The Secret Factors That Affect Secret-Keeping

By now in this series, you’ve seen that secrets aren’t just about “good vs. bad people.”

• In Part 1, we explored what secrets are and the most common types people keep.

• In Part 2, we walked through what secrets do to you—physically, emotionally, and relationally.

• In Part 3, we unpacked the difference between privacy and secrecy.

Now we’re going one layer deeper: Why do you and your partner handle secrets so differently in the first place? Why is one of you like, “We don’t need to talk about everything” …while the other is like, “If you don’t tell me everything, I can’t relax”?

It’s not random.

Research across communication science, family systems, attachment, and identity psychology suggests our “default” approach to disclosure is shaped by early rulebooks, nervous-system strategies, and social norms about what’s safe to reveal (Petronio, 2002; Bowlby, 1969/1982; Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002; Meyer, 2003).

In this part, we’ll look at four powerful “secret factors”:

• How culture and family shape your rules around disclosure

• How your attachment style affects what you share and what you hide

• How gender socialization influences the secrets you keep

• How straight vs. LGBTQ+ experiences add extra layers to all of this

And you’ll get a simple mapping exercise to uncover your own “settings”—and your partner’s.

1. Culture & Family: Your First Secret Rulebook

When we talk about “culture,” we’re not just talking about nationality or ethnicity (though those matter). We’re also talking about:

• Your family’s way of handling conflict, privacy, and shame

• Your religious/spiritual community

• The norms of your neighborhood, region, and social class

All of that creates an early, implicit rulebook:

• “This is what we talk about.”

• “This is what we never say out loud.”

Communication researchers call this boundary management—how families and couples decide what information stays private, what gets shared, and who “owns” what knowledge (Petronio, 2002). These rules aren’t always spoken. Most of the time, they’re absorbed.

Two common cultural patterns

1) “Keep the peace” cultures (often more collectivist, harmony-focused, or reputation-focused)

Messages might sound like:

• “We don’t air our dirty laundry.”

• “What happens in this family stays in this family.”

• “Don’t embarrass us.”

In these environments, people may learn to:

• Minimize or hide conflict to preserve social harmony

• Conceal addiction, infidelity, money problems, or abuse to protect family status

• Equate loyalty with silence and emotional restraint

This aligns with cross-cultural research showing that collectivist or high-context cultures often prioritize relational harmony and face-saving, which can change what people disclose and how directly they communicate distress (Triandis, 1995; Ting-Toomey, 1988).

2) “Speak your truth” cultures (often more individualistic, expression-focused)

Messages might sound like:

• “Be honest, even if it hurts.”

• “Say how you feel.”

• “Secrets are toxic.”

In these environments, people may:

• Disclose more openly as a sign of authenticity

• Expect detailed emotional processing

• Interpret withholding as suspicious or emotionally unsafe

This aligns with research on individualistic contexts that place greater value on self-expression and direct disclosure as markers of intimacy and trust (Markus & Kitayama, 1991).

Most of us grew up with some combination of these patterns, plus our family’s particular “rules.”

How this plays out in your relationship

Imagine this pairing:

• Partner A grew up in a home where money, mental health, and sex were not discussed. You “handled it quietly.”

• Partner B grew up in a home where emotions and disagreements were discussed openly.

Fast-forward:

• When Partner A doesn’t disclose a financial issue, they may feel they’re being responsible: “I’ll fix it first.”

• Partner B may experience that same choice as betrayal: “Why didn’t you trust me?”

Same behavior. Totally different meanings. Family communication patterns research shows that families tend to cluster around orientations like conversation (open talk) and conformity (harmony/obedience), which predict how comfortable people feel disclosing sensitive topics later in adult relationships (Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002).

Reflection

• Growing up, what were the three biggest topics your family avoided?

• What did “being loyal” mean—telling the truth, or keeping quiet?

• How does that show up in your relationship today?

2. Attachment Style: How Your Nervous System Responds to Secrets

Attachment style is, in many ways, your nervous system’s default strategy for closeness, safety, and dependence—shaped by early caregiving and reinforced in adult relationships (Bowlby, 1969/1982; Ainsworth et al., 1978).

Very briefly:

• Secure: “I’m basically worthy of love, and others are generally dependable.”

• Anxious: “People might leave; I need reassurance and closeness.”

• Avoidant: “People might overwhelm/control me; I need distance and self-reliance.”

• Disorganized: “I want closeness but fear it; relationships feel unpredictable.”

Attachment doesn’t just shape how you love—it shapes how you manage uncertainty. And secrecy is basically uncertainty with sharp edges.

Anxious attachment & secrets

Someone with a more anxious style may:

• Overshare quickly to feel close and “lock in” the bond

• Feel panicked when their partner is vague

• Interpret privacy as rejection

• Keep their own secrets mainly when they fear abandonment or conflict

Inside, it can feel like:

• “If I don’t know everything, I can’t trust.”

• “If you don’t know everything about me, you’ll leave.”

This fits attachment research showing that anxious attachment is linked to heightened threat sensitivity and greater reassurance-seeking behaviors (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007; Cassidy & Shaver, 2016).

Avoidant attachment & secrets

Someone with a more avoidant style may:

• Under-share or delay sharing to stay in control

• Keep more of their inner life private

• Experience detailed questions as an intrusion

• Use emotional distance as self-protection

Inside, it can feel like:

• “If I tell you everything, you’ll use it against me or need too much from me.”

• “I’m safer if I keep a distance.”

Avoidant attachment is consistently associated with discomfort with dependence and a preference for emotional self-reliance (Fraley & Shaver, 2000; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).

Secure attachment & disclosure

Secure partners typically:

• Disclose more gradually and appropriately as trust develops

• Share key information in a timely way

• Respect privacy without interpreting it as abandonment

• Assume hard conversations are survivable

Secure attachment correlates with healthier communication patterns, better conflict repair, and higher relationship satisfaction (Simpson, 1990; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).

Reflection

• When you’re afraid of losing someone, do you tend to cling and confess, or pull away and go quiet?

• When your partner asks for honesty, does it feel relieving or threatening?

3. Gender Socialization: What You Were Taught to Hide

Let’s talk about “men and women,” with a big caveat: gender is complex, nonbinary realities matter, and norms vary across cultures. What we’re pointing to here is gender socialization—the messages people internalize about emotion, strength, desirability, sexuality, and worth based on how they’re perceived and raised (Eagly, 1987; Brody & Hall, 2008).

Common messages for people raised as boys/men

• “Don’t cry.”

• “Be strong. Handle it yourself.”

• “Don’t be weak or needy.”

• “Sex is conquest; feelings are optional.”

These norms can lead to restrictive emotionality—not because men have fewer emotions, but because they’re taught to conceal them (Levant, 1996; Addis & Mahalik, 2003). Common secrecy outcomes:

• Hiding fear, sadness, vulnerability

• Concealing mental health struggles

• Keeping money/performance failures secret

• Using humor, anger, or silence instead of disclosure

The secret underneath often sounds like: “If you see my weakness, you’ll lose respect for me.”

Common messages for people raised as girls/women

• “Be nice.”

• “Don’t be too much.”

• “Don’t upset people.”

• “Good girls don’t want too much sex / power / anger.”

These norms can lead to:

• Hiding anger, resentment, sexual desire, or dissatisfaction

• Concealing needs to avoid being labeled “needy” or “dramatic”

• Staying silent about betrayal or harm to preserve stability

• Saying “it’s fine” while quietly accumulating pain

Research on gender norms and relationship dynamics shows that women are often socialized toward relational harmony and emotional labor—sometimes at the expense of direct self-advocacy (Jack & Dill, 1992; Brody & Hall, 2008). The secret underneath can sound like:

“If I bring my full self—my no, my desire, my anger—you’ll call me selfish or unlovable.”

These are patterns, not destinies. But they explain why secrecy often clusters around different topics (sex, money, vulnerability, power) for different people depending on socialization.

Reflection

• What did you learn about crying, anger, sex, and asking for help?

• Which emotions did you learn to hide?

• How are those rules still shaping what you disclose today?

4. Straight vs. LGBTQ+ Relationships: When Secrecy Has Been Survival

For many LGBTQ+ people, secrecy isn’t just relational—it’s historically been a safety strategy. That might mean:

• Hiding orientation or identity (“staying in the closet”)

• Concealing relationships from unsupportive family or workplaces

• Managing two selves: one for safe spaces, one for everyone else

Even after someone is out, that history doesn’t evaporate. Identity concealment can imprint on the nervous system as vigilance, caution, and sensitivity to rejection cues (Meyer, 2003; Pachankis, 2007).

Patterns that can show up

• Hypervigilance about being outed (public affection, social media, family events)

• Pain when a partner asks for concealment (“Don’t tell my parents yet”) because it may echo shame or invisibility

• Difficulty trusting that love is safe and enduring, especially after rejection or discrimination

Minority stress theory explains that stigma, discrimination, and the need to monitor safety create chronic stress loads that can affect mental health and relationship functioning (Meyer, 2003). At the same time, LGBTQ+ relationships often have strengths that can reduce secrecy harms:

• More intentional conversations about boundaries and “outness”

• Stronger reliance on chosen family and community support

• Explicit negotiation of what is private vs. unsafe to disclose publicly (Weston, 1991)

Reflection

• Have you ever had to hide a relationship or identity to stay safe or accepted?

• How did that shape what “honesty,” “visibility,” and “privacy” mean to you?

5. Why You Keep Having the Same Fight About “Telling the Truth”

Here’s a common dynamic. One partner experiences disclosure as closeness and security. The other experiences disclosure as risk, shame, or loss of control. Let’s put it together with a quick hypothetical:

• Jordan grew up in a family where money was secret, conflict was private, and therapy was shameful. They lean avoidant and were socialized as male.

• Riley grew up in a family that processed everything out loud. They lean anxious and were socialized as female.

Jordan gets laid off and quietly burns through savings. They don’t mention it because:

• “I’ll fix it before it becomes a problem.”

• “No need to worry Riley until I have a solution.”

• “Talking about this will make it worse.”

Riley finds out months later by accident. To her, this feels like:

• Betrayal

• Emotional abandonment

• A replay of childhood secrecy

They’re not just fighting about money. They’re fighting about:

• Family rulebooks (Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002)

• Attachment alarm systems (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007)

• Gendered shame scripts (Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Levant, 1996)

• Boundary ownership (“who has the right to know what?”) (Petronio, 2002)

Understanding these layers doesn’t excuse harmful secrecy. But it does shift the question from: “What’s wrong with you?” to: “What happened to you and what would safety look like for us now?”

6. A Mini-Mapping Exercise: Your “Secret Settings”

Do this alone or with your partner (writing is best).

A) Culture & Family

• In my family, secrets were mostly used to:

  • Protect people

  • Protect our image

  • Avoid conflict

  • Control people

  • Something else: _______

• Three things we almost never talked about:

B) Attachment

• When I’m scared of losing someone, I usually:

  • Share more

  • Shut down

  • Swing between both

• When my partner is private or quiet, I tend to:

  • Assume the best

  • Assume the worst

  • Go numb and detach

C) Gender Messages

• Growing up, I was taught:

  • “Strong people don’t show _______.”

  • “Good people don’t talk about _______.”

• The emotions I’m most likely to hide now are:

  • _______ (anger, fear, desire, shame, etc.)

D) Identity & Safety

• Have I ever had to hide a relationship or part of my identity to stay safe, accepted, or housed?

  • Yes / No

• If yes, how might that experience still live in my body when I think about “telling the truth”?

The point is not to psychoanalyze each other. It’s to build compassion:

• “You’re not secretive to hurt me—you learned secrecy to stay safe.”

• “You’re not prying to control me—you learned that silence can be dangerous.”

That understanding is the soil where new agreements can grow.

You’re Not Broken. You’re Patterned (And Patterns Can Change)

The way you handle secrets isn’t a random personality quirk. It’s tied to:

• Culture and family norms about disclosure (Triandis, 1995; Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002)

• Attachment strategies for closeness and threat (Bowlby, 1969/1982; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007)

• Gender scripts about emotion and worth (Levant, 1996; Addis & Mahalik, 2003)

• Safety histories tied to identity and visibility (Meyer, 2003; Pachankis, 2007)

That doesn’t mean you’re doomed. It means you have a map. And once you have a map, you have more choices. If you’re realizing, “Oh wow, this is all over my relationship,” you don’t have to untangle it alone.

• Start the Clarity360 to see your relationship as it really is across research-based metrics that matter for your long-term health and relationship quality.

• Join The Clarity Circle for guided support to unlearn old rules, build new boundaries, and practice honest communication in real time.

You deserve a relationship that makes sense in light of your story, not one that keeps replaying old pain on repeat.

Up next: When Secrets Become a Problem—Red Flags, Self-Reflection, and “We Need to Talk.”

---

REFERENCES

Secrecy / disclosure / privacy boundaries

• Petronio, S. (2002). Boundaries of Privacy: Dialectics of Disclosure.

• Afifi, T. D., & Guerrero, L. K. (2000). Topic avoidance in close relationships.

• Slepian, M. L., Chun, J. S., & Mason, M. F. (2017). The experience of secrecy. JPSP.

Culture & self / communication

• Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism & Collectivism.

• Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self. Psychological Review.

• Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Intercultural conflict styles (face negotiation).

Family communication patterns

• Koerner, A. F., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (2002). Family communication patterns theory.

Attachment

• Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and Loss, Vol. 1.

• Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of Attachment.

• Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in Adulthood.

• Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment.

Gender socialization & emotional restriction

• Levant, R. F. (1996). Male normative alexithymia.

• Addis, M. E., & Mahalik, J. R. (2003). Men, masculinity, and help seeking.

• Brody, L. R., & Hall, J. A. (2008). Gender and emotion in context.

• Jack, D. C., & Dill, D. (1992). Silencing the self.

LGBTQ+ minority stress & concealment

• Meyer, I. H. (2003). Minority stress and mental health in LGB populations. Psychological Bulletin.

• Pachankis, J. E. (2007). The psychological implications of concealing stigma.

• Weston, K. (1991). Families We Choose.