Dating for Nerds: A Shy Guy's Guide to Meeting Women

[Jimmy Snyder]

I'm not a nerd, so I can't help you out. My wife tells me she has a great deal of experience dating a nerd, but she refuses to help you out.

 

[Moonbear]

Seriously? It sounds so incomplete. Girls respond to this?

Remember, the first step is just to exchange names. It's the same as meeting new neighbors. You walk up, introduce yourself, stick out your hand to shake theirs and hopefully they tell you their name and shake your hand back. You might follow up with a few questions, "What do you do?" (i.e., what's your job) or if you're student age, "Where do you go to school?", or "Where did you move here from?" if they have just moved in recently, vs. "Have you lived here long?" if they are the existing neighbor and you're the new one. Then you just see where things go from there.

If you want other options, do a search for all the similar threads. I think those of us who have frequented GD for a long time could probably write a collaborative self-help book entitled, "So, You're a Nerd and Want to Ask Her on a Date..."

 

[junglebeast]

I think those of us who have frequented GD for a long time could probably write a collaborative self-help book entitled, "So, You're a Nerd and Want to Ask Her on a Date..."

Having experience giving advice doesn't necessarily mean the advice is any good

 

[Moonbear]

Having experience giving advice doesn't necessarily mean the advice is any good

Since when does that matter when writing a self-help book?

 

[Pyrrhus]

A word of advice: It doesn't matter what you say, what matters is the way you say it, and what you project.

Good luck!

 

[Moonbear]

A word of advice: It doesn't matter what you say, what matters is the way you say it, and what you project.

Good luck!

I hope you'll be understanding that we're going to put that one in the last chapter of the book...but not the last page...everyone reads the last page before buying the book. If they know that before they buy, they won't buy. Of course, we could put it in the middle, and then dedicate the remainder of the book to the ways of saying it and what is projected.

 

[Redbelly98]

A word of advice: It doesn't matter what you say, what matters is the way you say it, and what you project.

Yep. You definitely want to avoid coming across as some kind of weirdo or creep. In fact, consider it your mission to convince her you're not a weirdo or creep.

 

[MissSilvy]

Girls can smell fear and a lack of self-confidence. If you go up to her and keep acting shy and embarrassed, she'll most likely say no.

Also, yes, going up to her randomly without any prior contact and asking her out right away will get you labeled as creepy.

 

[27Thousand]

Girls can smell fear and a lack of self-confidence. If you go up to her and keep acting shy and embarrassed, she'll most likely say no.

Also, yes, going up to her randomly without any prior contact and asking her out right away will get you labeled as creepy.

I think that may be one practical implication of learning non-verbal flirting. Being able to figure out if they're receptive may increase the chances of not being seen as pushy, and help one appear to have good timing.

Now if I can come up with a mathematical equation

I'm thinking along these lines, in Algebra you learn how you have the Y & X axises, solve for Y, and predict Y from X. Well combining that with other principles, in mathematics/statistics they've created Linear Regression. Maybe if you have many X independent variables to look at you can increase the chances of figuring out the Y independent variable (whether she likes), or the concept of Multiple Regression. So first think

Then make it a multidimensional scatter plot, and when you have multiple X independent non-verbal behaviors and know the correlational coefficients for every single one, plus interaction effects (or interaction correlation coefficients), add it all up, predicting the Y dependent variable or the ability to read the woman may go up.

So what I want to do is email many of the authors of these peer-review journal articles begging them for their data sets. Then I could use statistical software to calculate an equation like:

y^ = b0 + b1x1 + b2x2 + ... bnxn
likelihood she likes guy ... (certain percent mathematical constant) times (non-verbal behavior yes or no) + (%)times(non-verbal behavior yes or no) + (%)times(two or possibly three happening at the same time) and so on with the equation. Then there could be an optimal cutoff threshold where after adding variables doesn't do much, but where excluding some may hinder predictability.

Then maybe something like Calculus could be added into take into account rate of change for the regression line which predicts. Then maybe other mathematical concepts could be added in.

 

[whs]

I used to think like you once. I was shy, scared to talk to girls etc. But then one day I decided that was it for me.

So I just started striking up conversations with just about any chick I happened to make eye contact with. You can literally say anything, and as long as your body language is confident/friendly, they will be happy to talk back. That's it.

Make a goal to talk to X number of girls next week/month what have you until you no longer are wondering such odd things. ("It seems so incomplete.." Seriously? Come on...)

If you see this girl across the street, throw your pen across the street at her and run over to it and say you were writing something and you dropped it. If you are still shy/creepy she will look at you weird, if you have learned the ways of normal human interaction, she will laugh.

 

[27Thousand]

I used to think like you once. I was shy, scared to talk to girls etc. But then one day I decided that was it for me.

So I just started striking up conversations with just about any chick I happened to make eye contact with. You can literally say anything, and as long as your body language is confident/friendly, they will be happy to talk back. That's it.

Make a goal to talk to X number of girls next week/month what have you until you no longer are wondering such odd things. ("It seems so incomplete.." Seriously? Come on...)

If you see this girl across the street, throw your pen across the street at her and run over to it and say you were writing something and you dropped it. If you are still shy/creepy she will look at you weird, if you have learned the ways of normal human interaction, she will laugh.

So what do you think about using mathematical equations for body language when talking to women, at least using it to get a "probability" for the "gist of it" and using experience to smooth out the edges? Yes I know some may think this is wondering about odd things, and not unreasonable to think that. However, if reading body language makes the OP or any of us a better person and better at knowing if someone's interested then don't you think it could be useful? Something to consider, women want men they're interested into talk to them, and those they're not interested into stay away. I wonder if that could be a plus for learning how to become better at reading people?

Like for example, earlier at a place I worked there was this one beautiful woman who'd always smile at me and give girly waves. One day she was doing something with her teeth and I said, "You shouldn't do that, it could hurt your teeth." Something unexpected happened, she then smiled deeply, leaned toward me and said, "So... Why are you interested in my teeth?" with a big smile. I didn't say anything because I didn't know if you can ever be sure if someone's flirting or not. I think maybe learning how to figure out these things intellectually/scientifically may be able to greatly help some of us out? Something to consider, in order to learn from trial and error you need something to try out in the first place.

 

[Pyrrhus]

27Thousand, too much analysis and too much thinking about what to say, how to say, and when to say it.. It's not going to be helpful at all, because you'll be in your head all the time micromanaging your thoughts, which is RIDICULOUS. In contrast, being confident and comfortable about yourself, it's better. You see someone you want to meet, you go there, and just express yourself. Yes, sometimes, you might get undesirable responses, but who cares?. Rejection is just part of life, and it is nothing to be feared. The reason why "Just be yourself" is a good advice (at least for "regular people") it's because you need to develop PREFERENCES and TASTES. You need to SCREEN the girls, and pick the ones you consider high quality. The girls aren't the only ones that SCREEN guys, you should have STANDARDS. This process is "somehow similar" to the activity of tasting fruits or ice cream flavors.

In the end, Don't be afraid of who you are, embrace that (but before this you need find out who you are..., and no... It's not a Lvl 75 Tauren in WOW).

 

[27Thousand]

27Thousand, too much analysis and too much thinking about what to say, how to say, and when to say it.. It's not going to be helpful at all, because you'll be in your head all the time micromanaging your thoughts, which is RIDICULOUS. In contrast, being confident and comfortable about yourself, it's better. You see someone you want to meet, you go there, and just express yourself. Yes, sometimes, you might get undesirable responses, but who cares?. Rejection is just part of life, and it is nothing to be feared. The reason why "Just be yourself" is a good advice (at least for "regular people") it's because you need to develop PREFERENCES and TASTES. You need to SCREEN the girls, and pick the ones you consider high quality. The girls aren't the only ones that SCREEN guys, you should have STANDARDS. Don't be afraid of who you are, embrace that.

Something you may possibly want to consider, as far as screening others and being yourself, don't you think that being able to read them to find out if they're at least somewhat interested in you will give you more confidence and allow you to be more yourself? Consider, if you're good at reading others, you may not be so obsessed about impressing others but rather concentrating on those who already show interest and who you're also interested in.

Also consider, in professional sports, they say they do their best when there's "flow" or when they don't think about it. However, when someone first learns a sport they have think about it until it becomes automatic, just like when you learn how to ride a bike. Even with professional sports, if a coach notices a player has an error in technique, the player during practice will try to consciously think about their technique and correct for it. Many people learn social skills through "gut feeling" or intuition, however just like some individuals have learning disorders/dyslexia, it's possible some may neurologically be less able at reading people. So if it doesn't come through gut feeling, do you think it could come through enough practice/technique until it becomes just as automatic as sports players who get so good they can just let it "flow"? Could you get to a point where you wouldn't consciously be thinking about everything, but rather just thinking about the present?

 

[Pyrrhus]

Yes, that's what I'm saying. It does get to that, but you have to be willing to put yourself in the situations where you'll learn. As you get older or more experienced, whichever comes first it'll be more automatic to you. This is advice for "regular people". Individuals who suffer from other disorders, I can't really say anything to help here, except keep trying.

 

[Astronuc]

Like for example, earlier at a place I worked there was this one beautiful woman who'd always smile at me and give girly waves. One day she was doing something with her teeth and I said, "You shouldn't do that, it could hurt your teeth." Something unexpected happened, she then smiled deeply, leaned toward me and said, "So... Why are you interested in my teeth?" with a big smile. I didn't say anything because I didn't know if you can ever be sure if someone's flirting or not. I think maybe learning how to figure out these things intellectually/scientifically may be able to greatly help some of us out? Something to consider, in order to learn from trial and error you need something to try out in the first place.

One doesn't respond intellectually or scientifically in the case where one wants to establish a relationship that is something more than a scientific or intellectual casual friendship. Actually, a casual friendship or acquaintanceship is a good starting point.

One could have responded "Are you flirting with me?", and that would go in one direction, as opposed to a response like "my name is ______" , to which she might respond with her name, from which the conversation could proceed along the lines of casual conversation and general information about each other.

I'd would echo as some others have intimated, don't overanalyze an individual situation.

 

[whs]

So what do you think about using mathematical equations for body language when talking to women, at least using it to get a "probability" for the "gist of it" and using experience to smooth out the edges? Yes I know some may think this is wondering about odd things, and not unreasonable to think that. However, if reading body language makes the OP or any of us a better person and better at knowing if someone's interested then don't you think it could be useful? Something to consider, women want men they're interested into talk to them, and those they're not interested into stay away. I wonder if that could be a plus for learning how to become better at reading people?

Like for example, earlier at a place I worked there was this one beautiful woman who'd always smile at me and give girly waves. One day she was doing something with her teeth and I said, "You shouldn't do that, it could hurt your teeth." Something unexpected happened, she then smiled deeply, leaned toward me and said, "So... Why are you interested in my teeth?" with a big smile. I didn't say anything because I didn't know if you can ever be sure if someone's flirting or not. I think maybe learning how to figure out these things intellectually/scientifically may be able to greatly help some of us out? Something to consider, in order to learn from trial and error you need something to try out in the first place.

Lol. I don't need equations to read body language. It was built into my system when I was born. In fact, I let my subconscious do most of it.

But in all seriousness, you can get advice from millions of people, practice things to say etc, but at the end of the day all you really need to do is just remember that the girl is simply another human being.

Talk to them like you would talk to your buddy.

 

[27Thousand]

Lol. I don't need equations to read body language. It was built into my system when I was born. In fact, I let my subconscious do most of it.

But in all seriousness, you can get advice from millions of people, practice things to say etc, but at the end of the day all you really need to do is just remember that the girl is simply another human being.

Talk to them like you would talk to your buddy.

Okay so what about people who are not as very talented with social skills as you are? If there are people who have dyslexia/learning disorders, what's to stop some from neurologically having trouble with reading peoples' social intents?

 

[Redbelly98]

Everybody has trouble reading social intents, at one time or another. The more you interact with people, the better you get at it. I'd say it took me until my mid to late 30's before I was reasonably good at it.

If somebody has a disorder that presents a barrier to understanding personal relationships, they should see a professional about it. There may be drugs or other treatment that can help. But honestly, I don't think anybody on an internet forum could help someone in that situation. The person would have to go see a professional in person in order to get help for their specific situation.

 

[whs]

Okay so what about people who are not as very talented with social skills as you are? If there are people who have dyslexia/learning disorders, what's to stop some from neurologically having trouble with reading peoples' social intents?

Well ya, I am not sure how math would help these people? Like RedBelly said, they must go see a doctor that is trained to help them.

Might work for a robot though.

 

[Redbelly98]

Ah, I'm reading past posts more carefully now. So this is somehow about using math or physics to figure out how to interact with people socially? The problem I see with that is, it's like saying if you learn how to calculate ballistic trajectories and analyze collisions mathematically, then you could become a decent baseball player. Not so. You become a decent baseball player by actually practicing and playing baseball. The reaction time required for the task of hitting a ball, or engaging in social interactions for that matter, is way way shorter than the time needed for a mathematical analysis of the conditions that suddenly present themselves.

Of course, my earlier post that somebody with a disorder should seek help from a professional doctor still holds.

 

[Matterwave]

Just go over there and ask if you can borrow a cup of sugar for baking a chocolate cake (girls love chocolate cake). If you don't like baking then go over there and ask her if she has any tape followed by "because I'm ripped!" (do this while flexing your muscles, chicks love this).

Hahahaha, this is the first forum post in a long time that actually made me laugh out loud. XD

Anyways, on-topic, I've experimented with this, it doesn't seem just asking random chicks out work so well...Most of them will be polite, but probably think it's weird. You probably should start a more platonic conversation first. =D

 

[27Thousand]

Ah, I'm reading past posts more carefully now. So this is somehow about using math or physics to figure out how to interact with people socially? The problem I see with that is, it's like saying if you learn how to calculate ballistic trajectories and analyze collisions mathematically, then you could become a decent baseball player. Not so. You become a decent baseball player by actually practicing and playing baseball. The reaction time required for the task of hitting a ball, or engaging in social interactions for that matter, is way way shorter than the time needed for a mathematical analysis of the conditions that suddenly present themselves.

Of course, my earlier post that somebody with a disorder should seek help from a professional doctor still holds.

And using your baseball example, people aren't born knowing how to play baseball, and don't use their "gut feeling" or instinct to know it. They have to learn it, and through a lot of conscious effort until the technique becomes automatic. In professional sports, they say they do their best when they just "let it happen", or flow, but to get there they first have to think about it and practice. When you first learn baseball, you have to consciously think about technique until it becomes automatic enough. If a professional sports player finds they have a problem with technique, they will consciously focus on technique during practice sessions. Although during the game they work on "flow", during practice they often consciously think about technique to perfect it.

Most use instinct or "gut feeling" to learn social skills. However, just like some have learning disabilities/dyslexia, some may neurologically not pick up on it that easily. For these people, consciously thinking about technique and lots of real life practice until it becomes automatic may be necessary, just like learning to play the piano, ride a bike, complicated sports, etc. I'm saying you need practice, but that for some people the technique doesn't come on their own no matter how hard they try. They may need additional instruction just like people learning to play the piano don't usually use instinct/"gut feeling" to pick it up.

When someone takes a keyboarding class so that they don't have to finger peck, they need instruction and conscious thought at first until it becomes automatic. Just like people can become good with keyboarding through instruction and practice, by doing the same thing you may be able to cut down on reaction time with learning social skills that way.

 

[27Thousand]

Where I'm coming from

Well ya, I am not sure how math would help these people? Like RedBelly said, they must go see a doctor that is trained to help them.

Might work for a robot though.

Everyone, I think there may be a misunderstanding here! I'm not saying I'm going to say to a woman, "Excuse me for a second, let me pull out a calculator and a cheat sheet to figure you out!" No, that would be very weird!

Maybe this will help in where I'm coming from, and if you don't agree with my approach perhaps you can suggest a different one:

I have much trouble knowing if a woman is interested or just trying to be friendly. Earlier in college, there was a woman in one of my classes who would always smile and sit next to me in class. Then after class she would walk with me and talk until she went past her next class. This would happen like every day we had class together. There was this one guy in class who'd act very friendly toward her. One day she walked in class, paused, looked at him, then me, then him, then me, smiled, and came over and sat next to me. So after two months of this, I decided to ask her on date. When I finally did, she told me that she would have to see because she thought she was doing something with her roommates and would let me know the next day we had class. Then that next class time she didn't sit next to me, although she always did. After class she got up and walked out of class quickly. I then tried to catch up because I had to find out. She then finally said she was dating a guy. Then another time, some guy I knew said that some woman (different woman) told him that she didn't know what my problem was, because I wouldn't ask her on a date and she thought it was supposed to be obvious that I should. I asked the guy who the woman was, and he said he didn't know but that she referred to me. I was confused because I had no clue whatsoever who it could be.

So you see why it may be helpful to be able to read people/situations? So I went to Yahoo!Answers asking about this, and some woman said you can find out by testing the waters by lightly flirting and see how a woman responds back, to get a rough idea of whether she's receptive. She said you can try lightly touching the woman on the arm to get her attention when talking, or when joking with her. If she acts uncomfortable, then that's a lot less of a rejection than asking straight out for a date and she rejects. If she smiles, giggles, or does something to flirt back, then that's a good sign. Later on, I also came across some peer-review journal articles where they had hidden cameras at public social gatherings, etc, where researchers found most of the time when a man asks a woman on a date or some similar thing, the woman sent out a pattern of a type of body language, and most of the time when women don't send out this body language they don't get asked out (they kept number counts for all of it and used the Scientific Method). There are also follow up studies where they would test some of these body language patterns and found they correlated with how women would rate how attracted they were to a man (both personality and looks wise).

The thing is, in these studies not all body language is equal, some don't mean much while others do. Follow-up studies find some of the body language means that the women is just the flirty personality type who's after men in general, while these same exact follow-ups find some of the body language is quite associated with a woman being interested in a particular man. Then some critics will say a lot of body language is quite ambiguous and Miss Silvy accused it of not being Science, while at the same time others will say the opposite and that these studies is Science proving what's already common sense. So taking a bunch of classes because of a minor in Statistics, I know that there are techniques for coming up with equations where if you have data you can say "Given these many variables, we have an equation that says whatever percent of the time this will happen in this range." (In another thread I think you said you know quite a bit about curve fitting, etc) I'm not doing it because I want to pull out a calculator, but rather to help me form an image in my mind of how it generally works and what body language you need to pay attention to more, while at the same time what other body language doesn't matter as much. The patterns you can find by looking at data scatter plots/equations sometimes seem different than the gist of it you see on paper. Also, if you can come up with mathematical equations to predict "90% of the time it happens in this range" (or something along those lines), it would be good evidence to use against those critics who say to not care about body language. I mean, if you come up with equations, then how can the critics argue? Historians say mathematical equations was very a big part of what set Galileo/Newton apart from others. Of course I'd still use experience/practice in order to learn, I'd just use a lot of conscious thought for the techniques and practice until it becomes quite automatic, just like learning to play the piano, baseball, or learning to drive a car.

whs and others, hopefully this helps in where I'm coming from? I mean, isn't interacting with other human beings something worthwhile?

 

[seycyrus]

...
Earlier in college, there was a woman in one of my classes who would always smile and sit next to me in class. ... I decided to ask her on date. ...

Good Job, well done! Things might have changed for her from the beginning, but at least you know you tried. She started to leave quickly because she wanted to sent you a new "correct signal". Maybe her situation will change in the future and then she will know for a fact that you are interested.

...problem was, because I wouldn't ask her on a date and she thought it was supposed to be obvious that I should. ...

One often puts a positive bias on "signals" from women one finds attractive. You probably are not as attracted to this second woman as you were the first. or maybe you were so fixated on the first one, that you did not notice the second.

So you see why it may be helpful to be able to read people/situations? ...

Certainly! And it sounds like you are doing it the right way, through action rather than non-action. Keep up the good work, and relax.

 

[Astronuc]

I have much trouble knowing if a woman is interested or just trying to be friendly. Earlier in college, there was a woman in one of my classes who would always smile and sit next to me in class. Then after class she would walk with me and talk until she went past her next class. This would happen like every day we had class together. There was this one guy in class who'd act very friendly toward her. One day she walked in class, paused, looked at him, then me, then him, then me, smiled, and came over and sat next to me. So after two months of this, I decided to ask her on date. When I finally did, she told me that she would have to see because she thought she was doing something with her roommates and would let me know the next day we had class. Then that next class time she didn't sit next to me, although she always did. After class she got up and walked out of class quickly. I then tried to catch up because I had to find out. She then finally said she was dating a guy. Then another time, some guy I knew said that some woman (different woman) told him that she didn't know what my problem was, because I wouldn't ask her on a date and she thought it was supposed to be obvious that I should. I asked the guy who the woman was, and he said he didn't know but that she referred to me. I was confused because I had no clue whatsoever who it could be.

I've had similar experiences.

. . . Then some critics will say a lot of body language is quite ambiguous and Miss Silvy accused it of not being Science, while at the same time others will say the opposite and that these studies is Science proving what's already common sense.

Miss Silvy is somewhat correct - it's not quatitative. People are unpredictable. One cannot look at a person and know what they are thinking at any given moment. One simply has to experience (interact with) another person over time. And even then the other person might be unpredictable. Trying to fit the behavior of another person to a model is futile.

 

[27Thousand]

Miss Silvy is somewhat correct - it's not quatitative. People are unpredictable. One cannot look at a person and know what they are thinking at any given moment. One simply has to experience (interact with) another person over time. And even then the other person might be unpredictable. Trying to fit the behavior of another person to a model is futile.

Something to consider, to put things into perspective it may not be quantitative science in the same way Physics or a test tube in chemistry are, but it's science in the same way that it uses the scientific method like the medical field does. I was looking at some of the follow-up studies, and if you have two groups of people who are exactly the same and you manipulate an independent variable and then measure a dependent variable, then there's a cause-effect relationship. Even if there's a confounding variable involved, something is still acting consistent here and can be further studied and put into use. The studies used actual statistical techniques to make their conclusions quantitative to see that there was statistical significance and effect sizes.

The problem is the effect size, etc, just stays in the peer-review journal articles. They don't usually try to find patterns across studies that deal with effect sizes/mathematical equations, but rather just look at patterns of the general principle (people say they care about the concept rather than details). I don't see equations in psychology textbooks (okay maybe just a few but not many), which makes it vague and doesn't say the other factors which come into play. My proposal is to do what Newton did and turn it more into a quantitative science, patterns across studies rather than just staying inside of the peer-review article itself (when they use null hypothesis testing). From what I've learned from those stats classes I took, from the actual Statistics Department rather than Social Science Department, whenever you have an actual correlation or effect size (even if they're weak) you can always create a mathematical equation to say a general probability to make predictions in a certain range (even if it's a weak equation). My plan is creating equations and then searching for patterns across studies, and then working from there to see how strong/weak these principles really are (by converting it into quantitative science format just like people will convert documents into PDF). It makes it more falsifiable, and thus better able to be refined/improved upon over time (like the natural sciences do). It's kind of like data mining, but there are some differences in my plans. Also in the the hard sciences they say the better something is at making predictions, the more likely it can be used for technology. They already use these principles to come up with predictions, but they don't usually come up with generalized mathematical equations across studies that they want to make testable. So maybe I could use that for my dating life! Also as I said in some of the other posts, I'm not planning on it only being an intellectual adventure but also combining a ton of practice/experience with it.

 

[Pyrrhus]

27Thousand, So she rejected you at that time and at that place... What is the problem?. You pick yourself up, and try again. People are unpredictable, she may have liked you still, but you may have come to strong. You don't typically ask people out that you don't really know that well. Maybe, you could have tried something casual like coffee?. Anyway, I just don't understand, why will you rather follow a Data Modeling approach for your dating life, instead of just going out more, and putting yourself in situations where you'll have to learn from experience. Everyone makes mistakes, the first times they go for the girl. It just does not always work out, but you should never lose sleep because of that.

A thing about data models, they are not as good as you think. You should search the literature just for knowledge. Look for a paper by Leo Breiman, "Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures".

 

[27Thousand]

27Thousand, So she rejected you at that time and at that place... What is the problem?. You pick yourself up, and try again. People are unpredictable, she may have liked you still, but you may have come to strong. You don't typically ask people out that you don't really know that well. Maybe, you could have tried something casual like coffee?. Anyway, I just don't understand, why will you rather follow a Data Modeling approach for your dating life, instead of just going out more, and putting yourself in situations where you'll have to learn from experience. Everyone makes mistakes, the first times they go for the girl. It just does not always work out, but you should never lose sleep because of that.

A thing about data models, they are not as good as you think. You should search the literature just for knowledge. Look for a paper by Leo Breiman, "Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures".

Thanks for the encouragement, but what if I need much more than that? Just like usually people use instruction and lots of practice to learn to play the piano rather than use "gut instinct", what if I have to use that strategy in learning to read and deal with women? If it makes me a better person?

I went to Google Scholar and downloaded the Leo Breiman article. It looks interesting, because of a statistics minor, and I'll read it. What I don't understand, if women are completely random then why even try talking to them because you'll get random results? Something I consider, aren't some men better reading women than others and consistent at it? At the most we could say it's difficult to study/measure scientifically/mathematically at this point of time in history (at least), but that doesn't mean there aren't any systematic patterns which occur. If I try looking at many data sets and using R statistical computing to try to visualize and figure them out, I may even see gaps in "unknown" areas, which may lead to future hypotheses in my mind to be tested using the Scientific Method. Maybe I could then experiment in person to figure those areas out after looking at plots, etc. Right now for this very purpose of wanting to look at data sets for dating, I'm looking at many different online manuals on R Statistical computing programming language and practicing what I learn in the program itself. For Statistics 5600, multivariate statistics, we had to use this program (in the other classes we used SAS program but you can't do as much with it's graphics, I've also used SPSS but that's just point and click so you don't have as much control). If it leads to innovation? Then maybe it could help me with my dating life?

Here's a question I have for you, is it just that you don't think we can discover the patterns which happen with women/flirting, or do you think we can but that it would be unnatural to go about relationships in that sort of way? Something I'm trying to figure out, throughout history didn't people say both of those about a lot of things that we can now control through technology? Don't "what if questions" lead to creative innovation?

 

[Monique]

It's not all about learning to read women, it's also about the women being able to read you! Don't take the fun out of flirting by approaching it in a scientific way, you'll risk sending out the wrong signals and being perceived as unnatural.

 

[GeorginaS]

Am I understanding this thread correctly, and this is nerds giving nerds dating advice?

 

[Moonbear]

If you need an equation just to figure out who to ask out on a date, don't you think you'll be in a heap of trouble trying to maintain a relationship if you still can't read social cues properly?

 

[Redbelly98]

Am I understanding this thread correctly, and this is nerds giving nerds dating advice?

I just noticed the OP did not show his attempt at solving the problem. Infractions for everyone who helped will be forthcoming

 

[27Thousand]

It's not all about learning to read women, it's also about the women being able to read you! Don't take the fun out of flirting by approaching it in a scientific way, you'll risk sending out the wrong signals and being perceived as unnatural.

I could be wrong, but wouldn't becoming better at reading people and whether they're actually interested make it so you can be yourself more? Rather than worry about impressing, wouldn't you focus on those who are interested in you and at the same time you're also interested in?

Also, from what I understand with body language, it's two way. If a woman smiles and leans forward, I read that if you pull away she may think the man isn't interested, and that the man should smile back or do something else to flirt if the woman acts this way. Since many on the other threads seemed to doubt that body language takes part in flirting, maybe the equation could demonstrate it and help one think about how it works. Basically many when looking at mathematical equations in Physics will try to make it conceptual how it works, and think about it. What if inventing equations does the same thing?

 

[27Thousand]

If you need an equation just to figure out who to ask out on a date, don't you think you'll be in a heap of trouble trying to maintain a relationship if you still can't read social cues properly?

What about learning how to read if people are interested in you? That one girl on Yahoo Answers who told me to flirt with a girl and see how she responds back as a way to get an idea if a girl is interested?

 

[Pyrrhus]

You're being too reactive, 27Thousand. You seem to think the approach to Women is to react to what they do. Don't worry about that, worry about YOU. Do you enjoy her company? Do you like her? etc..., instead of Does she like me? Does she enjoy spending time with me?, etc..