10 Ways to be Charming

I love the title to this article, "10 Genuine Ways Anyone Can Be Exceptionally Charming," as if there were completely nefarious ways to be charming. That's one thing that I think is interesting reading the tales of victims of sociopaths. When you factor out other risk factors like drug abuse, alcoholism, bad family upbringing, etc., etc., my anecdotally based opinion is that sociopathy doesn't really seem to contribute that much more to ones propensity to "abuse" others (not misuse, but actually abuse). Maybe I am wrong, and I would love to see some actual data on this, but my impression is that the most common complaint against sociopaths is that they pretended to be so wonderful, which is why it was such a letdown to be let go. The truth is that sociopaths can be extremely friendly, considerate neighbors, passionate lovers, great listeners, funny, easy-going, intense, quirky/brilliant at times, and compelling. Despite being labeled "antisocial," sociopaths are often some of the most charming people you meet, and for the same reasons that anyone else is charming.

Here are excerpts from the top 10 list that I found most compelling(ly sociopathic):

• When you feel someone "gets" you, respecting your opinion, your point of view, your experience--whatever you're communicating--Charming people willingly admit their mistakes. They don't mind serving as a cautionary tale. They don't mind being a source of laughter, for others and for themselves.then you naturally feel more important. The other person doesn't have to agree with you; they just have to show they respect you. How? They maintain eye contact. They smile when you smile. They frown when you frown. They nod your head when you nod. In simple, nonverbal ways, they mimic your behavior--not slavishly, but because they're focused on what you're saying. That feedback loop helps two people bond--and the ability to bond is the essence of charm.
• Charming people don't try to win any unstated competitions with people they meet. In fact, they actively try to lose. They're complimentary. They're impressed. They're even willing to admit a weakness or a failure.
• Charming people don't actively (or unknowingly) look to disagree; they look for points of agreement. Then, if it's appropriate, they gently share a different point of view--and in that way, help create an outstanding conversation. [See also my worst media appearances.]
• Some people have a knack for getting you to talk openly yourself. They ask open-ended questions. They sincerely want to know what you think, and that makes you open up to a surprising degree. You feel like the most interesting man (or woman) in the world. And you like them for making you feel that way. As soon as you learn something about someone, ask why they do it. Or how. Or what they like about it, or what they've learned from it. Charming people ask sincere questions that make it easy to answer in a thoughtful, introspective way. They make you think, in a good way, about yourself, and in the process make you feel charming too. [I was once told that when I do this with people who are not used to being treated this way, it can be especially disarming.]
• They always pass the waiter test. Some people put on a great show in certain situations, but they don't try nearly as hard when they think a person is beneath them. I like to call it the waiter test: If you really want to know how an individual treats people, take him to lunch. How he interacts with the waiter is a much better indication of his interpersonal skills than how he interacts with you. Charming people treat everyone the same way: as deserving of respect and kindness.
• Charming people remember names and even small details, often to a surprising degree. The fact they remember instantly makes us feel a little prouder and a little better about ourselves. And that makes us feel better about them.
• They always say less. Charming people already know what they know. They want to know what you know. And that makes you feel important. Because you are.

You are important! Just because someone turned out to be a sociopath doesn't mean that they think they're better than you or didn't genuinely care for you in their own way. Before I was self-aware, yes, I did think I was better than most people. But that was because I only saw other people's flaws and not my own (sound familiar?). After being taken down a peg or two in my life, I realized that everyone's just different but an equally important part of the human race. I guess that makes me a humanist?

But are they sincere about it? See, I don't think they could ever be sincere in the exact same way that an empath is because for the empath a lot of what they think of as sincerity involves empathy. But does that mean the sociopath can't ever be sincere, because he isn't doing or saying the things for the same reason that you might?

Unleashing our power of seduction

Seduction gets a bad rap, as argued by Chen Lizra in her TED talk "The Power of Seduction in Our Everyday Lives."


The goal of her talk is to get people to see seduction as a valuable life skill. She thinks everyone can learn how to seduce, particularly when they start young. She talks about how the term seduction has been so sexualized that most people do not think that it could be a positive skill set. People think that seduction is a less honest or acceptable form of influence. People who have been seduced feel like they have been manipulated. Men are given more leeway to seduce and when it comes to work and seduction, people immediately think that you are sleeping your way to the corner office. These negative aspects of seduction are not inherent in seduction, but rather is neutral -- seduction can be used for all sorts of reasons, according to Lizra she uses it to be "classy" and "add to it" her sense of loyalty and integrity. At it's most basic, it is power. "Seduction is about charm, connection, vulnerability, pride, self confidence, and appeal."

Seduction formula

1. Desire -- knowing what you want and having the courage to go after it. "Keeping the maybe alive is a skill of presenting potential possibilities and then fueling them with desire. It's about learning where the emotional buttons are and then triggering them." The key is to look for what the other person is missing, then give it to them, and it's almost impossible for someone to say no to that.
2. Confidence -- Our self image is formed at an early age and is deeply affected by environment, e.g. since there is no advertising in Cuba their self image is not distorted. "Cubans grow up feeling intense pride and self confidence no matter what body size or shape they might have." Because, it turns out, that there is no objective beauty and to the extent we enforce particular standards of beauty we have allowed ourselves to be influenced into doing so by external forces? 
3. Body language -- "It makes it really easy to seduce and be seduced because you know what the other person is feeling."
4. Arousal -- You must "wake up in them the desire to give you what you want and lure it out." "You must give it your undivided attention in the moment." Fearlessness is key, because then a "no that was a maybe turns into a yes." 

"Everyone has the power to seduce in them" "Seduction is a skill no matter how you look at it. You can call it wooing, persuading, winning someone over, charming, it doesn't matter." The key is to "build the connection that gets you what you want." 

Book appendix (part 5)

(cont. from interview with my mother):


Sometimes I feel guilty for it because I know I was gone, being on the stage and trying to figure out what would bring happiness in my life and I was gone way too much. I should have been home more and keeping tabs on things.  

I know you were always closed off, like affection.  You weren’t ever very affectionate, as far as hugging.  You were kind of closed off emotionally.  I don’t ever remember you crying.  Instead of you being sad, you usually chose to be angry.  That was your emotion of choice.  It seems like when you got angry, you would just get in someone’s face verbally and then you would try to get that person to have their own emotional explosion.  I remember you would try to push dad’s buttons and get him to get really mad.  It’s almost like you liked the emotional turmoil of anger and every now and then you would feed into that and make it happen.  Then things would calm down, until they would build up again.  But I don’t know. Dad was like that too.  But it seemed like you and he butted heads a lot.  I don't remember you ever being sad or hurt.  Even when you were in the hospital with the physical hurt, you weren’t crying or sad.  You know, like a normal person would do.  Especially girl.  You know teenage girls, they would cry over stuff, be hurt or have their feelings hurt.  I don’t remember you ever being like that.  So you were definitely not the typical teenage girl.  I think that’s why you didn’t have a lot of teenage girl friends. Most of your friends were boys, maybe because you related to them a lot more.  Boys aren’t very emotional, they’re more thinking.   

I think you have a little ADD.  It’s hard for you to focus on one thing at a time.  You have to be doing like 3 things at once, even in church you’ll be doing multiple things.  You can’t focus on one thing at a time, or at least not for very long.  But I also think you’re always just thinking about things and wondering about things, so something will catch your interest and you’ll want to explore that.  You’re kind of an explorer type of personality; you like to explore new and different things.

In the way that you did far more and went far more than any of the other kids, that was a little bit of a surprise because I don’t think it was anything normal. You were like super child, going out and doing things far beyond what was expected.

I don’t think you’re trying to corrupt people, but I think you like to do things for shock value—just throw things out there and see how they land, see how they would fly. So I think I was a little uncomfortable with your influence over your younger siblings. I think you’re influential. Sometimes I see the whole family bending to what you want to do and I think we have set you or accepted you in that role of figuring out what we want to do or how we are going to do it, and I think we enjoy that. And I don’t think you carry it too far either. I don’t think you’re too pushy about it. But you are definitely a natural born leader. I think that’s what makes you such a good teacher. I think you’re influential because you’re smart and determined and passionate about the things you want to do, and I think people tend to want to follow someone like that. I think the family follows you because we know you’re smart and efficient and you can figure out probably the best way of doing things and you have novel and fun ideas. You’re always full of ideas. And you’re always coming up with good ways of solving problems or making things happen smoothly.

I remember one time when I was super proud of you, singing this particular song I like. That was a proud moment because you were just up there saying I’m my own person, I don’t care what other people do to me, I’m going to live my life the way I want to.  And I was just proud of you for that.  I don’t think I’ve ever been that way.  I’m getting to be more and more that way, but I used to not be.  I used to be codependent, trying to manipulate people from the wings but never really voicing my opinion and saying what I wanted, what I needed.  I was always kind of in the shadows.  That’s why I liked the stage I think, because I could be somebody else, another person.  And I was good at it and people thought I was wonderful, so I think that’s why I kind of got addicted to the stage.  

I think the book is kind of cool.  I see it as another step in your healing and becoming more your own person.  Kind of dealing with all of the stuff that’s happened to you and figuring out who you really are.  I think the book is part of this process.  

Psychopaths more attractive?

Sort of.

A study led by Nicholas Holtzman and Michael Strube at Washington University in St. Louis found that people with personality traits known as the "Dark Triad" -- narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy -- were better than others at using clothing, makeup and hairstyles to make themselves look attractive, Scientific American reported Tuesday.

They had people take diagnostic tests and took photos of them both in their normal clothes/make up and plain clothes:


Researchers found that in the first group of photos -- in which subjects wore their own clothes and makeup --subjects who scored high marks for the Dark Triad were typically rated as more attractive than subjects who scored low marks for these traits. This was also true of subjects who scored highly for psychopathy alone.

However, in the second group of photos, in which subjects were forced to wear plain clothing and no makeup, there was no correlation between physical attractiveness and "dark" personal traits.

As Julie Beck of PopSci writes, these results suggest that "mean people are just as ugly as the rest of us, they're just better at fooling everyone into thinking they're hot."

Is that what it means to have a good personal sense of style? You're just "fooling" people? Sounds like sour grapes to me.

How to be more charming

Under the headline "Top 10 Charming Gestures," this Ask Men article suggests:


We’ve all met them, haven’t we? People who just get along effortlessly with everyone -- those incredible individuals who seem to glide through life on a permanent high. These are the people we are all slightly jealous of because they are always doing something interesting or they always seem to have another amazing adventure to share. We can’t stay jealous, though, because they are just too damn likable. When other people discuss them, they always use that word: charming.

If you asked anyone what makes someone charming, the vast majority of people would have no idea. It would be some vague, intangible quality that doesn’t help us in developing that desirable characteristic. But help is at hand; part of our raison d’etre is to break these things down, so that you too can develop these life-enhancing social skills. Being charming is not as difficult as it may seem, and can be hugely rewarding: You get invited to more parties, you make more friends, you get more business opportunities, and important people are more likely to remember you. Above all, you have more fun. Sound good? Then get ready for these top 10 charming gestures.  

The article goes along to suggest some obvious and not so obvious tips, including the effective use of touch, believable flattery, accepting others' flattery graciously, including less social individuals into the conversation, using people's names, and always finding a way to turn conversations back to the other person.

Of course I credit a lot of my charm to a perfectly disarming smile.  I happen to have dimples (seen in some cultures "as a sign of attractiveness and veracity," according to wikipedia), which make me seem much more harmless than I really am.  The smile combined with a too-intense gaze is like coffee with cigarettes -- very complementary.  I do use people's names a lot, as the article suggests, but once it's clear that I can (or should) know their name, I refer to them by their title instead.  You can also do this if you have forgotten someone's name.  The Ryan Gosling character in the film Crazy, Stupid, Love did this to good effect ("fancy face," among others).  Other than that, I think the formula for charm is essentially  an utter confidence that makes you seem superior to others, but an accessibility and approving attitude that makes people feel comfortable in your presence.  Like all formulas, the devil is in finding the right ratio of one thing to the other.

What is a sociopath's weakness?

I think the young sociopath's biggest weakness is trusting in the power of logic and reasoning. In this post I talked about how high functioning sociopaths (more than empaths) realize that it is not the content so much as the context of a message or belief that is important. It hardly matters if you are speaking the most precious pieces of wisdom ever uttered, some people will just not care or not listen or will misinterpret what you say. People who realize the importance of context over content can go on to be great leaders. People who do not realize this go on to be great scapegoats -- often much later in history to be labeled martyrs.

Punishment comes to two types of people: those who deserve to be punished, and those who are punished to send a message to everyone else that the ruling party is powerful and should not be toyed with. The first can lead to the second as long as the punishment is well-publicized. The second sometimes coincides with the first, but not always. Sometimes people get stuck on the wrong/losing side of an issue by chance and they end up being made-an-example-of through no fault of their own. Examples could be well-meaning Nazis in pre-World War II Germany, American Confederates in the Civil War, etc. These type of people end up getting castigated not because what they did was "wrong," but as a signal to others that the winning party is strong and will not tolerate disobedience. Everyone should be worried about both scenarios happening to them, but the "innocent" should be especially worried about the latter.

I have always been something of a hothead -- always trying to overthrow little dictators as I encounter them. I loathe incompetence and obsess over efficiency, so I'd typically rather just oust those who offend my tender sensitivities than put up with them to any degree. Of course one need supporters to stage coupes. This is where I've sometimes succeeded, sometimes failed. Sometimes my charisma has been enough to gain a critical mass of followers, or in some cases the popularity of the leader was so low that his enemies quickly became my friends. When the incompetence has been less obvious, however, or the leader was popular, I've consistently failed and have even been vilified for my troubles.

Because of my love of efficiency, I've always wanted to be as direct as possible. I'd think that surely the people would understand if I just present the arguments and let them judge for themselves. But people are stupid and blind and doubt anything that contradicts what they "know" to be true (actually, conveniently, one of the reasons why sociopaths can remain undetected so well). It took me a long time to learn that indirect attacks often were much more effective than direct attacks. To this day, I am still more frightened by an angry mob than anything else. As Galileo learned, there are many victims of the inconvenient truths they espoused. And to the mob -- question the origin of your beliefs, lest you be a puppet to an unknown puppeteer.

Overconfidence

Confidence is an amazing thing. Because appearances are essentially all that matter, especially in circumstances of information asymmetry, confidence is an incredibly important for any leader or successful individual. The hazard of confidence, as this New York Times article by famed behavioral psychologist/economist, are when the individual starts believing his own inflated stories. Here were the more poigant parts:
The confidence we experience as we make a judgment is not a reasoned evaluation of the probability that it is right. Confidence is a feeling, one determined mostly by the coherence of the story and by the ease with which it comes to mind, even when the evidence for the story is sparse and unreliable. The bias toward coherence favors overconfidence. An individual who expresses high confidence probably has a good story, which may or may not be true.

When a compelling impression of a particular event clashes with general knowledge, the impression commonly prevails. And this goes for you, too. The confidence you will experience in your future judgments will not be diminished by what you just read, even if you believe every word.

True intuitive expertise is learned from prolonged experience with good feedback on mistakes. You are probably an expert in guessing your spouse’s mood from one word on the telephone; chess players find a strong move in a single glance at a complex position; and true legends of instant diagnoses are common among physicians. To know whether you can trust a particular intuitive judgment, there are two questions you should ask: Is the environment in which the judgment is made sufficiently regular to enable predictions from the available evidence? The answer is yes for diagnosticians, no for stock pickers. Do the professionals have an adequate opportunity to learn the cues and the regularities? The answer here depends on the professionals’ experience and on the quality and speed with which they discover their mistakes. Anesthesiologists have a better chance to develop intuitions than radiologists do. Many of the professionals we encounter easily pass both tests, and their off-the-cuff judgments deserve to be taken seriously. In general, however, you should not take assertive and confident people at their own evaluation unless you have independent reason to believe that they know what they are talking about. Unfortunately, this advice is difficult to follow: overconfident professionals sincerely believe they have expertise, act as experts and look like experts. You will have to struggle to remind yourself that they may be in the grip of an illusion.

I've mentioned several times that I believe one of the primary practical differences between a narcissist and a sociopath is that a sociopath does not believe his own lies. Sociopaths are able to lie to others and also lie to themselves, but some compartmentalized version of them will always hold on to the truth, lest they make some of these mistakes of overconfidence or underestimation that are so apparent in our brother narcissists. I fully agree with the article, though, that the only real way to avoid the perils of overconfidence is to have some touchstone that allows you to verify the validity of a particular belief. For me, I like to have people around me whose opinions I trust. If they tell me something is or not so, I have to basically take them on their word, like playing a game of mental blind man's bluff where I'm being guided by one or more participants. Luckily I learned how to trust people in my early 20's, otherwise I don't know what I would do.