Note: this article uses language that reflects monogamous relationships to stay within the framework of the theory in question. The author of this post, Brianna Patti, LMFT, uses gender-neutral terms to reach a wider audience.
If you’ve ever googled something like “how can i get my partner to show up for me,” you’re probably familiar with popular teachings of Gary Chapman’s The 5 Love Languages (1992). Many people have sought solace in this ideology as they weathered impasses in their relationship. Partners who feel distanced from their significant other can receive a glimmer of hope as they read about simple prescriptions for connection that they can suggest to their partner. It’s important to honor that this framework has provided millions of people with concise language that began important conversations about deep emotional needs.
Who invented the 5 love languages?
With that said, shedding light on the origin of this model reveals holes in its perceived universal efficacy. Chapman is known as a Baptist minister who counsels couples, which is not the same as a licensed therapist who has been educated, trained, and tested on materials pertaining to counseling couples. Dr. Gary Chapman does not claim to be a licensed therapist, but using the title of “doctor” and describing himself as a “marriage counselor” can be considered misleading– in the state of California, at least (CAMFT Code of Ethics, chapter 13 section 4).
With a bit of research, I discovered that Chapman earned his BA and MA degrees in anthropology, a Masters of Religious Education (MRE), and a PhD in adult education. Therefore, we can conclude that Dr. Chapman cannot make credible, secular claims about the science of receiving love and meeting unfulfilled needs. For the record, neither can I– I’m not a researcher! But I’m a knowledgeable consumer of research and can cite reliable sources and sniff out unreliable ones.
Chapman openly shares that the love languages framework is based on his Baptist counseling work, which I interpret as anecdotal, nonsecular, and therefore nonscientific. That doesn’t necessarily render his body of work as useless, but I encourage consumers of his work to think critically about whether or not to apply his teachings directly to their relationships– especially if your values are not aligned with Baptist teachings. In other words, it can be helpful to let the love languages theory spark your interest while also considering the limitations that I’ll outline next.
The Limitations of the 5 Love Languages
Human relationships are extremely complex. If we oversimplify our needs and try to squeeze ourselves into one of the five neat and tidy boxes outlined in this theory, we’re going to run into issues.
One of the more dangerous traps well-meaning couples fall into is the common emphasis placed on physical touch. For example, a partner might earnestly say, “My love language is physical touch, so I need us to have more sex.” While physical touch is an important form of intimacy, citing the framework as a reason why one person can pressure their partner into sex crosses a line. Even if that is not the partner’s intention, this is a common consequence.
Healthy intimacy requires consent, respect, and mutual desire. Using any relationship tool, such as a love language, as leverage is a dangerous road to navigate. Instead, a couple experiencing a desire discrepancy can explore the deeper meaning on both sides. For example, let’s say partner A has a high desire for sex and partner B has a low desire for sex. With specialized training, a therapist can help each partner patiently explore their needs below the surface. It’s possible that when partner A’s sexual needs are unmet, they grow resentful. And when partner B’s sexual needs are disregarded, they experience traumatic flashbacks. Without identifying this dynamic, the couple can get stuck in a distracting pattern of blame. Partner B might perceive their partner’s bids as aggressive, and partner A sees their partner as disengaged from the relationship. Through ongoing work with a skilled therapist, the couple may come to learn that partner A’s bids for intimacy are unknowingly sending partner B into fight or flight, but with an adjustment, the couple can learn to help partner B experience sexual desire with more safety. That can be SO healing and can bring the couple closer than ever. I’ve seen it happen!!
Another issue with the love languages model is embedded in my example above: the distraction from deeper issues. If a couple leans on the explanation of “we just don’t have the same love language,” they may avoid working through real relational challenges (e.g., conflict patterns, emotional distance, or unmet needs). While naming love languages can create starting points for discussion, lasting relationships usually require communication skills, empathy, flexibility, and conflict resolution skills– which is not the same as a one-size-fits-all homework assignment (i.e., “do acts of service for your partner who feels underappreciated.”)
RelationShip Tools beyond the Love Languages
So, after using a critical lens to examine parts of this theory, now what do we do? One option is to treat this as one tool in your relationship toolbox. Maybe it belongs on a menu of many options for times when you’re feeling disconnected from your partner. You can treat the love languages test as a lighthearted personality test that suggests a starting point– do you particularly enjoy giving/receiving words of affirmation, acts of service, gifts, or physical touch? Or maybe you enjoy the break from life’s stressors when you’re spending quality time with your partner. What does that even look like? This 33-year-old theory predates cell phones and social media, so you’ll have to explore what “undivided attention” realistically means to you in your relationship. For example, even without the luxury of a babysitter, you can share micro moments of quality time with your partner to supplement deeper, ongoing efforts to stay connected as you embrace the ever-changing seasons of life with the person you’re sharing life with. By embracing a variety of options to connect, you and your partner can discover more ways to connect, not fewer.
Lastly, I want to kindly address the fact that there is no shame in feeling drawn to a simplified remedy to something as complex as relationship issues. Growth is often accompanied by discomfort, and learning that a widely accepted framework does not have scientific support can make you feel uncomfortable– especially if you’ve benefited from the framework. Recognizing that relationships are richer than any single theory can open the door to more flexible, creative, and respectful rituals of connection.
With all that said, I invite you to use what resonates from the love languages, let go of what feels limiting, and try to have some fun as you explore new rituals of connection with your partner.
Read more about couples therapy here.
Read more about therapy with Brianna here.