The case for ignoring rejections

[uuu]

Lots of propaganda out there about how you should learn from rejection and use it to turn yourself into a better person. This is good advice in some situations, but not others.

For example, if you are rejected from a job, then this typically doesn't mean you made some particular, correctable mistake in your interview that you could do differently. It just means you were either not good enough or unlucky, and in neither case is focusing on the particular circumstances of the failure going to help you. You just have to keep grinding.

Similar statements can be made about romantic relationships.

 

[aeon]

Don’t ignore, but recognize the rejection has everything to do with the other person, and typically very little to do with you.

Feel free to be disappointed, but if it becomes crestfallen, or your self-esteem takes a hit, you might want to consider you have some self-work to do before re-engaging.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[uuu]

Don’t ignore, but recognize the rejection has everything to do with the other person, and typically very little to do with you.

Yes. But the point I'm trying to make is stronger than that: Sometimes the rejection has everything to do with you, and nonetheless, the best thing to do is ignore it.

For example, I was rejected by a girl the other week because of

Spoiler

my height.

 

[aeon]

Yes. But the point I'm trying to make is stronger than that: Sometimes the rejection has everything to do with you, and nonetheless, the best thing to do is ignore it.

For example, I was rejected by a girl the other week because of

Spoiler

my height.

But is that actually based on you, or her preferences, values, and judgment?

I mean, I get that you provided the stimulus input, and were the one judged and found lacking.

But the only thing we know for sure in this is you are ____cm tall.

If we could see her reasons for saying no, my guess is it would be orders of magnitude more complex and involved.

I guess too, I don’t put too much on those things we have no control over. Some will like us, some won’t, no point in worrying about the split when we have no control of the outcome. Or the characteristic.

And if someone wants to reject us for that sort of reason, that’s their right, and so no harm, no foul.

For example, I’m going to guess that of 100 random women off the street, you would only find a small number personally attractive, and that’s because of who you are, and the majority you found unremarkable have no reason to worry or doubt themselves.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[uuu]

But is that actually based on you, or her preferences, values, and judgment?

6 vs. a half dozen? The place I'm trying to get to is, it may or may not be about me, but that doesn't matter, because there's nothing I can do about it.

For example, I’m going to guess that of 100 random women off the street, you would only find a small number personally attractive, and that’s because of who you are, and the majority you found unremarkable have no reason to worry or doubt themselves.

I have actually done this experiment, and I find about 7 out of 10 women sexually attractive. I don't know what that says about me—probably that I'm not that different from most men? I know this is strange, but I don't really need to be strongly "attracted" to someone in order to be in a relationship. Once they clear a certain attractiveness threshold, I care more about things like personality and trust. And that threshold is, like, the 30th percentile.

Of course, to say this is to presume that I clear that 30th percentile myself, which I can't really know for sure. Hmmm. My thoughts on this matter are not yet fully formed.

 

[Wyote]

nothing I can do about it.

Yeah so why you stressin

 

[uuu]

Yeah so why you stressin

Because maybe if I thought about it hard enough, I would discover that there is something I can do about it!

Spoiler: This has never happened, ever

 

[Wyote]

Because maybe if I thought about it hard enough, I would discover that there is something I can do about it!

Spoiler: This has never happened, ever

Gotta think further outside the box.

But also, 6.9 out of the 7 you're interested in are just gonna be annoying as fuck anyway once you really get to know them.

 

[uuu]

Gotta think further outside the box.

But also, 6.9 out of the 7 you're interested in are just gonna be annoying as fuck anyway once you really get to know them.

Right, which is why you have to cast a wide net! If 69/70 women are annoying as fuck, then by being open to 70% of women, I still have a 1% match rate. If I did like some people and were open to only 7% of women, I'd be down to a 0.1% match rate—quick maths.

 

[aeon]

But also, 6.9 out of the 7 you're interested in are just gonna be annoying as fuck anyway once you really get to know them.

The glass-half-full optimist, lulz.

Right, which is why you have to cast a wide net! If 69/70 women are annoying as fuck, then by being open to 70% of women, I still have a 1% match rate. If I did like some people and were open to only 7% of women, I'd be down to a 0.1% match rate—quick maths.

The strategic pragmatist.

Chuckles,
Ian

 

[Asa]

For example, if you are rejected from a job, then this typically doesn't mean you made some particular, correctable mistake in your interview that you could do differently. It just means you were either not good enough or unlucky, and in neither case is focusing on the particular circumstances of the failure going to help you. You just have to keep grinding.

True. It often means you were one person in large pool of qualified people and you didn't get picked because of something small. I've been told "you were our second choice" a few times and was offered the job later.

Similar statements can be made about romantic relationships.

No. honestly no. If I tell you, "No," or "I'm not interested" just leave me alone. As in, never mention your attraction to me again and never approach me about it. It isn't a game. I'm not playing hard to get. If you keep pestering me I will internally label you a creep who is poor with boundaries and has poor listening skills and is, therefore, not relationship material.

 

[uuu]

No. honestly no. If I tell you, "No," or "I'm not interested" just leave me alone. As in, never mention your attraction to me again and never approach me about it. It isn't a game. I'm not playing hard to get. If you keep pestering me I will internally label you a creep who is poor with boundaries and has poor listening skills and is, therefore, not relationship material.

This is exactly what I'm saying? That if you get rejected, you should move on.

Edit: Aha, it seems you took "You have to keep grinding" to mean "You have to keep asking her out." This is categorically not my intended meaning, haha! I mean, you have to move onto other job opportunities/relationships while working on improving yourself to the extent you can.

 

[Asa]

Edit: Aha, it seems you took "You have to keep grinding" to mean "You have to keep asking her out." This is categorically not my intended meaning, haha! I mean, you have to move onto other job opportunities/relationships while working on improving yourself to the extent you can.

That's exactly how I took it.

Crossed wires.

Yes, move on!

 

[John K]

Lots of propaganda out there about how you should learn from rejection and use it to turn yourself into a better person. This is good advice in some situations, but not others.

For example, if you are rejected from a job, then this typically doesn't mean you made some particular, correctable mistake in your interview that you could do differently. It just means you were either not good enough or unlucky, and in neither case is focusing on the particular circumstances of the failure going to help you. You just have to keep grinding.

Similar statements can be made about romantic relationships.

Definitely! Some thoughts ....

If you are rejected from a job application, it isn't necessarily a failure at all - it could simply mean that there was someone else better qualified, like @Asa described. If you were being realistic about the application, then I suggest not using words like failure, because it isn't one. Persistence and self-confidence is what's needed, and an understanding that there is an element of chance involved, which is to do with stuff outside your control such as who else applies. I don't think there needs to be much learning in these circumstances, but more along the lines of up and at the next opportunity when it comes along.

If you weren't being realistic, then of course you have some work to do and some learning. If you don't then you will keep on getting turned down.

There are other possibilities - recruiting managers can be idiots who select in their own image and likeness. If it's like that then shake the dust off your sandals and move on - that's a lucky escape.

I guess similar statements can be made about romantic relationships too, but they won't be quite the same. If you are being realistic, then a rejection isn't a failure either, but just part of life's rich game. If you weren't being realistic, then there's some learning to be done.

In both cases, realistic could mean different things. For instance, it could be to do with how well you match the situation, but it could be to do with how you approach it.

 

[Sloe Djinn]

you have to move onto other job opportunities/relationships while working on improving yourself to the extent you can.

The latter part of this works better as a general rule. If you are constantly working on improving yourself for its own sake (and not as a means to an end) it will enrich your life. In turn, you will probably be more successful/attractive for it, though you'll still experience rejection for reasons beyond your control.

In the meantime....two words: mEns Pl@tf0rmS, bABy!

my height.