CW : sexual heteronormativity
Men and women reject prospective partners in different ways.
In both situations, we find reactions which range from graceful to chaotic. So it is meaningless to pin fragility in relationships on either gender.
Why do YOU go on dates?
I think a lot of people have many layers of secrets / sensitivity, so they date to admit people to privileged layers. The only privilege I have to offer to dates is in my pants.
All other privileges are already available to everyone else ... LOL ... not just dates
Most of my daily work involves reading, writing, and rewriting notes. Meanwhile the other aspects of my brain are monitoring my physiology : comfort of breath, resolution and throughput of conscious sensory data ( peripheral and imaginary buffers ), latency of motor ( peripheral space ) and imaginative ( imaginative space ) response to intent, need for food, need for hormonal stimulation downstream from physical stimulation.
I also think about girls - but not in terms of pornographic sex, for the most part - which is how people joke about what men think about in their free time. Mostly I just miss the pretty ones, and their emotional uncertainties which they presented as interfaces for me to add value - obviously this is quite superficial too, and I suppose it is a component of sex. Maybe I should be thinking about girls in terms of their organisational strengths and contributions to co-work : but I tend to think that's a given : I generally don't associate with people except when I know what they are useful for. Likewise I don't expect to be useful to others people unless they derive value from our interactions.
Strange things I've encountered in the dating environment :
1. People who have a thought, and presume that you have the same thought, without an explicit discussion.
This is generally bad, bad, news, as it establishes all sorts of runny foundations for activity that needs to be worked out later. The best thing to do generally is to say, "hold up, we need to talk about this". This is problematic with people who don't like to talk about things, enjoy being in moments without risk management, and who are only turned on when their verbal faculties are turned off. Bad, bad news. Recommend to avoid.
2. People who have presumptions about what vague words like "relationship", "love", "feelings", "loyalty" mean, and how they are reified in practice. Recommend to discuss.
Safer things I've encountered :
3. People who know what they want.
4. People who know what they don't want.
This is a non-exclusive list, whereas it would be nice to have a MECE framework, I'm just jotting this down between other work. Might get back to it later.
Tell me you're a full-stack
As dreamspace recoheres with soma
You realise sensorimotor reconnection
Calibrations, eyelids, fingertips, knees, and toes
Friction of sheets, floor beneath feet
Rules of physics still work the way you thought they do
Check
Deocclusion with tissues, phase change of edibles
Eggs scrambled in the microwave
Bread from the freezer, turned to toast
Nuts from a jar, pills from a box, coffee in a cup
Macros, sub-macros, mineral adjustments, stimulants, flavinoids
Check
Girls from the swipey swipe, neighbourly noises in Whatsapp
Three apps by Meta, three by Match, LinkedIn by MSFT
Bumble, CoffeeMeetsBagel, Telegram, Discord, Slack
Inboxes checked
Electricity flows through wired lines
Radio waves through space and time
Channel hops, subcarrier slots, symbols, control plane, data frame
IP packet, UDP, TCP, HTTP, window manager, compositor
Character device, kernel driver, interrupt, context switch, registers
Pages, segments, containerisation
Check
Stocks, bonds, commodities, swaps, saddles, currencies
Distributed infrastructure, consensus protocol
Neural network, Turing model, group theoretic category
Miscellaneous topology, stochastic parrot
Stochastic parrot, stochastic parrot
Check
Tell me you are full-stack
"Sex is good, but have you ever been around someone whose presence regulates your nervous system?"
After several years of dating, I've realised that these people are my largest expense. I don't want to regulate your system - regulate it yourself.
On Threads : I am bored ( reading about computer networking ). So the following posts may contain poetry. Please do NOT report all my posts for "send help" kthx
---
I miss young love, there was one who loved, not me, but the world, and I was part of that world that passed before her, and we knew each other, there was hardly sex, mainly wonder, and feeling, in her, and in I only a gracious participation in what I did not design.
---
I miss love worn thin, there was one who loved, not me, but themself, and I played to the script of their life, and wove my steps into their waning curiosity, and we wore upon each other, the fleeting hours of souls that had other things to do.
---
I miss shy love, there was one who loved, not me, but another, and I was all they had to hold, and strip, and suck, consumed, but hardly satisfying, and I could not become the one who wasn't there, and then we were also not.
---
I miss sad love, there was one who had lost, but could not find it in themselves to accept the ordinary circumstances of loss, and so we briefly touched upon our common abnormalities, and without compassion, we each saddened ourselves in separate ways, together.
---
I miss quiet love, there was one who found me in the space where stories are told and dreams are sold, and for a time we fell beside each other, but without any common equity, we busied ourselves with other loves and solitude.
---
I miss distant love, there was one who came to see me, and then I to see her, and then the word fell apart, and we came to see others, but once upon a time, we saw again each other, and now we see others, till another time. ---
I miss simple love, there was one who lived beside me, and without others to love we came to keep each other, when we were close, we would simply wonder what we were to do with each other.
---
I miss loud love, there was one who didn't cry, but rather raged, in fits of endless soliloquy, about the brokenness of our spheres and the breakers who would torment them in their sleep, I could only weep, dry tears, and rescind myself.
---
I miss mellowed love, there was one who had their share of many, and of more than could possibly be in the days we spent together, and yet they welcomed me as part of their delight, in the endless acceptance of what was not absolutely fitting to be.
---
I miss spurned love, there was one who wrought the world in their way, with attention to powers that were, and the horror of daring to do what they sought in a city that could never give them more than what they made, on their own, with their negligent lovers.
---
Of all the loves I miss, I miss having a clear view of what I want to know about the world, so I am going back to read now, computer networking.
I had a friend from highschool who decided I was one to tell things to. She would call me up and surprise me with stories about her sex life on a different continent. I wasn't sure what to make it of it, so I just kinda uhuh-ed a lot.
Later on in life, I finally decided I had time to have a sex life. I casually asked if she wanted to have sex with me, and (pretty much) never heard from her again.
I'm sure she was traumatised because she wasn't expecting it from me. But what was she expecting?
1. Many men, hurt many women
2. Many women have PTSD, from men
3a. Some men believe in compensating for (1.) and fixing (2.), so they are making an extra effort. Good for them!
3b. Some men, don't align with (3a.) and won't take the time to fix women that other men broke. I would say, good for them also!
This will always be controversial. But it's economics. There's a huge market for (3a.) type relationships, and for some women, that's all they want in life. Go get'em, ladies. Such men exist.
https://www.threads.net/@_jerng/post/DHknmbTT4od?
If you're sick of the product, try this.
( I'm just repeating what I tell my bestie. )
---
Ground Zero : before you start matching, make sure you've checked all these boxes :
- your profile states WHAT you want, and HOW a reader can get it
- your profile shows WHO you are, so a reader can WANT it
- it's really important to get this right, we'll see why below
---
Pro-tip : expect desperados ... loads of men are going to try to match you WITHOUT READING YOUR PROFILE ... and even more are going to match you even if they think your profile doesn't match.
- that's just the nature of the game : straight women match 30% of their swipes, straight men match 0.03%, about a 100x difference
- but you got this : because ( Ground Zero : you already anchored )
- alrighty, now you're looking at an inbox full of ???, let's blitz through ways to knock'em out ASAP
---
if you're into guys that READ : just start deleting matches that sound like they didn't read your profile. IT'S THAT EASY !
did the boys do their homework? Go back and look at that Ground Zero prep above :
- does their profile state WHAT they want, and HOW you can get it?
- does their profile shows WHO they are, and do you WANT it?
- No? DELETE HIS ASS. It's that easy.
---
do you feel like you're doing all the work in the chat? Are they too quiet / monosyllabic / antagonising? DELETE HIS ASS. You ain't got time for this.
At this point, anyone who's left is has at least established superficial mutual interest. Now're getting to the serious parts of the interview.
---
Dig deeper, and get dug. Ask about stuff they wrote in their Ground Zero - are you getting to know them better? Are they cagey / unexpressive? NO => DELETE.
Are they asking you about your Ground Zero - are they bothering to find out what you're about? NO => DELETE.
At this point, what's left is probably good for more chats online or over coffee ( or whatever you fancy ).
Next : how do you figure out who's LYING, and/or CONFUSED, and/or UNCERTAIN about their own interests? Drama!
---
Epistemology : "fact checking".
now you're looking for stuff they said, that doesn't make sense.
You're asking for REIFICATION : they said SOMETHING, but can you get some examples of SOMETHING?
You're looking for COHERENCE : they said A THING, but that doesn't fit THE OTHER THING they said. Can you get some clarification?
When they can't reify or be coherent, you're looking to find out why : are they in need of help ( delete if you don't wanna help ), or lyin?
---
Here's your chance to weed out some fuckbois.
Facts : Sex is fun, but not everyone wants the same thing. Loads of guys are lying to get sex. Loads more are playing Mr. Nice Guy, but they aren't so nice after it's done.
---
if you WANT sex, then talk to men about sex. Don't dodge the subject. If you DON'T WANT it, then just tell them you're not interested in sex.
- talk to men about WHY THEY like sex. Ask them what THEY ENJOY about sex
- TACTICAL : find out what they're PROUD of, PRAISE them on it, let them BABBLE : you're looking for intent
A: the dude likes sex, because he feels good
B: the dude likes sex, because he likes making his partner feel good
Retain B. DELETE A.
JFDI. You got this. The end
---
My relationship green flags are :
V-day fills social media with questions about how to confess love. I wrote a short op-sec checklist for an anonymous enquirer, presumably not female, who asked about female behaviour.
There are some questions that come before the answers you seek.
After you already lock all this down, it's much easier to answer the original questions ( roughly ) :
Regardless of business, or pleasure. ( Some view pleasure as a variety of business. )
I view the entire culture of getting into relationships assuming the best of the other person as a patriarchal weaponisation of emotional vulnerabilities built into the genome. Regardless of gender, I think folks need to formalise expectations in as much detail as possible before getting attached, formally or informally. That's the point of dating.
I understand if people want to maintain a culture that normalises an altruistic baseline which should be taken for granted. But it's horrible risk management, and I would never recommend that assumption as a matter of operational security.
This theme dominates most of the conversations I have with people, on dates, and about dating, these days.
LOL
Introduction
The purpose of this note is to provide some guidance for people, who are neither social butterflies nor prudish hermits, for the times when they may find themselves attending social events in an uncertain context. ( That is to say, you don't need to read any further if you already know how to behave in public, or if you never venture into public spaces. ) Perhaps you've decided to broaden your circles for business or pleasure, or you're the reluctant plus-one at someone else's party, or ... you just find yourself, from time to time, facing uncertainty in the public sphere. Well hopefully, this will help you out at least a little bit. In this article, the uncertain human subject will be referred to as an Attendee.
Foundation / Context
As always, before deciding "what one should do," ( ethics ), one must try to lay down the "what one is concerned with," ( ontology ). A presumption then is that the Attendee is reasonably conscious of what other humans are doing, and that the Attendee already takes a limited interest in certain other people's lives for one reason or another - whether they are blood-relations, neighbours cavorted with, or people the Attendee is potentially buying something from or selling something to.
Next, what actually ARE parties? Well parties are simply groups of people ... doing anything. But what then differentiates parties from non-parties? Broadly speaking, NOTHING - going to work is as much a party in the broad sense as lounging, with naked people over glasses of champagne, or in formal dress over someone's bungled baking experiments. [1]
Nevertheless, it is understood that parties have a teleological dimension ... they are more, or less, purposeful. When the purpose is to have FUN, the admitted scope of activities is broader; when the purpose is to get something DONE, the admitted scope of activities is narrower. [2] Often enough, it is the Attendee's discomfort with the PRESUMED PURPOSE of the party, which invokes in the Attendee the sort of cognitive dissonance, which concerns this article. ( See "I have nothing to offer," below. )
And people being people ... we must always remember that individuals have specific socio-psychical mechanics operating in their heads. [3] A detailed study of social psychology and emotional well-being is beyond the scope of this article, but this sentence serves as a pointer to further study, for the reader.
In a Nutshell / Abstract
An Attendee, by definition, plays the following game : the Attendee must triangulate between the minds of Other attendees they meet. Whereas, for each Other attendee, the Attendee acknowledges
- the common humanity of the Other attendee [3],
- the Other attendee's view of themselves and their relationship to the purpose of the party [2], and
- the sustainability of the party and its purpose as a whole [1] environment.
Problem Statement : "I have nothing to offer."
Nearly the most common cause of anxiety is ... a forecast that the Attendee will expend energy in vain, leading to a recurring hesitation of commitment to engage with the party. The two components of this are of course, an incompatibility with the purpose of the party [2], or an incompatibility with the social needs of the Other attendees [3].
Attendees who find themselves incompatible with a the main purpose of a party, often can participate meaningfully by appealing to the common social needs of Other attendees; and Attendees who find themselves incompatible with the common social needs of Others, may focus instead on pursuing the discernible purposes of the party. People who have issues with BOTH [2] and [3] typically avoid parties, so we shan't address them in this particular article.
Example A : family reunions
Nothing holds a family together, except a common respect for norms. Therefore a family party [1] is defined by its activation of norms, habits, rituals, traditions, buzz, and humdrum.
Example B : business networking
"Networking events", without further qualification, are a major source of revenue for event and facilities managers ( corresponding to a pure expense upon shareholders of businesses ). While the purpose of such events is often vague, leaving many Attendees to regress to general partying [3], the most productive Attendees will instead focus on harvesting new INFORMATION, and developing new RELATIONSHIPS with Other attendees [2], which is the implicit commercial utility of any and all parties in general.
In reflection it can be said that the productivity of a business networking event arises not so much from who attends, as much as it arises from the ( natural or trained ) talent of attendees to conduct research, and develop business opportunities. Each of these talents deserves its own article, but there are already many on the Internet for each.
Example C : intimate parties
"The less said the better," is a general consensus among partygoers engaged in discreet and controversial activity - however this generates an unnecessary veil of mystery about such events which can be discomforting to the uninitiated. ( See "I have nothing to offer," above. ) Yet, many parties which allow intimacy do not require it of all attendees.
Rather such parties serve as an otherwise ordinary environments where general partying [3] take place. Often, those present are ordinary people who celebrate epicurean values ... and a lifestyle about things such as travel, food, music, fashion, and various forms of content. An Attendee can engage Other attendees on any and all of these subjects, just as conversation occurs at any other party.
Then, if there is intimate attraction, it may or may not come up naturally, as it does in any other setting. If intimate attraction is not mutual, the Attendee simply bats it away, and sets reasonable expectations. The key to managing a counterparty's mood is of course, to shit-sandwich any avoidance of intimacy with a genuine interest in something else that the counterparty is interested in chatting about. Otherwise, as in all social interactions, once an absence of mutual interest is encountered, individuals may politely take their leave of each other.
Attendees with professional experience in other areas, may apply an economic lens to their party operations. An Attendee may can view intimate parties as events where the Attendee is there to shop themselves around as a product.
But you don't talk about the product. You just examine the players in the market, as they observe you, the product. Then you reflect upon it, in order to understand what they want, and what they are willing to give for it. You can talk about anything with the prospective individuals, or with anyone at the party ... except your own availability.
You can ask them what they like, or whether they are having a good time, etc. If they ask what you are looking for, you can say you're just there to make friends, but immediately counter with an exploratory question about something that interests them.
Conclusion
For people who don't naturally party, all partying is work, but I think it can become a second nature for any caring person who practices, the art of the party.
Today's Whatsapp counselling session took nearly three hours. I am concerned about my friends' anxieties, and will accommodate chats to discuss their concerns.
Sometimes their concerns are criticisms of my behaviour, and I simply check that my friends understand me correctly, and that they see me for what I am. If they truly understand my point of view, then they should expect me to provide the same outputs each time they provide a particular input, and it would be futile for them to repeat their same point over and over again. Once I am convinced that someone talking to me is fixed in their ways, I will usually leave them be, with less engagement, as there are few avenues to help them become less anxious.
Here are some points raised, and my common responses :
1. "Jerng complains a lot ... " : I need to coach myself to be better - as no one else is going to do it for me. There are very few days of my life not dreaded, lol. Life is just a long wait. So I enjoy complaining. It is my culture. The lyricists I grew up with were Billy Corgon and Thom Yorke, so go figure - I suppose I'm juve that way.
2. "... on social media." : Well social media is efficient - minimum effort, maximum reach. What better way is there to manage one's relationship with others in general? Bear in mind that I tend to find individuals boring, and I am more curious about how to engage with the species as a whole.
3. "Jerng is contradictory about liking money, and making fun of people who like money." : Money bores me ... I try to get as much of it with minimal effort, while focusing my time on stuff that can't be obtained with money ( usually learning stuff, or some other cognitive gymnastics ). I love complaining about money, because it irritates people. QED, I like being irritating. Be the change.
4. "Jerng is irritating." Well if everyone annoys me, it's only fair that I annoy everyone back. I do like to remind people to be more irritated by themselves - because generally people aren't as irritated with themselves as I'd like them to be. I do it because they would become the kind of people I like. Be the change.
5. "Jerng thinks he is special, and all his acquaintances refer to him as weird." Yes, it's quite on brand for me. I haven't reached the point where EVERYONE refers to me as a creep. Hopefully I can balance the irritation levels to avoid that. QED - the democratic opinion is that I am special.
6. "Jerng is special, in a disordered/disabled fashion." Given that I intentionally irritate people - I think it's a matter of who, how much, when, and where.
7. "Jerng receives more commentary from ladies." Not to be sexist but ...
8. "Jerng appears to want to get rid of his friends." I appreciate my friends, but there's a limit : everyone's disposable ... so I definitely don't appreciate old friends in the way many people appreciate old friends, as in they are classified as a non-disposable group.
9. "How would you know new friends are better than old?" The new friends are better simply because they are new, lol. People generally bore me, so it's a matter of freshening the air.
10. "Jerng is not that exciting to begin with. " I'm not trying to be exciting ... I am trying to be excited, there is a difference.
11. "Jerng writes about his love life." I write about my social life in general. If you want to call it love life, you may, but I don't think about it that way. If it is love life, then my love life with Malaysia is the general superset which I refer to mostly. Individuals I write about just happen to be part of the local scene.
12. "Jerng never faults himself." Who's looking to blame anyone? I just say life sucks, I'll deal with it.
13. "Jerng lacks accountability." One has to agree on an accounting standard, before that can be discussed. Most of us probably disagree on standards, but we rush to discuss accountability.
14. "Jerng takes opportunities with people, and emotionally abuses them." My point of view is that I'm doing other people a favour - some are needy, some are not. Some ask for help, some are offered help even if they do not ask. The audacity! Why not?
15. "People who can make it financially, wouldn't even bat an eyelid at Jerng." People should be financially independent, and care less about people like me. We agree.
16. "Jerng is abusive." I refuse intimacy, and I offer it. The frequency of this varies from counterparty to counterparty. I am here to remind people that they are responsible for what they want, and they can choose what they want.
17. "Telling people to get their own place is bait." If someone has their own home, they can see whomever they want to see, it's about THEIR FREEDOM. I need not be involved.
18. "Jerng gaslights people." People can say things I disagree with, but if they are asserting things I disagree with - they can be said to be gaslighting me - we simply disagree.
19. "Jerng gets people addicted to intimacy." If two people are discussing intimacy, and are intimate once, or twice, it does not mean there is anything beyond that. The point of social interaction is to understand other people - that is the entire enterprise of meeting new people.
20. "Letting people into your home is a laborious form of charity." Some people are averse to sleeping with strangers, and letting strangers into their homes. It is a big deal for them. Not all of us feel it is a big deal. I like strangers.
21. "Jerng hurts people." The way I see it, he only way to reduce being hurt in the long run is for person to become independent. So all the short-term "miss this," "care that", "want this", "want that" ... is trivial, and I don't mind running over it with a truck. I can only advise - if someone disagrees, they will discard my advice.
22. "Who is Jerng to advise anyone?" The notion of "who are you" is usually used by people who would assume that "who a person is, affects what they can do", but I don't have this limitation ( on myself ) for the most part ... the notion of "who" is trivial. I simply do what I like. What I am, is a person that does what they like, and I encourage others to do the same - and I discourage others, who tell others not to do it. That is "who" I am. I am the person they are talking to - that is all I care - if they don't want to talk to me, they block me - simple enough. And one day maybe, I will go to jail for talking. That is also ok. It is all in the plan.
23. "Nobody likes laws like Jerng." The law is something written - the interpretation is up to the judiciary - and there are executive operations which are independent of both items above. So we can die by many means of governance. One does not need to be a politician - anyone can be targeted by ordinary governance and end up in jail - that is a fact.
24. "People ask why anyone is friends with Jerng." You know, I find them very cute, right? Because they are the masses that I irritate. It is their loss if they are suffering. I simply bring more suffering, until they block me, or change. It is easy to focus on an agenda, if one does not care who agrees or disagrees with it.
25. "People just thing Jerng is peculiar and likes attention." Well I need to find some sort of entertainment in this life. So that's it. It is better to stick out like a sore thumb, and be a pest, than to put up with common tastes.
26. "Some people like Jerng." Good for them, I hope it makes them happy. I try to ignore them as it distracts me from my objectives ... of being irritating.
27. "Jerng is a source of trauma, and trauma solutions." I leave the appreciation to the audience, I only want the problems - and will go find more problems after solving old ones.
28. "Jerng only calls at night, at his convenience, when he has no other companions." Agreed, I prefer to sleep with a companion - but I have little other interest in people - hence I prefer if companions are self-absorbed also, with similar needs.
29. "Jerng needs to be loved." I'm more oriented to be focused on being ok with being hated. :D So it is incompatible with people focused on being loved. Matter of policy. I don't mind being loved - but it's not policy to prioritise it. For some people, it is. For some people it is not. I am on the nots.
30. "Jerng sells vague promises." I pretty much tell people that I like cuddles and conversation. The details they can find out as they go. 1. Don't over promise. 2. Over deliver. 3. Don't take what wasn't signed for. 1 and 3 go together. Explicit > implicit. It's clearer if you get into details. The world is full of fools who don't do details - I will not play their game. To my advantage? Precisely why they are fools. What is it to me?
31. "Accountability." Attachment is a problem to be solved by the person who is attached. That's my guideline for people. It's quite an ancient concept. The word accountability is thrown around like water - to be accountable for the use of the word, one has to be more detailed about how it is used. See related point 13. If it bugs you, take it to court - that is the standard of accountability.
The problem with sexual objectification is not about objectification - it's categorically-selective objectification which is the problem.
I'm in full support of holistic, diversified, multi-pronged objectification ... and I don't think that's much of an issue.
