Dating for Nerds: A Shy Guy's Guide to Meeting Women

  • Thread starter Thread starter Winzer
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a shy individual contemplating how to approach a girl he finds attractive, who lives nearby. He expresses a desire to break out of his shell and seeks advice on how to initiate a conversation. Participants suggest various strategies, emphasizing the importance of confidence and genuine interaction. They recommend starting with a simple introduction, asking questions to engage her, and avoiding overly rehearsed lines or excessive flattery. The conversation shifts to the dynamics of attraction, with insights on reading non-verbal cues and the significance of being oneself. There's a consensus that rejection is a natural part of dating, and building social skills through practice is essential. Overall, the key takeaway is to approach the situation with authenticity and openness, focusing on building a connection rather than overthinking the interaction.
  • #151
GeorginaS said:
That's a clip from a fairly popular teevee show, is it not? Surely they don't have a character on the show who mocks someone with Asperger's. Or, I don't know. I'm asking, not asserting anything.

I just know that Zoobyshoe suggested Asperger's, and 27Thousand has repeated on almost every thread I've seen him on lately about wanting to write some sort of formula for reading body language and social situations with women.

Most likely, the character is not specifically suppossed to have asperger's but is rather a composite of popular stereotypes about nerds, some of which are based on actual people with aspergers. Thus, yes, the show is mocking people with asperger's in this particular clip, but the writers are probably not aware of it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
DaveC426913 said:
And that, my icosaheptakilofriend, is a portryal of a person with Asperger's.

Hmmm. The broad stroke is right, some important details are not. The character has a non-Aspergery gay edge to his speech patterns, which is out of left field (It could happen, but it's not typical). Additionally, while he's on the phone he frequently casts pointed glances at his friends which say "Are you following? See how this works?" Autistic Spectrum people just don't get that kind of non-verbal communication; they avoid eye contact, and they have no idea how to use it to send unspoken signals. Thirdly, this character gets the give and take of conversation too well and lacks the talk-your-ear-off uninterruptability of a real Aspie. So I think Galteeth's analysis of what you're looking at is spot on.

re: icosaheptakilofriend, I met a guy with Asperger's a couple months ago who specializes in making colored cardboard models of arcane geometric shapes. I wish I could videotape him talking about his hobby and put it on youtube but I doubt he'd agree to act as a specimen.
 
  • #153
Moonbear said:
You're also more likely to get them to KEEP going out with you if you DON'T bore them silly or irritate them with harping over your mathematical model when talking with them.

What lousy dating advice. You're suggesting he should change his personality to fit whatever personality his prospective date likes!?

He might have better long term success if he does explain his mathematical model to them and only dates women that find his model interesting.

I'm using the same strategy, except with leaving the toilet seat up. Sooner or later, I'm sure I'll find a woman that actually likes it when men leave the toilet seat up. After all, according to this poll, 30% of people leave the entire seat up. Surely there's at least one woman among that 30%.

(Actually, that poll is disturbing, since only 3% close the lid before flushing. 97% of people couldn't care less about sending atomized particles of urine & fecal matter floating into the air where it can gently settle on their toothbrush, towels, faucet handles, counter tops, etc.)
 
  • #154
BobG said:
(97% of people couldn't care less about sending atomized particles of urine & fecal matter floating into the air where it can gently settle on their toothbrush, towels, faucet handles, counter tops, etc.)

THANKS! Now I'm going to have to curl up in a ball and shout speeches from the Henry plays till that image leaves my head.
 
  • #155
BobG said:
I'm using the same strategy, except with leaving the toilet seat up. Sooner or later, I'm sure I'll find a woman that actually likes it when men leave the toilet seat up. After all, according to this poll, 30% of people leave the entire seat up. Surely there's at least one woman among that 30%.

Gee Bob... you just need to install a bidet... maybe it's own small closet where it's away from the toothbrushes.
 
  • #156
physics girl phd said:
Gee Bob... you just need to install a bidet... maybe it's own small closet where it's away from the toothbrushes.

I hate it when people say my name backwards.
 
  • #157
BobG said:
What lousy dating advice. You're suggesting he should change his personality to fit whatever personality his prospective date likes!?

Nope, he doesn't have to change his personality, but if he doesn't, he's going to continue to have very slim chances of finding one of those incredibly rare women who would actually be entertained by his babbling over mathematical models of dating. If he wants to hold out for one of those, he need not worry about his mathematical model either, since even if he had one that worked, it would just keep telling him, "Nope, not that one either, keep looking."
 
  • #158
Moonbear said:
Nope, he doesn't have to change his personality, but if he doesn't, he's going to continue to have very slim chances of finding one of those incredibly rare women who would actually be entertained by his babbling over mathematical models of dating. If he wants to hold out for one of those, he need not worry about his mathematical model either, since even if he had one that worked, it would just keep telling him, "Nope, not that one either, keep looking."

You know what's really, really disturbing? I figured I'd do a search to find out what percentage of Americans liked statistics since I think it's kind of presumptious to just assume that women that like statistical models are a rare phenomenum.

The very first (and presumably most relevant page) informed me that 26.2% of all Americans over the age of 18 suffer from some kind of mental disorder every year.
 
  • #159
BobG said:
What lousy dating advice. You're suggesting he should change his personality to fit whatever personality his prospective date likes!?
No. It is not his personality that's at issue. It is his undiagnosed disorder that's at issue. He needs help to acquire the social interaction skills to interact with society.
 
  • #160
Galteeth said:
Most likely, the character is not specifically suppossed to have asperger's but is rather a composite of popular stereotypes about nerds, some of which are based on actual people with aspergers. Thus, yes, the show is mocking people with asperger's in this particular clip, but the writers are probably not aware of it.
You need to watch the show to get the context. In other scenes, he is utterly obvlious to certain types of human interaction. The character is definitely afflicted, but you're right, it's more of a blend of disorders, not a particular one.

The writers are very aware of what they're portraying.



zoobyshoe said:
Hmmm. The broad stroke is right, some important details are not. The character has a non-Aspergery gay edge to his speech patterns, which is out of left field (It could happen, but it's not typical).
There's no gay element; his speech patterns are just sit-commishly exaggerated.

zoobyshoe said:
Additionally, while he's on the phone he frequently casts pointed glances at his friends which say "Are you following? See how this works?" Autistic Spectrum people just don't get that kind of non-verbal communication; they avoid eye contact, and they have no idea how to use it to send unspoken signals.
As mentioned, in other instances he most definitely exhibits the kind of obliviousness to human interaction that is commoin in mild Aspies.

zoobyshoe said:
Thirdly, this character gets the give and take of conversation too well and lacks the talk-your-ear-off uninterruptability of a real Aspie. So I think Galteeth's analysis of what you're looking at is spot on.
He is a "high-functioning" Aspie.

BTW, the show is hilARious and catchy. Everyone I talk to says the same thing.
 
  • #161
zoobyshoe said:
THANKS! Now I'm going to have to curl up in a ball and shout speeches from the Henry plays till that image leaves my head.

Please let me know if that works.
 
  • #162
BobG said:
97% of people couldn't care less about sending atomized particles of urine & fecal matter floating into the air where it can gently settle on their toothbrush, towels, faucet handles, counter tops, etc.)
The Mythbusters busted this one.

The tootbrushes in their test rooms showed just as much (and in some cases, more) e. coli bacteria on them as the toothbrushes in their test bathroom.
 
  • #163
zoobyshoe said:
re: icosaheptakilofriend, I met a guy with Asperger's a couple months ago who specializes in making colored cardboard models of arcane geometric shapes. I wish I could videotape him talking about his hobby and put it on youtube but I doubt he'd agree to act as a specimen.

There are plenty of videos on youtube of people with AS if people want an idea of what it is.
 
  • #164
Galteeth said:
There are plenty of videos on youtube of people with AS if people want an idea of what it is.
Thanks! I didn't think of that.
 
  • #165
DaveC426913 said:
There's no gay element; his speech patterns are just sit-commishly exaggerated.
Listen again: there's a distinctly effeminate edge to his intonation.

As mentioned, in other instances he most definitely exhibits the kind of obliviousness to human interaction that is commoin in mild Aspies.
I'll take your word that he's more extreme in the other episodes, but even in this clip this character isn't mild at all. Even his nerdy friends think he's weird.

In real life, most people with Asperger's seem totally normal at first. It takes at least a minute or two of talking to them before you start feeling, "This person is a bit odd", and a lot longer than that before you think to yourself "No, he very odd" I don't think anyone who got their picture of Asperger's from this character would ever be able to pick one out in real life.
------------------------------------
Thanks to Galteeth I found a true example of "mild" Aspergers to show you:

http://life-with-aspergers.blogspot.com/2008/05/another-youtube-video-on-aspergers.html
 
  • #166
zoobyshoe said:
Listen again: there's a distinctly effeminate edge to his intonation.
I interpret as it more "snide and sneering". You've got to allow for the fact that, as a sit-com, certain traits are greatly exaggerated and demodramatic. Melodramatic speech patterns are a common hack in gay cliches.


zoobyshoe said:
I'll take your word that he's more extreme in the other episodes, but even in this clip this character isn't mild at all. Even his nerdy friends think he's weird.
Yes, his friends think he's weird all the time. He is. It's just that he's less about the "stuck inside his own head" than the other traits. (Stuck inside his own head would not make for a very intersting sitcom character).

You've got to be careful, having seen only one example of the character, to not jump to conclusions what is due to ASD and what is not. Sheldon is wearing a long-sleeved shirt under a t-shirt but you don't assume that's a representation of Asperger's, right?
 
Last edited:
  • #167
People with Aspergers have trouble reading emotions from facial signals that most people easily pick up on. They tend to avoid eye contact. I dated, well, I tried to date a guy with Aspergers. He needed "escape routes" for when he got overwhelmed, couldn't handle much face to face contact, had to keep up a lot of barriers, finally he just couldn't do it. He'd never been able to have a relationship. Such a great guy, so much to offer, just couldn't handle an actual relationship. He couldn't deal with anyone. No friends, barely able to stay employed except for the fact he had a rare skill that they needed, but he was an outcast at work.
 
  • #168
Evo said:
People with Aspergers have trouble reading emotions from facial signals that most people easily pick up on.
Much of Sheldon's comedic repertoire is about utterly missing obvious human interaction.


Evo said:
No friends, barely able to stay employed except for the fact he had a rare skill that they needed, but he was an outcast at work.
I read an article some time ago that suggested Asperger's may be a lot more comon that suspected - that the modern cliche of the friendless, socially-stunted IT whiz guy may have some merit to it. That these guys might be more than merely stunted, they may have a mild form of ASD.
 
  • #169
DaveC426913 said:
I read an article some time ago that suggested Asperger's may be a lot more comon that suspected - that the modern cliche of the friendless, socially-stunted IT whiz guy may have some merit to it. That these guys might be more than merely stunted, they may have a mild form of ASD.
He can program in K, something very few can do.
 
  • #170
Evo said:
I dated, well, I tried to date a guy with Aspergers.

https://www.physicsforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22464&stc=1&d=1260728326 :biggrin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #171
DaveC426913 said:
Much of Sheldon's comedic repertoire is about utterly missing obvious human interaction.



I read an article some time ago that suggested Asperger's may be a lot more comon that suspected - that the modern cliche of the friendless, socially-stunted IT whiz guy may have some merit to it. That these guys might be more than merely stunted, they may have a mild form of ASD.

I'm not sure who said it, but there's the famous quote "The problem with stereotypes is that they're often true." I'm glad I can actually tie this back into the main topic.

I have met "nerds" who were very much like this character, socially stunted and even with that same manner of speech (I wouldn't characterize it as effeminate exactly, there isn't the drawal, it's more defined by over-enunciation of consonants). My general impression of these types was that while they performed well academically on some things, like math, and had very serious study habits, they weren't truly "geniuses" in the sense that they had difficulty with abstract and subtle concepts. Not only would they miss obvious elements of social interaction (like people's intentions), they also struggled with things like literature and philosophy. I don't know if this is related to autistic spectrum per ce, but it is something I noticed. I recall that when I was younger, I often found a lot of the other kids in the gifted programs kind of odd. I was fairly odd too, but I mean "odd" in the sense that due to their confirmation to the stereotypes I felt I wouldn't really enjoy their social company.
I met a "nerd girl" a couple of years ago who was a math whiz, but after spending some time with her I found she made me a little uncomfortable because she had issues with respecting boundaries.
 
  • #172
Moonbear said:
Mathematical models are applied to human behavior. They're used for things like marketing research. The MAJOR FLAW in your ideas that you keep overlooking or ignoring or refusing to accept is that models describe POPULATION behavior, NOT individual behavior. If you have a minor in statistics, you should understand the difference between populations and individuals in data sets. You should also understand that means that while you might be able to predict that in a large crowd, roughly a percentage of people will act in a particular way to a particular situation, the models will NOT tell you WHICH people will act that way.

The work I did for my Ph.D. involved studies of animal behavior where I had a LOT more control over variables than in a typical population of humans, and I still could not guarantee a particular male or female would act in a specific way at a specific time given a specific stimulus. I could only tell you within a 95% confidence interval that a particular behavior would happen more often in response to a particular stimulus than if that stimulus was not present. This is a great thing in a setting like an animal breeding program where we don't care that one specific cow is going to breed at a particular time to a particular bull, but rather that out of an entire herd of cattle, we'll get MORE cows to breed to at least one of the bulls with a particular treatment than if we do nothing.

So, if you want to set up a dating service, and you figure out that some particular thing is going to improve successes of matches, then that's a great use of a mathematical model of behavior. But, if you think you're ever going to have 100% success on the first try every time, or that you can walk into a bar and spot THE ONE PERFECT woman to ask out, who is guaranteed to accept your offer, you're off on a wild goose chase. You're more likely to have success in getting a date if you go out to places where women congregate and start asking them out than if you waste all your time obsessing over some mathematical model. You're also more likely to get them to KEEP going out with you if you DON'T bore them silly or irritate them with harping over your mathematical model when talking with them.

Something you may want to consider, as far as the group versus individual principles, there is single-subject ABA research design. Although it's criticized for not detecting cause-effect like randomized experimental-control does, if used right it's better at "describing" tendencies at the individual level if run through many many individuals. Combining research methods together let's you test it from different angles. Behaviorists have used single-subject ABA to come up with quite universal patterns on reinforcement schedules and factors affecting reinforcement effectiveness. In the hard sciences they'll use many different methods to test something, so I was thinking of looking at many different data sets to find patterns, then brainstorming what may affect individual differences and then maybe test it by watching individuals discretely in public areas (kind of like single-subject). I don't have the resources not being a researcher so I can't follow-up with experimental-control as stage 3, but maybe if I ever become a researcher I can.

Also, consider not all scientific mathematical models are deterministic, but some in the hard sciences are also stochastic and can also be applied in a sort of technology like way. If I come up with models which can give some fairly accurate probabilities given maybe 5 well thought out variables, maybe that can be used as a good starting point and let personal experience smooth out the edges of interacting with women skills.

There's much more than factor analysis and multiple regression that one can explore with statistical software, and maybe it may help me know which women to ask on dates? I mean, what if you were in my shoes? Wouldn't you want help?
 
Last edited:
  • #173
27Thousand said:
I mean, what if you were in my shoes? Wouldn't you want help?
Well, I for one have definitely been urging you to get help.
 
  • #174
DaveC426913 said:
Well, I for one have definitely been urging you to get help.

I actually meant mathematical equations for dating. I guess some may accidentally see that as a double meaning.

At first it was intellectualizing it using principles in peer-review journals. Then some seemed doubtful that reading others through their body language was an important ingredient. So then on another thread I asked what made Science popular. One suggested math. I did research and found many historians think that's what separated Galileo and Newton from others, then the flash of insight on how to help myself with dating hit me like a lightning bolt! So if I spend hours practicing statistical computing programming language and acquire data sets, etc, my dating life can be normal!
 
  • #175
There have been a lot of responses above, critical to the goal of mathematical modeling of individual behavior. In the case of building a 'date-o-meter', I agree. The goal for such a predictive model is certainly premature if ever possible.

But there is some serious and interesting work going on in this area for the development of new and better human-machine-interfaces. See for example http://affect.media.mit.edu/areas.php?id=understanding". Certainly just at the outset, but real efforts are being made. If this is an area you want to pursue, you are not alone, and not (necessarily) crazy or deficient. :approve:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #176
DaveC426913 said:
I interpret as it more "snide and sneering". You've got to allow for the fact that, as a sit-com, certain traits are greatly exaggerated and demodramatic. Melodramatic speech patterns are a common hack in gay cliches.
I agree to both your assertions here. What you don't seem to be picking up on is neither exaggeration nor melodrama, but an off the wall effeminate edge which is distinct from the love of good diction you sometimes (but not always) find in people with Asperger's. Good diction exaggerated for comedic purposes should sound pretentious, not gay. Gay flamers often have noticably good diction, but that is not the element of their speech that makes them sound effeminate.

Yes, his friends think he's weird all the time. He is. It's just that he's less about the "stuck inside his own head" than the other traits. (Stuck inside his own head would not make for a very intersting sitcom character).
Your assertion was that he represents mild Aspergers, which excused, in your mind, the errors of portraying him as conversant in non-verbal communication by significant eye contact and conversational give and take. He's not mild, as the video I linked to proves, and your assertion he's mild conflicts with your assertions he's exaggerated for comedic effect.

I think all you're really trying to communicate is that you are mischievously delighted by your belief the writers are alluding to the Autistic Spectrum while maintaining plausible deniability.

You've got to be careful, having seen only one example of the character, to not jump to conclusions what is due to ASD and what is not. Sheldon is wearing a long-sleeved shirt under a t-shirt but you don't assume that's a representation of Asperger's, right?
I think you have to be careful about encouraging the conclusion people are authetically looking at Aspergers here, when he's doing things a person with Asperger's couldn't do (non-verbal communication by eye contact). This pronouncement:
DaveC426913 said:
And that, my icosaheptakilofriend, is a portryal of a person with Asperger's.
is phrased to imply you think it's a definitive portrayal. In fact, Galteeth's analysis is the only good one: he's a grab bag of all things "nerdy".

Everyone ought to watch this to help reground in the reality of Asperger's after viewing the sit com:
http://life-with-aspergers.blogspot.com/2008/05/another-youtube-video-on-aspergers.html

The various links on the page seem pretty informative also (haven't read them all).
 
  • #177
zoobyshoe said:
What you don't seem to be picking up on is neither exaggeration nor melodrama, but an off the wall effeminate edge which is distinct from the love of good diction you sometimes (but not always) find in people with Asperger's. Good diction exaggerated for comedic purposes should sound pretentious, not gay. Gay flamers often have noticably good diction, but that is not the element of their speech that makes them sound effeminate.
Agreed, I'm not picking up any gay or effeminate tones.
 
  • #178
27Thousand said:
I actually meant mathematical equations for dating. I guess some may accidentally see that as a double meaning.
No, it wasn't accidental. I got your meaning; I just chose to repurpose it.:wink:

27Thousand said:
if I spend hours practicing statistical computing programming language and acquire data sets, etc, my dating life can be normal!
OK, there is absolutely no middle ground on this one. There are exactly three ways of interpreting the above:
1] The writer has said it firmly tongue-in-cheek, as a joke, because it's ridiculous.
2] The writer is a troll, saying it only to get a rise, because it's ridiculous.
3] The writer is dead serious and thus has a very serious socializing disorder.
It is one of the three.
 
  • #179
DaveC426913 said:
No, it wasn't accidental. I got your meaning; I just chose to repurpose it.:wink:


OK, there is absolutely no middle ground on this one. There are exactly three ways of interpreting the above:
1] The writer has said it firmly tongue-in-cheek, as a joke, because it's ridiculous.
2] The writer is a troll, saying it only to get a rise, because it's ridiculous.
3] The writer is dead serious and thus has a very serious socializing disorder.
It is one of the three.

Option 4: Elaborate viral marketing scam for some NLP type dating system, aimed at "nerds."
 
  • #180
Galteeth said:
Option 4: Elaborate viral marketing scam for some NLP type dating system, aimed at "nerds."

That's another reason mathematical models would be something worthwhile to work for. The reason, some people confuse what is really pseudo-psychology with academic peer-review psychology. If you go to Google:

"Despite its popularity[13], NLP has been largely ignored by conventional social science because of issues of professional credibility[13] and insufficient empirical evidence to substantiate its models and claimed efficacy.[14] It appears to have little impact on academic psychology, and limited impact on mainstream psychotherapy and counselling."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming"

The Psychology you learn in school is much different than that, and uses the Scientific Method and peer-review journals (it doesn't mean the other stuff can't be true, but rather Psychology takes the same stance towards these groups that Karl Popper took towards those who didn't believe in making things falsifiable). Academic Psychology shouldn't be confused with media Psychology, just like Physics is not to be confused with Flat Earth Society.

Academic Psychology already uses quantitative methods inside of studies like "null hypothesis", effect size, regression to show there's some significance, etc. However, it's mostly within the individual peer-review articles, but not as much between studies. I think doing that would be great, so a great place to start is flirting, so we can go past the null hypothesis, falsification, prediction, etc, and bring up models between studies. Remember, I said I'm looking for a model that's not NLP (where they say it's exactly a certain way), but rather a more realistic "stochastic model" where they calculate probability, as a starting point for flirting and then I'll let experience smooth out the edges. Since there are already quite a few peer-reviews where certain behaviors beat the null hypothesis in how people act when flirting, it's guaranteed I'll be able to find some sort of equation for calculating probability given variables. The real question is how vague vs. predictive is the equation going to be? (which I'm going to try and find out; if the adjusted R^2 is 0.2 [20% of the time it does better than chance] then it won't be worth it even if it beats the null hypothesis, but if I can get it up to 0.8 then it could be worthwhile even if many predictor variables are required) Even in Hard Sciences you can't be for sure that you have absolute truth, but rather go with the model/explanation/principle which best fits/predicts the evidence.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #181
DaveC426913 said:
No, it wasn't accidental. I got your meaning; I just chose to repurpose it.:wink:


OK, there is absolutely no middle ground on this one. There are exactly three ways of interpreting the above:
1] The writer has said it firmly tongue-in-cheek, as a joke, because it's ridiculous.
2] The writer is a troll, saying it only to get a rise, because it's ridiculous.
3] The writer is dead serious and thus has a very serious socializing disorder.
It is one of the three.

Consider this, I want to learn how to flirt. I hear men say that they don't ask women on dates unless they "feel it", and women say they send men hints whether the man is aware of it or not. I hear women say they wish men who they're not interested in would just leave them alone, while those they are interested in should be more courageous and just "ask the woman out".

Someone suggested to me that reading whether someone's friendly, bored, flirtatious, etc is a good idea to increase chances. Then a woman on Yahoo! Answers told me to try flirting with women and see how they respond back, to get an idea of whether they're interested.

So then I came across resources saying that historians believe mathematical models is what set Galileo and Newton apart from most others who were interested in the natural world, even if they were criticized for it. If I get a hold of data sets from peer-review flirting studies, perhaps I could look for patterns even if nothing's 100%? If it helps make me more confident and be myself, if I can know who's going to be receptive, so that I don't have to stress out thinking of it and rather focus on those who are interested?

I mean, if I can just make it conceptual in my head how to tell who's receptive and not after I start talking to someone, then perhaps it may help?
 
  • #182
27Thousand said:
Consider this, I want to learn how to flirt.
Then get out there and flirt. Full stop.
 
  • #183
DaveC426913 said:
Then get out there and flirt. Full stop.

And if people won't let me because my social skills aren't good enough, then where do I start in the first place? In order to learn from trial and error, you first need to be in those situations, and so that means developing social skills can help me get into situations where I can have experience (just like some say you can't get certain jobs without experience, but then it's difficult because in those situations you can't get into situations to have prior job experience without already having experience).

Also, don't you think you need something to try in the first place if you want to learn from trial and error? If you don't get it from "gut feeling" and instinct, then you may have to learn it the same way one learns the piano, through instruction followed by lots of practice.

Something to consider, don't you think in order to learn from experience you need to know if it's working or not? So learning how to read body language much better may increase my chances of learning from trial and error.
 
  • #184
27Thousand said:
And if people won't let me...
Won't let you? What do you mean? They nail your shoes to the floor?

27Thousand said:
then where do I start in the first place?
you start by joining in social expeiences and getting used to being around people.

27Thousand said:
In order to learn from trial and error, you first need to be in those situations, and so that means developing social skills can help me get into situations where I can have experience
Yes, so get out there and socialize.

27Thousand said:
Also, don't you think you need something to try in the first place if you want to learn from trial and error? If you don't get it from "gut feeling" and instinct, then you may have to learn it the same way one learns the piano, through instruction followed by lots of practice.
Forget the instruction. Get out there and socialize.
27Thousand said:
Something to consider, don't you think in order to learn from experience you need to know if it's working or not? So learning how to read body language much better may increase my chances of learning from trial and error.
Get out there and socialize.

All of this is rationalization. You are literally hiding behind your logic. Get out there.
 
  • #185
27Thousand said:
Something to consider, don't you think in order to learn from experience you need to know if it's working or not? So learning how to read body language much better may increase my chances of learning from trial and error.


By the time you will learn the equations of body language you will be long a sad bitter old man.
Dont worry about chances. Just do. Quit thinking and DO something. Anything.
 
  • #186
DaveC426913 said:
Yes, so get out there and socialize.


[/B]

You mean, out from the house in the mean world where the big bad wolf lurks ? No way :P Its safer on the computer behind the keyboard.
 
  • #187
DaveC426913 said:
Won't let you? What do you mean? They nail your shoes to the floor?

For example, when I started college, I called someone on the phone I knew from high school, "How do you make friends?" He told me to invite people to do things with me. So my first semester in the dorm towers I called someone, on a different floor, on his dorm room phone. I asked him if he wanted to play ping pong. He said he would be busy. So I called him back a week later asking if he wanted to play ping pong. He then again said he was going to be busy. I tried this again for the next few weeks, then after a while thought maybe he might be getting annoyed, and then I stopped.

Later on someone told me you're supposed to try small talk with someone first so that they feel comfortable before asking them to do something. I tried doing that with roommates since you see them more often and it's less awkward, and it seemed like some were much warmer all of a sudden toward me and would do some activities, but then after asking them to do things a few times they seemed to be aloof while being friendly towards many other people instead. They'd also ask others to do things, but not really in return ask me even if I had asked them earlier. (There are many people who are analytical but are social because they know how to speak the other person's language, so the issue can't just be being analytical, plus I'd suppress being analytical with them so I know it's more to it than that. Even some people would all of a sudden seem extremely interested in something I was tfrom biology/physics I may have been thinking about at the time, but being interested in something together doesn't mean they want to hang out.)

Then I read in a book that sometimes people will ask people indirectly so that it comes across as less intrusive and if they say they're "busy" it's less of a rejection. So I would read examples of it, and if someone said they were interested in something or were doing something, I'd say something like, "I like doing that," etc. Then I found they'd sometimes they'd say something like, "You should come," or, "We should do that sometime" (before if they'd say, "We should do that sometime" I didn't do anything, because I didn't know how one was to respond to that until I read it in a book, and remember I read that late in life in college). However, after doing things together a few times, they'd seem to loose some interest. Worthwhile friendship I'd think would have much more to it than just doing some activities together, so maybe there's something I'm not doing?

If I talk to people from high school, they tell me that I seemed extremely extremely aloof and they thought it was weird, although from my perspective they wouldn't let me interact.

If I'm in social groups, it seems like people don't connect socially with me no matter how hard I try, although individual one on one doesn't seem to have the same issue. In social group settings they'll talk back and forth and seem interested in each other, but don't seem to notice me. I read in a book that people use body language to pass the conversation back and forth in group situations just like you throw a ball, so maybe if I learn more about it and use do it yourself exercises just like you learn to play the piano, maybe it'll help.

Mathematical models would allow me to visualize how it's all related (even if it's probability rather than certainty, it could give me a starting point to work from and then I could use experience to smooth out the edges).
 
  • #188
27Thousand said:
.

If I'm in social groups, it seems like people don't connect socially with me no matter how hard I try, although individual one on one doesn't seem to have the same issue. In social group settings they'll talk back and forth and seem interested in each other, but don't seem to notice me. I read in a book that people use body language to pass the conversation back and forth in group situations just like you throw a ball,
.

Ok, what do you need a mathematical model for ? To tell you that they are not interested in you ? You already seem to know , realize and acknowledge this.

27Thousand said:
so maybe if I learn more about it and use do it yourself exercises just like you learn to play the piano, maybe it'll help.

You are like the kid who wants to learn football and play in NFL and yet all he does is watching football games in TV. Like the kid who wants to box, but delays ad infinitum joining
a boxing gym, for he preferes to run in his yard and say "Im getting in shape for boxing". Both end up doing a big nothing as time passes.

Reality check.

You want to learn how to interact with humans, there is only one way about it. Go down in the field and play.

Ill be blunt. Your approach doesn't have a chance in hell. With it, you won't get better at socializing, flirting, getting laid or whatever else you are trying to do. It will only make you a weirdo.

Second, I suggest to change yourself. Maybe you are the problem. Maybe ppl are not interesting in socializing with you because how you look. How you dress. How you relate to them.

Your chances to get better with this approach are a big 0. Face the evidence, and do what it takes. Maybe you need a bit more than understanding body language. If you need to change, do change yourself. And you can start by stopping obsessing over some fantasies.
 
  • #189
27Thousand said:
For example, when I started college, I called someone on the phone I knew from high school, "How do you make friends?" He told me to invite people to do things with me. So my first semester in the dorm towers I called someone, on a different floor, on his dorm room phone. I asked him if he wanted to play ping pong. He said he would be busy. So I called him back a week later asking if he wanted to play ping pong. He then again said he was going to be busy. I tried this again for the next few weeks, then after a while thought maybe he might be getting annoyed, and then I stopped.

Later on someone told me you're supposed to try small talk with someone first so that they feel comfortable before asking them to do something. I tried doing that with roommates since you see them more often and it's less awkward, and it seemed like some were much warmer all of a sudden toward me and would do some activities, but then after asking them to do things a few times they seemed to be aloof while being friendly towards many other people instead. They'd also ask others to do things, but not really in return ask me even if I had asked them earlier. (There are many people who are analytical but are social because they know how to speak the other person's language, so the issue can't just be being analytical, plus I'd suppress being analytical with them so I know it's more to it than that. Even some people would all of a sudden seem extremely interested in something I was tfrom biology/physics I may have been thinking about at the time, but being interested in something together doesn't mean they want to hang out.)

Then I read in a book that sometimes people will ask people indirectly so that it comes across as less intrusive and if they say they're "busy" it's less of a rejection. So I would read examples of it, and if someone said they were interested in something or were doing something, I'd say something like, "I like doing that," etc. Then I found they'd sometimes they'd say something like, "You should come," or, "We should do that sometime" (before if they'd say, "We should do that sometime" I didn't do anything, because I didn't know how one was to respond to that until I read it in a book, and remember I read that late in life in college). However, after doing things together a few times, they'd seem to loose some interest. Worthwhile friendship I'd think would have much more to it than just doing some activities together, so maybe there's something I'm not doing?

If I talk to people from high school, they tell me that I seemed extremely extremely aloof and they thought it was weird, although from my perspective they wouldn't let me interact.

If I'm in social groups, it seems like people don't connect socially with me no matter how hard I try, although individual one on one doesn't seem to have the same issue. In social group settings they'll talk back and forth and seem interested in each other, but don't seem to notice me. I read in a book that people use body language to pass the conversation back and forth in group situations just like you throw a ball, so maybe if I learn more about it and use do it yourself exercises just like you learn to play the piano, maybe it'll help.

Mathematical models would allow me to visualize how it's all related (even if it's probability rather than certainty, it could give me a starting point to work from and then I could use experience to smooth out the edges).

27K, you're way, way overthinking this. People here have repeatedly given you great advice: you can only learn to meet women by meeting women.

But I sense your apprehension, so you have to start small. Go somewhere where there are lots of young people, like a university or a shopping mall. As you walk past a woman you find attractive, look her in the eyes and say "hi" and keep walking.

Just take note of the woman's response. Some will look away immediately - that means, I'm not interested. Some will pretend not to see you - that also means, I'm not interested.

But once and a while one will say "hi" back, or smile. That means, maybe I'm interested.

If you're very shy and unsure of yourself, you may have to practice this for several weeks before it feels natural. Do it until you're comfortable saying "hi" and until you feel confident interpreting the response.

That's a first step, no mathematical modeling is required.
 
  • #190
This has gone on too long. Locked.

27Thousand, talking to a school counselor or a therapist would be a good idea.
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
12K
Replies
24
Views
8K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
54
Views
41K
Replies
10
Views
7K
Back
Top