The Fundamentals

Ezra Klein spoke up the other day in defense of dating coaches. He notes that he pays for guitar lessons:

I would like to learn to play guitar well. But it's nowhere near as central to my happiness as my lovelife. Yet I'm allowed -- even praised -- for seeking expert guidance there, but would be roundly shamed if I sought a dating coach.

I think the issue here is a sense that if you're looking to expend time and money on you ought to be working on the fundamentals. Like maybe you should spend that cash on a gym membership or some better clothes or reading some interesting books or learning to cook (or play the guitar!) or whatever else it is that might make you a more appealing dating prospect. It's true, of course, that in the real world better marketing often does work even in the absence of better fundamentals, but as an announced plan of action it sounds a bit disreputable.

UPDATE: I don't even need a dating coach to tell me I should link to Sara Mead's article on education in the 2008 race.

Comments

Right. A dating coach also implies that you're learning how to better manipulate a romantic partner, rather than genuinely improving yourself and making yourself more appealing to a romantic partner.

Posted by Patrick | October 2, 2007 4:59 PM

There's something a bit off in Ezra's analogy, but I can't quite put my finger on it...

Wait, I've got it! A guitar is a musical instrument that millions of people all over the world have played and studied in minute detail. Hundreds of books have been written detailing ways to get the best response from the instrument. If you put your fingers in a certain position, you'll get the same result every time. The guitar has no needs of its own; it exists solely for your pleasure, and the enjoyment of everyone else in the room.

The same can probably not be said for Ezra's girlfriend.

Posted by LaFollette Progressive | October 2, 2007 5:00 PM

Nice observation. Maybe someone more familiar with the business world might tell me whether an impression I have is correct. . . Getting advice and assistance on specific management or technical tasks is fine, but going to a seminar on how to encourage teamwork among your subordinates or how to negotiate seems faintly ridiculous. Is this true, or just my misimpression?

Posted by RSA | October 2, 2007 5:03 PM

But there are plenty of people who have adequate fundamentals but lack the skills for getting a first date and/or turning a first date into a second date. Appeal as a long-term dating prospect is a very diferent set of criteria from appeal as a first-date or second-date prospect. What if you're great but don't know how to find an appropriate partner, or you get nervous around attractive strangers of the opposite sex, or you were trained by your friends or parents or TV shows that the way to make dating prospects like you is to be disrespectful, or forward, or slutty, or timid, or spend lots of money, or talk yourself up, and so you're playing the game by the wrong rules and thus never get a chance to get past the game portion, or you're only attracting people who are unhealthy for you.

Sure, if you hire a dating coach because you want to learn how to trick people into going to bed with you, that's fairly disreputable. But I would guess (having never worked with a dating coach myself) that dating coaching is about maximizing the chances that you make first impressions that are accurate reflections of your personality so that potential mates can make accurate judgments about whether you're worth seeing again.

And if working on the "fundamentals" is what you need, then the dating coach will presumably tell you so.

Posted by Galen | October 2, 2007 5:05 PM

I agree with Matthew's post and Patrick's comment, but it is also true that the early stages of "dating" with a potential romantic partner are a complex strategic game, and somebody with great fundamentals can still manage to screw it up by acting inappropriately. You need to show definite interest without coming on too strong, etc.

Posted by nbt | October 2, 2007 5:06 PM

Well, Galen made my point (far more articulately than I did) while I was typing.

Posted by nbt | October 2, 2007 5:08 PM

in defense of dating coaches

For some reason, I thought this was going to be a post about the Isaiah Thomas - Anucha Brown Sanders case. But I guess in that case, she never actually dated the coach.

Posted by Al | October 2, 2007 5:11 PM

RSA- Both negotiation and management (including motivating team members) are well researched serious disciplines which can be learned. There are definitely better and worse ways to go about them, and the efficacy of those techniques are born out by scientific studies. I would guess that a single seminar isn't likely to do the trick, though.

Posted by Galen | October 2, 2007 5:13 PM

That was a really fucking geeky way of making a simple point.

Posted by bubba | October 2, 2007 5:19 PM

I agree with Galen. You can have the fundamentals/tools/skills, in the world. But you still have to get drafted. In short, having the qualities that make you an attractive person to date does not mean you will have the qualities that allow you to know how to *get dates*!

Put another way: there is nothing dishonest or manipulative about using a resume coach or a head hunter to help you find a job, even though you may be the single most qualified person in the world.

Posted by McKingford | October 2, 2007 5:20 PM

It's true, of course, that in the real world better marketing often does work even in the absence of better fundamentals

The critical issue for most people is that their lack of "marketing" skill will deprive them of useful feedback and sap their motivation. Once the marketing is taken care of, even the sleaziest P.U.A.'s will start working on their fundamentals (or "lifestyle", as they refer to it.)

Posted by xxx | October 2, 2007 5:21 PM

Is this how you youngsters fuck around these days?

Posted by gregor | October 2, 2007 5:26 PM

Ezra's analogy is a bit off the mark in another way.

A good guitar teacher/coach is presumably someone who plays the instrument very well, perhaps even at a professional level. Thus it's fairly easy to evaluate good teachers simply by listening to their work. While it's true that there are many who can play well, but have no ablitity to teach. But it's also true that any decent teacher should have some degree of proficiency on the instrument.

How does one find and evaluate a good dating coach? Someone who gets laid a lot? Someone who found a long term partner?

I think the whole dating coach thing is disreputable more because it is an easy gig for charlatans and blowhards, rather than for the people who would hope to improve their skills.

Posted by Dan F. | October 2, 2007 5:27 PM

C'mon Champ! That ass can be yours. It's all up to you now. You just gotta reach out and grab it. And, don't forget, Champ: You're soooo good looking.

Posted by Coach Harry Poms | October 2, 2007 5:31 PM

Thanks, Galen, for correcting me.

Posted by RSA | October 2, 2007 5:32 PM

Really, the problem here is that Ezra is OMG dreamy, so his experience can't easily be extrapolated.

Posted by SDM | October 2, 2007 5:33 PM

If the dating coach knows anything, it's that what will make the client less attractive is that he or she is hiring a dating coach. So go ahead and hire the coach, but keep it dead secret, the way the clients do in the movie Hitch. Dating is simple. It involves social skills, and social skills are taught trial-by-fire in kindergarten through the workplace, and even so are perceived to be things that should actually be known inherently. Social graces are supposed to be invisible.

None of this is true of guitar playing.

Posted by Phoebe | October 2, 2007 5:36 PM

There seems to be a prejudice against the idea of dating coaches because we feel that charm is either natural or it is "earned" over years of socializing, and the idea that someone can teach you aspects of social interactions sounds someone unseemly or like cheating.

I think it's the pernicious influence of all those 80s-era teen movies whose big message was to "be yourself."

Posted by Tyro | October 2, 2007 5:41 PM

"How does one find and evaluate a good dating coach? Someone who gets laid a lot? Someone who found a long term partner?

I think the whole dating coach thing is disreputable more because it is an easy gig for charlatans and blowhards, rather than for the people who would hope to improve their skills."

Agreed. And I have to admit I'm a bit cynical about the "team-building" and "motivating your employees" crowd as well. No offense, Galen, but the fact that there are better and worse methods for interacting/motivating your employees does not mean there's a corresponding teachable "skill". Even if a "few" managers were able to "learn" such techniques, I'm not sure that it would be worth the fees required for doing so. I don't know that to be the case, but I'm a bit jaded from numerous experiences with this type of "training".

"Is this how you youngsters fuck around these days?"

Only during office hours...

Posted by Rihilism | October 2, 2007 5:45 PM

I think this criticism of the argument for dating coaches is really missing the point, and Matt's use of the business metaphor "marketing" shows it spot on. With the evils of the current corporation-dominated economy we tend to forget that marketing fundamentally serves a very noble purpose: informing consumers of what good traits your product does have. If you are a company full of great product makers and already have a product that many consumers, were they to have perfect knowledge, would very much like to purchase but are unable to because they don't know about it, then the advice "make your product better" would not be very good advice at all.

And who's to say a dating coach wouldn't be a good person to give an objective evaluation of the product anyway? Think of it as more a general consultant who can tell you whether your product is lagging the marketing or whether your marketing lags the product, than someone who only knows the marketing end of things.

Posted by Will | October 2, 2007 5:50 PM

And I have to admit I'm a bit cynical about the "team building" and "motivating your employees" crowd as well.

You mean having my employees participate in "trust falls" and building towers out of office equipment won't really improve morale and productivity? Crap! Looks like I'm stuck having to give them interesting assignments and having to stop screaming at them as I chase them down the hallways for missing deadlines.

Posted by Tyro | October 2, 2007 5:50 PM

What Galen and nbt said.

Fortunately, my dating life is nearly two decades in the rearview mirror, since I got married back in 1991. But I remember times when I was about as fundamentally sound and worthwhile as a person can be, with a good life and great friends, and couldn't get a date to save my life.

Dating coaches? Why not.

Posted by low-tech cyclist | October 2, 2007 5:52 PM

We're all singularities. Nobody can tell you how to be a better you whereas playing guitar is an externality, a skill like making an omelet.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | October 2, 2007 6:13 PM

My qualifications for making this statement are that I found a husband and kept him for 20 years, in reasonable happiness.

So, if you want to succeed in finding a mate, or at least have more than one date per person, find something interesting in the world past your own nose. Guitar lessons, sports, religious bodies, political campaigns, the Opera Guild, all get you out of your own miserable head. That's the key, boys and girls. Dating coaches are one more group of people focused on YOU, which is pretty much exactly the opposite tack for successful treatment of your condition. Get off your ass and out of your head and you'll find someone.

Posted by Karen | October 2, 2007 6:27 PM

The analogy with resumes mentioned above seems pretty exact. There's nothing wrong with it, exactly, but if someone is consistently frustrated in their work, it's a pretty safe bet there are many more reliable & rewarding ways of addresing the problem than hiring a resume coach.

On the other hand-

If you basically know what you want to do and have the right qualifications, it's entirely appropriate to turn to someone with more experience to get some advice on your resume. So if Ezra really thinks his date-fu needs work, he should ask a trusted female friend for advice.

Posted by lemuel pitkin | October 2, 2007 7:09 PM

So if Ezra really thinks his date-fu needs work, he should ask a trusted female friend for advice.

The thing about Ezra is that he's super-hott so his date-fu's just fine.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | October 2, 2007 7:20 PM

My qualifications for making this statement are that I found a husband and kept him for 20 years, in reasonable happiness.

So, if you want to succeed in finding a mate, or at least have more than one date per person, find something interesting in the world past your own nose. Guitar lessons, sports, religious bodies, political campaigns, the Opera Guild, all get you out of your own miserable head. That's the key, boys and girls. Dating coaches are one more group of people focused on YOU, which is pretty much exactly the opposite tack for successful treatment of your condition. Get off your ass and out of your head and you'll find someone.

Thanks, Rod Stewart!!

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | October 2, 2007 7:57 PM

Galen comes closest. I've coached people on job interviews, done team-building, and been involved with other types of management training--unlike, I suspect, nearly every person who has posted a negative comment here. So....

1. It depends--there are charlatans in every field, and there are inspiring, moral exemplars, too.

2. Date coaching and job interview coaching are't about pretending to be something that you're not. They're about (a) getting comfortable with yourself, and (b) not shooting yourself in the foot. Amazingly enough, some people actually have trouble with that. Coaches can help those people. So can getting involved with activities you like.

3. Stop wasting my time with uninformed opinions. Show my some experience, or STFU.

Posted by vorkosigan1 | October 2, 2007 8:40 PM

"Show my some experience, or STFU."

SHEESH! I was trying to be nice about my personal doubts about "coaching". Sorry to mess with your consulting fees...

Posted by Rihilism | October 2, 2007 9:01 PM

My understanding of what dating coaches do is they basically just help people get over shyness and/or learn how to approach strangers in a non-threatening/creepy way, as well as providing the crucial insight that rejection and incompatibility ought to be treated as a routine part of attempting to meet new people. These are things some people need help to grasp. They're going to teach you how to put what you already have towards achieving a goal that has eluded you--meeting people to date. There doesn't seem to be anything harmful about that. The reason it seems stupid to people is that those who already have these skills tend to be mystified by the idea that someone else might not. But in fact, they learned them at some point, too, they just didn't think about the learning process as such.

Posted by Greg | October 3, 2007 12:05 AM

So I guess Matt isn't interested in "The Game"?

The PUA (Pick Up Artist) movement has a lot of good information on getting laid. They get a bad rap - and some of them deservedly so - for being "manipulative" - as if most human interpersonal relationships AREN'T "manipulative" by definition.

In reality, all this stuff is simply about techniques for removing FEAR from the parties to a relationship by devising methods that WORK. It's essentially "relationship martial arts".

As I like to say, the only difference between the words "martial" and "marital" is the position of the letter "I".

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | October 3, 2007 1:00 AM

RSH,

I agree with you. Did you see Jon Stewart's interview of Chris Matthews (who was plugging his new book, Life Is a Campaign?). Stewart was slamming Matthews, saying that his book was manipulative and was about getting ahead by playing political games. Matthews point was if you want to accomplish anything, good or ill, you've got to play the game.

I think Matthews had the better point and its the same way I look at the PUA fans. It goes into a social skill that a man can use for good or ill, but you have know the rules if you want to play.

The guys I've known who've gotten into it weren't doing so become players who pick up and discard a new girl every weekend. They did it because they didn't have the ability to carry on a simple conversation with a friendly woman or ask her out to dinner without stammering. Now they could use their newfound self-confidence (the critical factor, IMHO) and social skills to break girls' hearts all over town, but I suspect most of them learn the game to get into a serious relationship. And doesn't that makes the world go around (or at least, continually repopulate it)?

Oh as for the guitar/girlfriend analogy, I believe Dash, Rip Rock took it to its logical (if perhaps illegal) conclusion. http://mog.com/music/Dash_Rip_Rock/Recyclone/String_You_Up

Posted by beowulf | October 3, 2007 3:04 AM

UPDATE: I don't even need a dating coach to tell me I should link to Sara Mead's article on education in the 2008 race.

Second, Edwards has managed to combine a serious rhetorical assault on NCLB with policy proposals -- better tests, looking at student learning gains over time, help for struggling schools -- that are fairly consistent with the law's intent, and would improve, rather than eviscerate, its accountability.

Boy! That sure doesn't sound like the plan I read!

max
['The number one goal of any campaign is spreading confusion. Discuss.']

Posted by max | October 3, 2007 7:27 AM

I don't get what this is about.

Men: Try to look wealthy. Even if that means going bankrupt by buying cars you can't afford and clothes you would never wear to do anything other than score women in.

Women: Wear something really low cut, and buy the best push-up bra you can find. If you're not that cute, I'd suggest going to the more darkly lit clubs.

There. I too can be a dating coach. Now cry over how sad a world is that these are really the only tips you will ever need to know in life. If you're poor and male, nobody will want you. If you're female.. well, someone will probably want you if you keep looking long enough.

Posted by Soullite | October 3, 2007 7:57 AM

Alternative dating tip for Nice Guys(TM), not that there are any of those on this thread:
If you're poor, unattractive and male, try working on your personality and not being so bloody bitter. Also, try not pursuing women who are signalling with their grooming and clothing choices that they are shallow and thus unlikely to care about your beautiful soul (hate to tell you this, but women who put a great deal of work into looking good are unlikely to chose to mess up their appearance with an loser schlub of a partner. There are always exceptions, because putting a lot of work into looking good is a social norm for women so not as strong a signal as it could be, but it's still advisable to avoid the extremes.)

Posted by Kali | October 3, 2007 12:38 PM