@cubicgarden so this is the answer. Manipulate people into falling in love with you. It's where I'm going wrong.
Ah Valentines day, the day when us singletons are meant to feel crap about the fact we are alone and unloved? Bollox, I feel great and to be honest it feels like any other day, except I imagine most restaurants will be overpriced and booked up? Brunch in Pimlico, London wasn’t… (I even said to a female friend I would love to meet up for brunch while I was down in London, forgetting it was valentines day, thats how much I care about the moneymaking day)
And its the whole, how you should be living you’re life which slightly winds me up, just like the follow my steps and this will work for you.
More than 20 years ago, the psychologist Arthur Aron succeeded in making two strangers fall in love in his laboratory. Last summer, I applied his technique in my own life, which is how I found myself standing on a bridge at midnight, staring into a man’s eyes for exactly four minutes.
I already had enough problems with most of the 36 questions and the setup… For example.
6. If you were able to live to the age of 90 and retain either the mind or body of a 30-year-old for the last 60 years of your life, which would you want?
What? Seriously when would you bring that up? Why would you bring that up? What would you ultimately learn from it which isn’t a binary state?
Now I admit some of them are pretty good and I have been known to ask at speed dating, of my own mind (I knew nothing of the 36 questions)
30. When did you last cry in front of another person? By yourself?
Which I ask as… Tell me the last time you cried?
The problem with most of these is the context and the answers will sometimes be almost useless. If it was more about picking and choosing from a few of these questions or a general guide it wouldn’t be so bad. Frankly besides the science (yeah I can’t believe I said that too, but bear with me) its not exactly much more than another buzzfeed list, which funny enough got the force of the community against it.
Just like the buzzfeedy list… there was always going to be trouble around the corner.
— Chris Northwood (@cnorthwood) February 13, 2015
I had enough of this frankly bollox advice things… The problem seems to exist not because the science is wrong, although I could argue they are trying to quantify the unquantifiable. Nope its taking the science and then trying to boil it down to a easy to digest list for us common folk to follow. F-that! and F-them for doing the science a great injustice!
If you start the experiment with …
Let me acknowledge the ways our experiment already fails to line up with the study. First, we were in a bar, not a lab. Second, we weren’t strangers. Not only that, but I see now that one neither suggests nor agrees to try an experiment designed to create romantic love if one isn’t open to this happening.
Then whats the bloody point? You might as well just pick and choose the questions, modify some and do you’re own thing. Yes I understand it doesn’t sell adverts/papers but frankly I get sick of these pre-subscribed nonsense. Say this and you will get this, if this then that, because humans are well known for acting exactly the same to the same input.
Its worth saying I’m not against advice but there is a big difference between
4. Keep it fresh – Avoid the Yes/No game with light-hearted open questions. Chat matters know “who, what and how” yield greater results than “me, myself and I” But tread lightly, nobody wants a grilling.
– All bar one’s guide to flirting from Flirtology
and ask this question:
13. If a crystal ball could tell you the truth about yourself, your life, the future or anything else, what would you want to know?
Generic pointers are far more useful when dealing with the unquantifiable. Directed or rather specific advice will get you specific results and only work in specific conditions. Unless you can recreate the whole experiment then why even bring it up? Plus if you go back to the start, don’t tell me exactly what to do! That is no way to live life, feel the joy and energy of life in the opportunities which arise out of mistakes and being adventurous.
— Tony Churnside (@TonyChurnside) February 11, 2015
Tony asks my view on pplkpr.
pplkpr is an app that tracks, analyzes, and auto-manages your relationships. Using a smartwatch, pplkpr monitors your physical and emotional response to the people around you, and optimizes your social life accordingly.
Well at least its not a complete system, it works with other wearable devices.
pplkpr has been extensively tested with the Mio wristband, but any Bluetooth LE (also called Bluetooth Smart or Bluetooth 4.0) device that transmits heart rate in real time will work. This includes the Polar H7 chest band and the Zephyr HxM.
Big crowd gathering for my talk at Love, Sex and alienation event in Manchester pic.twitter.com/RyCV9TjpLd
— Rosie Wilby (@rosiewilby) November 16, 2014
What are relationships? Why do we seek them out, and how can they enrich our lives? Spring invites you to a thoughtful matinee discussion on the borders and nuances of human interaction. From anthropological, biological, social and philosophical perspectives this event will explore the sticky and personal terrain of love, sex and alienation. What do human relationships have the potential to be? What do they look like when they’re going well?
The speakers were… Rosie Wilby and Don Milligan
It was the first time I had ever been to a spring and to be honest first time I had really heard of them. The subject reminded me of geekstalksexy event we put on years ago. Rosie talked about her experience and feelings about non-monogamy, as she did for BBC Radio 4 and elsewhere a while ago.
This view point on non-monogamy didn’t go down quite as smoothly as I thought it would with quite a left leaning audience. To be fair the spectrum of non-monogamy was boiled down to pretty much cheating or poly (we all know theres so much more to this field). The conflict was moved up a level when someone suggested that there was no way you could get the same level of love from multiple people and that you maybe poly people might be wasting their lives trying.
This was seriously upsetting and as a non-poly person, even I was slightly shocked at this. Thankfully a lady passionately responded and made the person rethink their narrow view.
Rosie then made the excellent point that even if you don’t think its for you, we must be supportive of peoples choices. She compared it to what people said in the 80’s and 90’s about queer people and the feminism movement right now. And she was dead right!
We must support peoples rights to make well informed decisions about what works for them. If that be serial monogamy, non-monogamy or anything else. As long as its not harmful to others and everybody involved are giving informed consent (something we talked a lot about on LoveGrumps yesterday which you unfortunately won’t ever hear due to the bandwidth issues we experienced).
Rosie was full of good points and she made one about communication and having the confidence ask for what you want and don’t want. I was going to make the point that its usually a relationship break up when the people involved stop communicating.
Then the talk turned to children, logical families, emotional faithfulness, assumptions about relationships and what we learn from media about relationships. A lot of ground was covered and likewise Manchester Spring looks like a interesting place for these types of conversations.
Something Rosie said stuck with me long afterwards. It was the nature of love affair friendships. She made the point that she has a friend who she only watches films with, a close friend she goes out with, another one she knows is really into something she loves, etc, etc. The instant answer is… “yes but those don’t involve having sex/sleeping with them?” But is a relationship not complete without sex? Who are you to say the relationship I have with my friends and family doesn’t count? Point is, could it unrealistic to expect one person to fill all those roles. Maybe Helen Fisher is right? lust, attraction and attachment can be/is better achieved by multiple people?
I am personally not poly, into open relationships or anything on the map of non-monogamy but know quite a few people who are and considered what it would be like for myself personally. Could I really cope, would I end up jealous and twisted, do I have the maturity to really say what I want? Its a interesting one. Maybe we are more non-monogamous than we actually think?
One thing for sure is I wanted to talk about what a interesting weekend I had, but found it difficult to talk about it in a frank and open way. The idea of non-monogamy is still cast in the murky world of the unknown, maybe its time to be honest with ourselves and stop living the hollywood dream. Maybe we’ll feel so much better for doing so?
It’s a simple question and a common one — one whose answer could determine the fates of both a multi-billion dollar industry and millions of lonely hearts. It’s a question that seems distinctly answerable: we have user data, surveys, clear metrics for success or failure, entire books full of colorful charts.
And yet, just this week, a new analysis from Michigan State University found that online dating leads to fewer committed relationships than offline dating does — that it doesn’t work, in other words. That, in the words of its own author, contradicts a pile of studies that have come before it.
Well the new analysis by Michigan State, leads nowhere new. The answer to the question is complex…
We don’t actually know.
Some of the reasons for that ambiguity are clear in this latest study. For starters, there’s this greater cultural issue of how we define relationship success: Is it marriage? Is it monogamy, a la Patti Stanger? Is it what OkCupid’s data team calls a “fourway” — four messages back and forth between two semi-interested parties? That’s a tough one to parse, and different studies have defined it different ways
So the success criteria isn’t clear but if one thing was clear it would be around matching algorithms.
Most paid sites claim, for instance, that it’s their highly scientific matching algorithms that lead people to serious relationships; in his 2013 book on the subject, however, the journalist Dan Slater concludes that most of those claims are bunk. (“Everyone knows that all personality profiling is bull****,” a former Match executive told him. “As a marketing hook, it works great.”)
In reality, dating sites are most effective as a kind of virtual town square — a place where random people whose paths wouldn’t otherwise cross bump into each other and start talking. That’s not much different from your neighborhood bar, except in its scale, ease of use and demographics.
Hence the popularity and rise of the social dating apps and services.
It was my ex-wife Sarah who introduced me to Dan Savage many years ago. She use to listen to his radio show and podcasts about life and relationships. Ever since I have kept a ear out for his insightful notes on relationships and life.
Paying the price of admission is a fascinating idea.
…the personal sacrifices, large and small, that make long-term relationships possible. For some, the price of admission—what it costs to ride a particular ride—includes “taming one’s sexual desire for the sake of another.”
The price of admission sounds a lot more like a neutral and when ever I hear it, I think roller coasters and that can’t be a bad thing…. *smile*
The other thing I find fascinating about the price of admission is the notion of act as if or fake it till you make it.
…the idea is to go through the routines of life as if one were enjoying them, despite the fact that initially it feels forced, and continue doing this until the happiness becomes real. This is an example of a positive feedback loop.
Its makes clear sense when thinking about one person but is really interesting when thinking both people in a relationship is doing this for the benefit of their partner first and themselves secondly.
The short talk I did for Primeconf is now live like most of the talks on the site. I blogged about the conference here already but its funny looking at the talk from a audience point of view. Not only because there is a 3min section which is dropped in to cover some technical problem, but also because I now notice the lack of smooth transitions between sections. Putting in the books as reference was somewhat missed too, which is a shame.
I didn’t know I was running over, as the mac timer said 6:50 mins when I finished. I certainly wouldn’t have elaborated on certain areas if I knew the time. Its always best to have a countdown clock somewhere very visible for speakers. Must remember to never trust a mac with keynote…¿
So as a whole and based on the fact it is a subset of a much deeper talk. Its not bad. It would be good to explore in more detail some of the sections and bring in some of the video evidence I have. But alas that’s for another day maybe…
At breakfast today with Chris and Kat, we were talking about previous people we’ve been out with and the question of chemistry. I mentioned the eye of the beholder and how everyone has a different things they like. Therefore the chemistry is going to be different too.
Kat agreed and gave a great example, which I hadn’t ever thought about.
Do you think people who you found attractive become almost ugly at certain times? Like if they cheat on you…?
And she makes a great point. Perception is a interesting thing. Someone which seems great, then becomes tainted because of their actions. And I think Tainted is the right word too, because it becomes impossible to see them as attractive again ever after. No matter what people say or think.
BroApp is your clever relationship wingman. Select your girlfriend’s number, create some sweet messages, and set the time of day when you want those messages sent. BroApp takes care of the rest.
The android only (at the moment) app will send your partner sweet nothings on an automated schedule. It has some nice features like it can use geofencing to not send messages when your too close to your home for example. As a whole, its a very cut down version of tasker or locale. Both can be setup to do this and a whole ton of other things.
I won’ t lie when I first came across it, I laughed out loud and the video makes it sound even worst!
Its easily laughable but i wonder about how far off is broapp from FB or G+ suggesting you say happy birthday to a friend? Automation of human relationships is uncomfortable but a interesting point. No one likes to know they are part of an automated process but maybe once we get over ourselves? Or maybe its just the way things are? Human relationships can’t be boiled down to an automated process… I hope.
Reminds me of the question of can you match people with an algorithm? And my post about technology assisted dating. If its even slightly possible for them, maybe it could actually work. But hopefully not so you can spend more time with the bro’s! Have a bloody heart!
Single Black Male, why do you make me laugh so much but also shake my head so much?
For example here’s a post which had me doing both… 40 questions women in new relationships have answered. Here are the best/worst questions and answers with my own thoughts underneath. Check out the site for more…
3. How do I know if he’s just using me for sex?
He’s not. You can easily find someone to have meaningless sex without a title. (Note: If you are the type to call someone your boyfriend without actually having a conversation about it, then he may be using you for just sex and you rationalize it by calling him your boyfriend. Don’t worry it’ll make sense later.)
I see the logic, and to be honest its not far wrong
4. At what point is it appropriate to have the “where is this going” talk?
Whenever you want it to end.
5. Should I initiate that discussion or should he?
This one had me in stitches… But beyond the instant humor, that where is this going talk, certainly puts most people on the edge. You should know where its going and shouldn’t have to directly ask like that really.
8. What did he find when he Googled my name?
The same thing you’d find if you Googled your name. (PS – Stop Google’ing mofos! In a world that is losing all sight of tradition, can we at least keep face-to-face interaction as the best source of getting to know a person?!)
Keep googling but for goodness sake talk to your partner before jumping to conclusions. They deserve the right to explain themselves, even if you don’t like it.
12. Why did his last relationship really end?
The two of them were not meant to be. If you give it time, he’ll either tell you or you’ll stop worrying about it.
FFS! Stop worrying…
15. How long do we have to date before I meet his friends?
Not long but most men aren’t trying to hide you from their friends as much as they’re trying to protect you from their friends.
16. If he hasn’t invited me to meet them yet, is it because I embarrass him?
17. Why hasn’t he texted me yet? I hope he’s not with someone else.
Stop being paranoid.
Hearing this one…:) Sometimes there is a whole story which needs to be told before you can meet someone and explain the relationship. The embarrassment thing is unlikely unless you have weird quirks? And instead of “stop being paranoid” you should read about inner tantrum.
20. What if he thinks some of my friends are hotter than me?
He does, get over it.
Damm lay it out straight…
23. How he would he propose to me?
You’re getting way too far ahead of yourself.
24. Better yet, how much he would spend on a ring?
Seriously to both questions?
31. I wonder what his ex-girlfriend looks like?
Stop lying, you’ve got Facebook like the rest of us.
Indeed! Just like you googled his/her name, damn straight you did! See number 8.
37. Do I embarrass him?
Do you talk when you’re out with him? Yes? Then, yes.
39. What would he do if I slipped a finger in his ass while we’re doing it?
Either punch you in the face, blow his load, or reveal to you that he’s bisexual.
Oh man! Rolling on the floor laughing at this one, seriously…! LOL
I watched About time which is self described as being from the creator of Love Actually, Notting Hill and Four weddings and a Funeral.
There must be a reason for its 7.8 imdb rating. Well this sums it up…
The main reason I’m writing this review is due to the fact that most of the negative reviewers on IMDb seem to have missed the point of this film entirely. I’m not going to go into much detail as I think the film speaks for itself (and I hate it when people put spoilers in their reviews).
It’s not a romantic comedy as most would have you believe. It’s a comedy/drama that revolves around the relationship between a father and son. The romantic themes are just a small part of this great film.
Once you stop thinking of it as a rom-com you will see the brilliance of it all. It’s not the greatest film of all time, it’s not the prettiest, the funniest or the best written.
What it is is a heartfelt tale of a father/son relationship. The time travel elements are just a plot device, the romance, just a plot device. It’s laugh out loud funny in spots and tear-jerking in others. It’s well written, but still light and breezy when it needs to be.
Look past the surface of this film and feel the emotion that these fine actors bring to the screen. Let go and just enjoy it for what it is.
And that person was right. The time traveling part was interesting but then a certain thing happens and your questioning what you would do. But the things which are really noteworthy for me is the message about life and the relationship with his father in the later parts of the film.
There’s a couple great quotes in the film and here’s one near the end…
Tim: We’re all traveling through time together, every day of our lives. All we can do is do our best to relish this remarkable ride.
Connecting people to information that’s what we do at Google…
Although I’m aware of some of the problems with Google, specially when it comes to Data collection (although they got nothing on the NSA) I’m somewhat sympathetic to the higher level value. And although I do have certain issues with Google, I’m generally neutral to positive about what they do. Watching the internship, I didn’t expect to be coming out the cinema thinking super positive thoughts.
Theres a number of negative ways you can look at the film…
- Sitcom rubbish
- Google propaganda
- American dream nonsense
- An advert for Google, which I paid to watch
- An alternative world which doesn’t exist
But while I watched, I enjoyed. Not only that, I was sitting in a cinema with a ton of older people who might actually identify themselves closer to the characters than my internet enabled self.
The internship is a simple hero’s journey film…
Billy (Vince Vaughn) and Nick (Owen Wilson) are salesmen whose careers have been torpedoed by the digital world. Trying to prove they are not obsolete, they defy the odds by talking their way into a coveted internship at Google, along with a battalion of brilliant college students. But, gaining entrance to this utopia is only half the battle. Now they must compete with a group of the nation’s most elite, tech-savvy geniuses to prove that necessity really is the mother of re-invention.
Of course at the end, Billy and Nick gain internships after the rollercoaster journey they take, yada yada…
So what surprised me is and made it interesting was…
- A strong rally cry for diversity
This is very strong, and although it can be seen as the usual sitcom setup (look at the big bang theory for example) what makes it intriguing is it being at Google. A place seen as quite elite and somewhat pushy about qualifications and which university you came from? I remember in the early days talk of 7-9 interview rounds and very choosy selections. The idea of a group of quite diverse in age, gender and race in Google, still fills me with an element of oh really?
- A emphases on real-world experience
Most of the film there are great views of the google campus but surprisingly there are lots of scenes outside the campus. At one point the diverse team we’re following through the film are sitting watching the sunrise above the golden gate bridge. One of the characters known for looking at his phone all the time, turns to Nick and says he would like to stay a little longer. Taking in the current/now. Also this is explicitly told when Neha turns to Billy at the strip club (whaaat theres a strip club in the google movie? yeah I know!) and says that despite her rich virtual/fantasy life, she has no real-world experience. This could almost be an advert for schemer.
- Ideas from elsewhere
As said before a good section of the film exists outside the google campus, not only that. There is the notion that ideas come from it rather than just the googleplex. Lyle’s drunken antics inspire the team to create an app that guards against reckless phone usage while drunk. Theres also lots of references to the knowledge characters have from previous experiences, as you’d expect I guess.
- The fact there is a scene in a strip club
This shocked me, not only was there a scene in a strip club but some of the strippers were actually topless. Although this is part and parcel of a sitcom, I didn’t imagine google would be that comfortable with this? Theres even a small joke about one of the guys who ends up in the toilet drying himself under the hand dryer for obvious reasons. Once again part of parcel of a Vince Vaughn sitcom but not what I expected Google or even most corporations to let slide.
- And not just one but two relationships
So you got all this real good memes about diversity, real world experience mixed up with in a sitcom and then they throw in not just one but two love stories. Nick casing a geek sexy Dana and Lyle getting his geeky charm on with Marielena. We’re not talking an episode of Dates but the thread of love is nicely handled. Lyle’s love interest also highlights the just be yourself quality too.
Yes could be corny and talk about the non-love relationships between characters like Headphones tutoring Billy but thats best left alone.
The internship surprises and puts a smile on your face. It certainly warms the relationship with google, which I guess is the main point. If Vince Vaughn convinced Google of that fact, then he succeeded. The film will feel dated in years to come and is never going to win any awards but with a IMDB rating of about 6.3 its certainly way above most sitcoms and even most films out there.
People who have been in a relationship of what ever kind for more that 5 years are lucky. Yes they are matched with someone significant but they don’t have to go through the fuss or even hell of announcing it on fb.
Recent research suggests that the decisions people make about whether and how to represent their love lives on Facebook can often be quite telling. For example, my colleagues and I found that people who post a “Single” relationship status on Facebook have more sexual partners between relationships than those who opt out of posting “Single” on their profile. We also found that people who disclose that they are “In a Relationship” on Facebook also report being more committed to that relationship. Even among married people, we found that those whose primary Facebook photos include their spouses are less likely to split up 6 months later
With previous girlfriends, it was carefully chosen when to change fb statuses. I usually change mine to prove I was no longer dating.
The act of publicly publishing your status (even subconsciously) has a massive profound effect… going by this study a positive effect?
I believe this also applies to publishing things like your new years resolutions. Which I have done for years.
I’ve been thinking about the fact I’m now in a relationship with a lovely woman and no longer on the dating market but the weird thing is, we met via a friend of a friend not online dating or speed dating etc…
I know everyone says, “when your not looking it will happen” but frankly I can call balls on that theory (in my case at least). I may not have met Laura unless I was openly dating and discussing my experiences on twitter.
This openness has its advantages and disadvantages I’ve found… But for all the taking the piss out of myself (you know who you are), I feel like I’ve helped people to be more open with there inner thoughts.
So while reading along together again…it got me thinking…
I thought long and hard before submitting the above to Marco. Divorce is a subject that, despite its sad prevalence, remains taboo. Divorce is generally discussed behind closed doors, on long phone calls, or via whispers in crowded restaurants. I do not regret my decision to be public about my experience, though. I received many responses, often from people who are going or had gone through something similar. Those people found comfort in knowing that they were not alone, and that is justification enough.
Me and Laura are divorcées and I maintain the fact you will never know how bad things can get until a divorce. I do feel slightly sad I didn’t share more at the time but it was a shame thing. No one wants to talk openly about the end of a relationship but in actual fact thats when we probably need to talk and be open the most.
Anyway its a good read and raise a number of interesting thoughts… Of course I hope to never experience divorce again…
This time we tackle the difficult subject of how to split up in the best way possible.
So how did the rules & the game one go?
It went well, we started a little later than expected and once again my partner in crime failed to turn up (I’m pretty much fed up of her, so I won’t be doing it with her ever again). We had about 18 people again and the gender split was actually towards the female this time around.
The difficult subject of the rules and the game was dissected by the crowd and there was a interesting debate starting to happen around multiplication and uneven relationships. Unfortunately some of the debate was over powered by certain people. I didn’t do a very good job giving everyone a go. But alas we learn and next time I’ll be more cutting with allowing other people to voice their own views.
There was criticism that everything was setup for straight relationships. Although the rules and the game applies to heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Of course the purpose of the night was to highlight how stupid both books are, and actually how much money is being made off the back of these generic rules and tactics.
We never got down to the more thoughtful stuff (such as Real Social Dynamics) but hey maybe thats for another month.
This time around instead of seeking inspiration (as such) from How to loose a man in 10 days and he’s just not that into you (has a fantastic opening which points to why lots of women love the guys who treat them bad?) It will be the breakup artist and must be seen in full a complete history of my sexual failures (going to have fun showing parts of that one for sure)..
I was in a meeting today with 3 female collages (I won’t say which ones for now) about BarCampMediaCity and somewhere along the conversation we got talking about my love life… don’t ask me how we got there but something happened…
One of the ladies said something about first dates and I replied saying I’ve got some crazy experiences over the last few years I’ve been dating. We had a brief chat and somewhere along the conversation she said something which I had to unpick.
It came about that she believed that on the first date, men should always pay for the meal.
I was shocked! Like totally dumbfounded…
I can’t believe in 2011 we still have these old fashioned views. I was under the illusion that woman had moved on and wasn’t buying all this chauvinistic crap. I was also under the illusion that insisting to pay for the whole dinner put the woman in a difficult position, like you owe the man something.
It turns out I might have been wrong all this time.
But to be honest, I say rubbish… This sounds like something straight out of the rules.
I might be wrong but I certainly like to think the woman I go out with are not bound by such frankly stupid ideology. Its 2011 for goodness sake! I can make a lady feel better in much better ways than paying for her meal. I mean, come on… Is she meant to be grateful that I unimaginatively paid for her meal instead of something creative and from the soul?
Just because I don’t pay for the whole meal doesn’t mean I’m not into you, maybe I respect you so much that I’m not going to undermine you by paying for the whole bill. I understand you have a great job and would like to share the bill with me also out of respect…
Maybe in there lies my problem, I show too much respect for woman and I should also adopt this chauvinistic take? To be fair its worked for lots of my other friends but I deep down like to think the woman who I end up growing old with (in the end) is smart enough to see through this crap and is happy to take her own path and make her up her own mind. Not be pressured by this old fashioned legacy…
What do other people think? Should I cover the costs of all the dates I go on? It certainly will restrict how many dates I will go (time to loose the serial dater tag then) on in the future if so…