More on the Myth of Confidence...

[USMCHokie]

Emilia said it well. She noted that confidence is 'closely related' to a 'strong sense of identity'. So, you're right, Hokie, in that confidence is not the only thing that is deemed attractive. The words and behaviours of a people who are content with themselves, are attractive.

 

We all aspire to be content with ourselves, so if we perceive another's behaviours as being indicative of that, we are interested to learn how they've achieved such a state. Being around someone who is comfortable with themselves rubs off on others. It helps us to relax.

 

Confidence is a word. A noun we have created in order to give a name to our perceptions of those who display such contentedness. It is related to the concept of trust. If we apply it to others, we perceive we can trust them to do certain things; if we apply it to ourselves, we believe we can do certain things (in addition, if we fail, it doesn't matter.) These 'things' vary from situation to situation. Can anyone name anyone who is/was able to demonstrate confidence is every situation they face(d) in life?

 

It is important to remember the words 'perception' and 'belief'. These are subjective. What some call confidence, others call arrogance and, still others, call insecurity.

 

Hmmm, this is interesting. I've never seen confidence associated with contentedness. Now my counter would be this: what about folks with absolutely no ambition or drive and have extremely low expectations and standards for themselves who are very content with mediocrity or less...? By that definition, they should be very confident in themselves and therefore very attractive...

 

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but just trying to think it through for discussion.

[Badsingularity]

But the fact that they can be identified means that they can be consciously trained and developed. They have an entire PUA industry built around behaviors that are commonly associated with "confidence"...which suggests that what women actually find attractive is those behaviors reflecting confidence...i.e., a perception of confidence is all you need...

 

 

There are a lot of small subconcious behaviours and physical signs a man naturally potrays when he is confident.

 

He is not thinking about doing them. It just happens as a product of his self confidence.

 

To try and fake every behavior and movement including the small things like facial muscles and speed of movement, speech, voice tonality, or even the things he says because he is not scared of what people think, by consciously thinking about it and TRYING to do it would be very hard to do. It would be very hard to appear natural and relaxed while doing it. That is why a lot of women can see through the pua stuff, because if the guy is faking it, it will not feel real to her. Something will feel off.

 

Also it would never compare to the guy who is not even trying yet displaying all the same things.

 

Like I said some of it can be trained , but the guy doing that will not be able to reach the same level of attractiveness as the guy who is realy confident. He will be thinking too much.

[PJKino]

Those behaviours and the body language are only there because he is confident in himself.

 

Without the self confidence the body language would be that of a man with no confidence in himself.

 

The body language differences that occur when a man goes from being insecure to one with high self confidence are often tiny and not noticeable by someone on a conscious level.

 

They involve eye movement. Speed at which he moves his head. Tiny variations in how the facial muscles are held on the face. Speed at which he talks.

 

Things that are picked up on by women on a subconscious level and create feelings of attraction.

 

Things that tell a womans brain that he can protect her, he is not scared of everything, he will do what he needs to be done, he is happy, he is in control.

 

You're overanalyzing things if a women isnt physically attracted to you none of this matters..

 

To get women basically she has to be physically attractedt o you and if you pass the physical test dont be a social retard and youll do fine with women

[mickleb]

Hmmm, this is interesting. I've never seen confidence associated with contentedness. Now my counter would be this: what about folks with absolutely no ambition or drive and have extremely low expectations and standards for themselves who are very content with mediocrity or less...? By that definition, they should be very confident in themselves and therefore very attractive...

 

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but just trying to think it through for discussion.

 

Contentedness as in content with themselves, yes.

 

Well, ambition and drive don't equate to confidence, in my book, necessarily. I'm a little bit like the person described above(!) (All dependent on our individual perceptions of 'standards' and 'expectations', of course.) I've rejected some of the typical 'markers of success' that society has put forward , quite happily.

 

That makes me someone who some (perhaps large swathes of people) would write off as a failure. But I don't agree! I certainly know my words and behaviour are different now, to when I would consider myself to be lacking in confidence. And my interactions with others appear to be much more positive.

 

So, from my personal experience, I can tell you that I was as fit as a fiddle when I was 20 years younger, but didn't think I was, so it didn't benefit me much. Part of my journey to becoming confident has been to learn how to be happy without a partner, so as I've got more content, I've cared less about how 'attractive' I am. All I can tell you is that I'm happier, I seem to make those around me happier and I (generally) like other people more, now. Ultimately, it doesn't bother me if those large swathes of people think I'm hideous! So, the point becomes moot.

 

It is all subjective, which is why all this PUA stuff can only do so much. It's like make-up. It seems to me, though, that a person who is still happy with how they are and who they are - whether their mascara is running down their cheeks, or they've witnessed their life's work getting flushed down the toilet -is a person most of us like to be around. Confident = free of fear = happy.

[USMCHokie]

Contentedness as in content with themselves, yes.

 

Well, ambition and drive don't equate to confidence, in my book, necessarily. I'm a little bit like the person described above(!) (All dependent on our individual perceptions of 'standards' and 'expectations', of course.) I've rejected some of the typical 'markers of success' that society has put forward , quite happily.

 

 

I wasn't necessarily equating or even correlating ambition with confidence. I was merely trying to get your take on your contentness theory with a person that has a very low threshold to be content.

 

So, from my personal experience, I can tell you that I was as fit as a fiddle when I was 20 years younger, but didn't think I was, so it didn't benefit me much. Part of my journey to becoming confident has been to learn how to be happy without a partner, so as I've got more content, I've cared less about how 'attractive' I am. All I can tell you is that I'm happier, I seem to make those around me happier and I (generally) like other people more, now. Ultimately, it doesn't bother me if those large swathes of people think I'm hideous! So, the point becomes moot.

 

So are people happier around you because you are more confident, or because you have a happier demeanor and state of being? I would guess that people are drawn to the happiness rather than the confidence. Like I hypothesized in the OP, confidence is nothing more than an internal construct which produces effects that people are attracted to. Confidence is surely the cause, but it's the tangible effects of confidence that people are attracted to, not the internal state of being confident.

 

It is all subjective, which is why all this PUA stuff can only do so much. It's like make-up. It seems to me, though, that a person who is still happy with how they are and who they are - whether their mascara is running down their cheeks, or they've witnessed their life's work getting flushed down the toilet -is a person most of us like to be around. Confident = free of fear = happy.

 

And this is exactly why the PUA exists...because PUAs have identified that it is the effects of confidence that women are attracted to, not confidence itself...therefore, their philosophy is that you need only emulate the behaviors, or effects, if you will, in order to create a perception of confidence. Of course the PUA stuff can only do so much, but it can certainly help with the initial attraction where a woman really doesn't have much to judge attraction on besides surface traits...

[Badsingularity]

You're overanalyzing things if a women isnt physically attracted to you none of this matters..

 

To get women basically she has to be physically attractedt o you and if you pass the physical test dont be a social retard and youll do fine with women

 

 

No...nooouu..

 

I analyze things quite well.

 

What I'm talking about is a substantial piece of womens physical attraction pie.

[irc333]

For most of us, the every day guys who ain't in the top 10% of looks or wealth, it really comes down to luck

 

Exactly...I was wondering when someone was going to say that attracting women was all about luck, or probably being at the RIGHT place at the RIGHT time.

 

Of course, this probably forgoes a lot of dating advice on how to approach women.

[threebyfate]

Either piss or get off the pot.

 

It's not twisting at all...it's similar to why people ponder philosophy, science, or even religion...

Fine if that's the way you wish to spin it.

 

Refer to my quote. What does it mean to you?

[USMCHokie]

Refer to my quote. What does it mean to you?

 

Either piss or get off the pot.

 

This one above? I often use the line myself, and it's generally used at a moment of indecision, where one is encouraged to make a decision rather than deliberate upon it.

[threebyfate]

This one above? I often use the line myself, and it's generally used at a moment of indecision, where one is encouraged to make a decision rather than deliberate upon it.

It's also part of the heart of confidence.

[USMCHokie]

It's also part of the heart of confidence.

 

Indeed, exactly as I defined it...a bias for action...

[threebyfate]

Indeed, exactly as I defined it...a bias for action...

Bias assumes prejudice. Insufficiently explicit.

[Failboy]

If was constantly being approached and sexed by objectively sexy women, you can bet your arse I'd be a confident mutha*****.

 

But I'm not, in fact I fail a lot with women. So in conclusion, I am also not very confident.

 

My guess is that most people are like that, right?

 

So.. in the end, people see a confident guy with women and think this must be his edge. Then they see an unhappy guy without women and think this must be the reason he fails.

 

Yet both the confidence of the successful guy and the self-doubt of the unsuccessful guy are merely products of how they succeed in the world.

[mickleb]

I wasn't necessarily equating or even correlating ambition with confidence. I was merely trying to get your take on your contentness theory with a person that has a very low threshold to be content.

 

Sorry, Hokie. We seem to be getting confused. I'm finding your question difficult to answer because 'a very low threshold' is so subjective. A person who wants to be confident in their job on Wall Street wouldn't necessarily perceive the unambitious person as confident, or attractive (regardless of how self-assured that person felt). But they might. That's happened a lot, actually, with business people turning to meditation and (some interpretation of) Buddhist philiosophy - with those who practise it seen as having an inner strength (some would call confidence), which is deemed attractive.

 

Does that go anywhere to answering your question, or are we further from it now?!

 

So are people happier around you because you are more confident, or because you have a happier demeanor and state of being? I would guess that people are drawn to the happiness rather than the confidence. Like I hypothesized in the OP, confidence is nothing more than an internal construct which produces effects that people are attracted to. Confidence is surely the cause, but it's the tangible effects of confidence that people are attracted to, not the internal state of being confident.

 

Of course being happier makes someone more confident. The two are intertwined. I am confident I am living my life productively. This self-assurance, by itself, contributes to my happiness. If I was unhappy, I couldn't come to such a pleasing conclusion! I think people view others' happiness as success. People are interested in the 'secret' of such success. We like to dig around a bit and try to ascertain if this apparent happiness is 'real', i.e. lasting and not at the expense of some other area of our life. Whilst we believe the happiness is 'real', we perceive confidence (in others or ourselves). The source of someone's happiness becomes magical. The concept of confidence is a little ethereal, too. It's because it's a bit intangible that we get a frisson out of it!

 

And this is exactly why the PUA exists...because PUAs have identified that it is the effects of confidence that women are attracted to, not confidence itself...therefore, their philosophy is that you need only emulate the behaviors, or effects, if you will, in order to create a perception of confidence. Of course the PUA stuff can only do so much, but it can certainly help with the initial attraction where a woman really doesn't have much to judge attraction on besides surface traits...

 

PUAs have identified the effects of confidence that - they think, some - women are (initially) attracted to. Their recipe is based on a formula that may work for a certain type of woman, but will be laughed off by others. The spell wears off after the guys get to do their 'O-face', too. So, yeah, being able to shag some women is something. Same is true (in reverse) for the painted lady. The 'proof' you are attractive, to some degree, is a starting point. But most move on, sooner or later.

 

I equate confidence with being true to oneself, and others. PUAs and heavily made-up ladies are masking themselves in order to get their buzz. If they can be as happy discarding the rulebooks and the war-paint, I think they'll find they're more attractive to more people. People will want to know how they did it, and see them as confident in themselves. Dunnah. I'm just one person. AND I'm a bloody woman!

 

Hope this makes sense. Feel free to ask further questions if not!

[USMCHokie]

Bias assumes prejudice. Insufficiently explicit.

 

Bias =/ biased.

[threebyfate]

Bias =/ biased.

Bias has the nuance of "at the expense of".

[USMCHokie]

If was constantly being approached and sexed by objectively sexy women, you can bet your arse I'd be a confident mutha*****.

 

But I'm not, in fact I fail a lot with women. So in conclusion, I am also not very confident.

 

My guess is that most people are like that, right?

 

So.. in the end, people see a confident guy with women and think this must be his edge. Then they see an unhappy guy without women and think this must be the reason he fails.

 

Yet both the confidence of the successful guy and the self-doubt of the unsuccessful guy are merely products of how they succeed in the world.

 

As everyone on LS knows, I'm a strong believer that the foundation of confidence is and must be built from some degree of external validation...

[threebyfate]

As everyone on LS knows, I'm a strong believer that the foundation of confidence is and must be built from some degree of external validation...

Speaking of bias...

[USMCHokie]

Bias has the nuance of "at the expense of".

 

Would you care to elaborate...?

 

Bias = a particular tendency or inclination (add:"at the expense of")

 

Therefore:

 

Bias for action = a particular tendency or inclination to act "at the expense of". . .

 

.... at the expense of what exactly...?

[threebyfate]

Would you care to elaborate...?

 

Bias = a particular tendency or inclination (add:"at the expense of")

 

Therefore:

 

Bias for action = a particular tendency or inclination to act "at the expense of". . .

 

.... at the expense of what exactly...?

You used the word which I find to be inaccurate usage to explain confidence.

 

Had you stated "Unafraid to take action", I would have agreed.

[USMCHokie]

Sorry, Hokie. We seem to be getting confused. I'm finding your question difficult to answer because 'a very low threshold' is so subjective. A person who wants to be confident in their job on Wall Street wouldn't necessarily perceive the unambitious person as confident, or attractive (regardless of how self-assured that person felt). But they might. That's happened a lot, actually, with business people turning to meditation and (some interpretation of) Buddhist philiosophy - with those who practise it seen as having an inner strength (some would call confidence), which is deemed attractive.

 

Does that go anywhere to answering your question, or are we further from it now?!

 

And this is where I find objection with the confidence = contentness theory...and honestly where I find objection with the whole idea that "confidence" is what attracts people... The incredibly subjective nature of it makes it difficult to be convinced that it's actually confidence that people are attracted to, rather than other traits and characteristics themselves, many of which are reflective or suggestive of confidence.

 

Of course being happier makes someone more confident. The two are intertwined. I am confident I am living my life productively. This self-assurance, by itself, contributes to my happiness. If I was unhappy, I couldn't come to such a pleasing conclusion! I think people view others' happiness as success. People are interested in the 'secret' of such success. We like to dig around a bit and try to ascertain if this apparent happiness is 'real', i.e. lasting and not at the expense of some other area of our life. Whilst we believe the happiness is 'real', we perceive confidence (in others or ourselves). The source of someone's happiness becomes magical. The concept of confidence is a little ethereal, too. It's because it's a bit intangible that we get a frisson out of it!

 

But they see the happiness. They don't see your confidence. They have to make the logical leap in their mind that your happiness equates to you being confident, just as you make the association between happiness and confidence in your mind. And the fact that you can merely appear happy and not be truly confident suggests that they attracted to your happiness, not your confidence. In fact, it's a logical impossibility for them to be attracted to what they perceive to be your confidence, because such confidence doesn't even exist!

[Failboy]

As everyone on LS knows, I'm a strong believer that the foundation of confidence is and must be built from some degree of external validation...

 

 

I agree. I've only been here for a few days so I don't know the general mind-set of the people here.

 

It just baffles me when people demand from some guy who gets zero external validation in life to "just be more confident" so he can suddenly flourish in all areas of life...

 

It's almost as ignorant as people telling guys who got nothing going for them in life to "just be happy anyways, it's a decision you can make" ... you know, that self-help-book attitude.

[USMCHokie]

You used the word which I find to be inaccurate usage to explain confidence.

 

Had you stated "Unafraid to take action", I would have agreed.

 

Purely a subjective view of the usage by both of us. For the Marines, that phrase is very commonly used to denote a tendency to act, or be decisive, in battle; or more simply, "confidence" in battle. It does not carry any connotation of prejudice. It is simply the broadest definition of the word, bias; that is, a tendency or inclination. But I'm sure you can add more accessories to the word as you see fit.

[threebyfate]

Purely a subjective view of the usage by both of us. For the Marines, that phrase is very commonly used to denote a tendency to act, or be decisive, in battle. It doesn't not carry any connotation of prejudice. It is simply the broadest definition of the word, bias; that is, a tendency or inclination. But I'm sure you can add more accessories to the word as you see fit.

You're making this up. Totally.

 

Might as well have stated "Strawberry towards action".

[USMCHokie]

You're making this up. Totally.

 

No I'm not. Here's a layman's blog describing it:

 

12 Simple Leadership Truths | This month: Initiative and Decisiveness

 

It's also spelled out in a number of our doctrinal publications, but that'd be a pain in the ass to pull up...