Much of the conventional thought in the community right now is that you should qualify women. It is supposed to create a demonstration of value and a hoop for her to jump through. Whenever someone has to work for your attention they want it more, right?
Well recently I have changed my attitude about this subject. I used to (Even on earlier blog posts) think that qualifying women to get them to make agreements on things, such as not being dramatic, allowing you to stay out late with your friends, or any other thing we want out of women in a relationship, would be a beneficial thing. What I found is that small qualifications were somewhat inconsequential, and in fact did not actually achieve that goal. Larger qualifications about personality, temperament, etc, would actually destroy your relationship in the end.
My last girlfriend I qualified the hell out of. I said I wanted all sorts of things. I wanted an adventurous woman willing to go camping with me, I wanted her to hold many of my spiritual values, and I didn’t want her to be dramatic. Well I really should have dated someone else. In the beginning she always jumped at the chance to show me she was who I wanted her to be. Eventually it broke down and she resented me for wanting her to be someone different from who she was.
Qualifying women at the beginning of a relationship works to get them to want you more. However it sets up a very bad precedent for a future relationship. If she has traits you don’t want then find someone else, seriously, do yourselves both a favor. You don’t want to have to change for her, don’t expect her to change for you.
Disqualifying on the other hand creates a really powerful thing. It creates a bubble where you two can exist just as you are with no expectations about each other. This is even more powerful because when a woman feels like you are ok with her just the way she is she will be more comfortable with you. This leads to her being more confident around you and improves her sense of who she is. Since most people don’t do this it will bond her to you even stronger. It is very attractive when you can be 100% yourself around someone. The side benefit is you seem more confident because you disqualify yourself as well and she becomes more attracted to you through that.
If you want a certain trait in a woman, choose women in your life with those traits naturally. Don’t try to qualify them into being something they are not. Instead of trying to qualify the drama out of her, be a man and speak up and call her out on her bad behavior.
Don’t qualify women out loud, instead if you find yourself qualifying her, disqualify instead. It will allow her to feel more comfortable with you because is shows your confidence and tolerance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Dear SSH,
On 16 april, you wrote in "the talk: solution":
...What a great way to enter a conscious relationship. Just knock out all the repeating issue's you have had before right up front. Make her accept your values and views on how the relationship should be.
In what way would you change the way you handle this stuff? If you would happen to be short on inspiration on of the coming weeks/months... could you do a future article on stuff you wrote a blog about in the past, and in the mean time discovered didn't work the way you thought back then?
Thanks a lot again man!
Gandert
thanks man.
But this throws up another question:
'Disqualifying on the other hand creates a really powerful thing. It creates a bubble where you two can exist just as you are with no expectations about each other. This is even more powerful because when a woman feels like you are ok with her just the way she is she will be more comfortable with you.'
So you are disqualifying her as well as yourself right?
How does one disqualify her?
I think my head is gonna explode.
xxx goose.
otherwise
It's important (to me) a woman have a willingness to participate in my world, but if a woman is into you, they'll just say what they think pleases you most.
It amused me mightily when I first read swinggcat stuff on qualifying girls to be adventerous, I though if you really wanted to find an adventerous girl what you'd do is walk up and be a bit nutty and see if she had the nerve to respond to it. That truely does screen for adventerous girls - but eliminates masses of them too!
Many of us misjudge disqualification with self-deprecation. Please point more about this equilbrium, so we might never fall into the self-deprecating region. I know you are DQ while beeing playful. Is it a requirement ?
A girl talled me in a bar: "You got to have big balls, right?". I said, "No they are tiny, itzi bitzi tiny" and acted to her showing that. Is this self-deprecating or is just DQ?
Some great questions. Here is attempt one to answer them as i sit in the airport on a layover.
When i learned from Chad he was very inssistant on never qualifying a woman. I didn't believe him at the time and continued to do it. Then i was in San Francisco with a woman who threw out qualifications left and right. I spent the whole time shooting them down as if i was manning the DQ Howitzer. It felt very uncomfortable. Even though I fit in the qualifcation just fine i didn't like being put in the box. It gave me an insight into how a woman must feel when trying to live up to your qualifications. Since then i have had much more success not qualifying women.
I also found that even if you qualify a woman and make her accept that qualification she will at some point resent that. It is far better to make her feel completely comfortable with you, show her faults, then choose a different woman if you don't want to deal with her faults.
I would rather find out who someone is, a completely authentic picture, rather than them trying to be something to impress me and fit my qualifications. Then you just find out later you can't deal with her stuff. If you DQ then she is comfortable showing who she is to you and you get a quicker picture of her to decide if you like her or not.
If you want a woman who is adventurous, choose an adventurous woman, don't try to change someone into that. I don't want to change for a woman, nor do i want her to change for me.
----
Self deprication is when you actually don't believe you are good enough. When you DQ you are PROUD of your weakness and your tone and body language reflect that. As long as you are describing your weakness as a GOOD thing that you are proud of it will come off fine. your DQ if done playfully is fine.
One point though. I always try to DQ stuff that is about who i am, genuinely, and stuff that isn't me in a joking manner.
Big balls qualification:
"Thanks, i'm glad you see that. However yesterday i was too afraid to even jump on my little brother's trampoline. Those things are scary!"
Remember the agree part of the DQ as well.
Dan wrote:
"My last girlfriend I qualified the hell out of. I said I wanted all sorts of things. I wanted an adventurous woman willing to go camping with me, I wanted her to hold many of my spiritual values, and I didn’t want her to be dramatic. Well I really should have dated someone else. In the beginning she always jumped at the chance to show me she was who I wanted her to be. Eventually it broke down and she resented me for wanting her to be someone different from who she was."
Dan, you know I love you. And I think you are a brilliant man. And I've learned so much from you.
But I must say that this is simply a classic training error. It's not a problem with training (qualifying) itself, its just a problem of insufficient reinforcement and wrong reinforcement schedule; not an intrinsic problem with qualifying.
Perhaps initially you didn't reward her enough when she worked for you. Hence her new behavior extinguished. Or you didn't change schedules. You need to initially reward/reinforce every single instance of the new behavior, and then you need to transition to an intermittant and then variable reinforcement schedule so as to make the new behavior resistent to extinction.
Growing people means expanding their identity by broadening their range of behavior. This is my definition of loving someone.
all the best,
- Jason_LA
Training issue? I guess if you want to change someone that might work. I don't want to me "trained" or changed. So why would i do it to someone else?
"Growing people means expanding their identity by broadening their range of behavior. This is my definition of loving someone." Jason_LA
I like this quote but something doesn't sit will with it. Maybe it's the growing people like we are plants. I would re-write it as
"People growing together means expanding their identity by broadening their experieces" SHH
I don't want to change someone. If they truly want to change their behavior i want it to be a choice they make, not influenced my my qualifications or training.
Women try to change men all the time. In fact it is very common that once women change a man into what they want they don't want him anymore. Hence the reason why we should learn to NOT change and be ourselves without supplicating. Change the things we want to change only because we want to change them.
I think if we want that for ourselves, shouldn't we want that for a partner as well?
You are right and I agree it's very important to love a person as they are today. And it's equally important to see the potential inside them already and to help them realize that positive potential. Without challenge we stagnate. Often that's the point at which we go find new lovers.
4:1 simply means that 80% of the time you are positively reinforcing existing behavior. 20% of the time you are challenging for new behavior. The ratio is even more successful at like 8:1, but after that it's the schedule that's important. If you go below 4:1 or you don't change to intermittent reinforcement, you typically get extinction (the new behavior dies out) after a few resurgences.
I know the word training doesn't sit well, even though it's the scientifically accurate term. Substitute the word teaching. Or mentoring. Or leading. Or raising kids. Or being in marriage with. Or, just simply, from my point of view, loving.
Whatever you call it, it's the exact same process Wayne describes on page 21
"This is how picking up a woman works:
1. You prompt her to make an effort
2. Shake makes the effort
3. You appreciate that effort and use it as your reason for moving the relationship further...
(repeat)"
And timing (of appreciation), as Wayne says a bunch of times, is critical. It must be during (preferrably) or immediately after the work.
Yes, most of us are lousy reinforcers when we start out. We are slow. We say things like, "you looked wonderful last night." "Huh? don't I look wonderful now!?!?!" Again, a classic training error: delaying reinforcement.
This is the case for most women too. i.e. the ones you mention who prompt men to change and then don't reinfoce the effort they get. I've noticed however that those who have been teachers, especially elementary through high-school level teachers, rarely if ever make these conditioning mistakes. They make the best leaders. And lovers, in my experience.
Managing behavior is not intuitive. Shaping? Cues? Transitioning reinforcement schedules and the 4:1 rule? I'd have never figured 'em out. It took alot of experimentation to derive these understandings of how behavior changes.
The reality is that all people change and grow all the time. We seek novelty. We learn all the time. We respond to our environment as it changes. We have no choice as to whether growth will happen, but we do have a choice as to how to direct that growth. And I want a woman who will challenge me to grow and become more fully who I am and can be.
Alright I've geeked out enough for now. Aubrey Daniels' book 'Other people's habits' is a good read here. As is David Schnark's Passionate Marriage. And of course, Karen Pryor's Don't Shoot the Dog is the place to start.
- Jason_LosAngeles
Post a Comment