Dating advice and trends has never been louder or more complicated. From viral rules to endless relationship podcasts, people are constantly being told how to avoid heartbreak or recover from one. One
such idea gaining traction online is called ‘Shrekking’, a term used to describe intentionally choosing partners who feel less likely to reject or leave you. It is the belief that dating someone perceived to be ‘safer’ might protect you from emotional pain.
Across social media, often wrapped in humour, memes, and brutally honest confessions from people tired of modern dating disappointments. Many describe it as a survival tactic in a dating world shaped by ghosting, breadcrumbing, and situationships that blur emotional boundaries. For some, it feels like a practical response to repeated rejection. For others, it raises uncomfortable questions about self-worth, compatibility, and whether love can ever be built on calculated emotional safety.
What Is Shrekking?
Shrekking is described as a conscious or subconscious attempt to date someone perceived as less conventionally desirable or accomplished in order to feel secure in a relationship. It challenges the traditional cultural messaging that encourages people to “date up” or find partners who elevate their social standing.
Dating apps have intensified comparison culture, where people constantly measure attractiveness, success, and lifestyle compatibility through curated digital profiles. This endless comparison has heightened anxiety about rejection and abandonment.
For many, shrekking feels like reclaiming control. If a partner appears less likely to leave, the relationship can feel stable and predictable. But psychologists note that relationships built primarily on power imbalance or fear rarely foster genuine emotional intimacy.
Does Dating Down Offer Emotional Safety?
Shrekking is often driven by fear rather than preference. Fear of abandonment, fear of emotional vulnerability, and fear of repeating painful relationship patterns can all push individuals towards partners they believe will not challenge or threaten their sense of security.
Psychological research consistently shows that people tend to repeat attachment patterns developed during early life experiences. Individuals with anxious attachment styles may seek constant reassurance and may believe choosing a partner who appears dependent or less confident will guarantee loyalty.
Others engage in shrekking after experiencing betrayal or rejection. It becomes a coping strategy. The relationship feels safer because it appears to reduce competition or emotional risk.
However, therapists caution that emotional safety cannot be engineered through partner selection alone. When relationships are built on perceived inequality, they often create hidden resentment, reduced attraction, or emotional disengagement over time.
Can Dating Perceived ‘Safety’ Damage Relationships?
The illusion of safety is one of the most complex risks associated with shrekking. Choosing someone perceived as less likely to leave does not eliminate conflict, incompatibility, or emotional distance.
In fact, relationships built on imbalance can create subtle psychological strain. The partner perceived as “lower league” may experience insecurity or pressure to prove their worth. Meanwhile, the person engaging in shrekking may struggle with attraction, respect, or emotional engagement over time.
Psychologists also highlight that attempting to control emotional outcomes often increases anxiety rather than reducing it. Fear-driven relationship choices rarely address underlying attachment insecurities.
Is Your Attachment Style Secretly Influencing Who You Date?
Attachment theory offers valuable insight into shrekking. Securely attached individuals typically choose partners based on emotional compatibility, shared values, and communication style rather than perceived hierarchy.
In contrast, anxious or avoidant attachment patterns often lead people to make relationship decisions rooted in emotional defence mechanisms. Anxiously attached individuals may seek reassurance through control, while avoidant individuals may pursue partners who allow emotional distance.
Shrekking can operate as a hybrid defence. It provides proximity without vulnerability. The relationship exists, but emotional risk remains carefully managed.
Research suggests that long-term relationship satisfaction is strongly linked to emotional security, trust, and open communication rather than social or perceived desirability rankings.
Can Shrekking Ever Lead To A Healthy Relationship?
Relationship experts caution against viewing shrekking as entirely negative. Attraction is complex and cannot be reduced to social hierarchy alone. Many successful relationships exist between individuals with different career levels, personality types, or social confidence.
The issue arises when partner selection is driven primarily by fear or control rather than genuine emotional compatibility. When individuals choose partners based on perceived safety rather than shared values, long-term satisfaction often becomes fragile.
Healthy relationships require vulnerability, emotional risk, and mutual growth. They thrive when both individuals feel valued, respected, and challenged in supportive ways.
What Does Emotionally Healthy Partnership Look Like?
Experts suggest shifting the focus away from perceived leagues and towards emotional intelligence, communication style, and shared relationship goals. Choosing partners based on value alignment, emotional maturity, and mutual respect creates stronger foundations for long-term intimacy.
Emotional safety is built through consistent behaviour, trust, and communication, not through perceived power balance. Vulnerability, while uncomfortable, allows relationships to develop authenticity and resilience.
Shrekking may promise protection from heartbreak, but experts suggest it often postpones deeper emotional work. Real emotional security comes from self-awareness, boundary setting, and choosing partners capable of mutual emotional investment.
