Nice Guys, Right Guys

[Angela]

Jamie, no one said you were a misogynist. But now that you mention it!

You insist that you don't "hate" women, but you do declare that you mistrust and despise most women. What do you think being a misogynist means?

I read (in "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell) about a study in which therapists were able to watch videos of people and determine within some incredible degree of accuracy which couples would divorce, based solely on body language that expressed contempt. Contempt, they said, is the single most reliable predictor of failure in a relationship. I've had a few relationships, and I've witness a bunch of them, and I have to agree that contempt is a killer of love -- love just won't thrive where there is contempt.

Although you insist that you're at peace, etc., the contempt you hold for women rings loud and clear in your posts here. You may find it valuable to look boldly at how it is that very contempt that is having you not be happy in relationships with women -- it's not them, it's you! (Well, I say that alot to everybody. It's always you, not them. )

I don't mean to tell you there is anything wrong with you, and you certainly don't have to absorb anything I or anyone else here tells you. I just want to ask you with great love and well-wishing: don't you think it's worth considering, if the payoff is that you get love, connection, great sex, affection, partnership? Isn't it a risk worth taking, to consider taking a new tack?

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Jamie

If someone is lacking in some social skill, and they're not intentionally setting out to harm other people; no way do they desrve to be abused.

What anybody deserves has nothing to with it. It's what happens! You know it, I know it. Being a victim about it and saying that those people are nasty is not going to help anything. Better to understand why it happened (that would be because anybody who doesn't engagae in banter is bringing the vibe down and people will resent that) and then figure out what's the best way forward.

[Jamie]

Angela; it's like someone stamping on a grape, over and over, with a big size 11 boots, till all that remains, is skin of grape; and then the someone doing the stamping is moaning because the grape has an issue with being stamped on!

Oh, the irony ...

Plato, you're basically saying that if someone doesn't have the same social skills as you, that makes it ok for you to be abusive to them? Is that what you're saying? Because that's what I was pointing out in my previous post.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Plato, you're basically saying that if someone doesn't have the same social skills as you, that makes it ok for you to be abusive to them? Is that what you're saying? Because that's what I was pointing out in my previous post.

Dude, I think I finally understand where you're coming from! Correct me if I am wrong here at any stage:

P1. You think it is morally wrong to be abusive to others
P2(a). It was generally "popular" (for want of a better word) people who have been abusive to you in the past.
(b). Most attractive women are "popular."
P3. We can assume that anybody who is similar to the people who were abusive to you in school would also be abusive to you, put into the same situations.
P4. All "popular" people tend to be abusive towards those less "popular"
P5. Popular people are inherently morally bad people.
P6. You are not abusive to other people.
P7. You are a morally good person.
P8. Morally good people are better than morally bad people

C. You are better than "popular" people (which includes attractive women).

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Angela; it's like someone stamping on a grape, over and over, with a big size 11 boots, till all that remains, is skin of grape; and then the someone doing the stamping is moaning because the grape has an issue with being stamped on!

Oh, the irony ...

I'd say it's more like the person who got stomped on is moaning that he despises everyone who wears size 11 boots!

Anyway, you're a man, not a grape. Whatever happened to you with these women, they did not stomp you; you had interactions with them that didn't go the way you wanted them to go, but you were not diminished.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Angela

I'd say it's more like the person who got stomped on is moaning that he despises everyone who wears size 11 boots!

No. Not at all. I only object to my allowing myself to be stomped on. You're right though, it's no good being a grape, better to be a size 12 boot.

Thanks for that lesson.

Originally Posted by Angela

Anyway, you're a man, not a grape. Whatever happened to you with these women, they did not stomp you; you had interactions with them that didn't go the way you wanted them to go, but you were not diminished.

Hmmm. Angela, I'd really like not to discuss this any further with you, you may have the best of intentions and want to help, but you're not helping, at all, in fact, I'm getting really wound up by all this, and it's doing more harm than good.

I feel like I'm totally mis-understood and mis-represented, and I can't see any value in continuing with this.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Plato

Dude, I think I finally understand where you're coming from! Correct me if I am wrong here at any stage:

Yeah, I was simply saying that I dis-agree with what you're saying; that it's OK to be abusive to people who are less fortunate that you (in terms of social skills). I don't agree with that at all. That said, I accept that people will do all kinds of things that I don't think are right (murder, rape, being abusive etc); yeah, it makes no difference if I agree with them or not, or the morality of it, the only issues, are can they do it? and can am I going to let them?

That make sense?

I mean, some people are happy to go out and kill people; if someone wants to kill me, I'm not going to stand their and debate the morality of it with them!

Originally Posted by Plato

P1. You think it is morally wrong to be abusive to others
P2(a). It was generally "popular" (for want of a better word) people who have been abusive to you in the past.
(b). Most attractive women are "popular."
P3. We can assume that anybody who is similar to the people who were abusive to you in school would also be abusive to you, put into the same situations.
P4. All "popular" people tend to be abusive towards those less "popular"
P5. Popular people are inherently morally bad people.
P6. You are not abusive to other people.
P7. You are a morally good person.
P8. Morally good people are better than morally bad people

C. You are better than "popular" people (which includes attractive women).

Crickey, that's long list dude! Why does life have to be some frickin' complicated? Why so much analasis? It all seems inappropriate to me.

F**k it. I'm not better than anyone. I'm just me.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Hmmm. Angela, I'd really like not to discuss this any further with you, you may have the best of intentions and want to help, but you're not helping, at all, in fact, I'm getting really wound up by all this, and it's doing more harm than good.

I feel like I'm totally mis-understood and mis-represented, and I can't see any value in continuing with this.

Okay, I've gotten to the end of my interest anyway. But look what happens when you post about distrusting and despising other people on the forum! You get a response! That's going to happen whether you get value in the response or not.

Good luck. You know I wish you lots of joy.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Angela

Okay, I've gotten to the end of my interest anyway. But look what happens when you post about distrusting and despising other people on the forum! You get a response! That's going to happen whether you get value in the response or not.

Good luck. You know I wish you lots of joy.

But the part about distrusting and despising other people (not other people on this forum), was such a small part of what I was saying, and you just seemed to zoom in on that, and magnify that, and ignore everything else I was saying.

Lessons learned though; only reveal positive aspects of yourself on a public forum; hmmm ...

I wish you love and joy too Angela. Sleep well. x

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Yeah, I was simply saying that I dis-agree with what you're saying; that it's OK to be abusive to people who are less fortunate that you (in terms of social skills).

That's not what I'm saying! I don't think it is right at all. I'm saying I don't think it's a question of what's right.

And yeah, I get turned on by logic. It's a blessing and a curse.

Anyway, all the best to you Jamie. I really mean that.

[Jamie]

Thanks guys; I always think it's our intentions, the love and the energy behind our words; that always says much more than words ever can.

Peace.

[missing]

Originally Posted by Plato

Well, I would argue that there is plenty of opportunity out there to meet great women. I mean, seriously, women are everywhere. I think what you are talking about is actually a situation where it's a gentle progression that makes it easy for you to open up to somebody? Whilst other people are making fun of each other, you want to be taking things really gently and easily- having polite, honest conversation? I totally get that by the way.

you somewhat get what I mean. Ultimately I don't think relationships should be as difficult or confusing as they are. They are supposed to be about two people supporting one another unconditionally in life's endeavors that truly are (and should be) difficult. As far as I'm concerned, this forum (s+r) should not exist and the fact that it does is just another sign of the sickness of our times. All the creative energy that people put into relationships could be going to more important matters, making the world a better place. I'm aware this is something of a "head in the clouds" ideal that obviously doesn't line up with the world we live in, and it's better to accept reality for what it is. That doesn't mean you cannot prefer it different. I accept this reality, but I don't lie to myself that I like it. I don't.

For the "12-15/training wheels" analogy, I don't know if I agree entirely, but assuming you are right, perhaps by age 15 is when we should be "partnered up" for life, given to the more natural order of things. By extending this process we extend our childhoods (as our wealthy society is fond of doing) and "devolve" into these bizzare mating games that are so commonplace. We may look around and think "well yea, that's how it is" and it may seem perfectly natural to some people. Not myself. Which again isn't to say it's not real and shouldn't be accepted, but it is not "right" in my mind, and that is a hard thing to really quantify to somebody who doesn't themselves also feel it is not "right". It is a deeper, intuitive feeling. Of course this is just my interpretations, what I call "devolution" you seem to be calling "maturity" or "abundance". I'm not claiming one to be more right than the other, as I don't know. But I know what I think/feel. As always, it's subject to one day change. I have to say though, I seriously question your idea of "maturity" which to me sounds very perverse, the opposite of maturity.

And finally, to your thought that there is "plenty of opportunity to meet a great woman" I both agree and disagree. Well to be more direct I agree. There is plenty of opportunity. But it's not going to come to you, you need to go meet "it" and that takes work and dedication, and I'm not so sure it's worth it, or even realistic. Especially when you consider your 12-15/training wheel analogy again, to which I suppose I would be the kind of person who "missed out" those formative years and now must do the "extra work" to catch up. Incidentally this process is far worse a road block for men than women, as we are the expected initiators. We are expected to put ourselves on the line where women not so much. Not going to say this is right or wrong but from this perspective I think it's easy to see where a subtle kind of misogyny might develop amongst shy guys.

But to get back on topic, at age 25 my clock is starting to tick, and like Jamie I have resigned myself somewhat to the idea of not having a relationship, or rather not giving it much thought. Unlike he claims however, I can't seem to let go of the idea so easily and focus on other things, but I do have other ways I'd like to channel my "passion" if you will, primarily though art, which has become my life's purpose. Any relationship I end up with will be a side effect of doing this, and not actively seeking out a woman. To illustrate what I mean, I may one day try to go get rejected by multitudes of woman, but it would only be as an experiment in learning about reality, something I feel is part of the duty of being an artist. Of course I would only undertake such an experiment if I felt it could somehow serve my art. Otherwise, there is no point. Ultimately, the idea of finding a relationship with a woman has been filtered out of my concerns for this life, largely as a matter of practicality. If it happens it happens, if not it doesn't, I'm cool either way. I save my "caring energy" for my true purpose, and that is my art.

[Michael Chui]

Hm, well, I'm back from work now and while you've made it clear that you're not interested in continuing what you started, I do want to point something out that no one else has.

Originally Posted by Jamie

There really is very little bitterness in me, and it only comes up if I dwell on, or think about the situation.

This is bitterness.

Ignoring the fact that you're bitter doesn't make you less bitter; it makes you more bitter. You do not solve a problem by sweeping it under the rug; you solve it by facing it, getting hurt, and dealing with it.

You are no longer bitter when you dwell on, or think about, it and find that it's not very interesting because it's a past event in your life that no longer holds any power over you.

While I really don't care how you choose to live your life--it's your life--I think you do yourself a disservice not to acknowledge that you retain a secret pain.

I was briefly inclined to respond to each of your paragraphs in detail, but I think you'd rather I didn't, may it help you or not.

I'll simply end with this:
9—Enneagram Type Nine: The Peacemaker-Overview

While I am entirely unqualified to guess at your Enneagram Type (ignoring the trifling detail of whether or not the system is valid), I think that reading that webpage will give you insight into yourself and aid you in your growth.

[Soul Vibe]

Originally Posted by Vasilisa

I think everybody is too preoccupied with being liked by other sex. A person should be oneself in the relationship. With all bad and good traits.
Honest and open. That's about it.
If you feel a need for something - say about it. If you want a woman -express it in some way (subtle . If she doesn't like it , don't bother, there are plenty of others.
Give flowers, say compliments and pay in the restaurants but only if you want to do it for this particular woman, if you want to make her happy and get a smile on her face, not because you want get something out of her. If you don't feel it, don't do it. We feel when it's fake.
And the biggest turn on for women is brave, courageous men. We don't like chickens, so don't behave like one. Get rid of the submissive postures, too sweet smiles and feminine gestures. And if you have a chance to demonstrate your confidence and courage in front of the woman in the social situation - you are lucky, don't miss it!
I could say more. But I am afraid to say too much.
I constantly discuss stuff like that with my girlfriends, so I have a general view of what most of us like.

This is a contradiction. First you say "be yourself, honest and open, etc..", then you go on to say that to attract women, men should adopt certain qualities like confidence and courage. To get rid of submissive postures, and don't behave like a "chicken". Well, which one is it?!

Personally, I have been giving a lot of thought lately to the idea of being one's self. What does this really mean? Does anyone really KNOW who they are? I certainly don't, because I am constantly changing, trying to improve in areas where I perceive I am weak. So when someone tells me to "just be yourself", I get very frustrated, because I don't even know who that is yet! Not to mention, I hate the thought of stagnation. People who live by the mantra of "why should I have to change?" also frustrate me to no end. The only constant in this life is change. Embrace it. Be a part of it, and let it be a part of you. That being said, how does one maintain identity? Is identity just something created by the ego? Is it important at all?

[vapourmile]

Originally Posted by Aurora

Well from my pont of view, I don't go from friend to lover "like that".
If there ever was an interest on a level that could sooner or later result in being lovers - it's there all along.

Attraction is a damn hard thing to define and pinpoint. I know that I fall for individuals that make a non-verbal (and sometimes verbal) statement of confidence and feeling good about themselves.

If someone doesn't like themselves enough it makes a statement of something fishy going on.. I do accept insecurities about some things, but not being comfy being yourself is a definitive turnoff.

Yeah but speaking for the average frustrated chumps out there. In other words, speaking for myself, the postings here reflect what leaves the frustrated chumps feeling even more frustrated is that when we ask, we get advice like this! And other vague and paradoxical lines like "strong but vulnerable", that don't mean much except "We're looking for the kind of man we like and if you're not it then bad luck".

What losers like me want is a boot camp. I don't have the faintest idea about romance. I'm rubbish at communication. If I was the man you want I wouldn't be asking the questions I'd just be doing it but when a girl starts showing me she's interested I just start worrying about my first move. I'm useless.

The best conversation I have ever had on the subject is with a girlfriend and her flatmate, another girl of course, who were happy to run through a few specifics like holding a door open a letting her go first, which doesn't say a lot but it is meaningful and tangible and it makes sense because my brain is going "ah, I see, yes, be the leading male". Help! Saying things like "strong but vulnerable" doesn't mean anything to me. If I pulled a train along with my teeth but bruised my knee badly would that mean strong but vulnerable? See what I mean, we need detail like "take my coat when I come in and pull out my chair at the dinner table. A bottle of wine is better than flowers and a French Cabernet Sauvignon is better than an Australian Merlot but don't bring Champagne it means you're trying to impress".

You don't get it. Men never get deportment and finishing school. We don't get lessons on manners. Or at least, some of us don't and the ones who didn't, me for example, are messed up for life because outside of the family there is nowhere to learn, so if your parents are both sociopathic layabouts and you only got born because they couldn't be bothered to buy any condoms and anyway sex without is hornier, nine months later and BANG a baby with no hope in life is born.

The twist of the dagger is that women don't like men they have to teach loving to. They want to be swept off their feet and not be telling him how to hold a knife and fork. That means if you're an AFC then all that happens is you get overlooked for the man who knows how to behave. Come on girls, I give up. The losers in life want to know how to become gentlemen and, let's be honest, you could do with a few more of them, so come on girls, what turns you on?

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by missing

And finally, to your thought that there is "plenty of opportunity to meet a great woman" I both agree and disagree. Well to be more direct I agree. There is plenty of opportunity. But it's not going to come to you, you need to go meet "it" and that takes work and dedication, and I'm not so sure it's worth it, or even realistic. Especially when you consider your 12-15/training wheel analogy again, to which I suppose I would be the kind of person who "missed out" those formative years and now must do the "extra work" to catch up. Incidentally this process is far worse a road block for men than women, as we are the expected initiators. We are expected to put ourselves on the line where women not so much. Not going to say this is right or wrong but from this perspective I think it's easy to see where a subtle kind of misogyny might develop amongst shy guys.

I tend to resonate with this; but it also strikes me that men can be just as they are, and if you accept yourself, without trying to force yourself in to any mold, just be natural, you can talk to women, and have interactions with them, and it's all good. That's kinda where I am now, I don't expect or need anything back, and I can have an honest interaction and say just what I feel or think (but no 'gushing'), and I feel less need to please or to gain approval.

As guys, we don't have to expect things to go further than that. I think the problem comes when as a guy, you feel you have jump through hoops, or be like this or that (some idealised image of mr perfect), or otherwise distort our being. In fact, I suspect, the more willing we are to jump through hoops and not be true to ourselves, the less attractive we are to women.

Though I think we should concern ourselves, with being true to oursevels, more than with being attractive to women.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

This is bitterness.

Ignoring the fact that you're bitter doesn't make you less bitter; it makes you more bitter. You do not solve a problem by sweeping it under the rug; you solve it by facing it, getting hurt, and dealing with it.

In the most part, I agree with you Michael.

'Bitterness' is only a word; but the energy, hurt and pain which it describes, may well be in my system, stored up in my body as emotion, and in my mind as thought patterns. It's up to me to be aware of no-good emotions or mental patterns, to acknowledge them, 'process' and release them.

It may also be problematic in the sense that it somewhat inhibits free, easy, and spontaneous interactions with women. However, I am finding more and more that, that's just the kind of interactions I am having with women. Maybe I've gone past some cut off point, past caring (concern) or something.

I think I do accept the wholeness of myself, or at least, I'm getting there, and it is a process.

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

I was briefly inclined to respond to each of your paragraphs in detail, but I think you'd rather I didn't, may it help you or not.

It's tricky mate, there are so many faceats to all this, and it's easy for me to feel overwhelmed by all the different points; rather than picking out one issue at a time and debating that. It's also something of an emotive topic for me.

One thing I strongly feel though, is the importance of being true to oneself, understanding and accepting ourselves (though it's fine too, to develop and grow and change). It's more important to be true to ourselves, than it is to be in relationship. There's probably other things that are more important, and it may well be a useful exercise (for guys struggling with this stuff), to list them or be mindful of them. Good to realise that being in relationship isn't THE most important thing in life.

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

I'll simply end with this:
9—Enneagram Type Nine: The Peacemaker-Overview

While I am entirely unqualified to guess at your Enneagram Type (ignoring the trifling detail of whether or not the system is valid), I think that reading that webpage will give you insight into yourself and aid you in your growth.

Thanks for the link Michael, I may well take a look sometime.

I'm finding my own way through this though, and that feels right, for me. I do appreciate your taking the time to post, and to dig out the link.

Thanks once again for all your comments.

Jamie.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by missing

what I call "devolution" you seem to be calling "maturity" or "abundance".

You've nicely identified the key difference then.

You see banter as unneccessary, weird, even violent? Others see it as a way of having fun- it keeps things fresh, unpredictable and entertaining. It's also a way of helping people get over their insecurities. Example: if an overweight guy gets called "fat boy" by his best friends as part of the banter he knows they don't care that he's fat! In effect what they are saying is "you're not perfect, but I like you for who you really are." It's a proclamation that we are imperfect humans, but we don't care, we're going to have a good time.

What do you suppose it would take to enjoy shooting the sh*t with your buddies?

[vapourmile]

Originally Posted by Jamie

I tend to resonate with this; but it also strikes me that men can be just as they are, and if you accept yourself, without trying to force yourself in to any mold, just be natural, you can talk to women, and have interactions with them, and it's all good. That's kinda where I am now, I don't expect or need anything back, and I can have an honest interaction and say just what I feel or think (but no 'gushing'), and I feel less need to please or to gain approval.

As guys, we don't have to expect things to go further than that. I think the problem comes when as a guy, you feel you have jump through hoops, or be like this or that (some idealised image of mr perfect), or otherwise distort our being. In fact, I suspect, the more willing we are to jump through hoops and not be true to ourselves, the less attractive we are to women.

Though I think we should concern ourselves, with being true to oursevels, more than with being attractive to women.

Yeah, that's perceptive. Not just with females but with life on the whole.

[Plato]

And how does a person behave when they are totally comfortable? Party time boys.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Plato

And how does a person behave when they are totally comfortable? Party time boys.

No need to behave; well, for me 'behave' is like playing a game, monopoly or something, where there's you, sat back playing the game, and there's the token you're moving around the board (the act you're putting on). When you're totally comfortable, there's no difference, it's all one and you've taken aways all your masks. So it's not like your behaving at all, you just are.

I could be totally wrong though, I mean, what I know? I'm only a woman hating misogonist.

Ok, string me up and shoot me ladies.

[robc]

However, most guys don't want to be alone with themselves. They want a girlfriend or wife, some kind of relationship with the opposite sex.

If sheer volume were any indication of quality, then this tip would surely be in the Hall of Fame, "Just Be Yourself!" Unfortunately, volume is no indication of quality when it comes to relationship advice.

In fact, much of the time it's just the opposite. "Just Be Yourself" is not a great tip if you want to be in a relationship with a woman.

Think about it, challenge your existing thoughts on this topic. Isn't "Just be yourself" a counter-productive tip, here are a few reasons why:

Just be yourself is most likely the advice you would receive from someone who has no clue about how women, dating, and relationships work.

It doesn't matter if that person is male or female, young or old, single or married -- it's the stock relationship answer when one doesn't know or can't think of anything else to say... but doesn't want to seem as clueless as he/she actually is.

Ask your buddy what women want, or your mother, or your minister, or Doctor/teacher, etc. It's the same advice you hear from alot of people yet is it really that successful considering how hard alot of men find it to get into a relationship with the kind of women they would want to be with?

The truth is, it's not the correct answer or tip because like most men, we don't have a clue about that women want.

But people have to say something, right? And besides, they've been hearing "Just be yourself" for their entire lives so it must be the right answer. How could something be so prevalent and still be wrong? (similar to the world is flat theory)

Just be yourself has a benefit in that it allows the advice-giver to feel a sense of superiority/feel smug. I think we're (we're as in men, and yes I'm generalizing, if I'm wrong just say so, you won't hurt my feelings) made to believe that if we're seeking relationship advice in the first place, it's somehow indicative of lower intelligence or underdeveloped social skills.

I think it's also fair to assume that alot of people like to feel smug.

Take the "Just be yourself" tip a little further from the advice giver, press them a little, ask for more details. Tell them that you've been "just being yourself" your entire life and it's pretty much gotten you nowhere at all with women. What about that?

If you get a response, it's a pre-packaged one, "You just have to be patient and eventually you'll meet someone who's right for you." And here is my personal favorite... "And if it doesn't work out between you and her, then it wasn't meant to be." - That last line is crap, the relationship doesn't fail, the people inside the relationship fail and it's usually because people are unwilling to change themselves and are more focused on changing the other person.

Just Be yourself. Have Patience/Faith. That's about the extent of the advice you're likely to receive.

How successful has anyone really been by just being themselves when it comes to relationships with the opposite sex?

How does this advice help the person who's been struggling with women his whole life? A person who goes on one date every 6 months (if he's lucky) and never gets a second date? A person who's lonely, depressed, unhappy? A person who's obviously doing something wrong but has no idea what it might be? But hey, at least he's "just being himself"!

As an experiment, put the "just be yourself" advice on the side for the moment and take control and actively create the life you want.

You need to learn the mistakes you've been making in the past and how to correct this for the future, change your attitude, behavior & thoughts and this will enable you (any man) to find/attract and keep the woman he wants.

This is useful advice so forget about "just be yourself", it doesn't work. Another reason why it doesn't work, it gives you an EXCUSE for not doing anything - "just be yourself" and it will all fall magically into your lap. Which is great because we all need another excuse to do only what we want to do (which is usually passive & ineffective and comfortable).

Another excuse to sit on the couch, watch the tube, drink some beer, eat chips. Hey that's "just be yourself" and the women will all come running after you because they just love that.

I think it's safe to say that being successful with attracting the opposite sex and in relationships is not about "just being yourself". It's also not about pretending to be someone you're not.

So we've eliminated what it isn't about. So what is it about? It's about becoming the person that you want to be, it's about self-improvement (ie. steve's website, steve definitely doesn't preach "just be yourself") and reaching your full potential. It's about feeling good, being happy, and learning new things, it's about improving all areas of your life and attracting the things you want into your life by doing the things that place you in alignment with your goals. Doing these things will dramatically improve your social life.

Some people will think that the whole idea of "learning" how to act around women is ridiculous and try to make you feel bad for thinking about doing that. These same people also preach "just be yourself" and try to convince the you that you don't need "tricks/gimmicks" to do well with women.

I bet you alot of these so people preaching "just be yourself" would also hide in the corner when out at a club instead of trying to appear interesting and start a conversation with a woman at the bar. Those friends/people who promote "just be yourself" probably spend most of their time surfing the net or playing computer games. Probably these same people would also insist that you should buy be "friends" first with a girl you're attracted to or take her to the most expensive restaurant in town on your first date and also tell her you love her (on the first date), etc.

I'm sorry but when I hear people say things like "just be yourself", I know that these people don't have a clue, but they do have the audacity to preach "just be yourself" to those who are trying to improve themselves and understand what really works.

If you're on this site right now, you should know that "just be yourself" doesn't work. This site is about personal development for smart people and part of that is letting go of old ideas and learning & doing new things and improving who you are and what you know.

Just be yourself doesn't work, it's time for people to learn this and change and not only to do this to get a date and get into a relationship but for personal growth - accepting this new truth will dramatically improve your life.

Stop being lazy! Being good with women is about self-improvement, letting go of old ideas and embracing new ideas and new ways of doing things. Self-improvement often requires alot of effort & work. A lot of reading, implementing and practicing.

This takes time and effort. Steve even mentions that on his site, personal development for smart people is hard work but you get what you put into it. If you want improvement in your life put some effort into it.

Do you think that Michael Jordan became one of the greatest basketball players in history by "just being himself"? He busted his ass, trained harder than anyone else and learned more about himself, the game & other players to become the best player he could possibly be!

Here's another thing to consider... do you think women subscribe to "just be yourself"? Think about it, they spend hours working on their hair, their makeup, their skin, and everything else imaginable before going out. They spend a ton of money on clothes, shoes, accessories, diet pills, and anything else they can find to make themselves more attractive. Look at all the magazines catered to women trying to improve themselve, trying to attract new mates, improving their relationships, etc. Look at the covers and see what they're telling women and what women are learning to do.

Something men don't understand (and maybe you will understand after reading this) is that women have been studying men since they were old enough to read. They're having slumber parties, giggling, and professing the merits of playing hard to get, not returning phone calls, flirting strategies, not looking desperate, body language, etc.

Women are experts and I will say superior at learning this game and how to play it.

And men (yes I'm generalizing, some men do have a clue about this), we're busy "just being ourselves". While we're doing this, women are researching, studying, and practicing.

Is it any wonder that in most relationships the woman is in complete control?

Is it any wonder that when guys do occasionally get a date, they make complete fools of themselves? Just being yourself is the reason why men have so much trouble with women. I think being clueless in this area is normal for men.

However, this can change, change is very possible. The only limiting factor in this situation is yourself and what you are willing to do to change. Another thing to think of, you're on this site for personal development in some area of your life because "just being yourself" isn't cutting it.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Jamie

No need to behave; well, for me 'behave' is like playing a game

Eh? "Behave" is descriptive, not normative. At least how I meant it. :s

[Plato]

Robc... that's quite a post. I was tempted to quote it but managed to restrain myself.

I think the key point to be taken from your post is that it is perfectly possible to be "true to yourself" whilst changing your external behaviours and even thought processes. It requires recognition that the way we behave and think is not who we are.

[robc]

I do tend to be verbose, diarrhea of the mouth as my english teacher used to call it.

Yes you are definitely correct about the intent of my long winded post.

I'll leave it at that and cut it short, I don't want my posts to crash the server.

[missing]

Originally Posted by Plato

You've nicely identified the key difference then.

You see banter as unneccessary, weird, even violent? Others see it as a way of having fun- it keeps things fresh, unpredictable and entertaining. It's also a way of helping people get over their insecurities. Example: if an overweight guy gets called "fat boy" by his best friends as part of the banter he knows they don't care that he's fat! In effect what they are saying is "you're not perfect, but I like you for who you really are." It's a proclamation that we are imperfect humans, but we don't care, we're going to have a good time.

What do you suppose it would take to enjoy shooting the sh*t with your buddies?

I'm not against "banter" or "having a good time" or "shooting the sh*t" with ones buddies. I do this, and yes I admit that could probably stand to do it more than I do and perhaps "lighten up" as I'm often told. HOWEVER, that does not change the fact that I believe we as a society engage in this sort of behavior way too much, in a way I find evasive considering the perilous times which we live. It's no different than watching too much TV or playing too many video games. For sure socializing is healthy for us and should be encouraged but after a certain point it loses it's benefit and starts to become a diversion, a "game" if you will, to co-opt the title of Neil Strauss' infamous book. There is nothing wrong with "having a good time", but when we over-indulge in this, as I think our culture does, we evade the "big questions" life poses for us, the "serious" stuff which I personally believe is the reason we are here. Of course if you want to believe our reason for being here is "to have a good time" and be all light hearted about it, that's your prerogative and certainly fine by me, I simply disagree.

[Plato]

You think we spend too much time socialising? That's an unusual criticism. And what's wrong with being light hearted? And why are you bringing politics into the discussion?

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by Plato

You see banter as unneccessary, weird, even violent? Others see it as a way of having fun- it keeps things fresh, unpredictable and entertaining. It's also a way of helping people get over their insecurities.

In other words, because you have nothing better to say, you'll say something random (BANANA HAMMOCK) just to fill the silence with white noise.

And you laud this.

Just because people are shallow doesn't mean you have to defend their struggle to remain so.

[missing]

Originally Posted by Plato

You think we spend too much time socialising? That's an unusual criticism. And what's wrong with being light hearted? And why are you bringing politics into the discussion?

why is it unusual? I think we spend too much time and expend too much creative energy socializing in empty ways. And it's fine to enjoy it but I believe there are other things that need our attention/creative energy more. This can't be that hard to understand. Of course productive socializing is somewhat different, but I question how much of that is going on.

I never said there was anything "wrong" with being light hearted, I simply think many people in our modern culture want to be light hearted all the time, or too much of the time. I believe we need balance, and some things in life need to be taken seriously, at some point. Of course it sometimes is helpful to take a step back to view the comic absurdity of it all, but at it's core I believe that life is a very serious matter and to ignore this is to do so at your/our peril. The saying goes, "life is a comedy for those who think, a tragedy for those who feel". Or another variant, "from afar life is a comedy, up close a tragedy". I think most people would prefer to view our existence from a distant galaxy far far away, at least emotionally as physically would be impossible. Why do you think irony is so popular?

and what is wrong with bringing politics into it? Do you think the issues being discussed on this topic are divorced from politics? I don't, personally. Even the smallest social groups are political in some way. You're "fat boy" analogy actually illustrates this. You may claim the friendly banter that brings upon a nickname exists in a "feel good buddy buddy" kind of vacuum. And maybe sometimes it does. But that's the comedic, thinking version of things. From another perspective, perhaps "fat boy" isn't so secure in his weight, but has learned to parlay it into an advantage by being "light hearted" about it and thus getting into a social group. Others may appreciate having him around cause it makes them feel better about the fact that they are not overweight. None of this stuff can be explicitly stated (the politics) but it can be understood and implied beneath the surface in a way that everybody understands, and sees as a fair trade off. Certainly all can laugh and have a good time to an extent, but it comes at the expense of a little bit of "fat boy's" soul. Such is the political nature of human interaction, where there is always going to be some kind of "pecking order". Which of course isn't to say genuine friendship cannot develop in the minefield, but it's hardly in a direct efficient manner and the potential for lasting emotional scars seems pointlessly high. Translate this to the mating game and amplify the effects by 100.

[Jamie]

Good points missing.

But isn't it up to the individual? I mean, it's you or me, who makes the choice to assosiate with, or seek out the company of people; people who can be toxic and obnoxious, so why do we want to know people like that? Or when applied to the dating game; why would we (men) want to know a woman who is toxic (in a sense that she puts people down, and revels in her sense of power over men), just because she looks nice.

This is partly what I was trying to get at before; but more and more I judge a woman based on her attitude and how she is with other people, how kind she is, her warmth, and less so on her physical attributes. Though my body still may find her attractive in a purely physical sense, but my mind and spirit, may well be repulsed by her behaviour. An ideal partner for me would satisfy all of me.

Anyway, my question is, why does 'fat boy', stick around his 'friends'?

Also, I agree with your sentiments, that modern life can easily leave us feeling 'diffused', our energies and attention split up in to a thousand streams, and we can easily lose a sense of focus, concentration, power, stillness.