Astrology
These zodiac signs are most likely to fall for someone emotionally unavailable.

Crushing On Someone Who’s Emotionally Unavailable? You May Be This Zodiac Sign

Fire signs, I’m looking at you.

Updated: 
Originally Published: 
recep-bg/E+/Getty Images

Have you ever had a crush on someone and then realized they were totally emotionally unavailable? When someone is struggling with emotional unavailability, it can be difficult for them to connect and open up to others. As a relationship coach in New York City, I’ve worked with many singles struggling with avoidant dating patterns — and for them, being vulnerable with a prospective love interest isn’t as simple as it sounds. To let their walls down is to contend with a lot of things: their upbringing, their belief systems around love, and ultimately, their relationship with themselves. As a result, they may tell you that they’re super into you, but still come across as inconsistent, evasive, aloof, and flaky.

You may not personally have this problem, but if you find yourself crushing on a rotating door of emotionally unavailable people and you’re confused about their actions, you’re probably thinking, What gives? If you’re wondering why you keep crushing on the same types of people who tend to be “hot and cold,” your zodiac sign might just help you cosmically analyze your relationship patterns.

The truth is, some zodiac signs may be more likely to fall for someone who has trouble opening up. For example, if you’re a pioneering Aries, you might rush into an exciting connection only to have the illusion fall away once you realize they’re not able to be emotionally present with you. Or maybe you’re a freedom-loving Sagittarius with a crush on a fellow free spirit, but what happens if they can’t be bothered with emotions?

Whatever the case may be, here are the three zodiac signs that are most likely to crush on someone emotionally unavailable — and why they may be interested in this type of connection in the first place.

Capricorn (Dec. 22-Jan. 19)

Dennis Aglaster / EyeEm/EyeEm/Getty Images

As a Capricorn, you’re reliable, dependable, and steady in relationships — when you deem them worthy enough to commit to, that is. You’re keenly aware of the amount of work it takes to make a relationship thrive. Your all-or-nothing mentality means that if you’re not on the same page with your partner, you would rather not enter the relationship at all.

Capricorns are usually great at sniffing out BS. However, if you’re really into someone, you may have blinders up about their emotional capacity and as a result, you might be missing out on some important signals they’re emotionally unavailable. If you notice your crush is withholding their feelings, it may feel like an unbalanced, emotional roller coaster. However, given your determined Capricorn nature and steadfast loyalty and faithfulness, you may be open to working on things with your crush.

Aries (March 21-April 20)

It’s poetic that Aries is the first sign of the zodiac system because you love being first and bulldozing ahead with your boldness. Being one of the cardinal signs — the signs that start every season of the year — makes you want to lead, take charge, and courageously step into the life you want. You prosper on change and enjoy making your dreams come true. Romantically, you appreciate people who have a similar disposition, yet balance you out. That said, be careful that your need for excitement doesn’t veer off into choosing a partner who feels more reckless than safe. Like attracts like, and you might find yourself crushing on someone who says they want a relationship but may not have the emotional skills to follow through.

It can be tough when a person can’t provide you with the patience and reassurance you need to move from a crush to a real relationship. As a busy Aries, you have so much going on in your life that someone else’s emotional unavailability may not bother you too much. However, if you want to take things to the next level, just be intentional about asking for what you really want with your love life. If your partner can’t provide you with the emotional presence you crave, you may be bummed that it can’t work out — or, you’ll be quick to leave what no longer serves you.

Sagittarius (Nov. 22-Dec. 21)

Luka Milanovic / EyeEm/EyeEm/Getty Images

Optimistic, infectiously energetic, and effortlessly independent... there’s much to love about Sagittarius and your free spirit. You imbue all of your romantic connections with the very qualities you value the most in yourself: fun, adventure, and positivity. When it comes to crushing on someone, you don’t really have a “type.” You tend to follow what makes you feel good, which means that you attract different people who feed off of your sparkly energy. Your free-spirited nature can lead you down a path of abundance, but if you don’t moderate your flirtatious nature, you can surround yourself with too many options — and some of these crushes might not be able to offer you what you’re after.

Sagittarius, if you’re crushing on someone emotionally unavailable, there is still hope. Instead of flying off at the first sign of trouble, go deeper and ask your crush how they feel about the relationship to move things further. You won’t be compatible with everyone — so if it doesn’t work out this time, that’s okay. The good part is that you’re honest and truthful to a fault. You won’t stay in a connection if you’re not feeling it anymore. You may be quick to move on, but always with as much love and respect as you can muster.

No matter what your zodiac sign is, relationships are hard work. Having a crush on someone is tricky enough as it is, and it can be difficult to put in the effort to make a relationship last — especially when one or more parties are emotionally unavailable. No matter your sign, don’t be afraid to reflect on your strengths and weaknesses and dig into why you’re into your crush — even if they have some trouble opening up. Don’t forget: You’re in charge of your own cosmic connections, and things can always work out in ways you don’t expect.

This article was originally published on