Here’s what resonated most when I was studying this theory in college: many people (more than you’d think) fail to psychologically develop past stage five. The crisis you have to overcome when you’re 12 to 18 years old is called identity vs. confusion—figuring out who you are (or at least trying to). And this brings me to my extension of Freud and Erikson’s ideas: Stage five is what separates those who are stuck in high school from those who thrive in adulthood. (I’m talking 24-year-old mean girls who still exclude their friends from plans). It harkens back to the toxicity of “the 19 dating theory,” which I believe stems from one person being stuck in adolescence (again, stage five) while the other person is in stage six: early adulthood.

When you’re 19 years old, the crisis shifts to intimacy vs. isolation—it’s no longer about figuring out who you are, but rather who you are with someone else. If stage five was all about self-discovery, stage six raises the stakes: can you take your sense of identity and use it to form a healthy relationship? The answer might be no when one person is still stuck in stage five—they’re quite literally a walking identity crisis. As a result, a venomous cycle takes root when two people are in a ‘stage overlap.’ One person is ready to share, grow and connect, while the other is still searching for their footing (dragging both down in the process).

Let’s put this into context with Brielle and Joe. Brielle has just entered stage six—19 years old—where she’s trying to establish intimacy in her relationship. Yet, while she’s searching for a meaningful connection, Joe’s sense of self is fragile (he’s still stuck in stage five, despite being the same age as Brielle.) In Joe’s mind, controlling Brielle—what she wears, who she sees—is a way to affirm his own shaky identity. It gives him a sense of agency and control. Meanwhile, Brielle misinterprets his control as love. It’s what causes her insecurities to outweigh what she needs, making it difficult for her to stand up for herself. Her actions—changing out of the bodysuit, folding it like a secret she has to bury, sending him a photo of the “approved” shirt—are her way of prioritizing his approval over her own sense of self. What’s more, she believes that by appeasing him, she can avoid conflict and maintain intimacy. But in practice, her reality becomes isolation masquerading as a connection. (Hence why the crisis in stage six is intimacy vs. isolation.)

This is the bottom line. The 19 dating theory pulls from a dynamic built on mismatched needs. Brielle is reaching for connection while Joe is protecting himself from vulnerability. This push-pull creates a toxic cycle: Joe’s controlling behavior isolates Brielle, and Brielle’s attempts to maintain peace only enable him further. It’s like watching a car crash in slow motion—the more she gives, the more he takes, and neither of them learns how to break free. Their dynamic is rooted in (again) mismatched stages of psychosocial development, which is exactly what Freud and Erikson were getting at. Growth requires self-acceptance. And intimacy can’t thrive when one person is still stuck searching for their identity.