A fight between a black girl in in-school suspension and her black woman substitute teacher. If only teachers were allowed to carry tasers...
Readers may think my continual focus on the corrupting influence that adolescents have on adults is undue, but this pattern has many facets to it, one being the Lord of the Flies atmosphere that it encourages in the classroom. Violent crime is at an all-time low, and has been declining for 15 years, but we can squash it even more by knocking kids around when it's needed -- and that's pretty frequently for a supervisor of in-school suspension punks.
May 31, 2008
May 29, 2008
Michel Gondry: an adolescent, not a child
A running theme here is the fading of all recollection of adolescence as one ages; at best, memories melt into those of the very different phase of childhood. This shows when people comment on writer and director Michel Gondry. A Google search for "michel gondry childhood" gets 61,000 hits, while "michel gondry adolescence" gets only 24,000 hits. "Childhood" and "adolescence" are nouns, so this probably measures what people think he focuses on, where he draws inspiration from, what period of his life was most influential in making him who he is, and so on.
Using the personality adjectives "childlike" and "adolescent," however, gives a different picture: 5,000 and 19,000 hits, respectively. So, people seem to think that he and his work are more adolescent. Combining these two results, people believe that his work is about childhood, but from an adolescent perspective. He himself sits on the fence, titling his autobiography I've Been Twelve Forever.
I finally got around to seeing his movie The Science of Sleep, which is his most autobiographical -- he said so, and he wrote the screenplay this time. To judge by this movie, his work is adolescent but, contrary to what most believe, is decidedly about adolescence. He is mired in his girl-hating phase, for example, torn between his desperate physical urge to be with girls and his hatred of their girly natures. Being forced to work a humdrum job while dreaming of cool work is also more characteristic of 15 to 25 year-olds than any other age group.
Overall, the movie should prove useful in reminding adults what adolescence was really like, as opposed to most of the TV shows, movies, and books devoted to this life stage. Its fantastic and absurdist qualities work both for and against this, though: they charm the audience into paying attention, but they also suggest that you're only watching what some weirdo went through. Having been one of those weirdos, I don't know how the majority who were perfectly well-adjusted as adolescents will react. In this way, it's a bit like Heathers, and plenty of people appreciate that movie, so maybe The Science of Sleep will have a similar popular appeal over time.
Using the personality adjectives "childlike" and "adolescent," however, gives a different picture: 5,000 and 19,000 hits, respectively. So, people seem to think that he and his work are more adolescent. Combining these two results, people believe that his work is about childhood, but from an adolescent perspective. He himself sits on the fence, titling his autobiography I've Been Twelve Forever.
I finally got around to seeing his movie The Science of Sleep, which is his most autobiographical -- he said so, and he wrote the screenplay this time. To judge by this movie, his work is adolescent but, contrary to what most believe, is decidedly about adolescence. He is mired in his girl-hating phase, for example, torn between his desperate physical urge to be with girls and his hatred of their girly natures. Being forced to work a humdrum job while dreaming of cool work is also more characteristic of 15 to 25 year-olds than any other age group.
Overall, the movie should prove useful in reminding adults what adolescence was really like, as opposed to most of the TV shows, movies, and books devoted to this life stage. Its fantastic and absurdist qualities work both for and against this, though: they charm the audience into paying attention, but they also suggest that you're only watching what some weirdo went through. Having been one of those weirdos, I don't know how the majority who were perfectly well-adjusted as adolescents will react. In this way, it's a bit like Heathers, and plenty of people appreciate that movie, so maybe The Science of Sleep will have a similar popular appeal over time.
May 28, 2008
A second shot at girliness: some data
Having defined my index of feminine personality as 4 parts Neuroticism plus 1 part Agreeableness, here is how it changes across the lifespan (click for larger image):
I've scaled Neuroticism and Agreeableness to be fractions of the maximum raw value, so that they and their weighted sum lie between 0 and 1. (That is, 0 is no girliness and 1 is 100% girliness.) The value at one age means the value from that age to the next (e.g., 31 averages all 30-somethings). Age 17 represents the average from ages 14 to 20. I read the data off of two charts in this paper on personality and aging, which summarizes the existing literature and contributes new data on adolescents. "Self-reported" means the target individual filled out a questionnaire, while "observer-reported" means someone who knows the target filled it out. The data are pooled from males and females, since there's apparently no similar presentation of the changes in these traits among females only. But males and females probably change in the same direction as they age, so this still gives a good idea of what just females are experiencing.
It's no surprise to me that adolescents score the highest of all, although if you've forgotten what adolescence was like, try to recall how boy-crazy the girls were, how nervous they were at school dances, and how your girlfriends got butterflies in the stomach just seeing or thinking about you. (To those who needed reminding -- doesn't that seem like a previous lifetime?) It's also no surprise to me that 21 to 25 year-olds score show a huge drop from the adolescents: those immediately post-college years are when you first notice that girls aren't quite as girly as before. The mid-to-late 20s are a bit worse than the early 20s, again no surprise.
But then look at 30-somethings -- depending on who we believe more, they're either as feminine or a bit more so in personality than 20-somethings. There are several explanations for this blip in the data (it goes right back down afterwards). Maybe my index is wrong -- it produces something that seems so counter-intuitive. Or maybe some non-girly facets of Neuroticism are increasing from the 20s to the 30s -- say, Angry Hostility -- while the fall-in-love facets are decreasing -- say, Impulsiveness -- at a slower rate than the former were increasing. Then overall levels of Neuroticism would show an increase, but if we looked closer, we would see that it was not implying that 30-somethings are more likely to get butterflies in the stomach than 20-somethings.
Still, it could be real to some extent. If it were, here's my guess at why: after 30, the average woman can no longer deny that she is past her prime for good, is reminded of this fact daily, and begins to feel more anxious, vulnerable, self-conscious, depressed, and so on. By the time she's in her 40s, she's made peace with reality, and Neuroticism goes down again. I'll speculate even further that this "freakout at 30" response could serve the adaptive purpose of motivating a woman to snag another mate while she still looks OK. If the first husband was a good catch, he may have moved on to someone else by the time she passed 30. If he was a dud, this is her last chance to trade up.
After 40, the average woman cannot pass the looks criterion of all but the dregs of the male sex, so there is no point in having a girly personality to attract additional mates. Plus, she's about to enter menopause and, if the Grandmother Hypothesis is correct, will soon shift from an emphasis on her own kids to her grandchildren who need rearing. You definitely want a less girly and more nurturing personality for this phase of life.
So far, we've seen how girliness changes across the lifespan, and there may actually be some good news for those in need of help. In the next part, I'll present some concrete examples of older women who have fairly girly personalities, why they do, and how others can follow their example.
I've scaled Neuroticism and Agreeableness to be fractions of the maximum raw value, so that they and their weighted sum lie between 0 and 1. (That is, 0 is no girliness and 1 is 100% girliness.) The value at one age means the value from that age to the next (e.g., 31 averages all 30-somethings). Age 17 represents the average from ages 14 to 20. I read the data off of two charts in this paper on personality and aging, which summarizes the existing literature and contributes new data on adolescents. "Self-reported" means the target individual filled out a questionnaire, while "observer-reported" means someone who knows the target filled it out. The data are pooled from males and females, since there's apparently no similar presentation of the changes in these traits among females only. But males and females probably change in the same direction as they age, so this still gives a good idea of what just females are experiencing.
It's no surprise to me that adolescents score the highest of all, although if you've forgotten what adolescence was like, try to recall how boy-crazy the girls were, how nervous they were at school dances, and how your girlfriends got butterflies in the stomach just seeing or thinking about you. (To those who needed reminding -- doesn't that seem like a previous lifetime?) It's also no surprise to me that 21 to 25 year-olds score show a huge drop from the adolescents: those immediately post-college years are when you first notice that girls aren't quite as girly as before. The mid-to-late 20s are a bit worse than the early 20s, again no surprise.
But then look at 30-somethings -- depending on who we believe more, they're either as feminine or a bit more so in personality than 20-somethings. There are several explanations for this blip in the data (it goes right back down afterwards). Maybe my index is wrong -- it produces something that seems so counter-intuitive. Or maybe some non-girly facets of Neuroticism are increasing from the 20s to the 30s -- say, Angry Hostility -- while the fall-in-love facets are decreasing -- say, Impulsiveness -- at a slower rate than the former were increasing. Then overall levels of Neuroticism would show an increase, but if we looked closer, we would see that it was not implying that 30-somethings are more likely to get butterflies in the stomach than 20-somethings.
Still, it could be real to some extent. If it were, here's my guess at why: after 30, the average woman can no longer deny that she is past her prime for good, is reminded of this fact daily, and begins to feel more anxious, vulnerable, self-conscious, depressed, and so on. By the time she's in her 40s, she's made peace with reality, and Neuroticism goes down again. I'll speculate even further that this "freakout at 30" response could serve the adaptive purpose of motivating a woman to snag another mate while she still looks OK. If the first husband was a good catch, he may have moved on to someone else by the time she passed 30. If he was a dud, this is her last chance to trade up.
After 40, the average woman cannot pass the looks criterion of all but the dregs of the male sex, so there is no point in having a girly personality to attract additional mates. Plus, she's about to enter menopause and, if the Grandmother Hypothesis is correct, will soon shift from an emphasis on her own kids to her grandchildren who need rearing. You definitely want a less girly and more nurturing personality for this phase of life.
So far, we've seen how girliness changes across the lifespan, and there may actually be some good news for those in need of help. In the next part, I'll present some concrete examples of older women who have fairly girly personalities, why they do, and how others can follow their example.
May 27, 2008
A second shot at girliness: measuring it
Awhile ago, I suggested considering a composite of the Big Five personality traits Neuroticism and Agreeableness as an index of a feminine personality, since these two traits show the largest sex differences in all cultures. Thursday's typology of females is fairly similar.
Here I will take the sum of the two traits, but give different weights: I'm giving greater weight to Neuroticism to emphasize the part of female personality that makes her vulnerable, conscious of being evaluated, and lacking control over her emotions -- that is, what makes a girl most likely to fall head-over-heels in love. Specifically, I'm adding 4 parts Neuroticism and 1 part Agreeableness. If you wanted to emphasize the nurturing aspect of female personality, you would give greater weight to Agreeableness.
My aim is to help women approaching or over 30 snag a man, appealing to him on a romantic level, hence the emphasis on Neuroticism, which also signals youth. If you want to appeal to him on an "I'd be a great mother of your children" level, then you'd want to play up your Agreeableness -- and if you're 30 or older, you probably don't have to worry in this case, since the nurturing aspect of female personality increases steadily as the woman ages (I'll show the data for this some other time).
Still, I think the nurturing appeal is unlikely to help most women who need help: some do not want children anytime soon, some may be interested in a man who is unlikely to want to have children with them anytime soon, and so on. Unless he's a single father or both of you want kids right now, you'll have to appeal to him on a romantic level.
In the next part, I'll present some data on how this index of girliness changes across the lifespan. There are some obvious patterns (take a wild guess which age range shows the highest score), but there's also quite a surprise, one that may be good news for the women who need help.
Here I will take the sum of the two traits, but give different weights: I'm giving greater weight to Neuroticism to emphasize the part of female personality that makes her vulnerable, conscious of being evaluated, and lacking control over her emotions -- that is, what makes a girl most likely to fall head-over-heels in love. Specifically, I'm adding 4 parts Neuroticism and 1 part Agreeableness. If you wanted to emphasize the nurturing aspect of female personality, you would give greater weight to Agreeableness.
My aim is to help women approaching or over 30 snag a man, appealing to him on a romantic level, hence the emphasis on Neuroticism, which also signals youth. If you want to appeal to him on an "I'd be a great mother of your children" level, then you'd want to play up your Agreeableness -- and if you're 30 or older, you probably don't have to worry in this case, since the nurturing aspect of female personality increases steadily as the woman ages (I'll show the data for this some other time).
Still, I think the nurturing appeal is unlikely to help most women who need help: some do not want children anytime soon, some may be interested in a man who is unlikely to want to have children with them anytime soon, and so on. Unless he's a single father or both of you want kids right now, you'll have to appeal to him on a romantic level.
In the next part, I'll present some data on how this index of girliness changes across the lifespan. There are some obvious patterns (take a wild guess which age range shows the highest score), but there's also quite a surprise, one that may be good news for the women who need help.
May 26, 2008
Go to clubs, or wherever, during off-peak times
I've read that piece of advice here and there, but it doesn't get emphasized enough. If you go to a club on a popular night, several factors work against you making progress:
1) There's a lot more for a girl to choose from, in absolute terms, so she is less likely to pair up with any particular desirable guy to dance, talk, and so on. She may feel that she can do better if she waits, or she may become paralyzed from analyzing too many guys at the same time. Even if she does allow you in, she will flake sooner, lest she be occupied when there are so many other guys still out there to analyze. "The paradox of choice."
2) There are proportionally -- and therefore absolutely -- more creeps who show up on the popular night, as they prefer large crowds. Girls sense this and become more nervous and guarded, the opposite state-of-mind that you want them to be in. You might think it would work to your advantage since you stand out more amidst a sea of losers, but if the girl gets pestered so much, she is more in survival mode than relax-and-have-fun mode.
3) It's just harder for girls to see how great you are. Whether you're standing out by the way you dress, by your relaxed body language, by being surrounded by beautiful girls, or by any other way, this visual signal degrades more when it has to push through a mass of bodies to reach a girl's eye.
4) With so many eyes on them, the prettier girls will get sucked into attention whore mode. On an off-night, they cannot drink from a bottomless fount of free attention, so they're more willing to interact with strangers.
The only time it's worth going to a place at a popular time is if you've already got a girl and are going on a date. It is also worth doing when you first start working on your Game, just to get lots of practice approaching strangers -- and getting rejected. Otherwise, go when it's not so crowded.
- - - - -
To provide a concrete example, last Friday -- the off-night for the teen dance club -- I got a really good response from a great girl, got freaked from in front and behind by two pairs of girls (in each case, one being hot and the other being plain), and had a thick (non-fat) Black girl back it up and work it around.
The next night, I foolishly went back, even though I knew from previous experience that it was the wrong night to go. I just thought I was on somewhat of a roll, why not keep it going and at least get a make-out. * As it happened, that girl who I met the night before was there, but after giving me a warm welcome, said "I'll find you later, just stay around here," albeit in a friendly tone. Fuck that, I don't wait around for a girl.
Much later on, she sat down near me and tried to engage me in conversation, smiling, but I couldn't hear her well and she didn't want to move close (we were sitting in chairs outside), so I basically blew her off. If I didn't know that I'll see her again this Friday, I might have indulged her attention-whoring a bit, but if we're both regulars, it's better to protect my reputation as someone who doesn't cling to girls.
It wasn't a total disaster, though, as I also met the caramel-skinned Bostonian with a phatty who decisively ruined me a month ago. She approached, backed it up almost into me but left just enough room to make me chase her big ass, then worked it around and dropped it like it's hot. I got a good look at her face outside while cooling off, and she's quite exotic and pretty too. Still, she only grinded on me for half a song and moved on without speaking, as opposed to the first time when she pulled me aside, worked me over for an entire song, and spoke with me afterwards. The only difference was going on an off-night vs. a popular night, but that changes everything about a girl's mindset. Don't make the same mistake I did.
* Yeah, I could've gone to another place where some cougar would've let me have my way with her, but teenage flesh just feels better. When I gave older women a chance, I went to the 30-something club on Saturday night when it was packed, and I still got mobbed. I'm afraid of what would happen if I went there during an off-night -- probably something I would regret.
1) There's a lot more for a girl to choose from, in absolute terms, so she is less likely to pair up with any particular desirable guy to dance, talk, and so on. She may feel that she can do better if she waits, or she may become paralyzed from analyzing too many guys at the same time. Even if she does allow you in, she will flake sooner, lest she be occupied when there are so many other guys still out there to analyze. "The paradox of choice."
2) There are proportionally -- and therefore absolutely -- more creeps who show up on the popular night, as they prefer large crowds. Girls sense this and become more nervous and guarded, the opposite state-of-mind that you want them to be in. You might think it would work to your advantage since you stand out more amidst a sea of losers, but if the girl gets pestered so much, she is more in survival mode than relax-and-have-fun mode.
3) It's just harder for girls to see how great you are. Whether you're standing out by the way you dress, by your relaxed body language, by being surrounded by beautiful girls, or by any other way, this visual signal degrades more when it has to push through a mass of bodies to reach a girl's eye.
4) With so many eyes on them, the prettier girls will get sucked into attention whore mode. On an off-night, they cannot drink from a bottomless fount of free attention, so they're more willing to interact with strangers.
The only time it's worth going to a place at a popular time is if you've already got a girl and are going on a date. It is also worth doing when you first start working on your Game, just to get lots of practice approaching strangers -- and getting rejected. Otherwise, go when it's not so crowded.
- - - - -
To provide a concrete example, last Friday -- the off-night for the teen dance club -- I got a really good response from a great girl, got freaked from in front and behind by two pairs of girls (in each case, one being hot and the other being plain), and had a thick (non-fat) Black girl back it up and work it around.
The next night, I foolishly went back, even though I knew from previous experience that it was the wrong night to go. I just thought I was on somewhat of a roll, why not keep it going and at least get a make-out. * As it happened, that girl who I met the night before was there, but after giving me a warm welcome, said "I'll find you later, just stay around here," albeit in a friendly tone. Fuck that, I don't wait around for a girl.
Much later on, she sat down near me and tried to engage me in conversation, smiling, but I couldn't hear her well and she didn't want to move close (we were sitting in chairs outside), so I basically blew her off. If I didn't know that I'll see her again this Friday, I might have indulged her attention-whoring a bit, but if we're both regulars, it's better to protect my reputation as someone who doesn't cling to girls.
It wasn't a total disaster, though, as I also met the caramel-skinned Bostonian with a phatty who decisively ruined me a month ago. She approached, backed it up almost into me but left just enough room to make me chase her big ass, then worked it around and dropped it like it's hot. I got a good look at her face outside while cooling off, and she's quite exotic and pretty too. Still, she only grinded on me for half a song and moved on without speaking, as opposed to the first time when she pulled me aside, worked me over for an entire song, and spoke with me afterwards. The only difference was going on an off-night vs. a popular night, but that changes everything about a girl's mindset. Don't make the same mistake I did.
* Yeah, I could've gone to another place where some cougar would've let me have my way with her, but teenage flesh just feels better. When I gave older women a chance, I went to the 30-something club on Saturday night when it was packed, and I still got mobbed. I'm afraid of what would happen if I went there during an off-night -- probably something I would regret.
May 25, 2008
Why you attract bad girls
I'm sure lots of guys can empathize, even those low in empathy. It may be because you have a babyface. From an article I'm reading:
The citation is:
Hadden, S. B., & Brownlow, S. (1991, March). The impact of facial structure and assertiveness on dating choice. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.
Now, I googled to find this paper, but nothing came up other than citations. This means that in 17 years, it has yet to be published, and therefore may not have been a sound piece of research. Or it could mean the authors thought it was neat but not worth writing up, that the peer reviewers thought it was sound but uninteresting, etc. So I emphasize, this may be why you attract bad girls.
Surprisingly, research shows that babyfaced guys are not actually submissive like others believe (search PubMed for Zebrowitz). So the guy's babyface baits the bad girl into attempting to dominate him socially, perhaps to amuse herself and feed her sense of assertiveness, only for her to discover that he's much stronger-willed than she had assumed. (Whether or not he's tougher than a typical normalfaced guy is irrelevant: he seems exceptional to her because it's easier to exceed low expectations than high ones.) Mystery, intrigue, and being exceptional are of course powerfully attractive to females.
This may also explain why you've attracted all the Persian girls who've ever seen you, and so few Nordic girls.
Indeed, research has shown that highly assertive men and women, who tend to dominate others, prefer to date babyfaced rather than maturefaced people (Hadden & Brownlow, 1991).
The citation is:
Hadden, S. B., & Brownlow, S. (1991, March). The impact of facial structure and assertiveness on dating choice. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.
Now, I googled to find this paper, but nothing came up other than citations. This means that in 17 years, it has yet to be published, and therefore may not have been a sound piece of research. Or it could mean the authors thought it was neat but not worth writing up, that the peer reviewers thought it was sound but uninteresting, etc. So I emphasize, this may be why you attract bad girls.
Surprisingly, research shows that babyfaced guys are not actually submissive like others believe (search PubMed for Zebrowitz). So the guy's babyface baits the bad girl into attempting to dominate him socially, perhaps to amuse herself and feed her sense of assertiveness, only for her to discover that he's much stronger-willed than she had assumed. (Whether or not he's tougher than a typical normalfaced guy is irrelevant: he seems exceptional to her because it's easier to exceed low expectations than high ones.) Mystery, intrigue, and being exceptional are of course powerfully attractive to females.
This may also explain why you've attracted all the Persian girls who've ever seen you, and so few Nordic girls.
May 24, 2008
"I'm only sixteen..."
For some strange reason, some are imagining me sliming up to a girl, trying to stick my tongue in her mouth before even speaking to her, and her shouting this in disgust. But they would be wrong.
After pulling me by my tie into and behind her, and then working me up and down, she smiled at me. Knowing that it is always good to accuse a girl of something preposterous, I asked her, "So who dared you to do that?" (To spell it out, I'm calling her fake.) She desperately pleaded her case, and after each part of her speech, I'd throw in something like, "Oh that's what everyone says" or "Why should I think you're different" just to egg her on.
Having asked how old I was (I replied, "I'm a student at Nearby U"), she paused and said, "I'm only sixteen..." as though apologizing for her age. Like, "Could you ever find someone like me cool?" Given her apologetic tone, I didn't need to tease her about her age, but rather than reassure her verbally that I was OK with it, I just placed my hands around her shoulders and gave her two kisses, one on each cheek. She didn't move away one millimeter, proving that she welcomed my bold action, like a pound puppy that's unsure a visitor will choose it but then finds itself being cradled in his arms.
In fact, she'd earlier gushed about how bold and gutsy she thought I was to wear a suit, given me a big hug as a reward, and confessed that she'd seen me there last weekend, the way a band groupie would say "You guys were awesome last weekend at the Black Cat!" Throughout the night, any time she passed by, she'd raise one or both hands up for a high five, or shoot me a peace sign from afar.
I felt the urge to stay with her, to feel her ass lock into my lap again, to feel her head fill the void between my head and shoulder. (I did freak-dance with her one more time.) But her displays of vulnerability and attachment prevented me from pursuing a hedonistic good time with her -- I could imagine dating her, so it's best if she keeps some of her desire bottled up for later, instead of it dissipating as we grind further or make out on the dance floor.
As I was dancing a ways away from her, two Latin mamis ambushed me, one in front and the other from behind (the second time this happened tonight). I think the sight of me being sandwiched between two girls, with my hands on the hips of one, cut her a bit and provoked some jealousy, as she had a forced smile and somewhat forlorn look on her face, and flashed me a peace sign again. Yeah, it sounds heartless to dirty-dance with two girls at once in order to make a 16 year-old jealous, but you do what you have to do to make someone fall for you. I'd already asked her if she'd be there next weekend, and she said yes, so I'll be more comforting next time.
God, she's just my type too: very pretty face with large eyes and full lips, animated by her overflowing youthful vim and vigor, dark brown hair, tawny skin, 5'5 (though I'd prefer 5'2), normal weight, and more booty than breasts. I couldn't tell what color her eyes were -- if they're green, I'm a goner. She was wearing white short shorts and a white baby-doll top that had a vivid yellow floral print. When a girl wears white and yellow against her suntanned skin, she knows what she's doing. And she has just the right mix of bad girl and girly girl in her personality.
Like any inspiring girl, she's already pushed my "be the protector" buttons: when a group of guys seemed a bit too touchy-feely without her first showing interest, she kept herself at a distance but wasn't pushing them away either, so I asked her if she wanted me to protect her. Normally you don't ask, you just do; but sometimes the girl really is OK with what you think is wrong, so it's prudent to clear it with her first, lest to appear overly protective.
Even if we end up not dating (and I hope it doesn't come to that), having her as a friend would be invaluable. The PUA community already recognizes the value of being seen with attractive girls -- it puts the other attractive girls at ease around you, following your friend's example. But when you want to date someone much younger than you, it's also important to have age proof -- "He looks a bit older than me, but oh well, she's having fun around him, and she's my age, so he must be a cool guy."
After pulling me by my tie into and behind her, and then working me up and down, she smiled at me. Knowing that it is always good to accuse a girl of something preposterous, I asked her, "So who dared you to do that?" (To spell it out, I'm calling her fake.) She desperately pleaded her case, and after each part of her speech, I'd throw in something like, "Oh that's what everyone says" or "Why should I think you're different" just to egg her on.
Having asked how old I was (I replied, "I'm a student at Nearby U"), she paused and said, "I'm only sixteen..." as though apologizing for her age. Like, "Could you ever find someone like me cool?" Given her apologetic tone, I didn't need to tease her about her age, but rather than reassure her verbally that I was OK with it, I just placed my hands around her shoulders and gave her two kisses, one on each cheek. She didn't move away one millimeter, proving that she welcomed my bold action, like a pound puppy that's unsure a visitor will choose it but then finds itself being cradled in his arms.
In fact, she'd earlier gushed about how bold and gutsy she thought I was to wear a suit, given me a big hug as a reward, and confessed that she'd seen me there last weekend, the way a band groupie would say "You guys were awesome last weekend at the Black Cat!" Throughout the night, any time she passed by, she'd raise one or both hands up for a high five, or shoot me a peace sign from afar.
I felt the urge to stay with her, to feel her ass lock into my lap again, to feel her head fill the void between my head and shoulder. (I did freak-dance with her one more time.) But her displays of vulnerability and attachment prevented me from pursuing a hedonistic good time with her -- I could imagine dating her, so it's best if she keeps some of her desire bottled up for later, instead of it dissipating as we grind further or make out on the dance floor.
As I was dancing a ways away from her, two Latin mamis ambushed me, one in front and the other from behind (the second time this happened tonight). I think the sight of me being sandwiched between two girls, with my hands on the hips of one, cut her a bit and provoked some jealousy, as she had a forced smile and somewhat forlorn look on her face, and flashed me a peace sign again. Yeah, it sounds heartless to dirty-dance with two girls at once in order to make a 16 year-old jealous, but you do what you have to do to make someone fall for you. I'd already asked her if she'd be there next weekend, and she said yes, so I'll be more comforting next time.
God, she's just my type too: very pretty face with large eyes and full lips, animated by her overflowing youthful vim and vigor, dark brown hair, tawny skin, 5'5 (though I'd prefer 5'2), normal weight, and more booty than breasts. I couldn't tell what color her eyes were -- if they're green, I'm a goner. She was wearing white short shorts and a white baby-doll top that had a vivid yellow floral print. When a girl wears white and yellow against her suntanned skin, she knows what she's doing. And she has just the right mix of bad girl and girly girl in her personality.
Like any inspiring girl, she's already pushed my "be the protector" buttons: when a group of guys seemed a bit too touchy-feely without her first showing interest, she kept herself at a distance but wasn't pushing them away either, so I asked her if she wanted me to protect her. Normally you don't ask, you just do; but sometimes the girl really is OK with what you think is wrong, so it's prudent to clear it with her first, lest to appear overly protective.
Even if we end up not dating (and I hope it doesn't come to that), having her as a friend would be invaluable. The PUA community already recognizes the value of being seen with attractive girls -- it puts the other attractive girls at ease around you, following your friend's example. But when you want to date someone much younger than you, it's also important to have age proof -- "He looks a bit older than me, but oh well, she's having fun around him, and she's my age, so he must be a cool guy."
May 23, 2008
Don't lean in when talking to girls
This is so basic, yet so powerful, that it's one of the few pieces of advice to appear in every pickup artist writing, video, etc. It makes you look overly eager to accomodate, too happy to get into her space, and submissive to a complete stranger. Also, how do you even know she welcomes it?
Even -- especially -- if she is a lot shorter than you, do not give into the urge to bend over out of politeness. If she likes you, she will move her head into your space. Tonight at '80s night, a peppy 5'1 teenager asked me wasn't I hot in my suit. I yelled my answer, but it was on the loud dancefloor, so she didn't hear (deeper voices don't carry as well). Rather than bend over, I stood how I was, and she grasped my arm, stood on her tippie-toes and placed her head near my mouth so she could hear. She did the same when she wanted to make sure I heard her.
I asked another girl in the group, who was 5'3, if her friend always asks so many questions. Again, she didn't hear at first, but she did the same thing: nestled close to my side, stood a bit taller, and placed her head just above my shoulder to hear better. There is an important aspect of social psychology at work here, which I'll cover in a future post.
If I were 6'8 instead of 5'8, then I would slouch over or something, since the average girl could not stand that tall, but for the vast majority of girls, you won't have to worry about them standing up to get near your mouth. I emphasize that you should always doubt your urge to be polite -- girls don't want you to do the polite thing in these contexts. It gives a girl an incredible rush to arch herself on her toes, grab hold of your arm for support, and maneuver her head close to yours, as though she were going to whisper a secret in your ear. Have you ever seen a slow-dancing couple where the guy's head was on her shoulder? -- No? That's why.
Girls love doing things that make them feel feminine, and having to nearly scale your body to hear you is one of those things. It's like how little kids with ADD love to climb all over adults. You leaning into them robs them of that pleasure.
Even -- especially -- if she is a lot shorter than you, do not give into the urge to bend over out of politeness. If she likes you, she will move her head into your space. Tonight at '80s night, a peppy 5'1 teenager asked me wasn't I hot in my suit. I yelled my answer, but it was on the loud dancefloor, so she didn't hear (deeper voices don't carry as well). Rather than bend over, I stood how I was, and she grasped my arm, stood on her tippie-toes and placed her head near my mouth so she could hear. She did the same when she wanted to make sure I heard her.
I asked another girl in the group, who was 5'3, if her friend always asks so many questions. Again, she didn't hear at first, but she did the same thing: nestled close to my side, stood a bit taller, and placed her head just above my shoulder to hear better. There is an important aspect of social psychology at work here, which I'll cover in a future post.
If I were 6'8 instead of 5'8, then I would slouch over or something, since the average girl could not stand that tall, but for the vast majority of girls, you won't have to worry about them standing up to get near your mouth. I emphasize that you should always doubt your urge to be polite -- girls don't want you to do the polite thing in these contexts. It gives a girl an incredible rush to arch herself on her toes, grab hold of your arm for support, and maneuver her head close to yours, as though she were going to whisper a secret in your ear. Have you ever seen a slow-dancing couple where the guy's head was on her shoulder? -- No? That's why.
Girls love doing things that make them feel feminine, and having to nearly scale your body to hear you is one of those things. It's like how little kids with ADD love to climb all over adults. You leaning into them robs them of that pleasure.
May 21, 2008
Are women funny?
Blogger Alias Clio is a muse for the number-cruncher, as she so often proclaims but rarely offers evidence, and she is so stubborn in her beliefs that merely pointing out how crazy they are is insufficient. *
In a post at Roissy's, the topic of sex differences in funny-ness came up, she arguing that women are more humorous than men, who are so preoccupied with farting and fucking jokes that they don't get to develop the wry, ironic style that true humor consists of. Really?
Always eager to gather some data to prove how crazy other people are, I first offered Comedy Central's list of 100 Greatest Stand-up Comedians -- 8 of 100 are female (8%). Ah, but that's just those raunchy, low-brow stand-up comedians!
All right, consider the Pulitzer Prize winners for Editorial Cartooning, a genre whose style is dry, ironic, and so on -- 2 of 82 are female (2.4%). I admit that this has a strong male bias just due to visuospatial skills, which guys are better at, but still, it's not Michelangelo-level drawing, so it would be really hard to say that it would be near 50% if only it were entirely verbal. So let's go to humorous writers and performers.
Wikipedia has a "list of notable humorists" -- 8 of 97 are female (8.2%).
Wikipedia also has a "list of satirists and satires", which is grouped by time period:
Early -- 0 of 9 (probably 0 of 10, if males wrote The 1001 Nights).
Medieval - 18th C. -- 0 of 21 (probably 0 of 22, if unknown author called "Martin Marprelate" is male).
Born 1800 - 1900 -- 0 of 28.
Born 1900 - 1960 -- 4 of 65 (6.2%).
Born 1960 - present -- 6 of 62 (9.7%).
20th C altogether -- 10 of 127 (7.9%).
Admittedly, these are not lists of prize-winners or of something measurable, but they reflect the consensus of experts, so it's surely a random, representative sample.
In none of these areas do females approach 50%, even when the medium is verbal (which women tend to be better at), and even when we look just at those whose careers began after women's liberation. The numbers are very similar for both high-brow and low-brow humor -- about 10% -- suggesting that this distinction does not matter either.
Crucially, humor almost always has to do with oneself, other people, and the social ties that unfortunately bind us; and it is always interactive with other people, whether a live audience, a readership, or what-have-you. Therefore, there is no argument to be made to the effect of "Well, women can do it, they just don't like doing it." The personnel psychology literature is unambiguous that women prefer jobs that involve people, especially socially interacting with them -- if anything, being a humorist or comedian is right up their alley. **
This is the extent of my interest in this rather obvious question, but if readers know of other lists -- preferably a list of winners of a prestigious humorist award -- feel free to crunch the numbers and leave a comment. If the ball gets rolling, I'll move them into an addendum here. I know that Clio is going to claim that these lists don't really capture what it is to be a humorist, that there are scores of unseen female humorists (who would have to be far more numerous than unseen male humorists), or that there's an Anglo-American bias. All right -- find me a dataset that shows the females are near 50%, and then I'll believe it.
Now, why funny people are predominantly male is an entirely different question. This post is just to demonstrate that they are.
* I kid because I love.
** Where females have the requisite ability and suitable motivation, they make up half or more of the field. For example, here is Steven Pinker on women in his field:
Addendum: Here is a running list of more stats from other sources (see comments section for detail).
YouTube's 100 most subscribed comedians of all time -- 7 or 8 of 100 (7-8%).
In a post at Roissy's, the topic of sex differences in funny-ness came up, she arguing that women are more humorous than men, who are so preoccupied with farting and fucking jokes that they don't get to develop the wry, ironic style that true humor consists of. Really?
Always eager to gather some data to prove how crazy other people are, I first offered Comedy Central's list of 100 Greatest Stand-up Comedians -- 8 of 100 are female (8%). Ah, but that's just those raunchy, low-brow stand-up comedians!
All right, consider the Pulitzer Prize winners for Editorial Cartooning, a genre whose style is dry, ironic, and so on -- 2 of 82 are female (2.4%). I admit that this has a strong male bias just due to visuospatial skills, which guys are better at, but still, it's not Michelangelo-level drawing, so it would be really hard to say that it would be near 50% if only it were entirely verbal. So let's go to humorous writers and performers.
Wikipedia has a "list of notable humorists" -- 8 of 97 are female (8.2%).
Wikipedia also has a "list of satirists and satires", which is grouped by time period:
Early -- 0 of 9 (probably 0 of 10, if males wrote The 1001 Nights).
Medieval - 18th C. -- 0 of 21 (probably 0 of 22, if unknown author called "Martin Marprelate" is male).
Born 1800 - 1900 -- 0 of 28.
Born 1900 - 1960 -- 4 of 65 (6.2%).
Born 1960 - present -- 6 of 62 (9.7%).
20th C altogether -- 10 of 127 (7.9%).
Admittedly, these are not lists of prize-winners or of something measurable, but they reflect the consensus of experts, so it's surely a random, representative sample.
In none of these areas do females approach 50%, even when the medium is verbal (which women tend to be better at), and even when we look just at those whose careers began after women's liberation. The numbers are very similar for both high-brow and low-brow humor -- about 10% -- suggesting that this distinction does not matter either.
Crucially, humor almost always has to do with oneself, other people, and the social ties that unfortunately bind us; and it is always interactive with other people, whether a live audience, a readership, or what-have-you. Therefore, there is no argument to be made to the effect of "Well, women can do it, they just don't like doing it." The personnel psychology literature is unambiguous that women prefer jobs that involve people, especially socially interacting with them -- if anything, being a humorist or comedian is right up their alley. **
This is the extent of my interest in this rather obvious question, but if readers know of other lists -- preferably a list of winners of a prestigious humorist award -- feel free to crunch the numbers and leave a comment. If the ball gets rolling, I'll move them into an addendum here. I know that Clio is going to claim that these lists don't really capture what it is to be a humorist, that there are scores of unseen female humorists (who would have to be far more numerous than unseen male humorists), or that there's an Anglo-American bias. All right -- find me a dataset that shows the females are near 50%, and then I'll believe it.
Now, why funny people are predominantly male is an entirely different question. This post is just to demonstrate that they are.
* I kid because I love.
** Where females have the requisite ability and suitable motivation, they make up half or more of the field. For example, here is Steven Pinker on women in his field:
I work in a scientific field — the study of language acquisition in children — that is in fact dominated by women. Seventy-five percent of the members the main professional association are female, as are a majority of the keynote speakers at our main conference. I'm here to tell you that it's not because men like me have been discriminated against.
Addendum: Here is a running list of more stats from other sources (see comments section for detail).
YouTube's 100 most subscribed comedians of all time -- 7 or 8 of 100 (7-8%).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)