Love Shy

Post Reply New Topic

While I undoubtedly qualify as love-shy, I have some problems with Gilmartin's book, as intriguing as I found it. With the tone of it, his writings many times are aggressive, curt and derogatory.

He also believes in the paranormal. There is one chapter (or is it two) devoted to paranormal topics and how they affect love shyness e.g. I'd no idea what Kirlian auras were before I read the book, indeed I just skipped those chapters.

This test is probably the dumbest test ever,
but I took it out of curiousity.

You Scored 29

These are the typical scores for some groups of men

Self-Confidant Non-Shy Men: 114.3
Healthy College Males: 103.9
Young(University) Love-Shy Men: 47.8
Older Love-Shy Men: 38.6

Why is it a dumb test? I never even looked at the questions.
They say that this behavior can be improved early in life and gets harder the older one gets. So, older love shy males are pretty much stuck in their ways and perhaps completely hopeless.

I got 96. But the test very flawed. 1-3 of the questions asked what you would do if you see a girl alone. For me, it seems that aperson should never be lonely, so I will go up to the person and talk to them and give them company unless they have a) hurt me in the past, or b) are a republican.

I got 134. A couple years ago I would of never got near as much. Wow, how so much has changed? There is one stituation tho, when a girls speak a different language but are still good enough english, I wouldn't talk. Mainly because they tend to speak the language they started with. Unless I successfully become fluent with that same language or relatively I wouldn't but this isn't really got to do with being shy more of language barriarer problem.

Also I wouldn't often talk to a girl who is studying for most obvious of reason. Unless she doesn't seem to be concertrating and there isn't an exam or assignment due tomorrow then I would talk to her.

Last edited by Betterclassed on 14 Sep 2008, 2:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

*giggles*

I scored a 38 and I'm only 26. Sigh... I already knew I was love shy, among a laundry list of other undiagnosed "problems". I kind of wish I had the money to get diagnosed and treated, but I have to prioritize eating, having a place to live, and paying for my car to get to work to make the money I need to buy the food to eat and have a place to live. I'm anti-doping anyways, so I guess it's better not to be diagnosed.

This time around I decided to take the test, and it was no surprise. I scored a 33.

I got 106. So much for "love shyness" holding me back, then.

Perhaps not intrinsically, but if I desire to be with a female then complications can arise in obtaining said relationship

Anyway, it's certain that I'm mildly love-shy. The only criteria I don't fall under is the fact that I have no real problems hanging out with platonic female friends. And in only two of my prospective sexual encounters did I turn them down b/c I didn't want to risk falling in love with those particular females. The other ones, well, they were just gross girls >_<

maybe you just need to know a woman for a long time before you are comfortable about the cheesy/touchy feely stuff of a relationship? a lot of women, especially in mid thirties, are exactly looking for that - going to the movies with someone for a year or two and not getting closer to each other than you are comfortable with. just try to make friends with all kinds of women, pretty and not at all good looking, some of the best relationships guys have are with women like that.

The questions make no sense at all to me. There seems to be an underlying age and culture bias. Every other one seems to start: "You are at a dance....", "You see some girls dancing.." What's with the emphasis on dancing? I've known hundreds of couples and can't think of any that met while "dancing".

I sometimes think these sorts of labels are simply a way to avoid the fact that some of us are just born unattractive. It seems unfair and unjust that some are not given a fair chance, so people don't like to confront it directly. And the attractive like to think they are somehow 'doing' something to achieve the effect, rather than they were just blessed. We're not all born with the hardware to be athletes, artists, engineers, so why assume we all have the hardware to attract others? For some of us being so-called 'love shy' is a perfectly rational means to protect from rejection.

My point is that being love shy is the effect of rejection, not the cause. (and there's another thread around detailing the awful rejections some of us have had)

ugh... who revived this thread?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Gilmartin is full of s**t...

No one cares about "Gilmartin". Leave us to be entertained by taking these ridiculous internet tests.

I am taking the test and I find there to be a large gap between whether I 'can' do something and whether I would actually want to.

I can do anything I want. I don't want to initiate conversations.

I guess I'd count because I can't do relationships but it seems like they are trying to create too many disorders. I mean love shy? Come on, just put it under aspergers or social anxiety and be done with it.