I interpreted the signals as “this woman is interesting,” yet when I got to know those woman, I was not actually >interested in their personality. I put a lot of effort into fixing this miscalibration, and I think it was worth the effort.
I was interested in intellectual women, and somehow got it in my mind a that certain kind of contrarian signalling in women was evidence that they were intellectual.
Thus, I tried to spend more time with that type of woman, both as friends and potential partners. But that type of woman didn’t find me very interesting. Several times, particular individuals were painfully careless with my emotions.
Eventually, I realized that (1) those types of people didn’t find me interesting, and (2) I didn’t actually find those types of people interesting. So whenever I received the contrarian signals and got a first impression that the sender was interesting to me, I would try to consciously remember what I’d learned.
In short, I realized I needed a better / more compatible group of friends, and went and found better friends. It hasn’t been an unqualified success, but some of that is that I’ve invested time in things other than making friends—and Paul Graham is probably right that popularity is a skill, and needs an investment of time just like any other skill.
I’m interested in intellectual people, even angels or robots. The shape of their reproductive system is irrelevant.
I’m interested in doing the innate programmed courship dance that Nyan referred to, mostly with women
But in particular I am interested in doing the innate programmed courtship with intellectual women and that I never managed to do on the southern hemisphere.
I don’t feel creepy or creepied around women. During the last 11 years, from 15 to 26, the majority of groups and classes I belonged to were mostly female (Theather, Psychology, Dance, Neighbors, travellers...)
I am interested in knowing whether it is impossible to keep intellectual with an attractive women as a straight male while doing the dancing.
The problems are many: As Nyan mentioned, due to biocultural heritage, women are less interesting on average. Males are attracted mostly to fertility characteristics, so I’ll just want to do the dance with women who are less than 15 years older than me, have different genetic profiles, different immune system (smell good) and have the oh my goodness I hate evolution so much stupid, evil 0,7 waist to hip ratio. Words cannot express how I hate this fact, it’s nearly as much as I hate ageing, yep, that much. So there’s about 20% of my age women I’d like to do the dance with. 45% in northern areas where my genes are outliers.
To find the interesting ones, It is necessary to see through the thick signalling fog. Isn’t it disgusting that the thickness is not only proportional to the attractiveness, but it is the attractiveness?
If that was not enough, let me remind you that the more attractive a woman is, the less incentives she’ll have to bother being interesting beneath the fog.
There, here is the human condition. Thank you darwinian evolution for such a thoughful careful design of a hell worst than Dante’s for anyone who wants to have a truly interesting women with whom he can interact both intellectually and do the sex dance…
Damn I wish all you Americans and European LW straight and quasi-straight guys have better world surrounding you for this goal than I do, and if not, I feel your pain.
And if you think girls have it good and easy, then 1) you didn’t grasp the meaning of these entries 2)the comment below might help you change your mind
And if any male feels this is correct, then just begin to think how each of the items can be reversed, and how it is even ever more terrible to be a female that is reading that commentary, or things Unbelievably more stingy.
If you are a girl, a guy’s fog is as thick as his attractiveness for the same reason, but he is also larger than you, and because in humans as a near-universal it is the woman that moves into a male’s house/city/village/hut that fog not only keeps hidden the secret of the attractive and intellectual partner, but may sometimes be literally guarding the difference between life and death. Or at least having kids or not (if that is a value for you).
Women are not much socially smarter than man for nothing. They are smarter on social cues because they have much higher stakes if they access people incorrectly. A betrayed men usually will turn his rage on a woman. Whereas a woman that is betrayed will not turn hers into the man first, but the woman with whom he slept. This is not completely understood yet, but on thing is known, the guy is more dangerous than the woman.
If evolution has made being a male looking for a dance with intellectuals in Latin America hard, I can only begin to fathom how hard it must be to be a woman in some societies (!kung, Arabic, Yanomamo).…
Details?
I was interested in intellectual women, and somehow got it in my mind a that certain kind of contrarian signalling in women was evidence that they were intellectual.
Thus, I tried to spend more time with that type of woman, both as friends and potential partners. But that type of woman didn’t find me very interesting. Several times, particular individuals were painfully careless with my emotions.
Eventually, I realized that (1) those types of people didn’t find me interesting, and (2) I didn’t actually find those types of people interesting. So whenever I received the contrarian signals and got a first impression that the sender was interesting to me, I would try to consciously remember what I’d learned.
In short, I realized I needed a better / more compatible group of friends, and went and found better friends. It hasn’t been an unqualified success, but some of that is that I’ve invested time in things other than making friends—and Paul Graham is probably right that popularity is a skill, and needs an investment of time just like any other skill.
I’m interested in intellectual people, even angels or robots. The shape of their reproductive system is irrelevant.
I’m interested in doing the innate programmed courship dance that Nyan referred to, mostly with women
But in particular I am interested in doing the innate programmed courtship with intellectual women and that I never managed to do on the southern hemisphere.
I don’t feel creepy or creepied around women. During the last 11 years, from 15 to 26, the majority of groups and classes I belonged to were mostly female (Theather, Psychology, Dance, Neighbors, travellers...)
I am interested in knowing whether it is impossible to keep intellectual with an attractive women as a straight male while doing the dancing.
The problems are many: As Nyan mentioned, due to biocultural heritage, women are less interesting on average. Males are attracted mostly to fertility characteristics, so I’ll just want to do the dance with women who are less than 15 years older than me, have different genetic profiles, different immune system (smell good) and have the oh my goodness I hate evolution so much stupid, evil 0,7 waist to hip ratio. Words cannot express how I hate this fact, it’s nearly as much as I hate ageing, yep, that much. So there’s about 20% of my age women I’d like to do the dance with. 45% in northern areas where my genes are outliers.
To find the interesting ones, It is necessary to see through the thick signalling fog. Isn’t it disgusting that the thickness is not only proportional to the attractiveness, but it is the attractiveness?
If that was not enough, let me remind you that the more attractive a woman is, the less incentives she’ll have to bother being interesting beneath the fog.
There, here is the human condition. Thank you darwinian evolution for such a thoughful careful design of a hell worst than Dante’s for anyone who wants to have a truly interesting women with whom he can interact both intellectually and do the sex dance…
Damn I wish all you Americans and European LW straight and quasi-straight guys have better world surrounding you for this goal than I do, and if not, I feel your pain.
And if you think girls have it good and easy, then 1) you didn’t grasp the meaning of these entries 2)the comment below might help you change your mind
And if any male feels this is correct, then just begin to think how each of the items can be reversed, and how it is even ever more terrible to be a female that is reading that commentary, or things Unbelievably more stingy.
If you are a girl, a guy’s fog is as thick as his attractiveness for the same reason, but he is also larger than you, and because in humans as a near-universal it is the woman that moves into a male’s house/city/village/hut that fog not only keeps hidden the secret of the attractive and intellectual partner, but may sometimes be literally guarding the difference between life and death. Or at least having kids or not (if that is a value for you).
Women are not much socially smarter than man for nothing. They are smarter on social cues because they have much higher stakes if they access people incorrectly. A betrayed men usually will turn his rage on a woman. Whereas a woman that is betrayed will not turn hers into the man first, but the woman with whom he slept. This is not completely understood yet, but on thing is known, the guy is more dangerous than the woman.
If evolution has made being a male looking for a dance with intellectuals in Latin America hard, I can only begin to fathom how hard it must be to be a woman in some societies (!kung, Arabic, Yanomamo).…
Huge inferential distance between us. I don’t understand your response, and I can’t even tell if you agree or disagree with my comment.