There Won't Be a Book

I’ve come to two conclusions. Or maybe I’ve come to one conclusion that directly impacts the second conclusion. No matter, the results of my thinking are the same: random, ambiguous, and flawed.

First, the theory of “the one” related to the great spouse search is completely false. If you’re looking for “the one,” quit now. In fact, quit yesterday. It’s as asinine as thinking that you’re on Earth to accomplish only one, single thing, and if you fail to accomplish that one thing, your life is meaningless and unsuccessful. Once you buy into that line of thinking, the logical end is tons of stress and anxiety. You constantly have to be on your toes, ready and aware to alter anything and everything about life, because if you miss the opportunity of the lifetime (not opportunity of a lifetime, but opportunity of THE lifetime…you’ll only have one, in this line of thinking), you’re screwed. For a guy who, at first, does not succeed, this is not the right plan for me.

Instead, my evolving ideology thinks that life is a game of “types.” There’s a type or two of work or career field I’m cut out for. The more I stray away from the type of work I’d rather be doing, the unhappier I’d be. There’s a type of worship style that God uses to get ahold of me. The more I stray away from that type, the less likely I am to get the point. And there’s a type of lady I’m naturally attracted to. The less like the type the lady is, the rockier the road to happiness will be.

Because of that, the whole idea of finding or writing an end-all-be-all-tell-all book on successful relationships is pretty frivolous. My relationship I’m currently in is unique, just like everybody else’s (clarification for Shay: everybody’s relationship with their other is unique, not everybody else’s relationship with my g/f; that, as we say in the industry, would be bad). That would require a relationship book for all the many millions of relationships there are right now, and each one of those books would sell only one copy. As they say in the industry, that’s not good. Instead, a better pursuit would be to take up learning your relationship style and finding someone who clicks on the same things you do.

If anything else, your odds are better in “the type” theory of getting married than they are in the theory of “the one.” Wherefore comfort one another with those words…

Show me a contract

I believe I should write a book on relationships. I will too, if somebody offers a lucrative publishing deal. Well, lucrative in the sense that I can dilly-dally around for another couple of years before fully entering into adulthood (trans: getting a job). Here’s the promo sheet:

Title: “The Inverted Relationship: Going Through Life in Reverse”

Authors: Me and the girlfriend

Synopsis: Various and sundry circles have pushed the “true” meaning and purpose of dating, courtship, and other methods of relationship building as figuring out if two people are “right” for marriage. Its fine and dandy, but the inherent problem is that couples rarely ever engage in “married” people activities during the relationship building process. That’s why I propose (no pun intended) a complete overhaul in the relationship building process. After the initial acquaintance phases are over, start doing married people things (within good reason, of course). Activities include but aren’t limited to: Volunteer to take care of kids (have I mentioned how cool the idea of adoption is lately? Yes, Leah, I know, I haven’t mentioned ANYTHING lately), work out each other’s budgets (which, if you’re in college and have no money, it’ll be a piece of cake), plan each other’s vacations (but don’t tell the parents till after the fact if you end up going on the vacation together), and, of course, lots of time observing and hanging around other married people. The purpose is twofold. 1) See if you’re ready for married life—if not, then by the previous arguments you have no business dating and 2) if you are ready for married life, to see if you can handle married life with your significant other. It’s a really crazy notion, but it takes the whole “date with a purpose” idea to its logical end. Plus, it actually works.

The Short List

I’m in an “old man passing down words of wisdom” mood today. Plus I remember somebody lamenting that there aren’t any good books to help you make the move from singleness to coupleness. Honestly, I’m of the opinion that it’s more luck than anything else, and there’s only so much you can write about having good luck. As friends of mine say, even if you polish a pile of poo to where it shines, it still stinks to see your face in it. But as much as you sometimes can’t control being single or coupled, you can control a heckuvalot when you finally do get coupled. And, though cliché, it is in your best interest to start prepping yourself for coupleness while you’re stuck in singleness. Thus, my short list of things I wish I’d developed before I got coupled. You’ll know how sick and twisted (read: twiterpated) in about 5 minutes.

1). Self Confidence: Gals dig self-confidence. Guys dig self-confidence. Gals and guys dig self-confidence. Why is it, then, that so many of us lack it? And why is it that “self-confidence” is so dang hard to define and develop? I’ve always said there’s a fine line between confidence and conceitedness. Though I admit now that it’s a rather large, grey blob more than it is a fine line, merely defining self-confidence as a humble but assured belief in one’s self doesn’t make it any easier a trait to develop, especially in the face of overwhelming evidence that suggests you have reason to be concerned about yourself. As I read once, “The only consistent feature of all your dissatisfying relationships is you.”

2). Patience: Patience is more than a virtue, it’s on the list of “almost unattainable character traits” up around self-confidence. If you thought managing your own hectic schedule was tough, try to manage it around somebody else’s hectic schedule. It sucks. It sucks hardcore. It usually means feast or famine when it comes to spending time with your other. When you’re eatin’ good, no worries. But when you’re hungry, oh how time doesn’t fly. Granted, you’re likely to only notice the famine when you’re not busy and there’s nothing at all going on. Thus, you probably need…

3). A Life: Patience becomes less necessary when there’s tons of other stuff occupying your time. The busier you stay when you’re away from the other, the less time you have to analyze how much better you could have done on the last outing. You also come up with really groovy ideas for the next outing, and gals dig groovy ideas. I was of the opinion that what can be done today can just as easily be done tomorrow long before I got coupled. It’s even easier to put stuff off for the good and noble cause of courtship.

4). Accountability: There’s also going to come a time (no, hasn’t happened to me yet) that there’s not a lot of things more important than spending time with the other. Unless you’ve got a roomie, good friend, or other person in you life willing to kick the crap out of you a time or two after something truly important gets left undone, life’ll be pretty tough. Not necessarily because things don’t get done, more because you’ll be hearing “Gosh, you’re whipped” more than you want to.

Sometimes you wonder if you’re only here to serve as a warning to others.

*****UPDATE*****01/12/06*****0930*****

If, per chance, you fail to develop these traits while in singleness, you can always work on them when you decide to put the relationship "on hold," whatever the h--l that means.

Unfortunately, I get to find out what that means.

Second helping

Mmmmm, pie….I like pie…..I think I’ll have another piece.

Tis been almost a month since the curse of pathetically poor social luck was lifted. So far, I got no regrets in turning to the dark side. Even when it means admitting hypocrisy on my part, I still have no regrets. I think that’s a good thing, but, in typical Dingdong fashion, I’ll have to analyze it to be sure.

There are a lot of things I swore I’d never do if/when I ever had the chance to do the whole relationship thing again. Some of it’s been pretty easy to stick to. For example, take rushing the whole physical side of things. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a guy. Guys of all people like physical things; but after you make the mistake (even if it’s not THE “mistake” people so often think of) of getting closer before you get closer, you won’t do it again. I think the whole touchy/lovey/dovey junk just doesn’t work till after there’s a solid emotional knowledge base of the person. Even just the simple stuff like hugs and holding hands means a whole heckuva lot more a month or so into the relationship because the emotional attraction has had time to grow. Physical barriers are easily broken, and after you break them, it’s difficult—if not impossible—to put them back up.

Without the get-to-know phase, you end up being more enamored with the relationship itself than you do with the other person. I read this article a while ago now (like, almost a month ago—coincidence, I hear you say), and the part at the end about “the Us” made me think a little bit. To a point, “the Us” is an inescapable part of a relationship/romance (whatever). Many people like to call it “the new.” Friends get excited that you’re in “the new” relationship/romance (whatever), parents want to know about “the new” significant other, so on and so forth. After a few weeks, though, “the new” should be pretty well over. Granted, it reappears every time you take a step up the commitment ladder (which, if anybody knows what those steps are and what’s different between them, please let me know…soon…), and a lot of people talk about breaking in “the new” marriage—don’t ask me what that means. But “the new” shouldn’t stick around as long the second or third time around. If you’re constantly striving to talk about “the new” more than you are about the other person, that’s when you’ve got a problem.

I also said I’d hate to have a clingy-type relationship/romance (whatever) where I’d be on the phone or hanging out every night of the week, and, yeah, kept that too, but it’s been a rough statute to keep. There comes a point right after “the new” wears off where you just click with the other person, and after that happens, having your own life becomes less important and spending time with the other gets close to breathing, eating, and sleeping on the list of priorities. I think the slang term for it is being “twiterpated” or “whooped,” but I could be wrong. All I know is that life is a lot more fun with her around than it is with her not around, and sacrificing some level of comfort at home on the couch to be out and about with her is a sacrifice well worth making.

It doesn’t even have to be “out,” in the most literal sense (this is gonna sound like I’m trying to score pineapple points, but it’s the honest truth). The most enjoyable part of the last month has been just crashing somewhere, hanging out, talking about life and attempting to solve all the world’s problems. It’s like writing a blog, except you talk instead of write and it’s to another person instead of a computer. Admittingly, I’ve got that dreaded fear in the back of my mind that we’re gonna hit that proverbial wall of having nothing else to talk about and then it’ll be over, but luckily there are no walls on the horizon at this point.

Which, it borders hypocrisy to admit I’m stressing out over stuff. I’ve decided that some level of insecurity and stress is a good thing. If you weren’t worried that there was a chance that you’d lose the other, you’d have no reason at all to talk, date, court, woo, impress, or any of the other stuff we all curse but secretly and sneakily makes the social system work. And no matter what stage of a relationship/romance (whatever) you’re in—whether it be startup or marriage—insecurity can be the best motivational factor in striving for a great relationship/romance (whatever) instead of settling for a good one. Granted, the sources of the insecurity change as the relationship/romance (for the last time, whatever) progresses (yeah, still waiting for that discourse about the various accepted levels of the social system…anytime…now…..), but taking a small dose of general anxiety, stress, and/or insecurity’s a decently good thing to have on occasion.

Did I mention I like pie? It’s the coolest.

Digesting a piece of the happiness pie

For those of you wondering, yes, it is official. The dingdong’s off free agency and in the ball game. The apple is in the crisper. The chicken is in the pot. The car has a driver. The pursuit has a happiness.

Singleness, at least for the time being, is over.

So, needless to say, that explains not only the lack of posting the past few weeks, but also will explain the lack thereof during the holiday season (though an overabundance of comments may reverse my recent speculation that nobody reads me anymore and hasten new posts). As I told a friend and confidant, I have to rush to make my quota of dates for the year since, you know, late start and all.

Through the course of college (no pun intended), it became readily apparent to me that the purpose of education in general is not to make you smarter, but to make you realize that you know a lot less than you think. It’s a small secret that, I think, has made more of an impact on how I think and operate as an individual. Take, for instance, this dating thing. I’m no expert; far from it. I really expected that everything I ever thought about girls, dating, and relationships would be disproven. The stereotypical stuff sorta has. But, incredibly, I’ve managed to back up more of what I’ve serously thought about how the world operates than I have debunked it. Things are still in the early innings, though, and I reserve the right to modify and/or amend as necessary.

Let’s start with the groove theory. I still think the overall concept of a connection between two people being a product of environmental/contextual factors and personality factors is highly valid. But, rather than it being E=G[M/(S=P)], I think the actual equation needs to be simplified into something more general, like sparks=place*personalities (S=P-cubed, maybe, where s=sparks, p1=place, p2=guy, p3=gal). That way it keeps with the whole point accumulation theory that we’re all so familiar with (i.e. I better darn well get some pointage for cutting down a friggin’ Christmas tree for HER apartment this weekend).

The simpler equation also makes it more evident that any one factor could overcome a deficit of the other two to create sparks. For example, there are those people (guys and gals) that have the natural ability to draw attention to themselves in spite of precarious circumstances, and, to some extent, explains why people click even when the world seems to be against them. I think I’m my own best proof of this. Granted, my personality is anything to brag about, but put her and I together, and we click along pretty well. In spite of EVERYTHING to do being sold out or cancelled on our first outing, we still decided it was worth a second to see if it was a bum night or if our luck was that bad (for the record, MY luck is that bad—there was less than nothing to do on the second outing; but Charlie Brown holiday specials came to the rescue).

There are also places or situations that naturally create romantic-type feelings between two people that, for all intents and purposes, would not have even considered hooking up. I’m no authority on that subject; see here and here for thoughts and ideas. Personally, I’ve come full circle and am now a big fan of networking/bumming/patheticness. For me, knowing it was a set-up totally relieved those blasted initial encounter nerves that I so often got trying to start the ball in motion myself because, logically, if she was interested enough to agree to the set-up, she obviously saw something she sorta thought she did or could like. Without having the nerves, the only thing left to worry about was living up to expectations (which in my case, I knew, couldn’t be much).

It also helped that the matchmaker is not one of those very driven personalities, but has the gift of meddling. When she (yes, the matchmaker’s a she; but she’s married, to answer that question) wants to make something happen, she’ll go to the ends of the earth and fudge the truth to make it happen, then have a huge debriefing session to verify everything she already knew. So, when I asked her and the husband to make it a double on the first outing, she not only happily agreed, but arranged the whole day and time thing (the husband and I figured out the actual gameplan--which, of course, failed) and she called both her and me the next day (and the day after the second outing) to follow up on her match and tell me what she thought. It sounds—dare I say—pathetic, but follow me. Yes, I think the double is a good thing. Yes, I think follow up is a good thing. There’s less pressure and more thinking capacity to carry conversation during the outing, and you’ve got at least two other people to confirm or deny the existence of sparks and help you rationalize the next move. I recall, again, the book Good to Great by Jim Collins. One of the distinguishing characteristics between the great companies and the mediocre ones was the ability to boldy confront reality. Collins said (paraphrased, of course) that the best way to confront reality was to have regular meetings where staff could openly discuss the company without fear of persecution. When you do the double, you allow yourself to have that meeting, of sorts, where the other couple can tell you if there's a future or not because, accordingly, mediocre companies solve problems (bad relationships), great companies take advantage of opportunites (good relationships).

This point, alone, could be well expounded upon. We actually met each other at church (which, if you want me to endorse a pineapple place, church would be it) the week before the first outing. I was actually expecting to meet another potential fruit that day, and had set everything up myself to make that meeting succeed. However, I always pick bad produce from the grocery store, so I shouldn't really be surprised that my piece of fruit didn't show up at service. I could have put everything on hold, allowed myself to miss the opportunity (admittingly, its been done before), and go on trying to solve a problem (the gal and I had a fling a few years ago--it didn't work, obviously). Instead (wisely, thanks to tons of good mentorship), I chose to take advantage of an opportunity. It doesn't mean I created a situation, it doesn't mean I forced something to happen, I merely took advantage of an opportunity. Personally, relationships are tons better things to be in when they naturally form, and while it does take intentional work to make one (any relationship, really--friends, parents, siblings, or the boy/girl kind) grow, the majority--if not all--of my best personal relationships "just happened" for no rhyme or reason.

So, there ye be; a live case study to mull and ponder. If anything else, it should totally reinforce the notion of modern-day miracles.

Please, don't shoot

It’s a good time to be an 18-year-old-male-southern-gospel fan.

Yes, I just made five bucks starting a blog entry with that sentence, which is totally not the point, mind you. But it justifies the next few minutes of ballsy, testosterone-fueled rambling about a topic that likely will cause the head of my voodoo doll to be put on a stick and burned in a hot grease fire. So don’t even bother clicking that “flag this as offensive” button on the top of the blogger window; I already know it is. Actually, if you can make it through the locker room, I think there is a practical lesson; if for no one else, then for me.

I have concluded that the southern gospel industry is disproportionately loaded with jailbait. First, by jailbait, I don’t necessarily mean girls that will send me to jail; more like girls that would get me in trouble. You know, the whole apple/pineapple thing. It’s the negative stigma attached to the word “jailbait” that keeps the mind in the sanctuary during the worship service, if you know what I mean. Second, this isn’t just a random accusation that’s unsubstantiated, impractical, or impossible (like one of the sg publications putting out a swimsuit edition every year, though if the only thing stopping them from doing it is a freelance photographer, I can take pictures as well as anybody). It’s an observation based not only on tons of evidence during extremely slow days at work, but also through interviews and surveys with trusted friends and advisors. And, no, they’re not mad scientists, convicted criminals, cradle snatchers or anything weird like that; just guys making observations. Observations are completely acceptable within the realm of scientific discovery (and no, “scientific discovery” is NOT slang for “dating” or “sex,” as much as I think it should be sometimes).

Having just turned 25 in the last week, I can now officially claim to be in a quarter-life crisis. The inner clock of wanting to get out of college mode, find “the” job, “the” place to live, “the” girl…basically “the” life and live it, I sorta decided that it doesn’t necessarily matter what order the “the’s” happens in, as long as they do happens. And knowing that it’s not about how much you know, but who you know, I’ve been in a mood to utilize my networking skills a lot more. I think that’s just a nice way to saying that I’m turning into a bum, but oh well. Bums at least have a 9-to-5 job begging on the street corner and can go home to a cardboard house at the end of the day. I split several hours of every day between any of three jobs (all of which are pretty cool) and go home to a rented place (which is nice and comfy). It’s a far better life than being a bum, but there’s little to no consistency in it.

Alas, I digress; back to the story. They say confession is a good thing, so here's everything out in the open now. When I first started working in s.g. radio back in my late teens, I was the single guy everybody tried to hook up (completely fine with that, mind you). One day I was jawing with a good bud and radio-type, and somehow worked our way into talking about music rotation calls. He mentioned that Annie McRae called the station the other day, and he tried to put in a good word for me with her. I didn’t ask him to that first time, mind you, but from then on, I always made sure that regardless who called, there was a good word put in for me with the record execs and the artists. Call it networking, call it bumming, call it pathetic, I don’t really care. Point is that it doesn’t work. Annie McRae, Trecia Cisneros, Lauren Talley, Jessica Brown; nothing, no love at all (I was gonna say “no love for the dingdong,” but that sounds too…yeah, this is the point where we enter the locker room).
By this point, we were just yakkin more to hear our own voices than to actually get me closer to social involvement (no, still not slang for anything), and we noticed that for every lady within my “dating pool,” there were at least twice as many out of it. So, the genius friend of mine suggested considering the younger ladies. But, having dated a high school girl four years go (back when high school girls were in my dating pool), I decided that’d be like an apple going after a peach seed. I love peaches; they make great pie, cobbler, ice cream topping, etc. But there’s not much you can do with a peach seed. If you don’t believe me, then make a peach seed cobbler and see what happens. Not only will your teeth hurt like a sonuvagun, but I’m sure those seeds can’t feel good coming back out.

While it wasn’t necessarily the most spiritual exercise of my life, I did learn a couple things. I’ve since abandoned large-scale networking. While I did have honest connections with “the stars,” that whole crappy phase was nothing more than a teeny bopper fantasy about hooking up with a Backstreet Boy (I was dumb when I was a kid; stupidly, insanely dumb; how the &^$% did I survive 25 years? I really want to beat myself with a stupid stick now). I do think friends of friends are decent places to scout for potential datables, but it has to be practical. In my quest for maturity, I’ve noticed that God’s left us tons of evidence that proves the world and the people therein operate, for the most part, very practically, and if I look hard enough for a reasonable explanation, I’m fairly likely to find one.

Second, while betting on the long shot can get you a great return every couple million chances, you’ll probably make more money putting down a few bucks on the sure winner. I just got through reading Good to Great by Jim Collins, and in his study he found that the greatest companies put more effort and energy in developing their opportunities than they did in solving their problems. If I go and find a lady outside the dating pool, I’m putting more energy in solving problems I create for myself than I am in building opportunities.

After the botched relationship early in college, I vowed I’d never date a high school chick again (and, yes, I’ve kept my vow). And really, after going through grad school, I doubt I’ll date a freshman or sophomore. I have nothing against freshman or sophmores, but there are way too many differences in their lives and mine. The high school and early college years are all about discovering who you are and all that warm fuzzy crap. I’ve got a decent handle on that, even though it took the two extra years of grad school to get the full extent of who I am. Even in early grad school, though, I became less concerned with who I am but more about what I’m doing. All those bloody leadership books another good bud of mine made me read have me longing for a life of significance. I know there’s many ways to do something significant, and I don’t necessarily care what path to significance I take. I just want to know I’m on the path and moving in the right direction. Apples can do things like that; peach seeds can’t. Put an apple with a peach seed, and you create more problems than you build opportunites.

The Groove Theory, revisited

You know, I really despise the whole notion of horoscopes and psycho-non-sense. It’s not necessarily because it’s wicked or of the devil, anybody can write bluntly vague but true statements like these whether possessed by evil forces, aliens, or an addiction to soda pop. My problem is that somebody’s getting paid a ton of money to write crap like my horoscope I read yesterday:

"Romantic relationships require genuine enthusiasm to be successful, and you can only put genuine enthusiasm into someone you really dig."

That’s so brilliantly obvious that I lost 10 IQ points and had to beat myself with a hammer as punishment. Seriously, that’s like saying “Work is hard so do something you enjoy for a living.” In a utopian society, we’d like to think that we’re smarter-than-the-average-bear enough to avoid investing time, effort, and energy into something that is completely pointless. Even writing the oh-so-unintelligent horoscopes still puts food on the table, so it has positives (the paycheck being the only one I can think of). But occasionally you’ve got to give in and do something that goes against the ultimate plan, hoping only that the time invested in pointless activity makes you mentally stronger to withstand the urge to give in to mediocrity again in the future.

It’s amazing to me how completely odd and random the human decision-making process is at times. Guys tend to ignore the obvious dangers of emotional pain and heartache in an effort to meet our inner physical need of reproduction, and gals ignore obvious logical hindrances of situations because of an emotional warm fuzzy feeling that hints at comfort and security. I’ve got an idea that would totally fix the problem, but as of yet, God hasn’t set up a website where we can go and download a daily agenda of things He wants us to do and people He wants us to see. As somebody once said, “If you’re forced to rest, a laurel’s as good a place to do it as any.” So, until the download-your-agenda website thing gets set up, we’re stuck pondering life’s difficulties in the public sphere and coming up with hypothetical answers to unsolvable problems.

Reviewing the notes from the academy, I think the sole purpose behind the development of the groove theory was the hypothetical answer to an unsolvable problem. While somewhat ambiguous and, dare I say obvious, the groove theory represents an honest attempt at making the decision to pursue or not to pursue more objective and empirical instead of a subjective gut call. Thus, you get a better idea of whether the pursuit of social happiness will be worth “genuine enthusiasm” or whether it will land you in the clutches of mediocrity (i.e. ending up with a lemon instead of a pineapple).

Even if you’ve landed in the vicious cycle of limbo, the groove theory offers hope of making the limbo rock (heh, punny). By taking the principles of the groove theory and putting them into practice, you should be able to figure out if the costs of time, effort, and energy in limbo are worth the potential benefits of a relationship with “someone you really dig.” You should be able to figure out how to put yourself in situations that market your strengths and downplay your weaknesses (because let’s face it, apples get pineapples because of their ability to market themselves) if your desire is to move out of limbo. While the whole notion of pickup lines is scorned and abandoned, the principle of them is highly applicable: the majority of the socially successful have a set routine that nets more profits than losses. Find your groove, embrace your groove, play your groove.

I want to be a horoscope interpreter. Equally as pointless, equally as profitable.

The Indoctrination, if you will, of the Groove Theory

After much research, analysis, debate, and a good bit of luck, it is my pleasure to present to you the mathematical theory of relationships (the groove theory, if you will).

E=G(M/S+P) where E=effective style, G=groove, M=mac factor, S=speech, and P=personality

Put into words, your effective style is equal to your groove times the quotient of your mac factor divided by the sum of your speech and personality.

I shall have to admit, the work is not my own. I ran across it the other day while cleaning out boxes of high school memories. During the summer of 1997 I went on a three-week retreat that literally began the process of changing me from the shy geeky introverted type I was back then to the less shy, less introverted, but still geeky type I am today. It was one of those summer academy things where they shack you up with 20 people you’ve never met on a floor of a dormitory full of 280 other people you don’t know and tell you “Have fun, broaden your horizons, but don’t get into trouble.”

And, honestly, nobody got into serious “we have to kick you out of the academy” trouble. But, fortunately for my less-than-socially-apt self, I lucked out and got in the house of guys that thought getting to know all the girls was the best way to broaden the horizons. Thus, “The Indoctrination, if you will, of the Groove Theory” not only represents our greatest feat as a band of brothers, but also the countless hours of trial and error courting the lovely ladies of “The House of the Wandering Penguins.” And, wouldn’t ya know it, the theory came to us one evening while we were sipping carbonated beverage listening to White Town’s “Your Woman.”

It made perfect sense at the time (both the song and the theory); not so much sense now, unfortunately. As M.C. Bennett told me later, “The groove theory simply cannot be explained. It just is.” I feel obliged to define the terms and explain the theory anyway, but do allow me some leeway to adjust the definitions should further research on my part turn up more accurate information.

Simply put, a person’s effective style is how good he or she looks to the opposite sex after an encounter. Are you potential arm candy, or just another waste of space? To find out, you start with the groove. The groove is the environmental variable of the equation. Is the situation favorable for hooking up, or are you more likely to get slapped in the face? Everyone hopes for a positive groove or a favorable environment to make a connection, but mathematically it is still possible to effectively style in hard times. The mac factor is your optimal ability to be a player. Its not about whether you execute or not, its about your potential. Some people got the mac, some people don’t. Speech and personality are the action/event variables. Speech takes into account the overall positiveness or negativeness of the conversation and adds it to the combination of the two personalities. If the convo was good, and the personalities, then the sum will be positive; likewise bad convo and a personality clash result in a negative sum. Obviously, a really high convo/personality sum makes for a large denominator, and thus the mac factor has to be that much higher to result in a significant quotient. This takes into account the other variables at play (i.e. doubt on the part of the other person, an overtly favorable environment, sheer odds that everybody gets lucky once in a while, etc.)

I know by now you’re dying to ask, “So, Dingdong, what’s it all mean?” Truth be told, other than the obvious, I don’t remember yet. The obvious is that tons of factors go into making a connection with somebody. Is the time right? Is the place right? Do you say what needs to be said? Are you naturally drawn to people like him/her? Above and beyond that, there are varying levels and degrees of connection. If there weren’t varying levels and degrees of connection, 1) there’d be no fighting among roommates over who gets to date the hot chick/dude, because the first person to connect would win and 2) there’d be no big decision over who to date, who you like better, etc, because it would be a 100% connection or a 100% repulsion.

The only thing I still hesitate to say the groove theory covers is the recurring encounter. While the groove does improve with recurring exposure (no Shay, I don’t mean nudity), the speech/personality sum also improves, and unless your mac factor grows proportionally, your effective style may diminish over time. This is inconsistent with tons of prior research that supports the notion that people become more attractive and attracted to each other over time. The important thing, though, is that the unthinkable has once again been achieved. At least on paper (and now a computer screen), it is possible to use logic and reason to explain the highly illogic and unreasonable.

Go ahead and put my Nobel Prize on the mantel next to the little league trophy and the die-cast race cars.

Of Love and War

Word of wisdom for today: don’t start reading your horoscope just because it’s opposite the comics. Yesterday’s astrological hypothesis was another winner:

“The dynamic between you and your romantic hopeful is getting interesting, humorous, and/or annoying. The more you ignore this person, the more he/she adores you.”

Well, since I have no idea who this so-called ‘romantic hopeful’ is and therefore can’t pay her any attention, I don’t think I can mess this one up (if indeed the hypothesis turns out to be true—I half-think it’s a load of bovine feces). Of course, this is banking on the “absence makes the heart grow fonder” notion, which is true to a certain extent. I often find myself digressing into thoughts of “what if” and “what should I do” after any kind of remotely successful social encounter (and yes, the barometer for determining “successful” has been lowered during the “Great Drought of the 20s”—some would rather call it the “college years”).

The negative side effect of the absence produces fondness theory is that one inevitably has to go through relationship purgatory (commonly known as limbo) before seeing results. Unlike the popular party game, social limbo sucks. Compare it to that feeling of non-hunger-non-fullness that makes one ponder whether to eat dessert or snack after a meal—you’re sick if you do, you’re hungry if you don’t. The exact same thing can be said of limbo. You’re sick on an emotional level—if not a physical level as well—if you keep to the absence program, because its driving you crazy that some resolve can’t come of the situation. But once you break the silence, one phone call leads to another call and the twiterpated thirst won’t ever be quenched.

Limbo’s not necessarily a bad place to be if one knows how to manage it. I remember reading something about a year ago (though I don’t remember where) that said something to the effect of “If you’re forced to rest, a laurel is as good a place as any to do it.” Looking at the dearth of opportunity that is life at this point, limbo doesn’t sound like a bad vacation from reality. While it is always possible to over-think a situation, limbo gives one a chance to play out various scenarios. It gives a person time to talk to members of his or her personal cabinet (yes, everybody needs a personal cabinet; let me know if I need to explain this concept, it’s actually one of my better theories) and come up with a war plan for almost every possible situation. By the time the battle breaks out, it’s possible a guy or gal could have several good and reliable courses of action that would prevent the new-relationship jitters.

But, after awhile (days, weeks, months…kinda depends on the opposition), the whole “out of sight, out of mind” opinion becomes more relative. Guys’ attention spans are only as long as the time between commercial breaks during the game, and we’ve already got a lot to think about then. I mean, you’ve got quarterback ratings, cheerleaders, rushing stats, cheerleaders, receiver vs corner matchups, cheerleaders and a whole heckuva lot of other stuff to keep track of; not much time to ponder limbo. That’s why it’s apparent to me that the whole be obvious approach to relationship initiation is the best on both fronts. Guys gotta do enough to make the girl stick in the mind longer than the next big play, and gals gotta do enough to make sure they stick in the mind more than the dynamics of the game (and no, dynamics is not slang for cheerleader).

So, what’s there to do while in limbo? Using the war metaphor, before engaging in battle, one needs to send out a good recon team to gather intelligence. In fact, I’ve got an official “Director of Intelligence” on my personal cabinet solely for the purpose of gathering intel (granted, each cabinet member functions as an intelligence gatherer at times, but its always good to have a go-to person). Take all the information you can get, and start coming up with various scenarios and courses of action with your “Secretary of Defence.” In the meantime, don’t go out of your way to avoid engaging the opposition (well, avoid the “traditional” engagement, because, you know, nobody’s gone strait from limbo to being engaged, but engaged as in a meeting or an encounter). While engaging the opposition can be awkward, awkward moments lead to more obviousness and obviousness leads to decisions, whether good or bad. At the same time, don’t go looking for a fight when there’s no opposition to fight. Provoking action unnaturally would be somewhat intimidating; and intimidating, unsubstantiated action is akin to terrorism (and nobody likes terrorists). The key is to realize when the window of opportunity is open the widest to avoid snagging the clothing as one jumps through (unless, of course, you’re a nudist; then its even more important not to snag stuff).

If only there were a mathematical equation one could use to figure out the probability of success…

Points and Produce

It was another one of those funny-horoscope-next-to-the-comics days in the daily news paper:

“Work gets tense, but that's nothing compared to your personal life! What causes stress is not the situation itself but your thoughts about it. With a little help, you can manage those.”

That may explain the pounding headache I’ve had since I set out on this whole self-discovery method of explaining the social fabric of the space-time continuum; that, or I’ve got SARS.

What’s the whole meaning and point of the last week? I think I’ve finally concluded that it confirms the obvious point that since guys have the advantage on the scoreboard when it comes to building social relationships, they are the ones to initiate and lead in the relationship. Yeah, I know, obvious point, and one many of you are telling me to wake up and observe. But find the best method (heck, any successful method) of relationship initiation is another one of those “not a lot of research here” areas. Thus many guys—yeah, including myself (doesn’t take a genius to figure that out)—find ourselves in a bit of a quandary when attempting to pursue “happiness” (or Allison, or Heather, or whoever she is).

The system itself wouldn’t have as many problems as it does if it weren’t for the other variables in the fledgling equation: girls and intangibles. I’ll be the first to admit I’m not one to take a subtle hint (I miss the obvious hints too, mind you); that’s why I told the ladies last week to be obvious in any and all hints you choose to give us concerning your feelings (or lack thereof) of attraction. If you want us to keep in touch or call you or something, we kinda have to have your phone number. More often than not the phone number exchange is the figurative signature on the metaphorical contract sealing the fact that two parties are interested in each other and the relationship can commence in some shape or form. So, when we ask for your phone number, we’re probably gonna call. If you ask for ours, that means you’re gonna call. It’s a weird and funky system, I know, but apparently people make it work.

And blast those bloody intangibles for causing fear and anxiety. If I were a gambling man, I’d venture I miss an opportunity or two every couple of weeks because of fear, anxiety, and a general lack of self-confidence. Going out on a limb, I generalize that’s precisely why 80-90% of guys and girls return home alone after a night on the town. I’m thinking, too, that the intangibles are somewhat rooted in the fruit basket theory because we’re either a) uncertain whether we’re an apple, pineapple or worm and/or 2) uncertain whether the potential interest is an apple, pineapple or worm. It’s fine to be talking to fruit of your own kind, even better to be talking to the premium produce, but it’s a health to be with the rotten stuff. And it sucks even worse when you are the rotten stuff, but since nobody gives honest opinions anymore, you have no idea if you’re rotten or carmelized.

So, yeah, the horoscope’s dead on today. I’d banish myself from thinking, but it’s still not proven that I have those processes yet.