|
Post by terrahawk on Apr 25, 2006 19:31:50 GMT -5
One of the first things I tell a girl when we start to date is that I in know way appreciate being manipulated, and if I sense she is doing so, I will give her the exact opposite of her desired result. Turn about's fair play right...be fore warned.
|
|
|
Post by sushiboat on Apr 25, 2006 19:50:44 GMT -5
People are evaluating each other all the time. People watch each others' actions and size them up. Men and women test each other. Anyone who has standards gives a test by the very act of applying those standards. If you can say, "I would never date a person who ______," then you have a test.
|
|
|
Post by aforgottenmemory on Apr 26, 2006 3:35:48 GMT -5
People are evaluating each other all the time. People watch each others' actions and size them up. Men and women test each other. Anyone who has standards gives a test by the very act of applying those standards. If you can say, "I would never date a person who ______," then you have a test. That isn't testing. A test would be to apply specific actions or say certain things in order to see how the other person will react. Obviously you both have standards. You're both there to see if you get along well and want the same things but it's pathetic to start throwing out "tests". I don't think many people do anyway, other than those who've read the rubbish you seem to have brought yourself up on Dating itself is a test of compatibility, but that's as far as this whole "test" theory goes.
|
|
|
Post by MrNice on Apr 26, 2006 8:37:11 GMT -5
sometimes in a form of a girl just trying to get something from the guy so she will act upset - and the guy will start running around her asking whats wrong. Its easy to criticise a 'girl like that' or 'what she does' and say well I wouldn't take that kind of behaviour, and everything is simple when you know all the facts before hand and are not involved. But when the girl that YOU HAVE FEELINGS for does this, you most probably will get upset too and give in to whatever she wants.
As for people obviously having standards - when feelings are involved standards start going out the window. ANd if the guy is desperate there is no standards to begin with.
|
|
|
Post by aforgottenmemory on Apr 26, 2006 10:24:13 GMT -5
sometimes in a form of a girl just trying to get something from the guy so she will act upset - and the guy will start running around her asking whats wrong. Its easy to criticise a 'girl like that' or 'what she does' and say well I wouldn't take that kind of behaviour, and everything is simple when you know all the facts before hand and are not involved. But when the girl that YOU HAVE FEELINGS for does this, you most probably will get upset too and give in to whatever she wants. As for people obviously having standards - when feelings are involved standards start going out the window. ANd if the guy is desperate there is no standards to begin with. You're twisting my words lsdima, that isn't what I meant. I'm only talking about someone you've only just started dating and don't know so well. It's still not a test of any kind!?If I was in a relationship with someone who used crying as a method of manipulating me then it would piss me off and probably end up in an argument. If she's genuinely upset then it would depend on how reasonable or not I thought she was being. For example, if I had spent all of last week with her and had plans to do something with a best friend for one night. Then she turns around and says she wants me to cancel my plans with my friend because she wants to spend the night with me. I wouldn't cancel my plans (in that scenario) even if she was upset. I'd feel bad yeah but to me that sounds fair enough. When you're in a relationship you learn what's important to one another (or you should) and while my girlfriend would take priority, my friends are still a major part of my life. It just depends on who you believe to be in the right or the wrong. Nothing to do with this great big biological gender difference some of you seem to think there is.
|
|
|
Post by sushiboat on Apr 26, 2006 11:29:01 GMT -5
If a woman looks straight at you, and you look away, that's a test. She probably doesn't think of it as a test. She does something, you respond, and she has learned a little about you. If she just comes out and asks whether you are confident or not, what answer is she going to hear most of the time? The answer that seems most desirable.
Anyone who has been around the block knows that people fudge the truth to make themselves look better. You can't rely solely on what people say about themselves. Just recently, someone here posted about fudging his resume by saying that he is a good communicator. The consensus, from both men and women, was that that was fine and reasonable. However, this guy will face a test. If he is looking at his feet during the interview or stuttering, etc., the interviewer will have doubts or perhaps even dismiss the claim entirely.
I bet that somebody is going to say that he/she is always 100% truthful and would never put up with anything less from others.
|
|
|
Post by aforgottenmemory on Apr 26, 2006 12:08:22 GMT -5
If a woman looks straight at you, and you look away, that's a test. She probably doesn't think of it as a test. She does something, you respond, and she has learned a little about you. If she just comes out and asks whether you are confident or not, what answer is she going to hear most of the time? The answer that seems most desirable. Anyone who has been around the block knows that people fudge the truth to make themselves look better. You can't rely solely on what people say about themselves. Just recently, someone here posted about fudging his resume by saying that he is a good communicator. The consensus, from both men and women, was that that was fine and reasonable. However, this guy will face a test. If he is looking at his feet during the interview or stuttering, etc., the interviewer will have doubts or perhaps even dismiss the claim entirely. I bet that somebody is going to say that he/she is always 100% truthful and would never put up with anything less from others. Oh the way you and lsdima find fault in the things I say simply astounds me, where did I say anything of the sort? Also can I just say how much I despise any argument revolving around the words , "Everybody knows that..." A job interview is a lot different from a date Sushiboat. A date is about making a friend (you know what I mean lsdima before you question me on it ) whereas an interviewer is looking to see if you're capable of working to a standard the company deems suitable. If it involves talking to people a lot then yes, they will look more at your body language, eye contact and how you present yourself in the whole interview. As for your example: STILL NOT A TEST!!! If a woman looks across the room at a man it isn't to see if he's confident or not, it's to try and get his attention. If he looks away, the turn off isn't him being unconfident. This is what I mean by women/men not finding the quality of confidence itself attractive but what it brings! If you were to look at someone, smile and they looked away you could read it a multitude of different ways. You could think they don't like you, you could think they were shy, you could think they were rude, you could think they were blind if you're that bloody arrogant! One thing I doubt though is that many people think, "Oh he's unconfident, that's a turn off"
|
|
|
Post by wagnerr on Apr 26, 2006 12:43:26 GMT -5
I don't think women conciously test men. No. Still, women are a lot more attentive to detail than men are. And i mean little details too, things the male eye is not trained to notice. So when a woman throws out a little comment to a man she's dating that night, it's to gain insight into his character and what he thinks. I don't think its necessarily meant to be a test. She's just trying to get to know the man in ways that he might not think relevant. She may be searching for some indicator of compatibility. Being able to look a woman straight in the eye is a good indicating factor for a lot of women, i think. But also with people in general too. Eye contact was once the toughest thing to do for me, and i suspect for a lot of shybies as well. But if you can look at people square in the eye and speak to them, that says a lot.
|
|
|
Post by MrNice on Apr 26, 2006 12:47:42 GMT -5
AFM, you are wrong about the interview - when people interview you, technical merit is just a portion of it - getting to know you as a person is just as important - if not more important. If you have a bad vibe they will not take you. Of course it varies from job to job - but when interviewing someone (and I have done this) you always think - would I like to work with (be around, communicate with, hang out with, talk to, solve problems with) this person? Its very similar to your regular social interaction.
you are still stuck in the 'what people think' land - its more of a vibe, a feeling. no - a woman does not look at a man thinking 'lets see, if he is confident he will look back' If someone is not confident/looks away it looks like they have something to hide or are afraid of something - its a bad vibe. You can call it a test or not - but if someone tries to talk to you (for example asks you on an interview what makes you a good communicator) and you look at your feet and start saying something incomprehensible - what impression will you make upon that person? Dating friendship interviewsing - its all social interaction, there are similarities and there are differences.
The first impression is the most important. This is where alot of tests happen. No, they are not like technical test where you get a score. That is just an analogy, however if you make a bad impression people will not want to be around you whether it is dating friendship or an interview.
|
|
|
Post by Crashtastic on Apr 26, 2006 12:53:05 GMT -5
If a woman looks straight at you, and you look away, that's a test. She probably doesn't think of it as a test. She does something, you respond, and she has learned a little about you. If she just comes out and asks whether you are confident or not, what answer is she going to hear most of the time? The answer that seems most desirable. Anyone who has been around the block knows that people fudge the truth to make themselves look better. You can't rely solely on what people say about themselves. Just recently, someone here posted about fudging his resume by saying that he is a good communicator. The consensus, from both men and women, was that that was fine and reasonable. However, this guy will face a test. If he is looking at his feet during the interview or stuttering, etc., the interviewer will have doubts or perhaps even dismiss the claim entirely. I bet that somebody is going to say that he/she is always 100% truthful and would never put up with anything less from others. You're insane. This is just arguing for the sake of it. What is the point...maybe you hide in the corner and jerk off afterward....other than this I have no idea why you would bother debating such little insignificant minuscule bullshit. Technically you could call these little human behaviors a test, but its just taking info that is provided by body language and forming an opinion about it (observation). In these instances used as example, no one is deliberately setting up the situation to get a result (testing).........blah blah blah...yadda yadda yadda.
|
|
|
Post by aforgottenmemory on Apr 26, 2006 12:53:55 GMT -5
Oh not you too Russ Even without the intent of testing I still don't think of it as a test at all. It isn't about standards or compatibility in that respect. It's just who is more approachable. I know shy people aren't comfortable going up and talking to anyone but who would you choose between these two people: Warm, smiley and chatty (qualities adopted through confidence) Cold, frowns and quiet (qualities adopted through unconfidence) You're testing to see if that person likes you back I guess but as far as i'm concerned, that's as far as it goes.
|
|
|
Post by wagnerr on Apr 26, 2006 13:04:36 GMT -5
Oh not you too Russ Even without the intent of testing I still don't think of it as a test at all. It isn't about standards or compatibility in that respect. It's just who is more approachable. I know shy people aren't comfortable going up and talking to anyone but who would you choose between these two people: Warm, smiley and chatty (qualities adopted through confidence) Cold, frowns and quiet (qualities adopted through unconfidence) You're testing to see if that person likes you back I guess but as far as i'm concerned, that's as far as it goes. I don't think women try to subject men to physical and psychological examinations while on a date, no. But i do think women throw out little remarks at times to get feedback. I'm not sure why they do this, but oh well, who knows? I suspect men do it too, but i'm not aware of doing this myself.
|
|
|
Post by aforgottenmemory on Apr 26, 2006 13:19:01 GMT -5
AFM, you are wrong about the interview - when people interview you, technical merit is just a portion of it - getting to know you as a person is just as important - if not more important. If you have a bad vibe they will not take you. Of course it varies from job to job - but when interviewing someone (and I have done this) you always think - would I like to work with (be around, communicate with, hang out with, talk to, solve problems with) this person? Its very similar to your regular social interaction. Why do you keep taking the things I address specifically and make out as though i'm talking about it as a whole? Yes you're right there, I never said otherwise. But interviewers don't take people on just because they like you, they do if you show you're capable in every aspect. lsdima wrote:I'm not lsdima. I understand that completely, much like I said in my last post about who was more approachable. I know people don't "think" along those lines but you wouldn't look across a room at someone looking specifically to see if that person was confident enough to smile back. You'd simply be hoping they would because it gives you the green flag to go and talk to them. It's warm, it's friendly. An interviewer however is looking for certain qualities in someone to hire. Yes it's important to show them you're a likeable person as well but the two are still not comparable. An interviewer is testing you, someone you're dating isn't. They test to see if they like you but again...as I keep saying...that's as far as it goes in my opinion. The ones who manipulate I can see through and quite frankly question why they even bother. We do actually think along similar lines on this lsdima it's just you've misunderstood me for the most part, possibly through fault of my own
|
|
|
Post by aforgottenmemory on Apr 26, 2006 13:31:18 GMT -5
If a woman looks straight at you, and you look away, that's a test. She probably doesn't think of it as a test. She does something, you respond, and she has learned a little about you. If she just comes out and asks whether you are confident or not, what answer is she going to hear most of the time? The answer that seems most desirable. Anyone who has been around the block knows that people fudge the truth to make themselves look better. You can't rely solely on what people say about themselves. Just recently, someone here posted about fudging his resume by saying that he is a good communicator. The consensus, from both men and women, was that that was fine and reasonable. However, this guy will face a test. If he is looking at his feet during the interview or stuttering, etc., the interviewer will have doubts or perhaps even dismiss the claim entirely. I bet that somebody is going to say that he/she is always 100% truthful and would never put up with anything less from others. You're insane. This is just arguing for the sake of it. What is the point...maybe you hide in the corner and jerk off afterward....other than this I have no idea why you would bother debating such little insignificant minuscule bullshit. Technically you could call these little human behaviors a test, but its just taking info that is provided by body language and forming an opinion about it (observation). In these instances used as example, no one is deliberately setting up the situation to get a result (testing).........blah blah blah...yadda yadda yadda. Thankyou Crash! I agree. *skips away*
|
|
|
Post by MrNice on Apr 26, 2006 13:37:30 GMT -5
lol, I guess you are really intelligent and can see right through people and all those people that end up in a relationship with the wrong person are not as smart as you are perhaps its the shyness that gives us this unique ability to see when we are being manipulated
also you chose to ignore the point I was making about how when you actually fall for the person all reasoning goes out the window
|
|