Profile Clinic: Knowing when to stop.

Okay, time to take a break from the "attachment model"... and get back to the profile clinic.

"Wil E. Quixote" writes that, despite frequent editing and reediting of his profile, he continues to do poorly - he's been matched with over 120 people, and has been in open communication with one.

I know the cycle of "reediting". I wrote about it several times. I did a search for my "failure spiral", and I'd recommend that he reread these articles.

The good news? He does have good material in his profile. The problem is - he's trying just a little too hard. My guess is that, if he were to state his positives in a short, confident manner, he'd start doing much better.

So, here's a new starting point, from the vantage point of someone out of the spiral.

My suggestion? Take this, and leave it alone for awhile. If you want to introduce a change, introduce them one at a time, and don't make any further changes until you know the results of the last change you made.

So, let's get crackin'!

When asked about his passion, Wil wrote:

I am interested in many things. I get excited about ideas and concepts. I enjoy discussing ideas or being exposed to new things. I also dig language and stories. The shows and movies I love the best have popping dialogue and dynamic concepts. But the greatest of these is love for my friends and the passion I feel for helping my students.

One characteristic mistake that people make in the "failure spiral", is that, when the question asks for one thing, they lose focus. They don't know what will "sell". And they start listing a lot of things, hoping that something will hit the target.

He needs to be confident, and stop trying to sell. He could just answer with the first two sentences - they're short, concise, real, confident, and consistent with the rest of the profile. (I'd change the "or" to "and", though.) Or, he could rewrite the answer to state "the passion I feel for helping my students". (I'd skip "love for my friends" - far too cliched.)

Pick one. Stick with it. Be confident, and brief.

When asked to describe the most influential person, Wil writes:

I had two extraordinary teachers, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Alcock, who mentored and encouraged me. I have been blessed with a lot of great people in my life, but they are the ones who I model myself after, as a teacher and a man.

I'd dump the second sentence. And I'd hint at one specific thing they mentored or encouraged you to do. One extra sentence, maximum. And, please, don't make it a run-on.

And, now, the checklists:

4 things friends say:
# Affectionate
# Articulate
# Kind
# Funny

life skills
# Using humor to make friends laugh
# Finding pleasure and contentment in simple things
# Being a good friend and companion

I'd keep the life skills. As far as "things friends say", I've noticed that more commanding and "alpha" responses get more responses. Funny and articulate are both "alpha" traits, and I'd keep them. "Kind" and "Affectionate" are less so. I'd consider finding other alpha traits that are consistent with his personality.

Now, when asked what he's looking for, he writes...

I'm hoping to find a chatterbox with a sense of humor and an interest in ideas. I enjoy talking about random things. Philosophy. 80's TV. Crazy animal trivia. A pretty close second is that I gravitate towards people who are affectionate. All the people I've strongly connected to have been verbal and they've been warm.

Good - but he's selling much harder than he needs to. I'd cut everything out of this section but the first sentence. The rest of the profile supports this sentence just fine.

Now, as far as the first thing people notice....

I have a sense of wonder and play about a lot of things. I still notice hawks in the sky and put on foreign accents for my own amusement. I like being silly.

This is pretty good. I'd either keep this, or I'd take "I enjoy talking about random things. Philosophy. 80's TV. Crazy animal trivia." out of the last section, and put it here.

I'll let you pick. But pick only one. Don't try to use both.

As far as traits people don't notice right away, Wil writes:

I'm pretty heavily faceted. People who see one side of me are often surprised by the other sides. If you get The Clown, The Thinker, or The Caretaker, its worth knowing that there are other parts of me.

This is a non-answer. It describes everybody - not just you. And it looks like you're wimping out.

I'd pick one "facet", and write about that. You've already made "The Clown" and "The Thinker" obvious. And I'd avoid "The Caretaker" until she's earned enough credit to earn that role from you. Pick another facet, and write about it. Two sentences maximum. And make them short.

When asked to describe his leisure time, Wil writes:

I read a decent amount. Not as much as I did when I was a kid, but you cant drive to work reading. Or so I'm told by a CERTAIN TRAFFIC COP. I rollerblade some. I love to polish my cooking skills. They are actually reasonably shiny by now. I play boardgames a fair amount. "Apples to Apples" and "Betrayal At The House On The Hill" are favorites. But most of all, I love to share ideas and stories. I'm pretty open to new experiences. Mostly I love hanging out with interesting people.

There's good stuff here, but it's buried under weasel words and weasel phrases. Here's how I'd rewrite it.

"I read a lot. I rollerblade. I like to polish my cooking skills. I play boardgames - 'Apples to Apples' and 'Betrayal At The House On the Hill' are my favorites. But, most of all, I love hanging out with interesting people, sharing ideas and stories."

If you want to throw the joke back in... hold for awhile. After you know how your profile plays without the joke, add it. But, right now, the joke seems to represent the "try harder" attitude that is hurting your efforts. For the sake of example, leave it out for now.

And now, for the last book he read...

I am re-reading Story Of The Stone by Barry Hughart, and I'm really loving it. If you imagine Han Solo and Sherlock Holmes combined, made them chinese, and 100 years old in ancient china, that would be the main character.

I also like Harlan Coben in general. He writes very taut thrillers. One of the things I like about them is that they are a celebration of regular folks and the basic goodness of people. I also read a lot of Terry Pratchett, who is basically what you get if you stick The Kids In The Hall in a blender with traditional fantasy novels. Really. Its freaking hilarious.

The second paragraph? Trying too hard. Get rid of it.

The first paragraph could stand some tightening up, as well. I'd go with, "I'm re-reading 'Story Of The Stone' by Barry Hughart, and I'm really loving it. Combine Han Solo and Sherlock Holmes, make them Chinese, and set them 100 years ago in ancient China. That would describe the main character."

As far as what only his friends know, Wil writes:

My best friends EARNED the right to know these things by doing four tours in Sarasota, braving nearly blind snowbirds in cadillacs, encephalitis, and tropical storms. You have to at least go out on a couple dates with me. 8)

This approach is common, and it's a wimp-out. And the forced humor doesn't help matters. A complete rewrite is in order.

Good news? We've cut a lot of material. We can use one of the scraps here. "I get geeky about animal trivia." "I still get hypnotized by 80's television reruns." "I put on foreign accents for my own amusement." Pick one, and only one. And keep it just as short as I typed.

Finally, Wil ends with this call to action:

Not really. If you havent been watching Pushing Daisies, you should. I just like to plug the show. Its that good. Your other shows are in re-runs. Give it a try.

For now, stick with a standard call to action. If you really want to try plugging "Pushing Daisies" instead, do it as an experiment after you already know what a standard call to action does.

And there you go. Your personality is still there. We certainly haven't buried it. We just stopped overselling it. And it makes you look much more confident.

This profile won't appeal to everyone. But, my guess is, he won't want to meet women who aren't interested in the guy that we've described. It looks like a good start.

Give it a shot. And resist the urge to edit until you know how things are already working, okay?

Good luck. And let us know how you're doing, Wil!

Navigating Phase 1 Attachment

So, you've crossed phase 0 attachment. You're friends, but chemistry still needs to be established.

This is a point where, if you haven't started to establish touch... you need to. In this phase, contact should be friendly and playful, but not particularly intimate. Act like she's a friend that you're starting to flirt with.

Some women are more demonstrative than others. Keep that in mind. The state of physical escalation is a clue to your state of attachment, but only a clue. Some women are very reserved with contact. Some women will kiss you in phase 1. It doesn't change the state of attachment.

But, yes, phase 1 is where you see whether the "chemistry" is in sync. And, if you like my theory, you can even break it down. Is she seeing you as idealizable? For what? Are you seeing her as idealizable? Do you enjoy the mirroring and twinship processes? Is she showing indicators of interest demonstrating that you're seeing the potential, in each other, to meet these basic social needs?

If so, you're special. You're feeling particularly good around each other. The chemistry - it's there.

And you're ready for another phase.

Because, chemistry, alone... is scary for most women.

And I'll continue the "attachment model" in a few days.

From the Labs: Chemistry and Twinship

In the last two columns, we talked about my (rather budding) theory that chemistry often occurs when people provide combinations of being idealizable, and provide mirroring experiences. These are powerful social needs for many people. And people feel good when they're provided - in balance.

There's another social need that Kohut described. He called this "twinship".

Twinship is the experience of being with someone who understands what you're experiencing, and who shares your experience with you.

And, yes, many pickup artist techniques also serve to simulate a twinship experience. Mental magic tricks. Reading body language. Picking up IOI's, and knowing when to reciprocate. NLP mirroring techniques.

But, again, you shouldn't restrict providing twinship to just these techniques. Go ahead. Say things that are just "on the tip of her tongue". When it's appropriate, don't be afraid to say that you're sharing the feelings and emotions that you think she has.

But don't get carried away. You don't want to SAY you understand or share things that you don't. You also deserve to find someone who shares your experiences. Don't cheat yourself in the process of trying to get a "successful seduction". As I will always repeat - the goal of this is your mutual happiness with someone, not certainty of an outcome with a specific person.

But twinship, combined with idealization and mirroring, can stir powerful emotions.

For both of you.

And those emotions? I call 'em chemistry.

At least, until someone finds a better theory.

From the Labs: Mirror, Mirror - a key to chemistry?

Yesterday, we talked about one potential component of chemistry - being idealizable.

But, that's not enough. There are a lot of people who hold up, and stand by standards. But holding up a standard, alone, makes a person look inflexible and immature. And there are other social needs to be met.

Another social need that Kohut described was that of "Mirroring". And it balances the aspects of idealization that may make someone look harsh and impossible to please.

Basically, you can't be harsh all the time.

You have to be observant. Notice what's special about her. And let her know that you appreciate it.

You can't just gush about the obvious. That's placating, and women can smell that from a mile away.

You have to notice things that aren't obvious or common.

And, yes, the pickup artist community has many techniques that simulate the mirroring process. Cold reads. Pet names. Escalating after she qualifies for you. They can be fun, but you're losing out if you don't take opportunities to mirror outside of these structured interactions as well.

Of course, you can take this too far as well. This shouldn't be an act. If you don't like something, don't pretend that you do, just to mirror. And, if you're having trouble mirroring... well, why are you hanging around anyway?

And, yes, if all you do is mirror, you look like a needy suck-up. You need the other aspects as well.

But, when you're successful, she'll appreciate your observations. Maybe bask a little. Or do them more. Or reciprocate with compliments of her own.

They're signs that the mirroring is taking hold. And the chemistry, at least from this aspect, is starting.

And, yes. There's one more potential aspect of chemistry... and it's coming next.

From the labs: What makes someone special?

So, you're having a decent time on the date. There aren't any signs that she's violating your "must haves/can't stands", and she's not indicating that you're tripping any of hers. Thanks to eHarmony, you're finding that you're getting along okay.

Logically, everything should be okay. Where's the sense of attraction?

Well, as pickup artists, and even eHarmony has noticed, chemistry is not usually a result of these things. As famous pick-up artist David DeAngelo points out so succinctly: "Attraction is not a choice."

But, pickup artists have noticed some things that help the process. And, yes, they've proposed psychological theories as to why they work.

But, as an incorrigible psychology geek, and therapy patient who's recognized these forces at play in his own life, I began to notice some different patterns. That the same psychological needs that played out in my therapy were ones that were also being "tweaked" by the pickup artist community. (Which is not to say that it's manipulative. I think that these same processes are unavoidable in "natural" interactions as well. Education just makes us more conscious of them.)

These psychological needs seem to be very basic. I'm sure there are more of them. And I'm sure that I, as well as other people in the community, will continue to refine this model.

The first need is what the analyst Heinz Kohut put forth as "Idealization".

Basically, it's the social need to have someone in your life to look up to. A powerful father-figure, if you will.

Pickup artists "tweak" this need with a lot of things. Social proofs. DHVs. Qualifiers and disqualifiers. Negs. Management of shit-tests. The "cocky" part of being "cocky and funny".

Essentially, tricks to demonstrate social status and dominance.

But there are other things that women idealize as well. And every woman is different in the qualities that they idealize.

When do you know that a woman's starting to idealize you?

She'll be giving you genuine compliments.

Accept them. Tell her that you appreciate her noticing. And let her stare doey-eyed at you for awhile.

But it's important to notice what a woman idealizes about you. And see if you really want to carry the qualities that she idealizes.

But, yes, almost all women want a man that they can idealize, to some degree. And, in my opinion, building this is often a crucial component to building chemistry.

Is that enough to build chemistry?

No. Idealization alone puts you in another category. People who are only idealizable tend to be seen as domineering, intolerant, bullying jerks. Very few women want to be around someone who is so rigid.

It's important to be idealizable, but other forces need to be present as well.

We'll talk about another basic need tomorrow.

Attachment Phase 1: But are you special?

A little time has passed during your first date.

You've passed "Phase 0". You've established that, in fact, you are having a good time with her. And she's having a good time with you.

And, if you want to be friends... either of you can leave things be.

But, is the chemistry there?

There's the rub.

Everyone has their own unconscious "attraction triggers". Things that they're hungry for, and are seeking in someone else.

Some of us are conscious of them. Some of us aren't. Most people, if asked, "What kind of guy are you attracted to?" will give a mixture of answers - and some of them will be "socially correct" things to say, but which aren't really attraction triggers at all. They may also name some "triggers" that relate to true attraction triggers, and some may actually be true.

But, if you're hitting them? She'll let you know with some of the deeper "indicators of interest" that pickup artists discuss.

This phase is where standard pick-up advice stands out. Because many of the "stunts" that pickup artists use hit common attraction triggers. And the men who truly hit a woman's emotional triggers are rare in most women's lives.

Now, you don't go overboard here. You don't want to tell a woman that you're able to provide something that you don't really want to provide. If dazzling her makes you feel bad, rather than good, don't do it. Remember, the goal is your mutual happiness, not a "successful seduction".

And, when everything's said and done, you may find that a woman isn't meeting your attraction triggers.

In which case - stay at phase 0. And enjoy the evening. And anything else that you may enjoy as friends.

You're probably wondering, "What are these common attraction triggers?"

Well, I can't list them all. But I can talk about some common ones.

... And I'll talk about 'em tomorrow.

RelyID - Who does it REALLY help?

I was prepared to continue my "attachment model" series today, but, lately, I've been getting a lot of panicked emails about one of eHarmony's newest "services" - relyID. Especially with eHarmony's recent implications that people's profiles are "incomplete" unless they submit to this service.

You may ask, "Why are they pushing this so hard?"

To understand that, you need to understand some things in the history of online "dating" services.

A few years ago, just as eHarmony was starting to become popular, a competitor arose.

Much like eHarmony, it offered compatability testing, based on tests that were (supposedly) designed by legitimate psychologists. (And I only say "supposedly", because I haven't really checked out their claims.)

But this service also separated itself from eHarmony from the fact that it did background checks on it's members. And threatened that it would prosecute any member who's background check indicated that they were married.

eHarmony took the high road. It investigated the possibility of initiating background checks. However, they discovered that such a process would be too error-prone to be useful. And decided it would be (legally) safest to modify the position they already had - that, since "background checks" are subject to errors, it's best not to spread possibly false information. Or give anyone a false sense of confidence that a potential match was safe. They publicly acknowledged that there are some "scammers" on the service, and told it's members to use caution.

I think eHarmony was right. And, yes, to my knowledge, eHarmony's competitor only carried out it's prosecution threat once.

Time passed. And, yes, "scammers" started to become more prevalent.

And, of course, this being America, many scam victims got together, and started a class-action lawsuit against another online service, for failing to do "enough" to prevent the scammers from operating. (Although, to be completely fair, many people in online dating communities had noticed that scammers seemed particularly attracted to the service that was sued.)

The case was settled out of court - and the settlement cost was very expensive.

So, eHarmony, in my mind, may be justifiably nervous. If you do background checks, you can get sued for giving false information or a false sense of security. And if you don't do background checks, you can get sued by scam victims for not doing "enough" to prevent it.

So... what would happen if another company came along, and said, "We'll do the background checks AND take responsibility for what happens as a result?"

You guessed it. eHarmony took the bait. Because now, if someone gets scammed, they're protected.

If the scammer didn't use RelyID verification? "You initiated communication with someone who refused to verify their identity? I'm sorry, but that was a bad call. You can't blame us for THAT."

If a scammer finds enough information about the person they're pretending to be, and passes the RelyID process? "Identity verification is provided by RelyID. We are not responsible for the quality of the services that our advertisers provide. You can contact RelyID at ______."

And, in the end, eHarmony still comes out OK.

Yes, I suppose that RelyID might be sued out of business someday. They're picking up a lot of risk.

But, they can turn a tidy profit, until that day. (And, I imagine that eHarmony might, as well.)

Oh, and the information that you're entrusting RelyID with?

Did you read the Terms of Service agreement?

They're allowed to share your private data with anybody. For any reason.

Now, do you believe that a company who is about to be sued out of business will hesitate in earning a few bucks by selling their information? Perhaps to the very identity thieves we hired RelyID to protect us from?

I don't trust it. And I won't use it.

Yes, using RelyID demonstrates that I'm not providing a casual false identity. But, really, in the end, the "verification" comes from information that even not-terribly-sophisticated identity theives can still obtain. It really doesn't provide much protection.

And, in the end, a woman who's too scared to meet someone who refused the RelyID... probably will find new reasons to fear me after the process is over.

I really don't see it expanding my pool of "dateable" people.

But, as Dennis Miller says, "That's just my opinion. I could be wrong."