"Chicks dig confidence."

Post Reply New Topic

Rdos is perferect example of arrogance

Physical contact is for whenever both parties want it; it's noöne else's business.

Its a balancing act, self aware but not displaying self consciousness.

For example: In a group situation you make a social mistake yet don't make a big deal about it, because you are okay with that part of yourself, it's just one aspect of your identity, you note it and will aim to do it differently next time.

To be all the things to yourself that you might hope to find in a partner, for example loving, accepting of flaws, respectful, forgiving, reflective, eager to learn, unafraid to be humble, realistic etc.

To know what you need and want in life, be proactive to make that happen without arrogance or lack of consideration for others and not rely on a partner to provide what you need to be healthy and content.

Nope, I don't hug friends, but I make an exception for daughter.

How do you know? I don't think you know me well enough to claim that.

I don't think so. As I wrote a while back, I've succeeded with it twice.



You cannot know that without trying it.



That was not the point. The point was that you cannot combine the observation method with dating, and that's why that method will not have any dating.

What I need and want is a partner to be content. So it's a catch 22

OK, back to confidence. This thread is getting de-railed. I was talking to a male friend about this and when he was interested in his now wife he said that he was confident in his musical skills and that was one way he tried to get her interested. If they were at someone's house he'd pick up their guitar and play a few tunes.

That isn't all he'd do, he did eventually ask her out, but that was one example of being confident about who you are around your crush.

It also shows you'd better have good reasons to be confident.

As long as you believe you are good at something, and people around you aren't trashing you, all you need is to believe it yourself. Besides, if you are around a stranger woman, she will not know if you are good at music or whatever you think you are good at, and you don't need to actually show your talent directly to her when first seeing her.

IOW, confidence doesn't need to have specific substance behind it. It's a way of thinking about yourself. If you think you are worthless, you will transmit that to girls around you, but if you think you are good and interesting you will transmit confidence.

If you are not competent at something, you won't be confident at it - if yet you insist to be confident then you are being delusional.

In hurtloam's example, if he was a sh***y guitar player, 'confidence' in this case would be a delusion and would have backfired at him - look what happens to the untalented -yet confident- candidates in reality-shows musical competitions: Utter historical failures.

I personally don't believe in the confidence advise, it's a cliche BS, it is totally stupid, I believe that confidence is the result of successive recognized successes due to competence at something, ie those who are very confident in approaching women romantically are so due to previous successes with them (which are due to their attractiveness and their charm). Likewise, repeated failures due to incompetence will eventually result in lack of diffidence.

I wasn't talking about being confident in techniques to pick up 'chicks', instead I was referring to an inner/everyday confidence based on realistic skills/traits, not the ones you would like to have. Its not delusional if its real.
Attending guitar lessons will make you a better musician. Its a relative concept, you might only perfect and feel confident playing one or two tunes, but through the right experiences you have made tangible progress.

Yes, agreed. The problem today is that many people only regard success as being at the very top level of competence in some area, which naturally few people with be able to achieve. But if you lower your expectations, then you are likely to be competent at something. And confidence is not dependent on what others think is competence, but what YOU think is competence.



Agreed, and music is one of the fields where you typically need to be very competent to pass as good enough. I wouldn't bet on ever getting competent in that area. The expectations are just too high.



That doesn't fit my experience. Sure, at my current stage, it could very well be that my confidence is due to real success (after all, I have success in the operating system area, and also some in the ND research area). But that wasn't the case in high-school, and already at that stage, I was rather confident in the eye-contact game with girls. The only "competence" I could claim at that point was being best in class in math, and that was not a popular feature with girls.

Can't claim any direct charm, and I'm average looking.

I don't understand this part.

Competence is the ability to do something successfully, and in most cases, your competence at something is determined either based on the evaluation of other people who have expertise in the related skill or the reactions/evaluations of those who are on the receiving end (ie. audience of your singing..etc).

One can live in a delusion of being very competent at something while he's actually not.

So it is enough what YOU think is competence, OTHERS and RESULTS will determine whether you are competent or not.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 25 Apr 2016, 5:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Certainly, but the standards today are very high in many areas. In the past, there were local musicians that played at dances, and they didn't need the same competence as today's super-stars need. Still, the musicians of the past could claim competence even if they wouldn't be able to do so today (because of very high expectations).



You could be competent at a small, special interest that almost nobody practise, and that has no standard for "competence". That would not be delusional.



The thing is, if you are a competent neuroscientist, you cannot show off that to a potential date. In fact, most competencies will not show off to random strangers, and about the only exceptions will be music and maybe acting. That's probably why evolution invented "confidence".

Yes you can, if you tell her (not lying) that you are a recognized professor in neuroscience or a neuroscience researcher in some recognized research institution, making peer-reviewed researchers for instance or having a career in such applied sciences for instance..etc.

Sure you don't have to show her tables and formulas, but she can still tell whether you are something real in that field or a poser even if she's not specialized in such field.

For example if I am dating an Accountant woman and she tells me that she works as a Chief Accountant for 5 years and has a CPA degree then I would assume she is competent at it, even if I am not seeing her work and even if I don't have deep understanding in accounting. How can I know that? Because she wouldn't have lasted if she wasn't, she's being constantly evaluated by others, by her employer, by the her auditors, by the gov's auditors..etc.

That would be the case for most fields.