My patient showed me her phone. As I scrolled through the text thread, my stomach dropped. The previous Tuesday, the guy she had been seeing for two months had sent three paragraphs about how much he was looking forward to introducing her to his friends that weekend. By Friday, he had vanished — no response to her texts — nothing. Then Sunday night, he resurfaced with “Hey, what’s up?” It was as if the whole weekend hadn’t happened.
When she asked where he had been, he wrote back: “Wow, I didn’t realize you were keeping track.”
She looked at me with an expression I have seen dozens of times in my practice: equal parts confusion and self-doubt. “Am I overreacting?” she asked.
As a therapist, here is what I have learned after years of these conversations: Dating isn’t just about finding someone you like; it’s about liking yourself. It’s about feeling deep inside that you matter. So when you find yourself constantly accommodating, humoring or yielding to another person’s desires, it’s time to ask whether you are on the right track.
I have noticed certain patterns in modern dating that my patients keep missing. Not the neon-bright red flags such as love bombing and breadcrumbing. No, these patterns are subtler, often well-disguised as virtues, but they are no less destructive. Each has the pernicious effect of eroding your self-worth. I call them orange flags. Here are a few:
Ghostlighting
Ghostlighting combines ghosting (vanishing without explanation) with gaslighting (making you question your reality). It happens when a love interest disappears for days or weeks without explanation, and then returns as if nothing is amiss, while making you feel crazy for asking where they have been.
You might hear: “I told you I was busy” (they didn’t). Or “You’re being too sensitive” (you aren’t). Or some variation of a classic: “I didn’t realize you needed a play-by-play.”
The effect is destabilizing. You start wondering if your expectations are too high or if you misremembered. Ghostlighting keeps you off-balance and less likely to call out behavior that you know instinctively is wrong.
I have watched patients twist themselves into knots trying to be “cool” and “low maintenance” with people who treat them like secondary options that can be canceled without notice. My female patients, in particular, worry about being labeled “needy” for wanting a basic level of clarity and consistency, which shouldn’t raise an eyebrow if requested by anyone. When basic expectations become coded as gender-specific flaws, it becomes harder to trust your own instincts about what you deserve.
The most insidious part? By convincing yourself to expect less of your potential mate, you end up mattering less to yourself. Over time, you begin to believe that perhaps you are the problem, and that feeling can be hard to shake.
Depth avoidance
One woman I work with spent three months with someone who seemed perfect on paper — attentive, charismatic, always up for an adventure. When she came to our session after their breakup, she said something that stuck with me: “I just realized I have no idea who he actually is.”
Over many conversations with him, she had skimmed over her childhood, her complicated relationship with her father, her fears about her career. He listened attentively, asked questions and seemed genuinely engaged — to a point. Each time she tried to go deeper, she hit a wall. His eyes glazed over, his fingers fidgeted, and his attention wandered to the table behind her. Same thing when she asked more probing questions of him — anything beyond his favorite band or weekend plans. “Whoa, am I in a therapy session?” he would say with a laugh.
By month three, she could recite his opinion of 15 different IPAs. She knew he loved hiking and how often he went to the gym. But she knew nothing about his relationship with his family, the things that kept him up at night or his feelings about having children. Nor did he know her any better.
Some people enjoy the attention and companionship of dating, but they aren’t ready for a real relationship or going deeper emotionally. Others have learned that staying surface level protects them from getting hurt. When someone consistently refuses depth, they are making a choice for both of you about what kind of relationship is possible. No matter how much you give, how vulnerable you make yourself, how many risks you take, you will never be able to break through. The question isn’t whether these deflectors are unkind; it’s whether they will ever let you in far enough to create a satisfying relationship.
Deflection
Your date peppers you with questions. You find yourself talking for hours about every subject: your family, your past relationships, the details of your daily routine. It feels heady at first, like someone is finally paying attention. But as time goes by, you realize something else is going on: While you have divulged your entire life story, you have learned virtually nothing about them. Your questions are met with deflection, or vagueness. “Enough about me,” they say, “tell me more about your relationship with your sister.”
Deflection is a bit different from depth avoidance and much less common, but it can be just as disappointing. The person who deflects may genuinely fear being known, or get off on the sense of control that derives from holding all the informational cards. Or, they may simply never have learned the value of opening up. In any case, when they opt for safety over intimacy, you are left in a lonely and one-sided relationship. Real connection requires both people to show up.
Situationships
If you are in a situationship, your partner will keep things vague, not because they want out but because they fear being in. They will love you ardently in private but avoid holding your hand in public. They will spend entire weekends with you, but they won’t commit to plans more than a few days ahead. They will practice exclusivity but be unable even to utter the words “boyfriend” or “girlfriend.” Every attempt to define what you are to each other is met with: “Why do we need to put a label on this? Can’t we just enjoy what we have?”
This pattern often reflects genuine ambivalence or calculated avoidance. These uncertain lovers may have learned that keeping things loose shields them from the vulnerability that commitment requires. And they will reframe your justifiable need for clarity as insecurity. If defining the relationship feels like pulling teeth, you may be in the clutches of a situation-shipper.
Dating requires hope, but it also demands discernment. Wanting to know where you stand; wanting someone to open up, as you have opened up; needing to feel a sense of safety — these aren’t high-maintenance requests. They are the minimum requirements for any viable relationship.
Awareness of all of the above orange flags is the first step in taking your budding relationship seriously. The goal isn’t to downgrade potential partners; it’s to upgrade yourself, to make sure that the relationship seeds you’re planting have room to grow. Often a simple probe such as, “I’ve noticed we haven’t defined what this is yet, and I’d like to” is enough to root out those who will never make space for you in their lives.
My patient eventually ended things with her ghostlighter. The text she sent was simple: “I need someone who shows up consistently and doesn’t make me feel bad for noticing when they don’t.”
Afterward, she texted me: “I thought walking away would feel sad. Mostly it just feels like I can breathe again.”
This is how you know you’ve made the right choice. It’s not that you’ve stopped caring. It’s that you stopped selling your own needs short. It’s that you’ve decided to matter to yourself, even if that means walking away.
Sarah Gundle, PsyD, is a clinical psychologist practicing in New York. She is an assistant professor in psychiatry at the Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Medical Center.
If you have a question for a therapist about mental health, relationships, sleep, dating or any other topic, email it to [email protected], and we may feature it in a future column.
The post Ghostlighting and 3 other dating ‘orange flags’ you should watch out for appeared first on Washington Post.
