How do you guys do the "no contact" thing?

Post Reply New Topic

I’m just very puzzled. Going into great depth as to why one perceives something as being unfair or why posters’ advice “shouldn’t” be so, doesn’t change anything.

I could dislike the fact that 1+1=2 but arguing with you as to why it should be 5 instead of 2 is not going to make it 5.

Logic.

If logic doesn’t appeal to one, there’s the Serenity Prayer which is actually pretty logical.

I’m going to have to accept the fact that I can’t change 1+1=2 into 1+1=5 and move on...

You can’t control or dictate someone else’s behavior.

You can control your own.

Wanted to add a thought to this. You've mentioned a few times that you would really like to be a professor and you're doing a 2nd Ph.D to help with this.

You might want to consider that you may be having the same problems with your dating life that you have in your work life. A Ph.D certifies that you have achieved the highest level of scholarship and that you are capable of functioning independently as an educational leader and scholar; none of that is going to effectively change if you have a second Ph.D.

You may want to consider that your behavior is what's been holding you back in more than 1 area of your life. It's kind of accepted that academics are going to have SOME quirks but you still have to work with other human beings.

Actually you are right as far as saying that the reason I am back to school is *not* because the second degree will help me in any way but rather because I can't get a job.

However, I don't think its behavioral as such. Although I can see "common roots" between "academic" things that stop me from getting a job and behavioral things that turn women off. In particular the common root is that I can't accept something I "don't like". Academically, what happened was that I wanted to do string theory but string theory made some assumptions that I didn't like. In particular, what I was stuck on was "how can a particle be a string rather than a ball and how is it possible that it stays that way without consisting of its own molecues that would push it that way" and the other question i was stuck on was "how is it possible that calculus of Grassmann variables contradicts the calculus as I know in such a blatant way". So, instead of doing what I was asked to do, I was trying to "rewrite" those concepts in the way that I "like" them. What I mean by this is that I tried to invent my own concepts -- which I "like" -- that would eventually produce the concepts that I "don't like" in some way -- so that I would end up "liking" them by default. So I was doing this, instead of doing the reading I was supposed to do.

The other mistake that I made is that I didn't know the rules of the game. I thought that the main thing are courses and grades. Well, it was true when i was undergrad, but its no longer true when I am in grad school. Now, what would have happened if I was to take a course -- that is being graded -- where I have concepts that I "don't like"? It would have been either of the two things: either I would "force myself" to use those concepts until the semester is over and I get that grade, or I drop the course and take another course instead. But since research isn't being graded, I didn't realize that being too slow would get me into trouble. Well, it did, they tried to expell me from school -- despite the fact that my grades were all A and B -- all because of subjective opinions of my research advisors. Well, they didn't expell me -- what they did instead was that, in January 20, they gave me a deadline of June 1: by June 1 I have to either find an advisor or else get expelled. But nobody wanted to be my advisor due to my reputation. Finally, the day before June 1, a retired professor agreed to be my advisor just to save me from being expelled. So I stayed in school and got my Ph.D. three years later. But the thing is that this advisor was not in my research area, so I had to find a different advisor that is in my research area, and that other advisor was in Mississippi while I was in Michigan. But I didn't have to transfer to Mississippi: I was able to stay in Michigan by arranging so that I had two co-chairs in my disseratation committee -- one is that retired professor (who is in Michigan, but not in my field) and the other is that other professor who "is" in my field, but is in Mississippi. As long as "one" of them was in Michigan, they allowed me to stay in Michigan and get Michigan Ph.D.

The way it slowed me down though is that the Mississippi professor is a huge procrastinator so he wasn't able to give me a really good guidence on writing papers. So I posted 29 papers on arXiv.org, but only 3 of them got published. Part of the reason why they don't get published is that Mississppi guy isn't very helpful; so if I didn't spoil my relationships with people in Michigan maybe I would get more help. But the other reason why they don't get published is that a lot of them address the questions I "used to be" stuck on back in Michigan which I finally answered. To me this is obviously super-important (important enough to get stuck on it on the first place) so I feel like they are publication-worthy. But others disagree with me. Others probably don't see why I was stuck on the first place -- which is why back when I was in Michigan and I was running around the department asking those questions nobody could really undrsetand what I was really asking which is why nobody got me un-stuck. So for the same exact reason back when I was stuck on those things people didn't really see why I was stuck -- well, for that very reason now that I am super-excited that I solved them nobody can really see what is there to be excited about, which is why they don't want to publish it.

So I guess the common thing with finding girlfriends is that with girlfriends I am also stuck on certain things -- this time psychological. So who knows maybe 20 years from now, when I will be 60, I will answer those psychology questions and try to publish papers on how I finally answered them but nobody will want to publish it since nobody had those questions except for me. But I guess I don't really want this to happen, looking for wife at 60 is a bit late. So I do see why I should be less stubborn, its just hard.

Ironically enough, this is exactly what happened to me academically -- except that it wasn't 1+1=2 that I didn't like but rather it was Grassmann variables. So thats part of why I am in academic mess I am currently in: it took me 15 years to get to "like" grassmann numbers so I couldn't learn supersymmetry, string theory and other stuff that uses them during those 15 years, and also I wasted too much time thinking about it. Well, finally I solved it, so now that I solved it I better try to get it published, so that at least I didn't waste all that time for nothing. But I regret that I made that choice back in the day. If only I knew how LONG it was going to take I would have just picked some area of physics that doesn't use them (which would have been easy). Well, actually I did, but only after I already ruined my relationship with most people in the department, so I was pretty much on my own except for three people that was still willing to help me.

Okay let me explain what I mean when I say its not fair. Lets take the way I handle classes. So I typically don't pay attention in class then I go home and study all night long, then I am sleepy and tired so I sleep through class, then I again study all night long, etc. Well, I end up getting mostly As, despite all that (and no I am not on disability service of any kind I am against it out of principle). Now, do you see what happens? When I screw up, I can make extra effort to make up for it. I wish it was that way with dating but its not Thats how its unfair.

While it is not often that you get a second chance with the same woman, knowing that there are millions of other women out there whom you have not yet taken even one chance with makes the dating "system" eminently fair -- when you mess up with one woman, there are many more upon whom you can take a chance.

Fair or unfair, focusing all of your effort and attention on just one woman after she has already rejected you is futile; after all, it's not like she is going to waste any more time on you when there are millions of other men who may treat her better.

Forget about her, learn from your mistakes, and look elsewhere.

Not quite: there is something about me that makes women think I am inherently undatable, so they never give me the first chance (nobody approaches me). Thats why during VERY RARE instances where I do get the first chance, and blow it, I want the second chance: I don't know who else would give me the first chance and how long I would have to wait for it.

And this is in contrast to courses where yes I can get the first chance all I want by taking more and more courses. But with dating its different. With dating its like "you can't take this course cause you are not popular".



If she thinks dealing with me is a waste of time, then she thinks that I am immovable robot who can't ever do any better. But, if so, why should I waste any time on "myself" trying to better myself if SHE doesn't think I can?

Yeah, I know. That's what I'm saying. You already have one Ph.D and you can't get a job. Getting a 2nd Ph.D isn't going to help you get a job when you already have a Ph.D.



Yeah... I disagree. I think it's probably more behavioral than you think or realize. You're not doing yourself any favors being stubborn and disagreeable - in your career or with women.

That specific reason is the exact thing I have problems with. I don't like when people assume I will be later on the same way I am how. After all, I would HATE the idea of spending the rest of my LIFE doing what I am doing -- which I am totally not happy with -- and I totally want to change. But when others act as if I will never change I feel really discouraged.



And thats the one thing I don't do. But shouldn't I get any bonuses for the fact that what you see is what you got?

Now I totally get the concept of working harder for an occasion. During the test I work harder than elsewhere. But during the test its clear its a test. But during the dating its not: its like we both have to pretend its a normal interaction when in actuality its a test. And even if I learn that this game is a general rule, I have that weakness of still taking people as individuals. So when a woman in question -- such as the women being discussed now -- acts totally genuine without trying to be super impressive, then part of me thinks "okay finally I found someone genuine I can be myself with". So I act myself -- but nope, it turns out it was still a test: she just was a really good actress. I mean, who would ever imagine that someone as genuine as that woman was would be willing to just suddenly shut me out without any explanation? Yet she did.

In fact, a perfect illustration of the hypocricy that I see comes from the following quote of yours:



So if its natural, then people should know that I do it anyway -- regardless of whether I show it or not. So if I happen to show it, the only information it should give them is that I am honest. Well, honesty is a good thing, isnt it?

How else can I make sense of this? Is it that "you" know its natural but most people don't? And most people think "they" are the only ones who do it -- and so they hide it -- and then when they see someone else doing it they judge that person since they assume that nobody else between the two of them ever does it? Is it kind of like the story of a naked emperor type of thing?



When I jump from the cliff I know 100% (or at least 99%) that I will severely injure myself, so no point in doing it. But with the mistakes I do make, I don't know it. For example, one thing I was repeatedly told not to do is talking about ex-s too much. Well, guess what: with my second long term relationship and third long term relationship (each of them lasted 2 years) I talked about a certain ex of mine throughout the duration of it, yet this didn't break us up. But then again, talking about ex-s made some other girls leave me right away. So then I thought its unfair since I couldn't predict what time it goes which way. Or the other example is the whole politics/religion thing. I LOVE talking about politics/religion. In many cases its fine for the simple reason that the girls share my views. In other instances they don't share my views but its still fine since its not that important to them. Yet in the other instances it would create a problem. I don't know when would it go which way, so I keep doing it. And yet another thing I do is talking about myself too much. Once again, many people tell me it is a problem yet sometimes I do that and get away with it (like in case of my third ex, that lasted two years, every time we skype all I was doing was complaining to her why nobody talks to me -- and she was sitting there listening without ever losing interest due to this). So again how can I know which way would it go? Thats why I need feedback to which I can react.



Well, I don't believe in sex before marriage. What makes me desperate is solely emotional aspects of it. I am "assuming" that girl I talk about knows it, since she is seventh day adventist and we talked about faith a lot so I was assuming we are on the same page. Or are you saying she might think that I only pretend to have the type of beliefs I think she has and then will back off on it -- but she didn't call me out on it since she doesn't know for sure -- is this what you think might have happened?



Well, math and physics is hard to learn too. But the difference is that I can read math or physics book over and over as many times as I want. But with women, once I turned them off, thats it, they are gone. That, plus also I can check out as many library books as I want. But with women, I have to wait for months or years for any of them to ever approach me. So thats what slows me down.

@QFT: If you have it all figured out, then go right ahead and show us how successful you can be; but if you are not being successful, then you do not have it all figured out.

You are arguing against people who have succeeded where you have failed. You will not win this argument. You will continue to fail unless you change your behavior. It is really just that simple.

Wow! Deja-vu! I feel like I've been through this discussion before … something to do with tractors …

The reason I do second Ph.D. is this. Regardless of anything behavioral or otherwise that you might suggest -- I know that the one thing that DOES hold me back is lack of publications. Now, it takes time to get published. So how should I earn money during this time? I don't want to take non-academic job since it would disract me from what I am doing. But if I am a graduate student, I get paid for being TA, so I don't need to look for job. So what I am trying to do is "not" the actual degree but rather keeping myself in school as long as possible until I get publications. Do I plan to get a degree? Yes. But only because leaving without a degree looks really bad. So since I am at school I better get a degree.

The other thing I hope for is this. Like I mentioned, my papers don't get published. So I want someone to co-author them with me so that they can edit it and it does get published. When I was doing postdocs I was trying to ask my advisors to do it but they said they were "busy". They agreed to do it, but they kept postponiing it. So I figured if I were in grad school again, maybe my ph.d. thesis advisor will do it since its more of his job. Well in a sense I am right: when I give something to my thesis advisor he looks at it right away. But, on the other hand, it doesn't get any closer to getting published since he is being super picky and we go in circles a lot. So maybe the advisors that were "busy" were having the same issue -- but instead of being angry with me over something unreadable they just postponed reading it.



Can you tell me exaclty "how" its behavioral? I mean if I submit things to journal and they reject it, then its not like they are put off by my behavior they don't even see me. The only thing I can think of is that maybe -- due to my behavior -- I failed to make connections with people at the conferences so I don't get the help I would have gotten. But is this what you were thinking of as well, or what were you thinking of?

I have it figured out in terms of how my mind works -- not in terms of other peoples minds. You asked me why I see it as unfair. I explained why I see it that way. But if you ask me why other people aren't buying it, then the answer is I don't know -- which is why I keep asking those questions.

Why are you arguing with the facts you are being given?

It’s not logical. It’s not going to change them.

Just find a way how to make them work for you. Don’t tell me you can’t because, with the right attitude, you can.

So what you are saying is that the whole world should adjust to how your “mind works” or how you think it should be?

Ease up on the control.

And try to follow the advice you’ve been given instead.

@QFT: Other people are not buying into your reasoning because (1) your reasoning is invalid, (2) they don’t have to buy into your reasoning, and (3) they have already figured out valid ways that work for them.

Your way sucks. Theirs doesn’t.