DEAR DR. NERDLOVE : A few months ago, I (f/34) went through a tumultuous breakup. It was one of those heart-wrenching, soul-crushing ones that leave you questioning a lot about yourself and relationships in general. The relationship itself was definitely in a death spiral before the end, but the ending was dramatic. There was yelling, fighting, accusations being thrown around… it was a lot, and I’m glad it’s over.

But I’m not sure if it’s over enough for me to be dating again.

Just when I thought I’d be nursing my wounds for a good while, I met “Derek” (not his real name). We connected almost instantly, and before I knew it, we were in the whirlwind phase of a new relationship.

Now, Derek is kind, understanding, and genuinely seems to care about me. But here’s where things get a tad complicated. This relationship is still in its infancy, and I’m constantly questioning its authenticity. Is it real? Or am I just subconsciously trying to patch up my hurt from the previous breakup? Is it too soon? Am I just dating him to be dating someone?

My friends, well-intentioned as I believe they are, aren’t making things easier. Many of them believe I dove into this relationship too quickly, suggesting I’m merely using it as a way to avoid processing my previous relationship and the accompanying heartbreak. Their concerns have made me more introspective and, honestly, a bit paranoid about my own feelings and intentions.

How can I genuinely decipher whether what I’m feeling for Derek is real and not just a rebound reaction to my past breakup? Is there a way to differentiate genuine feelings from those that might be rooted in avoidance or a desire for a quick emotional fix?

Eagerly awaiting your perspective,

Lost in Emotional Limbo

DEAR LOST IN EMOTIONAL LIMBO: I will be honest, LEL, I have a lot of issues with the concept of rebound relationships. A lot of times, it seems to me that “rebound” is the label that we put on the relationships that didn’t “work” after the last one – especially a previous relationship that most people would call “serious”.

A lot of the things that we classify as signs of a rebound relationship – not being sure what we want, just wanting to fill a hole in our lives, craving validation, having large, loud and complicated feelings about our ex, even the relative speed at which the relationship progresses – are all things that we see in other relationships too, not just “the next person we date after a break up. Those often look and act precisely the same as supposed rebound relationships except for the timing, and yet we don’t consider those relationships to be “lesser”, just unfortunate.

I suspect that some of the feelings around rebound relationships comes from the way we often conflate duration with seriousness or importance and the deference we feel those relationships are due. If you were in a “serious” relationship and you launch into your next one soon after that first one ended, then that would imply that You’re Doing Relationships Wrong, not giving that previous relationship and its import the due consideration and mourning while you “process” it. If you don’t do all the performative “oh, this ended and that is bad” motions before finding someone else and being twitterpated over them, it means that you have failed in some particular way. And thus when that relationship ends – as most relationships do – then it’s clearly  because you did a Bad and got caught in a rebound relationship instead.

Similarly, there’s a tendency to look at relationships as being inherently serious or meaningful in ways that flings or affairs aren’t. A fling after a break up could be seen as acceptable as someone explores their newfound freedom. But a relationship? So soon afterwards? SCANDALOUS! What does it say that they’re willing to diminish the importance of a RELATIONSHIP by just diving into one before you’ve had the appropriate ritual mourning period?

The thing is, this tends to assume a lot about the person, the relationship and what it means to be over someone. People are complex, and the fact that someone was in a relationship for months or years doesn’t mean that it’s going to take an equal amount of time to recover from it. The idea that it takes half the length of the relationship to get over someone is something makes a great tweet or declaration in a TikTok video, but that’s a guideline at best and not one that necessarily applies to everybody.

Take “getting over” your ex or “processing your feelings”, for example. One of the things that folks often don’t realize is that many times, the end of the relationship wasn’t the break up. The end of the relationship may well have happened much earlier, when one person realized that they were done and no longer wanted to be part of it; the separation didn’t happen until later. But in the interim period, that person may well have processed things and gotten over their ex before what we would have recognized as the end of the relationship. So it may seem like they either got over their ex incredibly quickly – or haven’t gotten over them yet – the truth is, they were doing that work long before outside observers realized that the relationship had ended.

Similarly, getting into a relationship with someone else shortly afterwards, being incredibly excited or caught up in the NRE of it all doesn’t necessarily mean that somebody’s on the rebound. We’re all familiar with the phrase “get over someone by getting under someone else” and there is truth to that. Sometimes part of the healing process may involve a fling or giving oneself permission to be excited by another person again. Whether it’s the validation of someone else finding them sexy and desirable, the desire to draw a line demarcating a new stage of life, getting a much-needed dopamine and oxytocin fix or just letting oneself enjoy things that they may have been missing in their previous relationship… sometimes processing the break up really does involve fucking that ex right out of their life.

And that’s before we get into things like the fact that humans are a novelty-seeking species and a new partner who’s different – sometimes wildly different – from an ex is inherently exciting or just maybe somebody really just wants to enjoy fucking someone for funsies.

Or – and hear me out – sometimes you get out of one relationship and get lucky, finding someone who’s a great match for you a lot sooner than you might have expected.

Your friends are assuming a lot about you and your feelings and acting as though they know you better than you know yourself. They might have a point if you have a tendency to throw yourself into relationships with folks who are bad matches, each time declaring that this shall be a love to last forever before ending up on the couch crying into a pint of Jenni’s three weeks later. But if that’s not your pattern, then at a certain point, you have to be willing to accept that maybe you know yourself and your feelings better than they do, seeing as they’re your feelings. And while it’s sweet that they worry, the guidelines they expect you to follow tend to be more ritual and “everybody knows”, rather than actual rules.

And that’s before we get into whether having a quick emotional fix is inherently a bad thing. It’s not. It can be bad if you’re only seeking those to the point that it’s interfering with your life. But hey, not everyone wants a three Michelin star dinner every time they’re hungry. Sometimes a motherfucker just wants some goddamn chicken nuggets and fries and a goddamn Hostess cupcake or two.

Now, with your new beau, I’d give you the same advice I’d give anyone who’s caught up in the thrills of New Relationship Energy: you can enjoy it for the sake of enjoying it without making more than it is. Right now, you and Derek barely know each other. That, to my mind, is far more important than whether this is a rebound or not.

You don’t say how long you and he have been together, but I’m guessing that it hasn’t been long at all. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but it does mean that right now you aren’t in a place where you should be looking much further ahead than the next week or next month with him. This isn’t a time to be making long-term plans with him – not because this is a rebound, but because this is a new relationship. You aren’t even at the point where you two feel comfortable farting in front of each other, never mind being able to share a life together. And that would be true regardless of how long it’s been since your last relationship.

Right now, you’re with a new guy who makes you feel amazing and whose company you really enjoy. Well, go the f--k on enjoying yourself; you deserve it. Just recognize that this is new and exciting and you want to keep your wits about you even as you enjoy the thrill of the new. See where it goes, especially as the NRE fades and you get to know each other on a deeper level. Let it be whatever it’s going to be, without needing to force it to conform to other people’s idea of what is appropriate right now.

But at the same time, don’t let either its suddenness or its longevity – however long it does or doesn’t last – define things for you. You don’t need this to be a love to last a lifetime for it to be legitimate, significant or important. A relationship that lasts six months can be more important and more successful than one that drags on for a decade.

Maybe Derek will be the last guy you ever date. Maybe he’s going to be your Pete Davidson: a soft place to land and recover until you’re ready to move on to your next adventure. Maybe he’s just some really good sex that you needed right now. That’s all fine.

Right now, you’re happy and you’re allowed to be happy. So let yourself enjoy this. Don’t overcommit before you’re ready, but otherwise? If this is what you want for now, then that’s really all that’s important. The rest can be dealt with as it comes.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com

DEAR DR. NERDLOVE : After reading many of your posts and many conversations with friends, I’m starting to think that dating is just too difficult for all people, for a very different set of reasons for each person. It seems like people of all genders have trouble with dating, because of the way dating works in our culture and I’m not sure I understand why.��For one thing, I don’t understand why it has to be a guy’s job to ask a woman out if women don’t enjoy getting male attention most of the time. If women don’t like male attention, then doesn’t it make more sense for women to be the ones to pursue men, and not the other way around? I’m not saying that women never ask men out, but if I were to go out to an event to meet people, for example, as the guy I’m the one who’s expected to “make the first move” and initiate everything; it would be unreasonable to just show up somewhere, not talk to anyone, and expect a woman to just start talking to and flirting with me. For females, however, this happens all the time. I think this is also why there are way more men than women on dating apps, women are turned off at all the unwanted attention.��Men seem to have the opposite problem. When women get too much attention, men don’t seem to get enough. I think this creates a disconnect where men think they would enjoy getting excessive female attention, even if that’s not the case. This disconnect, I think, is one reason men can sometimes go for more “aggressive” tactics to get women; in their minds, they would love getting this attention, so they figure they’re not doing anything wrong. I also think this all results in men being more prone to believing bulls--t they pick up online, things such as “the six-sixes” or that “women only date Chads” etc. Guys learn that stuff when they go online to look for answers for why they never get attention from the opposite gender.��My question, I guess is, why does our society have to work this way? Nobody likes this current system, so why are we not changing it? I think we can all agree that it would be better for everyone if it was just as easy for all genders to find someone to date, and there were no “double-standards” or different expectations placed on different genders.��My next question is how am I supposed to date if this is how dating works in our society? I think that, as a guy, I’m the one taking a bigger risk in pursuing a woman than the woman is in pursuing me. If a female friend, for example, were to pursue me and I wasn’t interested I would probably take it as a compliment, since I so rarely get that kind of attention. However, if I pursue a female friend who’s not interested in me, I run the risk of becoming yet another guy that’s only interested in her for dating, and this may ruin the friendship between the two of us. I know this could be part of that “disconnect” I mentioned earlier.

Regards�Looking for Answers

DEAR LOOKING FOR ANSWERS: Welp, this is gonna be a long one.

You know, your second to last paragraph reminds me of an XKCD comic. Specifically, XKCD #592, where a group of friends comes up with what they assume is the ultimate solution to the sexual rules that create so much drama. As soon as they think they’ve figured it out, they rush out to tell everyone the good news, only to come running back in the room after the changes created more drama, saying “holy s--t guys, people are complicated”.��What you’re asking can be boiled down to “because SOCIETY”, with jazz-hands and music stings. But boiling it down that simplistically is doing a disservice to the complicated and twisted knot of multiple different threads that all come together to create a situation that makes a lot of people miserable. ��People are, in fact, really f--king complicated. As is society.  And those complications are born out of a lot of different factors all coming together.

So, you’re not wrong that dating is pretty frustrating for… well, pretty much everyone right now. But it’s a situation that defies simplistic answers because what you’re seeing is the intersection of tradition, changing social mores, the decay of social media under capitalism (what Cory Doctorow calls “ens--tification” and what I call “f--kin’ tech bros”), grifters who prey on social dissatisfaction and a whole lotta folks who just don’t want to admit what the real issue is.

So let’s roll it from the top, shall we?

First, why do men have to make the first move, especially if women don’t like male attention? Well, this starts off with the false assumption that women don’t like male attention. It’s not the attention that’s the problem. What they complain about is unwanted attention – something that tends to spur folks to send that whole “here’s how it works” comic or the “sexual harassment seminar” SNL sketch that says the answer is “be attractive, don’t be unattractive”.

The issue at hand isn’t the relative attractiveness of the person. The issue is that, for the folks who are on the receiving end of this attraction, it’s less about the hotness of the person giving them attraction and far more about that person not giving a s--t what the woman wants.

There is a significant difference between someone who says “hey, is that a good book?” and who goes away when he gets the not-interested signal and the guy who plops himself down next to her or across from her and insists on trying to push through her disinterest. And men, especially are still told that you should push through that initial disinterest because that’s how “alphas” or “real men” or whatever other label you want to apply do it.  

The people who are receiving this attraction are being told that they should be grateful for it and accepting of it, regardless of whether they’re interested in the person, interested in receiving attention at all or whatever else they might be want. It doesn’t matter to the person giving the attention that the person receiving it may be busy or working, may be having a s--tty day, has a partner, has no interest in sex and or romance… her wants and needs are treated as tertiary (at best) to the desire of the other person who wants her time.

And very often, if the person receiving that attention doesn’t skillfully thread the needle of turning them down without provoking or upsetting them, there’s a distinct chance that this encounter could turn ugly, even violent. 

But to make matters worse, her disinterest is often framed as either something to be ignored or a sign to push even harder. Back when the pick-up community was surging, this disinterest was even gamified; people were told it was a “s--t test” or her “bitch shield” and wasn’t legitimate. Her disinterest was a show, a performance, a way of seeing who the “real” men were vs. the average frustrated cucks.

So right off the bat, there’s a conflict between one person’s desires and agency and another’s, with women getting the short end of that particular stick.

Just as importantly, men are “expected” to do the initiating, partially because of tradition and gender roles (men are expected to be aggressive, dominant and leaders), but also partially because guys can get weird when gender roles are challenged. This weirdness can range from over assuming the woman’s interest (she has to want the “d” right now otherwise she’d never flout the social rules about making the first move!) to thinking that it’s a trick or a trap.

It’s very much a #MasculinitySoFragile situation. It becomes much more understandable when you consider how many things men are told they’re not supposed to do because it makes them girly or gay (which, in and of itself, is a gender role upheaval).

Compounding this – especially the “if women don’t like the attention, why aren’t they the ones initiating” question – is the ever-present and legitimate worry about danger. Women have more to fear from men, physically and socially, than men do from women. This isn’t just a matter of violence; it’s also the risk of sexually transmitted infections, pregnancy, social consequences for being sexual in ways that people disapprove of and so on. Cis men don’t need to worry about getting pregnant and, in a post-Roe society, also don’t need to worry about being forced to carry that child to term, with all the health risks, social and economic costs that come with it.

You also have fallen into a trap of assuming that women who want attention or who want guys to come talk to them are sitting around doing nothing. Women put in a lot of time and effort to be approachable – from makeup and styling to their behavior in the venue. It’s not treated as effort or work, in part because much happens before they even show up.  Society, after all, has expectations that women are supposed to look and behave a certain way (see also: how women are treated if they show up without makeup and how guys don’t know how much makeup is involved in a “no makeup look”).  However, it’s also because it’s not recognized as effort. But if you were to read advice for women, especially from women’s magazines, you could fill libraries with all the rules and behaviors women are expected to perform in order to get male attention. And you could find just as many women who are punished – directly and indirectly – for not behaving in just the “right” ways to get male attention.

And it’s worth nothing that women can and have done exactly what you said – went some place, didn’t interact with anyone and just minded their own business – and still recieved unwanted attention. It, again, comes because society still teaches men that women exist in public as something to be consumed, rather than an individual with agency and an internal life that doesn’t revolve around men. This is, once again, men ignoring her lack of demonstrated interest because their desire to get what they want from her overrides her desire to be left alone.

That same dynamic of “guys are the aggressor” follows us everywhere, including onto dating apps. But the same aggressive behavior, regardless of the other person’s interest, turns off women and enough of it makes them quit the apps in frustration. This helps contribute to the uneven split in gender ratios, which is then further exasperated by algorithmic sorting that affects who you do and don’t see, incentivizing increasingly aggressive and socially maladjusted behavior from guys who want to maximize their ability to match with the women they want.

It’s also worth noting that many guys don’t think that unwanted attention is bad… in part because they assume that the people who might give them attention would be attractive to them if the roles were reversed. In other words – they see it as the porn fantasy instead of the reality.  

But not only would many of them flip their s--t if a man – especially a very “butch” or dominant man – were to hit on them aggressively (there’s those flouted gender roles again) and doubly so if the aggressor were a trans woman. There’s a reason why “gay/trans panic” was considered a viable defense for murder, after all. And it’s worth noting that there were no state laws banning this until 2014 and most states haven’t passed laws prohibiting it, and there is still no federal law prohibiting it, despite having been proposed in 2018, 2019, 2021 and 2023.

And, I might add, being creeped on by a woman, even an attractive woman, is still deeply uncomfortable. It’s not about the fact that someone you’re uninterested in flirting or hitting on you, it’s about the continual disregard of your lack of interest and pushing against your boundaries. Especially if it’s at a time and place where you have to be mindful of how you respond.

But this disconnect isn’t what fuels the push towards aggressive tactics by folks and that gets exploited by people like Andrew Tate and his ilk. What actually fuels it is quite simple: equality. When women had to rely on men for literal survival, men didn’t have to work as hard to find relationships. When “good sex” was seen as a bonus for women but required for the men in their lives, being a good lover wasn’t as much of a concern for men as much as being a provider.

If one’s only choice is between potential poverty, homelessness and starvation and marriage, most people are eventually going to find someone to marry… even if that meant marrying someone you weren’t really that crazy about.��People often don’t realize that modern courtship as we know it didn’t really start until the 1900s, really didn’t come into vogue widely until after WWI and primarily a factor in urban areas at first before being spread via mass media and pop culture. So the “standards” and “traditions” that we currently hold to are barely 100 years old; the older ones are even more stringent and women had much less of a say in the matter than they do now.

It’s also very easy to forget that women didn’t have the full right to own their own finances or get a credit card until the Equal Credit Opportunity Act was passed in 1974 – that’s within Gen X’s lifetime.

Similarly, the advent of the no-fault divorce – which didn’t hit some states until 2010 �– meant that women weren’t forced to stay in relationships if they didn’t want to, or that they had to jump through absurd legal hoops in order to “justify” ending it in a literally adversarial process. ��Similarly, modern advances in birth control – and especially, birth control that women had access to and control over – meant that women had less risk for actually expressing and enjoying their sexuality and empowered them to have sex for pleasure in the same way that men do.

So, after several generations of courtship, where the rule was “you pretty much have to pick someone, so go for the least bad option”, women have increasingly had the ability to actually consider interests beyond “will I starve in the streets if I don’t get married?” and were able to be choosier in who they actually wanted to have a relationship with, who they might want to marry or if they wanted to marry at all.

And even then, the dynamics that shaped courtship and dating were still very much present. With the arc of history bending increasingly towards equity (including the various waves of the feminist movement, increased intersectionality with issues of class and race and so on), women have been progressively able to choose who they want to date, f--k and marry and on what terms.

Men, on the other hand, haven’t adjusted as well to this. Part of the struggle with toxic and restrictive ideas and rules regarding masculinity is adapting to these changes, and how many people haven’t adapted… and resent having to do so.

This isn’t terribly surprising if you really think about it. Gen X grew up in an era when Boomer culture was still very dominant; if it seems like we are way more familiar with older pop culture (by which I mean ranging from “Leave It To Beaver”, “Ozzy and Harriet” to “The Brady Bunch” and so on) than our younger peers, it’s because that was 90% of what pop culture was. We grew up being taught the rules of life from folks who came of age in the 50s and 60s, and much of the culture of the era reinforced those rules. So many, if not most Gen Xers and a sizable portion of elder Millennials were raised with social mores and rules that were codified a generation previously. Young Millennials and Gen Z are growing up in an era when those old ways have been changing… but Boomers and the people who benefited from the Boomer generation’s rules are still very much a dominant cultural and political force.

It’s worth noting how any of the various movements that supposedly exist to help men are, in fact, barely disguised attempts to reinforce old and outdated social mores. The Pick-Up community, evopsych, the Red Pill community, the “manosphere” and folks like Tate all dress old toxic ideas up in modern drag; if you actually examine what they endorse and teach, it’s very retrograde, 50s-esque gender and sexual roles and beliefs. Hell, the “tradwife” crowd doesn’t even bother with the pretense of being for the modern era. They claim to “RETVRN” to a 19th century by promoting a version that never existed (and certainly didn’t exist for anyone who wasn’t white and middle class) but that also rolls back the legal, social and economic progress that women’ve experienced in the last 120 years.

So much of why the male “rules” of courtship seem to be aggressive and counterproductive is because they’re still trying to fit 1950s rules into 21st century society. It’s tempting and alluring because it promises “simplicity” but also power and authority and the hallmarks of those restrictive ideas of what it means to be a man. So folks who may feel tension between the restrictive forms of masculinity and the more egalitarian and modern forms feel like they’re going to be given guaranteed rewards, while the more modern forms say “it’s going to take effort, it’s going to take work and you’re not guaranteed that you’re going to get the girl because girls have agency and choice too and you have to work with that.”

The simple appeal of both social power and approval by their peers and superiors (all male, natch) AND the promise of sex and the adoration of women for just existing is incredibly high. Especially if you’re already feeling awkward or unsure about yourself or confused by what can feel like conflicting messages.

And then they get pissed because the rewards they were promised for being men aren’t coming and certainly aren’t coming in the way they were told. And, in fact, they’re discovering that a lot of those old ways were actively harmful –  not just for women, but for men and society in general.

S--t, that’s literally the underlying premise of Fight Club.

Now how do you navigate dating in the modern era? Well, you can hope and work for a completely egalitarian society where these double standards and expectations don’t exist, but you’re going to have to date in the world that is. And part of that is recognizing that while there’s risk involved that risk isn’t evenly distributed, nor are the consequences of it. And straight, cis men are much more insulated from those.

Part of it is going to be learning to read the room, understanding the people you want to date and learning how and where to find them. This means working on your social skills and social calibration, but also making are that you are able to take “no thank you” with grace. The “attention” that women complain about isn’t coming from men who hear “not interested” and say “no problem, have a good night”, or who are turned down by the friend they have a crush on and continue to be a friend, rather than making their hurt feelings her problem. It’s coming from guys who hear “no” and think that just means “keep going, I’ll give in eventually”.

Another part is getting a good idea of who you’re compatible with and making sure that you are compatible with them too. There’s a distinct difference between being attracted to somebody and actually being compatible with them, and a lot of guys fail because they don’t consider that part.

But just as important is learning how to communicate. All of dating is communication. Flirting is communication. Sex is communication. Relationships are communication. Much of what the most aggressive tactics come down to isn’t communication, it’s domination. It’s one-sided, “I demand, you give, I take”. Communication, by its very nature, is two-way, speaking but also listening. Not just hearing, listening, understanding and working within those understandings. The idea of “women don’t like male attention” is hearing, not listening. Listening is active, it requires paying attention and trying to understand. Sometimes what you think you hear isn’t what the other person is saying; in those moments, seeking clarity and understanding is important. And sometimes that means actively pursuing clarity and understanding yourself, instead of hoping other people are going to provide it for you.

And it’s worth noting that dating is a full-contact sport. There are no guarantees that you won’t get hurt. You may get your heart broken. You may get into a relationship that’s bad for you. You may date someone who is actually, actively dangerous. There are risks, as there are with any interaction between two or more people. The keys are understanding which risks are more likely and how to mitigate them, which risks are too much and which risks you’re willing to take on. If you drive, you risk injury and death. Driving is common, frequently encouraged (tacitly and explicitly) and treated as standard, but it’s not required. There’re lots of folks who choose not to drive, for many reasons, including not wanting to take on that risk. And that’s ok.

So it is with dating. There are risks. You have to decide if you’re ok with those risks. But there are rewards, too… and the only person who can decide if the rewards are worth the risk and the effort is you.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com

DEAR DR. NERDLOVE : Why do I have to initiate conversation nearly 100% of the time? I regularly go out to try to meet new people, in various different places, but nobody ever comes up and starts talking to me. But if I want to meet anyone, I have to do just that. But why do I have to be the one who has to do that 100% of the time? Shouldn’t it be something like 50/50? I’m not even talking about the societal expectation that men initiate romantic and sexual relationships with women and do all the approaching here, this is with anything, even platonic.

I have such a hard time initiating conversation that I usually just stress out and sit down alone. Things might go better if someone started conversation with me. But nobody does.

The only explanation I can think of is that nobody has any interest in me. Even if I go to a group thing where the group all sits together, nobody seems to acknowledge me, if I try to say anything, it’s not noticed or ignored.

Why do I have to be the one who initiates conversation every time?

That’s Me In The Corner

DEAR THAT’S ME IN THE CORNER: It seems like I get a variation of this question fairly often – both in a romantic context but also in an extrovert/introvert one. So we’re going to do a dip into who makes the first move and why.

There’re a few things that contribute to this sort of situation, and it’s important to not get tunnel vision as to why… or if it’s really happening the way you think.

First and foremost: The idea that “the only explanation is nobody has any interest in me” is overly simplistic and to an extent, self-serving. Yes, it’s putting yourself down, but it’s also implying that you’re the only person so put-upon and so isolated that this is the only reason why other folks can’t make the first move. This is a variation of the Illusion of Asymmetric Insight, where you assume that you can read everyone else perfectly, but you are a black box of mystery to everyone else.

You need to consider the distinct possibility that you’re not the only person who gets shy or intimidated about trying to talk to folks they don’t know. While there are certainly folks who network the way other people breathe, that’s not everyone. Hell, in a post-lockdown society, that’s likely a minority; pretty much everyone went feral during the lockdown and not everyone’s gotten back in the swing of being social again.

Second: consider the effort you’re putting in to being approachable. This is, quite honestly, an underappreciated skill, and something that a lot of folks don’t realize is a skill. A lot of times, men (and it’s mostly men) who complain that they have to do all the approaching don’t realize that part of the reason why they don’t have people coming over to talk to them is because they’re frequently giving off “don’t talk to me” vibes and signals.

If you’re getting so worked up that you’re stressing out and going to sit down somewhere, then you’re likely sending off messages that say “not interested, go away”, and people are reacting accordingly. Closed off body language, focusing on your phone or looking like you just bit into a moldy lemon are going to dissuade folks from coming over to say hi.

Similarly, if you’re posting up away from the crowds or in places that are out of the flow of traffic, you’re increasing the obstacles between you and people who might be interested in talking to you. The more that someone is going to have to make an effort to get over to you, the more interested in talking to you they’re going to have to be. And even someone who’s generally social and outgoing is going to have to be pretty invested in meeting you if they’re going to have to cross a lot of tables or people or whatnot to get there. The more effort it’s going to take to get to you, the more you’re going to have to signal your interest in other people approaching you.

That means doing things like looking around the room and meeting people’s eyes, looking relaxed and smiling like you’re having a good time. You want to have open, inviting body language – which means not folding in on yourself, not holding things in front of or across your torso like a shield or turning your back to the room in general. And if you are browsing your phone, looking up and looking around more than you look at the phone is going to signal interest in other people. Otherwise, it just looks like you’re not interested in being social.

Third: considering that other folks can be as shy or as cautious to meet other folks, you want to make it as easy for them as you’d like it to be for you. If you’ve wondered what to say when you meet someone or wanted an excuse to talk to them, then remember that other folks are feeling the same way. This is why being out in the flow of traffic is important, as is facing the room, instead of facing the bar, or the table or just “away”. But so is having something that can function as a conversation starter.

If you remember the early days of the PUA craze, one of the more common aspects that people would mock was the concept of “peacocking” – people wearing eye-catching, outré or just plain weird stuff out to bars, as immortalized by Erik “Mystery” Von Markovik’s fuzzy top hat. In theory, this was supposed to confidence – no “average frustrated chump” would dare roll up in the club looking like they got caught in an explosion between Spencer’s Gifts and Hot Topic, after all. But while folks took this to absurd levels, there was value to it it: not to ‘display confidence’, per se, but something that could serve as an easy conversation starter for folks who wanted an excuse to say “hello”. I’ve had more people start conversations with me because of my tattoos than I can easily count.

Now, part of the problem is that it’s easy to go overboard, which is why it’s a good rule of thumb to have a statement piece, and let the rest of your outfit be normal and support it. If you’re going to wear, say, a funky hat, or a really cool jacket, you want to keep the rest of your look fairly simple – especially if you’re not someone who has the personality or style sense to pull off a more complicated look.

And it’s worth noting that this conversation piece can and should be tailored to the crowd that you’re hoping to interact with. If you’re going to be around nerds, wearing a piece that signals your nerdy interests is a good starting point. I’ve had great conversations with folks that started because I recognized that they were wearing a shirt with Captain Harlock’s insignia or a Mighty Nein reference.

Fourth: There’s being ignored and then there’s not being heard or understood. A lot of folks who are shy and retiring or who feel awkward around crowds often are bad at either making themselves heard or asserting themselves enough for others to engage with them. If you’re sitting with others and you’re only making token efforts at saying something – opening your mouth to reply, but not actually speaking, for example – then a lot of times people may not notice that’s what you’re trying to do. You have to be willing to speak up with more volume and forcefulness than you might normally – either to be heard over the crowd or not talked over by others. If you’re not willing to claim your space, then you’re just putting yourself in the position of needing of hoping that someone else will notice and call attention to you… much as you seem to have been with hoping other people will notice you and come over to talk to you, first.

And, frankly, yes, this can be a skill issue, too. Being a good conversationalist is a skill. Being a good conversationalist in a group setting or a party or a bar is a related, but different skill. This is one of the reasons why learning to be good at small talk is important; it’s part and parcel of establishing a rapport with someone and getting to know them. For all that folks talk about hating small talk, it’s an important skill to acquire. At its base, small talk is about finding common ground and shared interests or experiences that can then be leveraged into other topics.

So too is hearing and being heard, learning how to follow and adapt to the flow of conversation and how to contribute, even if you’re just contributing by listening.

And finally: if you’re getting overwhelmed by trying to talk to people, then you need to consider what the cause is and why. Is it social anxiety? Is it that you’re trying to meet people in the wrong places? If you’re having such a hard time that the effort of starting a conversation is enough to send you into a spiral, then you’re going to have to learn to either manage it (possibly via therapy or medication, especially if it’s an anxiety disorder) or work around it. You may need to focus on lower-energy, less chaotic venues or places that lend themselves to one-on-one conversations. Or you may need to build up your social muscles, practicing having mini-conversations over the course of the day.

But at the end of the day, someone needs to make the first move. It may as well be you. Because if you’re hoping that someone else is going to do all the heavy lifting for you? You’re likely going to be waiting a long time until you find one of those mythical extroverts that go around adopting people.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com