Subscribe
You remember back when you were in school. Everyone wanted to be “liked” by everyone else. In fact, even the word “like”, implies a connection between sameness and affection. No to mention that when you’re a teenager, to be like someone is often a prerequisite for being liked by that person.
There were, of course, different ways to conform and court popularity. You could play up an inherent trait and look for people with similar qualities. Funny people might end up in the Drama club, physically strong people might come together in the Weight-lifting club, fearless craziness could get you in with the Rock climbers, and people with an aptitude for argument or ideas would get drawn together into Debate or Science clubs… Or you could meld yourself to a social clique based on shared interests: Punks, Goths, Arties, Geeks or Stoners, etc. You could even conform to a group of people who specialized in not seeming to care about conforming. They were the “Cool” kids. Yet you didn’t just mould yourself to other people’s interests, talents, or skills. You used your own interests, talents, and skills to gravitate toward – or to even attract – people who shared them. And, out of the conformist cliques based on some type of talent or skill would come the perfection of that talent or skill.
Next came work, and accomplishment, and rewards; all of which reduced the pressure to conform almost to the point where it didn’t exist. You conformed along the lines of who you were and what you did best, and after a short while your substance as an individual replaced the need to conform. The singularity of your personality and your achievements attracted people even more than your reassuring resemblance to them did. You became an adult.
However, there was always one type of person that didn’t belong to any particular group. He belonged to every group. He (or even she) didn’t gravitate toward a clique based on a shared interest, or talent, or skill. He gravitated toward any clique that would have him.
He could be the “class clown” who ingratiated himself at the price of his dignity; or the kid that vandalized bus shelters, or caused outrage in order to please. Or she was the “easy” girl. Such a person didn’t appeal to others on the basis of a quality that they shared with them, or a quality which was also the essence of an activity that did not belong to everyone: athletic prowess, dramatic skill, intellectual capacity, etc. Such a person divorced popularity from identity, and from the kind of accomplishment that might boost self-esteem and strengthen identity. He transformed his very self – not his interests, talents, or skills, his self – into a product that he tailored to fit the needs of others. For this type of person, there was no such thing as other people to try to relate to. There was only an audience to try to please.
Therefore, in your quest to have a better, more fulfilling sex life, avoid this type of “universal personality”, which plays to the lowest common denominator.
The person who will do anything to be popular is the most basic kind of person, since he depends only on his ability to become like other people, rather than on some personal talent that might make him superior to other people.
You might also enjoy reading:-
- Altering the truth to impress friends
- Low sex drive – not a problem, say women
- Influence: Part 4 – Principle of Liking
- Finding a man to seduce
- How to establish and build rapport
Posted by Jonathan in Philosophy, Sociology