4 ms·

I just read a couple of pages, and this is a great read. "If you are mainly looking for flirting opportunities, . . . . seek out clubs full of happy, sociable

by ajays 14y ago

I just read a couple of pages, and this is a great read. "If you are mainly looking for flirting opportunities, . . . . seek out clubs full of happy, sociable under-achievers." It's pure comedy gold, Jerry! Having said that: I hate to stereotype, but I find us geeks (men) to be pretty bad at flirting. I don't know if a 26-page tome will solve that problem or not....

mhd 14y ago
Basic social science articles always read like they're written by Captain Obvious. "1. Do initiate flirtation with people of roughly the same level of attractiveness as yourself. 2. Don’t flirt with people who are unlikely to return your interest." But on the other hand, there's really no easy way out (writing about it, I mean). I've yet to find a more "practical" approach that doesn't read like either semi-useless and somewhat obvious statistics ("try to position yourself between 3 and 4 feet away from your flirting partner"), or just oozes sleaze ("pickup artists", ESR etc.). Getting technical about human beings and our social interaction works quite well in a clinical, observing manner, but once it's meant as actual practical advise, it's very easy to cross boundaries.
- noamsml 14y ago
  As someone with borderline autism, I find this sort of guide extremely helpful, because things that may be obvious to you take me immense amounts of time to learn and internalize. Normally I find myself having large amounts of "rules" governing me that turn out to be incorrectly identified from social conduct or incorrectly inferred from the on-the-surface descriptions of things. Hell, even the concept of flirting is something I've just barely started grasping in my 20s. I know I'm a bit of an outlier, but it's sometimes good to be reminded that yes, you can try to flirt in this or that situation, or that X or Y are a good sign of flirting. EDIT: Of course, this is mostly still good as a reminder, introduction, or to shatter misconceptions. The only way to really learn flirting, I've found, is the same as one would learn any other culture: by immersion. As someone whose approach to such things is less intuitive, immersion may be followed by analysis to extract explicit lessons from my experiences.
- bmelton 14y ago
  Interesting is that it seems to focus on long-term relationships as the reference point against which it gives its advice. For shorter-term relationships (not implying anything), I've found best success with flirting with women considerably more attractive than myself. I've asked a number of my more attractive girlfriends why they were with an ugly schlub like myself and I get two common answers: Personality/humor/laid-backness is one, and the other is that it seems that the best looking ladies either don't get approached, or don't get approached with anything better than tired old pickup lines. I do agree with their findings on pickup lines though. Some friends and I spent a few weeks testing out different ones (in the name of science, naturally), and I had, by a large margin, the most success with "Hi, I'm Barry. Can I buy you a drink?" -- obviously varied if I'm not somewhere I can buy a drink from.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - TheCount 14y ago
    What do you count as a success? The only solid markers of success are sex, blowjobs and a girl meeting you on a different day, i.e. for a date. In that order. Everything else is 'harmless flirting,' basically meaningless as an indicator of 'success.'
- orangecat 14y ago
  or just oozes sleaze ("pickup artists", ESR etc.) They may be sleazy, but they're basically right.
  - te_chris 14y ago
    [citation please] care to back that up?
  - mhd 14y ago
    Even if their statistical shenanigans would be scientifically "accurate" (which I still doubt), by no means would I, morally and ethically, consider them "right". I'm the stereotypical reclusive, clinically shy geek, but I've gotten past puberty, and stopped considering penetration to be the "end game". Note that those douchebags seem to be exclusively care about that, there's no "relationship artist" trade that I'm aware of.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - barrkel 14y ago
      Believe it or not, sometimes women are looking for "penetration" as the "end game". Not every encounter is expected to end in a life-long marriage.
      - mhd 14y ago
        I think "sometimes" is the key word here. I like cookies but eating them all the time might be a bit unhealthy. And preaching the "all cookie lifestyle" would seem a bit odd. From what I've seen of the "pickup scene", that seems to be the rule. I like the PDF here. It's a nice, social science view of flirting, and although it's always odd to view interaction in a statistical way, it's not written as how to best exploit and game things ("flirting" vs. "pickup"). I think this style is way better than your usual "how to get any girl in bed" type of book (or your average Cosmo type of article for the distaff side).
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

by ajays 14y ago

mhd 14y ago

Basic social science articles always read like they're written by Captain Obvious. "1. Do initiate flirtation with people of roughly the same level of attractiveness as yourself. 2. Don’t flirt with people who are unlikely to return your interest." But on the other hand, there's really no easy way out (writing about it, I mean). I've yet to find a more "practical" approach that doesn't read like either semi-useless and somewhat obvious statistics ("try to position yourself between 3 and 4 feet away from your flirting partner"), or just oozes sleaze ("pickup artists", ESR etc.). Getting technical about human beings and our social interaction works quite well in a clinical, observing manner, but once it's meant as actual practical advise, it's very easy to cross boundaries.

noamsml 14y ago
As someone with borderline autism, I find this sort of guide extremely helpful, because things that may be obvious to you take me immense amounts of time to learn and internalize. Normally I find myself having large amounts of "rules" governing me that turn out to be incorrectly identified from social conduct or incorrectly inferred from the on-the-surface descriptions of things. Hell, even the concept of flirting is something I've just barely started grasping in my 20s. I know I'm a bit of an outlier, but it's sometimes good to be reminded that yes, you can try to flirt in this or that situation, or that X or Y are a good sign of flirting. EDIT: Of course, this is mostly still good as a reminder, introduction, or to shatter misconceptions. The only way to really learn flirting, I've found, is the same as one would learn any other culture: by immersion. As someone whose approach to such things is less intuitive, immersion may be followed by analysis to extract explicit lessons from my experiences.
bmelton 14y ago
Interesting is that it seems to focus on long-term relationships as the reference point against which it gives its advice. For shorter-term relationships (not implying anything), I've found best success with flirting with women considerably more attractive than myself. I've asked a number of my more attractive girlfriends why they were with an ugly schlub like myself and I get two common answers: Personality/humor/laid-backness is one, and the other is that it seems that the best looking ladies either don't get approached, or don't get approached with anything better than tired old pickup lines. I do agree with their findings on pickup lines though. Some friends and I spent a few weeks testing out different ones (in the name of science, naturally), and I had, by a large margin, the most success with "Hi, I'm Barry. Can I buy you a drink?" -- obviously varied if I'm not somewhere I can buy a drink from.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- TheCount 14y ago
  What do you count as a success? The only solid markers of success are sex, blowjobs and a girl meeting you on a different day, i.e. for a date. In that order. Everything else is 'harmless flirting,' basically meaningless as an indicator of 'success.'
orangecat 14y ago
or just oozes sleaze ("pickup artists", ESR etc.) They may be sleazy, but they're basically right.
- te_chris 14y ago
  [citation please] care to back that up?
- mhd 14y ago
  Even if their statistical shenanigans would be scientifically "accurate" (which I still doubt), by no means would I, morally and ethically, consider them "right". I'm the stereotypical reclusive, clinically shy geek, but I've gotten past puberty, and stopped considering penetration to be the "end game". Note that those douchebags seem to be exclusively care about that, there's no "relationship artist" trade that I'm aware of.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - barrkel 14y ago
    Believe it or not, sometimes women are looking for "penetration" as the "end game". Not every encounter is expected to end in a life-long marriage.
    - mhd 14y ago
      I think "sometimes" is the key word here. I like cookies but eating them all the time might be a bit unhealthy. And preaching the "all cookie lifestyle" would seem a bit odd. From what I've seen of the "pickup scene", that seems to be the rule. I like the PDF here. It's a nice, social science view of flirting, and although it's always odd to view interaction in a statistical way, it's not written as how to best exploit and game things ("flirting" vs. "pickup"). I think this style is way better than your usual "how to get any girl in bed" type of book (or your average Cosmo type of article for the distaff side).

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]