It is easy to rush to interpretations of what is meant by a manifestation of affection, on some level, or what is meant by the absence of that manifestation.

Wide ranges of social or cultural differences in attitudes about affection exist. To fail to understand such differences properly, before interpreting a level of affection, or its absence, might be a very serious mistake.

Some might view the reassurance of a hug, for instance, as an expression of loving attentiveness, and therefore, rush to interpret reluctance in that regard to be an absence of the love that is not displayed in that manner, at that time.

The problem with such an interpretation is that it does not weigh in another very significant alternate cultural view, and therefore, runs the risk of being an example of self destructive false certainty.

There is a very sincere view, held by some, that it is damaging to the sense of love and affection for someone, that they actually do feel and care very much about preserving, to expose it, by expressing it, amidst unresolved matters of disrespect that have left feelings of offense still lingering.

This view is rooted in the idea that emotionally driven actions leave semi-permanent imprints in the psyche that attach those actions, in the psyche, to the circumstances and corollary feelings, perceptions, and senses that were also present in the psyche at the time.

If, then, according to this view, feelings of resentment remain in one's psyche at the time that affection is expressed toward the one who gave offense that remains unresolved, the risk arises that the feeling and senses of affection will be cheapened, undermined, and devalued, and otherwise polluted in the psyche, by being attached to feelings of resentment that were present at the time.

Many professional counselors agree, to refer to an extreme example to illustrate the psychological point, that a woman who was sexually abused as a child by her father, will suffer for many years, thereafter, with the negative emotions of guilt, fear, and resentment being attached in her psyche, for ever after, to the experience of sexual interaction.

To survive this attachment, or at least mitigate it, the consciousness is left to make a very difficult and problematic choice. One might embrace the connection, and thereby associate sexual sensations with quiet acquiescence to abuse, or, in the alternative, engage in active repression of portions of the psyche during sexual activity in order to isolate the conflicting feelings. Either way, the full beauty of sexual interaction that is not left free to be experienced without such waves of simultaneously contradicting emotions is, therefore, further polluted by being further bound, in the psyche, with such unhealthy attachments recorded in the brain with the experience.

Now this example might be more extreme than what most other situations involve, but the principles of consciousness and related conscious processing and the principles of sub-conscious attachment still apply.

A less extreme scenario, as an example, might be useful.

Imagine a scenario in which a father exposed his children to effusive expressions of love and affection from time to time, only to be largely absent and unconcerned about their lives and well being when it really mattered. Imagine such a childhood to involve being falsely accused by someone, whose accusations were believed or upheld by the father, in the absence of a thorough and fair investigation of the matter. The child is left undermined in a way they know they don't deserve, and the father has played a meaningful role in this injustice. He won't abide further discussion of the matter, but insists on imposing affection and expressions of love on the child whose reputation has unjustly suffered.

In such a scenario, the child comes to equate the father's expressions of love and affection with insincerity and the requirement of acquiescence to illegitimate condemnation as a way of life.

There is little question that such an upbringing will impact negatively on the purity with which a child might otherwise have grown to appreciate expressions of love and affection.

Once having come to understand this dynamic, it would be small wonder if the child, once grown into adulthood, is reticent to engage in affection on any level, with someone from whom matters of unwarranted disrespect remain unresolved.

There is little mystery here, once the dynamics are properly considered.

To overlook them in passing further judgment, that is unwarranted, on the one who is reticent to engage readily in affection until after things are resolved, is to further exacerbate the complexity of the dynamic with the very same pollution of injustice being attached to affection.

Some feel very strongly, for these reasons, that affection should be preserved for those moments when harmony prevails in the absence of unresolved feelings of offense due to unwarranted disrespect and injustice.

Imagine a scenario in which such a person is informed by the significant other in their life, for whom they have felt deeply warm feelings of love and affection, but from whom the complexity of recent moments of gratuitous disrespect remain unresolved, is informed by the significant other that he will be abandoned if he does not overlook the injustices and disrespect and engage in affection according to the perceived wishes (demands) of the partner.

A very serious miscalculation has occurred. First, the absence of affection has been labelled inaccurately as an absence of love. And then to pile offense onto the injustice of false and unfair judgment, the accused is informed he will be abandoned if he doesn't acquiesce to the judgment and proffer the required affection amidst this polluted complexity.

There is very likely a very serious mental health issue manifesting itself here, and it is not the mental health issue of the one reticent to engage in affection in such moments.


For some, affection is not really and On-Demand kind of thing

---