Quite the Life (and all in Times New Roman 10pt!)
I mentioned Rob and John Carter and I chatting on their MEET THE AUTHOR show in previous blog posts.
This is post #10 in a series of thirteen snippets taken from the full interview video. You can also listen to the interview via podcast
Today’s snippet deals with my recognizing and sharing an aspect of victimhood which, when I first mentioned it publicly – wasn’t well received.
Enjoy!
Dennis Pitocco and BizCatalyst360 published The Stranger The Better, one of the chapters in my soon-to-be-released non-fiction The Th!nk You Do.
A fascinating piece of social research has made it to my desk. It deals with males’ success rate with females in typical mating situations.
To readers outside of social anthropology, this means “What can guys do to make sure girls notice them in bars, at clubs, in the mall, in the hall, in the cafeteria, at the dance, …?”
The research points out one of those things that’s obvious. So obvious, one might ask, “Somebody had to do research on this?”
Well, yes. Because when you think about it, it’s not what most guys do in typical mating situations and that’s probably why few males have the kind of success they want.The Trick Is…
Let me know what you think.
Enjoy!
For those who didn’t know, I’ve signed with a new publisher and my first book out with them, The Think You Do, should be available late Nov-Dec ’22.
Read:
As always, let me know what you think.
I have never accepted “Boys will be boys” as an excuse for socially unacceptable behavior. But have you noticed that the vast number of “acting out” news items involve males? Consider DUIs, fights, shouting matches, anything you care to recognize as “bad behavior” and the involvement of males greatly over shadows the involvement of females.
Why is that?
Well, to a certain degree it’s because guys can’t help themselves.
No, this is not an apologetic for bad behavior and I’m definitely not providing men a carte blanche. What I’m recognizing is that the wiring of the male brain makes it easier for them to behave badly. Women don’t have the same wiring.
And no, I’m not kidding. Research performed at John Hopkins and elsewhere is verifying yet another difference between males and females, another evolutionary difference in addition to the obvious sexual traits.
It works like this: cause humans to do something pleasurable and their brains release dopamine (the “pleasure molecule”). Well, duh!, right? But male brains release up to three times as much pleasure for a given stimulus as female brains do.
Three times as much? Well, heck. Sign me up right now, please.
Continue reading “That Th!nk You Do Chapter 6 – Guys Can’t Help Themselves”
For those who didn’t know, I’ve signed with a new publisher and my first book out with them, The Think You Do, should be available late Nov-Dec ’22.
Read:
As always, let me know what you think.
NextStage did a bunch of political research during the ’08 Presidential race, and some of which appeared on my BizMediaScience blog. One of the questions that we still get with regularity involves the public’s perception of Senator Clinton versus Governor Palin.
The question being asked was asked about politics and the answer has little to do with politics. It really has to do with how people perceive another person’s hard work, ambition, drive, steadfastness, …, in a word, competitiveness, and especially how these traits are gender-biased. Thousands of years ago when I was in college a fellow told me that I was steadfast. “And that is a quality of the Lord,” he added. I responded, “I’m steadfast, you’re stubborn, and he’s too stupid to know any better.”
My response beyond being glib is a statement of psychological distance.
Let me give you an example. Steadfast, as in “holding to one’s beliefs”, is great when people share your beliefs. But if you don’t share my beliefs and I’m somehow stopping you from achieving your goals? Then perhaps my steadfastness is, to you, stubbornness. What if you have no opinions about my beliefs per se but believe I have no idea what I’m doing? Then perhaps I’m too stupid to know any better.
The above is a demonstration of a given trait being considered as a plus or minus based on psychological distance — how far one person’s beliefs are from another’s.
Competitiveness is interesting because it comes in two forms. Goal-directed competitiveness — where you compete against yourself to achieve a goal — has no psychological distance component. Interpersonal competitiveness — when you want to beat someone else — has a strong psychological distance component attached. Psychological distance comes into play when there’s recognizable winners and losers.
Public perception of an individual’s competitiveness is what gets votes. Both men and women think highly of people who are goal-directed, not so highly of people who are interpersonally competitive (probably because we don’t know when that competitive nature will be directed against us). And both men and women will create extreme psychological distance between an interpersonally competitive female but not so much towards an interpersonally competitive male, which is where gender-bias comes in.
Politicians get votes by demonstrating a balance between goal-directed and interpersonal competitiveness. Both Senator Clinton and Governor Palin are competitive — they are politicians, after all. Senator Clinton’s staff had a difficult task (whether they realized it or not) that they executed well (whether they realized it or not); Senator Clinton had to compete against her Democratic rivals and convince the public that she was goal-directed. Specifically, that her goal wasn’t the Presidency, her goal was to benefit the voters.
Governor Palin’s staff never managed to get her image out of the interpersonal side of competition. People who were undecided knew she was against the Democrats, but once you got past that, what were her goals? There was no goal-direction to balance her interpersonal competitiveness.
Oops.
Continue reading “That Th!nk You Do Chapter 5 – Rules of Competition”
For those who didn’t know, I’ve signed with a new publisher and my first book out with them, That Think You Do, should be available late Nov-Dec ’22.
Read:
As always, let me know what you think.
Susan (wife, partner, all things known and unknown) and I are coming on our 25th wedding anniversary (note to readers: we just celebrated out 38th). We’ve been together for 31 years (now 44). I wrote our wedding vows:
I can not promise you fidelity, sanity, health, hope, love, comfort or joy. All I can promise is that I will change. Not all my changes will be good. I ask God’s help that not all will be bad.
I ask you today to be with me in my changes, to tell me when I am foolish, to heal me when I am sick, to love me when I forget to love, to give me hope when I have none to give, to give me comfort when I am cold and alone, to give me joy when all I know is sadness.
Stand with me the rest of my days. I have asked you to do this. I ask you again, here, before our friends and families. It is said before others, but the words are for you. I love you.
Nobody in the audience knew what the vows would be, not even the minister. People knew I’d written them and everyone assumed they’d be whimsical if not funny. I can’t tell you the number of people who’ve asked for copies of our vows since then.
Continue reading “That Th!nk You Do Chapter 4 – Change (which is Constant) and Managing the Work-Life Balance”