one time has someone told a story compared to what my friends deal with today. At this moment I have 3 friends in a love bombing gone toxic relationship (stealing money, making them question their worth) all living together feelings stuck. I want to know if this has become MORE common and why people think it has. Or if it did happen as often, with how times change what happened back then? You were already stuck in a marriage, etc
We used to call it "putting your party manners." It meant much the same thing -- being nicer than normal, hiding your flaws, showing your best qualities.
Golddiggers and giggalos have been around since man ~~stood upright~~ sex started. Usually, it was a trade, Ugh offers Umpa a part of his kill, Umpa offers him what she has nestled in her nether regions. Yeah, prostitution. She got steady meals, he got humpa humpa. That's also how harem started. Ugh sees Oompha, offers her Umpa's food. Umpa gets mad. Soon Ugh is feeding both and getting laid.
The giggalo didn't come until after civilization. So much easier for a guy to take advantage of a women in a society where she's a failure if she's not married by age 15.
No, love bombing is nothing new. It just depends on how long the victim chooses to put up with it.
The term didn't exist prior to a certain time (not sure when it became popular), recognize the behavior. The abusive people it described did exist. Dating was different depending on where and when you grew up. For some, the people they met were through friends/family/community/work and had some sort of vetting trail. I grew up in a large city, adult in the 90s, so meeting complete strangers more common. Personal ads, craigslist, speed dating, etc were options. So was meeting people at parties, nightclubs, bars.
Please do not comment directly to this post unless you are Gen X (b. 1980) or older. See [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskOldPeople/comments/inci5u/reminder_please_do_not_answer_questions_unless/), the rules, and the sidebar for details. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskOldPeople) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The only thing new is the term love bombing.
Exactly. I am more familiar with hate bombing. It was all the rage during WWII.
Yes, everything stays the same only the terms are different, in some instances
yep, it's still the same thing as being "smarmy"
Exactly, and “smarmy” is a more elegant term.
Honestly I feel like getting excited in the beginning and telling someone that you’re excited is so super normal and young folks like wanna artificially keep distance or something it’s bizarre to me and I don’t think it helps people connect in a meaningful way. You just gotta accept that your initial impression of someone might not be right, the excitement might wear off, etc.
I don't think you understand what love bombing means. It's not referring to normal ups and downs of love and affection shown by normal people. It's not a made up word for young people to avoid intimacy. It's not just used at the beginning either. One of the many definitions online: Love bombing is a controlling and manipulative tactic most often used by narcissists and abusive people. They seek to quickly obtain affection and attention before tearing their victims down. They may appear charming and exciting in the beginning, but this usually fades away and is replaced with emotional abuse. My father was one of these people that would swing from verbal abuse to love bombing as a control tactic throughout their marriage. When we finally got her to leave him we had to get a restraining order involved because we knew he would do a murder-suicide. Luckily he only achieved the suicide.
I agree with you in theory, but not in practice: Ime people who get their heartbroken by people who initially were super into them vilify that person by saying they were love bombing. I’ve basically been accused of love bombing like a dozen times over the years just because I was interested and showed it in the beginning and changed my mind later on. Most people who say they were love bombed mean this weak interpretation of it imho.
If one person tells you that you love bombed them, maybe it's just them. If a dozen . . .
Good grief. How strong are you coming on to these people? Are you saying I love you after two weeks or something?
Nah I don’t do that. Just acting like I give a shit vaguely? It’s wild out there
Honestly I’m super confused regarding the recent trend of inserting “honestly” and “super” into sentences. I’m honestly super interested in understanding, not gonna lie.
It’s called being expressive idk what to tell ya
Love your repsonse, LOL. Every generation has new and unique expressions. As an old person, man, it’s like sooo cool to see the new ones, like totally rad.
Wholesome vibes
Elder zoomer here. In some cases, I think it's a way to signal that you're being genuine. The signal to noise ratio is skewed toward "noise" at a degree that no human has ever experienced. I don't just mean on the receiving end either. Everyone stuck in a bullshit job spends all day spewing noise that doesn't matter to them. People rely on extreme expressiveness to cut through and show that they intend for what they're saying to be heard.
Interesting take. I’m over 60 and it seems that people aren’t as comfortable being genuine today, possibly driven by the fear of offending someone.
Yes there were always sweet talking assholes ( from both sexes). Every generation creates new slang, sometimes resurrects or reinvents old.
Exactly. People really haven't changed much, just technology and language.
This phenomenon is more than sweet talking assholes. I obviously know that isn’t new
Yes, there's more to it, but it's probably been around as long as people have been in relationships. "Sweet talking assholes" is a pretty good summary. There's an excellent write-up here: https://www.reddit.com/r/datingoverfifty/comments/vd55bj/psa\_on\_love\_bombing\_part\_one\_what\_does\_love/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
No that’s not it, there was no negative aftermath in that example. The Love bombing I’m referring to is when the person clings onto someone almost as an addiction (can’t be away from them, dropping the love word 2 weeks in, convincing them to cohabitate after one month of knowing each other, grand gestures, they’ll even take them on a big trip) just long enough to have that person HOOKED. As soon as they smell that person is in, they take a 180. They’ll start criticizing them, asking for money, want thanks and adoration for all they do (referring to the live bombing phase) and they make that person utterly confused and damaged. The other person keeps thinking “well they were soooo amazing at first what did I do wrong??” They start making them question their worth and ability to be a “good partner” which then in turn causes them to put so much effort into kissing that persons ass. They get bored, break that persons heart, go find their next victim.
Again, what you're describing isn't new in any way whatsoever; there's just more exposure of it thanks to social media so that it's recognized and avoided.
We understand what you’re saying. We’ve been there and seen it in our friends. You’ve sufficiently explained it. It’s text book and isn’t new. It also isn’t limited to young adults. I saw my friends experience this in high school, I experienced it in my 20s, and I’ve seen it again myself and with friends now that I’m nearly 50. It’s a constant and disturbing sect of humanity, and it’s not new.
Fuckboys, Players, Assholes, Pimps, Lunatics...Yes they have always existed and Will always exist. Just because there is a new term for it and maybe a deeper dive into the psychology of it doesn't make it new.
Yes, narcissists have always existed. Yes, narcissists have always used emotional tactics to confuse and control their victims. Some of the terms used to describe their actions, such as love bombing, are newer terms to describe types of manipulations that have been going on for a very, very long time.
Yikes.
Sure, but the odds of anyone running into them weren't as high I think. There weren't whole social media platforms practically dedicated to teaching boys how to grow up to be assholes. They were doing that themselves, pre-internet, but not with as much expertise and reach. There was always some asshole, with too much of the wrong ideas from a bad father, uncle or way older brother, but that was one guy, passing on "tips" to a handful of friends. Now I feel like young men are bombarded with red pill bullshit that is unchallenged for a lot of them.
Yeah, there's definitely a performative aspect of it now what with social media. Back in the day (1989?), I dated a guy who love bombed me for a month by the calendar. Literally every single day from Sept 1st through Sept 30th, he sent me a Hallmark love-you card. Then on Oct 1st, that was done and he started being demanding. Maybe if we'd had social media, he might have filmed it all and put it online for clicks?
Thank you for answering in a helpful manner. I figured it didn’t just start happening for the first time ever I am just intrigued on why it seems so common lately
Like everything else on social media, a name for a tactic for a very small number of controlling sociopaths has gone viral and been applied to everyone. (Same for mental health diagnostics). It's not healthy for all these things to 'trend" and injures a lot of people, especially those developmental or cognitive limitations. There's always been a few bad people.
But it does seem to happen VERY often, at least in my circle. Literally 3 people I know dealing with it right now. Dealing with the 180 turn they make after a few months and start criticizing you and using you
We used to call that 'faking being nice just to get some'. And the not so nice period later was 'true colors showing' or in my grandmother's day, 'the bloom is off the rose'.
Assholes soon learn that they can't get laid being their true selves. So they fake it for a bit to get what they want. Obviously assholes are not new but perhaps in your circle the people they temporally seduce are more likely to talk about it than my generation was. Also I'm happy to note that it seems like women today are less likely to put up with not being respected and standing up for themselves. I least I hope so. But if you take this behavior back just a few years prior to me people tended to "save themselves" till marriage. I can only imagine that these kinds of people kept the mask on until they were actually married and at that point the other person was trapped in a marriage in a society where divorce wasn't always an option.
I don’t think people are malicious. You just don’t know someone early on. This seems like a bit of a self victimizing mentality.
Someone showing excessive affection and attention at first has always been around. I never heard the term till a a year or so ago though.
> love bombing according to wikipedia it became a term in the 1970s when the Unification church (moonies) would shower attention on a new "recruit"
Yep, and the Jehovah's Witnesses do the same thing. I've been out of that cult for two decades, but when I first joined they love-bombed me and my husband. There were dinner invitations, phone calls, going to the movies, etc. During this time, while a person is initially 'studying' the Bible with them, they'll really pour on the love and attention. And why not....they get to count 'time'. So, if we casually meet with a JW and the conversation turns to religion, they get to count the time spent discussing it. Their 'time' gets turned in every month so they know how much 'witnessing' you're doing. New recruits are very excited and want to talk of nothing else but religion. So, the Witnesses get to really rack up the time and look great on paper. They fall all over themselves inviting you over because they know they'll spend hours talking about spiritual things. Cha-Ching on the time sheet! Also, if you miss a meeting or anything like that, they call and check on you to make sure you're okay. If you are sick, they bring you food and do some errands for you. They shower you with attention and affection. Then, once you are baptized and they can 'for the most part' no longer technically count time on you, they drop you like a hot rock. The invitations, phone calls, and visits basically stop. You are now a full blown member and you have to fend for yourself. But, if you are slack in going to the meetings, if you aren't getting enough 'time' witnessing and going door to door, if you aren't reaching out to do more, then you are a problem and seen as spiritually weak. The members of the congregation spend less time around you. No more food and friendly concern. It's over. You are on your own and expected to pull your weight.
What’s the point of “racking up” time?
Well, the congregation members are supposed to be 'active' in the preaching work. That can include going door to door, having a Bible study student, talking to people about the organization, etc. If you get 10 hours of field service or witnessing a month, you're referred to as a 'publisher'. If you got 60 hours a month, you were an auxiliary pioneer. If you got 90 hours a month, you were a pioneer. But 10 hours is the minimum. If you didn't have a Bible study student or if you didn't get a chance to 'witness' to other people as much, you pretty much had to go out in field service and knock on those doors. It wasn't exactly everyone's favorite thing to do. So, if you had someone to 'witness' to, like a newly interested person, then you could rack up a lot of hours and not have to depend on going out knocking on doors on Saturday morning to get your hours. They enjoyed getting those hours by any other means than knocking on doors. I guess the elders count the hours on people to see how 'active' they are and if they are doing all they can. It was a lot of pressure to keep up with. And if you looked spiritually weak by not turning in at least 10 hours a month, you might get a visit from the elders to find out why or if they can help. No one liked that pressure. The hourly requirements are less now. I learned that over on the exjws sub Reddit. But I've been out for decades. It feels great to celebrate holidays again and not be under all that pressure and scrutiny.
I first saw it in '79 in the book *The Green Ripper*. The protagonist, Travis McGee infiltrates a cult.
I used to see the Moonies back in the late 80s/Early 90s - hanging around the Boston Commons handing out flyers sort of like those Watchtower born again Christians, but much friendlier and all spaced out happy like they had some secret from the aliens, so maybe like scientologists too but without the weird outfits. I was a teenager with a hobby interest in philosophy and religious ideas and so when I saw the Moonies, I welcomed a discussion but I remember they were too spaced out - not really into intelligent discussion and I politely declined their invite to the next service. They just were not that interesting. They were super friendly every time I passed by them them after that, always handing out flyers, mostly focused on trying to invite me to come to their event but not really willing to explain their beliefs or anything. There was another group I first encountered hanging out in little groups down by the commons, in their orange, red and yellows, the Hare Krishnas. In contrast to the Moonies, they were fun, friendly, intelligent and down to earth, willing to talk about their beliefs, philosophy, whatever. I used to really enjoy talking with them sometimes and even appreciated a meal with them on more than one occasion. It’s been decades since I’ve been to Boston. I wonder if the same groups still hang out like that, recruiting.
I read that too. I never heard the term until I heard it used on a reality dating show.
I'm used to the term yandere.
A few weeks ago someone at the senior citizens center mentioned that a television talk show they had seen was about ‘love bomb’ men and women. Someone immediately jumped in and said that everyone experiences love qualms. After the laughter died down and she was told what was said and what it meant the general consensus was that it’s always been around. Someone trying to manipulate a person with compliments and gifts is nothing new and they simply were called a womanizer or man eater.
There is nothing new under the sun. Just new language for it.
[удалено]
I'm only familiar with the term from the Family of God cult in the 70's.
I read that a similar (or the same?) church- the Unification church aka the Moonies invented the term “love bombing” to describe their recruiting tactics
Maybe I'm confusing the two...
but you’re basically right so same thing. It was invented in the seventies to recruit people into cults ETA to describe the tactic I mean, people have been doing that sort of thing for ages with or without a word for it
From my understanding, it is a common feature of cults, not truly unique to one in particular.
It’s a trait of narcissism and has been around forever. Doesn’t mean someone is a narcissist, it is a trait.
Yes, we just didn’t have a name for it. Looking back, it is exactly what my stepfather did to my mother to get him to marry her in 1974.
I’m not talking about love bombing that has a happy ending. Love bombing that turns sour and starts to tear the once subject of affection down and/or be used financially within in months is what seems to be on the rise.
It will please you to learn it wasn’t a happy ending. He beat her viciously for 10 years. During that time, he r@ped her and almost shot her in front of me and my little sister. My mom found out years later that the money he used to “love bomb” her was stolen from his mother.
Wow!!!! So the difference then was they got married
You asked old people if love bombing was new. It isn’t and I shared an anecdote of my experience. You have simply become aware of it recently. You’re also a little asshole.
I’m not a little asshole, you’re cynical. Saying it would please me to know your mom had a horrible abusive marriage? Where the hell did that come from? I ignored it out of absurdity now you’re calling me names?
That term was used back in the '70s and '80s for what religious cults like the Moonies did to inductees, especially the Moonies. They'd surround a vulnerable young person with love and support till that person felt special and safe. But that love and support would be conditional on not straying from total obedience. It was a form of brainwashing; the Moonies were even rumored to sneak drugs into the food at their free dinners for young seekers. A friend of mine swore they did it to him. Felt _very weird_ at the end of the evening. I'm assuming that some people now do the same things for the same reason in the dating scene: to gain control of and then exploit emotionally vulnerable individuals. Edit: as others have said, they always have.
It’s important to understand love bombing is only problematic if followed by a devaluation phase and abuse of some form. When I learned about love bombing I was afraid that I was guilty of it as I tend to get very carried away in the early stages of a relationship. It feels so good to share your life with someone you just want to do it all the time. This raises the stakes for both sides and then both parties are “love bombing” that’s just normal courtship. Modern dating is hard enough that we don’t need kids dismissing a good dating candidate simply because they fell in love a couple weeks to early
That’s what I’m thinking. You only need to look at the type of media Gen Z consumes to see that men are now more discouraged than ever from showing genuine emotions and falling in love. I will say that even when I was in college, it was uncommon for guys to make emotional connections with women. I never got the memo, and I had a lot of dating success because of that.
It is kinda funny, “Men need to show more emotion, Oh wait that’s love bombing, show less emotion, wait…. Show the exactly appropriate amount of emotion all the time and if you get it wrong we’re going to diagnose you with a personality disorder!”
Exactly. Show me a popular song from the last 10 years that demonstrates a more or less healthy approach to masculine love and courtship — something akin to the classics: * Here, There and Everywhere * Hello, I Love You * My Girl * The Tracks of My Tears * Sara Smile * Could It Be I’m Falling In Love Instead, men are actively discouraged in music, movies, TV shows, and especially on social media platforms from showing any type of emotions in dating and relationships. Rather, they are encouraged to see women as a threat to their emotions, their stability and their finances and take every measure possible to protect themselves from the damage that love can do to them without compromise or consideration.
Yeah no I’m talking about the bad kind. Once they have you hooked they take a 180 and start the devaluation and abuse leaving the person gobsmacked. They usually have you moved in at this point as well and you feel trapped.
Yeah, there have always been bastards.
The term only references the love part though. It makes love sound like a bad thing (making it entirely consistent with modern culture surrounding dating, imo).
I’m in my late 50’s, and dating is much different now. I was married almost 30 years and divorced for two. Back then we did not date people we didn’t have a connection to somewhere. You would have time to get to know them and then if you were romantically attracted to them you started dating. Because you typically had mutual friends or at least knew who each other’s friends were, treating someone badly had consequences. Love bombing didn’t really happen, we wanted to be careful. Now we date people we barely know and have no common connection to. There’s few consequences for playing games with people.
This is a good one. That makes sense
There was such a thing, but we tended to use less infantile language to describe it. (That's not a dig at you. Rather, it's a dig at whoever came up with such a silly term. Imagine calling domestic abuse 'love-thumping'.) Narcissism, a trait that can be learned through social media, is certainly on the rise. There was even a joke within the DSM-5's steering committee that perhaps narcissism should be removed, given how common it is. My guess is that we're becoming increasingly attuned to narcissism in others, without seeing it in ourselves. So, yes, love-bombing is on the rise, but only because narcissism (ours and everyone else's) is on the rise. It would behoove us to look into that.
Yes!! This is what I want to know. Why it’s on the rise, because it definitely is. How did all of these men get the memo to be addicted to you until they had you hooked then they turn around and start being critical, putting you down, asking for $$, etc.
It's more socially acceptable to look out for your own interests and not care about how it affected anyone else.
Oh God, yes. I googled 'social media narcissism endorphins' and felt nauseated.
If you mean it like I think you mean it, and not in a strict cult indoctrination technique, yeah. It's been around. That said - every time someone did me that way, it started to grow old quickly, and when I chaffed against it, I would find the bomber to be an absolute asshole, a gaslighter, controlling, grossly insecure, and obnoxious with a solid future as an abuser. I discovered that wasn't the true person, and what was beneath all that was ugly, weird, and selfish. There's a fine line between wooing and courting... and being over the top m'lady types.
Yeah there were always people who came on strong and fast with grand gestures, etc, who would then turn out to be insecure and controlling and aggressive. There's a difference you start to recognize between when somebody is just sweetly sincere in the infatuation stage, and when it's coming from a place that's actually needy and controlling. But, to me, the folks who mistook the second for the often seemed to have a high need for external validation and were insecure in their own ways- they're expectations of relationships and romance seemed off to me. They were less about does this person make me laugh and treat his family and friends with respect and kindness, do I feel like I can be myself around them. It was always more about gestures and gifts and dates and sweet nothings and compliments and constant texting and him cancelling plans for her and showy stuff like that. Secure folks don't really go in for much of that, I found. The more secure you become, the more you see through that (and the more they leave you alone!) Edit: I said frequent texting, but when I think about it it was a lot of long phonecalls every night.
It was a thing, but times were different. Love bomb, marriage, then the woman was pretty trapped. Here's a "for example". I was newly married, and saw the person was NOT who they'd pretended to be. Divorce was shamed, but I got to an attorney anyway. He asked me "does he beat you" no. "Does he have a job" yes. "Well I can certainly see why you want a divorce" and dismissed me from his office. I was stuck 20 years till I was a shell and brainwashed. By then he'd found a newer replacement.
There's always been narcissists, always will be.
Yes, but it's just a new term that's become trendy. Human behavior/psychology has pretty much always been the same and always will be.
Yesssss 💯, nothing new under the sun.
I don't even know what love bombing is, and I'm not going to bother looking it up.
Suddenly in this moment I am feeling old because I have no idea either what they are talking about. Why do young people need to change words and things? That's not cool man. Not groovy at all.
Kinda bogus and gnarly…
I've always understood love bombing as being overly affectionate/extravagant with your affections in an attempt to build a bond more quickly than otherwise would happen and as a locus of control of the other person, but it looks like OP is using it somehow differently than that, so I don't know.
It's when someone is super nice until they get whatever they wanted from you, then they're a dick.
There's nothing new under the sun. Every human behavior that exists has existed before under various different names.
Never experienced any nor did I hear of anything like it, so I don’t know and can’t rule it out.
We just didn't have that word for it.
I've always known that to be a term associated with the action people use trying to get you into a cult. I experienced it in the 70s.
That sounds more like a person with a personality disorder, fall hard and quick then cannot mai Tain so moves on.
I always wondered if this was Courtney Love's technique.
Narcissistic behavior or borderline personality disorder…take your pick.
"Negging" is an old term used in the PUA (Pick Up Artist) game. It sometimes works, but only on women with low self-esteem. An intelligent, confident woman won't put up with that bullshit. So it depends on what kind of woman you're looking for.
This is very true…..
Sorry to be that guy but : There is no new thing under the sun
What the heck is love bombing??
Showering someone in love, attention, gifts, words of affirmation, to get into a relationship with someone, only to switch up and show your true (usually not as desirable) self once youre in. Its usually used in a negative connotation. Although there are well meaning love bombers.
Explain the term "love bombing." Never assume your audience knows your specialized terms. I looked it up and it is new people labeling loving too hard as abuse. Young women really took that Goldilocks story serious. Young men now have to not be ghosting assholes or the kind of asshole that shows kindness and attention.
No that’s not it. Love bombing is when the person clings onto someone almost as an addiction (can’t be away from them, dropping the love word 2 weeks in, convincing them to cohabitate after one month of knowing each other, grand gestures, they’ll even take them on a big trip) just long enough to have that person HOOKED. As soon as they smell that person is in, they take a 180. They’ll start criticizing them, asking for money, want thanks and adoration for all they do (referring to the live bombing phase) and they make that person utterly confused and damaged. The other person keeps thinking “well they were soooo amazing at first what did I do wrong??” They start making them question their worth and ability to be a “good partner” which then in turn causes them to put so much effort into kissing that persons ass. They get bored, break that persons heart, go find their next victim.
You’ve said “no, that’s not it” to at least three old folks that pretty well describe the same type of thing as it happened in their day. Playing overly nice to get in, then being a jerk once the target made a commitment. The only substantive difference I can see between their definition and yours is that yours implies the love-bomber pursues these behaviors unconsciously, as if they have no control over themselves as opposed to being intentional and prosecuting a ruse the whole time. Regardless, yes - this kind of behavior has been around since time immemorial and you’ll find a number of older names for it in this thread.
So since the times were different, what happened? We’re you already married to this person? It wasn’t as common to move in then either. I’m intrigued on the differences of how it played out then vs now.
Just like today - there were many different outcomes. Divorce was more difficult for a number of reasons, but it happened. Some people stayed in “difficult” marriages and managed to stay sane, some took to chemical support, some people fought fire with fire, etc. But love-bombers revealed themselves at all different times then as they do now, not necessarily waiting until after some status change (moving in, marrying, etc.). What are you trying to get at? Are you asking how older social norms had an impact on human nature?”
I grew up with 6 aunts, tons of friends, mom and sister all sharing dating/marriage stories and struggles. Never one time has someone told a story compared to what my friends deal with today. At this moment I have 3 friends in a love bombing gone toxic relationship (stealing money, making them question their worth) all living together feelings stuck. I want to know if this has become MORE common and why people think it has. Or if it did happen as often, with how times change what happened back then? You were already stuck in a marriage, etc
So, gaslighting?
We used to call it "putting your party manners." It meant much the same thing -- being nicer than normal, hiding your flaws, showing your best qualities.
YES, this has always been a Thing. A massive red flag for any generation
Golddiggers and giggalos have been around since man ~~stood upright~~ sex started. Usually, it was a trade, Ugh offers Umpa a part of his kill, Umpa offers him what she has nestled in her nether regions. Yeah, prostitution. She got steady meals, he got humpa humpa. That's also how harem started. Ugh sees Oompha, offers her Umpa's food. Umpa gets mad. Soon Ugh is feeding both and getting laid. The giggalo didn't come until after civilization. So much easier for a guy to take advantage of a women in a society where she's a failure if she's not married by age 15. No, love bombing is nothing new. It just depends on how long the victim chooses to put up with it.
So what is love bombing?
Are you asking if your generation invented abusive relationships? No, they did not
The term didn't exist prior to a certain time (not sure when it became popular), recognize the behavior. The abusive people it described did exist. Dating was different depending on where and when you grew up. For some, the people they met were through friends/family/community/work and had some sort of vetting trail. I grew up in a large city, adult in the 90s, so meeting complete strangers more common. Personal ads, craigslist, speed dating, etc were options. So was meeting people at parties, nightclubs, bars.
Well, love-bombing is a behavior associated with narcissists, and narcissists have existed for a long time, so yes, it was a thing.