INTJs and the dating game [Archive]

rwyatt365

11-19-2007, 11:08 AM

As one that did the "club thing" (albeit years ago), I have to agree in principal on the futility of them as a fake environment. However, I will say that – since the majority of the youthful population (and some not so youthful) view clubbing as a viable mating arena – it is a relevant avenue for those willing to endure the agony of the environment. I tended to treat them as a convenient way to observe the "game" and find out if I could be successful in at it. My findings; yes, I could be successful but at the expense of personal integrity. I decided that I would rather be "me" than to get laid!

After that epiphany I found out that there were some – not many, but some – females that actually appreciated not being aggressively "hit on" (or, at least they pretended to which has been my downfall – I can't effectively tell the honest ones from the posers, so I ended up in bad relationships).

So, the moral of my story is that; a) true love is possible for the INTJ if b) you are patient and c) you can tell when someone is faking it.

Agogo

11-19-2007, 11:31 AM

I can't make sense of it. Why would I want to go in a club?

rwyatt365

11-19-2007, 12:04 PM

I can't make sense of it. Why would I want to go in a club?
Like Bloozegit says, to get your insides pounded into jelly and ooze from every pore in your body (especially the big ones!).

Sevs

11-19-2007, 01:07 PM

To get social contacts or maintain them. I get along quite well with people but it seems that in general unless you don't go out (clubbing) with these people you don't actually get in the position to become proper friends. At least that is the way it seems to me. Although it does seem after you have been out a few times with people and they realize you can be fun you can then be friends with them even if you don't go out clubbing with them anymore.

At least that is my experience.

The other reason for going to a club is basically getting laid. Which works but as mentioned above goes against the whole personal integrity thing.

Firelie

11-19-2007, 01:17 PM

I honestly don't see how a meaningful, healthy relationship could ever result from a club environment. Granted, I haven't been to every club ever, but the few I've been in were far too loud, drunken and crowded for anything more than dancing (which seems to lead more to sex and STDs more often than dating).

Gabrielle

11-19-2007, 01:27 PM

Clubbing never works for me. I went with my friends a few times, but then I didn't exactly achieve any new friendships because I just hanged out with my friends (basically one of the guys was dancing and we were rolling around laughing at him). Unless you're looking for a quick lay, there isn't much point going there... if you want to dance that much just crank up the volume to your favourite song and dance in your room. Same thing (at least for me).

Figmentum

11-19-2007, 01:27 PM

If a girl is dumber than I, she can go to hell. Stupid chicks are a complete turnoff.

blueback

11-19-2007, 02:15 PM

Hi there.
One of my biggest fears is that i'll stay alone for the rest of my life from now on as i refuse to play "the game" and i very much doubt to be as lucky as with my last gf again.

Why do you assume that dance clubs are the only place you can play the 'dating game'?

You could go to a bar, though, or a musical venue. Some place with areas that don't reaquire a megaphone or semaphore flags to communicate. The great thing about those areas is that you already have a topic of conversation and if you decide you don't want to talk to that person anymore you can just talk to someone else 3 feet away.

I dunno. I guess you'll either try it out or you won't.

As long as you volunarily withdraw from a game I suppose you can't "lose" although it is a forfeit. When it becomes important to you you will learn what you need to know. I just don't want to see any of you guys compromise your standards and settle because you don't want to put some effort into learning how to be social.

WavesSootheMe

11-19-2007, 04:12 PM

After that epiphany I found out that there were some – not many, but some – females that actually appreciated not being aggressively "hit on"

I completely despise guys that pursue me aggressively. It's overwhelming. I am a girl that goes to clubs and bars and musical venues and the like, but because I enjoy dancing and being with my friends, not because I want to meet anyone. If a guy approaches me at a bar or I feel like a guy is hitting on me, I don't trust his intentions at all. The whole getting to know someone while on one on one dates is awkward to me. It feels so forced and inappropriate. How do you know if you want to date someone before you get to know them? It makes no sense. I much prefer it when genuine feelings for another can develop in a non-date environment, like studying or group activities, which then leads to dating and more often than not a relationship. It seems like people are much more natural that way. All that's come of the "dating game" for me is a string of casual, non-exclusive relationships, which I'm done with at this point. However, as I'm getting older less and less opportunities to meet people the way that I prefer are available. *shrugs* I guess I'm as lost as you, Sevs, and just hoping that patience and knowing myself and what I want will get me there.

Sevs

11-19-2007, 04:18 PM

Thanks alot for your responses guys, good to know I'm not the only one out there.

This brings me to another question It's obvious that many girls actually enjoy clubbing for the sake of it (dancing and what not) but are there actually any guys that go to a club for fun and not with the intention to get laid or "meet someone" ?
Just wondering

Part of the reason my ex gf left me was that I was not "fun enough" as she really enjoys clubbing and is a amazing dancer. I can actually understand her but I can't change who I am not even for her.

Ah well just got to keep on looking and hoping that oneday i meet another single intelligent girl that actually likes me...

blueback

11-19-2007, 05:26 PM

rwyatt365

11-20-2007, 06:51 AM

There's a difference between 'changing who you are' and 'learning something new.' Don't let fear of change keep you from learning from someone who wants to teach you. Just explain to them that you might be uncomfortable for a while and if they don't respect that you can stop seeing them. However, it's hard to justify not learning how to dance, from an 'amazing' dancer, because you define yourself as a guy who doesn't dance and you don't want to risk that definition.
But there's also a difference between asking someone to "try something new" and forcing something down someone's throat.

Too often people use the "you're afraid to change" argument as a way to intimidate, or coerce a person to conform to another's standards. I'm all for change, and not afraid to try something new, but there is nothing wrong with a person recognizing what is fundamental to their nature and cannot be significantly altered.

For example; I know that I need time to myself in order for me to be effective. Sometimes I just need to get away from other people and be with myself for a while. Now, I also know that is not always conducive to "family life", especially when you're surrounded by "social butterflies". I could insist that all non-work time is "me time" and revel in my alone-ness, but that isn't fair to the family. So, I make a change and set aside some "me time" and some "family time".

The alternative would be for someone in the family to say, "You're just 'afraid of change'. What you have to do is to devote all of your non-work time to the family – it's the best thing to do". If I do that then I will have crumpled under the pressure to conform. Now, the family might be satisfied, but I would be miserable because I need that "me time" that I can't have any more. That would end up being a bad thing for all parties concerned.

All I'm saying is that change is good, forcing change of fundamental behavior is not good. If you do something different because you want to, and it doesn't violate who you are, then go for it. But don't let anyone pressure you into something that you don’t want to do, or you know that you can't sustain in the long run – you're only asking for trouble.

blueback

11-20-2007, 07:26 AM

All I'm saying is that change is good, forcing change of fundamental behavior is not good. If you do something different because you want to, and it doesn't violate who you are, then go for it. But don't let anyone pressure you into something that you don’t want to do, or you know that you can't sustain in the long run – you're only asking for trouble.

And I'll I'm saying is that not everything is a choice between surrenduring to the pressures of conformity and standing firm against everyone else in the world. Give me independance or give me death!

Come on, learning how to dance isn't conforming to the will of malignant forces. It's just a new skill.

Skills are like hand-tools, you can never have too many of them. Other, lesser Myers-Briggs types might not be able to learn something without being changed by it, but INTJs can.

Of course, I might just be speaking from my experiences. I volunteered for the military, and I like it enough that I'm planning to give it 20-30 years, so obviously I've gotten something out of serving the will of others. I've noticed that most of the people here aren't in the military so you guys probably have a different perspective on doing what others want you to do.

rwyatt365

11-20-2007, 07:37 AM

And I'll I'm saying is that not everything is a choice between surrenduring to the pressures of conformity and standing firm against everyone else in the world. Give me independance or give me death!

Come on, learning how to dance isn't conforming to the will of malignant forces. It's just a new skill.

Skills are like hand-tools, you can never have too many of them. Other, lesser Myers-Briggs types might not be able to learn something without being changed by it, but INTJs can.

Of course, I might just be speaking from my experiences. I volunteered for the military, and I like it enough that I'm planning to give it 20-30 years, so obviously I've gotten something out of serving the will of others. I've noticed that most of the people here aren't in the military so you guys probably have a different perspective on doing what others want you to do.

You're right! Learning to dance is only submitting to the collective socialization pressures of the decadent amoral masses. ;)

No, really, I understand. Things like that are just like learning a new skill. It's just that I've been subjected to the "ram it down your throat, if you don't change then you're a p---y" school of persuasion and it's a really sore spot with me.

i respect anyone that joins the military, especially those that do it as a career choise. My sister just retired from the Air Force after 30+ years, she's one tough cookie. I couldn't do it.

BloozeGit

11-20-2007, 07:22 PM

No, really, I understand. Things like that are just like learning a new skill. It's just that I've been subjected to the "ram it down your throat, if you don't change then you're a p---y" school of persuasion and it's a really sore spot with me.

i respect anyone that joins the military, especially those that do it as a career choise. My sister just retired from the Air Force after 30+ years, she's one tough cookie. I couldn't do it.

Well I was conscripted, that was a flying start to the "ram it down your throat" concept that was to come for the next few years, but that's probably another story altogether...

As for the dancing and all, I don't see it as a bad thing. It's just that whenever there's music that's worth dancing to, I'll probably be too busy nursing a pint, and I can't possibly leave it alone to go dancing can I? ;D

The fact that I have three left feet is just coincidental. Really. :p

Nomad

11-20-2007, 09:20 PM

And I'll I'm saying is that not everything is a choice between surrenduring to the pressures of conformity and standing firm against everyone else in the world. Give me independance or give me death!

Come on, learning how to dance isn't conforming to the will of malignant forces. It's just a new skill.

Skills are like hand-tools, you can never have too many of them. Other, lesser Myers-Briggs types might not be able to learn something without being changed by it, but INTJs can.

Of course, I might just be speaking from my experiences. I volunteered for the military, and I like it enough that I'm planning to give it 20-30 years, so obviously I've gotten something out of serving the will of others. I've noticed that most of the people here aren't in the military so you guys probably have a different perspective on doing what others want you to do.

Yup, very useful skill. I learned to line dance in the Army, and can dance freestyle and have a pretty good sense of rythym. No white mans overbite for me. I went years ago to a new years Eve party hosted by a radio station who's chief demographic was 18 to 30 year old females. i was working for the band, the New Morty Show, a swing band. Literally 100 attractive women leaning on the walls aching to dance and NO MEN!.

I thought to myself, "It's not rational to eschew this advantage."

I started lesson January 2.

You want to up your odds, gentlemen? Learn to dance. It allows you to assess potential mates, have fun, get exercise, and you will have an advantage over most guys who can't dance. My information provided to me by my operatives on the other side indicate that you are judged by your ability to dance, with the notion that skill there will translate to other acts of physicality.

Or don't. More for me.

-Nomad

rwyatt365

11-21-2007, 05:43 AM

Yup, very useful skill. I learned to line dance in the Army, and can dance freestyle and have a pretty good sense of rythym. No white mans overbite for me. I went years ago to a new years Eve party hosted by a radio station who's chief demographic was 18 to 30 year old females. i was working for the band, the New Morty Show, a swing band. Literally 100 attractive women leaning on the walls aching to dance and NO MEN!.

I thought to myself, "It's not rational to eschew this advantage."

I started lesson January 2.

You want to up your odds, gentlemen? Learn to dance. It allows you to assess potential mates, have fun, get exercise, and you will have an advantage over most guys who can't dance. My information provided to me by my operatives on the other side indicate that you are judged by your ability to dance, with the notion that skill there will translate to other acts of physicality.

Or don't. More for me.

-Nomad
...and me! :thumbsup:

In my college and 20-something days I was a "dancin' fool"! I did all of the ridiculous dances of the 70s and early 80s. Since then I've lost touch with my "dancing roots", but I could do it again if I had to. ;D

Warren_Wong

11-22-2007, 01:50 AM

Hi there.

I was wondering how many of you like or play the so called "dating game".

Personally i totally hate clubbing and dating and I see no point in it. As clubs are totally fake environments and people try to be better than they actually are.
Also the whole getting to know someone to me is just total BS. Also I am aware that there are loads of "tricks" to make other people fall but it just doesn't seem right.

I met my now ex girlfriend at school and it started out with revising maths together. There was never any need for all this superficial "dating" and feelings just developed genuinly.

One of my biggest fears is that i'll stay alone for the rest of my life from now on as i refuse to play "the game" and i very much doubt to be as lucky as with my last gf again.

I was just wondering how other INTJs see the whole thing.

Regards sev.

Long term, I think the most important thing is common interests. Dating itself is very artificial in my opinion, because you're essentially making up interests. As soon as those interests fade away, then the relationship would fade. I've been going through the same thing myself for the last two years, but I've finally fallen in love with a girl who I respect and admire.

I think that's the key... you have to naturally be together and respect and admire the other person.

Henry

11-22-2007, 02:14 AM

I completely despise guys that pursue me aggressively. It's overwhelming. I am a girl that goes to clubs and bars and musical venues and the like, but because I enjoy dancing and being with my friends, not because I want to meet anyone. If a guy approaches me at a bar or I feel like a guy is hitting on me, I don't trust his intentions at all. The whole getting to know someone while on one on one dates is awkward to me. It feels so forced and inappropriate. How do you know if you want to date someone before you get to know them? It makes no sense. I much prefer it when genuine feelings for another can develop in a non-date environment, like studying or group activities, which then leads to dating and more often than not a relationship. It seems like people are much more natural that way. All that's come of the "dating game" for me is a string of casual, non-exclusive relationships, which I'm done with at this point. However, as I'm getting older less and less opportunities to meet people the way that I prefer are available. *shrugs* I guess I'm as lost as you, Sevs, and just hoping that patience and knowing myself and what I want will get me there.

The entire purpose of casual dating is to get to know the person to see if you want to remove the casual modifier. You glean what you can from the first 15 minutes or so over drinks or at the bookstore or whatever, and then you do lunch or coffee or whatever, and then you take the great leap of having dinner with that person. Don't like person? Rinse, wash, repeat.

LSB

11-22-2007, 02:14 AM

Hi there.

I was wondering how many of you like or play the so called "dating game".

Personally i totally hate clubbing and dating and I see no point in it. As clubs are totally fake environments and people try to be better than they actually are.
Also the whole getting to know someone to me is just total BS. Also I am aware that there are loads of "tricks" to make other people fall but it just doesn't seem right.

I met my now ex girlfriend at school and it started out with revising maths together. There was never any need for all this superficial "dating" and feelings just developed genuinly.

One of my biggest fears is that i'll stay alone for the rest of my life from now on as i refuse to play "the game" and i very much doubt to be as lucky as with my last gf again.

I was just wondering how other INTJs see the whole thing.

Regards sev.

I've been struggling with this for my entire short life (I'm still just a kid, but hey), and my solution for a long time was simply to ignore the relational aspect of life until I managed to finish all obligations (school, etc) and actually start my life. However, I don't think simply pushing it aside is a real solution.

I don't work in these kinds of environments ('clubs' etc), and I have no idea how to 'hit on' someone, or whatever. I've come to the conclusion that unless someone initiates a relationship towards me, I'll be alone (not lonely) for the rest of my life. So be it, I have other things to do. It's just not worth the massive struggle when there are other things I can do that I'm good at and which takes much less effort to enjoy.

Henry

11-22-2007, 02:28 AM

I've been struggling with this for my entire short life (I'm still just a kid, but hey), and my solution for a long time was simply to ignore the relational aspect of life until I managed to finish all obligations (school, etc) and actually start my life. However, I don't think simply pushing it aside is a real solution.

I don't work in these kinds of environments ('clubs' etc), and I have no idea how to 'hit on' someone, or whatever. I've come to the conclusion that unless someone initiates a relationship towards me, I'll be alone (not lonely) for the rest of my life. So be it, I have other things to do. It's just not worth the massive struggle when there are other things I can do that I'm good at and which takes much less effort to enjoy.

Bullshit.

Go to a bookstore or museums or coffee house or college or whatever.

"Hi I'm LSB"
"Hi I'm Jane"
"This is an excellent frapuccino"
"Yeah it is I love it"
"Whats ur favorite drink here"
blah blah blah blah it will go fine from here

It may also go
"This is an excellent frapuccino"
says nothing
Rinse, wash repeat.

For a rookie it will be about 15% real interest, 25% will have a friendly but uninterested exchange w/ you, 55% polite disinterest, 5% rude. No way around the rude ones, just rinse wash and repeat. Once you get better you'll learn to read the subtle social cues better and the polite disinterests and rudes will drop to 30% or so.

Its hard and unnatural for us, but its either having a few people not be interested in talking to you, or being single. Its an easy choice really.

WavesSootheMe

11-22-2007, 04:20 AM

The entire purpose of casual dating is to get to know the person to see if you want to remove the casual modifier. You glean what you can from the first 15 minutes or so over drinks or at the bookstore or whatever, and then you do lunch or coffee or whatever, and then you take the great leap of having dinner with that person. Don't like person? Rinse, wash, repeat.

Yes, this is the purpose of casual dating versus serious dating, but I don't understand why it's considered dating in the first place. Why put that expectation out there so soon? Fifteen minutes of smalltalk? Kill me now. Fifteen minutes with me in a forced situation like that is useless. I won't be myself. I'll be uncomfortable and likely annoyed that a stranger is cutting into my time. I don't trust their intentions, because such approaches are obviously based solely on outward appearance, and unless the guy is incredibly perceptive, my outward appearance can be misleading. With a good social circle and outside involvement, the same purpose can be furthered in a situation where individuals are much more true to form. I've done it both ways, and at least for me, nothing meaningful has ever come from giving a random stranger a chance to date me from the start. One meaningful relationship did come from meeting a random stranger, but I met him with a friend and he treated me like a friend. The dating didn't come until later. I'm not saying it can't work. I just know myself, the way that I function and what works best for me. I'm glad that you've found a method useful for you, but I wouldn't expect resounding agreement from this crowd.

tubaglue

11-22-2007, 10:04 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by LSB
I've been struggling with this for my entire short life (I'm still just a kid, but hey), and my solution for a long time was simply to ignore the relational aspect of life until I managed to finish all obligations (school, etc) and actually start my life. However, I don't think simply pushing it aside is a real solution.

I don't work in these kinds of environments ('clubs' etc), and I have no idea how to 'hit on' someone, or whatever. I've come to the conclusion that unless someone initiates a relationship towards me, I'll be alone (not lonely) for the rest of my life. So be it, I have other things to do. It's just not worth the massive struggle when there are other things I can do that I'm good at and which takes much less effort to enjoy.

Quite frankly, as someone who has had to overcome the same social issues, in my experience, Henry's advice is spot on. Dating is majorly a numbers game. The more you talk to people, the more you notice about your interactions, the better you're able to interact, so on and so on. You can't expect everyeone to like you and you certainly will learn that everyone you meet you won't necessarily like. But every once in a while personalities click and everything works out. Nothing worthwhile is easy, you've gotta push your comfort level a little bit, it's better than being alone. And believe me, I still feel socially awkward, but it gets better if you work on it... like anything else.

blueback

11-22-2007, 10:20 AM

I don't trust their intentions, because such approaches are obviously based solely on outward appearance, .

Well. . .yeah. It would be hard to base an approach on much more without stalking.
However, I think you might be looking at it from the female perspective, rather than impartially. See, "guys" have to take a different approach to dating than "gals". It's biological and social, we pretty much have to initiate everything. So Guys either pick up naturally, or teach themselves, how to talk to girls they don't know, but think they'd like to. Gals, on the other hand, tend to just wait around for Guys to talk to them. This puts a lot of pressure on the Guys because they are the ones getting actively shot down, at least girls are rejected passively.

Anywho, that means that only the guys who can handle the pressure approach girls. So girls are mostly approached by guys who have had success with girls in the past and are confident that if you aren't interested in them, the next girl will be. Yes, they are trying to manipulate you because MOST girls want to be manipulated. How are they supposed to know you're an INTJ (1% of the population)? The problem with shooting down every guy who approaches you, just because he has the balls, is that you might be missing out on some great guys. Instead of brushing them off just because you think that any guy who talks to strange girls in public must be a player, test them to see if you might like them.

Don't make small talk, that's not you. Instead, throw some tough questions at them. Say something that will put them back on their heels and force them to reevaluate you. Something that makes it obvious you are smart, clever, funny, etc. I had a girl do that to me once, called me on something I was doing and I absolutely loved it (it was online). We never met but we traded emails for a year after. Her first response was designed to be really bitchy but, because I was an INTJ, I saw things in it that reminded me of myself. Try it, there could be some guys out there looking for you, so be yourself. If you find a guy who has balls AND appreciates who you are you will be better off than only knowing guys who need two months to work up the courage to ask you out.

I've done it both ways, and at least for me, nothing meaningful has ever come from giving a random stranger a chance to date me from the start. .

You just need to screen them better. Have fun coming up with some tough-as-nails questions to ask them, or things to do that will make them reevaluate who you are immediately.

I just know myself, the way that I function and what works best for me. I'm glad that you've found a method useful for you, but I wouldn't expect resounding agreement from this crowd.

Actually, you've found SOMETHING that works for you. How do you know you won't get better results trying something else? That's the same thing the guys here have to learn if they want better results.

Henry

11-22-2007, 06:50 PM

Yes, this is the purpose of casual dating versus serious dating, but I don't understand why it's considered dating in the first place. Why put that expectation out there so soon? Fifteen minutes of smalltalk? Kill me now. Fifteen minutes with me in a forced situation like that is useless. I won't be myself. I'll be uncomfortable and likely annoyed that a stranger is cutting into my time. I don't trust their intentions, because such approaches are obviously based solely on outward appearance, and unless the guy is incredibly perceptive, my outward appearance can be misleading. With a good social circle and outside involvement, the same purpose can be furthered in a situation where individuals are much more true to form. I've done it both ways, and at least for me, nothing meaningful has ever come from giving a random stranger a chance to date me from the start. One meaningful relationship did come from meeting a random stranger, but I met him with a friend and he treated me like a friend. The dating didn't come until later. I'm not saying it can't work. I just know myself, the way that I function and what works best for me. I'm glad that you've found a method useful for you, but I wouldn't expect resounding agreement from this crowd.

Whatever. If you don't like the output you're getting, change the input. Or subtly cry about it.

It seems like people are much more natural that way. All that's come of the "dating game" for me is a string of casual, non-exclusive relationships, which I'm done with at this point. However, as I'm getting older less and less opportunities to meet people the way that I prefer are available. *shrugs* I guess I'm as lost as you, Sevs, and just hoping that patience and knowing myself and what I want will get me there.

WavesSootheMe

11-23-2007, 12:31 AM

blueback, thank you for the constructive advice. I appreciate having something to which I can actually respond. I was trying to give a girl's perspective and I am aware of the differences. I'm glad that you delineated them a bit. Based on odds, yes, guys have to deal with the pressure of initiating contact. The opposite side of that is that girls have to deal with sorting through the guys that initiate, and I like to do this as painlessly as possible.

They aren't supposed to know I'm an INTJ, but the method used seems to be indicative of the kind of girl they want. If they're being manipulative, trying to snag a girl that wants to be manipulated, they're barking up the wrong tree, and thus, they're shot down immediately. Simply using this approach because of the idea that it's what most girls want, says to me "I want most girls."

I won't venture to guess what the majority of women desire. I have no idea. My take? If a guy actually took the time to pick up on something about me and used that in an interesting way for his approach, he'd definitely catch my attention. I'm much more likely to give any unique attempt a chance. Obviously looks are a big part of it, but that's understood without a boring comment about my eyes that I've heard a million times. I know it may seem a bit unfair, but if you stick with a typical approach you will be tossed aside as typical. I'm not going to give every guy that comes up to me 15 minutes of my time. It's more bearable if I can make the decision quickly. I'm not partial to wading through a bunch of garbage on the off chance that someone actually is amazing.

I do like the idea of foregoing the small talk and throwing out a tough question from the start. It's a good suggestion. I have done it in the past, but I have yet to see someone rise to the challenge. Perhaps I'll engage in such behavior more frequently when a relationship is more of a priority in my life.

By the way, meeting people through a circle of friends doesn't mean waiting 2 months for an invitation. Typically a month tops. As I said, this aspect is part of the attraction to the method. I like being able to ease into things.

Last, you're right. There are potentially other successful methods out there for me, but typical expectations of society need not apply. I guess it's about taking the "game" and making it your own.

Henry, you're hilarious. Observation and explanation of my experience and approach thus far does not equate to whining or complaining by any means. Maybe it's time we hear a bit about your experience. For you, how many serious relationships have resulted from asking a complete stranger a question about her favorite drink?

INTJohn

11-23-2007, 05:54 AM

"The Dating Game" - now you're gonna really get me going. I'm 52 years old - youthful & athletic. Accomplished, Intelligent & worldly -both book and street - by anyones standards.......... I have no problem attracting, attractive women and I generally run like hell from them.........my problem is finding one that is intellectually stimulating and emotionally stable who knows how to have fun and enjoy Life without getting stupid or full of Drama about it.

At 52, My dating age bracket is essentially women in their 40's - Has to be the worst decade for a man like me to date a woman if he wants a relationship that has any depth or substance to it. Physiologically they're all peri menapausal if not menopausal and though I have a limited sample for an in depth generalization, as near as I can tell from the last 8 years or so of dating and conversation, clinically most of them are in therapy, strung out on hormones and anti depressants - in short they're frikkin' nuts - who act like a bunch of spoiled 14 & 15 year old teenagers trapped in 40 & 50 year old bodies complete with "victim complex"; having more pill containers in their purse than lipstick tubes and who seemingly can only keep their crap together by wearing their thong on backwards - assuming they can even sightfully fit into one in as much as America is the most overweight out of shape country in the world and human history; irrespective as to gender........

............and, I grew up as a young man during the drug ridden, sexually promiscuous 70's; I found an EXtremely very few women attractive then - why would I find any of that era attractive today??????????

So if there is an attractive, physically fit, intelligent, educated and accomplished woman NT out there somewhere.........in her 30's or 40's who cares about herself as well as the world around us, it would be an absolute pleasure to hear from you.

There; I don't think I can be anymore direct than that.

INTJohn

BloozeGit

11-23-2007, 07:19 AM

INTJohn, I don't expect that you will be endearing yourself to the 40+ female demographic anytime soon, but I had a good laugh about that description!

INTJohn

11-23-2007, 07:55 AM

INTJohn, I don't expect that you will be endearing yourself to the 40+ female demographic anytime soon, but I had a good laugh about that description!

Yeah; well, thats me........MR. Politically Correct.........having never run for Congress or been a Presidential candidate, I've never given a damn about courting "the female vote" or anyones vote for that matter........

I would like to meet just one (1) quality woman for my life.........the rest I could care less about..........and I could've written a doctoral thesis - trust me - on this topic. I really had to restrain myself.

INTJohn

Henry

11-23-2007, 11:12 AM

Henry, you're hilarious. Observation and explanation of my experience and approach thus far does not equate to whining or complaining by any means. Maybe it's time we hear a bit about your experience. For you, how many serious relationships have resulted from asking a completely stranger a question about her favorite drink?

Actually my current relationship, which has been going for 2 years, started by something even more pedestrian. As I recall, it was something about how cold it was outside as waiting for a bus from campus. And there were probably a half a dozen shorter relationships that worked on one level or another from similarly lame startups followed by casual dating.

Don't like the output, change the input. A lot are unhappy with their results here. The process creates the result. Change the process to change the result you are getting.

Lucid

11-23-2007, 09:17 PM

Don't like the output, change the input. A lot are unhappy with their results here. The process creates the result. Change the process to change the result you are getting.

I think it's really easy to tell people that. But it often takes a lot of observation and reflection for someone to figure out how their process needs to be changed.
It's perfectly valid for people to come on a forum and discuss, with like minded people, their problems, their approach, what they might be doing right or wrong, and offer or ask for advice.
Quite frankly I think this is part of the process of changing the input. While your advice is good, it's rather counterproductive for you to come on and accuse them of whining when most were, in fact, already trying to do exactly what you advise.

Henry

11-24-2007, 01:09 PM

I think it's really easy to tell people that. But it often takes a lot of observation and reflection for someone to figure out how their process needs to be changed.
It's perfectly valid for people to come on a forum and discuss, with like minded people, their problems, their approach, what they might be doing right or wrong, and offer or ask for advice.

Lets revise "ask for advice" to "brag about their alleged IQ and social skill superiority, then subtly whine about lack of success in interpersonal relationships, all while making derisive statements about the people who practice methods that are clearly more rational and efficient than theirs". Then we're on the same page.

Lucid

11-24-2007, 01:33 PM

WavesSootheMe

11-24-2007, 09:47 PM

Lets revise "ask for advice" to "brag about their alleged IQ and social skill superiority, then subtly whine about lack of success in interpersonal relationships, all while making derisive statements about the people who practice methods that are clearly more rational and efficient than theirs". Then we're on the same page.

I'm rather unclear as to what statements have given you such an impression. I don't recall anyone bragging or whining or making derisive comments about anything below. Are you now "subtly whining" about people seeing things differently than you? This is no more likely than anyone writing a post below simply to whine. I doubt anyone here has anything against your method for you. However, your general statements lack any perspective outside yourself. Simply because you find one method clearly rational and efficient doesn't mean that it will be in all other situations for all other people. I think the point is more to put your perspective and ideas out there for others to do with them what they will and invite healthy, insult-free debate. If someone disagrees with something that you find clearly rational, it is not a personal attack. It's more likely because their context is different from your own or because your statements were not cogent and respectful. I have absolutely no problem agreeing to disagree, without resorting to insinuations of weakness on either part.

rwyatt365

11-26-2007, 07:38 AM

Ok, ok!
Sounds like it's time to take a little breather here.

There are obviously two camps here; the Wal-Mart "volume buying" side, and the "boutique shop" side – which boils down to the age-old question of quantity vs. specialization. Of course there are advantages to either and "your results may vary" depending on your temperment.

This seems to be a place to agree to disagree.

WavesSootheMe

11-26-2007, 08:58 PM

Well said rwyatt365! I must learn your skills of conciseness :)

Bonnie

12-08-2007, 06:43 AM

I've never specifically dated - I've just got interested in a guy, we get close as friends and 'potentials' as it were, and then we become official.

And as for clubs - the Student Union at my uni is quite club-like, and whilst I can handle that if I'm with friends who just wanna dance and drink, I hate the fact that if I did meet someone new and interesting there, it would be impossible to make a connection because of the atmosphere and noise. I'd love to just go to a comedy evening or a play and connect with someone I sit next to or meet in the interval. Then we've already got something in common and something to talk about and a good atmosphere to do it in.

However - I do like guys that can move on the dancefloor, and they're hard to find anywhere but in a club!

Rei

12-08-2007, 07:33 AM

Plus you have to shout at someone to be heard. Nothing says romance like,
"HEY WHAT'S YOUR NAME!? DO YOU COME HERE OFTEN?!"
"WHAT!?"

Actually, the trick is to lean close to the ear and speak at the regular volume. If you spend the night yelling it'll kill your throat.

I know a lot of frequent clubbers. I don't know how people pick up boyfriends and girlfriends at the club either. In fact, I don't understand how people can date people they've only seen two or three times before in general.

Developing feelings for someone over an extended interaction would be my ideal start to a relationship. However, the chances of that are very small considering I rarely spend very much time with ANYONE in general.

Casual dating is not considered an option. And none of my current friends have the potential of interesting me in that way.

Verdict: I'd probably go to a club to meet people maybe for friendship, but I'd never date them off the bat.

But I expect to be single for the rest of my life anyway. :blank:

Lucid

12-08-2007, 12:34 PM

Actually, the trick is to lean close to the ear and speak at the regular volume. If you spend the night yelling it'll kill your throat.

I know a lot of frequent clubbers. I don't know how people pick up boyfriends and girlfriends at the club either. In fact, I don't understand how people can date people they've only seen two or three times before in general.

Developing feelings for someone over an extended interaction would be my ideal start to a relationship. However, the chances of that are very small considering I rarely spend very much time with ANYONE in general.

Casual dating is not considered an option. And none of my current friends have the potential of interesting me in that way.

Verdict: I'd probably go to a club to meet people maybe for friendship, but I'd never date them off the bat.

But I expect to be single for the rest of my life anyway. :blank:

I've usually met past boyfriends through other friends. Often at parties or bars.
Occasionally I go on dates with people I meet once or blind dates set up by friends (ugh), but I have yet to have this yield much in the way of positive results.

WavesSootheMe

12-08-2007, 12:47 PM

Where were you girls earlier?!?

Rei

12-08-2007, 01:23 PM

I've usually met past boyfriends through other friends. Often at parties or bars.
Occasionally I go on dates with people I meet once or blind dates set up by friends (ugh), but I have yet to have this yield much in the way of positive results.

Friends of friends I'd consider, but there still has to be a "get to know" period where you hang out and stuff.

Blind dates? BLAGHKKK
I'm glad none of my friends would do that. They know I'm too picky to try to play matchmaker.

Where were you girls earlier?!?

:thinking:
As in earlier in the conversation?

Lucid

12-08-2007, 01:48 PM

Friends of friends I'd consider, but there still has to be a "get to know" period where you hang out and stuff.

Blind dates? BLAGHKKK
I'm glad none of my friends would do that. They know I'm too picky to try to play matchmaker.

Well my experiences with dating near strangers or total strangers (blind dates) is that they're usually awkward and not much fun. But I'm also usually willing to give anything a try. That's kind of my philosophy in all things.

WavesSootheMe

12-08-2007, 02:56 PM

:thinking:
As in earlier in the conversation?

Yes! I could have used some girls that shared my perspective.

banzai

12-08-2007, 05:16 PM

They aren't supposed to know I'm an INTJ, but the method used seems to be indicative of the kind of girl they want. If they're being manipulative, trying to snag a girl that wants to be manipulated, they're barking up the wrong tree, and thus, they're shot down immediately. Simply using this approach because of the idea that it's what most girls want, says to me "I want most girls."

My problem has been the other side of this coin--most gals seem to expect a guy to be flirty and manipulative. Hell, I'd even subject myself to something that ridiculous if I knew for a fact that they were worth it, but at that point all I generally can muster up is mild interest.

I guess most females don't understand that my time, attention, and intelligent discussion are things I don't waste without a reason (i.e., that I'm somewhat interested in getting to know them better).

I've met a few girls I knew in highschool, and almost unanimously they said that they had tried to get my interest but I didn't seem to reciprocative.

This problem isn't limited to dating though, friends and family don't seem to understand I care about them until they really need me. I just don't see how sending a card proves anything...

edit: I will mention that there has been occasions where my behavior is understood, but they were few and fleeting.

Rei

12-08-2007, 07:46 PM

Yes! I could have used some girls that shared my perspective.

Sorry, I didn't see this thread till this morning =/

WavesSootheMe

12-08-2007, 08:30 PM

Sorry, I didn't see this thread till this morning =/

You should be ashamed :angry:

I figured. No worries :)

My problem has been the other side of this coin--most gals seem to expect a guy to be flirty and manipulative. Hell, I'd even subject myself to something that ridiculous if I knew for a fact that they were worth it, but at that point all I generally can muster up is mild interest.

All I can muster is mild interest too! Approaching me successfully without knowing someone that knows me isn't impossible but it takes a lot of patience. The guy that skips the small talk, asks really interesting, probing questions and leaves with only an email (no invitation to dinner, no phone number) probably has the best shot. From there, I like to approach it without the pressure of romantic interest and without going too far out of my way for a person I barely know. Perhaps converse a couple more times and then move on to group things like "My friends and I are doing (some interesting activity) you and a few of your friends are welcome to join us." If I keep in contact and show up for the activity, you at least know I don't hate you. If romantic interest grows from there, then I'll be comfortable moving on to one on one dates, etc. I need that time to just get to know someone as a person without constantly analyzing if they're someone I want to date. That early on I don't really feel much of a connection with anyone and without that connection dating makes me feel empty.

Rei

12-08-2007, 09:26 PM

This problem isn't limited to dating though, friends and family don't seem to understand I care about them until they really need me. I just don't see how sending a card proves anything...

edit: I will mention that there has been occasions where my behavior is understood, but they were few and fleeting.

Most of my friends and family know what I'm like. I never actively do anything to show that I care. But I'm always reliable when they need me. Those who can't tell and don't know this probably didn't make it into my friend circle.

You should be ashamed :angry:

I figured. No worries :)

Oh but I am!
I hate being late to the party :p

All I can muster is mild interest too! Approaching me successfully without knowing someone that knows me isn't impossible but it takes a lot of patience. The guy that skips the small talk, asks really interesting, probing questions and leaves with only an email (no invitation to dinner, no phone number) probably has the best shot. From there, I like to approach it without the pressure of romantic interest and without going too far out of my way for a person I barely know. Perhaps converse a couple more times and then move on to group things like "My friends and I are doing (some interesting activity) you and a few of your friends are welcome to join us." If I keep in contact and show up for the activity, you at least know I don't hate you. If romantic interest grows from there, then I'll be comfortable moving on to one on one dates, etc. I need that time to just get to know someone as a person without constantly analyzing if they're someone I want to date. That early on I don't really feel much of a connection with anyone and without that connection dating makes me feel empty.

That is basically a summary of what would be a successful meeting of potential love-interest for me too.

Firstly, the guy has to be pretty smart/good at reading people/my type to be able to tell that how I'd want to be approached. It's automatic filter out if someone asks me for a contact/date right off the bat. I hate it when people push it.

I find it feels so forced if you jump right into the relationship. I don't want the person to be acting, or be forced to act like what they think they should act like. I want to see how they act normally, and that if I like them it is for their normal selves.

banzai

12-08-2007, 10:07 PM

Firstly, the guy has to be pretty smart/good at reading people/my type to be able to tell that how I'd want to be approached. It's automatic filter out if someone asks me for a contact/date right off the bat. I hate it when people push it.

I find it feels so forced if you jump right into the relationship. I don't want the person to be acting, or be forced to act like what they think they should act like. I want to see how they act normally, and that if I like them it is for their normal selves.

That's quite the catch though, considering I keep my true self somewhat enigmatic until I am sure someone would understand it. I would imagine others do the same...

How could two people who are so good at blending in find each other? It's like some INTJ game of social poker. ;D

WavesSootheMe

12-08-2007, 10:32 PM

That's quite the catch though, considering I keep my true self somewhat enigmatic until I am sure someone would understand it. I would imagine others do the same...

Hmmm, I don't. I lay it out there. Take it or leave it. I don't go up to random people and tell them my life story, but if I'm asked questions, I give honest answers. I figure they might as well see the real me from the start, saves me from wasting my time trying to figure out if someone will understand me or at least try to understand me. The last guy that approached me seemed to be quite shocked with my frankness but at the same time intrigued. Unfortunately, he asked for a date at the end, I offered an email and he walked away with nothing.

banzai

12-08-2007, 10:42 PM

Hmmm, I don't. I lay it out there. Take it or leave it. I don't go up to random people and tell them my life story, but if I'm asked questions, I give honest answers. I figure they might as well see the real me from the start, saves me from wasting my time trying to figure out if someone will understand me or at least try to understand me. The last guy that approached me seemed to be quite shocked with my frankness but at the same time intrigued. Unfortunately, he asked for a date at the end, I offered an email and he walked away with nothing.

Well, I tend to act non-assuming so I don't have to deal with people's issues. I just don't have the time or the energy to deal with people's unavoidable response to my abrasivenesses. If you push hard enough then you'll get a big piece of my mind, though.

Example--I went into a hardware store and picked out a large assortment of what would seem strange and seemingly unrelated items... the cashier asked me what I was working on. Now, I can either spend 20 minutes explaining something that they would never understand or I just feed them something to get off the subject. Or I could tell them what I really think... "if you could understand you probably wouldn't be working at a hardware store", and now their attitude is a potential problem.

I wouldn't go around spilling out details to strangers, but I've had a hard time finding a happy medium... and especially in the regards we're speaking, turning it off.

WavesSootheMe

12-08-2007, 11:27 PM

Example--I went into a hardware store and picked out a large assortment of what would seem strange and seemingly unrelated items... the cashier asked me what I was working on. Now, I can either spend 20 minutes explaining something that they would never understand or I just feed them something to get off the subject. Or I could tell them what I really think... "if you could understand you probably wouldn't be working at a hardware store", and now their attitude is a potential problem.

Yea, that might be a problem, but do you really think things like that about girls you're interested in dating? I'm honest about myself and the world at large, not necessarily about what I think of them. I don't have a problem censoring that at all.

banzai

12-08-2007, 11:57 PM

Yea, that might be a problem, but do you really think things like that about girls you're interested in dating? I'm honest about myself and the world at large, not necessarily about what I think of them. I don't have a problem censoring that at all.

Well, no, like I said, I just have a hard time turning it off. I'm so used to pushing people away from discussing something with me that I forget that the fact that I do want to have discussions with strangers sometimes. The "I hope I get a chance to talk to her some more" seems to get pushed out by "why on earth would you want to get dragged through another conversation".

Another part of it is that, in person, I am very modest... I'm not even sure about this one. In my circle of friends, I'm the alpha and everyone knows it, but with strangers or acquantances I am very careful about establishing myself in that sense.

Seems like I have a creative, curious side to me with an insatiable appetite for discover that wants to be friendly and social but seems to often get overpowered by my other, critical, stubborn, focused half. Although I can appreciate it for tempering me into the disciplined person that I am, it has made things difficult in this sense. :irked:

Lucid

12-09-2007, 12:26 AM

All I can muster is mild interest too! Approaching me successfully without knowing someone that knows me isn't impossible but it takes a lot of patience. The guy that skips the small talk, asks really interesting, probing questions and leaves with only an email (no invitation to dinner, no phone number) probably has the best shot. From there, I like to approach it without the pressure of romantic interest and without going too far out of my way for a person I barely know. Perhaps converse a couple more times and then move on to group things like "My friends and I are doing (some interesting activity) you and a few of your friends are welcome to join us." If I keep in contact and show up for the activity, you at least know I don't hate you. If romantic interest grows from there, then I'll be comfortable moving on to one on one dates, etc. I need that time to just get to know someone as a person without constantly analyzing if they're someone I want to date. That early on I don't really feel much of a connection with anyone and without that connection dating makes me feel empty.

For me it's mostly physical attraction that gets them through the door. Maybe it's shallow, but I'm really picky about what I'm attracted to. I can't help it. I'm just not physically attracted to 95% of the population. I've gone on dates with awesome guys who were intelligent, funny, great conversationalists, doing something with their lives... all around awesome people. But if the physical attraction isn't there, then it's pointless for me. And what I'm attracted to physically isn't usually very conventionally attractive and that doesn't help matters either.

Add to this the fact that the method most males use to approach me is... well... cheesy. And sounds fake. I'm really not impressed by "I have a hot car and need a hot lady for the passenger seat" or "yo, can I get that phone number?" Or even worse (and both of these have happened), "me and my friends think... uh... you're like... a goddess!" accompanied by a slack-jawed stare. And "So, how many blonds does it take to screw in a light bulb?" I had to give that guy credit for both balls and novelty for trying to pick up a blond with a blond joke.

So as you can probably see, I have some trouble meeting people. :)
It's cool though, I enjoy some of the experiences I've had with dating either because they make for good stories (for example, I went on a date once with a guy who showed up so drunk that he passed out on the shoulder of the stranger next to him in the movie theater), or because often I do get to meet cool people in the process, even if I'm not interested in them romantically. You just have to keep your sense of humor and keep an open mind I think. Also, statistically, if you date enough people, you're bound to meet a few that are worth keeping around. :p

WavesSootheMe

12-09-2007, 01:55 AM

But if the physical attraction isn't there, then it's pointless for me. And what I'm attracted to physically isn't usually very conventionally attractive and that doesn't help matters either.

Physical attractiveness is probably the least of my concerns when it comes to attraction. I have my standards, but it's intimately tied to personality and connection for me. I can't look at a guy and think "he's attractive." I have to know him first.

Add to this the fact that the method most males use to approach me is... well... cheesy....

No kidding!

You just have to keep your sense of humor and keep an open mind I think. Also, statistically, if you date enough people, you're bound to meet a few that are worth keeping around. :p

I'm glad you can find the fun in it :). This past year was pretty much my first year of being single since I went off to college in 2000. I threw myself into the dating scene and experimented as much as I could muster. I've gone on so many dates in the last year. Maybe I have a few interesting stories, but mostly I just feel bored and dead inside - unable to connect with anyone. It has warped my view of what's out there. I value my time and I hate wasting it on such a small statistic. Odds-wise (and you even say something similar below) I've found many more worth-while people through friends and groups than through random dating. I don't mind meeting random people, but my filter is high and I really do need to ease into the dating part. I'm now at a point where I'm dating less, but I value the dates that I am going on much more and that's the way I've decided I like it.

banzai

12-09-2007, 03:17 AM

Well, at least you have a venue for dating. I mean, it's not like we have a slew of compatible partners in the first place...

I moved to my current city by myself about a year ago... work in a large multi-building facility with people well advanced into their careers and much older than me. I've had to make a few friends through the things I like to do but past that it's been a bit difficult.

College students take the social network they have at their fingertips for granted... :irked:

WavesSootheMe

12-09-2007, 11:00 AM

College students take the social network they have at their fingertips for granted... :irked:

More than two years out and I haven't left it :embarassed:

Rohsiph

12-09-2007, 11:16 AM

Firstly, the guy has to be pretty smart/good at reading people/my type to be able to tell that how I'd want to be approached. It's automatic filter out if someone asks me for a contact/date right off the bat. I hate it when people push it.

I have trouble understanding this perspective, reflecting on my own methods--

and I guess feel annoyed that I didn't stumble across this tidbit 8 months ago, when I jumped the gun after identifying an INxJ in the wild. O_o

I suppose my approach could be similar if I had to sort out people approaching me, but as it is I've been approached by . . . about 6 people over the last three years, and only one of them was a woman (who ended up giving her number to the other two friends I was with that night).

It's almost hard for me to imagine what it'd be like, to have to fend off strangers . . .

Rei

12-09-2007, 11:50 AM

Well, at least you have a venue for dating. I mean, it's not like we have a slew of compatible partners in the first place...

College students take the social network they have at their fingertips for granted... :irked:

Well lets see
1. I'm mad busy and frantically studying all the time. I'm honestly not looking for a relationship unless I know it's going to be stable/improve my motivation to study.
2. Given 1, I'm most likely not going to meet people who're motivational at a campus pub where most people 'socialize'. Those who are motivational are... most likely locked up and studying/doing volunteer work etc like I am.
3. Given 1 and 2, it is not likely I'll meet anyone interesting that I'd be interested in dating during college. I'm more likely to try to meet people at places I enjoy going to like cool coffee shops, book stores, music pubs, museums etc after I graduate.

When I meet people I wouldn't tell them anything about myself unless they ask; and if they ask I answer the immediate question only... unless it was a very very good question. However, I usually represent myself as accurately as I can. I rarely try to blend... unless I'm at an academic conference, and everyone there are being unidirectional nerds.

I have trouble understanding this perspective, reflecting on my own methods--

and I guess feel annoyed that I didn't stumble across this tidbit 8 months ago, when I jumped the gun after identifying an INxJ in the wild. O_o

I suppose my approach could be similar if I had to sort out people approaching me, but as it is I've been approached by . . . about 6 people over the last three years, and only one of them was a woman (who ended up giving her number to the other two friends I was with that night).

It's almost hard for me to imagine what it'd be like, to have to fend off strangers . . .

IMO INTX types, or maybe specifically INTJs are a little suspicious and very self preserving. I personally rarely believe everything a total stranger at a pub tells me and prefer to depend on what my intuition tells me. Now in order for me to pick up enough for my intuition to work, I'd have to have know the person longer to trust the person. Also INXJ's are not risk takers, we don't invest unless we're more or less sure of the success of something. Because of that I wouldn't date unless it's a long term commitment.

When someone approaches me with breakneck speed I'd automatically build a cautionary barrier. According to my own preference for meeting people, no one can be interested in me as a person (enough to commit) in such a short period of time.

That's my opinion anyway... anyone feel free to contradict me.

Lucid

12-09-2007, 12:01 PM

I'm glad you can find the fun in it :). This past year was pretty much my first year of being single since I went off to college in 2000. I threw myself into the dating scene and experimented as much as I could muster. I've gone on so many dates in the last year. Maybe I have a few interesting stories, but mostly I just feel bored and dead inside - unable to connect with anyone. It has warped my view of what's out there. I value my time and I hate wasting it on such a small statistic. Odds-wise (and you even say something similar below) I've found many more worth-while people through friends and groups than through random dating. I don't mind meeting random people, but my filter is high and I really do need to ease into the dating part. I'm now at a point where I'm dating less, but I value the dates that I am going on much more and that's the way I've decided I like it.

I went through like a 3 or 4 year period when I was dating and nothing was working, or I wasn't meeting anyone at all. I got really depressed and discouraged. So I kind of know how you feel. It sucks when you go through a slump like that. Fortunately I had a pretty good relationship for two years that just ended in August, so I'm feeling much more positive about the whole dating thing now. But I'm sure you'll find someone. Statistically speaking, most people do.

When someone approaches me with breakneck speed I'd automatically build a cautionary barrier. According to my own preference for meeting people, no one can be interested in me as a person (enough to commit) in such a short period of time.

I know what you mean. When people come on too strong too fast it's a real turn off for me too. I tend to think, "You don't even know me. There's no way you can be this into me this quickly. You must be desperate for a relationship for other reasons." And that's a real turn-off. Maybe that's suspicious, but that's what goes through my head.
Also, when someone I've been dating for a week or two calls all the time or gets upset if I can't hang out because I already had other plans or something... that's a turn off too. I tend to think, "That's how you are after two weeks? How are you going to be after a year?" Because I need much more space than that.

Rei

12-09-2007, 02:26 PM

I went through like a 3 or 4 year period when I was dating and nothing was working, or I wasn't meeting anyone at all. I got really depressed and discouraged. So I kind of know how you feel. It sucks when you go through a slump like that. Fortunately I had a pretty good relationship for two years that just ended in August, so I'm feeling much more positive about the whole dating thing now. But I'm sure you'll find someone. Statistically speaking, most people do.

I'd be more comforted if you said, "most INTJs do."

I know what you mean. When people come on too strong too fast it's a real turn off for me too. I tend to think, "You don't even know me. There's no way you can be this into me this quickly. You must be desperate for a relationship for other reasons." And that's a real turn-off. Maybe that's suspicious, but that's what goes through my head.
Also, when someone I've been dating for a week or two calls all the time or gets upset if I can't hang out because I already had other plans or something... that's a turn off too. I tend to think, "That's how you are after two weeks? How are you going to be after a year?" Because I need much more space than that.

I'm okay with being bummed out if I can't hang out. Calling all the time might be something I could work out. Then again I don't really have anything to base this on.

PortInStorm

12-09-2007, 02:47 PM

I come from a forensic psychology background, and not dating strangers from a bar is a solid security measure (does it even need to be said?). I would absolutely need either the recommendation of a good friend (and a friend set-up was how I met my husband) or some time to observe them "in their natural habitat" so to speak. Because it's not always possible to get out safely once you've decided on the second date that this guy gives you the creeps. My husband still thinks it's wierd that I insisted on meeting him at the restaurant for our first official date so he wouldn't know where I lived (without investigation) and I'd have my own vehicle if things went awry. Oh well, I was safe.

"I guess most females don't understand that my time, attention, and intelligent discussion are things I don't waste without a reason (i.e., that I'm somewhat interested in getting to know them better)." Well said. Sensors need such obvious cues. Obviously it can be a little frustrating with Intuitives' subtlety (sp?) at times (almost like blindly patting your way down a hallway), but it's such an elegant little game that intuition lets us win. If only I had learned to go with my gut feeling a long time ago. But no, I had to listen to all that "He's just not into you" crap :-). Doesn't necessarily apply to us.

The Many

12-09-2007, 03:14 PM

I know what you mean. When people come on too strong too fast it's a real turn off for me too. I tend to think, "You don't even know me. There's no way you can be this into me this quickly. You must be desperate for a relationship for other reasons." And that's a real turn-off. Maybe that's suspicious, but that's what goes through my head.
Also, when someone I've been dating for a week or two calls all the time or gets upset if I can't hang out because I already had other plans or something... that's a turn off too. I tend to think, "That's how you are after two weeks? How are you going to be after a year?" Because I need much more space than that.

Reminds me of a stalker I had only a couple of weeks ago. Essentially a girl called me up during a couple of weeks after having talked to me for 10 minutes at a party, she said she couldn't live without me and that kind of stuff. I mean... no. Just no. But on the other hand, the one time I fell in love it took about five minutes from me meeting her until it was a (sad) fact, so I know it can happen.

It seems like most INTJs are a lot more specific and picky about partner choices than I am, though. If there is nothing I actively dislike about a girl I usually don't mind her, but for feelings to develop I probably have to relate to her well as a person, as well as be sexually interested in her. This doesn't often happen...

WavesSootheMe

12-09-2007, 03:45 PM

IMO INTX types, or maybe specifically INTJs are a little suspicious and very self preserving. I personally rarely believe everything a total stranger at a pub tells me and prefer to depend on what my intuition tells me. Now in order for me to pick up enough for my intuition to work, I'd have to have know the person longer to trust the person. Also INXJ's are not risk takers, we don't invest unless we're more or less sure of the success of something. Because of that I wouldn't date unless it's a long term commitment.

When someone approaches me with breakneck speed I'd automatically build a cautionary barrier. According to my own preference for meeting people, no one can be interested in me as a person (enough to commit) in such a short period of time.

That's my opinion anyway... anyone feel free to contradict me.

Exactly

I went through like a 3 or 4 year period when I was dating and nothing was working, or I wasn't meeting anyone at all. I got really depressed and discouraged. So I kind of know how you feel. It sucks when you go through a slump like that. Fortunately I had a pretty good relationship for two years that just ended in August, so I'm feeling much more positive about the whole dating thing now. But I'm sure you'll find someone. Statistically speaking, most people do.

People seem to be confusing my dislike for casual dating with a complete lack of hope in dating at all. This is not the case. It's quite a transition to go from two back to back three year relationships to being single. I did the best I could in the past year to process everything and figure out my place in this new dating world. I'm in an excellent place now. I don't think it's sad that I can no longer stomach going through the process of weeding out random strangers. It's not the only way to meet someone, as I said I'm dating less but in a way that's more meaningful to me. Plus I haven't completely shut the door on the random stranger thing, it's just not as easy to get through it anymore.

Rohsiph

12-09-2007, 05:52 PM

IMO INTX types, or maybe specifically INTJs are a little suspicious and very self preserving. I personally rarely believe everything a total stranger at a pub tells me and prefer to depend on what my intuition tells me. Now in order for me to pick up enough for my intuition to work, I'd have to have know the person longer to trust the person. Also INXJ's are not risk takers, we don't invest unless we're more or less sure of the success of something. Because of that I wouldn't date unless it's a long term commitment.

When someone approaches me with breakneck speed I'd automatically build a cautionary barrier. According to my own preference for meeting people, no one can be interested in me as a person (enough to commit) in such a short period of time.

That's my opinion anyway... anyone feel free to contradict me.

I think your view follows . . . if people threw themselves at me, I can imagine adopting a similar opinion.

I wonder, though . . . the specific event I mentioned was noticing a girl in an audience at a theatre show, and deducing that she was part of the production crew. I figured I'd have no hope of ever really running into her again (this was right at the very end of a Spring semester), so I tested my deduction by punching her name into Facebook . . . and then I sent her a message. I explained: I saw her at the show, figured out who she was from the program booklet, and hadn't introduced myself in person because (truthfully) I hadn't recognized how attracted I was to her until after I left (the usual for me). I asked if she would like to meet me somewhere on campus, so we might be able to get to know each other--and I left it at that . . . and never got a response.

Of course, I have seen her a few times on campus this semester . . . but now I feel like she'd identify me as a stalker if I dared to approach her, so I keep avoiding her. Ah well . . .

Diana

12-09-2007, 06:25 PM

I know what you mean. When people come on too strong too fast it's a real turn off for me too. I tend to think, "You don't even know me. There's no way you can be this into me this quickly. You must be desperate for a relationship for other reasons." And that's a real turn-off. Maybe that's suspicious, but that's what goes through my head.
Also, when someone I've been dating for a week or two calls all the time or gets upset if I can't hang out because I already had other plans or something... that's a turn off too. I tend to think, "That's how you are after two weeks? How are you going to be after a year?" Because I need much more space than that.

Oh, this is exactly like something that happened to me just a few months ago! There was this guy from my school (at best guess, an ESFP) who would not quit asking to be in a relationship with me, and I kept telling him "I don't even know you...you don't even know me.." [We'd talked only a few times!]..to which he responded, "yeah I do! I know you really well! I know ___ and ___ and ___." Well, whoever he thought he knew - it couldn't possibly be the real me, for there's no way I'd reveal my full self so easily, so soon.
When he started his threats about wanting to marry me , I ran for the hills!!!
You just [I]have to be suspicious of these types of people out of pure self defense. Deduced from things later that he basically was not a very emotionally healthy guy...yikes..

Lucid

12-09-2007, 07:15 PM

Oh, this is exactly like something that happened to me just a few months ago! There was this guy from my school (at best guess, an ESFP) who would not quit asking to be in a relationship with me, and I kept telling him "I don't even know you...you don't even know me.." [We'd talked only a few times!]..to which he responded, "yeah I do! I know you really well! I know ___ and ___ and ___." Well, whoever he thought he knew - it couldn't possibly be the real me, for there's no way I'd reveal my full self so easily, so soon.
When he started his threats about wanting to marry me , I ran for the hills!!!
You just [I]have to be suspicious of these types of people out of pure self defense. Deduced from things later that he basically was not a very emotionally healthy guy...yikes..

Yes, I've had similar experiences! Something that maybe some people who are critical of some of the females on this thread not being thrilled about dating complete strangers don't seem to understand is that for women, dating complete strangers can be dangerous. Probably for anybody (judging by the experience The Many described). I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, just that it can be a little sketchy.

The Many

12-09-2007, 07:27 PM

Yes, I've had similar experiences! Something that maybe some people who are critical of some of the females on this thread not being thrilled about dating complete strangers don't seem to understand is that for women, dating complete strangers can be dangerous. Probably for anybody (judging by the experience The Many described). I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, just that it can be a little sketchy.

You are quite correct. I have learnt that this girl who has been calling and text messaging me actually has a boyfriend with an Arabian name. Now I'm not one to assume things about people, but honour killings are too dangerous to be discounted. It's possible that she only wants to test him and use me as cannon fodder. She's been quiet for a few weeks now though, which is a good thing.

Rei

12-09-2007, 07:50 PM

I think your view follows . . . if people threw themselves at me, I can imagine adopting a similar opinion.

I wonder, though . . . the specific event I mentioned was noticing a girl in an audience at a theatre show, and deducing that she was part of the production crew. I figured I'd have no hope of ever really running into her again (this was right at the very end of a Spring semester), so I tested my deduction by punching her name into Facebook . . . and then I sent her a message. I explained: I saw her at the show, figured out who she was from the program booklet, and hadn't introduced myself in person because (truthfully) I hadn't recognized how attracted I was to her until after I left (the usual for me). I asked if she would like to meet me somewhere on campus, so we might be able to get to know each other--and I left it at that . . . and never got a response.

Of course, I have seen her a few times on campus this semester . . . but now I feel like she'd identify me as a stalker if I dared to approach her, so I keep avoiding her. Ah well . . .

:stunned:
I'd be pretty freaked out if I were her.

I'm a bit of a daredevil so I'd actually reply suggesting just an instant messenger exchange to start off... just to see what you're like. But the notion of meeting up is way overboard. You may not be a bad guy, but how are we supposed to know that? Better to be overcautious than to be found raped and murdered in the bushes the next morning.

I hate when random people find me on facebook and try to add me (some don't even note me... seriously, what the hell?). I don't even know who they are. Some of them are like 10+ years older than me too... freaky isn't it? GAWD :yuck:

Lucid

12-09-2007, 08:05 PM

I think your view follows . . . if people threw themselves at me, I can imagine adopting a similar opinion.

I wonder, though . . . the specific event I mentioned was noticing a girl in an audience at a theatre show, and deducing that she was part of the production crew. I figured I'd have no hope of ever really running into her again (this was right at the very end of a Spring semester), so I tested my deduction by punching her name into Facebook . . . and then I sent her a message. I explained: I saw her at the show, figured out who she was from the program booklet, and hadn't introduced myself in person because (truthfully) I hadn't recognized how attracted I was to her until after I left (the usual for me). I asked if she would like to meet me somewhere on campus, so we might be able to get to know each other--and I left it at that . . . and never got a response.

Of course, I have seen her a few times on campus this semester . . . but now I feel like she'd identify me as a stalker if I dared to approach her, so I keep avoiding her. Ah well . . .

You know, she may not have responded for a variety of reasons, not just because you were so forward. I'm not sure that helps at all, but maybe you just aren't her type, or she didn't feel she had anything in common with you. Maybe she was dating someone else.

On this topic though, I'd be interested to hear how people deal with rejection and how people go about breaking it off with someone or turning them down.

elsdfr

12-09-2007, 08:19 PM

On this topic though, I'd be interested to hear how people deal with rejection and how people go about breaking it off with someone or turning them down.

INTJs don't get rejected and once you're in, you're in for life :p

Seriously though, not well at all. I couldn't use a pickup line to save my life and can't admit strong feelings because I've been that weak before and and got burnt badly.. damn you women, damn you!

Rei

12-09-2007, 09:39 PM

On this topic though, I'd be interested to hear how people deal with rejection and how people go about breaking it off with someone or turning them down.

I'm female... and I'm highly conservative in terms of these kinds of things. I've never actually made a move. However, I have made it clear I was mmm... interested (which already took a lot because like elsdfr said, admitting feelings isn't my strong point. Partly because deep down, I do see feelings as a weakness. And partly because feelings are rather foreign to me and I don't really know how to explain or deal with it.). The guy either didn't get it or wasn't interested in dating. How I'm dealing with it? Not very well. The fact that it's so up in the air is killing my need for closure. In the past getting over people I was interested in. I had to find one very good reason why it was 'wrong' or that it wouldn't have worked out. Until I do, I'm a bit of a wreck because I simply don't know what to do when feelings happen to me and logic doesn't make things make sense.

Breaking it off. The first, and last time I did that I sent an e-mail (yes I know I'm horrible, but I don't think I could have said it in person) and said it wasn't working out for me. I think I'd just turned 15 :p so there's my excuse.

I'm usually extremely straight forward about turning someone down. I dislike the ritual of leading people on. Unfortunately, even being straight forward doesn't work that well :irked:
For some really messed up reason, guys think I'm playing hard to get. Meanwhile I'm going bonkers with annoyance that literally telling them "I'm not interested" and to "leave me alone" isn't clear enough.

Diana

12-09-2007, 10:29 PM

On this topic though, I'd be interested to hear how people deal with rejection and how people go about breaking it off with someone or turning them down.

I'm not often the direct initiator of things with guys, so I don't often face rejection. But just because I don't initiate doesn't mean I act oblivious...;)

In terms of rejecting or breaking it off with someone, it depends on the depth of the relationship and depth of respect they've treated me with.

Dry and unromantic as it sounds, I tend to approach relationships with a mental checklist of standards/expectations of the person, to which they are usually made aware before I decide to be in a relationship with them. (A few specific main things here...not an unattainable standard) Some of those are negotiable and some are not. That way, if the relationship needs breaking off, I can somewhat have an objective reason for it. I don't think I'd ever say something like "I dunno...I'm just not that into you any more..." but rather something like, "Well, I was looking for a person who wants to complement me in "x" areas or who isn't [insert violation of standard here]...etc." Even if feelings remain, justifying my actions with logic goes along way for knowing it was the right thing to do.

This topic reminds me of my parents story! While casually dating, my mom (ESTx) broke things off with my dad (INTJ) a few times before they eventually really began a serious relationship. One time, my dad apparently was trying to gauge if there was any chance of a future at all with her, and asked her to specifically define what percentage of a chance he had. My mom was so annoyed with having to be so black and white about things and told him, "You have about a 14% chance of ever dating me again!!"
Guess he overcame the odds...

Rei

12-09-2007, 10:56 PM

I just thought this would be an interesting addition to the thread...
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Basically for me, the "relationship temptation" area overlapping the the "friend" area is virtually the only area I consider the "dating zone". Either that, or "Dating zone" also has to be "friend".
Someone needs to make this 3-D with time on the z-axis

WavesSootheMe

12-09-2007, 11:39 PM

Since I never make the first move (I did once but it was a very specific situation with a friend and I was already positive of what the results would be), I don't often deal with rejection. It's odd, it doesn't even really occur to me to assess what I feel for someone until I know that they're interested. Somehow they think I'm flirting (maybe I am without realizing it?) and from that they get up the courage to make a move. After "the move" I think about what I feel for them and if I'm interested I'll make the second move. I used to be far less clear with my rejections, but that just led to more drama, so now I'm completely and totally honest. It's when I have mixed feelings that it's difficult to figure out what to say. The ends to my relationships have always been mutual or executed by me (my last ex did temporarily end our relationship the first time, but it was to be with his mother while she was fighting cancer). Deciding when to end a relationship is tough, actually ending the relationship is the easy part. I do it in person or on the phone and give a clear explanation if asked.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The "relationship temptation" in the F buddy zone doesn't even make sense to me. How can you base a relationship on pure looks? These zones should be angled or something. That "relationship temptation" in the friend zone=my current situation. The question is if the mental attraction, which is certainly there, is enough to overcome the lower ranking on the physical attraction (which isn't 0, just average). I'm thinking the only way to find that out is to stop thinking and try.

And yes, someone should make an axis for time :)

banzai

12-09-2007, 11:48 PM

The "relationship temptation" in the F buddy zone doesn't even make sense to me. How can you base a relationship on pure looks?

Let's take a moment to think about all of the people we have met in life... :laugh:

These zones should be angled or something. That "relationship temptation" in the friend zone=my current situation. The question is if the mental attraction, which is certainly there, is enough to overcome the lower ranking on the physical attraction (which isn't 0, just average). I'm thinking the only way to find that out is to stop thinking and try.

I think you underestimate how much attraction develops when you're in a relationship with someone. After all, initial physical attraction is somewhat mathematical... and most people aren't horribly disfigured, not too hard hard to learnn to like what they look like after long enough.

rwyatt365

12-10-2007, 11:21 AM

The Many

12-10-2007, 11:33 AM

I think we can conclude that the main reason INTJs have a hard time finding anyone is that we sit and draw diagrams online instead of meeting anyone.

banzai

12-10-2007, 11:48 AM

I think we can conclude that the main reason INTJs have a hard time finding anyone is that we sit and draw diagrams online instead of meeting anyone.

I was thinking something along the same lines...

"Only an INTJ would make a graph of this..."

Then I imagined a graph-aided relationship.

"See, Sally, you're about... -here- on the graph, and I don't see you moving to *here*, I don't think this relationship is going to work out..."

rwyatt365

12-10-2007, 11:52 AM

I think we can conclude that the main reason INTJs have a hard time finding anyone is that we sit and draw diagrams online instead of meeting anyone.
Yeah, but think of the time savings when you do meet someone;

She: Hey, how 'bout a good time?
Me: [pulls out diagram and points to "F-Buddy"] You are here
She: OK

Lucid

12-10-2007, 12:06 PM

I think we can conclude that the main reason INTJs have a hard time finding anyone is that we sit and draw diagrams online instead of meeting anyone.

I laughed.

However, with respect to F-buddies and diagrams... I've had a couple F-buddies. In every case I found them both physically attractive and mentally attractive, but for many other reasons, undateable. All were and still are close friends as well as f-buddies. One notable example is a guy who was actually my high school sweetheart. (it sounds so cheesy to say that). He is both mentally and physically attractive, but we had already dated and knew why it didn't work out. We had great sex, though. He's still married now and he's still one of my best friends (I was his best man in his wedding). I had another f-buddy who was also a close friend where there was mutual attraction. However, he had just gotten out of a 7 year relationship and also has three children (not something I was really ready for at age 23) and to further complicate a relationship, he's my best friend's roommate. Although that last part does make the f-buddy thing extremely convenient.

I think there's more to who we date and why we date them or not than physical and mental attractiveness. At least there seems to be for me, which may also be why I've had so few relationships. :)

With regard to rejection: I prefer to be broken up with over email or over the phone. Then no one has to drive, I can be upset (if I'm going to be) in private. And it gives me a chance to sort through my feelings about it before I respond. I have once or twice taken breakups very hard, but in the last few years I generally get over it in a week or two.

When I have to reject some stranger's advances I just tell him I have a boyfriend. Often I get, "What's your man got to do with me?" in response, which is frustrating. But I find it's better than saying, "I'm not interested because I think you're unattractive and somewhat stupid," which is often the truth of the matter.

If I have to break up with someone I usually do it over the phone if we've only been dating for a few weeks. I tell them that I don't think it's going to work and why (usually because I'm not interested in them romantically) and I make a point to only apologize for it once. I get angry when people break up with me and keep saying they're sorry. Also, I try to do it as quickly as possible. I use the "band-aid removal" technique to ending relationships.

radioactivez0r

12-10-2007, 01:06 PM

I know what you mean. When people come on too strong too fast it's a real turn off for me too. I tend to think, "You don't even know me. There's no way you can be this into me this quickly. You must be desperate for a relationship for other reasons." And that's a real turn-off. Maybe that's suspicious, but that's what goes through my head.
Also, when someone I've been dating for a week or two calls all the time or gets upset if I can't hang out because I already had other plans or something... that's a turn off too. I tend to think, "That's how you are after two weeks? How are you going to be after a year?" Because I need much more space than that.

When someone approaches me with breakneck speed I'd automatically build a cautionary barrier. According to my own preference for meeting people, no one can be interested in me as a person (enough to commit) in such a short period of time.

That's my opinion anyway... anyone feel free to contradict me.

I think this is one of my bigger issues when meeting people I take an instant liking to (even if I learn things about them that don't necessarily excite me a great deal). A friend of mine told me I tend to jump right in, and I'm sure that's true. The problem for me is defining that happy medium between "being polite" and "being overly aggressive" wherein the person tunes into my interest but isn't put off by it.

Rei

12-10-2007, 04:03 PM

With respect Rei, I offer this modification to your diagram;

The mod's are;

My f-buddy never overlaps the Zone of PAIN (mutually exclusive domains)
There is a Dead-Zone where no matter how physically attractive, if they can't meet minimum mental capacity they will not become a f-buddy (sorry Jessica S.!)
A F-buddy is, and always be a f-buddy – minimum mental requirements are again necessary to rise above the purely physical, no chance of relationship temptation.
Friends of sufficient mental attractiveness can rise to 'Relationship Temptation' status and can potentially migrate into 'marriage Potential' or 'Marriage Inevitable' status (depending on physical attractiveness) and could – if sufficiently fine – go directly to 'Marriage Inevitable' status.
Dating zone can range from mere awkwardness to marriage depending on the combination of mental and physical attractiveness.
And of course there is the mythical "Goddess" zone (no mortal can achieve this state). 'Nuff said?

I just ripped the diagram off from somewhere. It definitely needed some adjustments, even for myself. Thanks for doing it for me :thumbsup:
Though I have to comment about that hole b/w friend the middle ovally thing... I feel like someone's going to come along and be like "omg I'm not in a group."

"Only an INTJ would make a graph of this..."

Then I imagined a graph-aided relationship.

"See, Sally, you're about... -here- on the graph, and I don't see you moving to *here*, I don't think this relationship is going to work out..."

LOL!
Well it makes everything so much more analyzable. Clear-cut way to set your boundaries.

I think there's more to who we date and why we date them or not than physical and mental attractiveness. At least there seems to be for me, which may also be why I've had so few relationships. :)

I agree, there are things like lifestyle and family background etc etc. Though IMO, in a way it's just part of mental attraction.

I think this is one of my bigger issues when meeting people I take an instant liking to (even if I learn things about them that don't necessarily excite me a great deal). A friend of mine told me I tend to jump right in, and I'm sure that's true. The problem for me is defining that happy medium between "being polite" and "being overly aggressive" wherein the person tunes into my interest but isn't put off by it.

Yeah, I sometimes get a little too overly casual about being all guyish. Some people just don't take jokes as well as we think they should...

PortInStorm

12-11-2007, 10:51 AM

Yeah, but think of the time savings when you do meet someone;

She: Hey, how 'bout a good time?
Me: [pulls out diagram and points to "F-Buddy"] You are here
She: OK

:laugh:That KILLED me!

rwyatt365

12-11-2007, 11:16 AM

I just ripped the diagram off from somewhere. It definitely needed some adjustments, even for myself. Thanks for doing it for me :thumbsup:
Though I have to comment about that hole b/w friend the middle ovally thing... I feel like someone's going to come along and be like "omg I'm not in a group."
Then all you have to do is say "Well, just raise your mental capacity and we're good to go!" (or some such thing.
I agree, there are things like lifestyle and family background etc etc. Though IMO, in a way it's just part of mental attraction.
Those are just extra dimensions on the plot. Imagine a 5-dimensional hypercube. "Well Sally, according to this, you need 4% more looks, and your family quotient is kind low. But I think I can make an exception this time - will you marry me?"

trap

12-11-2007, 11:24 AM

Lucid

12-11-2007, 11:47 AM

trap

12-11-2007, 12:13 PM

I think many people misinterpret the INTx tendency to analyze what we want in a partner as being some kind of rigid definition of who we will or won't date. This is not the case. And many non-INTx's don't seem to understand this process and so take it as you have.

There is a tendency though to describe the person or the qualities they are looking for in a vacuum, in an individualistic, objective sense. When I get comments from my INT friends, they are said in this sort of way, like "you are a persuasive person", not "you have influenced my thinking about X". It's said in a way that they are out of the picture, the interaction is not acknowledged directly, it's this objective, "you're this sort of person", sometimes it seems like a compliment. But I think it's symbolic of that lack of attention to the interaction & subjective appraisal of how a certain person affects him/her.

An important question of compatibility in friendships & relationships is that you like the way that person makes you feel, it's just not acknowledged much by NTs, particularly INTs. For instance, being aware that a friend values your intelligence & way of thinking (even if they can't think the same way) would reinforce your need to feel competent.

Yes, all relationships are about compromise. The question is how much are you willing to compromise. I completely understand not wanting to do something that is perceived as "changing yourself" for the acceptance of another person. INTx's don't expect a partner to like everything about us, and most of us are willing to make small changes and compromises to be with someone we care about. But there's definitely a line where the minute changes become too much. If I have to change most of who I am to be with someone, I think it's safe to conclude that I'm not the right person for them anyway.

Ok, I get that. I just want the feedback loop/attachment style/etc factored in. I think it's important.

rwyatt365

12-11-2007, 12:13 PM

How do you respond to someone who says "I don't want to change who I am to be with X", as a loss of integrity?

Isn't every relationship about some degree of compromise in many ways, personality/temperament included? Where does this belief come from, this idealistic vision of someone accepting every minute quality of myself? Isn't the question that each person needs to value the differences in the other person to make it work?

I just hear INTs that have this idealistic vision of who they should date, marry, etc.--they will pick apart the individual qualities of a person on paper without much thought put into the interaction & feedback loop that is created with each person--it's too individualistic, with less attention to the dynamic between the 2 people.
I think of people like this; everyone is like a rubber band, able to stretch and grow but only to a limit. Once the "pressure" to modify is released, the person returns to some "resting state". Also, if stretched beyond their limit, the person will "break". Now every person is different in the level of "pressure" necessary to cause them to begin to stretch, and the amount of stretch it takes before that person will break.

Compromise in relationships is about the level and duration of influences (that "pressure" in the example above) that people exert on one another. As long as there is some influence (a hint, an argument, guilt, sex, etc.) there is a possibility for change. And the interplay of influences between two people results in some degree of compromise, or another. Remove that influence and the person "snaps back" to their resting state (i.e. what is comfortable for them). Sometimes the influence is too much for one party or the other – that's when people "snap" (Holy crap! Why did she go off like that?!) Concerning INTJs; the tendency for our type is to have a very high yield-point, that is it takes a lot of pressure for us to "alter form" (i.e. conform). And we have a fracture-point that is not too far removed from that yield-point, that is if you push us too hard we'll snap pretty badly if pushed too far.

INTJs are more than willing to let anyone and everyone "be themselves" – it's just that the way that most people are is harmful to our psyche, and we know it (or find it out soon). When we find a personality that is "toxic" to us, rather than test the waters we simply say "no". It's not being idealistic – on the contrary, it's being very rational. Why subject yourself to a bad situation just to "taste the diversity of life"? It's not devaluing the other person, it's accepting them for what they are and recognizing that what might be will turn out poorly. To an INTJ, that is being efficient (to others, it is being cold).

As far as "picking apart" other people, that happens when someone refuses to accept what they have been told by the INTJ, "Why can't we get together?" we're asked and we answer, "Because…". We're said to be picking the other person apart, when actually all we're doing is reasonably and rationally responding to the question that was asked. Many INTJ have the philosophy "If you don't want to hear the answer, don't ask the question".

Lucid

12-11-2007, 12:29 PM

I think of people like this; everyone is like a rubber band, able to stretch and grow but only to a limit. Once the "pressure" to modify is released, the person returns to some "resting state". Also, if stretched beyond their limit, the person will "break". Now every person is different in the level of "pressure" necessary to cause them to begin to stretch, and the amount of stretch it takes before that person will break.

Yes, there's a big difference between, "She likes facial hair, so I'm growing a beard." and "I'm not allowed to hang out with most of my friends anymore, I had to change my religious beliefs and my major in school, plus I'm not allowed to play video games or watch zombie movies anymore."
Each person has a limit of what they are willing to change.

There is a tendency though to describe the person or the qualities they are looking for in a vacuum, in an individualistic, objective sense. When I get comments from my INT friends, they are said in this sort of way, like "you are a persuasive person", not "you have influenced my thinking about X". It's said in a way that they are out of the picture, the interaction is not acknowledged directly, it's this objective, "you're this sort of person", sometimes it seems like a compliment. But I think it's symbolic of that lack of attention to the interaction & subjective appraisal of how a certain person affects him/her.

What your INT friends are saying is this: "You are a persuasive person (to me)." Since they are the ones speaking, the "to me" part is implied (in their minds) and doesn't need to be vocalized. At least that's my guess. I don't know your INT friends, but that's how I generally think and speak.

An important question of compatibility in friendships & relationships is that you like the way that person makes you feel, it's just not acknowledged much by NTs, particularly INTs. For instance, being aware that a friend values your intelligence & way of thinking (even if they can't think the same way) would reinforce your need to feel competent.

I think this is actually something like the above. Of course we want the person we're with to make us feel good when we're around them. That almost goes without saying to our way of thinking. When I say, "I look for these certain qualities in a mate," what I mean is, "These are the qualities I've found, through experience, make me enjoy spending time with a person and make me like how I feel when I'm around them."
I think that many non-INT types view this "liking how you feel when you're around someone" as an almost mystical quality beyond quantification. And to an extent, there has to be something unquantified about it (the person's general attitude, etc.). The stuff that's not quantifiable doesn't enter into our "ideal" descriptions because we can't quantify it. But it should go without saying that it's a requirement. Why would I want to date someone who made me feel crappy when I was with them?

INT types analyze why they feel good around a certain person. What is it about this person that makes them feel good in their company. We then take the traits we identify and look for them in others. If we meet someone new with completely different traits that make us like them we are accepting of this and add the new traits to our mental lists. I think that's the feedback/loop/attachment style. We are aware of it, and it does matter a great deal to us. We just describe it in different terms than many others do.

rwyatt365

12-11-2007, 12:46 PM

There is a tendency though to describe the person or the qualities they are looking for in a vacuum, in an individualistic, objective sense. When I get comments from my INT friends, they are said in this sort of way, like "you are a persuasive person", not "you have influenced my thinking about X". It's said in a way that they are out of the picture, the interaction is not acknowledged directly, it's this objective, "you're this sort of person", sometimes it seems like a compliment. But I think it's symbolic of that lack of attention to the interaction & subjective appraisal of how a certain person affects him/her.
I've found myself doing this as a matter of course, and being lambasted because of it (so it's a big sore-spot with me). When I respond to someone, or make a comment to someone about a quality that they have the first words that come out are "You are…" (you are persuasive, you are pretty, you are standing on my toe). I'm not consciously trying to objectify that person – as a matter of fact I am trying (in my mind) to "subjectify" them, to show what I think of them. For me to say "you have influenced my thinking…" is as foreign to me as trying to say the same to them in Swahili – the thought just doesn't enter into my mind.

It could be said that this is due to a lack of attention, etc…as you say (and I won't say that this is not entirely true). But, it's just how my brain is wired. I don't make a conscious effort to try to withdraw from a conversation/interaction. It is my way of trying to enter into the same! And to that point I would posit this; is the person that doesn't understand this of me trying to force me into their paradigm? Are they not taking my personal foibles into account and showing a lack of attention to my needs as an INTJ? By asking that I become as they are, are they in turn ignoring the "essential me"? If so, then who's the worse offender?

trap

12-11-2007, 01:44 PM

I've found myself doing this as a matter of course, and being lambasted because of it (so it's a big sore-spot with me). When I respond to someone, or make a comment to someone about a quality that they have the first words that come out are "You are…" (you are persuasive, you are pretty, you are standing on my toe). I'm not consciously trying to objectify that person – as a matter of fact I am trying (in my mind) to "subjectify" them, to show what I think of them. For me to say "you have influenced my thinking…" is as foreign to me as trying to say the same to them in Swahili – the thought just doesn't enter into my mind.

It could be said that this is due to a lack of attention, etc…as you say (and I won't say that this is not entirely true). But, it's just how my brain is wired. I don't make a conscious effort to try to withdraw from a conversation/interaction. It is my way of trying to enter into the same! And to that point I would posit this; is the person that doesn't understand this of me trying to force me into their paradigm? Are they not taking my personal foibles into account and showing a lack of attention to my needs as an INTJ? By asking that I become as they are, are they in turn ignoring the "essential me"? If so, then who's the worse offender?

Oh, I'm just trying to understand, my nature is to adapt to who I'm talking to, & I find myself trying to say things in third person back to an INT, because I know they value that sort of objectivity. But I also notice that when I put it in personal terms, that is appreciated, just like I would appreciate it. When talking about objective systems, I think the NT way is better, when talking about people, I think the personal NF approach is better & fits better. But I try to adapt & I think it's cute when I get an "objective" compliment.

I do think there are overarching goals beyond type like good relationship communication, where maybe both partners need to compromise their natural way of communicating to accommodate the other person, compromise to a degree that is "acceptable". And I think the INT objective way could be easily misinterpreted by a lot of types.

WavesSootheMe

12-11-2007, 10:25 PM

And I think the INT objective way could be easily misinterpreted by a lot of types.

It can be, but only by those that are making too many assumptions about me from the start. All it would take is a question, an effort to understand the true intentions behind what I say, as I often have to do to understand others that think in different ways than me.

Ribcakes

12-15-2007, 01:57 AM

If a girl is dumber than I, she can go to hell. Stupid chicks are a complete turnoff.

that is my philosophy as well.
i think clubbing is just a way for people to get laid really
very few real relationships come out of that type of situation

Solaris

12-16-2007, 11:41 PM

How do you respond to someone who says "I don't want to change who I am to be with X", as a loss of integrity?

I actually view that as maintaining integrity. I know who I am, and I know what is and is not compatible with that. Also, I like who I am. I won't change myself *for* people. I will, however, change myself if I see a reason to do so -- but other's feelings are almost never a reason for such action.

Isn't every relationship about some degree of compromise in many ways, personality/temperament included? Where does this belief come from, this idealistic vision of someone accepting every minute quality of myself? Isn't the question that each person needs to value the differences in the other person to make it work?

I just hear INTs that have this idealistic vision of who they should date, marry, etc.--they will pick apart the individual qualities of a person on paper without much thought put into the interaction & feedback loop that is created with each person--it's too individualistic, with less attention to the dynamic between the 2 people.

It seems you don't understand the inner workings of NTs very well.

Solaris added to this post, 3 minutes and 38 seconds later...

Oh, I'm just trying to understand, my nature is to adapt to who I'm talking to, & I find myself trying to say things in third person back to an INT, because I know they value that sort of objectivity. But I also notice that when I put it in personal terms, that is appreciated, just like I would appreciate it. When talking about objective systems, I think the NT way is better, when talking about people, I think the personal NF approach is better & fits better. But I try to adapt & I think it's cute when I get an "objective" compliment.

I do think there are overarching goals beyond type like good relationship communication, where maybe both partners need to compromise their natural way of communicating to accommodate the other person, compromise to a degree that is "acceptable". And I think the INT objective way could be easily misinterpreted by a lot of types.

It seems more sensible to me to, instead, find somebody who communicates in the same way as I. I've been in relationships and friendships where we communicated in vastly different ways, and they weren't that successful. Therefore, I still don't change myself for others, and value others as who they are (not who I think they should be so they can communicate better with me, they are just different, that's all).

Sunnyoneshine

12-18-2007, 05:16 AM

i don't like clubs, but love the music (most of the time). Since I spend so much time thinking its nice not to have to think (or be able to talk) occasionally.

Each to their own. Dating is generally emotive (from a female perspective), which is not an INTJ forte to start with.

rocksteady

12-20-2007, 02:27 PM

I can't wait to meet a woman who's dating graphs overlaps mine!

And, a bit late i know, but I was skimming through the clubbing conversation and felt I was qualified to add something. Club's can be interesting places to say the least. I have a lot of experience with working in them and marketing for them, I was also a DJ at several nightclubs with varying levels of reputation. I found one thing to be true, the game is rigged for those in power, so it's best to take advantage. Normal social rules don't apply in the club atmosphere when you are part of the "in crowd". It makes for a much more enjoyable experience I'd say. So basically, I agree that from the average patrons standpoint, clubs generally are not fun for our personality types, but if you are in a position of leadership or power, it can be quite fun! interesting experiences for sure!

Pinkie

12-20-2007, 03:28 PM

Ahhh, the dating scene. I am so glad that I'm well out of all that... the trouble is that the entire thing is so false, and I just don't understand it. When I was younger I used to read all of these teeny books where the girl, like, ZOMG REALLY LIKED (like, REALLY REALLY LIKED) the boy but ohno she just can't tell him or she'll DIE, so she just sends out stupid mixed signals until some Deus Ex Machina comes along and makes everything go Happily Ever After.

Why can't people just be simple?

L30

12-20-2007, 03:51 PM

Ahhh, the dating scene. I am so glad that I'm well out of all that... the trouble is that the entire thing is so false, and I just don't understand it.
[..]
Why can't people just be simple?
Actually I found my girlfriend by just asking a random girl out and grabbing her when the right time came..
If you want it to be easy make it easy .. (the fundamental flaw most people make is to fall in love too soon, if u see a girl u like u must flirt and ask her out immediately)

quentin

12-20-2007, 09:47 PM

If you want it to be easy make it easy .. (the fundamental flaw most people make is to fall in love too soon, if u see a girl u like u must flirt and ask her out immediately)

That is deeply annoying. I would prefer to get to know a girl at least a little bit before making any sort of move. However, it seems that if you don't immediately swoop in, you won't get the girl. Now that I think about it, just about every girlfriend I've ever had, I asked out within minutes of meeting her. It's so irritating that you have to do that. Dating is so illogical.

Tarrick

12-20-2007, 11:02 PM

That is deeply annoying. I would prefer to get to know a girl at least a little bit before making any sort of move. However, it seems that if you don't immediately swoop in, you won't get the girl. Now that I think about it, just about every girlfriend I've ever had, I asked out within minutes of meeting her. It's so irritating that you have to do that. Dating is so illogical.

Agreed. I mean, first of all, one must establish if you can stand her/him for more then ten minutes in more then one setting. Then you move on to if you have any sort of mutual interests/connections. After you establish that you could be at least friends, then you can start to think about asking her/him out.

WavesSootheMe

12-21-2007, 12:08 AM

Agreed. I mean, first of all, one must establish if you can stand her/him for more then ten minutes in more then one setting. Then you move on to if you have any sort of mutual interests/connections. After you establish that you could be at least friends, then you can start to think about asking her/him out.

Exactly. Even if it can work out that way in some instances, the opposite is true as well. I know people that were friends for ages before they actually started dating and they've now been in a healthy (in my opinion) committed relationship for quite some time. There's definitely a window but it is absolutely dependent on circumstances.

Lucid

12-21-2007, 12:19 AM

That is deeply annoying. I would prefer to get to know a girl at least a little bit before making any sort of move. However, it seems that if you don't immediately swoop in, you won't get the girl. Now that I think about it, just about every girlfriend I've ever had, I asked out within minutes of meeting her. It's so irritating that you have to do that. Dating is so illogical.

Personally, I also prefer to know the person a bit before dating them. I'm not sure why your experience has been that in order to get a girlfriend you have to ask her out almost right away. I don't know why asking her out quickly would be necessary for success. It generally isn't necessary with me.

Having said that, I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with moving quick like that if everyone involved feels comfortable doing it. If you find you can't stand each other for more than 10 minutes at a time, you can always break up. ;D

quentin

12-21-2007, 12:41 AM

There's a paradox at work here. INTs allegedly have a strong intuitive sense, but this seems to be an area where normal people are a lot more immediately intuitive than we are.

Tarrick

12-21-2007, 02:38 AM

There's a paradox at work here. INTs allegedly have a strong intuitive sense, but this seems to be an area where normal people are a lot more immediately intuitive than we are.

It's called "Staring at a tree instead of the forest" or something like that.

It's just that INTJs can miss a lot of "normal" activity because we filter out a lot of the background noise of everyday life while in pursuit of whatever it is that we are concentrating on.

Well, that's me at least. If I focus on paying attention, then I pick up a lot of things that I wouldn't normally see.

quentin

12-21-2007, 07:02 AM

Pinkie

12-21-2007, 07:20 AM

^That's the thing, really. I don't want to assume too much, so I go the other way and think, Oh, he's just being nice, when in fact he isn't 'just' doing anything. What I really need is for people to wear a big notice with 'I LIKE you' on it. That would probably do the trick.

rwyatt365

12-21-2007, 07:24 AM

I'm sure I'm not the only INTJ male who's had the experience of a girl coming on or chatting me up or whatever, and being oblivious to it. I've had friends nudge me when she turns away and say softly something along the lines of, "She really seems to like you," and I'm like, "Huh? I didn't notice anything. She's just being friendly, is all."
No, quentin, you are not alone. I used to get sore arms from my wife hitting me in them in response to her perception that some woman was hitting on me. It took a long while for her to believe that I really didn't see what she was talking about. I guess I missed out on lots of "opportunities" as a younger man by being so oblivious.
I have a real problem with that - figuring out women's intentions towards me. I can never figure out whether they're just being friendly and like me as a person, or are attracted to me as a potential boyfriend. It's very tricky. I don't want to make the mistake of misinterpreting mere friendliness as romantic attraction and embarass myself when she turns me down, so I go overboard in the other direction and just don't make any moves myself unless she makes it very obvious that she wants me.
Wouldn't it be nice if every person came equipped with a "Love-o-meter"? A little dial with settings like; yuck, disinterest, friend, SO-material, lust, etc… So that, instead of guessing, all you had to do was to look at the meter and proceed accordingly. Makes things so much easier!

Solaris

12-21-2007, 04:04 PM

Sevs

12-21-2007, 05:03 PM

Hey guys really interesting to read all your opionions on the topic i never thought id get that much response to this thread =).

I still think the world would be a better place without the dating game. What seems weird to me is the fact that most people if you straight out asked them out would say no simply because you haven't followed rituals at least that is the impression I got from posts in other forums / talking to people.

Cyrus

12-21-2007, 07:02 PM

elsdfr
INTJs don't get rejected and once you're in, you're in for life

I tend to agree that it has been rather trying finding someone I can relate to who can understand the strengths and quirks of an INTJ.
My current gf is INFJ. Great great match for INTJ I would say. We know a similar couple INTx INFJ couple. Generally NTs and NFs get along very well. Practically all my close friends are NTs or NFs too

Lucid
Also, statistically, if you date enough people, you're bound to meet a few that are worth keeping around
Haha. Yes yes, I think in order to get attached we need to start meeting more people in general, which does mean filtering through a lot of trash.. but think of the close friends you already have. Are they worth filtering through …. 100 idiots? How about a close mate? =) Takes effort, like anything else.

I would say a safe bet would be to hunt for NTs or NFs
[my 2 cents on how to recognise them...]
I’ve been making it a point to people watch more lately (INTJs focus too much on their inner world and generally don’t give a damn about what’s going on outside? Including other people? is it just me?) and realised that it’s very easy to tell an NT type from the way they speak. NTs tend to have a very distinct structure in the way they speak – we do sound kinda cold. NFs tend to round their consonants and vowels which makes them sound “warm”. I think most S types get thrown out automatically cause they don’t understand jack-all about what an INTJ is talking about, so that’s a good filter. (btw, is it just me, or do you all find most ESs to be particularly needy and annoying? “oh please listen to me babble about my favourite tv program or I’ll feel so hurt” wussbag)

Surprised that no one has brought up any literature regarding the subject matter.
Do take a read @ this, it helped to shift my perspective quite abit
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
In a nutshell, it’s written by a pick up artist. The message it sends (from an INT point of view), is that human nature is immutable to a very large extent. There’re laws that govern it, just like… there’s the law of gravity. Reading The Game from a technical, “cut this down to what makes things tick” point of view helped me understand the general social dynamics of many situations. I know 2 people (NF types) who are masterful at this… I don’t quite agree to their morals, but nonetheless… the proof of the pudding is in its eating. Social laws exist in this GAME

Sevs

12-22-2007, 04:37 PM

Thanks for mentioning "The Game" it was one of the books i always wanted to read but kind of never got round to. I am devouring it as we speak. Even if I do not agree with some of the ethics in there i find it fascinating to see how "the game" / social situations works.

Cyrus

12-23-2007, 12:11 AM

Welcome, glad it helped. I dont agree with their ethics either. IMHO, it's the way human nature functions, an amoral tool that can be used for good or evil (sounds like money..) depending on its user.

It dictates the necessity of social graces, manners, blending it, having a spine (or growing one) etc, that are... well, things that appeal to practically ALL people. So yea. It's a technical list of stuff to work on to get along with people. We are after all, 1%...

have you all seen this?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
INTJ (social) chameleons

quentin

12-23-2007, 03:03 AM

I had an epiphany last night. An aquaintance of mine was talking about his ex-girlfriend and how he missed her even though he'd been the one to break up with her. I asked him why he broke up with her. He said he didn't know. That seemed like a strange answer and more I kept asking him, "Why? There's got to be some sort of logical reason," the more he kept insisting that he didn't know why.

Is this the way normal people operate? They don't think, they just do. Most couples seem to just sort of get together at random. "Hey, you're kind of cute, let's do lunch," and that sort of evolves into a relationship. I guess a lot of couples break up for no real reason, too. Or maybe there's a logical reason for both getting together and breaking up, it's just that they can't articulate it, it just "feels" right. I think that perhaps as INTJs we should just respond as normal people do, instead of overthinking the pros and cons of a relationship with this particular person at this point in time and what kind of approach I should make and I hope I don't come across as too creepy/awkward/nerdy/desperate and even I get her to go out with me she doesn't come across as bright as me and I'll probably get bored with her pretty soon and I think I heard somebody tell me that she already has a sort of boyfriend and maybe she wasn't really flirting with me, she was just being friendly so I should exercise caution and if I do ask her out for a date where would I take her because first impressions are important and if things screw up on the first date because I took her to a place either too low-scale or tried too hard to impress her by taking her to someplace too upscale for a first date and anyway I've been staring at her too long because I've been thinking about what to say when I walk up to her, she's probably getting unnerved by my constant looking in her direction but not saying anything, I'm coming across as some sort of psycho stalker and anyway it looks like there's some other guy over there who's coming on to her, he looks like he's succeeding at it and there's really no point in competing over women like some sort of primitive alpha primate and anyway first conversations with strangers are awkward and full of boring small talk, it's going to be a painful process and if she rejects me in front of all these other people that's going to sting, ouch and I probably will get rejected because I'm not a natural at this and she seems to be enjoying hanging out with her friends very much, some strange guy coming over and trying to sleazily hit on her will probably ruin their girls' night out, not like I'm a sleazy guy or anything but it can be easy to get mistaken for one if you approach a girl all wrong, and anyway the logical conclusion is that there is no point because I have a 50% chance of failure and that risk factor is much too high, and I know from experience that I'm not very good at this type of thing, I've failed in the past, and let's face it, I'm just not that good with women, so what is the point of even beginning to try, I'm just going to sit here talking with my friends and sipping my drink while staring at her from across the room the entire night.

Whereas a normal person would just, uh, do whatever it is normal people do.

Anyway, the epiphany was when I was talking to this guy unable to answer a simple question of why he broke up with or even got together with his ex-girlfriend, is that most people - or at least the Sensing/Feeling types, who are the majority - don't approach relationships like we do, from the head. Instead, they go with their gut instincts. They get involved with somebody because it feels right. "Sparks" is what they call it. I have the hardest time understanding that concept, and it's annoying when a woman uses that "there's just no spark" line on me. What is this mysterious "spark" that people talk about and how do I replicate it?

The problem with dating/relationships is that it's not a logical process. The way normal people approach dating is completely counterintuitive to the way I think. For example, the whole thing about having to immediately approach someone that you like, instead of waiting around and being sensibly cautious - that totally goes against my basic nature. Dating has a weird, twisted logic of its own that runs counter to normal logical systems. So I guess the best way to approach dating as an INTJ is to embrace the irrational. If you get an immediate "spark" of attraction, go for it, no matter how irrational that weird sudden rush of attraction feels - that's what SF types do, they feel something in the air between them and another person and just do it. Remember that love is not rational and it is not logical. It falls out of the air for no reason. So don't overthink it.

Cyrus

12-23-2007, 11:54 AM

quentin, do read The Game. =) google david deangelo as well. He kinda teaches people how to be pick up artists. sounds sleezy, but it helps put a conceptual framework to "the irrational" game of dating.
INTJ or not, we're human and we're social creatures. There IS a part of us that is susceptible to feelings and all that other stuff that we kinda lable as taboo because we dont quite grasp it. In other words, it CAN be broken down into a science. There're people who know exactly which buttons to push... it is systematic, albeit dynamic.

haha, I JUST came back from a meal with a close friend of mine. NF type. he said the SAME thing. "it felt right" but that in and of itself has caused ALOT of pain too.
Ts and Fs suffer different pitfalls. Fs need to learn to follow their head and T types need to be more sensitive and learn to go with the flow.

I've found that I get along very very well with NFs and fellow NTs. ES types in general, drive me insane.
Let's go through some _numbers_ here (have I got ur attention? heheh) 85% are S types. 75% are E types. 85 * 75 = 63.75% are ES --> people we're unlikely to get along well with.
15% are N types.
So in a crowd of 100, expect to get along WELL with 15%.

Personally, I've gone through the pain of "why do I not get this? I am clearly better than that dumb bloke, but why doesn't she like me?" But I guess a large part of it is realising who I am and how I am wired as an INTJ and coming to terms that I will get along better with a smaller portion of the population. And yes, NFs and fellow NTs understand me very well. Most of the time, they share the, "why dont these blokes understand me??"
Nothing illogical about that. Its just how the population is distributed. For me, it helps trying to listen and determine whether the person is an S or N. If S, then I know that it's likely to be a personality wiring problem, not a character problem on my part.

Emotion, is not logical. Love on the other hand, is a decision. You may not like someone NOW, but u certainly can love the person despite that (family, close friends). Emotion is a by product of a decision to love. Emotion doesn't sustain marraige.
Love does

quentin

12-24-2007, 02:58 AM

Yes, I've read the Game, but I didn't find it particularly helpful. Neill Strauss was writing about picking up bimbos in nightclubs and that's neither the environment I feel comfortable in (at ALL) nor the type of women that I desire as anything more than one-night stands. I've tried going clubbing and picking up women before and it's not as if I didn't have any success at it, but I found the whole scene/routine depressing. That type of thing just doesn't suit me.

It really is a numbers game. It's not as if I can't meet women, it's just that the type of women that I might actually take seriously as relationship potential are so very, very few and I don't know where to find them. It's easy to find someone where there's an immediate physical/emotional attraction, this "spark" people speak of. But I also require an intellectual attraction as well (most people don't, which is why it's easier for your average person to find a suitable partner). I need someone that I can talk to on my level, without having to dumb down my words and thoughts, and that can understand me and my weird quirks.

Tall order.

INTroJect

12-24-2007, 03:03 AM

Spain was so easy for the dating game. You don't even have to speak the language. They are so ridiculously E that they do all the work for you, you just have to show up and take the prize.

Lucid

12-24-2007, 02:38 PM

quentin, do read The Game. =) google david deangelo as well. He kinda teaches people how to be pick up artists. sounds sleezy, but it helps put a conceptual framework to "the irrational" game of dating.

Actually The Game has been brought up on this forum before, although maybe not on this thread, and I think it was several weeks ago. From what I've heard about it, it seems to be a book about how to manipulate stupid women. However, I have not read it. You have read it, but said that you disagreed with its morals but found many of the principals to be sound. I'm interested in the topic, could you tell me (although you don't have to go into too much detail, I'm sure that would make for a very long post), what you found helpful and what morals the book preaches that you disagree with? I've considered reading it myself but I think my head would explode from anger before I got very far and it might cause me to head to a club and systematically kill every "player" there. Or at least as many as I could before the cock-man oppressors took me down ;)

From what little I have heard about The Game it sounds like it would only be successful with women who are rather naive and gullible, or who don't have much experience with dating... or who aren't very intelligent. This is a mostly uninformed opinion on my part, which is why I'm asking you about it. :)

quentin

12-25-2007, 01:15 AM

From what I've heard about it, it seems to be a book about how to manipulate stupid women.

That's it. That's exactly it.

Tarrick

12-25-2007, 01:40 AM

If "The Game" is merely about how to temporarily dazzle bimbos (as Quentin is implying) then I see no reason for it. I have no interest in such relationships and would rather find something that is bit more permanent than an one-night stand out of a bar.

blueback

12-25-2007, 02:27 PM

I think you guys might be talking yourselves out of a valuable learning experience.

I've been following the Pick Up Artist (PUA) literature and culture for many years now, since before The Game and Mystery's TV show made it a topic of conversation, and it has a lot to offer to the person who cares to look. That being said, it has a lot to offer INTJs specifically because it is a logical approach to a problem that doesn't yield easily to logic.

First; The Game, by Neil Strauss, is a story book. It is a long anecdote about his time researching the PUA community generally, and Mystery in particular. It is not instructional, it is not meant to be instructional. . .it isn't even meant to be an unbiased description of the subject matter. It is his opinion of the events that he lived through. However, he has produced a lot of work since that book that is meant to be instructional and supportive of the learning curve.

Second, dating is called a game because it has all the salient features of a sport. It has two or more participants, it has an audience, it has a goal, and most importantly it has rules. The rules are key because if you don't follow them then you aren't playing the game and the people who are will reject your attempt to interfere.

Participants: You and the person you're interested in
Audience: them, friends, family, observant strangers, etc
Goal: this varies but usually everyone agrees that the point is to form a pair-bond
Rules: complicated, but understandable. Despite the fact that the goal is usually agreed upon by all parties, the rules often aren't. That is because there is an observable (measurable) difference between what people say and what they do.

Now, like any good experiment, you have to define a lot of things. In this case, the PUAs chose to focus on a social situation with a high degree of interaction and replicatability. Night Clubs, and to a lesser extent bars, are populated by people who have pretty much all agreed that they are interested in interacting with strangers to raise the potential for a romantic encounter. That means that they can engage in (or observe) many more fresh interactions between strangers per hour than in any other location. Of course, night clubs don't contain a representative cross-section of the whole population, or even of the dating age population. However, people are people, especially when it comes to matters of the heart, so information gathered in one context is applicable to the population as a whole.

What they discovered was that the progression of steps from meeting to sex was linear. That means that the steps can vary in time, sometimes being compressed and sometimes being extended, but they cannot be skipped and they can be predicted.

They also "discovered" that some of the steps are capricious. There are all sorts of outside factors that can speed you through the steps in minutes, prolong them over months, or block progress all together.

Finally, they sifted through all the "things" you could possibly "do" and they found that a few of them were very good predictors of success. Things like standing up straight, speaking loudly and clearly, smiling, are all universally agreed upon and understood. Things like opening with a false time constraint, memorizing demonstration of higher value stories, learning kino routines, and practicing techniques to out-alpha every other guy present are not universally agreed upon but they are effective non-the-less.

So, I suggest you look into it. Once you get past the grand-standing and self-promotion there is a lot of useful information. The Venusian Arts Handbook is probably the best place to start. The key to all of it is that you have to practice it. If you just sit around and think about it, you will never change your habits. And, if you always do what you've always done you will always get what you've always gotten. Just ask yourself if you're happy getting what you get. If the answer is yes, then keep it up, if the answer is no then what harm could there be in trying something else?

John254

12-25-2007, 08:58 PM

Hey everyone, first time on this site. Finally found out why I thought I was so different from everyone I knew (tested INTJ quite a few times in college). Anyway, I really like this thread because I am trying to figure out how to find an ideal mate, I have dated a few times and found the "dating scene" very disgusting. Does anyone know where any good sites are for MBTI dating? Do INTJs ever find their match on here? Lol, I live in Killeen Texas and there are very few people (besides my close web of friends) that I can even come close to tolerating, please help asap! Nice meeting everyone, I hope to find out more about myself with this site. Take care.

Cyrus

12-25-2007, 11:27 PM

Good post blueback. I concur

The Game is written as a novel, not a manual. I’m not interested in picking up bimbos, not by ANY far stretch, but I am interested in improving as a person, and learning certain social rules and behaviours helps with that immensely.

I look out for things seem to put other people at ease, like humour (incidentally, there's also a scientific formula for humour...) "my housemate's cat is a reincarnation of Richard Nixon"
Other things I look out for are 'principles'. Eg:
People in general are receptive to light social contact.
Dont talk too fast it makes people feel uneasy because it tends to communicates insecurity.
People like to listen to interesting stories, especially if they’re live experiences.
Don’t laugh out too loud when you first meet someone.
Look out for ladies, open doors, etc.
Control your tone, add some warmth; cold clinical-ness of tone triggers all sorts of natural psychological alarms (read: Potential psycho killer) or at least communicates "I'm not comfortable with YOU as a person, so here is the information ONLY" --> I'm not interested in YOU as a person, I'm interested in the topic and if you have nothing to intelligent to say by all means Pi*s Off when your little brain runs dry.
(I know another INTJ who communicates this very well and not surprisingly... people don’t like him)

In a nutshell, I see alot of subtle social dynamics that show us how to communicate verbally and non-verbally. When "I would like to talk to you. How do you do?" is communicated at every level, conversations with people flow much much easier.

It shows to a large extent how people are wired psychologically and how to be more open with people and get people to be more open with you so that you can build a decent relationship (friendship or otherwise) with someone _who is worth the while_;

Dont let the context of The Game colour your perception. Our social fabric is a game and knowing how to be play by those social rules makes every ones life happier.

These are very much NFP traits actually. Have a friend who can say, "I can be a fu**er, but everyone will still love me". And as much as I hate to admit it, it is true.
He's a master at social relations and making people feel comfortable with him. People love him and open all sorts of doors of opportunity for him although he’s not as technically proficient.
“I don’t necessarily like them, but I don’t hate them either, so why not make friends? I want them to like me. Keep a loose network of people. It’s extremely useful and more efficient than trying to do everything by yourself.”

Yet another wise quip:
"Acquaintences come and go
Friends help you out
Brothers/Sisters (real family & close friends) stick by you
but
Enemies accumulate" --> Learn to make friends

Good lawyers bend the law in their favour. Same thing for good social engineers.
Along similar lines, check out, The Science of Influence:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Hope this helps clarify things :)

Lucid

12-26-2007, 12:02 PM

Good lawyers bend the law in their favour.

No. I'm sorry. Everything else you've said may have merit (I haven't begun to respond yet), but this is false. I come from a family of lawyers. A good lawyer does his best to represent his client's side withing the confines of the law and the rules of the court. What you're talking about is an unethical lawyer.

But, since that's WAY off topic, on to The Game.

I can understand wanting to be more socialy adept. I'm (believe it or not) pretty good with people. I have lots of friends, all of whom have incredible respect for me and many of whom I've known since high school, and very few enemies. In fact, even my enemies usually want to be my friends. I make a good impression on networking contacts and as a result, many doors are opened for me.
I can do that without reading books, but instead observing people and how they act and react to me (although I recognize that many people can't do this).

So while the "manual for picking up bimbos" thing certainly leaves a bad taste in my mouth, I'm not a bimbo and so probably don't have much to be concerned with. So my only real problem with The Game, and the problem that I see at the heart of it, is that it seems to be a way to put on a fake persona for the purposes of manipulating others and getting from them something that you want.
How can this lead to anything meaningful?
I don't mean to say that acting nicer or trying to make a joke to make someone comfortable is manipulation, but it seems that The Game (from what I've read on this thread) takes this to an extreme which cannot be called anything but.

Maybe this goes back to the lawyer example. The lawyer you describe (bending the law to his benefit) is incredibly unethical and obviously only cares that he wins, even if it means he has to cheat to do this.
The Game seems to advocate a similar stance toward socializing. The fact that it seems the desired end result in the book is sex makes it seem really manipulative and unethical to me.

There's nothing wrong with learning some social graces and maybe toning ourselves down a bit for the sake of making friends and good networking contacts. Or even getting a date. But when your whole personality in these situations is a facade contrived to manipulate others into doing what you want, I can't see how a person who does this can sleep at night. Or how they can value any of the friends they might make as a result of such a facade, since all those friends know is the facade.

If you're using the book to gain a few socializing tips (like telling jokes or remembering to make eye contact), then more power to you for wanting to learn these things. If you're using it as I described in the previous paragraph... well I'd have to disapprove. :)

blueback

12-26-2007, 08:08 PM

Well, you haven't read The Game, so you're basing your opinion of it on other people's opinion of it. For what it's worth, my opinion of it is favorable. It is a novel, not a dissertation on human psychology. The novel actually covers a lot of ground, including the inevitable ill-effects of devoting oneself to chasing bimbos. At the end, everyone has learned a lot about themselves and the world, and most of the characters move on to more mature pursuits.

I get the impression you are disgusted by the pickup community's focus on "laying", or having sex with, many women. This is an amusing position to take since I have yet to throw a stick into a crowd of men without hitting half a dozen guys who want to have sex with many women. It's a common desire, the PUAs have simply gotten good enough at it to brag. Most men think of dating like roulette; they put their money on the table and hope they get lucky. PUAs think of dating more like kayaking on rapids; there are varying degrees of difficulty, you'll probably get wet, and you'll have a lot of fun.

If you've never been part of a community you should be careful presenting your opinion of it. Sure, you might not like the quick and dirty description of what goes on, but that doesn't mean you have understood everything. Once you get into the literature, you find that the vast majority of the things you are told to do are all focused on making you more self-confident. They dangle the carrot (sex) in front of you because it is a powerful motivating force and it can be tabulated. Every guy wants sex, or at least wants women to want to have sex with him, and it is easy to track. However, there is no step which states "try to find the girl that looks stupid and drunk" or "tell her you love her so that she'll sleep with you."

The PUA literature works because it doesn't leave a guy hanging like a self-help book which tells him to "be himself" and it doesn't lead a guy down the wrong path by telling him to "buy her a drink." Basically, it tells a guy to do things which make him project self-confidence. As long as he can keep doing those things he will quickly come to understand them and he will then become self-confident. Every author I've ever read agrees on one point, that a guy who is confident and consistent can do absolutely anything he feels like and he will pull girls left and right. Of course, once he feels self-confident he will become attracted to self-confidence in others (women specifically) and will lose interest in the bimbos he practiced on.

The specific actions that guys are taught to do have a very high success rate, once they begin to internalize the actions they can generate their own actions which will also have a high success rate, but the process is linear, they can't skip steps. It's founded on the fact that most guys are handicapped when it comes to dating. They have been bombarded with so much conflicting advice about how to go about it that they constantly second guess themselves, which is the least attractive thing they can possibly do. The PUA literature sets them straight simply by pointing out that if they engage socially over and over again they will start to see patterns, that it isn't as chaotic as they had thought, and then they will stop second guessing themselves.

Of course, this is a predominantly Christian country, so if you don't think that sex out of wedlock is bad, you usually tend to at least feel mildly guilty about it. That is up to you to deal with in your own way. I suggest that you practice, figure out what makes you happy, and then don't settle for anything less. But don't linger over the idea of other people having sex like it was a piece of road kill. If you're disgusted move on, nothing to see here.

Lucid

12-26-2007, 08:22 PM

Blueblack, I'm basing my opinion on what you and Cyrus have told me about it, among others. If you are a fan of The Game, that's fine for you. I think it sounds rather manipulative and am therefore not a fan.

I get the impression you are disgusted by the pickup community's focus on "laying", or having sex with, many women. This is an amusing position to take since I have yet to throw a stick into a crowd of men without hitting half a dozen guys who want to have sex with many women.

Stop making assumptions. I have a problem with anyone having sex with any number of anyone elses through manipulation. That's what it sounds like this book is advocating. That's why I have a problem with it.

Everything else in your post seems to be directed at your assumption that I have a problem with people having casual sex with large numbers of many other people. This is not the case, so I won't waste both my time and yours by responding to each of your incorrect assumptions.

My problem is with manipulation. Not sex of any kind involving any number of other adults of any race, religion or gender.

As I stated:
If you're using the book to gain a few socializing tips (like telling jokes or remembering to make eye contact), then more power to you for wanting to learn these things.

slut poacher

12-26-2007, 08:26 PM

as much as i hate clubs,i am always getting dragged to them by friends.i do enjoy sitting back and watching events unfold.it is not unlike watching animal planet,the posturing and posing followed by the show of plumage,then capped off by the mating dance.and if all the rituals have been performed successfully,the actual mating (provided her girlfriend isnt holding her hair out of the toilet)

Cyrus

12-26-2007, 10:15 PM

Firstly, apologies on my ignorance of lawyers. Heard of many stinking stories from some lawyers I know. No offence intended to you or ur relatives Lucid. There're ethical and unethical people in every field.

Back to topic...
I'm against manipulating anyone for sex. Tt's something I definitely dont approve of (and wouldn't want to sleep with someone I don’t know well anyway. U cant forge a mental bond in 1 night). Although I would have to say, that alot of the girls in clubs want to be played. They want some guy to come along and say the right thing, do the right moves, hit the sweet spot again and again and *ta-da*. There're people out there who do it because it works... male & female. Ethically wrong? Yes. Happens? Yes. Why? No bloody clue:irked:

But when your whole personality in these situations is a facade contrived to manipulate others into doing what you want, I can't see how a person who does this can sleep at night. Or how they can value any of the friends they might make as a result of such a facade, since all those friends know is the facade.

I understand where you're coming from. Although I must say that I've seen through some people who put on a mask for so long that they think it's their real face and defend it like it is, because they are afraid to look in the mirror and confront their own fallibility, weakness and insecurity. The thing is, that they draw the people who are similar to them internally and it becomes a permanent acting school = Bad politics. If we're personally honest, then we usually draw those who are also personally honest. Correct me if i'm wrong anyone. :)

The point I'm trying to drive across is not to put on a mask, but to become a better person by learning what works and internalising it. We can learn how to ride a bicycle, do math, study law until it becomes a part of us. Nothing very different wrt social things as well. I dont agree with all the literature I read, but that doesn't mean we cannot learn from it either. A female friend of mine read The Game to caution some of her friends. (but they’re bims. Lol) Much can be learned about the topic itself without sharing the same ethics as the people who wrote it. I hand it to PUAs who’ve turned this practically into a science and some part of The Game does talk about “undorking” guys, helping them out and building their self confidence – which is good.

Take the good, throw out the bad, add your own understanding.

And yes, I do feel that many people cannot understand or relate to the INTJ type of thinking or world view. Hence the need to watch, listen and adjust. :)

Lucid

12-26-2007, 10:50 PM

Firstly, apologies on my ignorance of lawyers. Heard of many stinking stories from some lawyers I know. No offence intended to you or ur relatives Lucid. There're ethical and unethical people in every field.

I heartily agree that there are good and bad people in every profession. I didn't take offense at your comment, I just felt it was necessary to draw the distinction between "good" and "ethical" with regard to lawyers. Although as far as many people are concerned, the two are interchangeable.

Although I would have to say, that alot of the girls in clubs want to be played. They want some guy to come along and say the right thing, do the right moves, hit the sweet spot again and again and *ta-da*. There're people out there who do it because it works... male & female. Ethically wrong? Yes. Happens? Yes. Why? No bloody clue:irked:

There are? Well I don't hang out in clubs much and I don't know many people who do, so I'll defer to your judgment. I had no idea, although now that you bring it up I can see how it might be.

I understand where you're coming from. Although I must say that I've seen through some people who put on a mask for so long that they think it's their real face and defend it like it is, because they are afraid to look in the mirror and confront their own fallibility, weakness and insecurity. The thing is, that they draw the people who are similar to them internally and it becomes a permanent acting school = Bad politics. If we're personally honest, then we usually draw those who are also personally honest. Correct me if i'm wrong anyone. :)

The point I'm trying to drive across is not to put on a mask, but to become a better person by learning what works and internalising it. We can learn how to ride a bicycle, do math, study law until it becomes a part of us. Nothing very different wrt social things as well. I dont agree with all the literature I read, but that doesn't mean we cannot learn from it either. A female friend of mine read The Game to caution some of her friends. (but they’re bims. Lol) Much can be learned about the topic itself without sharing the same ethics as the people who wrote it. I hand it to PUAs who’ve turned this practically into a science and some part of The Game does talk about “undorking” guys, helping them out and building their self confidence – which is good.

Take the good, throw out the bad, add your own understanding.

I'm totally cool with that. You don't have to like the ethics or morals of the people who wrote the book to get some use out of it.

Sevs

12-30-2007, 02:22 PM

Right I am almost through with the game and the question i ask myself are there any INTJ PUAs ?

I mean surely you need to have E tendencies to pull some of that stuff off?
---
Hey John welcome to the forum.

I have seen people recommend To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. for MBTI based dating haven't tried it myself but i guess you could give it a shot.

Sev

iamnotspock

12-30-2007, 02:30 PM

Right I am almost through with the game and the question i ask myself are there any INTJ PUAs ?

I mean surely you need to have E tendencies to pull some of that stuff off?

Well, I tried that stuff a few years ago before it was mainstream. It's actually good for a lone wolf. Mostly you are playing a game of one on one -- or one on two. Or at most two on two with a wing. Small groups are where I's excel. So I made a lot of progress before I got involved with an LTR and came back out the other end reborn as an AFC all over again.

Anyway, the key is practice. You cannot learn to ride a bike or swim from a book. A seduction board will have you out there making EC, openings, practicing kino, and number closes and doing field reports. I posted on the Don Juan forum until they revamped it and my account was lost. You need that kind of support to play the game.

The Many

12-30-2007, 06:17 PM

Right I am almost through with the game and the question i ask myself are there any INTJ PUAs ?

I mean surely you need to have E tendencies to pull some of that stuff off?

As I've stated somewhere else on this forum, I've both tried it and seen others do it - it works. I don't like it; after all it'll only lead to someone falling for some moves you make rather than you yourself. That, and I hate manipulating people, even though manipulation is technically nothing else than influencing others to make certain choices. I do, however, value honesty - I am of the belief that honesty is what will bring the best conclusions in the end (at least when it comes to personal matters, I know all too well that cheating will get you places, but now I'm leaving the topic).

But of course, it works if you want casual sex, but that's something I never cared for much anyway.

Sevs

12-30-2007, 11:49 PM

Well, I tried that stuff a few years ago before it was mainstream. It's actually good for a lone wolf. Mostly you are playing a game of one on one -- or one on two. Or at most two on two with a wing. Small groups are where I's excel. So I made a lot of progress before I got involved with an LTR and came back out the other end reborn as an AFC all over again.

Anyway, the key is practice. You cannot learn to ride a bike or swim from a book. A seduction board will have you out there making EC, openings, practicing kino, and number closes and doing field reports. I posted on the Don Juan forum until they revamped it and my account was lost. You need that kind of support to play the game.

Thats good that mean i can (try to) learn it =)

About 1.5 years ago when i somehow found all this PUA stuff i started reading loads on it and was about to try it out "unfortunately" that was when i met my now ex girlfriend and fell hard for her. Also I was in a boarding school in th emidlde of nowhere so there wasnt to much gaming to be done.

I have been an active lurker around the sosuave forums during this time period to but i never dared to post there as i know id be shreddered to pieces at this stage ;-).

As I've stated somewhere else on this forum, I've both tried it and seen others do it - it works. I don't like it; after all it'll only lead to someone falling for some moves you make rather than you yourself. That, and I hate manipulating people, even though manipulation is technically nothing else than influencing others to make certain choices. I do, however, value honesty - I am of the belief that honesty is what will bring the best conclusions in the end (at least when it comes to personal matters, I know all too well that cheating will get you places, but now I'm leaving the topic).

But of course, it works if you want casual sex, but that's something I never cared for much anyway.

Good thats what i wanted to hear "it works".

I think for some reason this is one of my mid-term goals becoming a PUA i don't know why yes I don't agree with the morals all the time but I think it's just one of these things id like to be able to do and a skill that might be useful for the future.

Sev

mikeeppolito

12-31-2007, 05:38 PM

am pretty much in agreement with the views posted here. I'm finding a great alternative to clubs and such is the young adult group at my church. Of course it's my belief to only date a woman that's a Christian. Given that, there's some pretty hot girls in this group! I develop crushes pretty easily but believe at least one or two girls would be open to "dating" me. What's nice though is that we all hang out together on Sundays during and after church. So this takes care of the "getting to know each other" part. And of course feelings develop naturally, etc. A totally great way to meet girls!

Maitri1970

12-31-2007, 09:08 PM

Hi Sevs,

I endured clubs when I was younger because my "friends" enjoyed going to them. When I grew up a little bit, I realized I was doing what other people my age were doing and neglecting the fact that I thought clubbing was a stupid waste of time. Ironically, I agreed to meet a friend of mine in a reggae club when I was still living in Japan and the bartender hit on me! We dated for almost 2 years but I wouldn't step foot in the club more than twice a year because I couldn't stand being around smoke and drunks. My boyfriend was a musician and his friend owned the club but he was very different when he wasn't at work. He was a young INTJ, as well. Weird.

I don't date now. It doesn't work and feels completely forced and fake. I hope to meet someone in my graduate program who's a school nerd, like me. They're the best! haha.

Cyrus

01-01-2008, 01:54 PM

Good thats what i wanted to hear "it works".

I think for some reason this is one of my mid-term goals becoming a PUA i don't know why yes I don't agree with the morals all the time but I think it's just one of these things id like to be able to do and a skill that might be useful for the future.

Sevs, yes it works. These PUA thingos are just tools really. With proper practice, anyone can learn the principles. The tools just are, the morals... belong to the person.

They can be used in helping to maintain a long term relation. I know 2 to 3 people who know how to play the game, but dont. They're stable long term people who learned it to treat a lady well.

I'd say this works well for INTJs who have little breadth wrt people we feel for, but alot of depth for those that we do care for.

The Many

01-01-2008, 03:35 PM

Good thats what i wanted to hear "it works".

I think for some reason this is one of my mid-term goals becoming a PUA i don't know why yes I don't agree with the morals all the time but I think it's just one of these things id like to be able to do and a skill that might be useful for the future.

Sev

The mechanic they play on is really more interesting than the Game itself, if you ask me. Just knowing what's going on will feed your ego, I've got a friend (ESTP, by the way) who's an extreme natural. Sitting back and watching him working with girls is very entertaining in itself.

terencec

01-01-2008, 05:36 PM

Anyway, the key is practice. You cannot learn to ride a bike or swim from a book. A seduction board will have you out there making EC, openings, practicing kino, and number closes and doing field reports. I posted on the Don Juan forum until they revamped it and my account was lost. You need that kind of support to play the game.

Unless someone was born with the talent, there is too much work to play the game and not much return (in my opinion) ... If we just want sex, why can't we pay for it? That is the most efficient way. If we want relationship, it may be worth to invest in it. HOwever, I see most people are quite different (espeically for "INTJ", less than 2% population), it is hard to believe the couples are compatible without giving up most of attributes. The problem will not show up in the beginning though.

Off topic. The main problem is the hormone. We are the prisoner of our hormone. Sometimes, I feel there is no free will about sex (I could not will what I will, i.e. my sexual desire has been programmed before I was born.) because I cannot control my sexual desire (I can control only my sexual act). What is the meaning to have sex pleasure (with a lot of women)? There is no meaning but most men still want it (me too). The other problem is we are "concious" that we think. This is my frustration.

iamnotspock

01-05-2008, 08:36 PM

Well, I have been using the first steps (baby steps) of the PUA playbook and enjoying the results. By simply smiling, talking to everyone, making good eye contact, using a soft voice, and keeping my speech and actions slow and deliberate (women are like deer, no sudden moves, and you can freeze them in your high-beams, ha ha), I've met a half-dozen women in my building this past week. And from the signals I get I can tell they are interested. That little flirtation right there is more fun than you can ever have on the internet.

Now the problem is how to turn an awkward elevator conversation into a mini-date. There are a few possibilities.

One is the gym in the building. If I'm going down there and run into one of them again I can suggest they join me next time, and get their contact info.

Another is the supermarket down the street. If we're both leaving the building and walking that way (likely) I can mention some great new food item there and see if they want to stop by. Nothing like candy to catch the babes.

Two of the women I met have dogs. If they're going out to walk the dog that is an easy one, just walk along for a bit and make some chit chat.

Anyway, I really need some new female companionship, I think my friend's GF is sick of me!

Des

01-06-2008, 07:46 AM

I was never into the club and bar thing. I wasn't interested in dating when I was in college actually but that's when the guys started hitting on me and asking me out. They didn't know how to take NO for an answer. I've noticed a lot of girls can't tell when a guy likes them right away. Luckily I can and so I started saying yes to these guys only to get free lunches and rides and show them that no means no. Then I'd dump them cold turkey. I really just wanted to be left alone to study. I figured I'd start to look for a mate AFTER college. I met my husband standing in line to register for a class. I was taking a math course at a community college off campus because all the maths were full at my school. I also procrastinate and didn't get in on time so I had to go off campus quite often. I thought I'd give him the same treatment but he was an INTP and when I found out we had so much common ground that it was insane and I was actually having fun, we became best friends. Then we became official and finally married. That's the short short version of it. I'm so glad my first boyfriend was the one as I had intended it to be. Also I had this list of qualities in my head that a guy had to meet. It was long and pretty strickt. If he didn't he wasn't worth my time. I didn't think anyone would meet it but when he did well I couldn't throw him out the window like I had the others. Now we DO still go out on dates for dinner every weekend or a movie. I think date night when you're married is the best and I'm a very happy person.

jdc127

01-06-2008, 10:28 AM

I would like to reccomend OKCupid. It is free and a great way to meet potnetial friends and mates without most of the whole social preliminary dating dance being necessary to discover if you are compatible.

danalaina

01-10-2008, 05:26 AM

Plus you have to shout at someone to be heard. Nothing says romance like,
"HEY WHAT'S YOUR NAME!? DO YOU COME HERE OFTEN?!"
"WHAT!?"

i always found this was the perfect time to say really outrageous things and then watch the resulting shifts in facial expression. fun.

yeah, i don't get out much.

danalaina added to this post, 6 minutes and 53 seconds later...

[...] are there actually any guys that go to a club for fun and not with the intention to get laid or "meet someone" ?
the little cynical part of me wants to say "only if they're gay." the even more cynical part of me wants to say, "no, not even then." XD

Part of the reason my ex gf left me was that I was not "fun enough" as she really enjoys clubbing and is a amazing dancer.
i was one of those chicks...i was out dancing every weekend, at least. i can tell you that the attraction to that lifestyle calmed down a lot for me after a few years. i don't remember things really settling down much for myself or my friends until maybe 25-28.

danalaina added to this post, 3 minutes and 32 seconds later...

You want to up your odds, gentlemen? Learn to dance.
brilliant assessment, per usual. it's not necessarily fair, but i always paid more attention to guys who could acquit themselves well on the dance floor. it's attractive and way too rare.

danalaina added to this post, 21 minutes and 54 seconds later...

I would prefer to get to know a girl at least a little bit before making any sort of move.
Agreed. I mean, first of all, one must establish if you can stand her/him for more then ten minutes in more then one setting. Then you move on to if you have any sort of mutual interests/connections. After you establish that you could be at least friends, then you can start to think about asking her/him out.

interesting. how long does that take for everybody?

i can (generally) tell you inside of thirty seconds whether i'm interested in someone (platonically/romantically/whatever) and inside of three minutes whether that person is likely to figure significantly in my life in any way.

if we're talking purely romantically, those numbers probably get even a little smaller, because i can automatically eliminate many just based on lack of physical chemistry.

if my gut tells me not to waste my time with the person, i'll sum it up and walk away a moment later.

so...out of curiosity...how much time do y'all generally need to make these assessments?

Rohsiph

01-10-2008, 06:29 PM

interesting. how long does that take for everybody?

i can (generally) tell you inside of thirty seconds whether i'm interested in someone (platonically/romantically/whatever) and inside of three minutes whether that person is likely to figure significantly in my life in any way.

if we're talking purely romantically, those numbers probably get even a little smaller, because i can automatically eliminate many just based on lack of physical chemistry.

if my gut tells me not to waste my time with the person, i'll sum it up and walk away a moment later.

so...out of curiosity...how much time do y'all generally need to make these assessments?

I remember reading at least a couple of times about how women "know" whether or not they're interested in someone almost immediately . . .

and I'm always at a loss when I hear it, because it sounds so limiting. The problem, re: earlier directions in this discussion, women are preyed upon--women don't have to limit themselves; if they make a mistake, there'll be another guy to go out with soon enough. Generally, of course . . .

I've never been in a significant "romantic" relationship before . . . I used to think I could tell, by one look, whether there was any potential for (kind of relationship) with anyone. But now, I try not to write anyone off immediately . . . the feeling is still there--I'll get impressions pretty quickly, particularly about types I tend to be incompatible with, but these days I make the effort to not push anyone away unless that hunch is just ridiculous strong (pretty rare).

iamnotspock

01-10-2008, 09:04 PM

If you write people off in 30 seconds or less how will you ever know if you were wrong?

This shows how much of the dating game is purely image based. One's accomplishments, ideas, integrity, conversational skills, etc. are worthless in a 30 second window. It is this time-pressure which favors players, who learn techniques to sway the snap-decisions in their favor.

Solaris

01-10-2008, 11:03 PM

I usually know inside the first few minutes if a person will have a significant impact upon my life. It hasn't been wrong yet. I can't tell you why that is, it just is. However, I am trying not to write people off (especially men), because I have come to the conclusion that dating friends who are men is a much better way to go. Therefore, a man in whom I am not instantly romantically interested may still have a chance once I get to know him. However, this instant knowing is not just for Extroverts. I know the same whether the person is E or I. It's like a little voice whispers to me about some people when I meet them.

danalaina

01-11-2008, 05:59 PM

If you write people off in 30 seconds or less how will you ever know if you were wrong?
i can't always, obviously. but it's happened often enough that i met a guy briefly, moved along because my gut told me to, and then learned something later on about him that reinforced it. women talk. hell, men talk, too. sometimes you guys are worse than a sewing circle.

This shows how much of the dating game is purely image based. One's accomplishments, ideas, integrity, conversational skills, etc. are worthless in a 30 second window. It is this time-pressure which favors players, who learn techniques to sway the snap-decisions in their favor.
i definitely respond to a guy's body language and also to what his eyes are telling me vs. what his mouth is. "image" is the wrong word, i think...it suggests we're only focusing on physical attractiveness, and that just ain't so. i get enough clues in thirty seconds to know whether that guy could ever get in my pants, and if he's not getting in my pants, he could never become my SO.

One's accomplishments, ideas, integrity, conversational skills, etc. are worthless in a 30 second window.
gotta disagree with you there. conversational skills come into play immediately. accomplishments and integrity will contribute greatly to your sense of self-worth, which is also pretty evident physically.

It is this time-pressure which favors players, who learn techniques to sway the snap-decisions in their favor.
yep. just like a guy who speaks French will have an easier time getting around over there. it's a language, like any other.

no need to worry, though. for the guys who don't possess that knowledge innately, How To books will only get them so far with a smart woman (assuming they're the target). it's much better just to be yourself and play the numbers (if you're impatient). eventually you'll find the women who immediately like what they see. we're all different. this idea that we're all looking for the drop-dead gorgeous alpha male is ridiculous.

but setting that aside, when we're talking about romance, it all comes down to chemistry...if i'm permitted to see a guy in action in a crowded room prior to speaking with him, i probably don't even need 30 seconds to tell you if i'm interested. no idea or accomplishment that you might blurt out in the course of a conversation can get around that.

iamnotspock

01-11-2008, 08:46 PM

In 30 seconds with an INTJ you would not learn much.

The notion that self-assurance can be determined by brief observation is also patently false. Confidence is highly situational. Meaning, a super-confident geek may be a low-confidence dancer. Observe them in the wrong venue and you learned .... nothing. I've also found that many confident "group" guys are weak one on one. Without their boys to back them up, they lack confidence and are easily handled. (Of course, women may like them this way).

More critically, while personality may be evident after a few dates, character takes much longer to uncover. Does your guy pay his taxes? Steal from his grandma? Or return your calls? How did you divine that in 30 seconds? Or does that not matter for your relationships?

Worse, once you bias things by an initial snap-judgement, cognitive dissonance sets in. Meaning, you will stick with the first decision despite contrary evidence until you get burned. How many guys have seen this with women over and over again? Always stuck on the guy who with a smooth line ... why doesn't he call you back? Isn't he the one? WHere could he be? Not possibly meeting another soulmate with his excellend body language....

The reason it bugs me is that in order to play this game an average guy or INTJ has to learn the player's skills. Once you do, you can then pickup women easily enough who "just know" you are the one. But they only think that b/c I held the eye contact a little longer (body language), ignored her and chatted up her girlfriend instead (jealousy), made fun of something trivial about her (neg hit -- shows status), used some light touch (kino -- arousal), and then made her ask for my number (reversal -- now she pursues, and this makes her think she likes me more, based on cognitive dissonance).

I played this game for awhile in my 20's, and in the end, I could not respect the women that constantly fell for it. They were just relying on biological urges rather than brains. I was never "the one". They knew nothing about me. I could have been a serial killer. But I was in fact just a guy who learned a skill and practiced a bit.

In the end, as an INTJ, I'd rather have the woman who took the time to learn something about me, realized we had something in common, and took it from there. Leave the instinct for the barnyard animals. But that rarely happens these days. Most people are seeking instant gratification, and they enable it by deceiving themselves about their intuition. Put this intuition to a test, though, and it reliably fails -- much like most modern marriages.

Vortex

01-12-2008, 01:24 AM

I wish there was a drug that would just kill of sexual desire. Its seriously annoying.

I tried the dating game a bit, got burned pretty hard, and I've just decided to ignore it for a while. For the life of me, I can't judge women I'm interested in (literally. I can't tell jack about them) and its screwed me every time. The natural irony, of course, is that I've wound up hyper, maybe not sensitive, but vigilant and constantly look for signs of rejection or betrayal. Its not attractive and I know it, but whatchya going to do?

While I develop crushes annoying easily (give me back my free will damnit!), I've decided, given the above, its in my own best interest not to peruse any for the time being. If a girl is interested in me (heaven help her), she can make the first move. Its still not 100% sure shes going to end up playing me, but I figure the odds are a hell of a lot better by forcing her to initiate. While this has killed off any dating, and made the chances near zero, its easier to ride out than the roller coaster that is the dating game.

Oh, and I have no interest in "casual" dating or one night stands. I personally feel its degrading jumping into bed with someone I barley know and who doesn't know me at all. There are much easier ways to take care of needs than going on dates. I personally find sex to be an exclamation point to a relationship, not the starting point for one.

My $0.02

danalaina

01-17-2008, 09:55 PM

i think you're painting us with too broad a brush...and certainly your ideas about "most women" should probably be tossed out here. as an INTJ female, i'm what...perhaps 5% of the population?

i've not really told you much of anything about my own personal criteria in social circumstances, and certainly it would be wrong even to assume that every woman who functions this way will have the same. i won't presume to speak for them, though. the only reason i imply similar women exist at all is that i'm not arrogant enough to believe i'm unique in this fashion.

In 30 seconds with an INTJ you would not learn much.
the very, very basic fact is that without physical chemistry, there is no hope for romance. period. that doesn't take more than 30 seconds to figure out. so yes, in 30 seconds, even with an INTJ, i learn enough to know if he's going to be ruled out accordingly.

if a guy makes it past this point, in the few minutes following, i'm evaluating how he handles himself. BUT...i didn't say that, based on this information, i'd tell him i wanna go home and make babies. good lord. what i'm looking for is chemistry beyond the physical at this point. i won't rule him out if it's not perfect, but again, i'm looking for deal-breakers. is he too arrogant? too cocky? too self-absorbed? mean to others present? you'd be surprised how many guys trip on their dicks at this point.

the process is about sorting quickly based on things that are automatic deal-breakers. at no point did i say i'd find my soulmate (and realize it) in 30 seconds. yes, some aspects of character can only be revealed in time. as i'm not the sort to ask for a credit report and references when a guy first says "hello," i wasn't aware that this concept was something that needed to be discussed.

The notion that self-assurance can be determined by brief observation is also patently false. Confidence is highly situational. [...]
about situational confidence and such...again, why are you assuming i wouldn't know this and be factoring that in?

Meaning, you will stick with the first decision despite contrary evidence until you get burned.
maybe some chicks do, but that's contrary to my nature. INTJs are nothing if not adaptable. we toss out bad ideas without sentimentality. you say "despite contrary evidence," suggesting that i'm going to keep something that has been proven not to work? O.o

How did you divine that in 30 seconds? Or does that not matter for your relationships? [...] Always stuck on the guy who with a smooth line ... why doesn't he call you back? Isn't he the one? WHere could he be? Not possibly meeting another soulmate with his excellend body language....
you sound bitter and angry...not things that are likely to have the women flocking. you don't need a book too see that, i'm sure.

your reaction to what is, after all, just my talk about what works for me suggests you've run into this wall yourself. some women may write you off for things you don't think are significant (or for things you don't even realize might be problems). but why would her ideas about what's good in a man somehow be less important than yours?

iamnotspock

01-18-2008, 12:43 AM

well, I don't know anything about *you* danalaina. maybe your 30 second rule works great for you personally. maybe you found the right guy that way. but I simply detest the whole "impulse buy" culture in all regards, in dating, and everywhere else it pops up. and the current state of *society* is what suggests to me that it doesn't work overall

to me, it seems that people are like pinballs, bouncing around inside a machine, hardly thinking where they are going or why, constantly buffeted by demands and desires they no longer control.

it **used** to be that society imposed order on that, having a system for how to dance or court a mate. rules were clear and results were predictable. honor and loyalty mattered much. capability, family status, etc. wanton desire was considered weak, a luxury of the rich

today, society operates in the opposite way, with commercial advertising designed to stimulate sexual appetite, physical hunger, everything appealing to the eyes, and the stomach, expectations encouraged beyond reality, all to better access the consumer's wallet. the consumer who thinks least and acts quickest is the most profitable consumer to hook on your line.

now rather than seeking a mate that is loyal and reliable, which might be arranged through a church or a family relationship, the only thing that matters is how much the mate appeals to the eyes, and desire. the outcome we have is an explosion of single moms and unmarried people who spend all their time dating. long term now means six months. this is very profitable for companies which sell much more products to single dating people than old married people. it is not so good for the people themselves.

in my experience as an INTJ my desire is directly connected to how impressed I am with someone's mind. I can appreciate that some women are "hot" -- but it's not what turns me on. and you cannot know someone in 30 seconds or less, not by a long shot. I want to see character, not personality. intellect, not vocabulary. you get the idea: depth.

but the frustrating part is that most people don't share these concerns. that includes most women. frankly, they are shallow. they still expect to randomly bump into the perfect guy, as in a romance movie, and to "just know" he is perfect. the odds of that encounter are small, and the ability to "just know" non-existence. but women cling to these fantasies well into middle age, wasting time that could have been spent on more fruitful endeavors.

as long as everyone is acting this way, there is little chance for more solid characteristics to stand out. you have to play the game or get ignored. if you play the game, you get chosen for shallow reasons. or you are forced to make equally shallow choices. you are reduced to a pinball.

in the end, I don't believe the notion that we each know what is best for us overall. we are too biased. too stewed in our own impulses and desires. too unwilling to consider that in a string of fleeting moments ten years will have passed. too shallow.

intj's believe in systems, strategic plans, data analysis, and the future. that approach works well for investing. buying expensive items like computers and cars. planning careers. so i'd rather take that approach to finding a mate then just walking up to the first one that looks nice. but it's hardly possible. I blame that on the consumer culture that plays to our basest desires.

in the end we'll all be serial daters. chasing chimera. but in reality, always alone, b/c things were too brief to truly be known. we have the social issues and health problems here in America to prove it. that is your 30-second dating culture right there

quentin

01-18-2008, 12:45 AM

I wish there was a drug that would just kill of sexual desire.

It's called saltpeter.

Colette

01-18-2008, 06:11 AM

quentin

01-18-2008, 06:33 AM

Yes, it should be, "14 whiskys. I think that's the record."

Sees beautiful girl walking down the sidewalk

"I love you!"

Falls, cracks head on the pavement, dies

The dying words of Dylan Thomas. History does not record whether that was a successful pickup line.

ElGuyay

01-19-2008, 08:59 AM

Iamnotspock, the 30 second rule is something we all use, even you, not just women. It's the concept of the first impression. It's where you learn where the person is coming from, how they were raised, how they treat people, and how they communicate. You may think 30 seconds is hasty but a person's mannerisms, dress, grooming and communication style are all indicative of those factors and CAN be deduced in 30 seconds. It's true, people are complex and take time to get to know, but if a person can't meet these criteria off the bat then they're a waste of effort getting to know. That's what the 30 second rule is about: determining if someone is even WORTH the effort to learn more about. All I'm saying is it works.

You can call it shallow all you want, but this is something even YOU do when you meet someone, you just haven't noticed.

Colette

01-19-2008, 09:23 AM

ElGuyay

01-19-2008, 10:19 AM

You'd be an advocate of the 'speed dating' phenomenon, then? ;)

If they'd slow it down and serve us liquor beforehand I'd partake in that faster than you can say, "I'm socially inept".

Colette

01-19-2008, 10:20 AM

If they'd slow it down and serve us liquor beforehand I'd partake in that faster than you can say, "I'm socially inept".

Hmm...now I reckon drinking 'n' speed dating might be about as risky from a judgment POV as DUI - you end up with a baggage-ridden nutter with an unhealthy attachment to her pet poodle ;)

ElGuyay

01-19-2008, 10:30 AM

you end up with a baggage-ridden nutter with an unhealthy attachment to her pet poodle ;)

Crazy=hot for the INTJ male, actually. I work around a woman who talks outloud to herself at full volume about world issues and all I want to do is propose to her.

Colette

01-19-2008, 10:36 AM

Crazy=hot for the INTJ male, actually. I work around a woman who talks outloud to herself at full volume about world issues and all I want to do is propose to her.

Excellent!

:thumbsup:

Richard0612

01-19-2008, 10:51 AM

Personally, I couldn't care less about getting a girlfriend. I absolutely cannot stand people who 'cling' on and will not let go. When I was about 13, this girl seemed to latch on and would not let go [odd really, because I'm not particularly physically attractive by any means]. If I ever did want a partner, she would have to be intelligent and analytical, someone who I could have a meaningful discussion with. This girl certainly was not. One day I lost my sanity and told her just how "shallow, stupid and immature" she really was. It worked 100%, but I now have to avoid the clique she built up around her for fear of being atomised!

Colette

01-19-2008, 11:03 AM

One day I lost my sanity and told her just how "shallow, stupid and immature" she really was. It worked 100%, but I now have to avoid the clique she built up around her for fear of being atomised!

Sounds like you'd be quite happy dating 'Robogirl' then..

I look for something a little more than dry mind-game playing, in a partner, myself. But that's just me ;)

Lucid

01-19-2008, 11:38 AM

With regard to this 30 second thing and shallowness...
I usually know in the first 30 seconds whether I might consider dating someone. Maybe this is shallow, but I have to be physically attracted to the person in question to date them. Unfortunately, there are very few people I actually find attractive. So I'll know in the first 30 seconds if he's got a chance or not.
However, that decision is sort of a probationary acceptance pending what happens when he opens his mouth. If it turns out he's a jerk or an idiot or someone I just have nothing in common with, it doesn't matter how physically attractive he is.
It's not shallow, it's just a first impression. As everyone else has mentioned, first impressions do impact how you view someone, but they aren't as concrete as Iamnotspock seems to think.

I would question, also, why Iamnotspock decided that these women all decided that he was their soul mate. In my experience, most women (and also most people) are pretty picky about who they decide to settle down and pop out children with, if they have any choice in the matter (meaning if it isn't an accident). So while anything is possible and I certainly don't know anything about the situation or the people involved, I find it rather unlikely that a large group of women would decide, based mostly on body language and a smooth line, that a guy was "the one." If this is actually the case, I would encourage investigation into the purity of the water supply in Iamnotspock's area, and possibly an evaluation of how close the power lines run to residential neighborhoods.

That being said, I have known a few people who do behave the way Iamnotspock described. But their behavior was the result of mental and emotional problems and cannot be considered the norm any more than pulling out one's teeth to remove the tracking devices installed in them by the CIA can be considered the norm.

thod

01-19-2008, 11:41 AM

You have a sex drive but dislike relationships. So use prostitutes them. Simple commerce no need for feelings. no complications that the other party was thinking of marriage. You can have a different girl every night if you want and dont have to make her come first. Disadvantage is cost but then you intj's always make so much cash from your schemes its not a problem. Beats paying for dinner, having to listen to her drivel about, how her cat is psychic, for 3 hours, and still not getting into her pants. In and out, then back to planning world domination.

youngblooded

02-02-2008, 05:49 AM

I dislike going to clubs as I feel like I'm walking into a place full of people who have spent the entire morning thinking up tricks and techniques to get close to me. For whatever reason

Vortex

02-02-2008, 11:21 AM

Vortex, you must amend your signature with great haste - you are flagrantly misquoting Dylan Thomas, and one of the most famous poetic lines in the English language. The OCD in me will not stand for such sacrilege!

Yes, I'm aware its not actually the true quote. Kind of a long story on how I got to it as it stands, but thats the way it is.

Brutananadilewski

02-03-2008, 03:37 PM

Lucid

02-03-2008, 07:01 PM

I wouldn't say that it's shallow at all, but rather the reality of our evolutionary mating mechanisms. I'm the exact same way. It never made any sense to me when people said that physicality doesn't matter, as romantic relationships aren't built on mental dialogue alone.

I've never understood that either. While physical attraction isn't the only thing that's important, it is important.

Obstinate

02-04-2008, 01:13 AM

Oh, while we're on this subject, someone help me out. I've got a different predicament. My problem isn't being too cold emotionally or anything, my problem is that I'm too sensitive, so when I meet someone I have this strong feeling that they're silently judging my negatively, only to find out later that the person thought I was doing that. And when it comes to dating, sure you can say that, but it's really hard when you're very highly sensitive. I think it'd be really great to meet a girl and not imagine being with her six months down the line in the first 10 seconds of meeting.

And the hardest about it all is, being a young African-American male who doesn't wear giant white tees and say the N-word every 5 words, I'm quite used to being turned down either because I'm not the same race as the girl I'm interested in, or that I'm not "black" enough (whatever that means). I like interracial dating, it seems really cool how different and hip it is these days, so as a 16 year old INTJ, how can I overcome all these fears and just go for it? What should one go up to a girl and say, and when?

quentin

02-04-2008, 07:24 AM

I figured as a young African-American male you'd be quite the catch for African-American females since according to the statistics 25% of African-American males in their 20s are either in prison or on parole. So there's a dearth of eligible young black men in the African-American community. I guess you'll have to wait until your early 20s when you're reap the benefits when so many of your peers have rap sheets. To be a tad bit cynical and insensitive about it. Besides, why would you want to date a girl dumb enough to buy in all that "keepin' it real" N-word BS?

Seriously, though, in one way dating does get a bit easier in one respect for us male INTJs as we grow older. The older and more mature women get, the more they look towards the value of stability in a partner. Most younger women go for the flashier, shallow aspects of boys, and thus it's the dumb, loud alpha male studs that get the girls when everybody is young and immature. As we grow older, however, our INTJ intelligent, reserved, non-flashy demeanor becomes a strength rather than a weakness.

Unfortunately for you, this starts to happen around the 30s, and you've got a long wait at your 16.

Obstinate

02-04-2008, 08:53 AM

I can relate. It's pretty lame to see such things as that.Guess I can't get started on dating a girl of every race til my 20s :(.

JTG

02-04-2008, 10:14 AM

I'm white and i didn't start dating anybody until i was 21. Girls just didn't give me the time of day, haha. I think as we get older, the traits that we possess make us stand out more. As some of the types may have trouble making the transition to maturity, many INTJ have already made the transition and are already looking to the future.

i get enough clues in thirty seconds to know whether that guy could ever get in my pants, and if he's not getting in my pants, he could never become my SO.

If this is how a majority of girls handle it, then it's why so many INTJ have trouble getting girls, i'm sure. I'll be the first to say i give a terrible first impression. At least 90% of the time, when i meet a girl she ends up giving me no impression that she's interested at all... ever. Of the other 10% that ever do show interest, about half of them show it after getting to know me. Maybe half of them (EFs?) show interest right off the bat, and those are normally the ones that lose interest after discovering i'm "boring."

So after that i'm left with 5% of the population that could potentially choose me. Subtract from that the ones that i wouldn't choose. Most don't meet up to my standards, because i require a lot of compatibility. Well... i'm 24 and have never been in a committed relationship. Need i say more?

This shows how much of the dating game is purely image based. One's accomplishments, ideas, integrity, conversational skills, etc. are worthless in a 30 second window. It is this time-pressure which favors players, who learn techniques to sway the snap-decisions in their favor.

This is a big factor, as well. What notspock is saying, is that there are a number of guys out there who have gotten good at presenting what they know women want to see. It's not always the alpha male image they put out there, because it's not always the alpha male image that girls want to see.

Saying that somebody doesn't need to actually talk about themselves in the first 30 seconds because they should exhibit self esteem doesn't change it either. Player types tend to be very confident, and good ones can mask their overconfidence, coming off as genuine and attractive in almost every way. Believe me, i know a couple of people who are very good at playing the attraction game.

no need to worry, though. for the guys who don't possess that knowledge innately, How To books will only get them so far with a smart woman (assuming they're the target). it's much better just to be yourself and play the numbers (if you're impatient). eventually you'll find the women who immediately like what they see. we're all different. this idea that we're all looking for the drop-dead gorgeous alpha male is ridiculous.

To tell us to play the numbers is a bit ironic, since that's all players do. They're more the type to go out, get shot down a few times, and then bring home somebody they know they can bag. In general, we (INTJ males) tend to be more reserved, preferring to take it slow, get to know somebody, and then decide whether we want to pursue anything.

I'll agree that physical chemistry plays a big role in attraction, but am i so out of mainstream when i say that personality is more important? There have definitely been a few occasions when i met somebody, wasn't attracted, and then became attracted after getting to know them. Intelligence, in particular, is a big turnon for me, but all positive personality traits reflect well on how i view somebody.

(sorry for the mile long post)

PRBori

02-23-2008, 04:52 PM

Aurelia

02-25-2008, 05:59 PM

Hi there.

I was wondering how many of you like or play the so called "dating game".

Personally i totally hate clubbing and dating and I see no point in it. As clubs are totally fake environments and people try to be better than they actually are.
Also the whole getting to know someone to me is just total BS. Also I am aware that there are loads of "tricks" to make other people fall but it just doesn't seem right.

I met my now ex girlfriend at school and it started out with revising maths together. There was never any need for all this superficial "dating" and feelings just developed genuinly.

One of my biggest fears is that i'll stay alone for the rest of my life from now on as i refuse to play "the game" and i very much doubt to be as lucky as with my last gf again.

I was just wondering how other INTJs see the whole thing.

Regards sev.

I can understand why you'd dislike the clubbing or bar scene. Unfortunately, dating requires putting yourself out there. If you don't want to be alone for the rest of your life but you don't put in any effort to meet new people, your fear could very well turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

One of the best ways to get out and meet people is to be active in organizations that you're interested in. This way you immediately have something in common with the other person. (I met my husband while we were both volunteering in a hospital and we began "dating" by doing crossword puzzles together.) The more ways you find to mingle with people be it getting involved in church, joining a rock climbing club or whatever your interests are, you are broadening your social circle and increasing the likelihood of finding someone worthwhile. Why not go through an online dating service like eharmony that profiles your personality/interests and matches your qualities to those who may best fit you?

iamnotspock

02-26-2008, 12:46 AM

PRBori

02-26-2008, 04:56 AM

I'm into neither one, clubbing is out of the question, I hate crowded places and I hate extrangers touching me.

Online dating, oh... I did that for a while, only idiots come my way, although I scan thru profiles, they lie a lot.... when you meet the people in person is a disaster almost all the time or they are just not what you expected.

The way I see it, if men want a women like me they will look for me and find me. I don't look for men, men look for me. Also, it seems to me that I have better chances of finding someone while attending conferences that are full of people in my field.

I met my current one at FOSE, and I will admit, our conversation was pure business at first... besides the fact that he has some amazing eyes "very light grey" sort of.... his mind and what he does complimented me. Intellectually we were just able to challenge each other and our careers just complimented.. his in Biometrics and I'm in Security. Ahh... and yes, his the one that told me he was interested.. I was interested to some extend, not all the way, but I would have never said anything.

Honestly, what did it was when he ask me 10 questions and due to my answers he was able to describe who I was on our second night together. Is like he just undress me right on the spot just because of my answers to 10 questions....

More importantly, he didn't run away when I mention marriage on our first date ;) instead he mention he was serious... hmmm... his being tested alright... This was March 2007... is now almost March 2008 and still around...:thumbsup:

Anyway, that's my experience. There is someone out there for everyone and you don't always have to look for them, when the time is right, they will show up....

:p:p

Aurelia

02-26-2008, 01:29 PM

> Why not go through an online dating service like eharmony that profiles your personality/interests and matches your qualities to those who may best fit you?

Let me take a stab at that. I actually tried it for a few months. And basically, my conclusion is that online dating is a cesspool. The women are either fat or weird.

Think ahout it. Attractive women get hit on a lot. They don't need to go online. My ex could not walk down the street five feet without some dude offering her dick. Unattractive women may not have so many immediate options, but they can always get a fuck buddy or twelve. It is only the really fat ones -- and the really weird ones -- that tend to go online for dates. So that is the first problem.

The second problem is that the premise of eHarmony does not work b/c the participants don't really follow it. Basically, they match you up based on their formula. So far so good. But then they send out the pics. So now, people are still judging on pics. And you can fastrack, which means skipping the formula and the q and a anyway.

Overall, eHarmony sucked. Wasted my $60. It is much better to join groups and meet people in real life, which was your first suggestion.

What's wrong with checking out pictures of prospective dates? At least it's from a pool of candidates you are more compatible with. Physical attraction has to be a part of the deal. That way you can at least eliminate those you are not attracted to in the least. I agree that a woman who ranks a 10/10 won't find the need to go on an online dating site but how many men who need a dating service would be a 10/10 themselves? While we all would love to date someone who matches our physical ideal, that is not realistic thinking. We do not live on a planet where the vast majority of us look like models.

My thinking is if your goal is to eventually marry you need to put yourself out there. Unfortunately weeding out the unattractive, strange or otherwise incompatible ones is a part of the dating process. The more opportunities you expose yourself to the better your chances are in finding someone. I have two friends who use online dating services and while there are weirdos on there -- they have also had some good experiences too. Perhaps dating through those services is like real estate. It's all about location, location, location. If you don't live near a larger city, you have less to choose from.

errrzarrr

02-26-2008, 04:46 PM

Pretty much the exact same way as you. Hate clubbing or crowded places in general. Not much into going out to seek men for dating either...

I pretty much go from work to home and vice-versa with exceptions to take the kids out once in a while. Other than that you will just find me home, in a very peaceful and lonely place on my computer working or just writing away my thoughts...

Yeah, That happens to the 99.99% of INTJs and I am in that group too. The good part for us and all types(the other 15 types), but especially good for us is that you DO NOT need to go to clubs to meet that cutie girl or boy you want. The best places for meeting people is anyplace! The school/university, work, supermarket, the queue to pay any stuff. Yeah, In fact, clubs are the worst place to meet girls.

blueback

02-27-2008, 12:11 AM

The way I see it, if men want a women like me they will look for me and find me. I don't look for men, men look for me.

This is exactly the approach most women "take" to dating, if you can call a plan that passive "taking" anything.

I was interested to some extend, not all the way, but I would have never said anything.

Again, this is a "tactic" that most women use. Basically, they are terrified of being rejected or making a mistake just like men are. . .but if men try to overcome that fear they will try to pull them down. No one likes it when their own shortcomings are pointed out through action.

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us...There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you...And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others - Marianne Williamson

Honestly, what did it was when he ask me 10 questions and due to my answers he was able to describe who I was on our second night together. Is like he just undress me right on the spot just because of my answers to 10 questions....

Ironically, he probably learned those questions from a batch of PUA material. There are dozens of games like that. I could list a couple right now that would probably be exactly what he asked or would work just as well.

Whether or not you knew that, the question then becomes: does it matter? Would it change your perception of the event if you found out that he had asked 100 women those same questions to get closer to them? Would it be more meaningful if you were woman # 1, what about # 15, what about # 98?

There is someone out there for everyone and you don't always have to look for them, when the time is right, they will show up....

Right. . . .are you still going to feel that way if he leaves you tomorrow and you have to start your "search" again? The odds of any one particular relationship lasting forever are pretty slim. You shouldn't think that just because you've got that "boyfriend thing" covered now that it will stay covered.

Who exactly were you talking to when you said that? Women? Men? Humans? If all humans followed your advice the population problem would quickly solve itself. . .so I suppose that has a positive externality to it.

iamnotspock

02-27-2008, 11:39 PM

What's wrong with checking out pictures of prospective dates? At least it's from a pool of candidates you are more compatible with.

My point was that the pool is more like a cesspool. There are some decent women, but lots of unattractive ones. This is actually good for the decent women who get tons more attention online than in real life. So it might work well for your friends.

But from an average guy's standpoint, he is now facing massive competition just to meet the average women, who could be approached in a tenth of the time in real life. And he is far more likely to meet fat or weird ones.

Finally, if the idea is that the internet is going to match you on many more factors than looks, it often fails, b/c so long as the picture is there, that is the deciding factor. In my experience, many women never even activate the compatibility features of dating sites such as Yahoo. And eHarmony fast-tracking also undermines their formula.

Bottom Line: The internet is a +2 for women, and a -2 for men. Guys should suck it up and approach attractive women in real life. That is my experience.

PRBori

02-28-2008, 03:50 AM

This is exactly the approach most women "take" to dating, if you can call a plan that passive "taking" anything.

I know, I really hate looking for men. I can tell when someone is interested in me, but I hate men trying to get with me. Besides I have very high standards I'm not willing to compromise.

Again, this is a "tactic" that most women use. Basically, they are terrified of being rejected or making a mistake just like men are. . .but if men try to overcome that fear they will try to pull them down. No one likes it when their own shortcomings are pointed out through action.

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us...There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you...And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others - Marianne Williamson

Not willing to repeat my mistakes at all, so I guess, yes to some extend what you said is true.

Ironically, he probably learned those questions from a batch of PUA material. There are dozens of games like that. I could list a couple right now that would probably be exactly what he asked or would work just as well.

I don't think so, he is genuine and direct just like I am. Trust me he has being tested dearly.

Whether or not you knew that, the question then becomes: does it matter? Would it change your perception of the event if you found out that he had asked 100 women those same questions to get closer to them? Would it be more meaningful if you were woman # 1, what about # 15, what about # 98?

I just found the conversation very interesting, when it comes to women he was very straight, not that I care much about his past anyway, but that's just a way for him to figure out if the relationship would work. So yes, he ask every one he was interested those 10 questions. He has being direct and honest from day one, and that to me was important.

Right. . . .are you still going to feel that way if he leaves you tomorrow and you have to start your "search" again? The odds of any one particular relationship lasting forever are pretty slim. You shouldn't think that just because you've got that "boyfriend thing" covered now that it will stay covered.

If he leaves tomorrow, well that's life, that's destiny. I'm not going to die because of it. As for searching again, unfortunatedly I have no plans to keep looking. I plan to enter celibate life afterwards.

Who exactly were you talking to when you said that? Women? Men? Humans? If all humans followed your advice the population problem would quickly solve itself. . .so I suppose that has a positive externality to it.

That's just my own point of view. I think that personnal experiences contribute on how you see things in life and what steps you take. Dating habits are not exempted.

blueback

02-28-2008, 07:19 AM

I just re-read that post and I apologize if it had a slight edge to it. At the time I didn't think it did but now I do.

That's just my own point of view. I think that personnal experiences contribute on how you see things in life and what steps you take. Dating habits are not exempted.

This is exactly what I've been trying to explain to everyone here, especially the ones who refuse to change their approach to dating.

Humans are horribly inadequate when it comes to understanding statistics. We just aren't programmed to understand them intuitively. What we are programmed to understand, what "feels right", are personal anecdotes.

However, if the only information you ever use to make decisions are your own personal experiences then you would have died a long time ago. You've never fallen off a cliff, but you understand that 100% of the people who fell off cliffs didn't enjoy the experience.

It's the same in dating. There is a lot of information out there that is culled from a massive pool of experiences and you SHOULD take advantage of it. You shouldn't ignore it just because it doesn't feel right. It only feels wrong because you don't have enough experience.

Colette

02-28-2008, 11:35 AM

I've always had a strong personality. Some people liked it. Others didn't. And to be honest, I didn't (don't) care either way. But, I have been told, even by close friends, that they found me intimidating at first. They felt "put off" by my intelligence. I've never been one to play dumb in order to make those who are less self-assured feel good about themselves. To me, if you have a problem with me being me, what does that say about you? Why do you care?

Hah - me too; and how often have I heard this lament from INTJ women now? Perhaps it should be our "catch cry to action" :)

That's the extent of what they're going to get. I've even teared up a bit when I see or hear people crying. Maybe, I'm tapping a little more into my F side in my old age (32)

32 is old?. Gah...there's no hope for me then :(

As far as my relationship with others...I have more female friends, but they are mostly NTs. I have platonic relationships with guys, but they're mostly married, family members, or guys who are my brother's friends. Most men find me physically attractive, but when I don't do the girly, dasmel in distress thing...they can't handle it. I'm capable and independent. I find it insulting to assume otherwise

For myself, I've been single for a number of years now, but haven't found it possible to have 'platonic friendships' with married or attached men (who vastly outnumber single men in my demographic group), mainly because of the jealousy and insecurity of the men's wives and partners (despite my lack of 'evil intention' toward the partner or husband with whom I am developing a friendship). This has happened on so many occasions now that I seldom try to go down the friendship track with married or attached men; although some still want to, and try to instigate friendship with me.

Speaking of that...when it comes to dress and grooming, I do believe in looking good. When I shop, I know exactly what I want. I buy it (if it's reasonably priced of course), and get the heck outta there! I also LOVE my stiletto heels. Unless I'm just going to the grocery store or something like that, I do put on make-up. To me, you are treated how you look. You may not like me, but you will respect me. And like a good friend of mine once said, "I may not know nothing, but I'm going to look like I do!" LOL.

I believe in looking good too, and looking feminine (not like an honorary male), but perhaps we differ about the reasons. I do it mainly for myself, and because it makes me feel good, regardless of what anyone else thinks; and thus occasionally I dress in what I regard as a 'younger style' - some may say a good 15 years 'too young' for my age, because it suits me and makes me feel youthful!

Aurelia

02-28-2008, 02:57 PM

My point was that the pool is more like a cesspool. There are some decent women, but lots of unattractive ones. This is actually good for the decent women who get tons more attention online than in real life. So it might work well for your friends.

But from an average guy's standpoint, he is now facing massive competition just to meet the average women, who could be approached in a tenth of the time in real life. And he is far more likely to meet fat or weird ones.

Finally, if the idea is that the internet is going to match you on many more factors than looks, it often fails, b/c so long as the picture is there, that is the deciding factor. In my experience, many women never even activate the compatibility features of dating sites such as Yahoo. And eHarmony fast-tracking also undermines their formula.

Bottom Line: The internet is a +2 for women, and a -2 for men. Guys should suck it up and approach attractive women in real life. That is my experience.

Cesspool... :laugh:
In an online dating service, I would say that women are actually at a disadvantage in comparison to men. My best friend has been in a wonderful relationship with someone she met online for the past six months BUT there was a fellow she met who tried to get her to give him $1200. In general, men use love to get sex (or in this case money). Women offer sex to be loved. While rich men don't have a problem with a trophy girlfriend using them for money, it is far more common for a man to manipulate a woman under the guise of love. This makes online dating for women treacherous. Especially as women are more likely to disregard physical imperfections in the quest for true love and most men will quickly dismiss a woman if she's above a certain age or weight. The standards of beauty imposed on women are much harsher than what is imposed on men.

Think about it. Older men who are not in the best physical shape can still be considered quite a catch whereas those women who aren't in the best physical shape are looked upon with disgust. According to your point about looks being the deciding factor and how online dating services is teeming with an endless supply of fat women, women would be at a disadvantage here right? While you may not have had much success in the online dating arena that doesn't mean it will be a waste of time or money for someone else. There are people I've met who not only dated someone they met online but married them as well. If you want to maximize your time and chances of meeting someone, online services provides an additional alternative. You can meet a number of women for $20 a month versus taking one out for dinner and still finding out you're not attracted to her.

PRBori

02-28-2008, 04:35 PM

I just re-read that post and I apologize if it had a slight edge to it. At the time I didn't think it did but now I do.

This is exactly what I've been trying to explain to everyone here, especially the ones who refuse to change their approach to dating.

Humans are horribly inadequate when it comes to understanding statistics. We just aren't programmed to understand them intuitively. What we are programmed to understand, what "feels right", are personal anecdotes.

However, if the only information you ever use to make decisions are your own personal experiences then you would have died a long time ago. You've never fallen off a cliff, but you understand that 100% of the people who fell off cliffs didn't enjoy the experience.

It's the same in dating. There is a lot of information out there that is culled from a massive pool of experiences and you SHOULD take advantage of it. You shouldn't ignore it just because it doesn't feel right. It only feels wrong because you don't have enough experience.

I understand your point, I do also know of many other people including my own mother's experience that I compare to some extend.

I still think that at the end it is a personal decision and my decision are in no way influence much by someone else. I think that's typical for us INTJ's.

iamnotspock

02-28-2008, 07:59 PM

Cesspool... :laugh:
In an online dating service, I would say that women are actually at a disadvantage in comparison to men. My best friend has been in a wonderful relationship with someone she met online for the past six months BUT there was a fellow she met who tried to get her to give him $1200.

This anectdotel (sp) evidence does not support your generalization. WOmen can ask men for money and vice versa. Goes both ways.

it is far more common for a man to manipulate a woman under the guise of love.

Oh, come on, now. Where is your evidence for that? I know lots of whipped guys who get led around by the nose. IT can go either way.

This makes online dating for women treacherous.

This makes love treacherous, period. Anyone can get their heart broken, or get used.

Especially as women are more likely to disregard physical imperfections in the quest for true love and most men will quickly dismiss a woman if she's above a certain age or weight. The standards of beauty imposed on women are much harsher than what is imposed on men.

Not sure I agree. A fat chick can get laid easier than a dorky guy.

Think about it. Older men who are not in the best physical shape can still be considered quite a catch whereas those women who aren't in the best physical shape are looked upon with disgust. According to your point about looks being the deciding factor and how online dating services is teeming with an endless supply of fat women, women would be at a disadvantage here right?

Nope. See my post again.

While you may not have had much success in the online dating arena that doesn't mean it will be a waste of time or money for someone else. There are people I've met who not only dated someone they met online but married them as well. If you want to maximize your time and chances of meeting someone, online services provides an additional alternative. You can meet a number of women for $20 a month versus taking one out for dinner and still finding out you're not attracted to her.

I don't take any out for dinner unless I'm interested. But note that you cannot really tell what they look like online half the time anyway (usually fatter in real life).

But overall you are trying to refute my MALE experience with your FEMALE friends experience? That is comparing XX and YY's....

Also, you are trying to argue that online was good for your female friends, but also put them at a disadvantage? That doesn't compute. Seems to me you are just arguing. I don't see why. What is your investment with eHarmony?

Aurelia

02-29-2008, 01:41 PM

Also, you are trying to argue that online was good for your female friends, but also put them at a disadvantage? That doesn't compute. Seems to me you are just arguing. I don't see why. What is your investment with eHarmony?
Since when has there been a reality show where men undergo plastic surgery then parade themselves in a beauty pageant? The media’s glorification of youth and sex drive many women to extreme measures. We could argue endlessly about this subject. Dating is harder for women because of the nearly impossible standards of physical perfection. Men are not subject to the same expectations and therefore are at an advantage when it comes to dating in general. Think about your statement where you express disdain for shallow image based approaches yet in almost the same breath you share your contempt for fat women. There is nothing extraordinary in understanding that women exchange sex for love and security whereas men offer love to get sex. Each offers what the other values. Yes, there are role reversals but that is more the exception than the rule. The online dating experiences of my friends have mixed results. That is why I gave different examples. My overall point is that it is possible to find love online. Though it did not work for you personally, that doesn’t mean Sevs won’t have any luck. For a man who does not have the necessary social skills to approach a woman in a normal setting, meeting several women online can be a beneficial experience and less intimidating. Online dating is merely another avenue for someone who does not like the bar scene.

umop_3pisdn

02-29-2008, 02:30 PM

I go to gay clubs, because I'm gay, and "the scene" here isn't terribly vast (small-ish city, not a huge selection), so there isn't a whole lot of alternatives in terms of venues. I don't have that much success with it, though. I've met a few cool people, but it's quite disproportionate, and I've basically stopped looking. I mostly just go there for something to do, now, since lots of my friends are gay and also happen to go there.

I don't find the dating game works for me. I live too much in my head to adequately connect to most people in such a setting. I mean, even if I'm in a lively dance club, chances are I'm still mulling over some philosophical or esoteric crap, or the book I just read or something. I also tend to expect too much from people, which results in me being disappointed. I also refuse to compromise myself, or to take part in the whole sexual-display/gender-role crap that so many people seem to get absorbed in, in such a venue/atmosphere.

iamnotspock

02-29-2008, 08:53 PM

Since when has there been a reality show where men undergo plastic surgery then parade themselves in a beauty pageant? The media’s glorification of youth and sex drive many women to extreme measures. We could argue endlessly about this subject. Dating is harder for women because of the nearly impossible standards of physical perfection. Men are not subject to the same expectations and therefore are at an advantage when it comes to dating in general. Think about your statement where you express disdain for shallow image based approaches yet in almost the same breath you share your contempt for fat women. There is nothing extraordinary in understanding that women exchange sex for love and security whereas men offer love to get sex. Each offers what the other values. Yes, there are role reversals but that is more the exception than the rule. The online dating experiences of my friends have mixed results. That is why I gave different examples. My overall point is that it is possible to find love online. Though it did not work for you personally, that doesn’t mean Sevs won’t have any luck. For a man who does not have the necessary social skills to approach a woman in a normal setting, meeting several women online can be a beneficial experience and less intimidating. Online dating is merely another avenue for someone who does not like the bar scene.

We were talking about eHarmony, not online in general. Craigslist is a whole different scene, for example. I've met some real babes there. I also met women online in other venues not dating sites. But eHarmony, in particular, was a wasteland and expensive disappointment.

As for the other part, look, men are faced with **different** expectations. Okay? It's a different game. Don't tell me it's easier -- you didn't play it. There are reality shows where men have to compete to be cooler, more assertive, more atheletic, more funny, more sincere, etc. to get the babe. It's equally hard.

My personal tastes aside, fat girls are at the bottom of the food chain, along with shy dorky guys. Let's not pretend. That's how it goes in our society. So they are the ones who tend to go online the most. Most women would rather meet a smooth man who approaches them in real life, than one who sends them an email on a dating site, right? So I advocate guys learn how to do that. I know when I do I meet much more attractive women than I meet online, much faster. They get a lot more than just a static image of me. That's all I'm saying.

Lastly, I don't hold fat women or shy men in contempt. I am the latter. I work on it. Fat women can do the same. I'm never gonna be a natural player; they are never gonna be model thin. So what.

Aurelia

03-03-2008, 11:21 AM

Actually, I brought up eharmony as an example of online dating but I did not exclude all other possibilities. While you continue to specifically point out that eharmony is a wasteland and expensive disappointment to YOU, I keep repeating that everyone will not have the same experience. One of my husband's friends met someone online and married them two years ago. We attended their wedding. As I also mentioned one of my best friends met someone on eharmony as well and is currently in a wonderful relationship. Did the experience suck for you? Yes. I get that. Does that mean everyone will have the same outcome as you did? No and you can't make that kind of generalization. I hope we can come to an agreement at least on that part.

Of course dating for men and women is different. There are different expectations for both and dating for men can be difficult too. Otherwise neither of us would have responded to Sevs question. While men can learn to change their approach with women and learn how to have more successful conversations, the pressure to change generally stops with their personality. Rarely does it entail undergoing a series of potentially life threatening surgeries to change their appearance as it does with women. For women it is both beauty and personality that count. We probably won't see eye to eye on this subject will we?

blueback

03-03-2008, 12:13 PM

Does that mean everyone will have the same outcome as you did? No and you can't make that kind of generalization.

Actually, just because one or two people "violate" the the generalization doesn't disprove it. In fact, if those are the only two people you can find out of thousands than they are the exceptions that prove the rule.

Generalization: A principle, statement, or idea having general application (american heritage dictionary)

See? Half of the letters in the word are devoted to the word "general." That should be a pretty good indication that it applies to the greater part of a situation, but not to every single part. Stop pretending that a generalization is some sort of absolute rule.

Aurelia

03-03-2008, 03:05 PM

Actually, just because one or two people "violate" the the generalization doesn't disprove it. In fact, if those are the only two people you can find out of thousands than they are the exceptions that prove the rule.

Generalization: A principle, statement, or idea having general application (american heritage dictionary)

See? Half of the letters in the word are devoted to the word "general." That should be a pretty good indication that it applies to the greater part of a situation, but not to every single part. Stop pretending that a generalization is some sort of absolute rule.

It is ridiculous that you would pick out one part of the conversation rather than trying to understand the overall point of the discussion. I'll put it in bold for you since it is clearly evident you didn't comprehend it the first time around. It is possible for people to find dating success online and no one is in the position to say that it absolutely cannot work for someone else. Bravo to you for picking up a dictionary but maybe you should work on reading comprehension.

Colette

03-03-2008, 03:08 PM

It is ridiculous that you would pick out one part of the conversation rather than trying to understand the overall point of the discussion. I'll put it in bold for you since it is clearly evident you didn't comprehend it the first time around. It is possible for people to find dating success online and no one is in the position to say that it absolutely cannot work for someone else. Bravo to you for picking up a dictionary but maybe you should work on reading comprehension.

:laugh:

You're my new best friend :)

blueback

03-03-2008, 07:54 PM

I didn't respond to "It is possible for people to find dating success online and no one is in the position to say that it absolutely cannot work for someone else" I responded to "Does that mean everyone will have the same outcome as you did? No and you can't make that kind of generalization". I thought that was obvious since only one of those sentences was included in my post.

Are you denying that those are your words?

I'm going to go ahead and assume your answer will be no. Since those are your words I responded too, and they form a perfectly legitimate point on their own, they're not taken out of context or anything. . . .why are you freaking out? You said it, I responded to it. It's not my fault you can't keep track of your own argument.

The discussion makes sense, most of it just isn't interesting. I'm just tired of people who refuse to acknowledge that generalizations are perfectly acceptable things, everyone uses them, and they make things easier. You simply provided me with a picture-perfect quote to respond to.

I didn't even respond to the part where you said that enough women choose to undergo unnecessary but life-threatening surgeries that anyone should care. I suppose the number is far greater than the number of men who choose to take unnecessary but life-threatening performance-enhancing supplements to improve their career and attract a better wife. I mean, since you obviously researched that point before you used it.

Oh, and about that other point, where you compared your issue about women who get plastic surgery and iamnotspock's issue with fat women. . .not the same thing. Losing weight is (with a few very rare exceptions) a simple matter of self-control while getting cosmetic plastic surgery is a one-time decision that can be made to happen with enough cash.

If you'd paid attention to threads related to this one you'd have seen me say "attraction is not a choice." I stand by that statement. I'm not attracted to fat women but I am attracted to slim women. Most of the men in the world would agree with me. Most women aren't attracted to disrespectful men but are attracted to confident leaders. Most of the women in the world would agree with me. Therefore, the steps each sex as a whole takes to make itself more attractive to the opposite sex will be different. The difference isn't some sort of cosmic judgement of their worth, it's just the way things are.

Oh look. . .I used generalizations. . .please don't make me feel bad about myself. I'm not going to name any names *cough*colette*cough*

iamnotspock

03-04-2008, 01:24 PM

My generalization is that online works better for women than men. And jennifer's friends were women. And I am a man. So the evidence we have so far supports my generalization that it works better for women than for men. Right?

noirartist

03-04-2008, 03:18 PM

I don't date and I don't like playing social games. In other words I'm out of the loop.

iamnotspock

03-04-2008, 03:58 PM

So you are married? A hermit? Or what?

Colette

03-04-2008, 06:01 PM

Phosphorescent

03-04-2008, 06:25 PM

I'm very much the same... dating seems contrived. Still, there's little one can do to get around it :/

It's still better than being alone, if just marginally.

Aurelia

03-04-2008, 07:25 PM

:laugh:

You're my new best friend :)

;D Thanks. I'm glad someone appreciated the sarcasm.

I'm just tired of people who refuse to acknowledge that generalizations are perfectly acceptable things, everyone uses them, and they make things easier. You simply provided me with a picture-perfect quote to respond to.

I'm not attracted to fat women but I am attracted to slim women. Therefore, the steps each sex as a whole takes to make itself more attractive to the opposite sex will be different. The difference isn't some sort of cosmic judgement of their worth, it's just the way things are.

Are we still talking about generalizations blueback? My response to you is the same. I understand that you were just trying to make a point that everyone uses generalizations. That part is fine with me. However your thoughts on the steps women take to make themselves more attractive is something I'd like to discuss further.

It is a disturbing trend that women feel it is necessary to mutilate their bodies and expose themselves to unnecessary harm all just to fit a very specific image of beauty. And what are you trying to say? That this should be acceptable? The American media in particular puts a very narrow minded view of beauty on a pedestal. The obsession with youth, sex and beauty is toxic to our society especially in the way that women and young girls view themselves. It doesn't surprise me that you are only attracted to thin women. It fits in with everything I've been saying. Women come in all different sizes and shapes. The thin girls are trying to puff themselves out with breast and butt implants. The more voluptuous girls want to emulate the starving runway models by going on ridiculous diets, opting for liposuction or tummy tucks as quick fixes. Society should uphold a standard of beauty that encompasses a variety of body types, skin colors, etc. It should also include iamnotspock's beloved fat women. By the way, the word fat has such negative connotations. It is a derogatory comment to make.

My generalization is that online works better for women than men. And jennifer's friends were women. And I am a man. So the evidence we have so far supports my generalization that it works better for women than for men. Right?

Not quite. My friends are in relationships with men not other women. So far your generalization still sucks. :laugh: iamnotspock you are truly relentless. How much longer are we going to argue this topic?

iamnotspock

03-04-2008, 07:58 PM

Not quite. My friends are in relationships with men not other women. So far your generalization still sucks. :laugh: iamnotspock you are truly relentless. How much longer are we going to argue this topic?

Gee, like to have the last word, much? But please rethink what you just posted. It doesn't make as much sense as you presume.

Rohsiph

03-04-2008, 09:25 PM

It's still better than being alone, if just marginally.

I'm curious: how do you see this?

blueback

03-04-2008, 10:11 PM

;D Thanks. I'm glad someone appreciated the sarcasm.

Hey, I called it sarcasm too! Why does everyone hate me? *being emo*

It is a disturbing trend that women feel it is necessary to mutilate their bodies and expose themselves to unnecessary harm all just to fit a very specific image of beauty.

Okay. You're disturbed. Why should I care about your feelings?

Of course, you are on the internet, so it's a safe assumption that you aren't in an undeveloped area. Did you know that there are women who use metal rings to stretch their neck to more than twice it's normal length to be more attractive. They can't even remove the rings cuz they'd snap their own spine. Did you know that there are women who pierce all sorts of places on their bodies with dirty, unsterilized spikes to be more attractive? Did you know that there are tribes in Africa where the woman has to have her clit surgically (with a razor blade) removed or none of the men will marry her? Actually, there are members of those tribes in America who continue the practice.

Even if you weren't aware of all that, you must be aware that women have done crazy things to be beautiful since humans evolved eyeballs. Doing them in a sterile, carefully controlled environment with a team of experts is hardly the most dangerous thing they could choose to do.

The American media in particular puts a very narrow minded view of beauty on a pedestal.

No they don't, they just respond to public pressure. If an ad with a random old guy selling Doritos gets 100,000 views and an ad with a random young girl selling Doritos gets 1,000,000 views they are going to go with the girl. It's that simple.

I think you're just looking for confirmation of your preconceptions. There are all sorts of different people on TV. Most of them are above the average in attractiveness because that is what people want to see. Even new born babies are more interested in beautiful faces.

The obsession with youth, sex and beauty is toxic to our society especially in the way that women and young girls view themselves.

Yeah, I've heard all that before. What's your solution?

It doesn't surprise me that you are only attracted to thin women. It fits in with everything I've been saying.

I said "I am attracted to slim women" not "I am only attracted to thin women." Seriously, it's like right there in text, all you have to do is pay attention.

I'm not even going to go into detail about how many different things I am attracted to, it wouldn't be worth the effort. Just trust me when I promise that I am as complicated as you are.

Society should uphold a standard of beauty that encompasses a variety of body types, skin colors, etc.

Riiiiiiiiight. <-sarcasm

Beauty is, by necessity, a minority. If everyone was beautiful then no one would be beautiful. Does it not satisfy you that fat women have been the ideal of perfection at several points in history? I'm sure that the men in Africa are greatly attracted to black women. The guys in asia are probably turned on by asian women, too.

The culture isn't responsible for protecting the feelings of individuals. Individuals are responsible for themselves. Suck it up, buy in, or change it but don't sit on the sidelines whinning that the world doesn't work the way you want it to.

By the way, the word fat has such negative connotations. It is a derogatory comment to make.

Well, I work out at least an hour every work day and I'm careful to eat healthy. I'm not fat. If I want to call someone fat, because it's a short synonym for obesity, then I will. If someone wants to get upset because they have too much bodyFAT and they don't like it being pointed out to them I have no sympathy.

I did see a movie once about a guy who had a glandular problem, I felt sympathetic towards him.

Would you like to propose another word, one to replace "fat"? If it's equally short and equally accurate I just might agree to use it to preserve your feelings.

My friends are in relationships with men not other women. So far your generalization still sucks.

I can see your point, that if your female friends met males on the internet then it's one for one with neither sex gaining an advantage.

However, you're forgetting all the facts. If the men had to deal with 10 women before they met one of your friends, but your friends only had to deal with 1 man. . .then it's 10 to 1 that the guys have it harder. Alternatively, you could look at the 'number required to treat'. If 10 men are still looking for every 1 that found one of your friends, but only 1 woman is still looking for every 1 of your friends that found a man, then it's still 10 to 1 that the guys have it harder.

Good try, though.

Aurelia

03-16-2008, 05:27 PM

We touched on a variety of subjects. How the media effects the standards of beauty in America or whether dating online is more beneficial towards women etc. It's not about my personal feelings and it's not about hating you. :rolleyes:

* Not everyone is physically beautiful. However beauty does come in all colors, shapes and sizes but the media upholds a narrow view of beauty.
* Since overweight individuals are despised in our society, any word associated with that condition will eventually have negative connotations (like the word obese). The word fat in particular is negative to many individuals. What would an overweight person rather be called? I don't know. Plus-Sized? Big?
* It is possible for people to find dating success online and no one is in the position to say that it absolutely cannot work for someone else. Instead of acknowledging that statement in our discussion about online dating, you keep talking about the ratio of men versus women but that isn't the point. What do you want me to say? That there are more men than women online? The gender ratio doesn't invalidate my statement. Somewhere in this forum someone stated how their discussion kept hitting a brick wall. This happens to be your brick wall and I'm tired of bringing it to your attention.

blueback

03-16-2008, 06:43 PM

It's not about my personal feelings...

You said it was a distrubing trend. That is not an objective word. It can only be used by someone who is describing their feelings.

* Not everyone is physically beautiful. However beauty does come in all colors, shapes and sizes but the media upholds a narrow view of beauty.

Sure, anything can be beautiful, it's a subjective, individual judgement. However, there are a lot of things that people agree are beautiful. A waist that is 70% the width of the hips, shiny hair, clear skin, high cheek bones, full lips, etc. The media is trying to entertain and sell, so they put people on camera who can sell and entertain.

To sell and entertain it helps a whole lot if people think you are attractive. That means that people on camera will probably fit a particular form because it is the one that appeals to the largest number of people. It's the audience that puts those cookie-cutter beauties on camera, not the "media." The media just asks them what they want to see and films it.

Besides, you can find all sorts of people on camera who aren't beautiful, haven't you ever seen Ugly Betty?

* Since overweight individuals are despised in our society, any word associated with that condition will eventually have negative connotations (like the word obese). The word fat in particular is negative to many individuals. What would an overweight person rather be called? I don't know. Plus-Sized? Big?

Right. Did you know that Colorado is the only state in the union that has an average BMI that is healthy? If fat people are despised then everyone hates everyone. Stop exaggerating the issue. I know plenty of fat people and they are just like normal people <-sarcasm

If any word that describes an excessive amount of body fat will eventually become verboten (german for forbidden) then lets just stop talking about it. Maybe then all the fat people will feel better about themselves.

So, are you saying that the word "fat" doesn't bother you personally? Does that mean you were trying to make me feel bad about using it because someone who is bothered by it might wander across my use of it and feel bad about themselves?

I'm pretty sure a person who is sensetive about their weight doesn't want anyone to talk about it, that is what being sensetive means. Should I just stare instead? I figure they should appreciate the attention since they obviously put a lot of time and effort into developing that gut in the first place.

You haven't even rebutted me yet. It would have been easy. You could have mentioned how obesity is directly related to poverty and that most of the people who are above a healthy BMI are that way because the only food they can afford to buy is incredibly unhealthy.

* It is possible for people to find dating success online and no one is in the position to say that it absolutely cannot work for someone else.

Yes.

Instead of acknowledging that statement in our discussion about online dating, you keep talking about the ratio of men versus women but that isn't the point.

Actually, since you are too lazy to go back and read your own posts, I will help you. iamnotspock said: "My generalization is that online works better for women than men. And jennifer's friends were women. And I am a man. So the evidence we have so far supports my generalization that it works better for women than for men. Right?" to which you replied "Not quite. My friends are in relationships with men not other women. So far your generalization still sucks"

Then, I explained to you how online dating can still be easier for women than men even though every successful pair formed online includes a man and a woman. You tried to use logic, I explained how your logic was flawed.

This happens to be your brick wall and I'm tired of bringing it to your attention.

So it took you 12 days to work up the energy to come back to this discussion? Damn, I thought I'd gotten through to you. I noticed that you didn't respond to most of the things I said. . .is that because I'm right or is that because typing is too exhausting?

creativeRhino

03-16-2008, 10:07 PM

I was never good at anything like flirting/dating/dressing up "nice" when I was a teenager. I had a few boyfriends, but didn't like the whole traditional male/female roles that were expected then (1970s..). I wanted to talk about mechanics/science/current events - not sex and football or pop-stars/movies.

My first hubby I met through friends and then we eventually found ourselves attracted and then we became a couple. Then we divorced after 7 years. Next time around I didn't go looking - I had a relationship with somebody I did gym training with, then met the man who became my next husband through his ex wife that I worked with. Then he died 9 years later. So here I am, late 40s still trying to work the dating thing out. Eligible men are scarce in this age group and it only gets worse in older groups. I'm still pretty useless at the whole thing. I've tried internet dating with some success but not much. I make it clear I'm looking for a "meeting of minds" and that seems to scare the inappropriate ones off. Funny thing is I have quite a few friends who are INTJs but the males I have a purely platonic friendship with.

I've recently met a fellow INTJ on a date and we could have kept contact as friends, but there was none of the "chemistry" he wanted. I think female INTJs go well with male INTJs, but male INTJs seem to be looking for more of a contrasting type.

My first hubby was an ExTJ and my second was an absolute ENTJ. Not a bad combo - I learnt to be much more self assertive in the face of the "take control" style.

I don't do well with S or F types.

xanodel

03-16-2008, 10:29 PM

I think this explains the problem quite aptly: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I quote:

" With the obvious qualification that we're talking here about a four-minute version of love and dating, we found that men did put significantly more weight on their assessment of a partner's beauty, when choosing, than women did. We also found that women got more dates when they won high marks for looks from research assistants, who were hired for the much sought-after position of hanging out in a bar to rate the dater's level of attractiveness on a scale of one to 10.

By contrast, intelligence ratings were more than twice as important in predicting women's choices as men's. It isn't exactly that smarts were a complete turnoff for men: They preferred women whom they rated as smarter—but only up to a point. In a survey we did before the speed dating began, participants rated their own intelligence levels, and it turns out that men avoided women whom they perceived to be smarter than themselves. The same held true for measures of career ambition—a woman could be ambitious, just not more ambitious than the man considering her for a date.

When women were the ones choosing, the more intelligence and ambition the men had, the better. So, yes, the stereotypes appear to be true: We males are a gender of fragile egos in search of a pretty face and are threatened by brains or success that exceeds our own. Women, on the other hand, care more about how men think and perform, and they don't mind being outdone on those scores."

Considering this is the closest I've seen to an actual objective experiment of dating preferences ( in contrast to the poignant anecdotal evidence from PUA), I'm inclined to say my dating life is rather doomed. Apparently once a "scary ice queen bitch" of the debate circuits for the fact I could beat guys in debates, I suppose I shall remain that way unless I am willing to lower my IQ by a sizable percentage. I suppose it also explains why the dates always worked better if I just let a guy ramble about sports where I was expected to listen and not contribute; they always were in for a shocker when I slammed down a book for a nice discussion on politics, economics or philosophy. While I do not hate or dislike the male race (as many of my best friends claim membership to it), I must admit to being a bit vaguely dismayed.

blueback

03-17-2008, 12:17 AM

eternaltriangle

03-17-2008, 01:40 AM

Thanks xanodel, that was interesting. It corroborates a lot of the emperical evidence I've seen from other sources.

So what are you going to do? I mean, is being alone better than being with a partner you don't want to be with? I've asked myself that a lot and my answer is that I would rather be alone than settle. I guess I could change my mind at some point, but it seems unlikely.

As long as two people live and let live, a non-ideal marriage is actually a pretty decent arrangement.

1. It is more cost-efficient
From the size of your house, to the amount of groceries you buy, it is cheaper per capita to buy for more than one person. I suppose joining a commune somewhere would be better for this, but barring that (I hate hippies) marriage is not too bad.

2. It can substantially increase your income
Two people can make twice as much money - OR choose arrangements where one specializes in non-monetary things (eg. raising kids), because the family's potential income allows it.

3. It reduces the average amount of chores
Through specialization of labour, each person can do those chores which they are relatively best at (this is why chore wheels are inefficient social arrangements). Plus, generally speaking, the space per person in a two-person household is less than that in a one person household.

4. It eliminates the time-expensive need to seek out sexual release
Obviously, your partner will not always be in the mood for sex at the same time you are, but this loss is more than made up for by the amount of time saved by not having to date, or seek out members of the opposite (or same) sex.

You may not end up with the perfect person, but as long as you give each other space, you can enjoy the advantages I have listed above. In sum they should save hours each week (or provide additional money, which means you don't have to work as long). If you want to go that way, for instance, you could have an open marriage, although that would require seeking out sexual partners, which is rather time-intensive.

Marriage is an efficient social arrangement, that is unfortunately marketed as a means for self-fulfillment (something it can be, but probably often isn't).

Haphazard

03-17-2008, 08:37 AM

vaguely dissatisfied

03-17-2008, 08:51 AM

I always found the prospect of kissing rather disgusting.

I wonder if I'd ever be able to find a boyfriend/girlfriend who'd be satisfied with rubbing noses instead?

Probably not. Why is this gesture so important?
It's sexual. In my culture anyway. You don't see people kissing on the mouth that arn't physically intimate (or want to be). Sex is like any aspect of an adult intimate relationship.......it has some value, but not all of the value. Kissing, sex, whatever intimate gestures are exchanged within the relationship are used to express that intimacy, as well as, establishing an emotional connection, affirmation of our sense of our sexual selves, and easing daily anxiety and tension.

Haphazard

03-17-2008, 09:29 AM

It's sexual. In my culture anyway. You don't see people kissing on the mouth that arn't physically intimate (or want to be). Sex is like any aspect of an adult intimate relationship.......it has some value, but not all of the value. Kissing, sex, whatever intimate gestures are exchanged within the relationship are used to express that intimacy, as well as, establishing an emotional connection, affirmation of our sense of our sexual selves, and easing daily anxiety and tension.

So I wouldn't be able to get anybody who understands that I'd rather not kiss.

Drat.

vaguely dissatisfied

03-17-2008, 10:21 AM

So I wouldn't be able to get anybody who understands that I'd rather not kiss.

Drat.
I'll tell you what I told my 15 year old daughter when she said that she would try to find a guy that didn't want to have sex. Good luck. First of all there are very few men that don't want to have sex. Secondly, adult intimate relationships are based on sex.....if they wern't everybody would marry their same-sex best friend (heterosexuals I mean......not wanting to leave homosexuals out of the equation.......just trying to be succinct).

Haphazard

03-17-2008, 10:25 AM

I'll tell you what I told my 15 year old daughter when she said that she would try to find a guy that didn't want to have sex. Good luck. First of all there are very few men that don't want to have sex. Secondly, adult intimate relationships are based on sex.....if they wern't everybody would marry their same-sex best friend (heterosexuals I mean......not wanting to leave homosexuals out of the equation.......just trying to be succinct).

I'm even more out of luck than usual because most of my same-sex best friends would very much like to have sex with me (they're either lesbian or bisexual).

Maybe I should bypass this whole romance/sex thing and just get a monitor lizard when I move out of the house.

Lucid

03-17-2008, 10:32 AM

I quote:

"By contrast, intelligence ratings were more than twice as important in predicting women's choices as men's. It isn't exactly that smarts were a complete turnoff for men: They preferred women whom they rated as smarter—but only up to a point. In a survey we did before the speed dating began, participants rated their own intelligence levels, and it turns out that men avoided women whom they perceived to be smarter than themselves. The same held true for measures of career ambition—a woman could be ambitious, just not more ambitious than the man considering her for a date.

So, yes, the stereotypes appear to be true: We males are a gender of fragile egos in search of a pretty face and are threatened by brains or success that exceeds our own."

Considering this is the closest I've seen to an actual objective experiment of dating preferences ( in contrast to the poignant anecdotal evidence from PUA), I'm inclined to say my dating life is rather doomed. Apparently once a "scary ice queen bitch" of the debate circuits for the fact I could beat guys in debates, I suppose I shall remain that way unless I am willing to lower my IQ by a sizable percentage. I suppose it also explains why the dates always worked better if I just let a guy ramble about sports where I was expected to listen and not contribute; they always were in for a shocker when I slammed down a book for a nice discussion on politics, economics or philosophy. While I do not hate or dislike the male race (as many of my best friends claim membership to it), I must admit to being a bit vaguely dismayed.

While I think that these things are probably true to some extent of most people, it's not by any means the standard across the board. There are lots.... (ok, maybe not lots) ...some men who prefer a female who is intelligent. I wouldn't get too dismayed about your own situation. You will probably either find a male who values intelligence and ambition in his mates, or find someone who is more intelligent and more ambitious than you are yourself. These men are probably rare, since you're really smart and really ambitious, but I'm sure there are a few out there.
Either way, you'll probably be faced with a higher standard of mates to chose from than the men who do nothing but talk about themselves and their interests and expect you to just nod your pretty head and won't debate politics with you.

Plus you get to be smart and ambitious in the bargain. You win.

vaguely dissatisfied

03-17-2008, 10:56 AM

I'm even more out of luck than usual because most of my same-sex best friends would very much like to have sex with me (they're either lesbian or bisexual).

Maybe I should bypass this whole romance/sex thing and just get a monitor lizard when I move out of the house.
You don't have to have an intimate, sexual relationship to be happy. You can adopt at some point if you like. Alot is made of relationships in this society, but alot is inaccurate also.

Haphazard

03-17-2008, 11:12 AM

You don't have to have an intimate, sexual relationship to be happy. You can adopt at some point if you like. Alot is made of relationships in this society, but alot is inaccurate also.

Exactly, but I still want a monitor lizard. Those things are cute.

vaguely dissatisfied

03-17-2008, 11:19 AM

Exactly, but I still want a monitor lizard. Those things are cute.
I don't see the attraction for monitor lizards, however, you have made me smile and I don't do that very often so...thank you.

Haphazard

03-17-2008, 11:25 AM

I don't see the attraction for monitor lizards, however, you have made me smile and I don't do that very often so...thank you.

You're welcome. I do what I can. :)

Rohsiph

03-17-2008, 11:44 AM

While I think that these things are probably true to some extent of most people, it's not by any means the standard across the board. There are lots.... (ok, maybe not lots) ...some men who prefer a female who is intelligent. I wouldn't get too dismayed about your own situation. You will probably either find a male who values intelligence and ambition in his mates, or find someone who is more intelligent and more ambitious than you are yourself. These men are probably rare, since you're really smart and really ambitious, but I'm sure there are a few out there.
Either way, you'll probably be faced with a higher standard of mates to chose from than the men who do nothing but talk about themselves and their interests and expect you to just nod your pretty head and won't debate politics with you.

Plus you get to be smart and ambitious in the bargain. You win.

Not that it'll add a whole lot, but another thing to ponder before giving up:

of the men who are seeking intelligent/challenging women to be with over the shallower standards, I assure you a lot of them are similarly dismayed when considering the dating world. Maybe not for all the same reasons (chief in my mind is how many of the more interesting women I've recently met who were married to boring men--who had settled before turning 25), but perhaps it's worth pointing out.

It's bound to be more difficult to successfully find the rarest of gems than it is to settle for some soft, sparkly rocks.

Aurelia

03-17-2008, 12:29 PM

So it took you 12 days to work up the energy to come back to this discussion? Damn, I thought I'd gotten through to you. I noticed that you didn't respond to most of the things I said. . .is that because I'm right or is that because typing is too exhausting?

Worked up the energy to come back to this discussion? Were you waiting for me? :laugh: I can't spend all my time in the INTJ forums arguing with you as there are other threads that I am interested in. Had I known you were waiting for a response I would replied earlier. How rude of me!

As you hoped that you had somehow gotten through to me, I had hoped for the same. I still don't agree with you on many subjects. Have you taken a look at my post about going under the knife? There are many examples of how unrealistic the standards of beauty are in our culture. Are there exceptions? Sure. I KNOW that I don't need to define the meaning of generalizations with you do I?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

While you have an extensive vocabulary what is the point of understanding the specific meaning of words when you don't get the point of the conversation? It doesn't really matter whether I provide evidence contrary to your arguments. Could I have provided evidence about obesity? Sure, I'm in the medical field. Could I post articles about how the media negatively effects women? I could do that too. The thing is you won't listen. What you find important in our discussions is irrelevant to my overall message. I have repeatedly posted what my bottom line is to you yet you continue to expound on matters that are meaningless. I'm pretty sure you know what I was trying to get at. The only purpose you have is to get a sense that you've won the argument rather than gain any understanding from our discussions. This I find both amusing and very childish. If you were honest about your intentions you'd come to the same realization. If I give you a cookie will that make you feel better? How about a gold star put next to your name? This is silliness.

Now don't get offended if I don't respond right away. Right now discussing minute details (you will undoubtedly find something) is not my priority. There are other things in my life that I must attend to. Studying for my board exam is the most pressing at the moment so be warned...it may take me another 12 days to get back to you.

Tokey41

03-17-2008, 01:02 PM

I always found the prospect of kissing rather disgusting.

I wonder if I'd ever be able to find a boyfriend/girlfriend who'd be satisfied with rubbing noses instead?

Probably not. Why is this gesture so important?

Your not alone! Although I don't find it disgusting to the point I won't do it... because as you said it's difficult to find someone who understands that. I actually find a lot of sexual things disgusting but I know in order have a relationship you need to compromise certain beliefs...

Which is probably why i'm single, screw compromising. I don't play the dating game because i'm happy with my lifestyle so why would I want to potentially mess that up for someone else? I'd much rather get to know myself better anyway.

apresmoimelle

03-17-2008, 01:04 PM

I am not all that interested in dating. When I unfortunately pass someone and we introduce ourselves and carry on in conversation fooling one another into thinking we could be interested in what the other person is saying, and blah blah blah..I do not know, but honestly I think intimacy gives me back pain.

Although, I am more than interested in having my cake, and eating it too. As in, I love the whole friends with benefits deal. I honestly prefer to just be friends with someone and be able to jump their bones when I feel like it and then be able to sit and not feel awkward about it. When you start to feel awkward that's when everything has more significance than it should...

Wow, that was a lot of information for just my tenth post in this forum...

Fervency

03-17-2008, 01:20 PM

Haphazard

03-17-2008, 01:23 PM

There was some talk about eHarmony on this thread, but I don't feel like going back and quoting it properly. Anyway, my complaint about eHarmony is different. They sent me matches, but when I read the profiles it seemed like they wouldn't be compatible with me. I pegged some of them as extraverts. I have in mind that I'm probably only compatible with introverts. Does anyone else share this same notion?

Actually, I've read in many cases that an introvert and an extrovert can make a good couple. I wouldn't say to reject somebody just based on whether they seem like extroverts or introverts.

Fervency

03-17-2008, 01:27 PM

Actually, I've read in many cases that an introvert and an extrovert can make a good couple. I wouldn't say to reject somebody just based on whether they seem like extroverts or introverts.

Being in a relationship with an extrovert seems to exhaust me. But ok, fair enough.

Haphazard

03-17-2008, 01:34 PM

Being in a relationship with an extrovert seems to exhaust me. But ok, fair enough.

I've read a bit on this...

It may be exhausting, but it's easier to get along for various reasons -- the extrovert will say what's on their mind. Having both can give direction to a relationship. An extrovert involved will open up communication lines that the introvert wouldn't have on their own, while the introvert has pensiveness and dependability on their side. Having a 'ying-yang' of introversion/extroversion in a relationship can help give balance to a couple and their relationship to the rest of the world.

I don't have the article bookmarked at the moment, but I can try to find it, if you like.

Likethewind

03-17-2008, 01:52 PM

Fair enough, Haphazard, yet I still prefer introverts. Polite, well-mannered and versed in the art of conversation, yes, but an introvert at heart. This would be nice, methinks.

Lucid

03-17-2008, 03:36 PM

Not that it'll add a whole lot, but another thing to ponder before giving up:

of the men who are seeking intelligent/challenging women to be with over the shallower standards, I assure you a lot of them are similarly dismayed when considering the dating world. Maybe not for all the same reasons (chief in my mind is how many of the more interesting women I've recently met who were married to boring men--who had settled before turning 25), but perhaps it's worth pointing out.

It's bound to be more difficult to successfully find the rarest of gems than it is to settle for some soft, sparkly rocks.

I think this is a good point. People of either gender looking for something above average are often frustrated.
One thing I've noticed as I've gotten older (an ancient 27 :)) is that people's standards change. Many younger people care that their partner is hot and drives a bad ass car (or enter other equivalently shallow criteria). Many older people tend to be tired of people who play little games, who can't hold up their end of a conversation (or debate) and have little ambition other than working some crappy job and going to the club every weekend.

I'm rather sorry for your interesting female friends with boring husbands. I wonder how many of their marriages will last.

iamnotspock

03-17-2008, 04:33 PM

I always found the prospect of kissing rather disgusting.

I wonder if I'd ever be able to find a boyfriend/girlfriend who'd be satisfied with rubbing noses instead?

Probably not. Why is this gesture so important?

Try an Eskimo ;-)

Actually, if you are looking for a man, many men are happy to skip kissing. That should be no problem at all.

apresmoimelle

03-17-2008, 04:35 PM

Try an Eskimo ;-)

Actually, if you are looking for a man, many men are happy to skip kissing. That should be no problem at all.

*gasps* Skip kissing? SKIP SUCKING FACE? What? I'm surprised...

iamnotspock

03-17-2008, 04:37 PM

I also hate the bar scene and other general dating practices. I don't want to be alone forever, so I thought I would try some of the online dating sites. Anyway, I have a complaint about eHarmony. They sent me matches, but when I read the profiles it seemed like they wouldn't be compatible with me. I pegged some of them as extroverts. I have in mind that I'm probably only compatible with introverts. Does anyone else share this same notion?

Yeah, I only go for introverts.

iamnotspock added to this post, 1 minutes and 14 seconds later...

*gasps* Skip kissing? SKIP SUCKING FACE? What? I'm surprised...

There are plenty of other body parts to suck ;-)

errrzarrr

03-17-2008, 04:50 PM

who's afraid of kissing?
common dude, we are humans. Not wild gorillas that jumps directly to the pinky hole (yeah the vagina)

put some effort on it, some of creativity. She will apreciate it (and you too).;)

iamnotspock

03-17-2008, 04:53 PM

Considering this is the closest I've seen to an actual objective experiment of dating preferences ( in contrast to the poignant anecdotal evidence from PUA), I'm inclined to say my dating life is rather doomed. Apparently once a "scary ice queen bitch" of the debate circuits for the fact I could beat guys in debates, I suppose I shall remain that way unless I am willing to lower my IQ by a sizable percentage. I suppose it also explains why the dates always worked better if I just let a guy ramble about sports where I was expected to listen and not contribute; they always were in for a shocker when I slammed down a book for a nice discussion on politics, economics or philosophy. While I do not hate or dislike the male race (as many of my best friends claim membership to it), I must admit to being a bit vaguely dismayed.

Just so you know, of the past ten women I went out with, the one I like best has a Ph.D. in quantam physics. I'm thinking that makes her way smarter than me. I like that.

In fact, I have gone so far as to ask women to send me their SAT scores, and gone out with the top three replies. But of these three, one was incredibly rude, one was incredibly boring, and the third spent two hours telling me her political opinion on everything under the sun and daring me to disagree.

I bet all of them think their problem is they are too smart for me or other guys. But my scores were better than theirs. And the girl I liked best is way smarter than me.

The real problem with these high IQ women (two are in Mensa) was not high IQ, but low EQ. The physicist is incredibly *pleasant* to spend time with. That is what guys want on a date. Not a Lincoln-Douglas debate.

stasis

03-17-2008, 06:01 PM

They sent me matches, but when I read the profiles it seemed like they wouldn't be compatible with me. I pegged some of them as extroverts. I have in mind that I'm probably only compatible with introverts. Does anyone else share this same notion?
Actually, I've read in many cases that an introvert and an extrovert can make a good couple. I wouldn't say to reject somebody just based on whether they seem like extroverts or introverts.
Fair enough, Haphazard, yet I still prefer introverts. Polite, well-mannered and versed in the art of conversation, yes, but an introvert at heart. This would be nice, methinks.
If you are interested, there is a discussion and poll specifically about that question here (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

Sesquipedalian

03-17-2008, 07:57 PM

Hm... my dating experience thus far...

Well, like a typical INTJ (I think...) I'm decades ahead of my peers intellectually and decades behind them emotionally/socially.

In middle school I had a couple of childish attempts at a "girlfriend."
In highschool I pretty much was angsty. I was frustrated with the substandard quality of my "education", my ignorant teachers, my shortsighted, ignorant peers, etc. I abandoned having friends and a social life and basically spent my entire senior year on the internet doing what I considered a real education. I got around 4 hours of sleep a night but I enjoyed myself (still making straight As, which is my example of how sad my "best in the state" highschool was, not how smart I am).

So my family go on a cruise the summer after I graduate from highschool. I run into a beautiful, curvy, model-looking blue-eyed blonde on a whale-watching boat. I summon up the gusto to strike up a conversation with her. Within a day or two we're enamored with each other. We basically spent the rest of the cruise in puppy love. We talked over IM and phone after we went back home (Tennessee for me, Kansas for her). I call her up a couple of weeks later and ask her to be my girlfriend. She's thrilled.

Her mom is a travel agent, so in the ensuing months we got to see each other every couple of months on her mom's free extra flier miles. Everyone thought we were destined to get married and have beautiful kids etc. I warned her early in the relationship that I had ADD (which she never acknowledged as a real condition... she truly thought it was some lame excuse people use when they're not listening), and that I occasionally deal with depression.

Over time she got fed up with my resistance to daily phone conversations and I became fed up with her mistrust of me (and time I mentioned a new girl friend she freaked out. No amount of reassurance stopped her whining). Around Thanksgiving a few years ago I fell into a deep, deep clinical depression. She didn't understand this, and I reminded her that I'd warned her about this, and that I just need time. Not only was she not supportive in a time when I desperately needed her understanding... She was accusatory. She was self-focused when I was over there suffering.

But, you know how viciously loyal we are. I was willing to work through anything. I figured she'd understand with time. Come Christmas (when her mom flew our whole family down to visit), she was totally sour. Nothing peirced her negative, childish attitude. I wasn't exactly prince charming, but I was struggling with every fiber in my being to be patient and ignore her childish behavior.

It got to the point where I couldn't take it anymore. I told her "We need to talk". Later that night I took her down to the basement and punched her in the face.

(Just making sure you're still reading! :D)

So anyway, I took her down to the basement and we talked. I said I was trying everything to show her I loved her. She said I was going about it all wrong. I said I'm willing to keep trying. She said "I'm not sure there's a point."

So... I sat there for about 10 seconds letting her statement and all of the negativity I'd overlooked for the past 3 months soak in, and said, "It's over."

She looked at me with shock and ran upstairs crying. ...as if she expected something different after she'd treated me like I was some kind of felon?

As weird as this might sound to all of you, I'm very conservative about intimacy, and decided long ago to wait until I'm engaged to kiss. I don't want to think about another woman when I'm kissing my future wife. So despite the fact that she was gorgeous and we were very attracted to each other physically, we never even kissed haha.

Since then, I've taken a handfull of girls out on dates. One was probably an INTP, but apparently I was too weird for even her. The rest proved themselves to be your steriotypical boring, one-dimensional S-types. I'm sure I made stupid social errors somewhere in there, but I can only do my best...

At first I was frustrated with the complete lack of viable options around me, but over time I've become very content as a bachelor. I can see myself being very happy should the unthinkable happen (me finding a woman right for me), but I am also very happy being single.

Well, that's my story... War and Peace style!

blueback

03-17-2008, 08:09 PM

Interesting story.

So despite the fact that she was gorgeous and we were very attracted to each other physically, we never even kissed haha.

So. . .you never even go off home plate and you were suprised that the relationship ended?

I dunno. On the one hand I want to respect individual preferences when it comes to how someone runs their own life, but on the other hand I want to yell at people to wake up and realize that some things just don't work.

I mean, come on, normal relationships don't include a no-making-out clause. If the two people in the relationship are comfortable with adding that clause, especially for an extended period of time, then neither of the two people in the relationship are normal. Two non-normal people means that the relationship is probably not headed anywhere. I'm not saying that you should change anything about the way you conduct your life, I'm just saying that you should think about it. The odds, IMHO, of finding a girl who is willing to go as far as get engaged to you without ever kissing you, and is functioning normally in every other way, are slim-to-none. However, if you forget about that idea and open up the the possiblity of a tiny bit of physical intimacy before engagement you will greatly increase your odds. There are plenty of girls that don't want to have sex until their married, but very few that don't want to kiss.

Haphazard

03-17-2008, 08:13 PM

It got to the point where I couldn't take it anymore. I told her "We need to talk". Later that night I took her down to the basement and punched her in the face.

I was thinking that was a very ballsy thing to do, but then I read on.

I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around 'too weird for an INTP" after your story, though.

Sesquipedalian

03-17-2008, 08:19 PM

Interesting story.

So. . .you never even go off home plate and you were suprised that the relationship ended?

I dunno. On the one hand I want to respect individual preferences when it comes to how someone runs their own life, but on the other hand I want to yell at people to wake up and realize that some things just don't work.

I mean, come on, normal relationships don't include a no-making-out clause. If the two people in the relationship are comfortable with adding that clause, especially for an extended period of time, then neither of the two people in the relationship are normal. Two non-normal people means that the relationship is probably not headed anywhere. I'm not saying that you should change anything about the way you conduct your life, I'm just saying that you should think about it. The odds, IMHO, of finding a girl who is willing to go as far as get engaged to you without ever kissing you, and is functioning normally in every other way, are slim-to-none. However, if you forget about that idea and open up the the possiblity of a tiny bit of physical intimacy before engagement you will greatly increase your odds. There are plenty of girls that don't want to have sex until their married, but very few that don't want to kiss.

It is true that there are very few girls who don't want to kiss until they're engaged, however, I believe there are many girls who will understand my desire to refrain from it. ...just as the abovementioned girlfriend did. We had a lot of problems, but one thing that was never a problem was physical intimacy. She understood how important physical intimacy was to me and she understood that this was a positive, not a negative quality in me. We held hands and snuggled etc, but just decided that it'd stop there.

EDIT (clarification): This personal rule stems from my desire to keep myself and every girl I date physically pure.

Regardless of what you might think, the relationship was excellent for the first year and a half :).

By the way, let me clarify that I don't require the same of the girls I date. Frankly I expect them to have kissed boys plenty. It's just my personal rule. I'd be willing to bet that my future wife would prefer that I'd kissed her and only her when it's all said and done.

Besides... Normal is overrated. I've never wanted to be normal. ...especially not in my relationships.

Lucid

03-17-2008, 08:28 PM

It is true that there are very few girls who don't want to kiss until they're engaged, however, I believe there are many girls who will understand my desire to refrain from it. ...just as the abovementioned girlfriend did. We had a lot of problems, but one thing that was never a problem was physical intimacy. She understood how important physical intimacy was to me and she understood that this was a positive, not a negative quality in me. We held hands and snuggled etc, but just decided that it'd stop there.

EDIT (clarification): This personal rule stems from my desire to keep myself and every girl I date physically pure.

Regardless of what you might think, the relationship was excellent for the first year and a half :).

By the way, let me clarify that I don't require the same of the girls I date. Frankly I expect them to have kissed boys plenty. It's just my personal rule. I'd be willing to bet that my future wife would prefer that I'd kissed her and only her when it's all said and done.

Besides... Normal is overrated. I've never wanted to be normal. ...especially not in my relationships.

With respect, it is definitely different not to want to kiss until you're engaged. If that works for you then right on, but it's hard for me to imagine marrying a guy I'd never kissed. Before I decided to get married (which is a huge commitment and a really easy way to make your life a lot harder if you make the wrong choices about it) I would want to have lived with the person, had sex with the person, spent a lot of time in a car with the person, kissed the person, etc. Just so I knew what I was getting into.
For me, a huge amount of a romantic relationship is the physical part. Without it I'm not sure I'd see the point of all the bullshit that's involved in a relationship. My thinking would be that I get companionship and caring from my friends, how would a non-physical romantic relationship be any different from a close friendship?

But I won't tell you how to make your relationship work or what to do or not do to make yourself happy. Besides I think Haphazard is also anti-kissing, so obviously there are girls like that out there. :)

Out of curiosity though, what do you mean by physically pure?

Sesquipedalian

03-17-2008, 08:41 PM

With respect, it is definitely different not to want to kiss until you're engaged. If that works for you then right on, but it's hard for me to imagine marrying a guy I'd never kissed. Before I decided to get married (which is a huge commitment and a really easy way to make your life a lot harder if you make the wrong choices about it) I would want to have lived with the person, had sex with the person, spent a lot of time in a car with the person, kissed the person, etc. Just so I knew what I was getting into.
For me, a huge amount of a romantic relationship is the physical part. Without it I'm not sure I'd see the point of all the bullshit that's involved in a relationship. My thinking would be that I get companionship and caring from my friends, how would a non-physical romantic relationship be any different from a close friendship?

But I won't tell you how to make your relationship work or what to do or not do to make yourself happy. Besides I think Haphazard is also anti-kissing, so obviously there are girls like that out there. :)

Out of curiosity though, what do you mean by physically pure?
Yeah, we just have drastically different worldviews. For me the physicality of a relationship of the benefit of commitment, not the prerequisite. The physical part of a relationship is certainly one of the most exhiliarating and enjoyable, but I'm willing to forgo that desire to protect both of our purity should the relationship not work out.

A fairly non-physical romantic relationship is drastically different than that of a friendship... For one I share a lot more. I leave a LOT out of most conversations... I invest a lot of myself in that relationship... I write poetry, compose music, fashion things (made a very sentimental jewelry box for the abovementioned girlfriend using seashells we picked out together on the cruise where we met. Each side of the box had a progressive pattern including color and size, and each side symbolized something in our relationship). ...and I don't snuggle and hold hands with my friends. It's an intellectual, spiritual, and emotional intimacy which I do not share with my friends.

I'm a devout Christian and essentially strive to adhere to the commands of the Bible, believing that obedience to these commands is what yields lasting blessings not only in this life, but more importantly, everlasting blessings in the next.

So, when I say I strive to remain physically pure and keep my girlfriends physically pure, I'm talking about taking wise measures to avoid being tempted into going farther than we should go in our intimacy (groping, sex, etc.) before there is enough commitment there to warrant such intimacy (marriage). I just cut it off one step before most because I know how intensely I can feel for a woman and what a striking effect a physically attractive woman can have on me. I'm essentially trying to be extra-careful to keep myself from lusting and giving into that lust.

Likewise, I don't want to leave behind me a long trail of broken-hearted, violated women. If we break up I want them leaving our relationship every bit as confident and chaste as they were when they first got into it.

blueback

03-17-2008, 08:42 PM

It is true that there are very few girls who don't want to kiss until they're engaged, however, I believe there are many girls who will understand my desire to refrain from it.

That's what I meant. She has to be okay with the idea because it takes two to tango, or in this case kiss.

My point was that any girl who is willing to date a guy for a year and never kiss him is going to have other things abnormal about her. The odds of that being the one and only thing that is, IMHO wrong, with her are very small. Since she probably has other things wrong with her, the relationship is doomed from the start.

Obviously I don't know her, but my first guess is that she was abused (or in some way physically mistreated) as a child. If she's as naturally beautiful as you say then the odds increase dramatically. It's just not normal to be comfortable with nothing more than snuggling your long-term boyfriend.

EDIT (clarification): This personal rule stems from my desire to keep myself and every girl I date physically pure.

As in no touching of anything besides the epidermis? Is that a religious conviction?

I'd be willing to bet that my future wife would prefer that I'd kissed her and only her when it's all said and done.

Well, at this rate, that is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Any girl who wants to kiss her boyfriend will obviously refuse to marry you. Good luck finding a girl, I think you're making your search more difficult than it should be.

Sesquipedalian

03-17-2008, 08:45 PM

I already answered most of what you addressed above, but the abovementioned girl had no history of sexual abuse or screwy parents. The most "irregular" thing about her was that her mom had divorced and remarried when she was young. In every way other than her looks she was your average girl... except for her religious conviction.

She was also a devout Christian, and as such respected my decision to refrain from kissing because she understood that it was out of a desire to honor God.

Lucid

03-17-2008, 09:03 PM

Yeah, we just have drastically different worldviews. For me the physicality of a relationship of the benefit of commitment, not the prerequisite. The physical part of a relationship is certainly one of the most exhiliarating and enjoyable, but I'm willing to forgo that desire to protect both of our purity should the relationship not work out.

Well, the physicality isn't really a prerequisite for commitment, but it's (for me) an essential component of the relationship. But, that's just me.

I'm a devout Christian and essentially strive to adhere to the commands of the Bible, believing that obedience to these commands is what yields lasting blessings not only in this life, but more importantly, everlasting blessings in the next.

So, when I say I strive to remain physically pure and keep my girlfriends physically pure, I'm talking about taking wise measures to avoid being tempted into going farther than we should go in our intimacy (groping, sex, etc.) before there is enough commitment there to warrant such intimacy (marriage). I just cut it off one step before most because I know how intensely I can feel for a woman and what a striking effect a physically attractive woman can have on me. I'm essentially trying to be extra-careful to keep myself from lusting and giving into that lust.

Likewise, I don't want to leave behind me a long trail of broken-hearted, violated women. If we break up I want them leaving our relationship every bit as confident and chaste as they were when they first got into it.

Ah. I think the religious aspect helps me understand where you're coming from, although I still wouldn't choose it for myself.

xanodel

03-17-2008, 10:07 PM

Just so you know, of the past ten women I went out with, the one I like best has a Ph.D. in quantam physics. I'm thinking that makes her way smarter than me. I like that.

In fact, I have gone so far as to ask women to send me their SAT scores, and gone out with the top three replies. But of these three, one was incredibly rude, one was incredibly boring, and the third spent two hours telling me her political opinion on everything under the sun and daring me to disagree.

I bet all of them think their problem is they are too smart for me or other guys. But my scores were better than theirs. And the girl I liked best is way smarter than me.

The real problem with these high IQ women (two are in Mensa) was not high IQ, but low EQ. The physicist is incredibly *pleasant* to spend time with. That is what guys want on a date. Not a Lincoln-Douglas debate.

I actually do have a pretty decent EQ score based on most EQ tests. Seriously though, you are taking my quote out of context (especially the sarcasm at the end). I simply intended to use the article to point out that for the most part, looks are pretty well emphasized when guys select mates, in support of what jennifer808 stated about dating. And I am perfectly aware it does not apply to all men, just a significant portion, and a significant weight is placed on looks when it comes to choosing women.

blueback

03-17-2008, 10:12 PM

It didn't sound like he was talking about looks, just about IQ and EQ.

pax sinica

03-19-2008, 12:33 AM

Thus, generally speaking, dating for Rationals is neither entertainment (as it is for Artisans), social participation (as it is for Guardians), nor deep bonding (as it is for Idealists); rather, dating for Rationals is a sometimes difficult search for a person they deem worthy of their personal investment.
...
The most independent of all the types, INTJs want their mates to be independent as well, able to stand up the sometimes formidable strength of their personality. Courtship is a special problem for Masterminds, since they regard the selection of a proper mate as a rational process, a matter of finding someone who correlates highly with their mental list of physical and intellectual requirements. They know quickly--usually on the first or second date--whether or not a relationship has any future, and they will not waste their time on courtships that seem to hold little promise. In general, Masterminds rely on their head and not their heart to make these choices, and at times, therefore, they will seem cold and calculating.

Pulled this from some website. I feel like all of these things are very true of myself. I have a certain kind of wild, hedonistic fun when I go to nightclubs, but from a serious dating standpoint it's quite futile. As noted in the thread, real communication is of course difficult in that setting. It's more about physical pleasure and music--sensory pleasure I guess you could say. And letting loose with drinks.

I do view dating as a rational process and seek females who meet certain criteria. I even view friends this way. I'm quick to write people off who don't fit what I look for. I don't see instrinsic value in simply knowing more people.

Was eHarmony mentioned in this thread or somewhere nearby? I'm interested in its scientific approach to online dating. I have an account but haven't paid for anything yet. I only rarely receive e-mail notification of matches, and sometimes they are far away. But I do like its rationale.

iamnotspock

03-19-2008, 05:59 PM

It didn't sound like he was talking about looks, just about IQ and EQ.

Yeah, the point of her post was she was "too smart" for guys. So, I was debunking that one. I also question the survey method. Would guys really turn down dates with good looking women b/c they thought they were too smart? I doubt it. There are a couple other explanations:

1. They give the unattractive women higher intelligence ratings to compensate, the same way people say your blind date has a "great personality"

2. The intelligence rating correlates with ambition scores, and since they used professionals at Columbia, men don't want a competitive date. That fits with mating theory in general, where pairs try to avoid direct competition.

One has to wonder how do people assess intelligence in four minutes? I doubt they were given math problems. So it's got to be inferred from some more shallow and obvious characteristics.

As for looks, they always matter, and not just for men. I've got plenty of chatty email transcripts with attractive women that stop where I sent a pic. No surprise there. But the problem was not that I was too intelligent or funny ;-)

blueback

03-19-2008, 07:23 PM

LOL

1) Yeah, never ask a girl whether or not the friend she is trying to set you up with is attractive. Trying to get an honest answer out of her is a futile endeavor.

2) I do enjoy the third wave of feminism. They seem to want to have everything everyway all the time. At least the feminists who just wanted the vote were straightforward enough to bargain with. Of course, women are graduating college faster than men are, so we might be on our way to a matriarchial society. I wonder how dating would work in a world where women were expected to ask men out.

Well, intelligence is strongly correlated with good communication skills. A large vocabulary and the wit to use it effectively can be demonstrated in 4 minutes.

Keep in mind that women are just as popular online as offline. They still have far more options than men do and online they can sift through them more efficiently. Besides, a percentage of those 'women' you talked to were probably actually ugly women, or men.

I think women put a lot of weight on how a man makes them feel. On the one hand they don't want to be manipulated, but on the other hand they absolutely love being manipulated skillfully (no, not INTJ women). It's like there's reality, and then there's the way they want reality to be. If you are able to craft that imaginary reality for them without making it obvious that it's fake they will love you. When you sent them your pictures you might have been shattering their imaginary world in which you looked like Fabio and they looked like Jennifer Lopez. Seeing your real picture reminded them that they had put up a fake picture.