SilasBarta comments on Let them eat cake: Interpersonal Problems vs Tasks - Less Wrong

70 Post author: HughRistik 07 October 2009 04:35PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (568)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: SilasBarta 09 October 2009 02:59:24AM 4 points [-]

Well, understanding the relationship between men approaching with romantic interest, and salespeople approaching is very important, because men have a good understanding of -- and sympathy about -- the latter. I think the insight the analogy yields outweighs the negative connotations.

Comment author: Cyan 09 October 2009 03:30:05AM *  3 points [-]

I'm a man, and I have little understanding and no special sympathy for salespeople, nor did I ever think of my romantic aspirations in terms of selling myself. I only ever had success when I stopped pursuing.

Comment author: SilasBarta 09 October 2009 03:32:27AM 5 points [-]

I meant sympathy for people being approached by salespeople. It's an especially important dynamic at play because women (supposedly) like being approached by some kinds of men, while (supposedly) view the others as similar to salespeople. So what makes a kind of advance wanted or unwanted? Therein lies the problem.

Comment author: Cyan 09 October 2009 03:51:10AM *  4 points [-]

Oh, I see. I got the analogy backwards. (Should have reviewed the thread, obviously.)

Receiving an irritating hard sell isn't anywhere near as threatening as receiving unwanted persistent sexual attention. The latter is an implicit threat of bodily harm. Even momentary unwanted sexual attention isn't like an unwanted sales pitch, because the fear is that it will turn into a longer interaction.

Comment author: SilasBarta 09 October 2009 09:30:19PM 2 points [-]

Yes, but unlike unwanted sales, unwanted sexual attention is counterbalanced by instances of wanted sexual attention, including when the "wantedness" gradually develops; while many people on principle refused to buy products pushed on them personally (e.g. through telemarketing), no matter how good the product might be.

Comment author: HughRistik 10 October 2009 08:55:58PM 3 points [-]

Good point. That's why expected value is important. The problem is that with typical straight women, bland approaches and pursuit often doesn't work very well.

As a result, the practice of men making non-bland approaches may be good for women on average in the big picture. How can that be?

Let's assume that typical women require a behavior of type X to be attracted to a guy (or X, if not completely required, is very effective relative to other behaviors in attracting women). Yet women are creeped out when they are approached by men who display behavior X if those men also exhibit unattractive quality Y, or lack overall attractiveness from non-X sources.

If so, we might have a very strange looking situation where most of the time, a man displaying X towards a woman will creep her out, yet simultaneously, a surprisingly high percentage of women are actually dating guys with behavior X!

For someone to find a relationship, they need a reasonable pool of potential partners to select from. If the practice of men approaching and pursuing women in non-bland ways helps women get this pool of potential boyfriends, then that could be a good thing for women, even if results in creeping women out a lot of the time.

What are the ethics of guys displaying behavior X when P( creepy | guy displays X ) = 90% but also P( guy displays X | guy is a boyfriend ) = 90%? I think it can be ethical, but it depends. If there is a similar behavior Z such that P( creepy | guy displays Z ) = 70% but also P( guy displays Z | guy is a boyfriend ) = 90%, then I think X becomes unethical because there is now a viable less-creepy alternative.

And this is only talking women's interests, not men's. There is an optimal level of creepiness-risk in male approaches that gives women the pool of potential suitors they need to find boyfriends. Yet depending on how the numbers work out, that level of creepiness risk might be enough that women, especially of increasing attractiveness, are going to get creeped out a lot of the time by men employing high-risk, high-reward strategies to get them above the bland, just-another-guy threshold.

Disclaimer 1: There are many, many ways of approaching women that are both potentially creepy and which don't even have a chance of working, such as catcalls. The expected value of these approaches is negative, and as a result they should be expunged from the male behavioral repertoire. Males exhibiting these behaviors need to be shown viable alternatives. While their behavior is oppressive to women, in a way they are also victims of oppression because their culture or subculture has inflicted maladaptive mating behaviors on them.

Disclaimer 2: Some women don't want roguish boyfriends who sweep them off their feet, yet must endure such approaches from men who are simply doing the kind of thing that works with the majority of women. I feel sorry for these women, but I think their main beef is with other women and the incentives they provide men: women with atypical preferences in men are victims of a tyranny of the majority in the female election of male behavior.

It is reasonable for men to approach women in ways that (they have good reason to believe) will have positive expected value with the majority of women (as long as they are willing to back off or tone things down if they are making a woman uncomfortable). A possible solution for atypical women is to find some way of signaling their preferences in men prior to being approached, by style of dress or subcultural affiliation, and I think plenty of women already do this, e.g. dressing like a hipster) girl signals that she wants to be approached by hipster guys who adhere to hipster norms of behavior.

For most people, male or female, it is probably better to receive too much sexual attention than too little (assuming that we are talking just about attention, not about sexual violence). If you do not receive sexual attention, you do not have sex, and you do not have relationships. For people who want these things (the vast majority of people), going without tends to hurt their mental health and warp their self-image.

Comment author: thomblake 11 October 2009 01:23:58AM 0 points [-]

Also, many people do buy from telemarketers, and many people would never want unsolicited sexual attention. I'm not convinced you're talking about the ordinary cases here.

Comment author: SilasBarta 12 October 2009 08:12:11PM 3 points [-]

Most of those purchases from telemarketers are species of akrasia: they don't want to buy, but they feel impolite saying no. They would prefer the calls not happen in the first place, unlike women, who do prefer males to initiate some relationships with them.

And I'm not sure you're using the term "sexual attention" correctly. It doesn't mean "offer/request for sex"; in this context, it just means any approach with romantic intentions that could ultimately lead to sex. To not want sexual attention means to not want any romantic partner, at least where you are not the initiator.

So I don't think that's a relevant observation to my point.

Speaking of your unusual perceptions of the ordinary case, were you really serious when claiming that you see a 50/50 female split in playing Magic and at rpg conventions? You must be the only one in the world who sees this!

Comment author: thomblake 12 October 2009 09:11:16PM 0 points [-]

You must be the only one in the world who sees this

Well I don't think I'm that bad of an observer, but I'd believe it's possible that people in the gaming groups / conventions I go to are the only ones that see this.

Comment author: SilasBarta 12 October 2009 09:14:06PM 1 point [-]

And the photographers at the same conventions all simultaneously taking unrepresentative samples, and the people who blog about these same conventions being poor observers, and you counting booth babes as attendees with whom a characteristic rpg lover has a realistic chance of a meaningful relationship...

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 12 October 2009 09:21:06PM 2 points [-]

Empirical test: Look for (SFW) photographs of reasonably randomly distributed groups (e.g. audiences, hallways) at a convention, post the first three samples found.

Comment author: thomblake 13 October 2009 12:39:36AM *  0 points [-]

booth babes

Yep, none of the conventions I go to have booth babes, that I've seen.

Though I realized I was counting "Anime conventions" and "multigenre conventions" in my mental picture of "rpg conventions" so that might unduly influence my estimate.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 October 2009 03:53:05AM 1 point [-]

So what makes a kind of advance wanted or unwanted? Therein lies the problem.

Could you explain more explicitly what this problem is? There are two meanings I could extract. One of which I would object to (but suspect you did not intend.)

Comment author: SilasBarta 09 October 2009 04:02:57AM 3 points [-]

Well, let me restate the problem: the best way for men to understand what women go through regarding unwanted sexual attention, is (supposedly) to think of how we regard salespeople. However, this analogy has a critical flaw in that women do not universally hate suitors who make advances, but only some of them, while people in general do hate salespeople, telemarketers, spammers, etc., irrespective of the merit of the product they're selling.

The problem is to find a unified theory for what makes these different kinds of advances garner so much hated -- or not.

Comment author: LauraABJ 09 October 2009 04:13:00AM 4 points [-]

I don't think that's the problem. If advancing induces hatred in the woman, she was not likely to want you if you approached her in a different way (though if someone's on the fence, having some finess can help). I think the decision of whether or not a woman wants the advance at all is made relatively quickly. The real problem is to find a unified theory of how women want men to be, a much harder sell for men in the self-help section.

Comment author: SilasBarta 09 October 2009 04:47:17PM *  3 points [-]

I can understand that much, but that still leaves a question unresolved. Let me put it this way: Would you say women dislike being approached by salespeople and telemarketers in a different (and stronger) way than they dislike being approached by men they're not interested in? Or are they in the same category?

What if you compared pushy salespeople to pushy suitors that women have decided they're not interested in (at least not at the moment)?

What if you compared salespeople to suitors that the woman not only isn't interested in, but considers out of her league entirely (i.e. below her)?

Comment author: pdf23ds 09 October 2009 04:51:23PM 0 points [-]

I think it's pretty important here to distinguish between pushy/persistant suitors (say, Steve Urkel) vs. people who get the hint. I'm not sure you're keeping that distinction in mind.

Comment author: SilasBarta 09 October 2009 05:02:27PM 3 points [-]

Considering that I broke the question down and considered those cases separately, I'm pretty sure I did keep that distinction in mind.

It's an important issue with a non-obvious answer because of all the glowing stories you hear from women about how "Oh, when [husband] and I first met, he kept asking me out again and again and I kept telling him no, but then I realized what a great guy he is and now we're married!"

Comment author: Cyan 09 October 2009 05:26:58PM 5 points [-]

all the glowing stories you hear from women

I don't recall hearing a story like this. The ones I hear usually go, "He kept asking me out again and again and I kept telling him no, and eventually I took to avoiding places where I might encounter him / documented his harrassment and went to HR / got a restraining order."

Comment author: taryneast 31 December 2013 07:06:04AM *  1 point [-]

Salespeople are wanted if you have explicitly gone into a store expecting to buy a certain kind of product. Then they are helpful sources of localised information. You want what they have and went looking for it.

Salepeople are not wanted if they are intruding and trying to push a product on you when you were not looking for it. If the methods or product are particularly offensive - that just adds insult to an already unwanted situation.