On the topic of "support your friends", if there's a funeral for someone you weren't super close with but your friend knew well and you're not sure whether to go, I would recommend just going, sitting up the back, offering your condolences if the opportunity comes up, and leaving.
I've failed to do this twice. Nobody else said or did anything, but I regretted it.
Well the thing is, that sometimes being there and giving them a nod is already saying enough. No need for words. Showing them you care is appropriate if you really do.
Let me tell you, it is absolutely not ok. The family does notice who is and isn't at the funeral and they WILL assume you are just not emotionally involved. I have seen this scenario play out. Don't be surprised if people stop showing up at something you organize. Breaking down at a funeral is absolutely ok and will strengthen the bond with those left behind.
> I broke down every funeral I went to and would rather avoid that in the future.
I understand it can be emotionally challenging, but arguably that expression of grief is what provides meaning to attending a funeral. Furthermore, if you don't attend a close friend's funeral, don't expect him or her to attend yours.
Got to disagree. If there's one situation where a public breakdown is generally understood to be appropriate, it's a funeral. And if you're saying you don't want to because it's uncomfortable for you to be seen that way, well, the funeral isn't about you.
While it's OK if this truly is what you need, be mindful that you're not making a decision you'll come to regret. There is no shame in crying at a funeral. Helping each other through death is one of life's innate obligations. One of the few things we have no choice but to do as humans is die.
Depending on culture and the people, just going might be uncomfortable for the people you want to support. Maybe your friend was close with the deceased and thus their family would like them to be there, but not a stranger. Additionally, your friend or the family of the deceased may feel obligated to interact with you and make you feel welcome because you went. Maybe they’d prefer if you hadn’t gone.
I’d instead recommend asking your friend (though again, this advice may be culturally dependent). Be sure they know it’s about you supporting them.
I remember when a family member died and only one classmate asked me if I wanted them to come to the funeral. I refused but remember the gesture to this day. It’s about the only thing I remember about the person. I also remember a couple of other friends to whom I was closer not asking me, and that stuck with me because they both disliked and badmouthed (I don’t really know why, I avoided dumb drama) the original person. That made me rethink a lot of things.
Anyway, I guess the point is to think of what your friend would like and make sure they understand you’re there for them.
I've found that no mater what country I've been to, or what social classes the people belong to, three topics have a 95% success rate when it comes to social relations with guys: sports, cars, fishing/hunting. And to some degree handywork.
It is a bit unfortunate, as I'm not at all interested in talking about those things - but they are such staple topics, that you can come off as a sort of outcast if you can't keep a short convo on those things.
Another observation has been that some topics are very polarized. In some countries you can talk pretty freely about politics, while in other places it is a faux pas.
But then again, part of finding out what the other party likes talking about is a skill in itself.
Wow, you've had a very different experience, and apparently met very different people (or at least saw different sides of them).
I have never discussed those things with my friends or acquaintances anywhere in the world, across many countries... I don't know anything (or care about) any of them, so I suppose I self-select out of those groups.
The people I end up bonding with (all over the world) are usually because of hiking and outdoor stuff, board games, Dungeons and Dragons, martial arts, history, travel, food, whiskey, couch surfing or hosting, national parks, musical theater, etc.
If someone tried to talk to me about cars, sports, or dead fish, I'd probably just excuse myself. It'd be a huge bore for me and them alike.
I don't doubt what you said, that these are popular topics with men in some parts of the world (especially parts of North America). But it's also totally possible to go through life meeting many people without ever discussing any of those, thankfully...
In my country (western Europe) talking about hunting/fishing would put get you side looks and take you for a very rural or conservative weirdo.
Sports and cars is more common with the older generation, but anyone below 35 will probably be uninterested, unless your circle is finance or blue collar work.
The problem with this is when the convo goes beyond the initial common phrase. The response is likely to go more in depth. Then you're stuck nodding awkwardly, laughing awkwardly or just fudging it further... Awkwardly. Personally if it's a sport I'm not into I'll just admit that and explain why. The conversation will usually naturally move on and you won't seem phony.
Huh, an AI that reads the latest news and suggest conversation topics would be funny, if conversing with someone interested in celebrity gossip, then it could delve into that topic, e.g. "What about astronaut Katy Perry, am I right?! Did you read that she was spotted having a meal with Justin Trudeau?".
"Aren't you concerned that so many people tie their civic identity to watching some rich guy's overproduced commercial sports theatre, but are disinterested in actual civics?"
While I’ve yet to meet somebody into fishing or hunting, I agree about cars and sports. Unfortunately since I have interest in neither it can be hard to fit in sometime.
Weirdly, as somebody non interested in these common topics it also feels like it’s up to you to figure out a topic of common interest and it really isn’t.
About sports also, most people super “into” sports don’t do any. Which is ironic because a conversation about technique is something I’ll gladly have.
For the few times where I had to speak to someone about topics I don't care much about, I found that simply asking questions to learn about them ( as well as the person I'm speaking to) is enough.
"What team do you support? Has it always been the case? How do you think they compare to <well-known other good team>?"
"What car do you drive? Any particular reason for that car model? What's the brand's best and worst things? Oh, that piece tends to break easily; pardon my ignorance, but what's the purpose of it?"
"Any key difference in the way you hunt/fish this or that animal, or the time of the year during which you hunt/fish? I don't know that word, what does it mean? Do you have any anecdotes about some hunting/fishing you did?"
Those have to be adapted to the person and situation, but they are pretty good to keep a conversation going. People love to speak about their interests, and a lot love to even teach about them. Putting yourself as the listener makes them perceive you as nice, and you might even gather interesting information to yourself, or at least gather enough knowledge to have an easier time speaking about it next time.
Yeah, I noticed this too about sportball people - they’re generally out of shape and not actually athletic (I’m fit and active in several outdoor sports). I just find watching or talking about sports excruciatingly boring. To me it’s the same thing as pornography, watching other people who are really good at it while you are a bystander, but your brain gets the physiological and-psychological signal that you’re actually part of the action. Though I don’t recommend the latter as a potential topic of conversation.
You don't need to know much about sports. If you can just keep up with what's in season that's typically enough. Who do you think will go to the super bowl? Have you done a final four bracket? are great questions as long as it's the right time of year.
"Going/been anywhere nice recently" is a pretty good one in the UK - most people have some kind of holiday and I don't follow football and my interest in cars is probably limited to my occasional bouts of incandescent rage at people not signalling correctly on roundabouts...
> I've found that no mater what country I've been to, or what social classes the people belong to, three topics have a 95% success rate when it comes to social relations with guys: sports, cars, fishing/hunting. And to some degree handywork.
Have you generally been to the Americas and Western Europe? Sports is the one universal, that makes sense in my experience too. But most people outside the rich upper class don't give a hoot about cars anywhere in the parts of Asia I've been to. And if you talked about fishing/hunting, you'd probably get weird looks trying to decide if you came from some modern hunter-gatherer cult.
Hunting is extremely rare (and generally an indicator of old money or living in an extremely rural environment).
Fishing is a lot more popular but even that tends to date you a bit. At least for Eastern Europe, fishing is a lot more popular among the 45+ year olds.
OP is primarily speaking about a North American perspective, I think.
Talking about cars in Western Europe isn't that safe bet either. In cities like Stockholm most people are not interested in cars. And similarily hunting and fishing are niche interests in urban areas.
I think most people here are mistaking cars as a subject for things like hotrods or racing or classic cars.
But you really can kick off a decent conversation by just commenting and asking about what they drive, usually by starting with "I see a lot of people prefer X here". And you end up learning a decent amount about them.
The problem is that I find the conversations that flow from these openers incredibly dull. So I just stay at home and read my phone instead, however unfortunately I hear that that is correlated with various negative outcomes.
"Hi, I have no interest in you or these topics but let's converse to extend my lifespan." Beer can help with this.
A lot of "social skills" content drifts into pickup-artist-y territory, so it's refreshing when something frames it around comfort, support, and actual connection instead of just "winning" interactions
Mainstream pickup artists yea. Some niche ones, not really. Wayne Elise feels like a good example, from back in the day.
On a throwaway because the judgmental people will judge me for the rest of my life due to me nuancing that not all people associated to pickup artists looked at social interactions in a zero sum way.
Agreed, it feels risky to just be associated these days, even if it's "adjacent" groups that explicitly don't want to be part of the "mechanical" side of improving social skills like "classical" PUA.
But, no way to change that in public perception without taking risks and being open about it.
So, if you're an HN reader, not wanting to be branded as a PUA but still want to find help socially (especially romantically), my two cents is look into the Ars Amorata community.
I read the page https://www.succeedsocially.com/morefun. Here's my initial impressions. Pros: it identified several important painpoints and give several decent examples. Cons: Being a truly fun person is all about reaction reaction reaction. Fun people react authentically (while censoring their ahole side because you don't want to be fun but unlikable), ridiculously (while reading the room), and intelligently (playing to the top of the crowd's intelligence).
Consider the intended audience though. This is for people who are lost and need perspective and concrete steps for improving. Compared to all the "fake it 'till you make it" or "just stop caring" type of advice, it's helpful.
> Fun people react authentically (while censoring their ahole side because you don't want to be fun but unlikable)
But here you explain exactly what is difficult. It's like walking a tightrope and someone tells you not to fall to the left and by the way, also not to the right.
Mask every day. Life goal: Be 100% artificial person. All openings and responses must be calculated and faked. Your inner self is faulty and not appropriate at any situation. Once you train and work hard enough to suppress it at all times forever, you may be accepted and allowed to participate.
"Be yourself" is not wrong, but it's not specific enough.
You can be perfectly authentic, but that doesn't mean being socially uncalibrated.
Get good at being sociable, then blend that with your personal tastes and preferences.
I thought "be yourself" was fine until I grew up and learned I was just being rude to most people and called myself introverted when I didn't make friends.
"Be yourself" works when you're awesome already (and keep performing).
So it's not useful advice for most that need to build yourself up to something that performs decently, nicely or awesomely (the most you can).
And Fake it till you make it is an awful expression (encourages posing and faking is legitimate when is not by definition) to communicate that you just need practice to obtain a level of performance.
What are you trying to make though? You're pretending to want the same things the people you think you need to fit in with want, but if you don't actually want those things, what point is there to be in a competition to get them?
Part of being truly social (and being emotionally mature) is to understand and apply the difference between manipulation and being mindful about behavior and speech. Same as honesty - honesty doesn't need to be brutal honesty. One can be authentic without being hurtful.
>Your inner self is faulty and not appropriate at any situation
Mostly true actually. If this was not so, the world would look like a daycare without supervision. Just a bunch of primal feelings and violence.
The actual meta-skill that is being developed by maturing emotionally and using soft skills appropriately (for the benefit of the situation and the participants, not for manipulation) is tact. Same as how people learn to apply just a little pressure when handling glassware, and a lot of pressure when lifting a heavy weight.
> Mostly true actually. If this was not so, the world would look like a daycare without supervision. Just a bunch of primal feelings and violence.
The inner self isn't just an id, it's your goals, interests, values and ways of thinking too. And the social fitness script is that you should only have acceptable goals and interests and acceptable ways of talking about them. Talking about wanting to buy a nice house and a sports car, good. Talking about wanting to beat the speedrun record for Mario 64 and how you've figured out a CPU glitch to use for it, keep it to yourself. "Let's agree to disagree", good, "let's sketch a causal model graph of this and plug in our guesses for priors to see where we get different intuitions", no.
> All openings and responses must be calculated and faked
Thinking about the things you say isn't faking it - it's just using your brain and being considerate.
If you just blurt out anything with no filter, that doesn't make you authentic, it usually makes you an asshole.
Not all thoughts are productive, many are bad and many are stupid. You should delete those or revise them. Not only when talking to other people, but even to yourself.
I can tell myself that I'm dumb or I'm fat or whatever, but that isn't true and just because I thought it doesn't mean I have to internalize it. No, I filter those thoughts, I tell myself "that's not true". Over time, I think them less.
Your own brain is not reliable. It does not operate on truth, or what is or is not productive. So tune it. Not for the sake of others, but for yourself too.
Being an asshole to others is bad, but being an asshole to yourself is arguably worse. The goal is to, overtime, build better thought procedses and mental models. Not to fake it.
> Thinking about the things you say isn't faking it - it's just using your brain and being considerate.
I guess what gets me with this stuff is that there are multiple things going on that are getting conflated. Considering your words is pretty straightforwardly good, it's learning to not say things you yourself wouldn't have wanted to say.
But then this stuff tends to show up in the context of work, or business, and it starts turning into selling. You are the seller, the other people are buyers. Buyers have no expectations on them, they react as they react and they want what they want. The seller must contort themselves to please the buyer and then close a sale to get one over the buyer. And this is where it gets corrosive for me. It feels like there's no common ground being built, the relationship is adversarial in both directions, and both sides are a bad model for a person to be. People are being split into feckless buyers who express immediate wants and judgments with no thought or development, and conniving sellers whose main order of business is to get themselves in front of the buyer and get noticed, no matter what the real value of what they are offering is. People might make money if they internalize this system and get good at it, but are they going to make lasting friends?
Which is fun and great if you came out as a happy cool human.
If you made it through the weird unadjusted side without any gimmick you just loose.
No one has to force you to stay what your surroundings made you. It's not your personality it's just a reflection and you can change it and make it better for you by adjusting and reflecting.
Sometimes people already are like something and don't want to change it or feel like they could change it, but also don't get along being like they are. This is more awkward to think about than just treating them as damaged or incomplete people who would get around to becoming people who can fit in fine once the damage is fixed or the incomplete development is completed, because it's harder to see good solutions.
You severely underestimate the biological side of things regarding social interaction. Neurodivergent people are what we are not just bc "surroundings made us so"
After COVID, I stopped caring and trying to fake being a normal person, and choose just to be me, alone.
I wasn't good at trying to be normal, and it's so much nicer to be free to not bother to make the effort and not be me. But I have no friends or good relationships with family (who don't understand or tolerate who I am).
I wonder why this was written as these very small paragraphs with only a few lines of content? Apart from the hosting issues due to hackernews it leads to a lot of intros and 'in the next section we will learn...' but the actually useful content is quite little and you have to dig hard for it. I'd personally favor a normal article.
I found it frustrating because of all the links everywhere. In the “How to use this guide” section it links to a body language section.
But there’s no context as to where this body language section fits in.
Am I supposed to read the body language section now and then remember to go back to the how to section? Or is body language discussed later? Then why link to it now? This format stresses me out.
Maybe I'm weird, but I find the writing style almost condescending.
It's a style I've seen elsewhere as well so not particular to this site, but I find it grating and off-putting. Feels like it treats me like a 4 year old.
For those who think they are decent at socializing, one book that may extend your skill further is ' Never split the difference'. Its a book about negotiating, but I think it does teach some key skills. Mirroring for example where you literally repeat back the last few words a person has said, I've found unexpectedly super useful - it almost allows people to expand on what they are saying and helps them go deeper into things. Basically the book (and other tools) has helped me become a better listener (I have always been decent at the talking side).
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Never-Split-Difference-Negotiating-...
Note: I only 'mirror' 2-3 times in a conversation. I've found over using it makes it have less impact. But that's just me.
Agreed that is a classic - I think the essentials are true but the language is a bit dated.
Definitely "trying to think positively about people and their actions/understand them", and giving people "a sense of importance" are very helpful social skills.
This is a very American society focused guide, a lot of these wouldn't even apply in Europe an especially not if you travel to Asia, Middle East, or Africa
> Interestingly enough, not nearly as much gets published for e.g. Europe. Innate ability ?
From my personal feeling:
US culture is more on the extraverted side (i.e. a lot of people want/need shallow conversation instead of shutting their mouth, except if they have something important to say) than what is common in many European countries.
Thus, people who are more on the introvert side have a harder time in the USA than in many European countries, I guess.
Also, for various reason the whole "self-improvement industrial complex" is much less prevalent in European countries than in the USA.
Relatedly, I would say that in the USA, there is the mentality "Our society is the greatest ever made since God created Earth, so if you don't feel happy, the fault is on you: you need to self-improve."
On the other hand, in many European countries, the mentality is rather like "The society [note that I didn't write "our" - there is barely any sense of belonging] is a corrupt, messed-up shithole. Yes, there exist those smooth talkers who tell you that you need to self-improve (e.g. social skills), but do you know what: those just want to make money from the mess you are in, and/or are telling you the things that those in power want you to brainwash with. So, instead of wasting time and money to get yourself a brainwashing to make yourself 'socially adapted', better invest this energy into exposing all these assholes in power who are responsible for the whole mess. Since there are so many people who also have this kind of hate, you will easily find friends this way, and thus become more socially skilled." :-)
Readit News
I've failed to do this twice. Nobody else said or did anything, but I regretted it.
Sometimes in life you just have to do stuff, even if you hate it.
These things also have a tendency to become easier the more you do it, so advising people to just not do it seems horrible advice.
Not showing up to a funeral of someone you were close to just because of your own discomfort is plain weird.
I understand it can be emotionally challenging, but arguably that expression of grief is what provides meaning to attending a funeral. Furthermore, if you don't attend a close friend's funeral, don't expect him or her to attend yours.
Dead Comment
I’d instead recommend asking your friend (though again, this advice may be culturally dependent). Be sure they know it’s about you supporting them.
I remember when a family member died and only one classmate asked me if I wanted them to come to the funeral. I refused but remember the gesture to this day. It’s about the only thing I remember about the person. I also remember a couple of other friends to whom I was closer not asking me, and that stuck with me because they both disliked and badmouthed (I don’t really know why, I avoided dumb drama) the original person. That made me rethink a lot of things.
Anyway, I guess the point is to think of what your friend would like and make sure they understand you’re there for them.
It is a bit unfortunate, as I'm not at all interested in talking about those things - but they are such staple topics, that you can come off as a sort of outcast if you can't keep a short convo on those things.
Another observation has been that some topics are very polarized. In some countries you can talk pretty freely about politics, while in other places it is a faux pas.
But then again, part of finding out what the other party likes talking about is a skill in itself.
I have never discussed those things with my friends or acquaintances anywhere in the world, across many countries... I don't know anything (or care about) any of them, so I suppose I self-select out of those groups.
The people I end up bonding with (all over the world) are usually because of hiking and outdoor stuff, board games, Dungeons and Dragons, martial arts, history, travel, food, whiskey, couch surfing or hosting, national parks, musical theater, etc.
If someone tried to talk to me about cars, sports, or dead fish, I'd probably just excuse myself. It'd be a huge bore for me and them alike.
I don't doubt what you said, that these are popular topics with men in some parts of the world (especially parts of North America). But it's also totally possible to go through life meeting many people without ever discussing any of those, thankfully...
Sports and cars is more common with the older generation, but anyone below 35 will probably be uninterested, unless your circle is finance or blue collar work.
"Did you see that ludicrous display last night?"
Huh, an AI that reads the latest news and suggest conversation topics would be funny, if conversing with someone interested in celebrity gossip, then it could delve into that topic, e.g. "What about astronaut Katy Perry, am I right?! Did you read that she was spotted having a meal with Justin Trudeau?".
"You catch the game?"
"They got some bad calls."
"Aren't you concerned that so many people tie their civic identity to watching some rich guy's overproduced commercial sports theatre, but are disinterested in actual civics?"
Weirdly, as somebody non interested in these common topics it also feels like it’s up to you to figure out a topic of common interest and it really isn’t.
About sports also, most people super “into” sports don’t do any. Which is ironic because a conversation about technique is something I’ll gladly have.
"What team do you support? Has it always been the case? How do you think they compare to <well-known other good team>?" "What car do you drive? Any particular reason for that car model? What's the brand's best and worst things? Oh, that piece tends to break easily; pardon my ignorance, but what's the purpose of it?" "Any key difference in the way you hunt/fish this or that animal, or the time of the year during which you hunt/fish? I don't know that word, what does it mean? Do you have any anecdotes about some hunting/fishing you did?"
Those have to be adapted to the person and situation, but they are pretty good to keep a conversation going. People love to speak about their interests, and a lot love to even teach about them. Putting yourself as the listener makes them perceive you as nice, and you might even gather interesting information to yourself, or at least gather enough knowledge to have an easier time speaking about it next time.
Now I'm interested: what are your top three topics for talking to women? :)
Dead Comment
Have you generally been to the Americas and Western Europe? Sports is the one universal, that makes sense in my experience too. But most people outside the rich upper class don't give a hoot about cars anywhere in the parts of Asia I've been to. And if you talked about fishing/hunting, you'd probably get weird looks trying to decide if you came from some modern hunter-gatherer cult.
Hunting is extremely rare (and generally an indicator of old money or living in an extremely rural environment).
Fishing is a lot more popular but even that tends to date you a bit. At least for Eastern Europe, fishing is a lot more popular among the 45+ year olds.
OP is primarily speaking about a North American perspective, I think.
But you really can kick off a decent conversation by just commenting and asking about what they drive, usually by starting with "I see a lot of people prefer X here". And you end up learning a decent amount about them.
"Hi, I have no interest in you or these topics but let's converse to extend my lifespan." Beer can help with this.
[1] https://store.theonion.com/collections/best-selling-products...
This is why I prefer talking to women.
Mainstream pickup artists yea. Some niche ones, not really. Wayne Elise feels like a good example, from back in the day.
On a throwaway because the judgmental people will judge me for the rest of my life due to me nuancing that not all people associated to pickup artists looked at social interactions in a zero sum way.
But, no way to change that in public perception without taking risks and being open about it.
So, if you're an HN reader, not wanting to be branded as a PUA but still want to find help socially (especially romantically), my two cents is look into the Ars Amorata community.
But, a lot of the actual material I did see actually seemed like it was universally applicable in non-toxic and non-exploitative ways.
I think a lot of the basic skills and concepts are the same, whether using them for positive goals or for selfishly manipulative goals.
It’s so unbelievably straightforward and useful. It’s unfortunate that I discovered it after learning everything the hard way.
I read the page https://www.succeedsocially.com/morefun. Here's my initial impressions. Pros: it identified several important painpoints and give several decent examples. Cons: Being a truly fun person is all about reaction reaction reaction. Fun people react authentically (while censoring their ahole side because you don't want to be fun but unlikable), ridiculously (while reading the room), and intelligently (playing to the top of the crowd's intelligence).
But here you explain exactly what is difficult. It's like walking a tightrope and someone tells you not to fall to the left and by the way, also not to the right.
"Be yourself" is not wrong, but it's not specific enough.
You can be perfectly authentic, but that doesn't mean being socially uncalibrated.
Get good at being sociable, then blend that with your personal tastes and preferences.
I thought "be yourself" was fine until I grew up and learned I was just being rude to most people and called myself introverted when I didn't make friends.
So it's not useful advice for most that need to build yourself up to something that performs decently, nicely or awesomely (the most you can).
And Fake it till you make it is an awful expression (encourages posing and faking is legitimate when is not by definition) to communicate that you just need practice to obtain a level of performance.
What are you trying to make though? You're pretending to want the same things the people you think you need to fit in with want, but if you don't actually want those things, what point is there to be in a competition to get them?
>Your inner self is faulty and not appropriate at any situation
Mostly true actually. If this was not so, the world would look like a daycare without supervision. Just a bunch of primal feelings and violence.
The actual meta-skill that is being developed by maturing emotionally and using soft skills appropriately (for the benefit of the situation and the participants, not for manipulation) is tact. Same as how people learn to apply just a little pressure when handling glassware, and a lot of pressure when lifting a heavy weight.
This is addressed by the author here:
https://www.improveyoursocialskills.com/foundations/social-m...
The inner self isn't just an id, it's your goals, interests, values and ways of thinking too. And the social fitness script is that you should only have acceptable goals and interests and acceptable ways of talking about them. Talking about wanting to buy a nice house and a sports car, good. Talking about wanting to beat the speedrun record for Mario 64 and how you've figured out a CPU glitch to use for it, keep it to yourself. "Let's agree to disagree", good, "let's sketch a causal model graph of this and plug in our guesses for priors to see where we get different intuitions", no.
Thinking about the things you say isn't faking it - it's just using your brain and being considerate.
If you just blurt out anything with no filter, that doesn't make you authentic, it usually makes you an asshole.
Not all thoughts are productive, many are bad and many are stupid. You should delete those or revise them. Not only when talking to other people, but even to yourself.
I can tell myself that I'm dumb or I'm fat or whatever, but that isn't true and just because I thought it doesn't mean I have to internalize it. No, I filter those thoughts, I tell myself "that's not true". Over time, I think them less.
Your own brain is not reliable. It does not operate on truth, or what is or is not productive. So tune it. Not for the sake of others, but for yourself too.
Being an asshole to others is bad, but being an asshole to yourself is arguably worse. The goal is to, overtime, build better thought procedses and mental models. Not to fake it.
I guess what gets me with this stuff is that there are multiple things going on that are getting conflated. Considering your words is pretty straightforwardly good, it's learning to not say things you yourself wouldn't have wanted to say.
But then this stuff tends to show up in the context of work, or business, and it starts turning into selling. You are the seller, the other people are buyers. Buyers have no expectations on them, they react as they react and they want what they want. The seller must contort themselves to please the buyer and then close a sale to get one over the buyer. And this is where it gets corrosive for me. It feels like there's no common ground being built, the relationship is adversarial in both directions, and both sides are a bad model for a person to be. People are being split into feckless buyers who express immediate wants and judgments with no thought or development, and conniving sellers whose main order of business is to get themselves in front of the buyer and get noticed, no matter what the real value of what they are offering is. People might make money if they internalize this system and get good at it, but are they going to make lasting friends?
Which is fun and great if you came out as a happy cool human.
If you made it through the weird unadjusted side without any gimmick you just loose.
No one has to force you to stay what your surroundings made you. It's not your personality it's just a reflection and you can change it and make it better for you by adjusting and reflecting.
After COVID, I stopped caring and trying to fake being a normal person, and choose just to be me, alone.
I wasn't good at trying to be normal, and it's so much nicer to be free to not bother to make the effort and not be me. But I have no friends or good relationships with family (who don't understand or tolerate who I am).
But there’s no context as to where this body language section fits in.
Am I supposed to read the body language section now and then remember to go back to the how to section? Or is body language discussed later? Then why link to it now? This format stresses me out.
I agree with you though. It's sad that content is being reformulated for those reasons.
It's a style I've seen elsewhere as well so not particular to this site, but I find it grating and off-putting. Feels like it treats me like a 4 year old.
Deleted Comment
Note: I only 'mirror' 2-3 times in a conversation. I've found over using it makes it have less impact. But that's just me.
And the book gives you a few useful tools to do that.
From my personal feeling:
US culture is more on the extraverted side (i.e. a lot of people want/need shallow conversation instead of shutting their mouth, except if they have something important to say) than what is common in many European countries.
Thus, people who are more on the introvert side have a harder time in the USA than in many European countries, I guess.
Also, for various reason the whole "self-improvement industrial complex" is much less prevalent in European countries than in the USA.
Relatedly, I would say that in the USA, there is the mentality "Our society is the greatest ever made since God created Earth, so if you don't feel happy, the fault is on you: you need to self-improve."
On the other hand, in many European countries, the mentality is rather like "The society [note that I didn't write "our" - there is barely any sense of belonging] is a corrupt, messed-up shithole. Yes, there exist those smooth talkers who tell you that you need to self-improve (e.g. social skills), but do you know what: those just want to make money from the mess you are in, and/or are telling you the things that those in power want you to brainwash with. So, instead of wasting time and money to get yourself a brainwashing to make yourself 'socially adapted', better invest this energy into exposing all these assholes in power who are responsible for the whole mess. Since there are so many people who also have this kind of hate, you will easily find friends this way, and thus become more socially skilled." :-)
Deleted Comment