Visiting an urologist, especially to treat impotence (male-specific.) Edit: scratch that. “Not visiting an urologist to treat impotence” is definitely signaling, so this was an example of a negative-signaling activity (for the lack of a better term), and doesn’t belong here.
To a lesser degree:
Brushing one’s teeth (though “high-quality” dental hygiene habits such as daily flossing can be used to signal that “I always have a fresh breath, so come kiss me!”.)
A solitary walk in a park / nature (can be used to signal that “I dislike crowded places” and “I am of contemplative nature”.)
Hmmmmm, this is interesting. I haven’t run into that phenomenon, and it doesn’t seem to be from lack of non-mixed-company opportunity.
Perhaps talking about that is a signal that everyone present is considered socially in-group? I was considered out-group or borderline in most of the relevant situations, and the few situations where the topic did come up were ones where the women initiating it had in general been especially trying to get me involved in the social group present.
That could be it. The conversations to which I refer have tended to be segues from complaining about cramps or passing references to gyn visits, neither of which I’d expect most people to bring up with socially distant others.
“Socially distant” as I understand the term doesn’t seem relevant—the majority of the opportunities were with co-workers in my department, who I saw every day and knew reasonably well; I just wasn’t part of the supposedly-congruent social group.
We’re definitely heading into territory where how I categorize things is unusual, though, here, so I could easily be misunderstanding you.
I’ve seen a lot of talk and advocacy of menstrual cups on all kinds of Finnish IRC channels with widely varying population counts. Anonymity isn’t a strong factor as a very large fraction of people on that network use their real names.
Most internet-based forms of communication follow very different social formats than RL interactions in general—most of the same principles apply, but not all of them. I think in that case, a relevant difference is that people assume that a newcomer is a member of the social group until proven otherwise, instead of assuming that they’re not a member of the group until they’ve made the appropriate social gestures.
It also seems like most people ‘feel’ anonymous online, even if they’re using their RL names. The lack of body language is usually assumed to be the cause of that.
Solitary walks (if truly solitary) should not be usable for signaling, at least not directly.
What you might get from it with respect to signaling, is authentic experience you can later use while talking about solitary walks and thereby signaling.
But I feel something else might be at work as well. I claim (although I have only anecdotical evidence) that one’s brain also responds to signals from oneself, i.e. by observing that you do solitary walks, you start to believe that you are the kind of person doing solitary walks, thereby increasing your chances of successfully convincing others that you are the kind of person doing solitary walks.
What you might get from it with respect to signaling, is authentic experience you can later use while talking about solitary walks and thereby signaling.
Talking is not necessary—if people know (by observing you directly or by any other means) that you take solitary walks, this is already a signal.
So, to turn such a walk into a pure 100% non-signaling activity, you’ll need to make sure that no one will ever know about it. And even after that, the self-signaling component you’re talking about will still remain, because there’s no way for you to forget the experience completely.
My best candidates:
Urination / defecation.
Vomiting.
Popping pimples.
Nose-picking.
Menstrual hygiene (female-specific.)
Visiting an urologist, especially to treat impotence (male-specific.) Edit: scratch that. “Not visiting an urologist to treat impotence” is definitely signaling, so this was an example of a negative-signaling activity (for the lack of a better term), and doesn’t belong here.
To a lesser degree:
Brushing one’s teeth (though “high-quality” dental hygiene habits such as daily flossing can be used to signal that “I always have a fresh breath, so come kiss me!”.)
A solitary walk in a park / nature (can be used to signal that “I dislike crowded places” and “I am of contemplative nature”.)
Menstruation and associated phenomena get a fair amount of conversational attention from women when we are not in mixed company.
Hmmmmm, this is interesting. I haven’t run into that phenomenon, and it doesn’t seem to be from lack of non-mixed-company opportunity.
Perhaps talking about that is a signal that everyone present is considered socially in-group? I was considered out-group or borderline in most of the relevant situations, and the few situations where the topic did come up were ones where the women initiating it had in general been especially trying to get me involved in the social group present.
That could be it. The conversations to which I refer have tended to be segues from complaining about cramps or passing references to gyn visits, neither of which I’d expect most people to bring up with socially distant others.
“Socially distant” as I understand the term doesn’t seem relevant—the majority of the opportunities were with co-workers in my department, who I saw every day and knew reasonably well; I just wasn’t part of the supposedly-congruent social group.
We’re definitely heading into territory where how I categorize things is unusual, though, here, so I could easily be misunderstanding you.
I’ve seen a lot of talk and advocacy of menstrual cups on all kinds of Finnish IRC channels with widely varying population counts. Anonymity isn’t a strong factor as a very large fraction of people on that network use their real names.
Most internet-based forms of communication follow very different social formats than RL interactions in general—most of the same principles apply, but not all of them. I think in that case, a relevant difference is that people assume that a newcomer is a member of the social group until proven otherwise, instead of assuming that they’re not a member of the group until they’ve made the appropriate social gestures.
It also seems like most people ‘feel’ anonymous online, even if they’re using their RL names. The lack of body language is usually assumed to be the cause of that.
Solitary walks (if truly solitary) should not be usable for signaling, at least not directly.
What you might get from it with respect to signaling, is authentic experience you can later use while talking about solitary walks and thereby signaling.
But I feel something else might be at work as well. I claim (although I have only anecdotical evidence) that one’s brain also responds to signals from oneself, i.e. by observing that you do solitary walks, you start to believe that you are the kind of person doing solitary walks, thereby increasing your chances of successfully convincing others that you are the kind of person doing solitary walks.
Talking is not necessary—if people know (by observing you directly or by any other means) that you take solitary walks, this is already a signal.
So, to turn such a walk into a pure 100% non-signaling activity, you’ll need to make sure that no one will ever know about it. And even after that, the self-signaling component you’re talking about will still remain, because there’s no way for you to forget the experience completely.
These are good examples; thanks!