- Joined
- Jun 18, 2022
- Messages
- 1
To those who are charming and influential I would like advice,
I post in this thread as I just got out of learning the big picture and am now training to implement techniques more naturally.
I got into an internet argument today that has gotten me L+ ratioed which means I have a "toxic" viewpoint people don't agree with. My stance here is simply I feel the content of my message is absolutely true reality of the world, but I acknowledge I wrote words that put me into a toxic light. I will post the FB thread text without ID to keep anonymity.
So the main things I want feedback on before I post the text thread.
1. alternate ways to give info on the internet that is easily consumable and presents thoughtful debate and eventual concession of ideals aka someone actually changes their viewpoint.
2. Real solutions and poignant suggestions on how to reword what I said to achieve goal I listed in point 1 and the topic title.
Disclaimer: I realize changing people (especially on the internet) is hard/impossible, but I want to come off natural, suave, and confident without being condescending to shift people's perspective even just a little bit. Mostly cause I want to help people deal with the practical realities of dating especially in a modern setting where I now have to categorize the sides of dating as masculine(provider) vs feminine(nurturer) rather than men vs women. This is so I can share a universal truth to people of all sexuality choices and lifestyles and not just deal with traditional viewpoints of dating.
I do have notes on "disagreeable traits" I had in the thread, but I won't share now as I don't want to bias the input I get and the solutions tied to said input. I have like 4 things I could potentially improve on as qualifying context that I am a reflective and mindful individual. Maybe too much in my head sometimes lol ugh paralysis analysis.
There is a lot of reading, so prep yourself for that.
Here is the thread copy and pasted from FB:
OP: Man, I just got rejected by someone i THOUGHT I had some connection with. Like I'm ok with being friends and stuff and I hold nothing against them. You can't force someone to like you, but there's gotta be something fundamentally wrong with ME if I've gone my entire life knowing only rejection. I'm 28 and never been on a date with romantic intentions. I've been in plenty of platonic dates, I've been 3rd wheel too many times to count and even the majority if my good friends are female. My current best friend was the first person I ever genuinely fell for, so I have no issues meeting them and maintaining good relations with them but wtf am I doing wrong to not be romantically interesting?
Me:
I use the SAC model for dating. Similarity, Arousal, and Compliance. All three are super important. I have little info about you and how you interact with people But it Seems you do fine with similarities hence the female best friend. If you find you are the “Nice guy friend” label then you need more arousal which can be flirting, teasing, coop rule breaking, touching, challenging, sexual convo, being sexy, bad boy, displaying preselection.
Finally to actually move the prospective date forward you absolutely need to get the girl to invest in the interaction via complying with your request. Stuff like “spin for me” or “move over” or “lets go to those couches they look comfortable” to “come back to my place for a nightcap”. It takes a lot of social calibration as certain lovers want more of one of the three aspects but you still need all three to be successful in dating. Glad you taken this chance to grow and look at what you could be doing wrong. Like many people say I do think if you want meaningful faster change you need to get serious and make consistent effort as if you were going to the gym (Zero likes)
Girl "R": YIKES If a man said any of those things to me I would never speak to him again
(12 likes)
Me: Sure if a guy text you that I would agree. All I would defend my view here with is that you read those examples as pure text with no emotion and no fun added. inflection, body language, vibe, and of course actually warming up to this stuff by you know getting to know the person is part of the process.
Girl "R": I can’t imagine why anyone would text me physical directives; I didn’t take it as such and it’s kind of condescending for you to continue to explain it as if I hadn’t considered that. Seriously, there is no playful inflection or anything that makes this ok
Men ignoring actual women telling them what they don’t like is ridic
This is some weird PUA bs and it’s gross
Do what you want in your life but don’t be giving advice like this, it literally makes the world a worse place. (2 likes)
Guy "C": it's a PUA sector strategy. It does work on a percentage of the population.(3 likes)
It's bad advice though.
Me:
Hmm an internet argument is hard to get through gracefully as it takes more time and words to understand where both sides are coming from. To me it seems you had a problem with the compliance examples and thats fair you want to be treated fairly and not like some servant. I do admit I initially deconstructed your argument so the Op doesn’t get discouraged from the big picture ideas and not get bogged down with simple examples and the semantics of them.
I would love to hear more about your experiences. I dont ask more questions as I am mindful of the medium we are communicating in and how it is not great for exchanging large amounts of info. Regardless have I understood your argument correctly? Or are there other factors of the SAC advice besides the C part you disliked?
To wrap my thoughts up here. I feel you now have doubled down defensively and drawn generalizations that you represent all women which you don’t. Your viewpoint is valid for women of similar life experiences as you but not those who want or do different things.
Here is a more tame compliance request that might appeal to you. “Hi i love the little hearts on your nails! It has a lot of detail. Can I have a closer look? *puts out hand*”
Is that more your style?(Zero likes)
Girl "R": I know I don’t represent all women, it’s not being “bogged down with simple examples and semantics”, the concept as a whole is just bad advice. And you’re still being incredibly condescending and dismissive. Great example on how to not talk to women. I think the fact you’re viewing it as an argument at all is a huge problem on your part.
There are currently at least 8 women and 3 men who agree with me. Do the math on how well this works on the majority of people confident in themselves who won’t fall for being preyed on. I’m not here to talk or discuss further to you; I’m here to let other men who mean well know that this is not going to work well for the majority of people. Looking for someone to “invest in an interaction” or “comply with your request” in this context is gross and toxic. Go touch some grass. (1 like)
Me:
I hope you consider what I have to say (in my wall of text) lol as Im not trying to be malicious or take advantage of anyone. So here we go. Interesting you dislike the whole concept. I would think you would agree with the similarities and arousal/excitement from the SAC model. Don’t people date for personality/shared interests and someone who can offer deeper intimacy than a regular friend can?
What is happening now is a disagreement on viewpoints on how dating works. You suggest your side is the whole truth that works for a lot of people and I have a completely immoral and toxic view on the world. Which is I disagree with so yes it is now a debate on ideals. You see your side as absolute hence I should conform to your idea? When really we share similar viewpoints and disagree on parts of what my viewpoint is.
Im glad you are engaging with me because I love reshaping my viewpoint to get the full picture which is where my “condescending” attitude comes from. This model isn’t some isolated(my thoughts only) and untested armchair couple day observation. I listen and draw big picture ideas while considering specific situations and how people react to the big picture ideas. I bounce the ideas around and let people challenge what I have to say to see if Im missing some exceptions or extra circumstances that changes the situation.
To you, "R" , and other people who disagree with the SAC model. Here is some food for thought. Both sides should and do use the SAC model the way I outlined it. Like I mention I still think the Similarity and arousal/excitement are understood non-toxic truths that I detailed in the beginning. So both sexes/sides want to do the S &A part of the model. So the viewpoint disconnect here is the Compliance trait and how it is a toxic trait men do to take advantage of women? Correct me if I didn’t phrase your viewpoint correctly.
I would argue that feminine people do compliance and investment requests to masculine/providers already via common examples like paying for dates, or passing screens on whether they care for her jn the way she wants. A couple example screens are “*Checks to see how they treat service wait staff” or “If I was a caterpillar would you still love me?” Or even “Do you like Harry potter if not this isnt gonna work out haha.” If a guy doesn’t pass those screens the attraction goes down and some of the screens are deal breakers unlike the Harry Potter one.
Finally I think guys should do screens and investment request as well as it lends itself to equal love in a relationship and for guys to not get taken advantage of which does happen in various forms like using him as a wallet and not providing reciprocation of love languages. Or she keeps him on the side stringing him along as a “backup” while she looks around for “better” options.
I offer up that both sides do compliance and investment to strike a balance in the relationship and avoid someone getting hurt and taking advantage off. That is the context I speak from not the toxic viewpoint you feel I harbor. Phew this grass does feel nice thanks! (Zero likes)
*End*
That's it as of 2 hours ago. I will update if she responds which would be great for me to get feedback on my last message and if it is the best way to debate and come off non-toxic. I would love to hear your guys input on this and it would be even better if I can get both initial impressions and deeper thought impressions.
I will also bounce this around with unfortunately just male friends who each represent a category of life experiences and viewpoints when it comes to dating, because I mention in the messages I love having a full picture of reality.
I will say after my first comment in the thread I watched an excellent short video by Jordan Peterson on how to do debate/arguments and he said to not only seek to understand their viewpoint and get them to agree to how I explain their argument but also "build up someone's argument then deal with that" which is why there is a radical shift in how I am presenting my ideas in the second and third comment. I love the analogy of doing "DBZ Goku Discussion" to come out on top with more respect if I can adeptly tackle solid arguments that I try to understand and build up accordingly.
I post in this thread as I just got out of learning the big picture and am now training to implement techniques more naturally.
I got into an internet argument today that has gotten me L+ ratioed which means I have a "toxic" viewpoint people don't agree with. My stance here is simply I feel the content of my message is absolutely true reality of the world, but I acknowledge I wrote words that put me into a toxic light. I will post the FB thread text without ID to keep anonymity.
So the main things I want feedback on before I post the text thread.
1. alternate ways to give info on the internet that is easily consumable and presents thoughtful debate and eventual concession of ideals aka someone actually changes their viewpoint.
2. Real solutions and poignant suggestions on how to reword what I said to achieve goal I listed in point 1 and the topic title.
Disclaimer: I realize changing people (especially on the internet) is hard/impossible, but I want to come off natural, suave, and confident without being condescending to shift people's perspective even just a little bit. Mostly cause I want to help people deal with the practical realities of dating especially in a modern setting where I now have to categorize the sides of dating as masculine(provider) vs feminine(nurturer) rather than men vs women. This is so I can share a universal truth to people of all sexuality choices and lifestyles and not just deal with traditional viewpoints of dating.
I do have notes on "disagreeable traits" I had in the thread, but I won't share now as I don't want to bias the input I get and the solutions tied to said input. I have like 4 things I could potentially improve on as qualifying context that I am a reflective and mindful individual. Maybe too much in my head sometimes lol ugh paralysis analysis.
There is a lot of reading, so prep yourself for that.
Here is the thread copy and pasted from FB:
OP: Man, I just got rejected by someone i THOUGHT I had some connection with. Like I'm ok with being friends and stuff and I hold nothing against them. You can't force someone to like you, but there's gotta be something fundamentally wrong with ME if I've gone my entire life knowing only rejection. I'm 28 and never been on a date with romantic intentions. I've been in plenty of platonic dates, I've been 3rd wheel too many times to count and even the majority if my good friends are female. My current best friend was the first person I ever genuinely fell for, so I have no issues meeting them and maintaining good relations with them but wtf am I doing wrong to not be romantically interesting?
Me:
I use the SAC model for dating. Similarity, Arousal, and Compliance. All three are super important. I have little info about you and how you interact with people But it Seems you do fine with similarities hence the female best friend. If you find you are the “Nice guy friend” label then you need more arousal which can be flirting, teasing, coop rule breaking, touching, challenging, sexual convo, being sexy, bad boy, displaying preselection.
Finally to actually move the prospective date forward you absolutely need to get the girl to invest in the interaction via complying with your request. Stuff like “spin for me” or “move over” or “lets go to those couches they look comfortable” to “come back to my place for a nightcap”. It takes a lot of social calibration as certain lovers want more of one of the three aspects but you still need all three to be successful in dating. Glad you taken this chance to grow and look at what you could be doing wrong. Like many people say I do think if you want meaningful faster change you need to get serious and make consistent effort as if you were going to the gym (Zero likes)
Girl "R": YIKES If a man said any of those things to me I would never speak to him again
Me: Sure if a guy text you that I would agree. All I would defend my view here with is that you read those examples as pure text with no emotion and no fun added. inflection, body language, vibe, and of course actually warming up to this stuff by you know getting to know the person is part of the process.
Girl "R": I can’t imagine why anyone would text me physical directives; I didn’t take it as such and it’s kind of condescending for you to continue to explain it as if I hadn’t considered that. Seriously, there is no playful inflection or anything that makes this ok
Men ignoring actual women telling them what they don’t like is ridic
This is some weird PUA bs and it’s gross
Do what you want in your life but don’t be giving advice like this, it literally makes the world a worse place. (2 likes)
Guy "C": it's a PUA sector strategy. It does work on a percentage of the population.(3 likes)
It's bad advice though.
Me:
Hmm an internet argument is hard to get through gracefully as it takes more time and words to understand where both sides are coming from. To me it seems you had a problem with the compliance examples and thats fair you want to be treated fairly and not like some servant. I do admit I initially deconstructed your argument so the Op doesn’t get discouraged from the big picture ideas and not get bogged down with simple examples and the semantics of them.
I would love to hear more about your experiences. I dont ask more questions as I am mindful of the medium we are communicating in and how it is not great for exchanging large amounts of info. Regardless have I understood your argument correctly? Or are there other factors of the SAC advice besides the C part you disliked?
To wrap my thoughts up here. I feel you now have doubled down defensively and drawn generalizations that you represent all women which you don’t. Your viewpoint is valid for women of similar life experiences as you but not those who want or do different things.
Here is a more tame compliance request that might appeal to you. “Hi i love the little hearts on your nails! It has a lot of detail. Can I have a closer look? *puts out hand*”
Is that more your style?(Zero likes)
Girl "R": I know I don’t represent all women, it’s not being “bogged down with simple examples and semantics”, the concept as a whole is just bad advice. And you’re still being incredibly condescending and dismissive. Great example on how to not talk to women. I think the fact you’re viewing it as an argument at all is a huge problem on your part.
There are currently at least 8 women and 3 men who agree with me. Do the math on how well this works on the majority of people confident in themselves who won’t fall for being preyed on. I’m not here to talk or discuss further to you; I’m here to let other men who mean well know that this is not going to work well for the majority of people. Looking for someone to “invest in an interaction” or “comply with your request” in this context is gross and toxic. Go touch some grass. (1 like)
Me:
I hope you consider what I have to say (in my wall of text) lol as Im not trying to be malicious or take advantage of anyone. So here we go. Interesting you dislike the whole concept. I would think you would agree with the similarities and arousal/excitement from the SAC model. Don’t people date for personality/shared interests and someone who can offer deeper intimacy than a regular friend can?
What is happening now is a disagreement on viewpoints on how dating works. You suggest your side is the whole truth that works for a lot of people and I have a completely immoral and toxic view on the world. Which is I disagree with so yes it is now a debate on ideals. You see your side as absolute hence I should conform to your idea? When really we share similar viewpoints and disagree on parts of what my viewpoint is.
Im glad you are engaging with me because I love reshaping my viewpoint to get the full picture which is where my “condescending” attitude comes from. This model isn’t some isolated(my thoughts only) and untested armchair couple day observation. I listen and draw big picture ideas while considering specific situations and how people react to the big picture ideas. I bounce the ideas around and let people challenge what I have to say to see if Im missing some exceptions or extra circumstances that changes the situation.
To you, "R" , and other people who disagree with the SAC model. Here is some food for thought. Both sides should and do use the SAC model the way I outlined it. Like I mention I still think the Similarity and arousal/excitement are understood non-toxic truths that I detailed in the beginning. So both sexes/sides want to do the S &A part of the model. So the viewpoint disconnect here is the Compliance trait and how it is a toxic trait men do to take advantage of women? Correct me if I didn’t phrase your viewpoint correctly.
I would argue that feminine people do compliance and investment requests to masculine/providers already via common examples like paying for dates, or passing screens on whether they care for her jn the way she wants. A couple example screens are “*Checks to see how they treat service wait staff” or “If I was a caterpillar would you still love me?” Or even “Do you like Harry potter if not this isnt gonna work out haha.” If a guy doesn’t pass those screens the attraction goes down and some of the screens are deal breakers unlike the Harry Potter one.
Finally I think guys should do screens and investment request as well as it lends itself to equal love in a relationship and for guys to not get taken advantage of which does happen in various forms like using him as a wallet and not providing reciprocation of love languages. Or she keeps him on the side stringing him along as a “backup” while she looks around for “better” options.
I offer up that both sides do compliance and investment to strike a balance in the relationship and avoid someone getting hurt and taking advantage off. That is the context I speak from not the toxic viewpoint you feel I harbor. Phew this grass does feel nice thanks! (Zero likes)
*End*
That's it as of 2 hours ago. I will update if she responds which would be great for me to get feedback on my last message and if it is the best way to debate and come off non-toxic. I would love to hear your guys input on this and it would be even better if I can get both initial impressions and deeper thought impressions.
I will also bounce this around with unfortunately just male friends who each represent a category of life experiences and viewpoints when it comes to dating, because I mention in the messages I love having a full picture of reality.
I will say after my first comment in the thread I watched an excellent short video by Jordan Peterson on how to do debate/arguments and he said to not only seek to understand their viewpoint and get them to agree to how I explain their argument but also "build up someone's argument then deal with that" which is why there is a radical shift in how I am presenting my ideas in the second and third comment. I love the analogy of doing "DBZ Goku Discussion" to come out on top with more respect if I can adeptly tackle solid arguments that I try to understand and build up accordingly.
