Wednesday, June 06, 2012

Hacking Into Personalities

I discussed the phenomenon of Game once before, and physics prof Steve Hsu just referenced it in relation to an HBO series written and directed by a woman who seems to believe in it (trailer at the link).  The most-famous application is the supposed ability of PUA's to hack the primitive hardware installed into females to get them into bed.  (My take: it apparently works on some of them.)

I certainly get why this would be the most fascinating aspect, to both men and women.  But I wondered in my post what the applications were for political figures and other leaders.  What does it mean in other types of attention-getting, such as wearing red, or performing arts?  There certainly is ample evidence that primitive programs influence our responses at least somewhat.  What are the limits of that?  what are our defenses?  One fascinating report of the women who have encountered "Game" and fallen for it is the split between those who rationalise their behavior later and those who say "I can't believe I did that.  I don't deserve to be treated like that and I can't imagine why I put up with it."

Today I connected it to something I noticed years ago:  women - not all women, but many - confide in their hairdressers more than one might think if viewed objectively. It may be related to a similar, unconscious "hacking" of more primitive responses.  Who do you allow to touch your face and hair ordinarily?  Your mother, your sister, your husband - a pretty intimate group.  Perhaps the mere allowing of a person in that close sets off a level of relaxation and trust.


Der Hahn said...

I've been reading a number of PUA and 'manosphere' blogs since becoming single again a couple of years ago. At a purely antecdotal level, I've found a lot of what they talk about to be both useful and to have an amazing ability to explain things that happened during the two most significant failed relationships that I endured. I've also found their advice useful in my current relationship which has gone better than I believe it would have had I been following my previous relationship programming.

All the usual caveats apply of course. I take what they say with a grain of salt. I apply the parts of their philoshophies I agree with and fell would be useful. I'm not into the pure pickup game so I can't speak to how well that works (or not).

I will say at the risk of sounding very non-PC that I find most women extremely unware of their personal attraction triggers. One of the things that game points out is that women don't seem to differentiate between what causes them to be attracted to a man, and what sustains a relationship with a man. The qualities they list consiously are almost always qualities they want to see *in a man they are already attracted to*.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

Non-PC or not, it is true from my observation, and that last sentence is well-put. Women seem to agree that this is true about many other women.

And likely, the same is true for men.

The hairdresser thing still fascinates me, though. If it is true for men at all, it is much more mildly so.

Texan99 said...

I guess I've never really had a hairdresser. I can't imagine confiding in one.

kaney said...

First let me say that we are labeling something that scientists and psychologists can only theorize. Some even say there is not unconscious mind, that it is simply a continuation of the conscious mind. For the sake of understanding NLP, it helps to consider that there is an "unconscious mind." One of the best descriptions I have heard so far is that the unconscious mind contains everything we are not thinking about now.

ceralin forte review