everywomanshero
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- May 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,814
- Reaction score
- 36
There is reason why your emotions seem to plague you with guilt when you sit on the couch for the 3rd Saturday in a row. The term is cognitive dissonnance.
Cognitive dissonance means your beliefs, attitudes, and actions are not consistent.
When you believe you should be approaching women and you rarely do, you're creating an inconsistency between your beliefs and your actions. It happens because you know better, but do the wrong thing anyway.
Just imagine if you had eaten a high fat mousse when you were on a diet. You would probably feel bad about it. BUT not nearly as bad if you had thought it was low fat initially and only later realized it was high fat. The reason is you didn't know any better, so it couldn't be avoided. So do what you know is right, and you won't have to feel the guilt anymore regardless of the immediate outcome.
Now here's a twist in cognitive dissonance as it applies to us. Have you ever noticed that when you spend too much money on a woman sometimes it doesn't pay off? I have found a possible explanation for this. In studies when people are offered either 20$ or 1$ to lie about a boring task being fun, how they rate the task is different. (note: these studies are older, so 20$ then is like 80$ now). So when the people were paid 20$, they had no dissonance. They felt the lie was justified by the compensation and thought no more about it. When given only 1$, that wasn't sufficient to tell a lie. After all, they aren't cheap or willing to lie without good reason. What ended up happening is the 1$ people backwards rationalized due to this injusitification effect that the task must be somewhat enjoyable and that's why they told the lie. In other words, when women receive injustifiable monetary/asset rewards for having spent time with a guy, it is possible that they attribute other reasons for this like it must have been fun. I believe this is often the case.
Cognitive dissonance means your beliefs, attitudes, and actions are not consistent.
When you believe you should be approaching women and you rarely do, you're creating an inconsistency between your beliefs and your actions. It happens because you know better, but do the wrong thing anyway.
Just imagine if you had eaten a high fat mousse when you were on a diet. You would probably feel bad about it. BUT not nearly as bad if you had thought it was low fat initially and only later realized it was high fat. The reason is you didn't know any better, so it couldn't be avoided. So do what you know is right, and you won't have to feel the guilt anymore regardless of the immediate outcome.
Now here's a twist in cognitive dissonance as it applies to us. Have you ever noticed that when you spend too much money on a woman sometimes it doesn't pay off? I have found a possible explanation for this. In studies when people are offered either 20$ or 1$ to lie about a boring task being fun, how they rate the task is different. (note: these studies are older, so 20$ then is like 80$ now). So when the people were paid 20$, they had no dissonance. They felt the lie was justified by the compensation and thought no more about it. When given only 1$, that wasn't sufficient to tell a lie. After all, they aren't cheap or willing to lie without good reason. What ended up happening is the 1$ people backwards rationalized due to this injusitification effect that the task must be somewhat enjoyable and that's why they told the lie. In other words, when women receive injustifiable monetary/asset rewards for having spent time with a guy, it is possible that they attribute other reasons for this like it must have been fun. I believe this is often the case.