“It is not you, it is me.”
How many times have we heard this statement from a partner, or caught ourselves whispering it, voice low, eyes averted, trying to make sense of the guilt we can’t name? (The author herself guilty!).
Often dismissed as a clichéd breakup line, this sentence hides a complex psychological truth: that sometimes, we are the ones standing in the way of our own happiness. We pull away from the person who cares, question the stability of a healthy connection, or stir conflict just when things begin to feel safe. This phenomenon, known as self-sabotage in relationships, is more common than we care to admit—and far more rooted in psychology than in mere bad luck or personal failure.
This article explores the hidden forces, attachment wounds, fear of intimacy, low self-worth, unresolved trauma, and maladaptive beliefs, that compel people to disrupt the very relationships they most desire. By unpacking these psychological themes, we aim to understand not only why self-sabotage happens, but also how awareness can become the first step toward healing.
What Is Self-Sabotage in Relationships?
Self-sabotage in relationships refers to a set of behaviors—often unconscious—that actively or passively undermine the stability, intimacy, or longevity of a romantic connection. These actions are not random; they often emerge just as things begin to feel “too good,” too real, or too emotionally intimate. Whether it’s ghosting after a meaningful conversation, starting an argument out of nowhere, or emotionally withdrawing from a supportive partner, self-sabotage usually arises not from a lack of desire for connection but from a deeper fear of what that connection might bring.
Unlike simple incompatibility or lack of interest, self-sabotage reflects internal conflict: the person both wants closeness and fears it. They may crave love deeply while simultaneously pushing it away, believing they are unworthy of it, or assuming it will inevitably be lost.
It’s important to understand that these patterns don’t emerge in a vacuum. More often than not, they are shaped by early attachment experiences, unresolved trauma, deeply ingrained beliefs about the self and others, and protective emotional mechanisms developed in response to past wounds. The saboteur is not the villain of the story, but rather, someone whose nervous system has learned that love equals risk, and vulnerability equals danger.
Common Signs of Self-Sabotage in Relationships:
- Picking fights during moments of closeness or peace
- Avoiding emotional intimacy or downplaying affection
- Cheating or flirting with others as a way to create distance
- Setting impossible standards for the partner or relationship
- Repeating the phrase “this is too good to be true” and acting accordingly
- Suddenly losing interest after intense emotional connection
- Withdrawing emotionally when things get serious
- Breaking up impulsively, then regretting it
Self-sabotage is not a diagnosis. It’s a symptom, a sign that there is a mismatch between what we consciously want and what we believe (often unconsciously) we deserve. To understand why it happens, we must turn to the core psychological themes behind it, wounds that often date back to long before the relationship even began.
Causes of self sabotaging one’s relationship
Self-sabotage in relationships is rarely a conscious decision. Rather, it emerges from an interplay of unresolved emotional wounds, faulty cognitive schemas, defense mechanisms, and relational learning shaped by early life experiences. Psychological research increasingly validates what lived experience shows: people often destroy the very love they desire—not out of malice, but fear. Below, we explore the central themes driving this behavior, with theoretical backing and empirical support.
1. Insecure Attachment Styles (Bowlby, Ainsworth)
John Bowlby’s attachment theory posits that the emotional bonds formed with caregivers in early childhood shape our expectations of relationships throughout life. Mary Ainsworth’s Strange Situation experiments further revealed patterns of secure, anxious, avoidant, and disorganized attachment styles, which continue to affect how individuals respond to intimacy and stress in adult romantic bonds.
- Avoidant Attachment:
Avoidantly attached individuals learned early on that expressing needs leads to rejection or punishment. As adults, they may downplay emotions, value independence over connection, and retreat at the first sign of emotional closeness.
➤ This often manifests as pre-emptive sabotage: ending things before vulnerability deepens, ghosting, or emotionally disengaging under stress.
“I’d rather end this now than wait for you to hurt me.” - Anxious Attachment:
Those with anxious attachment tend to hyperactivate their emotional system. They crave closeness yet remain perpetually afraid of abandonment.
➤ Ironically, their clinging or intense emotional reactions can drive partners away, fulfilling their worst fear and reinforcing the sabotage cycle.
“Why won’t you reassure me enough?” becomes a cry masked as control. - Disorganized Attachment:
Arising often from childhood trauma or abuse, this attachment style embodies a profound internal conflict: the longing for love clashes violently with fear of it.
➤ The result is erratic behavior—pushing and pulling, emotional chaos, sudden breakups, or sabotaging relationships that feel “too good to be true.”
“Why do I always ruin the good ones?” isn’t rhetorical—it’s a trauma echo.
Empirical evidence backs the link between attachment insecurity and relationship sabotage. For instance, Peel et al. (2019) found that individuals with insecure attachment styles were significantly more likely to engage in behaviors that undermined intimacy and stability, often as a defense against anticipated rejection.
2. Repetition Compulsion (Freud, 1914)
Sigmund Freud introduced the concept of repetition compulsion, where individuals unconsciously reenact unresolved emotional conflicts from childhood in their adult lives—particularly in love.
“The patient does not remember anything of what he has forgotten, but acts it out.” – Freud
For example, someone who experienced emotionally unavailable or volatile caregivers may become drawn to partners who are similarly distant or controlling. The subconscious goal is to “master” the unresolved trauma by re-engaging with it—hoping for a different outcome. In reality, the pattern only deepens the wound.
➤ Self-sabotage becomes a way to stay within the boundaries of the familiar, even if it is painful.
“The peace feels alien. The chaos feels like home.”
Peel et al. (2019) highlight how repetition compulsion often underlies sabotage patterns, especially in individuals who equate love with suffering due to early emotional neglect or trauma.
3. Low Self-Worth and Unworthiness Scripts
A person who believes they are fundamentally unlovable will resist or dismantle anything that contradicts that internal narrative. This psychological dissonance—between external validation and internal shame—leads to destructive behavior.
“If they knew the real me, they’d leave.”
“I don’t deserve this kind of love.”
This reflects what Turan & Yildirim (2023) term “worthiness distortions”, measured through the Relationship Self-Sabotage Scale (RSS). Their empirical work shows that low self-esteem and unworthiness scripts are key predictors of behaviors like emotional withdrawal, lying, and ghosting.
➤ The psychological mechanism here is cognitive dissonance: the discomfort that arises when someone’s kindness clashes with your negative self-concept. To resolve it, people subconsciously lower the quality of the relationship—by picking fights, distancing, or even cheating—until it “makes sense” again.
4. Fear of Intimacy
While many claim to desire deep emotional closeness, intimacy also threatens the protective layers built over years of emotional self-defense. Vulnerability means exposure—and exposure can mean abandonment, rejection, or humiliation.
“If I don’t let you in, you can’t hurt me.”
This fear is closely linked to attachment trauma, and often appears as “hot and cold” behavior—drawing close, then suddenly retreating or losing interest.
According to Peel et al. (2019), fear of intimacy is one of the strongest predictors of relationship sabotage, especially in individuals with unresolved emotional trauma. The fear isn’t irrational—it’s protective. But it often misreads love as danger.
5. The Shame-Defense Cycle
Psychologist Gershen Kaufman emphasized that shame is one of the most painful emotional states—because it targets the self, not just behavior. In relationships, being loved or admired may trigger internal shame:
“They don’t know the real me.”
“I’m fooling them.”
To escape this unbearable vulnerability, the person sabotages. This overlaps with impostor syndrome in relationships, a phenomenon increasingly reported in clinical practice (Esplin et al., 2024).
➤ Rather than wait to be “found out,” the person exits or poisons the relationship.
6. Meme Culture, Hyper-Individualism, and Performative Dysfunction
In a digitally saturated world, emotional dysfunction has been commodified. From TikToks about being the “toxic ex” to memes celebrating being “emotionally unavailable,” modern culture romanticizes and memes trauma as personality.
“Red flag queen.”
“I ruin good things and that’s just who I am.”
While humor provides a coping mechanism, it also desensitizes us to emotional sabotage—and reframes it as quirky rather than harmful. In turn, self-sabotage becomes performative, reinforcing emotional detachment and self-fulfilling emotional prophecies (Vernon, 2012).
7. Self-Fulfilling Prophecy (Merton, 1948)
If you fundamentally believe “good things don’t last” or “I’m too much to love,” those beliefs unconsciously guide your behavior in relationships. You may:
- Choose emotionally unavailable partners
- Interpret neutral behaviors as rejection
- Create conflict where none existed
Merton’s theory of the self-fulfilling prophecy explains how internalized beliefs shape external reality. Empirical studies confirm that cognitive distortions about love and self-worth are central to sabotaging behaviors (Peel et al., 2019; Turan & Yildirim, 2023).
8. Self-Handicapping (Berglas & Jones, 1978)
Self-handicapping is a defense mechanism where individuals create obstacles to success, so that failure can be attributed to the obstacle—not the self.
In romantic contexts, it might look like:
“I’ll emotionally withdraw, so if it fails, I can say I didn’t try.”
“I’ll push them away, so they can’t reject me first.”
This gives the illusion of control over inevitable loss—but it often ensures the very failure one fears.
9. Existential Anxiety and Fear of Meaning (Rollo May, Irvin Yalom)
Existential psychology adds another dimension: love demands responsibility. Loving someone means being accountable for their emotional world, which can feel overwhelming for individuals unaccustomed to interdependence.
Yalom emphasized how true love evokes existential fears—of meaning, loss, and transformation.
“What if this is real?” becomes more terrifying than “What if it ends?”
Sabotaging relationships, in this view, becomes a way to sidestep the profound vulnerability that authentic connection demands.
10. Learned Helplessness (Seligman, 1967)
Learned helplessness occurs when repeated emotional failures or betrayals condition individuals to believe they are powerless to change their relational fate.
➤ Even when offered stable, supportive love, they may respond with suspicion or detachment, convinced that it’s only a matter of time before they are hurt again.
This can become a self-reinforcing loop: sabotaging good relationships, confirming their belief that “nothing ever works,” and further lowering their capacity for trust.
Research by Esplin et al. (2024) supports this model, showing that individuals with histories of relational trauma often display sabotage behaviors tied to helplessness and pessimism, which correlate with anxiety, depressive symptoms, and poor self-regulation.
~Intersectional Dimensions: Gender and Culture
Psychological themes of self-sabotage are further shaped by gender norms and cultural scripts. For example:
- Men may be socialized to equate vulnerability with weakness, leading to emotional withdrawal, avoidant behaviors, or denial of needs.
- Women are often taught to suppress their desires, avoid confrontation, or fear being “too much,” leading to self-silencing or over-accommodation.
In South Asian cultures, romantic suffering is romanticized in literature, cinema, and mythology. Stories often equate true love with loss, sacrifice, or pain—encouraging patterns where emotional endurance is valorized over mutual emotional health. These cultural narratives can normalize self-sabotage as part of a “doomed but beautiful” love story.
Can Self-Sabotage Be Unlearned?
Self-sabotage may feel like an irreversible pattern—an internal saboteur too deeply wired to disarm. But the truth is, like most psychological behaviors, it is learned—and therefore, it can be unlearned. Healing from self-sabotage does not begin by fixing relationships, but by understanding the emotional frameworks that shape how we show up in them.
1. Cultivating Awareness: From Automatic to Conscious
The first and most essential step is recognizing the pattern. As long as self-sabotaging behaviors remain unconscious, they will continue to repeat. This involves noticing:
- Emotional triggers that lead to distancing or conflict
- Patterns across past relationships
- The internal monologue before sabotage happens (e.g., “This won’t last,” “I’m too much,” “They’re going to leave”)
Journaling, mindfulness, and therapeutic dialogue can help externalize and observe these mental scripts. According to Turan & Yildirim (2023), individuals who scored high on the Relationship Self-Sabotage Scale showed marked improvements in behavioral regulation once they became aware of their patterns—demonstrating that awareness itself can reduce relational sabotage.
2. Healing the Inner Working Model: Therapy & Attachment Repair
Attachment theory suggests that we operate from internal working models—subconscious templates of how love works. These can be reshaped, but not overnight. Therapy, particularly forms like:
- Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT)
- Internal Family Systems (IFS)
- Schema Therapy
- Trauma-informed psychotherapy
…helps in rebuilding a secure attachment system.
People with avoidant or anxious patterns learn to tolerate closeness, trust emotional safety, and gradually regulate their relational fears. Empirical research (Peel et al., 2019) affirms that structured relational work in therapy significantly reduces fear of intimacy and maladaptive beliefs about love.
3. Rewriting Cognitive Distortions and Beliefs
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is especially effective in identifying and restructuring distorted beliefs, such as:
- “I’m unlovable.”
- “Good things never last.”
- “If they really knew me, they’d leave.”
Over time, these are replaced by adaptive affirmations like:
“Love does not have to feel unsafe.”
“I can be loved without proving my worth.”
Vernon (2012) notes that such restructuring of relational expectations dramatically improves relational satisfaction and decreases sabotage behaviors by resolving unrealistic ideals about love.
4. Learning Emotional Tolerance
Many who sabotage love are not afraid of love itself, but of the intensity of feelings it evokes—vulnerability, fear, joy, shame. These emotional states can be overwhelming to someone whose nervous system associates closeness with threat.
This is where nervous system regulation becomes key:
- Grounding techniques
- Somatic therapies
- Breathwork and body-based trauma resolution
- Mindful self-compassion
These help increase the window of tolerance, enabling a person to feel closeness without triggering panic or avoidance.
5. Building Secure Relationships, Even as You Heal
You do not have to be fully healed to love or be loved. What matters more is conscious effort, transparent communication, and willingness to learn. Supportive, emotionally safe partners can become corrective emotional experiences, especially for those healing from trauma.
As Esplin et al. (2024) emphasize, secure relational environments act as buffers against sabotage cycles, improving emotional regulation, mental health, and long-term well-being.
6. Breaking the Shame Loop
The paradox of shame is that the more we hide it, the more it grows. Sabotage thrives in secrecy, in the quiet belief:
“I’m broken. I always mess things up.”
To break the loop:
- Speak it aloud in safe spaces (therapy, support groups, self-disclosure in healthy relationships)
- Humanize your patterns without over-identifying with them
- Reframe sabotage as protection, not pathology
Rollo May reminds us that the capacity to love is also the capacity to be hurt. To unlearn sabotage is not to erase that risk—but to believe it’s worth taking.
7. The Role of Compassion in Recovery
Self-sabotage often comes from parts of the psyche that once protected us—from emotional overwhelm, abandonment, chaos. Rather than silencing those parts, healing invites us to understand them.
Ask yourself:
- What is this part of me afraid of?
- What would safety in love look like, if I’d never known it?
- What would it mean to receive love without earning it?
This mindset doesn’t just dismantle sabotage—it opens the door to self-trust, which is the foundation of safe connection.
A Literary Glimpse: Devdas and the Tragedy of Self-Sabotage
Few characters in literature embody the psychology of self-sabotage in love as profoundly as Devdas. In Devdas, the titular character repeatedly pushes away the woman he loves, Paro—not because he doesn’t love her, but because he cannot tolerate the emotional vulnerability that love demands.
Haunted by unworthiness, shame, and an inability to emotionally regulate, Devdas drinks to numb his pain, isolates himself when closeness is offered, and ruins every chance at connection. He is not the villain of the story—he is its emotional casualty.
As analyzed in Devdas: Repression, Emotional Collapse, and the Psychology of Tragic Masculinity,
“Devdas is not simply heartbroken. He is terrified of receiving the love he does not believe he deserves.”
His downfall is not caused by external rejection, but by the war within—a textbook case of self-sabotage shaped by internalized shame, repression, and cultural expectations of masculinity.
Read the full psychological breakdown of Devdas on PsychLense.com: https://psychlense.com/?p=28
References
Berglas, S., & Jones, E. E. (1978). Drug choice as a self-handicapping strategy in response to noncontingent success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(4), 405–417. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.4.405
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. Basic Books.
Campos, D. (2023). Intergenerational transmission of emotional dysfunction: A developmental framework. Journal of Family Psychology, 37(1), 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001020
Esplin, R., Walker, J., & Kim, S. (2024). Self-sabotage and its impact on mental health: An attachment-informed clinical study. Journal of Interpersonal Psychology, 46(2), 178–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934223.2024.00102
Freud, S. (1914). Remembering, repeating and working-through (Further recommendations on the technique of psycho-analysis II). In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 12, pp. 145–156). Hogarth Press.
May, R. (1981). Freedom and destiny. Norton.
Merton, R. K. (1948). The self-fulfilling prophecy. The Antioch Review, 8(2), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.2307/4609267
Peel, J., Caltabiano, M. L., & Hall, T. (2019). The fear of intimacy and relationship sabotage: The mediating role of attachment style and self-esteem. Psychological Reports, 122(4), 1386–1405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118786132
Shen, L. (2024). Early trauma and adult relational dysfunction: An emotion regulation approach. Clinical Psychology Review, 45, 102204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102204
Seligman, M. E. P. (1967). Depression and learned helplessness. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 82(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025234
Stewart-Brown, S. (2005). Parenting, well-being, health and disease. In H. McGraw (Ed.), Children’s health and emotional development (pp. 47–65). Oxford University Press.
Turan, M. E., & Yildirim, H. (2023). Development and validation of the Relationship Self-Sabotage Scale (RSS): A psychometric approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 205, 112168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2023.112168
Vernon, P. (2012). Love, myths, and mental models: How beliefs about romance shape relational dysfunction. The Humanistic Psychologist, 40(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/08873267.2012.643676
Yalom, I. D. (1980). Existential psychotherapy. Basic Books.
