Chapter 7 of 8 · Back to push-pull
Dismissive-Avoidant Push-Pull, for a Dismissive-Avoidant Partner: The Guide
It's a Thursday in March. Your phone lights up: "hey. been thinking about you. how's things?" It's from the person who went quiet last October. There was never a breakup conversation, just fewer texts, then none. You never chased, and they never explained. Now you're typing "good, you?" before you've decided anything.
This guide covers the slow version of push-pull: the cool fade and the casual return. It covers why it feels so easy when your own style also leans toward space, and how to choose it, or end it, on purpose.
What the cycle looks like
The pull
The return is low-key. Saturday, 11:20: "saw that bar we liked closed down. end of an era." No apology, no reference to the four months of silence. You reply, they reply, and by Wednesday you're having dinner. It's good. Nobody asks for much. You both enjoy the easy rhythm of two people who don't crowd each other. It feels like the relationship you always wanted: close enough, never too close. You tell yourself the gap didn't matter, because you didn't fall apart during it.
The push

The fade starts after something gets closer. Maybe you met their friends, or someone mentioned a holiday in summer. Replies slow from an hour to a day. Sunday, 19:05, you: "free this week?" Tuesday, 08:40, them: "work is mad, will let you know." They don't. Nobody says "I'm ending this." There's no scene to point to. If anyone asked, you'd both say "it kind of fizzled." Part of you is relieved: no hard talk, no demands, your evenings back.
The timeline
Real cycles vary a lot. This is one recognisable shape, not a schedule.
- Months 1-3: The pull. Regular dinners, easy weekends, a key to each other's place that neither of you mentions.
- Month 4: Someone raises the future: a wedding invite for two, or moving closer. The replies start slowing.
- Months 5-6: The fade becomes a breakup in all but name. They stop suggesting plans and you stop asking. Neither of you ends it out loud.
- Month 10: They reach out: "been thinking about you." You meet for a drink, and it's back on as if nothing happened.
- Months 11-13: The same question about the future comes up, and the replies slow again.
Why your partner does this
Researchers describe the dismissing style as a defensive playing-down of the need for closeness, paired with a confident view of yourself [1]. When a relationship asks for more, such as more time, more talk or more commitment, the strategy is to turn attachment needs down rather than up. Researchers call this deactivating [2]. Distance makes the pressure go away. It isn't an absence of feeling. It's a way of managing feeling by keeping it smaller.
After a breakup, people higher in avoidance tend to report less distress and less effort to get the person back, and more coping alone [3]. That fits the quiet fade. The return is harder to pin down. No study measures a "came back months later" pattern in this style. What research does show: people long more for an ex when their current life or relationship goes flat [4], and lingering feelings are the main reason on-off couples get back together [5]. So the return fits a familiar story. Distance has made closeness safe again, and the old relationship looks better from far away. Treat that as a pattern that fits, not a rule.
Why it hooks you
Because it asks nothing of you that you don't already do. When they fade, you don't feel abandoned. You feel respected, maybe relieved. Your own default after a loss is to get on with things alone [3], so the push costs you less than it would cost an anxious partner. When they come back, the return is casual, which means you can say yes without a big talk.
That's the trap. Two people who both deactivate can let a relationship end and restart without either one ever deciding anything. On-off research finds that uncertainty about what a breakup meant makes a renewal more likely, and so does staying vaguely in touch [5][6]. A fade that nobody names is close to the most uncertain ending there is.
The mirror part is worth a look, without blame. Sometimes you might be the one who fades first, and they're just matching you. And the cycle may cost you more than you notice. It's the plans you didn't make and the person you didn't meet in month eight because you half-expected a text. One pairing study found no avoidant-avoidant couples in its sample at all [7]. That was one 1994 sample, so this setup may simply be less common, or less visible. Either way, there's no rulebook for it. You have to watch your own.
Surviving a push phase
When the replies slow, your instinct is to match them and say nothing. That's fine as a way to stay calm. It's less fine as a way to avoid knowing where you stand. You don't need to chase. You do need one clear question, asked once.
Give it a week of normal life first. If the slowdown is still there, send something short and plain. Then let their answer, or their silence, count as an answer. Don't keep the door half-open with memes and "haha" replies. In on-off research, staying in light contact after a breakup made a return easier [6]. If you don't want the cycle, that kind of contact is how it keeps going.
hey, things have gone pretty quiet. are we winding this down? either answer is fine, i'd just rather know.
If they say they need space, take it at face value. Ask how long, and mean it. Then fill your own time on purpose, not as a waiting room.
Surviving a pull phase
When they come back, it will probably feel easy, and that's real. You don't have to pretend the gap didn't happen, and you don't have to make a scene about it either. You need one honest conversation before you slide back in.
Ask what changed. Not "why did you leave", which invites a shrug, but "what's different now". If the answer is "I missed you", that's lingering feeling, and on-off research says that alone often brings people back without fixing what pushed them away [5]. Ask yourself the same question. Are you saying yes because you want this person, or because they're familiar and it costs nothing to say yes?
good to hear from you. before we pick this back up, can we talk about last time? it just stopped, and i don't want to do that again.
If they won't talk about it at all, that tells you how the next fade will go.
Getting off the cycle
Getting off doesn't mean becoming someone who needs a lot. It means making choices out loud instead of letting them happen.
- Name the ending, even when it's quiet. If it's over, say so in one message. On-off research found that mutual breakups made renewal less likely, and uncertainty about the ending made it more likely [5]. A named ending is a kindness to both of you.
- Set a contact boundary after a breakup. Decide what contact you want, and stick to it: no casual check-ins, no "saw this and thought of you." This boundary is for you, not a test of them. Light contact keeps the door open [6].
- Set a return boundary. If they come back, the deal is one real conversation about what happened, and a plan for what you'll each do when things get closer.
- Watch your own fade. When you notice you're replying slower after a good weekend, say so: "i'm getting a bit closed off, not going anywhere." It's the smallest possible move against deactivating [2].
- Count the rounds. Write down the dates. People who have cycled are more likely to cycle again, even after moving in or marrying [8]. Seeing the pattern on paper makes it harder to call it a coincidence.
i've liked this, but we keep drifting off and drifting back. i'm calling it properly this time. take care of yourself.
if you want to try again, i'm open to talking. but not to just picking up where we left off. that's my boundary.
None of this will make your partner change, and none of it promises they'll return. It makes sure that whatever happens is something you chose.
When to step off for good
- The same thing triggers every fade, whether it's a holiday, meeting family or a lease, and it's never been talked about.
- You've been through three or more rounds and neither of you can say what any of the breakups meant.
- You notice you've stopped dating or making plans in the gaps, half-waiting for a "hey" in your phone.
- When they come back, they refuse every version of the "what's different now" conversation.
If these sound familiar, you can choose to end it cleanly and mean it. Wanting space isn't a flaw. Wanting someone who stays around between the times they need you isn't too much to ask. Walking away from a cycle you never chose is a clear, calm decision, and it's yours.
Sources (8)
- Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An attachment perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7(2), 147–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407590072001 (abstract; accessed 2026-10-05)
- Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). The attachment behavioral system in adulthood: Activation, psychodynamics, and interpersonal processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 53–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(03)01002-5 (metadata only; accessed 2026-10-05)
- Davis, D., Shaver, P. R., & Vernon, M. L. (2003). Physical, emotional, and behavioral reactions to breaking up: The roles of gender, age, emotional involvement, and attachment style. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(7), 871–884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029007006 (abstract; accessed 2026-10-05)
- Spielmann, S. S., Joel, S., MacDonald, G., & Kogan, A. (2013). Ex appeal: Current relationship quality and emotional attachment to ex-partners. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(2), 175–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612448198 (abstract; accessed 2026-10-05)
- Dailey, R. M., Jin, B., Pfiester, A., & Beck, G. (2011). On-again/off-again dating relationships: What keeps partners coming back? The Journal of Social Psychology, 151(4), 417–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2010.503249 (abstract; accessed 2026-10-05)
- Dailey, R. M., Rossetto, K. R., Pfiester, A., & Surra, C. A. (2009). A qualitative analysis of on-again/off-again romantic relationships: "It's up and down, all around." Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26(4), 443–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407509351035 (abstract; accessed 2026-10-05)
- Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Davis, K. E. (1994). Attachment style, gender, and relationship stability: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(3), 502–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.3.502 (abstract; accessed 2026-10-05)
- Vennum, A., Lindstrom, R., Monk, J. K., & Adams, R. (2014). "It's complicated": The continuity and correlates of cycling in cohabiting and marital relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 31(3), 410–430. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407513501987 (abstract; accessed 2026-10-05)
Keep going
Dismissive-Avoidant With a Dismissive-Avoidant Partner: The Survival Guide
Two people who both turn closeness down. It feels easy, until nobody reaches first. How to keep the calm and stop the drift.
Why: hand-picked as a companion
The Push-Pull Cycle: Why Some Relationships Keep Ending and Restarting
Why some couples break up and get back together again and again: the fast fearful-avoidant cycle, the slow dismissive fade and return, and…
Why: hand-picked as a companion
Fearful-Avoidant Push-Pull, for a Dismissive Partner: The Survival Guide
They swing between close and gone in days. You stay calm through all of it. Here is why that calm keeps the cycle going, and how to end it…
Why: hand-picked as a companion
More like this
- Guide Anxious With a Dismissive-Avoidant Partner: The Survival Guide
- Guide Dismissive-Avoidant Push-Pull, for an Anxious Partner: The Survival Guide
- Guide Dismissive-Avoidant Push-Pull, for a Fearful-Avoidant Partner: Survival Guide
- Guide Dismissive-Avoidant Push-Pull, for a Secure Partner: The Survival Guide
- Guide Fearful-Avoidant With a Dismissive-Avoidant Partner: The Survival Guide
- Guide Secure With a Dismissive-Avoidant Partner: The Survival Guide
- Quiz Is your ex an avoidant?
- Guide Dismissive-Avoidant With a Fearful-Avoidant Partner: The Survival Guide
- Term Emotionally unavailable