Want to Mate, Men and Women? Be Confident for a Change!

I stumbled across a flirting, date "tip". This was phrased as a tip and it was about self-touch. It detailed that if a woman is interested in a man, she will touch her chest, leg.

I know (because I've dated women and we've discussed how they don't subscribe to that) that some women do not touch themselves ad a part of their body and then expect a man to obsequiously sidle up to her because of HER romantic interest. And as a male, I personally don't subscribe to that either. Why? Because the times that I observe with my fairly advanced body-language observation skills that a woman is doing some peculiar array of gestures and contortions that she is convinced is supposed to "express her romantic interest" (when in fact walking up to me and saying "I'm romanticlaly interested in you, want to chat?" would be the most phenomenal turn-on possible!) I was repulsed with how little confidence such a person has.

I guess my question is, doesn't that seem awfully reflective of the woman not having confidence? What's stopping the woman from boldly going up to a man that she's interested in and introducing herself? Why must she do this bizarre courtship ritual where SHE touches her self because SHE is interested in a man and instead of acting on HER romantic interest, she feels imprisoned in a set of cultural customs to passively "lure" her sycophantic romantic "prey" over to her? What percentage of women subscribe to such nonsense? I have absolute certainty that it's no 100% because I've met women who laugh at those tactics. What's frightening is that I think the percentage is quite high. In many ways, doesn't this passive, low confidence, indirect role that such a high percentage of women play ultimately condemn their outspokenness, their directness, their assertiveness in the relaitonship?

As homo sapiens were consciously are endowed with teh capacity to NOT resort to bizarre ritualistic courtship mating drills like the ones birds resort to that involve a flashing of colorful feathers and an exotic dance. As humans, we have the capacity to see the inherent ridiculousness in and the confining ramifications of courtship "drills" and even gender roles. And with our consciousness, we can live more full and complete and more importantly, more direct with our emotions in a way that relinquishes us from "moratorium of hte unknown".

"Club-winged Manakins, Machaeropterus deliciosus, reveal that males produce sustained harmonic tones through interactions among oscillating secondary wing feathers" in a courtship ritual. As conscious primates, we have the capacity to choose to NOT display a certain tone and oscillate our arms to convey affection, interest, or attraction. Instead, we have the capacity as humans to walk up to a member of the opposite sex and simply say with words the Nature of our interest in them! Don't you think it's time we've evolved? That it's time to relinquish antiquated courtship rituals that are literally inherent to a more primitive generation?

>>>>>>>>>>>


Doesn't that seem so unnecessarily confusing? I've seen women doing this and truly, honeslty, I thought to myself "that woman has an itch on her chest OR she's indirectly in a very muddled manner trying to get my attention because she's romantically interested in me.

I'm not a taxi driver! If woman touches her self romantically with the intention of "hailing me over for courtship", I don't stop and say "where do you want to go?" Because (to continue the metaphor) if she's failing to be direct, why should I -- HOW could I -- possibly be direct in my response to HER romantic interest?

Both woman and men need to take more confident ownership of their romantic interests.

Wait, do a lot of women SERIOUSLY suffer from the same low-confidence problems as men? Men do the Mystery Method etc PUA workshops because their confidence is low. I can see no different between That type of low confidence and the type of low confidence that causes a woman to passively touch a part of her body instead of having the confidence to approach a man with something are identical!

For me, personally, if I'm interested in a woman, I'll tell her. Or i'll directly ask what she seeks in a relationship (romance, friendship, merely chatting). I've just wasted too many years of my life stuck in the moratorium of the unknown because myself and the woman Both lacked hte confidence to address what kind of relationship was present.

So let's use this as an awakening to just boldly and confidently take ownership of our romantic interests. Why not? We have the capacity to do that as humans, right?!

>>>>>>

It's literally disgusting to me that people believe this rubbish. Utter, rubberish. This is preposterous! "Women are more in touch with feelings"? Please! Plenty of sensitive men out there that beg to differ. Men are better at 3-d perceptibility? Please, I'm sure there's some brilliant spatial designers that are female. ALL of these differences between men and women SIMPLY are the result of LOW confidence. Insecure males and insecure females flee and flock to the "Well, Thta'ts why he doesn't understand....our brains our different!" or the "Well, that's why she didn't communicate well...our brains are different" and then burrow themselves further into ignorance. Believing that men and female minds are different is -- it truly is -- a form of self-ridicule! It's ridiculing your own capacity to think as a human being by convincing yourself of the delusion that men and women are cognitively different. We're both the same species, we both have a need for sustanence, procreation, and shelter. Our brains cognitively function the exact same way. The "content" of what's in our brains and our personality and cultural background and personal perceptiosn of the world are undoubtedly different because there's so many different personalities and belief structures!! But to say that because one person has an XY chromosome and an other has an XX producing different reproductive systems, is in someway linked to the cognitive differences of the mind is truly and utterly preposterous! It's preposterous! Men and women have the same mind - a human mind!

It's truly foul and disgusting studies like these that perpetuate inequality in genders. These "false delusory trivias" are merely for the unconfident person to have ammunition in their ignorance and lack of confidence in dating in the first place!

Have you ever considered that there could be two reasons for a man or woman who have a romantic interest in each other to not date: 1) they're both too shy, timid, meek, and unconfident (this is about 95% of the reason why most of the time) or 2)they're both disgusted with how truly PUERILE the gender games have become!

Wanna Observe like Sherlock? Holmes' Elementary Meta-Strategy!

Holmes' Meta Strategy!
This is the transcription and reflection on Robert Dilts' Strategies of Genius.

Perception of Clusters of Details ---> Behavioral Observations + Environmental Observations ---> Inferences ---> Combinations of inferences ---> Conclusions

Cultural Assumptions & Facts are matched up with the observations to draw inferences, then the inferences are "compiled" to generate conclusions.

Why is Holmes Strategy so useful to learn?
Well, for one, Sherlock Holmes (although fictional) is the greatest observational-deducer probably ever to exist in our imaginations or out of it. The fact that he's fictional does not prevent his techniques from being genuine, applicable, and highly useful. The observational-deducing strategies used by Sherlock Holmes seriously fall in the category of something expansively NLP because it increases the options you have in life. You can (and will) draw these truthful, accurate conclusions seemingly from thin air. Yes, that is impressive and makes for a great trick, but also for your own awareness and heightened observational skills this is extremely potent. It's so valuabl eto understand how we go from submodality observations and asking the who, what, how, where, when (and sometiems why) questions to arrive at the causes and behavioral conditions and capabilities behind what we see. Wolves are notably more intelligent than dogs because of their 30% increased intelligence and heightened "observational learning". Observational learning means that they'll figure out how the cage they're in works, and can quickly escape than anything without observational learning. Similarly, learning and Applying Holmes meta-strategy for drawing deductive conclusions from heightened observations frees you and expands your life MUCH more than the person who does not use this strategy. Ultimately, by using and applying Holmes' filtering and questing and tying up observations with cultural assumptions, imaginations, and facts to reach inferecnes and then conclusions from the summation and formulaic equations of those inferences, you truly will lead a more liberated, more full, more complete life than someone who does not use these strategies. So learn on! :D

The fusion of cultural assumption & Fact with the observation is key and often the overlooked step.

If you see someone lightly hesitantly putting his hand on a woman's shoulder (observation), it's likely it's their first date (inference) because if they had gone on many dates, there likely would be no hesitation (cultural assumption)!

NLP Concepts utilized in Holmes' Strategy

Submodalities -- specifically visual acuity has been massively heightened and he ties in visual representation system observations with assumptions and facts to quickly create inferences

Logical Levels -- Holmes rapidly cycles through the logicals to quickly create awareness of how, who, what, when, where, and why someone did capabilities, identity, behaviors, environmental clues, and motives. So a strategy to add complexity and more detail to the Holmes' Meta Strategy for Observations to Conclusions (HMSO).


Applying Holmes' Strategy!
You can discover all those W-H questions by looking for corresponding clues, causes, conditions, and motives.

Environmental Clues answers ----> Where and When
Behavioral (or Antecedent) Causes ----------> What answers
Capabilities Conditions -----------> How answers
Beliefs & Values/Motives -----------> Why answers (Typically not investigated because of the psychological nature...and obscured concept).

Inference calls you to "imagine which behavior, environmental, capability, or belief CAUSES created the clues in those areas that you observe". In other words, if you see someone wearing a dress with a slight notch in their shoe, you'd create inferences and ask "what beliefs and capabilities does a person hold or have" to generate that environmental clue etc.

"Life is a great chain, the nature of which is known whenever we are shown a single link of it." -- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (Sherlock Holmes)

Examples

Example could be someone where's a nice dress antecedent cause, they're eager to impress. Behavioral Cause.

So just cycling through the Environmental, Behavioral, Beliefs/Motives, will inspire you to process in the W-H questions leading to logical level mostly-accurate inferences and conclusions about person!

Getting caught up in the "why" the beliefs and motives of a person can be useful at times, but usually is irrelevant. On certain levels, cognitive processes can be inferred from clues.

Exercises
Making the Magic of HMSO Holme's deduction-observation process a reality. Observe someone and try to deduce their profession.

Great trigger questions:
Right handed or left-handed?
Eye-correction?
Tan or not (do they work outside)?
Married or not? (Left-hand ring finger has ring?)
Where has the person been recently?
What's their nationality?

Professional tendencies: For example would a doctor walk differently than a technician or an actor or a farmer?
How might the different professional activities a person engages in effect their clothing?

Holmes reminds us "Singularity is almost an Invariable clue". So if someone has only one shirt cuff that's wrinkled, that's likely a clue that maybe they work at a desk and rest their elbow on the desk or frequently curl up only one shirt cuff. What profession would do that? Maybe a restaurant host who occasionally had to deal with priming an oily boiler or something. The key is look for individual asymetrical clues, those usual indicate something unique!

Plug in those answers and observational environmental clues to cultural assumptions, imaginations, personal memory, and context.

For the longest time I used to bombard my conscious mind with hundreds and thousands of these observational, environmental details. However, I never took the next two steps and drew inferences and deductions. So the environmental details was overwhelming. Drawing the conclusions from the deductions and inferences (which are from the observations) gives you the nice 1-4 "highly-probably" observational estimations instead of hundreds of seemingly (even though they're all connected pointing to 1-4 conclusions) disconnected observational details. In short, if you choose to observe many environmental, behavioral, or capable clues, be prepared to go all the way and make inferences from those observations, and then conclusions from those inferences. Otherwise you'll feel overwhelmed with a jumble of observations. So "to observe and fully reach conclusions from those inferences from observations" or "to not observe". Not observing is fine, and observing and following-through to inference and conclusion is fine and dandy, but simply observing details?? That's a recipe for quick overwhelm.

So I encourage you to practice these skills. And enjoy the discovery, excitement, and ease of using your visual (and auditory) acuity to draw seemingly astonishingly accurate conclusions from the "erroneously labeled" visual trifles:D Nothing is trivial!!!!!!

"Sir Arthur Conan Doyle -- “It has long been an axiom of mine that the little things are infinitely the most important. To a great mind, nothing is little”(Sherlock Holmes, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s fictitious deductive genius creation whose entire method is “founded upon the observation of trifles”).

For calibration and detecting deceit

For detecting deceit and calibration use the 1/2-second rule! Any micro-expression response that occurs within 1/2 second of a question usually has been unmeditated and thus is likely truthful. Anything longer than a 1/2 second the person can/will change! :D Gotta have quick observation skills. Thus, the truthful micro-expression response (and thus the most accurate observation) occurs immediately after the question! And your partner may already know with what word(s) you'll end a question so you must start observing (the 1/2 second) immediately once they understand the question (not necessarily after you've completed saying the question)! A lot of timing!

Asking unique and/or complex questions means the partner will have to direct their attention to the question which means there will be more of a window for an answer that was not meditated upon! So complex or unique questions extends that 1/2 second response sometimes for a more honest answer.

Another great question is a meta-question: questions about what they just said: "Should I believe you?" Often times someone will react to their own answers in different way because of the amount of self-consciousness involved.

Easier exercise, better temperature, smoother reading, and improved home. How? Law of Contrast!

Question. You're drinking a cup of lukewarm tea? You want to have it taste warmer. How do you make it taste warmer without a stove, microwave or anyway to heat the tea??

Think about this. It's a riddle.

Now the answer to our riddle as you may have guess. Answer: You drink a cup of frigid icewater!! Seriously, try this is it's amazing. The contrast principle seriously does work on a neurological level as well as perceptive level. If you have a bowl of lukewarm water that you want to "feel colder" douse your hand in hotwater for 60 seconds. The lukewarm water will feel frigid now compared to the hand that was in cold water (or the hand just at body temperature)!

What about hottubs. A jacuzzi is a very warm water physical shift, so things outside of the jacuzzi that may have felt hot, will now feel lukewarm, and the lukewarm temperatures may feel even chilly!

Cold showers. Taking cold showers will make everything feel warmer! You want to "increase the sensual perceptive temperature of the jacuzzi" but don't want to wait 4 hours for the water temperature to change? Simple. Take a frigid cold shower! Then jumping in the Jacuzzi will genuinely perceptively feel 10° warmer!

Great, so what about contrast principle expanded beyond the topic of temperature hot/cold? Well, here's a random example! Let's say you're reading a book that feels too challenging. The author uses an elaborate very advanced vocabulary and sometimes colloquial phrases. Great, so a bit of a tough read, eh? No problem! You don't need to spend 2 years learning advanced english (although that wouldn't hurt ;). Instead, simply apply the contrast principle! Read a very challenging book that uses outrageously difficult vocabulary and nonstop, confusing vernacular phrasing for an hour! Perfect example. Let's say you're tackling Around the World in 80s Days by Jules Verne, a remarkable book, one of my faves and highly recommended read. Now Verney uses a few brtish and 1800 phrasing. For example the following excerpt:

"Was she not due to sail yesterday?"
Yes sir, but they had to repair one of her boilers, and so the departure was put off until tomorrow."(p. 94)

Now you may feel a bit miffed and question if you're capable of reading this? What? She? Was she not due to sail? It's a bit different from the way we speak in modern day and age. She refers to the ship (the Carnatic in the story) and the phrasing is slieghtly and subtlely changed. Today we might say Wasn't she supposed to sail yesterday? Personally, I prefer the old-fashioned "was she not due"? However, the point is this way of speaking is slieghtly archaic and one may feel a bit overhwhelmed. Apply the contrast principle a pickup a copy of Shakespeare's Macbeth and zoom to Act 2, scene 1. You'll see this VERY daunting confusing and perplexing phrase:

"Thou sure and firm-set earth,
Hear not my steps, which way they walk, for fear
Thy very stones prate of my whereabout." (II.i)

What?? What what what??!! That the hell? Prate? Is he talking to the earth? What the hell is going on there?! Now for personal reference all that shakespeare's character macbeth is saying there is "Dude, I hope I can tip-toe quietly so I don't wake up these peeps"! Oh..okay now you get it! Now after scrutinizing this perplexing very archaic very bewildering phrasing of shakespeare go back and take a gander at Verneys phrasing. Was she not due to sail yesterday?" Pffftt...piece of cake, right?! Right. It's the law of contrast!

Okay, temperature and literature aside, what are some more applications of this? How about distance or exercise? Running 2 miles seems hard? Run 5 miles 4 times in a week. Then I guarantee you, a single 2-mile run will seem trivial!

Okay we've got temperature, literature, health-exercise. What about sales? Ahh....here's one of the most effective and frightenly highly utilized application of the contrast principle. If you can't afford a product and have to "settle" for less quality one. Pickup the "piece of junk" version and feel how clunky that feels and then test drive the product you can afford and it'll perceptively seem immensely more valuable. (Alternatively, you can do what I do and just save up and get the quality one that will provide more value and last longer!)

Vacations. Believe it or not, I think one of the reasons people vacation (say in a rugged backpacking trip in the mountains) is to experience a less comfortable environment so that their actual home feels all the more cherishable and comfortable!

This ones, going out on a limb, but what about relationships? Do you think people ever subconsciously deliberately dive into unfulfilling, destructive relationships to then appreciate the clarifying good relationships all the more? It's a stretch, but could be! The law of contrasts emerges again!

Temperature, Literature, Exercise, Sales, and Vacationing (and possibly relationships) -- you can control all of those with the law of contrast!! Why was this not taught in school? I do not know, but maybe our teachers were frightened how much fun we'd have with it!! Enjoy experimenting with the law of contrast to twist and transform perceptions in your life to your liking to customize what you experience so that it matches more closesly to your ideal!

Audeiu, mon ami.
er...
Bye, my friend!

(Just a little factoid, Shakes was a pretty literally inventive and cool dude. William Shakespeare "invented" over 2000 words. If master wordsmith William Shakespeare hadn't successfully (Andronicus) invented such varied (Love's Labour's Lost) phrasing, the OED would be 2000 words shorter. He used over 20,138 "new words" (words he invented or borrowed from modern times).

Analysis of Persuasive Closing Techniques

Most of these were galvanized from changingminds.org, a fantastic site (listed in "choice linkage").

Yes set close is actually asking a series of 2-3 "definite yes" answers. "You're alive right?" Right. Now, you've slept in the past 48 hours right? Right. You remember what the face of your Parents look like right? Right . You want to sign this contract now right? Right. Yes set close is generating a "rut" of yes responses so you can just pop in the question you desire yes from into that rut and there's a great likelihood of a yes response to the desirable question.

Wanna Read a Person Like a Book? Two Words: State Callibration

State Calibration

Body language can never lie; words and statements, however, can. Learning to calibrate increases your ability to know what a person is feeling. This becomes extremely potent when trying to eliminate confusion in communication and also to avoid getting deluded with words.

In Neuro-Linguistic Programming, State Calibration is just "indicators" of a person's state. When the red light is on on the oven, it mean it's heating up. When you've calibrated a person, you can know that a specific person a brow furrowed, right eye squinted and hunched means they're perplexed. Therefore the "brow furrowed, right eye squinted and hunched" state is like the red light on the oven; both the red oven light and the furrowed brow, squint, and hunch serve as indicators for what's going on "inside".

How do you calibrate a state? When you see a person having a unique body posture, or movement, you ask them what they feel, and if they respond, you'll know that that specific external body language, posture, breathing, and the like corresponds to their state! ANY time you see them with "brow furrowed, right eye squinted and hunched, ask them what they're feeling. If they respond, you've just successfully calibrated their state! Now whenever you see that external body languae, you will understand that for that person it calibrates to "perplexed".

A green light on the oven could mean, "cleaning mode", just as someone who's in a state where their breathing is steady, chest out, and smiling, and you ask them what they feel they'll say "happy" you've calibrated that "breathing is steady, chest out, and smiling" to mean happy for THEM. So to that specific person, just as the green light means "cleaning mode", "breathing steady, chest out, and smiling" means "feeling happy". Now, "breathing is steady, chest out, and smiling" does not mean happy for every person; just that specific person. To continue the analogy to now an absurd level of metaphor (LOL!) everyone's "oven" is built different with different indicator lights. The oven lights are just a metaphor for "external indicator" that calibrates to an "internal state".

So why is this useful? State Callibration has millions of applications, but we can focus on two: dissolving confusion and persuasion. Having calibrated a state is obviously clarifying because it decreases confusion from ALL of these external states and configurations of body posture, breathing cadence, brow, voice tone, etc, because now you know, after calibrating, those are indicators of internal states. If you ask them what they're feeling (so you don't fall into the trap of mind reading) and they answer with a response of their internal state, you have just calibrated their external sensory indicators to their internal state! Congrats!! Successful calibration!

Now let's examine the persuasive benefits of State Calibration. Let's say you've calibrated a state when you notice a person has "dilated pupils, slumped shoulders, and tapping feet". What state does that calibrate to? Well you ask them and they respond, "Interested. I feel interested right now." Excellent! Now you know that whenever that person displays that "dilated pupils, slumped shoulders, and tapping feet" external behavior, then you know they're interested. Why would knowing their internal state be so persuasively valuable? Let's say you're offering this person a sale and he suddenly pops into his "interested state" but SAYS "The price is too high; I don't have my heart set on the product." If you hadn't calibrated, you might've sold the product to him for a lower price. However, the calibration master would demand the sale as is or even increase the price! Why? Because the person who has calibrated already knows that this person is clearly interested.

Additionally, you can know when you've sucessfully put someone into a state. What if you've calibrated a woman to "aroused" or a prospective client to "attentive and eager". You know when your communication is successful because you have those calibration "lights" that flick on revealign to you that your communication is effective! All the best communicators and the most persuasive people utilize state calibration because everyone needs "checks and indicators" for if what they're communicating is working or not! You need feedback for what and how you communicate and all the lights start flashing and you can learn to read a person "like an oven" ;) with effective state callibration!

Personality Types -- Driver, Amiable, Analytical, Expressive

Very Cool list of 4 Personality types on persuasion blog. This article covers the driver, which may be my personality most often. Although I can definitely relate to amiable, analytical and definitely expressive, too. I may be analytical; highly likely with a few expressive or driver traits. My brother James seems to be analytical. My brother thomas, possibly amiable.

However, these are similar to a system I already prefer. And that's Virginia Satir's Computer, Placater, Distractor, and Blamer types. However these deal specifically how you interact with others. The above 4 types are vauge, Satir's are very easy to apply however!

An AMAZING site here with this Building Rapport article. I love the lists. I love the bullet-point format for organization and quick access to information. And Rapport is merely a small portion of the NLP's bracket of communicational tools (along with pacing leading (with representational system predicates, tone, voice, body language), congruence). But for learning Rapport. This article is AMAZiNG. very helpful. nice.
I see why rapport could be a great tool. It makes the other person think you're part of their tribe (when in reality you're very different). I've VERY different from most people I meet and therefore if I want to connect with someone for the purposes of business generating rapport is a must for me. then I can just break state and resume being myself after the rapport exchange :D

Also "warning warning salesman salesman!" LMAO!!! I think people totally think that about me occasionally. good tip on matching pace of speech, tone, and source (nose, chest, throat).

Good to have access to all those methods of communicating for the purpose of generation rapport for others! But then it's important to pattern interrupt that to resume being yourself. And I'm a very fast talker when I'm excited about something.

Phone Conversations - The Best Ones and How to End on a High Plateau!

we talked about the like design of our diploma, thomas being a doctor, my awesome NLP stuff I loved, That felt like a REAL conversation. A great and valuable and meaningful conversation, too! Because we talked about something obscure (a lot of my conversations are like my reciting some blog post or future blog post sometimes haha!) the diplomas, thomas being a doctor -- stuff that basically only we could have a conversation a bout, so that made it more fun and rewarding and meaningful too. On that topic, what exactly is qualifications for a "good, rewarding, GREAT phone convo"? Well, I've give this lot of thought. I think the best phone conversations are ones that are unique and highly-specific and maybe even obscure to the people in the conversation. In otherwords, highly relevant somewhat subjective phone calls! Now, I love universals -- universal truths, universal math, universal language, those solid everywhere you go truths, I love! But in phone calls I've spent a lot of time telling, kind of broadcasting, almost to people the same update or current event of my life or inspirational idea. That's GREAT to do for a seminar or for a motivational lifecoaching session because if it what you say is inspiring and great and motivational then more people should hear it! Great!! But for a casual phone conversation...sure it's great to share the inspirational snippet great! But ultimately, I could broadcast an inspirational snippet in a blog or hopefully when I get actual lifecoaching phone sessions going, so for a casual conversation, strangely I feel the most rewarded when we discuss something highly specific and relevant to each other!

I just had a great, great convo with my brother James and we talked about the text-font-design of our college diplomas as well as our younger brother's career path! haha! A very bizarre thing to examine but it was a topic -- a conversational topic -- that only could really exist from the relationship that exists between my brother and I.

For the longest time I erroneously thought the best phone conversation was me broadcast some inspirational lesson or message, and YES, that DOES have a place, if I'm in rapport with an audience or a person who's interested at that time in hearing and experiencing a motivational message, but if it's just a casual conversation, broadcasting a huge motivational message kind of just has a neutral effect and isn't as uplifting as a highly specific person-to-person relevant conversation!! That was very surprising to me!

One of the best things we talked about was how to properly end conversations. I've had tons of people and articles provide advice on the MILLIONS of lines, the script, the dialogue, the words, you can say to end a phone conversation such as...

• "I'm really sorry, but I have to go, it's dinner time. I'll call you tomorrow, OK? (pause) Bye!"
• "Sorry got to go, there's someone at the door, bye"
• "Oh my gosh! [Insert name of pet, younger sibling or child here!] Stop! You're going to kill yourself! Stop! Hold on!" [Hang up] If they call back later or something tell that the pet/ younger sibling/ child almost fell off the counter, or pulled a bookshelf down or something similar, but they ended up OK, despite some bruises and scrapes.
• "Hey, I'm going to have to let you go because I have to get off the phone."
• "Well i must be running up your bill, so Ill let you get on now, take care, bye"
• Blah Blah -- USELESS!

Those words are useless unless you know when you should or want to end a phone call!! My problem was that, frankly, I have all these little projects in my life that I could easily get to but valued phone conversations (I can be a very chatty person at times) and always feared ending a convo that might provide inspiration or interesting discussions. So the solution is WHILE you're talking you think of things on your todo list that you want to get done and then weave those into the conversation and share your excitement about doing this next project and then say so I'm "adios to go do xyz"! So you aren't "ending terminating, severing" the phone call; instead, you're getting stoked, psyched, and sharing your interest in this next project that you have to do (writing a blog entry, taking dog for walk, some appointment, a computer project I'm working on, making done, going to meet a friend) and then telling the person that you'll love to continue talking but are going to do that.

People have all these "lines", "excuses" to say in phone calls and I've experienced people saying those to me and frankly, it kind of bites. It hurts to have someone make up something they have to do to end a phone call. So basically I never gave myself permission to end phone calls, even when I mentioned another project I always "asked" the other person if it was okay for me to go!! I'd say "I'm so psyched about xyz, Isn't that a cool project! Is it okay if I go do that?" haha!! I seriously felt Sooo uncomfortable simply saying I have to go and choosing to end the phone conversation. Like my problem was not not having an awareness of how to end a phone call, but rather, that I never knew when I wanted to or when it was best to do! The key, again, is openness, sharing a project I'm working on and saying I have to get back to that!

I'm a very talkative and happy social person when I'm in the mood but that does not have to coexist with being focused and clear and sharing projects that I'm working on then weaving that into the convo to then launch into that next project or action from the convo. In other words, you shouldn't ever "end-terminate" phone calls with friends (you SHOULD with obnoxious people and I'm quite good at terminating phone calls haha!) But segueing-launching into the next action of your life is what you should do with phone calls with friends. Cool!



eHow suggests:

Use phrases that come at the end of a conversation such as, “it’s been great talking to you” or “thanks for the chat.” This is a subtle way to let the other party know you are trying to wrap up the conversation.

So in other words, ending a conversation is NOT saying no to the person, no to their ideas, nor anything like that! I erroneously assumed that if I ended a conversation, I would be trampling on the person's ideas and essence and personality. I literally ALWAYS waited for the other person to say they had to go. Seriously! Just about every single phone call I was in, I felt like I the other person needed to say they had to go or else I'd terminate the conversation at the wrong time or "illegitamately" which is ridiculous because there's no legitimate or illegitimate phone convos, it's just a chat. The mind maketh good or ill; if someone has to go and someone chooses to interpret that as a disparagement, that's an insecurity problem of THEIRS!! So basically I learned to validate ending phone conversations and the missing element of that for me was NOT learning knew ways to express or communicate saying no.

Instead, the missing link that I needed was that I never knew internally what needed to happen in my mind to validate ending the conversation. I never knew knew when I "should" or even "when I wanted" to end the conversation. When I tried to practice it I said "I'm doing this great awesome project where I scan in photos from experiences in my life and apply this very precise chronological naming system so that I get the things done

101 Ways to Say No -- Very funny!

Creating Rapport by Matching Representational System Predicates and Voice Tone and Speed Journal and then Mismatching!

The Assignment:
Practice Rapport and Mismatching!!! -- 2 Phone Convos -- in phone call observe auditorally the quality of the conversation with matching voice tone nad language rapport and then see how easy (hopefully) it is to end the call when you mismatch rapport (speaking loud if voice is soft, soft if loud slow if fast, fast if slow etc) mabye may not even need to say " gotta go !" --

March 30, 2009
10:14 AM

YES!! Totally did this with Citibank person. she had slow southern drawl that I matched, with ALL Visual predicates rock on1! and I matched those "does it show in teh screen?" "I'm trying to not be in the dark" "I see that I made a deposit on 3/3, but that it shows a new statement starting on 3/15", So Matched the s low pace and the visual predicates, then when I had to go I sped up pace a lot and switched to auditory GREAT!! and It like LAUNCHED me into the next thing I wanted to do instead of having lingering d oubts about hte conversation. it felt like I was in control (well certianly in rapport with) the convo and the best thing si that you get to know differnt types of people by doing reapport and I felt like I thought like southerner with a drawl for a bit then and i LOVED the closure mismatching created when I ended the phone convo. SO awesome!!! RAD!!! SUCCESS!! That felt great because I "saw eye to eye" lol with the person using their preferred representational system (visual) and their preferred speed-tone (slower) and i created that rappport for understanding and then when ended teh conversation, I mismatched with auditory and fast (likely my preferred rep system!) wanted to check in to see if she was trying to match with mine like she might thoguht my prefererd was visual so she tried tomatch that but, bah, not likley people arent' that cpmle.x HEY that was awesome!! Cool as!! great!! Felt awes.e one more of those ! Cool! One VERY cool thing I did at the beginning of the conversations was I cycled through all three VAK representational systems saying "I'm trying to see if.."...this sounds right but..I don't feel like it went through" So I PRESENTED the V-A-and K represetnational predicates to almost kind of push her to start using her preferred one, subconsciously that could imply that we're going to start using representational system predicates in this conversation "you better choose your preferred or else you'll be confused" and she went with visual. But that VAK cycle at the beginning kind of ELICITTED or sparked her to start using her preferred, and then all we did was use visual so it was GREAT predicate matching!! So awesome!!

So a good trick is:

1. Do the VAK predicate cycle to elicit their prefered representational system.
2. Create great rapport by matching those rep systems predicates as well as by matching voice tone and voice speed, and then;
3. mismatch to end the convo.
   

So awesome! Made me feel productive and made me feel like I "connected with a foreginer" because they are different rep systems. Additionally, when talking with the slow woman, it made me feel a bit frightened because I i knew I was stepping out of my preferred rep system speaking so slowly and usually only visual predicates (I think I like speaking fast with variety of VAK, but this is not verified fully) so that was interesting but the end result was HUGE success. Felt like I did this well and it was AMAZING how i could see and hear and feel how the rapport got established and then how easily it was to break and how I felt so much more in control of the conversation and connected to the erson.

So conclusively, VAK representational system predicate matching for rapport and mismatching for ending convs increases control and connection!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 30, 2009
10:39 AM
YES!! Did Second ONE with another citibank person she was a FAST Talker (HUGE differences!!!) I have to look closely to people's VAK representaitonal system. I thought all americans are the same and that I needed france or italian or australian accents to get "different people" but when I look at details the first and second women I spoke with were as different as east from west with representational systems. The second woman talked fast and complained of slow computer, she didn't use any predicates, but she was maybe auditory because talked fast, so I mathced talking fast, and then to end the convo I tried talking fast a gain out of habit, but I realized talking slow would've ended the convo because to HER the convo picks up pace and is going when people are talking fast. COOL AS!!! So awesome!!

AM
YES!! Did Second ONE with another citibank person she was a FAST Talker (HUGE differences!!!) I have to look closely to people's VAK representaitonal system. I thought all americans are the same and that I needed france or italian or australian accents to get "different people" but when I look at details the first and second women I spoke with were as different as east from west with representational systems. The second woman talked fast and complained of slow computer, she didn't use any predicates, but she was maybe auditory because talked fast, so I mathced talking fast, and then to end the convo I tried talking fast a gain out of habit, but I realized talking slow would've ended the convo because to HER the convo picks up pace and is going when people are talking fast. COOL AS!!! So awesome!!

I think the differences between these types of representational system preferences of each person were deeper and more exciting than I first thought. The southern person was maybe like kira...someone whom I don't speak the "same language" (have different predicates and voice tone-speed so I learn from and expand and stretch my method of communicating...whereas the second person, when I meet a person that "speaks my langauge" (i.e has same predicate preferences and voice speed-tone), just joke and have fun and saw what you want! THAT's the necessary adjustment cool!