Category: longer pieces

gwyn’s hyperoptimised guide to dating, #7.5 (on commitment)

gwynethtytLeave a comment

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7 (#7.5) | #8?

Extension of #7 — and I think there will be more, unfortunately (Kopi Date is in trouble!)

On Commitment

To commit to a romantic relationship is to pledge yourself to someone, possibly for life. You are investing your already limited time and energy into someone else and a relationship.

The implications of this decision are enormous:

  • It is an opportunity cost (the loss of total control of your time, of the opportunities to date others, of a particular flirtatious kind of freedom, etc);
  • It dramatically raises the potential for sunk costs: for young people, we are trading what might be the best years of our lives for the inherent uncertainty of love.

As such, commitment cannot be careless; it is a decision that must withstand interrogation.

I’m not interested in why we commit — philosophers have done that better — but rather how we can most effectively determine who to commit to from a selection pool.

As You Are, As I Am

My man accepts my “wild” side (if “society” deems it so, I guess; who is to say what?). This includes my past (debauchery galore) and my online self — which, really, are only slices of a whole.

It’s funny because some people consider me uncontrollable; they assume so from my public persona. Perchance. But anyone who reads this blog consistently (is that you?) should know I am compulsively logical. He recognised this, somehow. In contrast, the men who preceded him either did not make this vital connection or, even if they did, decided that the deal wasn’t worth pursuing.

Maybe he saw something in me early on that the others couldn’t. Or he just happened to be mentally resilient (or unhinged) enough to decide that the pros I brought to his table outweighed the cons.

Either way, he understands that I am more than what I display on the surface.

And so, he gets to eat cake: he gets my good, reasonable, controlled side.

Yes! I’m not that crazy around him in person!

  • First, I am pretty emotionally stable around others out of respect for them (surprise!; I learned over the years. Sorry to my exes, though, really!…).
  • Second, because he keeps me grounded. One time, I spilt wine on my keyboard. He hardly blinked before offering to buy me a new one. Another time, it was his turn to spill something, to his mortification. I didn’t get mad because what would be the point? I focused on scouring for cleaning agents instead…
domestication is a funny thing

It’s a circular problem: for someone to trust and show you more, you must believe they are more — even when they haven’t fully revealed themselves. I believe that this ability to trust someone before the fact is the solution to the “dating problem”; it distinguishes secure (and successful) daters.

I don’t typically expect people to give me so much benefit of the doubt.

But he did, and that’s why he won.

Power Dynamics

Power permeates everything, including relationships. What kind of power dynamics do you like? Equal, less, or more? There are no right or wrong answers, but it says much about you and what you seek.

The taming of the shrew

Remember the astrologist who interpreted my brattiness as “taking an anti-authoritarian stance to test the authority of the people around me to determine who I could trust”? (Huh? Many word for simple concept.)

Yes and no.

I do act bratty to mess around with others, and it’s my default mode because why not? It’s fun watching y’all squirm.

  • By the way, I don’t test authority for the fun of it. I challenge people and environments only when I think there’s room for improvement (or when they are WRONG!). I just seem testy all the time because well, I think many things can be bettered, including myself.

But I’m more than willing to be mellow with the people I care about.

  • That’s what taming a brat really means. Contrary to popular belief in the style of predators like Andrew Tate, you don’t tame a brat by asserting your dominance over her through force or Master/Alpha roleplay nonsense. The more you try to dominate, the less power you have because it reveals your insecurities (and on god, men have so many insecurities).
  • You tame a brat by meeting her at eye level — by respecting her as an equal. You do not choose; you are chosen.

And that’s what he and I are = equals, or so I think. He does not look at me like a hunter. What we have is not a game; it is a partnership.

Equality in partnerships

If you start off looking for a partner as someone you can control, you will find them — but the two of you will start with an imbalanced dynamic that corrupts all you are.

But here’s an interesting thought: I suspect everyone (secure) fundamentally seeks an equal partnership. We just don’t see it clearly sometimes.

Consider the following. I want equal emotional contribution, for sure — for him to love me as much I love him. But I’d be happy if he was financially dominant (and why wouldn’t anyone be, including men with richer wives?). No shame in acknowledging I have always wanted a man with a provider mentality; it’s how I was raised (I love my daddy darling), and I don’t see an issue with it.

Considering my self-sufficiency, I recognised this desire was silly, but no epiphany precludes the joy of being provided for. I enjoy it because I see it as an act of love. And he’s willing to show me love that way because it makes him happy. That’s what it boils down to, finances and future prospects aside — an alignment in giving and taking.

domestication, ii

Now you might think I am self-contradicting: what is all this talk about equality if you want to have your cake (him to give equally emotionally) and eat it too (him to give more financially)? Wait la.

The second thing is that power dynamics fluctuate across domains. Emotional contribution, social dominance, and financial status can differ widely in a relationship.

If time is money, and he gives me money, then I’m willing to give more of my time. I’m more than happy to manage the household — such as buying things to make his life easier before he even realises he needs them, or making our home a welcoming place for him to return to. And please don’t say that it’s so much easier to manage a household; just look at men in their dormitories.

  • The above example just happens to be gendered, as all things inevitably are, and as some people unfortunately cannot distinguish from actual inequality like the second shift. If I were working the same hours as him, he’d better be cooking, cleaning, and babying too. Or goodbye!

If he buys me a cake, I feed him with it. That’s how equality is achieved in a relationship — it happens when all domains are holistically integrated.

Feelings of trust and safety

Your body is excellent at putting together things that don’t add up. It’s so good, in fact, that it can do so way before your mind ever gets to it.

That’s why sometimes you have a nagging doubt that you can’t explain until later with the benefit of hindsight. The mind is fantastic at rationalising, which is to explain away inconsistencies with logic.

But your body can’t because it doesn’t “think” similarly. When your body senses a problem, it will force you to confront it every night when all the world’s distractions have subsided, and you’re left alone with your thoughts.

me being disappointed @ disappointing men

I will note that with my man, I sleep like a log in his arms. I feel safe. Sounds dandy and all but safety takes work to get to before your body will accept it. It entails a subconscious recognition that in this moment, you have given whatever you are willing to, and they have reciprocated in kind. It doesn’t mean there are no longer secrets, but you have accepted that what you have right now is enough.

There are even gradations to this. For the love of excessive detail, I can rank how safe I felt with men based on how my body responded when we slept together (non-sexually). I will go as far as to say your feelings when you lie beside someone are an accurate snapshot of your feelings towards them.

Level of safetySleeping behaviourSnapshot assessment
NoneNA – I am sleeping alone. Goodnight!Stay away from me 🙂
LittleWe may sleep side by side but not touch each other. I stay wide awake for a long time — if I even fall asleep in the first place.I feel empty, and his presence almost makes it worse.
MediumI might hold his arm or something at most. I take a while to fall asleep.I’m undecided about him. His presence is cool but not necessarily value-adding to my life (or sleep).
HighHe wraps his arms around me, and I nestle my cheek in the crook of his neck. I fall asleep quickly and sleep soundly through the night.I feel content. What we have is good enough.

It’s also about inferring your partner’s intention and deciding if it works for you. When I intuit that a man is just there for my body, in the sense that he has no care for me as a person, my physical self instinctively recoils. I can’t stand the thought of touching him, much less falling asleep around him.

  • So, despite my mythical ability to compartmentalise love and sex, even I only slept with men I trusted at the time. Not necessarily as potential lovers, but at least as another human being who seemed to respect me (and found me hot). Regardless of what you think, babygirl has standards, OK? I think to make any exception would be disrespecting myself.
  • That’s also why I don’t regret anything I did with them, even if I never want to be associated with them again. My acceptance is borne from trust in my past self — that she did what felt right, knowing what was appropriate then. Even if she did not make the best decision for me now, in hindsight, she could not have known the future; how can I blame her?

Consistency (and lovebombing)

Players, lovebombers, whatever

Early on — and let it be said that it is still early — I wondered if my man was lovebombing me.

it do be like that

My definition of a lovebomber is when:

  • They make premature proclamations of love. An essential criterion to catch a sinner, but insufficient.
    • Not a problem per se because time is relative. Who is to say how fast a relationship should and can develop? Sure, you need time to know someone, but do we make decisions based on all the available evidence? (If you think so, you’re wrong.)
  • The definitive sign of a lovebomber is when their actions do not line up with their proclamations.
    • I particularly detest men who make promises they do not keep. Your inability to follow through screams two things: 1) you lack accountability for your words; 2) you are careless with the trust that others put in you. Both are not even red flags; they are black. If you cannot fulfill a single promise made early on, how can I count on you for anything in the future?
    • This is also why in seeking to understand someone, you look at what they do, not what they say.

Suppose their actions line up with their proclamations for the trial period. Unfortunately, the test is not over; it will never be. The next challenge, now and forever, is consistency.

Consistency is key

I suspect that the most critical challenge all relationships face is consistency over time. Unleashing a barrage of sweet fawning in a relationship’s honeymoon phase is easy. Maintaining this affection over several years, after all the love dust has settled in the spaces between, is hard.

Maybe that’s why my friends told me not to give everything initially. Because once you show all your cards, you only have the option of withdrawing or persisting.

That being said, the human tendency to throw oneself onto the battlefield during the infatuation phase is an invaluable tool to determine who is worth keeping. As I argued, if they do not love you given some time, what makes you think they will do so later?

Barring major upheavals, love is most intense at the beginning. If you’re lucky, this love plateaus in time — giving way to consistency.

If you’re not lucky — it dies.

Good, bad, double-edged swords (are we bandits now?)

One thing I’ve learnt from my past relationships (and the advice of women wiser than myself, such as my Mami) is that where there is good, there will be bad. All traits in a partner are double-edged swords.

ah fight la fight

Fun examples:

  • If you want to date a hot girl who gives spectacular head, you must accept that she’s a little crazy and that you’ll never be able to fully control her.
  • If you want to date an “accomplished” and ambitious man willing to provide, you must accept that he likes to be in control most of the time.

My man likes to be the one ordering the food. Past me might have felt like my place at the table (?) was threatened. LOL. But we look at the bigger picture. Simply because he orders doesn’t mean my opinion is irrelevant. He always orders what I like and doesn’t tell me what to eat, ever — he merely informs the waiter on my behalf. And hell, if it makes him happy, why not?

Again, it’s all about give and take. I always want garlic kang kong for my veggie fix. But if we’ve eaten kang kong two days in a row, I’m happy to eat some potato leaves since I know he likes them more.

A relationship sails when you can tolerate the bad in light of the good.

You don’t really want any specific person. You want an idea of a person. You project your ideals onto potential lovers. If they fit that criteria, you will love them; you find that they’re enough; you settle. You are looking for the one, but it turns out there are many ones — that’s why you can move on and love again. It’s not the end of the world if someone doesn’t want you; you’ll find someone else, and you’ll love like you’ve never done before.

On commitment: ask, demand the very best you deserve, be willing to give in return, and you shall receive.

This post is dedicated to my future husband.

Happy Monthsary! The road ahead is long, but I hope we’ll make it together.

Even if we don’t — I want you to know I love you.

me and him, i hope

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7 (#7.5)

gwyn’s guide to hyperoptimised dating, #5.5 (on players)

gwynethtytLeave a comment

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7 (#7.5)

love is not a game — and we will strike down anyone who acts as if it is

babygirl affirmations (author: me)

Supplement to guide #5, as promised. Today, we delve into the psychology of players — those pesky distractions in your Love Quest that steer you away from your path, promising great rewards only to leave you stranded with nothing.

Or so I’d say, if only things were that simple.

My observations tell me that people are tempted to reduce players to one-dimensional creatures — selfishly motivated barbarians with limited capacity for self-reflection and sophisticated emotion.

I argue that this is not true. Selfish, yes, but everything else, no. In this piece, we will strip them, layer by layer (haha), to establish my argument.

You might be thinking: OK, sis, pretty prose and all, but why extend grace to these clowns when they are out only to hurt you and waste your time?

The primary reason is that understanding them helps you to grow.

When you dissect and decipher a player’s psyche, you will see what they really are: a timid child desperate to be loved not knowing how to go about it, who inadvertently hurts others in the process.

They’re just like you, and they’re just like me.

When you come to terms with this image of them, you will sympathise with — and maybe even forgive — them for why and how they hurt you. After all, would you blame a child for causing you pain, if you knew they didn’t know better?

And only then can you let go for real — to become the person you were destined to be without them.

The secondary reason is that you can put them in their place when you understand them. I think of it as my contribution to the world. 😛

The Ivory Guards, or Two (Exceptionally Intimate) Case Studies

guards? guards!

Prior to meeting my future husband, two men in particular were formative to my personal growth. I think of them as the guardians of the gates to Paradise, forged in ivory, iridescent and brittle. Together, they helped me discover the maxims of players (supposedly) that I will cover.

I deconstruct their psyches using their behavioural patterns I observed during our entanglements. So, yes, this is an exercise in psychological analysis. Even if psychologists can’t read your mind, I sure can try.

I am oversharing insofar as I believe there are lessons for my readers to take away, but you make of it what you will. Also, it’s a form of closure for me. I doubt I’ll ever write about them again following this post because I’ve taken everything I could from them. It’s time for me to move on, too.

A forewarning because the possibility of them reading this is never zero (I adore you, my orbiters): you will not like what’s coming. You may disagree with my interpretations, and that’s okay — either way, you ultimately have no say because you relinquished your privilege the moment you disrespected me as a fellow human being. Typically, I would offer my loverboys the possibility of taking it down if they were uncomfortable, but no such option will be offered this time.

Why? Because you shouldn’t be here.

leave while you can!!!

What you can take away from the following, though, is that this is an attempt to implode whatever relationship we had or might still have. I don’t write without anticipating the consequences.

I wish you the best, nonetheless.

Ivory Guard A

  • Context/identifier: We had a prior friendship. He reached out to me to restart, and I reciprocated. We both acknowledged that we were not in good emotional places then.
  • Bond: We had an intense connection, so I believed then, which he later admitted. I understood and could read him.
  • Green flags:
    • He respected my boundaries (for the most part), which is why I gave him so many chances. Yes, the bar was low.
  • Orange flags:
    • He would never directly admit his feelings for me. I started noticing it in the small things like him refusing to acknowledge I was hot or skirting the topic when I teased if he was obsessed with me, even though all signs were flashing in that direction. I did not like that, because why do I have to slave away like a dog for your approval when I could get it elsewhere easily? But I persisted, trusting that he would eventually trust me enough to overcome his insecurities.
    • He carelessly made promises he did not keep. Don’t make promises if you cannot follow through.
  • How he messed up: He ghosted me out of nowhere a month into our budding relationship, which involved a substantial amount of flirting (i.e., me saying whatever I wanted) and whatever tension.
    • By the way, people do not accidentally mess up stuff like this. Severing a relationship is always deliberate; hence, no justification will ever be enough.
  • My response: I was first confused, then upset and hurt. I double-texted him twice, gave up, and took a month to move on.
  • Whiplash era (when the power dynamics inverted):
    • He kept watching my stories even as he maintained his refusal to reply me. I was further aggravated when I noticed — accurately — that he would like the stories that he believed were referring to him. That was top-of-the-line manipulative behaviour, and it disgusted me.
    • It didn’t have the effect he intended, though, because our king did not realise that babygirl here had options and already had someone else (of course). LOL. So all his behaviour only resulted in my amusement to no end.
    • I engaged in retaliatory offense by kindly informing him (through public means since I knew he was watching) that I was not, in fact, talking about him.
    • He proceeded to
      • Call me in the middle of the night, possibly drunk (I did not notice because I was wilding out with my friends), before deleting the evidence the next morning
      • Text me to apologise, which I accepted
      • Ask me to go back to him, to which I said no
      • Ask me to go back to him again, to which I said no again
  • Psychological breakdown:
    • I found closure once I figured his behaviour stemmed from him being a coward (at that time, OK; he’s grown since). He did not know what he wanted and needed time to figure it out. I wouldn’t have minded, really, but what disappointed me the most was that he did not respect me enough to inform me that he needed that time and space alone.
    • In essence I was treated as an option he thought he could return to whenever he wanted. He thought I would wait for him. But my universe doesn’t revolve around you, you know. I doubt he realised this initially, but the moment he distanced himself, he could never again return to me. Above all, that was the dealbreaker, along with him thinking he could toy with my feelings with his orbiting behaviour. I told you I would win if you dared play games with me, and you still did.
    • My readers might think I’m delusional, so let me note that all of my observations above were validated when he apologised and asked me to return to him. Our only difference in interpretation was that I thought we were never together.
  • Cumulative emotional impact: I never cried over him.
  • I dedicate Santorini to him.

Ivory Guard B

  • Context/identifier: We met at a party. I forgot about him following the party, but he caught my attention when he initiated contact later. We agreed to meet before he ghosted me for a good month. (What’s with players and months?) But he pulled the sympathy card and said he could explain himself, so I listened, maybe because I wanted to see the good in him, or because I was naïve. Turns out he had recently broken up with his longtime girlfriend, whom he loved deeply (I could tell) but had a volatile relationship with. They had a dead bedroom, which is notable for two reasons: 1) it is a death knell in a romantic relationship, and 2) see psychological breakdown below.
  • Bond: In retrospect, we had nothing real. Most of what I felt towards him was rooted in my projections of what he could be, perhaps because he looked like an angel. But a pretty face is just that (since we’re already at this level of disclosure, I might as well say the men I met on Hinge subsequently put him and me to shame). I’ll never know what’s inside his shell; maybe I wouldn’t have liked it, and I suspect now that I probably wouldn’t.
  • Green flags: none (!)
  • Orange flags:
    • From the very beginning, he only seemed interested in my body. But see psychological breakdown below.
    • He also carelessly made promises he did not keep. By then, I was wise enough to know that the moment he broke our promise — we even did the pinky seal! — I was nothing to him.
  • How he messed up: He insinuated that we could be something more. Then I slept with him, and then he proceeded to withdraw rapidly in the days that followed.
    • I had not realised this yet, but looking back, I would still have slept with him even if he had been honest that he had no clue what he wanted. I knew from the moment I saw him again. Indeed, he was the one who taught me to compartmentalise sex and love. I realised that if I didn’t do so, I was setting myself up for a world of pain.
    • And in case you guys think I am a damn homewrecker: I have principles, OK. I ascertained that they were separated before I slept with him, and I would not have done so otherwise. Their relationship is doomed either way: even if he returns to her in the future, they will not be happy together.
  • My response: I did not pursue the relationship and let the conversation peter out, as he intended. If he didn’t want me enough, I would respect his decision. Later, in my Hinge era, I would decisively inform men that they didn’t like me enough and end our liaison, but I didn’t do so with him. It doesn’t matter because the outcome would’ve been the same.
    • Interestingly, my predominant emotion was disappointment more than sadness, unlike with Guard A. It was more like, oh, he’s just like the others. Haha, oh well.
  • Whiplash era (when the power dynamics inverted):
    • He continued watching my stories even when it was clear we were nothing (ugh, why do they all do this), which annoyed me. What do you want from me? It was affecting me, so I blocked him. I realised I had moved on when I was zoning out one fine afternoon and couldn’t recall his name.
    • So I unblocked him since he didn’t matter anymore. And guess who came back that night? Let me note here that he is an aggressive orbiter. When you block and unblock someone, they automatically unfollow you. He was not following me anymore, which meant he was actively searching for my profile and watching my stories. If that’s not preoccupation, what is?
    • At some point, more than anything, I felt sorry for him. I don’t know why he was still hanging around. (Maybe I was too hot to let go?) But I wasn’t going to help him by blocking him. I did write to my orbiters to him as a final grace — it was written for my orbiters in general, but he leads the pack. You can be the alpha male in this case if you like being one so much, baby.
      • I believe he read it because he stopped watching my stories after that. I might be overthinking, but the timing was too coincidental.
  • Psychological breakdown:
    • Though not necessarily with me, I suspect he was looking for love (surprise!!!). To be brutally specific, I think he was seeking love via sex because he did not know how else he could receive love. It was all he had known. He was aware, consciously or not, that his ex-girlfriend did not love him as much as he loved her, and it was staring him in the face every time she denied him sex. Despite knowing this, he could not move on from her. So his compensatory strategy to reaffirm himself as someone worthy of love was to find a replacement — oh look, that’s me!
    • I also suspect he has not reached out because I have established in no uncertain terms that I do not want him in my life, not after he betrayed my trust like that. That, or he’s not as optimistic as Guard A. We will never know for sure. But his feelings towards me are irrelevant — the only thing that matters, and has ever mattered, is that he did not act on his feelings at the time.
  • Cumulative emotional impact: I never cried over him.
  • I dedicate Evergreen to him — the parts that hurt. The lovely parts, I dedicate to my husband.

Players, Deconstructed

I defined players as the following in guide #5:

Players. Typically men. Players are not interested in seeking love with you — they only want sex.

What distinguishes this category of daters is their strategy: they masquerade as the genuinely seeking type, but this is only a ploy to get you in bed.

In other words, they prey on the (female) weakness in conflating love and sex to obtain the latter.

I realise that the definition applies only to Guard B (because I did not sleep with Guard A), and hence it is insufficient. I expand on the definition below, which provides a fuller picture and allows for the inclusion of women — namely, insecure people who date recklessly but fail to commit fully.

Notice how the definition is worded. It assumes that players do not seek love with you. It does NOT mean they do not want love. Put another way, even players desire to be loved. Whether they deserve it from you is an entirely separate matter. The point — and this perspective frames my entire argument — is that almost all of their behaviours can be explained by the fact that they are seeking love.

No player operates outside of the rules. Rather, they have mastered the rules and are exploiting them to their advantage at the expense of others. That is why when we speak of players’ behaviours, it is oftentimes layered with contempt, because we all recognise that they actively hurt others. And don’t think for a moment that they’re unaware of how they’re perceived — anyone with sufficient self-awareness, which is essential to play the game well, knows what other people think of them. Nonetheless, they persist in their maladaptive behaviour because they see no other way forward. This is, in turn, because they have demons they are unwilling to confront.

Players are fundamentally insecure. They want love, but instead of being honest with themselves and others, they inadvertently hurt everyone involved because they cannot bring themselves to do so. Whether the insurmountable barrier is their ego or emotional immaturity, they believe that the risk of honesty outweighs its benefits. Hence, they lie to get what they want, or they engage in escape behaviours when push comes to shove.

Nobody, not even players, can entirely separate sex and love. I have described players as professionals at discriminating between the two, but even they are not invincible. When you sleep with someone, no matter what, you are giving a part of yourself to them forever. This fate is inescapable as long as you are a being with the capacity for an emotional bond. The only exception to this would be if you’re hollow inside — I mean, you can’t give anything when you have nothing. But everyone has something, even if they refuse to admit it. I did, and so did Guard B. That is why he lingered longer than he should have.

For the twentieth time, I could be wrong. But as I have demonstrated repeatedly, I try to see the good in everyone, even men who have hurt me. Love is a boundless resource; it can be given over and over, and it will eventually be returned to you.

When you genuinely love someone, you can ironically break them with it.

Maybe break is the wrong word; rather, if you are willing, you can help them grow with you.

The karmic fate that awaits a player is that because they are paying attention to the wrong things, they are bound to realise, only belatedly, that they let the thing they were looking for all along — unconditional love — slip by unnoticed.

Love is what they need — but won’t ever have — until they come to terms with themselves.

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7 (#7.5)

gwyn’s guide to hyperoptimised dating, #5 (rules of engagement)

gwynethtytLeave a comment

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7 (#7.5)

Hi. How has your love quest been? Good, I hope, with my wonderful guides. LOL

Today, we detail Gwyn’s rules of engagement, namely how to (1) decide who to convert from texting to in-person meets and (2) suss out the ones suitable for you from your meetups.

Before we begin, I have a little silly activity for you. It ostensibly helps you to determine how many people you should meet given some rules you set for yourself.

How Many People Should I Date? (365!?)

Before my time on Hinge, while doing the important preparatory work, I found this hilarious calculator which calculates (using math) how many dates you need to go on to find an ideal partner. Please try it and log your stats so you can look back and laugh at yourself like I did.

It is based upon the optimal stopping rule, which advises that you spend the first 37% of your dating period evaluating potential partners (“data-gathering phase” to, well, figure out what you want) before committing to the next person who surpasses all previous ones.

Here were my stats:

  • if I’m willing to go on 3-4 dates a week (yah I was crazy, it’s not feasible in the long-run)
  • and want to find an ideal partner within 2 years (haha, 2 weeks [snorts])
  • settling with the best possible partner
  • with chances of rejection being 10% (yah I was optimistic I admit. 50% is realistic)

I need to go on 132 dates and let them go no matter what. Then I’ll have a 34.6% chance of finding The One from the total pool of 365 dates.

Insert a massive “your mileage may vary” comment here because this is a rational solution to an emotional problem. Logic is annihilated in the face of emotion. When I met my man, I was so sure about him that I dropped all future prospects immediately. If anything, it could guide estimating how many people you could meet given the effort you’re willing to put in. Aside from that, it’s just for fun.

Anyway, it’s time to YAP.

The Texting Stage, Our Infamous Friend

We assume you have converted a lucky few from dating app to text platform based on your initial impressions. So, we move into the next gear — ahhhh, so exciting!!!

Text Away to Prune, You Must

Don’t be afraid to double-text in moderation. It indicates interest, and if they liked you back, they wouldn’t see you as desperate. And it’s good grounds for elimination. I used the three-strike rule: you’re out if I double-text you more than twice. The third one is a parting message (see guide #6), and no take backsies~ (so it takes only 72 hours to DQ a prospect, wink). Remember: there are no bad texters. There are only texters who don’t like you enough.

Every single text should represent your authentic self. Skip the formalities. Speak like you would speak to your friends. Be polite, of course, but not to the point of being overly reserved. Be respectful but not detached. Send stickers and hearts. Be a little bit careless. It’s not a work interview — we’re here to have fun. Live laugh LJ, OK?

Know when to share what — match their level of reciprocity, but always give a bit more to keep the conversation going. And then more, more, more, until you burrow yourself into their hearts and leave your indelible mark. Your love is not a crime.

Use your gut feeling to decide what’s right. DO NOT trauma dump until you’ve met; sudden excessive disclosure is a turn-off.

People who like you do two things beyond bantering: (1) send you telebubbles of themselves and (2) tell you about their day without you asking. But this does not mean they (will) love you; it could very well be love-bombing behaviour. I remember the fun calls I had with Captain, who did not love me in return.

Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Moe, Who Shall We Meet Next (“Full Conversions”)

Meet only those you have established rapport with.

Don’t jump the gun no matter how high-value they seem (if you missed it, read the story featuring Guy #5; that was a bop). If you’re direct, just say you’d like to get to know them better before scheduling a date. If you prefer to be indirect, say you’re booked until next week. If you’re a woman, do not explain your schedule. If you’re a man, explain if you want brownie points. Ultimately, both parties will set aside time for each other if they are keen on meeting, which is natural if you have built a bond via texting.

OK I will admit I only spoke to My Man for 4 days before meeting him. BUT he is a special case (obviously) for two reasons. First, we had a common interest (jazz), which was a good enough reason to meet in itself. Second, I sensed from the start that he was a decent guy. He was polite, responsive, and showed initiative consistently. I was so certain about my judgement that I considered giving him a kiss by the end of the date before the date began. Yes, I’m crazy. And yes, of course I was right.

Rostering

To have a roster is to juggle multiple prospects at once, at least on a texting basis. I don’t know how common this is, but I suspect everyone does it to some extent. My roster had 3-5 serious considerations at any one time. And all the men I met were rostering. So there’s nothing to feel insecure or threatened about since everyone does it. Rather, your goal should be to climb to the top of that list (no compliment matches being told that “you’re #1 right now”, LOL. I’d better be!)

  • Funny one: high-value men do not just roster, they sometimes even deconflict. I matched two men who I discovered later were literal besties. They had an internal agreement on who would get me (although I had a say insofar as I only replied the one I liked more)!!! What is the world coming to!!!

Even discussing your rosters can make for a fun meta ice-breaker. A handsome guy asked me about mine, and I told him oh, you’re #2 because I haven’t talked to you much. He sweetly informed me in turn that I was #3 for a similar reason — because he had met someone else earlier than me, so they had a time advantage. But how long you’ve known someone is not predictive of how intense the connection will be; rather, it is the quality of your conversations.

Also, you’ll never know how intense the connection really is until you meet them. (My Man was not #1 in the texting phase. I then met him and decided he was #1 for the foreseeable future.)

weeeeeeeeeee

First Dates!!! ❤

Dates as Marriage Interviews… or Not

When someone from a dating app agrees to meet you, they are looking out for three things you can potentially provide them.

  1. Love, of which there are two subcategories:
    • 1a. Romantic love
    • 1b. Friendship
  2. Sex
  3. Financial benefit / a free meal (rare, included only for comprehensiveness; if you do this, you’re silly)

Gender differences

  • Men are always 2, and sometimes 1a&2.
    • Men sometimes want love.
    • But my guess is that men always want sex. In the sense that, even if he does not initiate any sexual contact, he will always welcome it if you offer. Let me say it again — always.
  • Women are generally 1a, and sometimes 1a&2.
    • Women can be looking for sex, too.
    • But we assume that a majority of women are primarily looking for love on the basis that they cannot compartmentalise sex and love as cleanly as men can.
  • 3 is a Shiny Pokémon that operates on rules from a bizarre universe. They are not dating to find love. They are looking to sell insurance (both men and women) or eat out for free (typically women). If you have the misfortune to meet someone like this, end the date ASAP.

Extrapolating from the points above we can identify subtypes of daters based on their intentions (which, interestingly, aligns somewhat with Hinge’s dating preferences).

Dater subtypes

  • Genuinely seeking a partner (1a&2). This person’s primary goal is to determine if you will be a good long-term partner for them. Sex is a bonus but a secondary afterthought.
    • The friendzoner (1b). A special breed. Basically, they go to meetups intending to build a connection with no possibility of romance. Friendship could also be an outcome of marriage interview failure — a coup de grâce — if 1a (love) doesn’t work out, but they still find their partner interesting as a person.
  • Players (only 2). Another special breed and the most interesting of them all. Typically men. They are not interested in seeking love with you — they only want sex*. What distinguishes this category of daters is their strategy: they masquerade as the genuinely seeking type, but this is only a ploy to get you in bed. In other words, they prey on the female weakness in conflating love and sex to get the latter.
  • Clowns (only 3). More likely to be women than men due to social norms.

The differentiation is important because their behaviours will differ if you observe closely.

  • 3 is obviously the easiest to tell. Out of nowhere, they ask you about your financial goals. We move on.

What we care about is how to separate a player from a genuine seeker.

who’s who? i’m Tom.

Differentiating genuine seekers and players

Genuine seekers’ behaviours. My pet name for them is “secure (wo)men”.

  • One thing I’ve noticed about men who are (really) looking for long-term relationships is that they cut to the chase. They talk about preferences and deal-breakers early. They help you decide in a collaborative manner — they do not lead you on, they do not play games.
    • One date (I will always have a soft spot for him because he was so kind to me) saw the way I looked at two kids walking by — and he immediately mentioned he didn’t want kids. This was half an hour into our first and only date. I remember turning my head, my line of sight fixating on his ethereal, dark eyes, and the anticipatory grief flooding my heart. Our relationship was doomed before it began, though I still enjoyed my time with him. (This is why you should put your family plans front and centre on your profile.) He later told me I would be a good mother. I believe him. I’ll be happy for him, too, when he eventually finds the one for him.
  • Genuine seekers are upfront about what they want. For example, someone told me he was unsure about me as a prospect but still wanted to sleep with me. I think “unsure” is a poor word choice if we follow the rule that “it’s a no if it’s not a hard yes”, but it remains superior to lying.
  • Other characteristics
    • They respect your boundaries. If you say no, they accept it, no questions asked.
    • They are NOT AFRAID TO SHOW THEIR AFFECTION!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Essentially, genuine seekers are rational machines. If you understand the rules they play by and you mirror them, they will respect you.

Players’ behaviours. AKA red flags to look out for.

  • Players are identifiable by their lying. Therefore, their insinuations of love, intended to bait you, do not match their actions.
  • It’s a terrible sign if all lines of conversation inescapably turn sexual as the night progresses, in the style of all roads leading to Rome. He’s asking about your body count. He’s asking when you had your first kiss or lost your virginity. Boring shit like that. Correct answer: not your business until right before I sleep with you. Questions that seem out of place, that make your inner goddess tilt her head. It isn’t the right time, and you know it.
  • Hot take, but you can kind of tell from the way he touches and looks at you (!).
    • Did he hold your hand before he touched your thigh? If he jumped straight to the second, you really only have one decision left to make: whether you want to sleep with him or not. Because he has made the other decision for you: he does not want to date you, and it’s unlikely this will change. One-night stands do not hold your hand. Whether you go home with him, you are leaving without him.
    • Your first kiss with him — was it innocent or indulgent? Genuine seekers kiss like the former, while players kiss like the latter. Why? Men interested in you care about your opinion of them, and this desire for approval debilitates them. But players do not care.
    • The hunter’s look. You’ll know when you look in their eyes. Players look down at you, chin tilted up ever so slightly (it’s hot though; I’ll give them that). This is the hunter’s look. You win if you can turn that look into one of confusion or admiration. In comparison, a genuine seeker looks at you more affectionately… like how your friends look at you when you laugh.
    • On power dynamics. Related to the above, players usually enter thinking they have the upper hand. This is not necessarily an unjustified assumption — they think this way because they have an established record of winning past games. So it’s on you to put them in their place. Once you call them out on their behaviour or act in an unexpected way (e.g. turning down their offer to fuck or publicly shaming them on your blog, HAHAHA), they’ll be neutralised — and you’ll know when it happens. You don’t have to do this with genuine seekers because they will be treating you as an equal in the first place.
  • BTW, if their texting behaviour suddenly ceases the day after you sleep with them (regardless of date #), the relationship is over. LOL. There’s no need to ask your friends what they think is going on. You’re hearing the death rattles of a hunt because it is the withdrawal phase. There is nothing much you can do at this point but come to terms with it. Sorry. Get into discard and recovery mode. If you want to avoid this problem, don’t sleep with them (YES THIS IS COMING FROM ME).

*Caveat: I portray players as one-dimensional creatures, but people are not that simple. However, that is beyond the scope of this post. If I think about it more, I might write #5.5 (on players).

big thunk

On EQ and IQ evaluations

IQ and EQ are pivotal considerations in seeking long-term partners. At the risk of sounding obvious, let me state upfront that people seek smart and emotionally savvy people as partners — this is a fact of human nature — but let me also qualify this.

People tend to attract and ultimately choose others similar in IQ and EQ levels. Relationships with significant discrepancies are unlikely to work out because what is there to build when you fundamentally don’t connect over your ideas or feelings? (So yeah, even though Hollywood likes to romanticise the “opposites attract” concept, it is a myth. One exception to this rule, though, is when one partner is socially dominant and the other is submissive.)

More importantly, I would argue that EQ is more important than IQ (though, of course, they are correlated). The problem is that you can’t tell someone’s emotional intelligence level off the bat from their profile, as opposed to conventional intelligence, which you can infer from their work and education. You have to meet them to know. Or you at least have to text them for a relatively extended period to see how they respond to situations and what you bring to the table.

Characteristics of high EQ people, based on my observations:

  • They know how to make someone else feel comfortable around them. They can “read the room”. They are constantly observing and assessing their partner’s cues to infer their emotional state, which they then use to decide the next best action to respond with.
    • Your body instinctively recognises when your partner is doing this. It’s the in-sync feeling — when you can’t find a word, and they complete their thoughts for you as if they were inside your head the whole time.
    • Remember I said My Man treated my bruises? He was like, oh, don’t scratch your legs! And why do you have so many bruises! Let me apply cream on them for you! Here’s why I was shocked: I was hardly aware of my bruises. Exceptional attention to detail.
  • They are excellent with “recovery” situations, i.e. when a conversation is going awry or there is an awkward situation. Again, it is a lot about awareness — because I know your intention, I can play along with it to save us both from embarrassment.
  • They remain calm in stressful situations. Because they can reframe a situation and generate solutions quickly. Sign of a high-functioning prefrontal cortex and good emotional regulation.

Contrast with when they lack this awareness. Guy #5, for example, lacked this (sorry I keep dredging this guy up, my sample size is limited and will no longer increase, unfortunately), at least in the few hours I was with him. He could not tell that I did not feel safe around him. And I think it would have been obvious if he was paying attention. I wasn’t physically receptive to his advances, though hell, I was doing my best. If we assume that he wanted to sleep with me, he failed because he mistimed his steps, which in turn was because he couldn’t determine when to do or say what accurately.

no chemistry vibes

Finally, the Rules of Engagement

  • Friends first, lovers later. Don’t meet anyone you wouldn’t have as a friend. Your lover is going to be your best friend (potentially for life!).
  • Be interested in them and show your affection confidently. Don’t be a wishy-washy person who blows hot and cold. If you wouldn’t like to be hurt, don’t make others suffer for your insecurities. Go away and work on yourself.
    • Secure people like honest people. If you tell them what you genuinely feel and think, they’ll be appreciative and reciprocate.
  • Similarly, be ready to give your all. This involves intense emotional disclosure when the time is right. You’ll know when. Pay attention to your body and your gut feeling. Don’t share anything that crosses your boundaries, but be willing to step out of your comfort zone.
    • I think some of us do not give everything initially because we are afraid of 1) being rejected and 2) seeming desperate (which ultimately leads back to 1 anyway because you are afraid that seeming desperate will lead to rejection). But people who want you will never see your affection as desperation.
    • I also understand that everyone is afraid of being vulnerable (myself included) but consider this: if the two of you are going to end up together, wouldn’t they eventually know all your flaws anyway? So be brave: your flaws will be loved by the people who matter because they are what defines you.
  • Remember that time is a commodity, especially so for working adults. When someone makes time for you out of their busy schedule, remember that they are giving you a lot of grace. So help them make the best out of it. They will be grateful.
  • “Have no expectations” is something I’ve been told repeatedly, but let’s dive deeper. Act like you’ll never see them again, and you’ll be surprised at how many doors open. Recognising the transience of your connection leads to treating others as best as you can, rather than casually or non-committally because you think “we might meet again”.
  • Active listening. In short, active listening requires that you be present. That means put your damn phone away and listen to what they have to say. LISTEN without planning to respond. Just pay attention and try to imagine yourself in their shoes. Ask questions to clarify and understand their perspective. Your curiosity will come naturally.
more on active listening here

So get out there and have a smashing first date. And if it doesn’t work out? Don’t worry. I’ve got you covered in guide #6, where we’ll discuss how to sever a connection — kindly and maturely.

Until next time, babygirls x

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7 (#7.5)

gwyn’s guide to hyperoptimised dating, #3 (knowing thyself)

gwynethtytLeave a comment

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7 (#7.5)

Alright, ya clowns, we are so back because I just submitted the first draft of my thesis. Good riddance! In letting it spread its wings, I, too, flew here immediately.

In this episode, we do the preparatory legwork before we jump into the battlefield.

Huh? Not dating yet? Yeah. Don’t get yourself all tangled up. Fail to prepare, and prepare to fail.

We will cover two aspects: knowing thyself and knowing thy enemy (as an extension of #1).

A necessary caveat to protect my readers’ feelings because I care for you: all of this is my own opinion. I am critical by design because because criticism is the way to improve. I fully acknowledge I may be wrong, and I might change my mind in the future. If you don’t like what you see, you don’t have to read it; set your own boundaries, or others will do it for you. But interestingly, if you experience a sting, it’s probably because you see yourself reflected herein.

oo wee (gee)!

Knowing Thyself

To know yourself and conquer the battlefield, you must be able to confidently answer two questions:

Who are you, babygirl? And what do you have to offer the market?

The Rationale

I mention figuring out what you have to offer. Now, I am all against self-objectification (I deal with enough from men daily. Stop DMing me from your damn anon alt-accounts or I will jolly well block you. This is my FINAL warning; stay in your place). But if love is a game, marriage is a market, and you are ultimately a commodity on auction. You define your own value, but you will still be subjected to market rate considerations. Nobody will pay for you if you act like you’re all that but have no concrete value.

Men (and women) can smell when you are all style and no substance. My second date told me he had met a girl who was “all talk and no show”, and his evaluation of her was “arrogant”. Ugh. I cringed internally for her. I would hate to be her; the prospect terrified me. I’m sure it’s the same for you. (That being said, what does it matter what others think of you? There’s no one to please when you play by your own rules.)

The point is that you need to be realistic and pragmatic about what you really are. Again, reducing ourselves to objects in the style of Carousell — bless that hellhole — you need to set accurate prices to find buyers. If you want to reach a class of buyers (the “elites”) that can pay a lot and are willing to, you have to be worth a lot in the first place.

And it’s not that hard to align yourself when you see things as they are. Think of it this way: when you underprice something on Carousell (as I did once), the messages come in a tsunami. When you overprice it, that item sits in your storeroom for years. Only when you find the sweet spot can you start pruning the buyers genuinely interested in making a transaction. On a dating app like Hinge, the logic is similar. If you present yourself authentically, you won’t have a shortage of likes from people who are interested in you as you are. But if you’re inauthentic or booooooring, you won’t be attracting “elite” buyers — which I assume is what you are seeking.

the bar gets lower everyday

Note the emphasis on as you are. Many buyers are out there, some of which are “elites”, but that does not mean they are a good fit for you. Sure, we got a snazzy, tall, handsome, rich man out here for drinks (story below, keep reading), but he looks at you condescendingly and only wants to sleep with you. Are you going to accept that? It’s you we’re talking about, you know. You’re so much more than an item on sale. Respect yourself.

The Process of Becoming

You must first know what you are and be willing to do the shadow work to get there. The fundamental question is: do you see and accept yourself as you are?

The easy questions

  • What are your goals and dreams? Where do you want to be in a year, in five years’ time?
  • What are your hobbies?
  • What are your strengths?

And so on. These are simple questions to answer but are nonetheless crucial because where you want to go will determine what kind of partner you’re looking for. In other words, they help you piece together your key considerations and dealbreakers.

Here’s mine after I did some self-analysis. It’s not the full version because why would I reveal myself so fully to the public (yes, I am being sarcastic). I’m just putting it here because I wrote it in jest, but it works well enough.

If he does the following, I would die for him
(inclusion criteria)		If he DOESN’T do the following, he can go away x (exclusion criteria/dealbreakers)
Read REAL books regularly (yes I am gatekeeping)Read my blog and tell me how much he loves my art
Actively listen (stop using your damn phone)Act BE obsessed with me 24/7/365
Communicate his thoughts and needs (a defining feature of a secure man)Plaster pictures of me all over his phone and social media profiles
Practice ACCOUNTABILITYText me first, politely, stating his intentions clearly
Have big dick energyLike me for more than just my hot N sexy body
Hmm. It’s quite close to what I actually want.

But life’s not all flowers and sunshine.

The harder questions (the real shadow work)

What are the flaws that define you? More importantly, are you okay with them?

A fantastic example from yours truly: my emotional intensity (often confused with “volatility“, which I will never stop yapping about). Tl;dr I feel emotions to an extreme degree, ostensibly more so than others experiencing those same emotions. Let’s say the same nice thing happened to us today, and we are both happy about it. While you might experience it as a 7/10 in intensity, I’m probably a 9/10. It doesn’t seem like an issue (ignoring my hypomanic antics) until I have negative emotions like sadness and anger. When I’m sad, I’m really sad, like 9/10 all the time. And when I’m mad — haha. Like they say, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

  • I don’t want to get into this further because it’s irrelevant to the discussion, but to put it simply and for my own closure, I don’t believe I’m more intense than the average person. I think people have this mistaken impression because (1) I can articulate my emotions clearly through writing, and (2) most people are not as keen on expressing their thoughts as publicly as I do. But just because you don’t see someone’s emotions doesn’t mean they’re not feeling it.
  • And because I feel this strange need to defend myself again, I no longer vent my negative emotions on people. I put them in places for me. And if my friends need distance from my evil space, they are always welcome to step away from the room. It’s not their problem unless they care.
  • Finally, consider this: what is a flaw, socially speaking? In contexts like social interaction with infinite possibilities, virtually any personality trait could be perceived as a strength as much as a flaw. I discuss it as a personality flaw in finding a husband because it repeatedly emerged as a dealbreaker for prospective men. But I doubt it is a flaw otherwise. If you took this part of me away, I would be an empty husk; I would no longer be the Gwyneth adored by my family, friends, and fans.

But that’s enough digression. Suffice it to say that I have accepted my emotional intensity as essential to my identity or how I view myself as a separate individual (yay, social psych!). Once I came to terms with myself, I could easily identify and eliminate those who would not help me grow. It is OK if they do not accept me; I am whole as I am. I will find someone who will accept me and walk by my side.

And that’s the beauty of it all, I guess: when you accept your flaws, they are no longer flaws.

The Consequences of Becoming

Okay, story time. I posted Instagram stories about this immediately after it happened (see highlights > Unhinged), but I’ll do a short recap because there are so many things to take away from it.

He was the fifth man I met since the Hinge era. We’ll call him #5. He invited me to drinks at this fancy bar. We did not text much prior to meeting. But his ELO score was so high that I threw caution to the wind (a mistake, as we will see). Essentially, this guy was maxed out on his educational attainment, job/income, height (perfect 180cm, supposedly), family background, and musical/sports skills. And he was handsome to boot. His profile was so absurd that when I saw it in my matches, I was like, babygirl’s in the big leagues, baby.

But here’s the thing: I had a gut feeling I was not enough for him. I texted my friends shortly before meeting him, quote in verbatim:

tbh he prolly just wants to sleep with me. i’m not wife material for this kind of level (i am not putting myself down. i am realistic). and i wouldn’t mind but actually i would. i not feeling it tonight

Why? We had nothing in common. Not education, definitely not income, ignore height, family background unclear. I was interested in engaging in some of his hobbies, but I was not there yet. I had not yet become what he was. In other words, there was an absence of connection.

So iconic. Anyway, I left the house knowing that I would return intact. (Note the link between connection and sex.)

Lo and behold, as God willed it, I was right on the dollar. I did not feel safe around this man and it stayed that way throughout. He wasn’t actively posing a threat to me, no, but I could feel my body unconsciously rejecting him. When he asked to hold my hand, and I put them in his, my arms literally strained to pull away. When he casually put his arm around my shoulder, I had to fight the instinctive urge to lock my body. (Another funny detail: he told me he had already had dinner. I was like… oh. Now that’s new. Talk about hyperoptimised dating; even the meal is eliminated!)

We did have a single moment when we genuinely shared a laugh, but it was not enough. He told me at the end that I was not what he was looking for. I was like, OK, taken aback, but I understand (all according to keikaku).

And… I don’t think I’ll sleep with you tonight.

When those words left my pretty mouth, he demonstrated the elite equivalent of a seizure. His eyes widened almost imperceptibly (what is this, Wattpad?), and he froze in his seat, tilting his head at me like I was some alien. I stared back at him, confused… starting to understand. He was so confident he could bag me based on his conditions alone that he had not anticipated failure.

Then we went downstairs to return to our separate homes. And we were settling our last goodbyes when he suddenly stepped forward to be closer to me. I flinched and backed away. I had to reiterate that I did not intend to sleep with him. And he looked at me in that way again, with that perplexed, distant gaze, indicating his inability to comprehend how a woman (who did not feel safe with him) could possibly not want to sleep with him. By this time, I already knew that he was not honest about his intentions insofar as he did not admit them — sealing his disqualification, sexually and emotionally.

He then got into the cab, and I was left standing there dazed as if I had emerged from a chess game.

He won the game, but I won the war, I guess.

real clown-to-clown communication moment

And yes, true to his fine upbringing, he texted me to thank me for my time with good grace afterwards. But even his text was de-rizzed, like he had deflatedly realised his place. I had excised the ego from the man. I reciprocated and then wiped the chat.

(He told me not to write about him, by the way. They all do. I don’t care.)

Apologies for the exposition. To circle back to our main point, when you know what you are and what you want, you can break any man’s ego. Sorry, I mean, you’ll be able to find the one for you way more efficiently.

Knowing Thy Enemy

Speaking of finding the one for you —

What do you want, babygirl?

You need to date to know what you want. If you don’t know what’s out there, you don’t know what’s good for you. It really is that simple. If you think you know what you want without having dated anyone, you’re probably relying on societal assumptions to define what you want. If that works for you, go ahead, but your chances of suboptimal outcomes are higher.

But there’s a hidden rule here — you attract what you are.

A man from my past reached out to me on Hinge. I was amused, so I replied, but he was never in the running. Not because of our history but because he couldn’t even figure out what he wanted from a relationship (as his profile indicated, not my assumption). OK, so you want to fuck me? Then say it like you mean it, and I’ll decide. (I had decided in advance: no.)

If you are confused, you will attract a confused person. In my humble opinion, that is a colossal waste of time because I am looking for a HUSBAND. However, I’m all for it if you guys can align on your confusion and collaborate to work it out together.

And that’s the kicker: even if you don’t know, you have to know that you don’t know.

Hence, we come full circle to knowing thyself.

Marrying (haha) the Two

To me, love is about finding the ideal partner while being the ideal partner. Thus, as I reiterate, work on yourself before you get out there. A relationship is a project, and you need to pull your weight. Any self-respecting person would expect their teammates to do their part, so why should you be exempt? You might have gotten away with it in your studies, but do you think the dating circle will be this forgiving? If you want to love, be ready to give yourself completely.

Knowing yourself and knowing your enemy are concepts that kind of reciprocally influence each other, but the first is paramount.

When you know and accept yourself, everything else will come naturally.

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7 (#7.5)

gwyn’s guide to hyperoptimised dating, #3.5 (becoming, #3)

gwynethtytLeave a comment

in this series: #1 (#1.5) | #2 | #3 (#3.5) | #4 | #5 (#5.5) | #6 | #7

A dual post because it was only a matter of time before all of what I’ve written would come together. To love and to date is to find yourself, and when you find yourself, you will meet the ones for you.

It’s #3.5 on the hyperoptimised dating series because the content is an extension of #3, which I haven’t yet written. But it will come soon.

These two weeks have been a huge test for me — of my will. I’ve learnt so much so quickly that even my core beliefs have been shaken. Up to this point, I believed I should give my everything in whatever I do, whoever I meet…. but I can see why people are hesitant to do so now. I tried to hyperoptimise the search for love only to find that the thing I could not optimise in the end was myself. We cannot optimise love because it is not meant to be optimised.

Everyone I’ve met tells me I give love too quickly and commit too fully. I don’t agree, but they’re right about the consequences, which are very real.

Nonetheless, I’ve made a few observations that are fascinating to me and that my readers might enjoy.

First: people like to aim for things that are just beyond our reach — it’s pure instinct. But the divine irony of it all is that to be the partner of a person who is “better” than you, you have to be better than yourself so you “deserve” them. I do not believe people “deserve” or do not deserve each other; everyone deserves to be loved. But there are unbreakable rules in life, and this is one of them.

I realised that I’ve always “joked” about finding a rich man because I have been looking for a man to compensate for a part of me that I perceived I lacked. But there is nothing to compensate for. As Cher wisely opined, I don’t need a rich man; I am the rich man. I will become him. When I do, the rest will work it out by itself. Indeed, that is the mentality of the secure men I’ve met — they take their time and are stern with their boundaries because they always want better, better, better.

And why not indeed? I’ve been out for less than a month on Hinge and am already batting like crazy. But not only is it about where you’re at now, it’s about where you’re going. And I will keep growing; in a year, I will be more, and in two years, I will be much more. When you tend to your garden, the butterflies will come. When I become a rich (and hot) man, I won’t need a rich man anymore.

So, ultimately, this is not about men or potential partners I might have. It is about me. It was always about me; it was always about you.

Second and related: if you are serious about finding the one for you, you must first know who you are.

I suspect men are afraid of me. Because I am so intense and seemingly ready to do unhinged shit (it’s only unhinged because they don’t understand) that they realise that they cannot control me — and these men cannot accept a woman they cannot control. I think that’s the crux of it all in a relationship dynamic: it’s all about power. In short, weaker men cannot handle me, and they drop me such that I shatter on the floor. (Most men can’t even handle being told that they’re weak.)

That’s what the men really mean when they tell me I’m “emotionally volatile” or I’m “headstrong” or whatever to that effect. They’re all related. I saw it flash across a prospect’s eyes when we met for the last time as potential partners. I told him about my plans for the future, and he tripped thrice, so much that I asked him if he was doing it for theatrical effect. He did not say it then, but it was already a dealbreaker for him, and maybe he just wanted to see it through to the inevitable end.

This guess of mine will never be fully validated because they will never admit it is so. But I can see it anyway — I see it with the men in my past and the men I’ve met recently. I see it in the way they orbit me. My malicious side wants them to think, in those moments they watch my stories, why are you still here? But hey, since you are, watch me — I’m going to be the girl you could’ve had and will never have again because you didn’t know what you wanted. You were a part of my life and I’m grateful for that — but you were not meant to stay. I’ve done it before, and I’ll do it again.

But it doesn’t matter whether they feel the way I want them to. I might be completely delusional. It doesn’t matter what they feel anyway. They have their own lives and deserve happiness too.

I’ll just not be there to see it.

I am not emotionally volatile. I used to be, maybe. I hurt others; I regret it. And I will make mistakes. I can’t help it if I have thorns on my body that regrow even when I tear them out and I bleed because I didn’t want to hurt others when they came close. I must accept myself for who I am. I can only hope my friends will love me regardless — and I trust that they do. I too accept them for everything that they are.

My emotional intensity is not a weakness; it is quite literally my cardinal trait. People who say I’m volatile do not understand me in the way I understand myself. And I do not have the time to explain myself to them because we have other things to do. Let them think what they want. I will say this though: if I am emotionally volatile, then let the primary emotions I cycle between be joy and awe.

I will be brave, even if I must make it alone.

There are always “better” people out there. But they are not for you. You deserve someone who sees you as you are. When you realistically recognise your place, you’ll know where you want to be.

Will you stay or will you go? That’s up to you.

I have only met one man about whom I was completely sure from the beginning. And the reason was simpler than I had expected — he felt like home, where I was meant to be, as I was. I was so sure about my gut feeling that I’d have given him the reins if he asked. But he told me, as if he saw something in me I did not then, that I was too unstable for him.

And on reflection — indeed, I am. He could not handle me. That’s not on him; it’s not on me. We were just not meant to be. We live, and we learn.

So, as I intended, the man I end up with will be a brat tamer. And he won’t even have to tell me. I will know when we cross paths. He’ll love the challenge, and I’ll give myself fully in return.

We will not “settle for” anyone until I find someone who loves me as intensely and deliberately as I love him. He has to be like me. I am looking for a soulmate. With or without them, I am walking ahead at my own pace. If I don’t get married, hell, so be it; there are more incredible things in life waiting for me.

My priority is not men. It will never be men. It will always be me.

And we are going to live.

gwynethtyt.com is 5!

gwynethtytLeave a comment

Oh my god!

Since the inception of this blog, I have written over 130 posts.

Here is a collection of my favourites, categorised by year, which I feel best captures her spirit.

2019: the big bang era
[26 posts]

11/6: hello, losers

  • The post that started it all. Reading this again makes me laugh because it demonstrates my point that people fundamentally don’t change. I mean, look at these iconic quotes from 2019 me:
    • “I enjoy oversharing about my life to the discomfort of others, though I should really know better. Either way, you’ll get my irrelevant opinions on all sorts of issues.”
    • “If you think I don’t have any [haters], you’d be surprised — I am so popular it pains me. I can’t even sin in good conscience anymore.”

3/8: my NTU URECA experience: a review

  • This post was the first example of what I would become most well-known for among my juniors — reviews and advice relating to my academic pursuits. And my wit, of course.

5/11: meta on oversharing

  • One of my purer self-expressions at the time related to the paradox of online authenticity — a recurring issue in my life. The dilemma in summary: being “real” online necessitates sharing negative experiences and potentially controversial opinions because that’s real life. However, doing so could lead to adverse consequences, mainly: (1) it might not be good for your reputation in a hypercurated online environment and (2) your disclosure could be weaponised against you.
    • (1) is more rooted in insecurity than anything else, but (2) is a real concern. Someone reported me to my superiors when I was a student leader because I allegedly made an inflammatory comment online.
    • The only thing I learned from that affair then, unfortunately for the instigator, is that some people have such uninteresting lives that they can only spend it attempting (and failing) to drag others down. But I’ll admit that the experience helped me learn to criticise in a way that convinces audiences while the targets can’t do jackshit to me. (-:
  • I only resolved the dilemma after going through therapy: now, I share whatever I want without concern for others’ opinions. The value that I create and the way I treat others is testament enough to my character. If you can’t see it, that’s on you and not me x

2020: the liberal feminist (ironic) era
[16 posts]

8/1: penis envy

  • Self-explanatory. Interesting in the sense that men do not only represent an outlet of emotional and sexual fulfilment for me (god, if only I could choose otherwise), but because the concept of manhood defined my psychic development as a woman. Freud would be proud.

12/3: my time at mcgill: a mid-term review

  • Went to McGill University in Montreal, Canada to expand liberal brain.

24/3: carte blanche

  • Still relevant. Will always be. My lover must understand this.

8/5: virgin crisis

  • A chauvinist triggered me to write this. The post is noteworthy because it demonstrated my propensity for conflict and polemics. I’m more selective with my battles now because I’m better able to distinguish what’s worth my time.
  • But my desire and ability to put men in their place will never die.
  • Trivia: named after a popular shoujo manga I read when I was younger.

14/8: reflections of a “student leader”

  • Babygirl does politics, and gets her way (you’re welcome to read and decide for yourself if I did).

2021: the pareto principle era
[11 posts]

1/6: gwyn’s guide to NTU psych modules (or: PSYCCESS)

  • This is the post I am most well-known for. I wrote it because it is what I would have wanted to read as a junior. The support I received motivated me to keep writing; it might be part of the reason I am still posting today.

22/12: gwyn reviews: the NTU counselling centre

  • This post marked a breakthrough for me because it was the first time I actively sought help for my depressive symptoms. It was formative in terms of my journey as a mental health advocate.
  • Trivia: did you guys know I got into trouble for this series (the mental health logs), because someone didn’t like what I said and reported it to someone with authority over me? I got away again, of course (see the pattern here?), because 1) I can and 2) people are delusional to think that they can police my non-political opinions in our fair and free society.

2022: the lowkey era
[8 posts]

28/6: geneva, a girl, and a reckoning

  • I went to Switzerland, Geneva, and got to meet my research idol. I will never forget my time there. Their melted cheese fondue was pretty good, too.

6/7: on sleeping (with) disorders

  • I have had a long troubled history of insomnia since I was an adolescent (it’s gotten a lot better in 2024, though). I paid doctors hundreds of dollars to confirm what I already knew. Speaking from experience: if you have a sleep issue, also get your mental health checked out — the two are inextricable from one another.

2023: the comeback era
[3 posts]

4/10: confessions of an ex-NTUSU exco

  • More political commentary. The feelings I experienced when I posted this and when I saw the response to it solidified my commitment to write until I die.

5/12: 25

  • To celebrate the end of my first quarter of life. Also to celebrate something I had neglected for a long time: myself.
@ominous_cloud_of_smoke / instagram

2024: the generative babygirl era
[60+ posts(!), so far]

26/2: discipline and punish

  • Marked another transformation where I realised I didn’t have to play by the rules anymore.

31/3: to my dearest

  • Tl;dr I realised my friends loved me immensely, perhaps more than any man ever loved me.

12/4: golden age

  • More thoughts on freedom following discipline and punish.

17/4: gwyn’s lay theory of relationships series

  • Being single and encountering a bunch of men made me have Many Thoughts about the nature of love, dating, and marriage. So where better to organise all these thoughts creatively than here?
  • I would like to thank the men who inspired me because, hell, I was compulsively putting out banger after banger LOL. Sublimation is real, and I have lived it.

10/5: how to counteract love bombers

  • Sums up my philosophy towards relationships: if they really wanted right, they would. I will accept nothing less.

16/5: the little things

  • I just like how soft this post is. I wrote it with the wind on my face and the rain pouring in the background.

1/6: the no man june logs

  • Embarked on this because I love self-improvement projects and gamifying my life. It’s not working out great because I clearly have impulsivity issues, but I’d be damned if I wasn’t having fun.

7/6: gwyn’s theory of interpersonal interest series

  • Another banger of a series (a little bit of disclosure: I was lovesick. I might still be. But I wouldn’t worry, because it’ll all work out in the end.)

That was a sweet trip down memory lane. Happy 5th birthday, my darling blog! I love you.

gwyn’s theory of interpersonal interest, #1

gwynethtytLeave a comment

In this series: #1 | #1.5

I was recently invited to give a TED talk (where TED stands for Topical Extended Discussion here) by a clown. Of course, I have risen to the challenge.

no donations to you, detested organisation!

I began with the intent to capture obsession but got sidetracked into operationalising interpersonal interest instead. Oh well, still a worthy contribution to society.

A brief primer on terms used in psychometrics (the art of measurement in psychology). Since I have repeated this to my students ad nauseam, I might as well lecture my fans too.

  • A concept/construct: the phenomenon you want to understand. Usually a “big idea” that needs further definition and explanation. In this case, interpersonal interest.
    • What does it mean to be interested in someone?
    • What are the characteristics that comprise interest? What are the central elements it must have, such that if they were not present, the concept would no longer be “interest”?
  • Operationalisation: to make a concept measurable. What are the observable signs of interest?
    • We must be able to see and measure these markers. For example, if thinking about someone is a sign of interest, we should be able to measure it somehow.
      • Example: count the number of times you think about that person in a day or the percentage of time you spend thinking about someone compared to others.
    • Things that are not measurable are psychometrically (and scientifically) worthless.
      • Example: the “energy vibrations” I send out to the universe when I am cursing men to dream about me. HAH
mrw I received this TED talk offer

Interpersonal interest: how much you’re interested in someone or vice versa. Contextualised to social media since that’s my panopticon playground and main site of research.

Now, the Checklist

Signs, in order of increasing intensity (0/absence = least interested, 5 = most interested). Checking off a sign higher on the list indicates that the lower signs have already been met.

  1. Watching your stories.
    • The more stories you watch and the more you regularly check for updates, the stronger the interest. (If your defense is “I’m just scrolling”… don’t you have better things to do?)
  2. Visiting your public platforms unprompted.
    • The preceding suggests they are taking the initiative to visit your profile (or blog, hehehe) without an external stimulus i.e. the action stems from an internal desire. Quite telling behaviour, if you ask me (I adore men who are obsessed with me).
    • Unprompted access to your profile is trickier to measure, but you can make logical deductions (my favourite activity). I wish I knew who read my blog, but it doesn’t matter because I delude myself into thinking that everyone reads it anyway. Delulu~ is the solulu~
  3. Texting.
    • Obviously. The more frequent and initiated, the stronger the interest.
    • A step up from the above because it means that at least one party has initiated contact, hence manifesting the interest. But see the section below on power asymmetry.
    • By the way, DMs on Instagram are like a 2.5. We’re not really friends until we have each other’s numbers (and I’m not just saying this because it means you can then PayNow me).
  4. Meeting in person.
    • Kind of an inevitability following 3 if the relationship is worth anything — see comments below.
  5. Putting aside your ego for them.
    • Best illustrated with a negative example — persistence in effort despite being rejected. Imagine one of your best friends said one day that they wanted to end the relationship. If you would fly down to their place and cry at their doorstep begging them to take you back, that’s a 5.
    • Because it means you’re down so bad you’d put your pride down for another shot, even when the odds are against you. The relinquishing of pride, given its fundamental importance to one’s self-esteem, is the greatest compliment you can confer upon another.
    • We love that; I do. I’ve done it before, and I’ll always have a soft spot for those who’ve tried it with me.

Some comments

  • Before you rate them, you must pre-categorise people into romantic OR platonic interest.
    • If you can’t decide, default to platonic (if you have to think twice, you don’t like them enough — don’t waste their time!)
    • Being interested platonically does not necessarily mean I am interested romantically (fine: the “friendzone”). BUT if I am interested romantically, I am probably also interested platonically. So romantic is a sub-category of platonic.
  • 3 (texting) and 4 (meeting in person) are the most intimately connected signs. The jump from 2 to 3 and 4 to 5 is comparatively large. Not that a relationship can’t be solid if it’s based entirely on text exchanges (the modern equivalent of a pen pal), but unless you have some extenuating circumstance (e.g. live on the other side of the world), there is no reason to not meet.
    • I detest 3.5 romantic prospects the most — those who linger in texting limbo but do not entertain further contact. They’re playing you, sis! You are a backup plan. DROP them like a hot potato, stat.
  • Only consider people 3 and above to be potential friends, 4 for lovers.
    • The 2s either have no courage or do not care enough about you to pursue a relationship. Neither is your problem. Your time should be spent cultivating 3s, 4s, and 5s.
    • They’ve said that they love you over text but can’t seem to find the time to meet? They are asking for a small loan of $20,000, too? They are a LOVE SCAMMER.
  • If you meet a 5 and you feel 5 towards them too — keep them in your life as far as possible.
mrw cornering people i like

On power asymmetries

And now, class, a fun activity:

  • Identify someone you’re interested in.
  • Rate your level of interest in them.
  • THEN, rate — based on their past behaviour — their level of interest in you. Only look at what they’ve done: do not assume, do not infer their intentions.

Use the following formula to determine the interest asymmetry score:
[their interest in me] – [my interest in them].

Examples (may or may not be taken from my past experience):

  • Someone acts like a 2 to me [their interest in me]. I act like a 0 to them [my interest in them]. 2 – 0 = +2.
  • Someone acts like a 0 to me. I act like a 5 to them. 0 – 5 = -5.

A positive score indicates that you have more power in deciding how the relationship will develop presently. A negative score indicates the power is in their favour. Higher scores = greater magnitude of asymmetry.

Any asymmetry calls for an attempt at rebalancing.

  • If you have more power (+): decide if their effort is worth matching.
    • If yes, match it.
    • If not, let them down easy. That’s the least you can do for them. (Except for players. Drag them to hell, babes.)
  • If you have less power (-): decide if they are worth your time and investment.
    • If yes and you want more, COMMUNICATE YOUR DESIRES.
    • If not, off you go for greener pastures, sweaty! We have no time for low-effort relationships.

That being said, you never know how someone might respond to you in the end. (People might really be watching my stories simply because they are interested in observing hypomania in the wild, or because I’m super hot, and NOT because I’m a complex person with deep feelings and thoughts and great music taste. Sigh)

And the scorecard now does not mean it will always be the same; people and contexts change. In particular, based on my past experience, the power dynamics in intense relationships (another favourite of mine) are always fluctuating. Is that stable? No. But is that fun? Absolutely.

Finally, we manifest that we will only settle for 5-5s.

Well, class is dismissed; I hope you enjoyed it. My DMs are always open to new ideas! x

kiss

gwyn’s lay theory of relationships, #2

gwynethtytLeave a comment

in this series: #1 | #2 | #3 | #3.5

It seems you all adore my lay theory (or at least find it fun), so here’s a follow-up! Please read part 1 if you haven’t figured out your type — you will need the info to contextualise the following.

In the previous post, we investigated the first tenet, which predicted that men prefer to marry for stability while women prefer to marry for love. (I still stand by this for Singaporean men, by the way.)

Alas, findings from my informal poll did not support my prediction. Instead, we found the opposite pattern: more men voted for love (57.9%), while more women voted for stability (54.5%). How exciting! Of course, that means we must investigate the issue further.

Yes. Study.

In the current study, we will do two things: (1) investigate the second tenet from my lay theory and (2) attempt to replicate the findings of the first poll.

To recapitulate:

Second tenet: I posit that people looking to date can be divided into two major types: people who date to date (the Romantics) and people who date to marry (the Pragmatics).

  • Your gender does not influence whether you are a Romantic or Pragmatic, unlike with marriage. Rather, other aspects such as your personality, upbringing and past relationship experiences will determine your type.

Aim of current study: observe the proportion of men and women that self-categorise into each type under my typology. We are looking at a combination of marriage and dating preferences this time (we looked only at marriage preferences previously).

Gwyn’s Typology of Love, Revisited

Hypotheses: Given the findings from the previous study, here were my predictions this time —

  • Hypothesis 1: For marriage, more men will select love, and more women will select stability.
  • Hypothesis 2: For dating, the split of Pragmatics and Romantics will be roughly equal across genders.

Method: Instagram poll

  • Participants were shown the prompt “Now that you have read my blog, tell me your type” (LOL totally legit study)
  • Men and women answered on separate pages. Both saw the same 4 options (format: marriage/dating preference)
    • Stable/pragmatic
    • Love/pragmatic
    • Stable/romantic
    • Love/romantic

Participants: 24-30 years old, mostly college-educated working adults

  • Inclusion criteria: must have read the first lay theory post (duh, I need more fans)

Results:

  • Overall, both genders (N = 47)
    • Stable/pragmatic n = 13 (27.7%)
    • Love/pragmatic n = 16 (34.0%)
    • Stable/romantic n = 11 (23.4%)
    • Love/romantic n = 7 (14.9%)
    • Stable = 24, Love = 23, Pragmatic = 29, Romantic = 18
  • Males N = 29
    • Stable/pragmatic n = 6 (20.7%)
    • Love/pragmatic n = 9 (31.0%)
    • Stable/romantic n = 8 (27.6%)
    • Love/romantic n = 6 (20.7%)
    • Stable = 14, Love = 15, Pragmatic = 15, Romantic = 14
  • Females N = 18
    • Stable/pragmatic n = 7 (38.9%)
    • Love/pragmatic n = 7 (38.9%)
    • Stable/romantic n = 3 (16.7%)
    • Love/romantic n = 1 (5.6%)
    • Stable = 10, Love = 8, Pragmatic = 14, Romantic = 4

Discussion

Hypothesis 1: For marriage, more men will select love, and more women will select stability.

  • Hypothesis 1 NOT supported.
  • Look at the split across genders (stable/love): males (14/15) and females (10/8). Within each gender, the votes are more or less equally split.

Now, what would Study 1 have to say about this!

Granted, Study 1 was better powered because not everyone reads my blog (sad), so the sample size this time is about half the original. Plus, fewer women responded than men. But if we consider the findings legit, maybe the split is more even than it initially seemed.

What we have suggests that gender does not play a significant role in determining whether you would marry for love or stability. Men and women are equally likely to pick either. Other characteristics such as personality, family dynamics, or past dating experience could better explain whether you prefer to marry for love or stability.

Hypothesis 2: For dating, the split of Pragmatics and Romantics will be roughly equal across genders.

  • Hypothesis 2 PARTIALLY supported — and the results are interesting
  • First, we look at both genders taken together (pragmatic/romantic) = 29/18
  • Then males = 15/14 — roughly the same, which matches my prediction
  • BUT females = 14/4 — disproportionately slanted towards pragmatic dating

My interpretation is that women are more selective than men in the sense that they prefer to date with the intention of ultimately marrying their partner (in the long term).

Actually, that’s not surprising at all. Evolutionary theory does predict that women tend to be more selective in their partners, and I don’t think I need to give an example of it — you’ve probably seen it play out in your own life, or at least by listening to your friends’ stories. (But read this for an interesting caveat.)

Sexual Strategies Theory (SST) put forward by Buss and Schmitt (1993) [suggests that] mate choice […] is highly sensitive to the temporal context of short-term versus long-term partnerships. Based on different minimum parental investment of different sexes, men are predicted to prefer more sexual partners and variety, i.e. more short-term mates. This has been replicated by several studies (Kurzban & Weeden, 2005; Oliver & Hyde, 1993; Schmitt et al., 2001; Shackelford et al., 2004). Thus, short-term relationship seeking is believed to be much more common among men than women.

Mehmetoglu & Määttänen, 2020, in Evolutionary Psychology

However, note that not all evidence supports the SST’s premise:

According to a study by Li and Kenrick (2006), “the sexes are similarly selective for long-term relationships, whereas women are more selective regarding short-term relationships” (p. 483). The study also found a significant interaction-effect in which the sexes were more similar in their preferences for short- versus long-term mates: both sexes prioritized physical attractiveness for short-term mates whereas women were less selective for long-term mates’ appearance (Li & Kenrick, 2006).

ibid.

Furthermore, the results we’re seeing in our study could be explained based on our participant characteristics rather than the theories provided above. That’s when things get more complicated and thus fascinating. Some alternative explanations I thought of:

  • 1. Women in Singapore have no interest in short-term dating because it is not considered a possibility in the first place. The dating phase is merely a means to an end. Or, to put it differently, no distinction is made between dating and marriage. Marriage is merely the inevitable, natural outcome of dating. I know people who think like this — and if we generalise, many women think like this as opposed to men, though some men definitely think the same.

The above begs the question of what “dating” means to us in the first place. Is it a short-term relationship with a non-guaranteed possibility of becoming more? The definition of pragmatic dating and the overwhelming female preference for it suggest that women are essentially looking for absolute certainty: they want to be confident that this is the person they want to commit to before committing to them.

Honestly, that baffles me. How can you commit if you do not know what you are committing to? There must inherently be a trial period in the style of Schrödinger, no? And isn’t that… well, dating? It has the absurdity of going to Best Denki, looking at a TV that is not switched on, and deciding to buy it based on its specifications alone. It’s not wrong, but it’s a suboptimal strategy to me.

But it might be just me getting this all mixed up.

  • 2. It is possible that (most) women in Singapore are not interested in dating for love. This is related to the above but has a little nuance to it. When I discuss this matter with my friends, I sometimes get this response: “Why try if it’s not going to work out?”

Again, a totally legitimate (albeit rather avoidant) response. But here’s a poem that expresses my counterpoint better than I can:

Everyone forgets that Icarus also flew.
It’s the same when love comes to an end,
or the marriage fails and people say
they knew it was a mistake, that everybody
said it would never work. That she was
old enough to know better. But anything
worth doing is worth doing badly.
Like being there by that summer ocean
on the other side of the island while
love was fading out of her, the stars
burning so extravagantly those nights that
anyone could tell you they would never last.
Every morning she was asleep in my bed
like a visitation, the gentleness in her
like antelope standing in the dawn mist.
Each afternoon I watched her coming back
through the hot stony field after swimming,
the sea light behind her and the huge sky
on the other side of that. Listened to her
while we ate lunch. How can they say
the marriage failed? Like the people who
came back from Provence (when it was Provence)
and said it was pretty but the food was greasy.
I believe Icarus was not failing as he fell,
but just coming to the end of his triumph.

Jack Gilbert, Failing and Flying

Well, darlings, that’s all I have for now. Let me know if you agree or disagree; I’d love to hear it.

Once again, I hope you find the love you deserve. You deserve everything. I love you!

Confessions of an ex-NTUSU Exco

gwynethtytLeave a comment

I was part of the NTU Students’ Union 28th Executive Committee in AY2018/19 as the Corporate Communications Executive (Relations). I am here to share my story.

OK, now that I’ve got your attention, this post is not about any particular individual or even a set of people. It is about the NTU Students’ Union as an institution and mode of government.

I will not name anyone in this post because I know my peers would rather not be entangled in this matter, not to mention that they have moved on with their lives anyway. (Crucially, I am not interested in being SLAPPed with a lawsuit.) I’m only here because I’ve been in NTU for longer than most people I know – first as an undergraduate and now as a graduate student.

This post is a singular reflection of my experience with the Students’ Union: what I thought it was, what it really was then, what it is now, and what it could be.

Therefore, a confession of sorts, though I have nothing to be ashamed of, as you will see.

What the Students’ Union was to Me, Part 1: The Introduction

I was peripherally involved with Union activities in Year 1. I was a member-minion of the Open House Committee, and my task was to secure partnerships with external organisations. The Open House work was basic, but I enjoyed seeing the event coalesce via that invisible thread of camaraderie interlacing it. Through that opportunity, I met others, some of whom would eventually become my teammates in the 28th NTUSU Executive Committee (henceforth SU/Union and Exco).

When asked to consider running as an SU Exco member in Year 2, I was starry-eyed at the prospect. And why wouldn’t I be? It promised to be an avenue for me to create change as I envisioned it. And I had dreams: I wanted to revitalise the floundering Union magazine, U-Insight, and transform it into an avenue where students could express themselves. I wanted to improve the communication channels between SU and the student body, mainly so that student feedback, previously scattered across sources, could be consolidated into a single place to amplify its voice.

Here’s a part of my presentation script that I used in the 28th Council Election Rally (2018) in standing for the role of Relations Executive. If you’re wondering about its authenticity, note its dated nature – for example, the Nanyang Chronicle was quietly discontinued after 2019. Yes, I am old. Yes, I called it Nanyang Chron.

  • I will now elaborate on my aims and goals should I be elected to this role. First, I want to expand and distinguish U-Insight. It was moved online fully since last year and now has its own unique platform, rather than being integrated on the NTUSU website, but it’s still relatively rudimentary. Currently, it has 11 posts over 5 months, mostly focusing on events and new initiatives that NTUSU pushed out in the previous academic year. As you can see from the picture, it has a grand total of 2 tabs or sections. So what I want to do is expand what the editorial has to offer in a direction that distinguishes us from the other editorials/magazines in NTU, such as Hey! Magazine and Nanyang Chronicle. My vision for the magazine is a platform that represents the voice of the students – on top of sharing news about policies and events, we also make students feel like they have a part to play in the growth of this editorial. Currently, what I am looking at is including more sections in the editorial, and some that our student-members can contribute directly to. This may include opinion pieces, Q&As, interviews, and so on. I will work closely with my committee to achieve these goals. If possible, we may even look towards collaboration with other student-run editorials like Nanyang Chron.
  • Feedback is one of the most important things for me, and as such will be a priority. I understand that we currently have a feedback link that is attached to all the EDMs [electronic direct mailer, i.e. fancy way of saying emails] blasted by the SU. There is another link that is pasted on a few bus stop posters asking students to provide feedback, but that link does not work. What I want to do is clean up and simplify the feedback process by standardising it, as well as putting this link up on more platforms. To achieve this, my proposed committee includes the position of online engagement officer, whom I will work with to collect feedback across a variety of platforms and analyse it.

I had dreams, and I wanted to achieve them. The position of Relations Executive offered me just that; it gave me power – the ability to influence events in the direction of my will.

And who wouldn’t want that?

So off I went to the elections, full of hope and ambition.

What the Students’ Union was to Me, Part 2: The Election

Let me explain how the Union (Executive Committee) electoral process works. Again. Because I’ve done this before, but let me do it again.

The SU Executive Committee is not elected by the students. The Union Council is elected by the students. The Executive Committee is elected by the Council.

Some context is necessary.

Anyone who glances through the NTUSU website might think the Council is the Executive Committee. It is not.

The Council is composed of:

  • The Executive Committee
  • The Academic Constituent Clubs (a fancy way of saying “school clubs”) – e.g. School of Social Sciences Club, Biological Sciences Club. All students are part of the club whose name matches their school.
  • The Non-Academic Constituent Clubs (i.e. the Big Three Clubs that seem to pervade every aspect of CCA life) – WSC, Sports Club, CAC. All students are members of ALL NACCs (bet you didn’t know that! And that’s why you can vote in their elections, even if you don’t participate in their activities or volunteer).

The power distribution within the NTUSU Council has baffled me, though certainly, I had no interest in pursuing the matter given that the arrangement benefited my position. How I understood it during my time was (might be inaccurate):

  • The Council, as a totality, is concerned with all student members. They discuss things sporadically. The duration between successive meetings can span up to months.
  • ACCs and NACCs are more concerned with things happening within their student sections. They primarily run events for their own members.
  • Exco is concerned with all “26,000 undergraduate students of NTU” and counting. They implement the decisions of the Council, kind of. They organise events for and represent everyone. They are the closest point of contact to the NTU management.

(If you’re wondering about the postgraduate students, they’re covered by another group entirely irrelevant to this discussion – the Graduate Students’ Association [GSA]. There are also the non-constituent clubs, which are the smaller clubs catering to more specific interests.)

When I write about it that way, there seems to be an overlap between Council and Exco. Hmm. The Council makes some decisions, but the Exco makes others, though the Exco is responsible for most of the legwork. Another interesting factoid: the current Constitution says that the Council “has the power to” exercise control over the Executive Committee. I am not sure how it works in practice.

I digress. Back to the electoral process.

Again: The SU Executive Committee is not elected by the students. The Union Council is elected by the students. The Executive Committee is elected by the Council.

There are two “levels” of elections happening here.

  • The first election, at the NACC/ACC level. Students vote here for the Committee Members of their NACC/ACC Club. This is what you vote for on Union Day. The President of the ACCs at this level – and only the President, not other committee members – becomes a Council Member. For NACCs, two (President and VP/Hon Gen) become Council Members.
  • The second election, at the council level. Council members, empowered by students as representatives of their clubs, vote here to decide which specific council members become members of the Executive Committee.

In other words, students do not elect anyone in the Executive Committee. The Presidents of their Clubs do.

A more concrete example to illustrate – myself. Students elected me as the Union Representative of the School of Social Sciences, and I became a Council Member. (That, or at least a temporary member who could stand for elections in the Council. The definition of a Union Representative is wonky.) Then, I was voted in by the 28th Council Members to become a member of the Executive Committee. If by any chance the Union Rep is not elected due to lack of confidence or a contesting candidate winning, they are required to resign from the Council basically immediately. In case I get questions on this, yes, my role was uncontested. (But I’m sure you’d vote for me even if it was contested. :-))

I noticed a lot of fanfare on the ground over students being unable to directly elect the Exco. Note that this election process is neither unfair nor problematic per se. The Prime Minister of Singapore is chosen similarly. The Prime Minister is defined as the leader of the Parliament, and the leader is decided through a “consensus among peers” involved. The voting public has limited influence over the final decision of who is selected as the PM – though, of course, it can have its preferences, and its opinions are sought by the government. A Mothership video explains it better than me here (unfortunately).

By the way, I can’t find the past Students’ Union Council Rally meeting minutes. The election archives (which I had to google to find and which doesn’t seem directly accessible from the main NTUSU website) only have the results of the ACC/NACC-level elections. If anyone can find the past Council meeting minutes, please leave a comment below, thanks. It is 5:51 a.m., and I am not in the headspace to search for gold in the desert.

What the Students’ Union really was: The Exco and its Jurisdiction

I learned following my successful election that there were limits to my power. To give some perspective, I guess my role at that time is the equivalent of the current Public Relations Executive in AY2022/23. I had to report to my Vice-President, who was accountable for my actions; they had to report to the President, who was accountable for our actions. The President, in turn, was accountable to stakeholders with various interests.

I don’t want or need to elaborate on how the Union is aligned vis-à-vis the university management regarding decision-making. I am sure there are plenty of posts out there that can paint a picture for you. I will say that the Union is dedicated to protecting the peace of the status quo. This is hardly surprising; it would be surprising if it were anything else.

My role was mainly limited to communicator ex post facto rather than decision-maker, given the limits of my power. So I could consolidate feedback and I could attempt to persuade, but I had no say in the final decisions made.

One of my first projects was consolidating feedback via Union channels. As I promised in my rally, mind you! The hot topic that year was the issue of being unable to see the results of your S/Ued options, unlike NUS’s practice.

Ultimately, this was the end result we communicated to students. Relevant extract copied below.

Context: the bolded sentence is a question asked by a student we received via our newly released feedback channel. We gathered recurring themes and officially responded to them via our editorial website, U-Insight (responses in point form below the question).

Why can’t we see our results before choosing to S/U it? What has NTUSU done regarding this issue? – MECH/4

  • The University Management’s stance is that the S/U option is part of the broad level efforts undertaken by the University to nurture a holistic learning environment that puts less emphasis on grades and focuses more on learning and exploring courses beyond their core disciplinary studies. The University Management believes that the current S/U declaration period up to two working days after the last exam paper of the semester gives students sufficient time to weigh their choices of either opting for grade or S/U notation, rather than as a means to pull up their GPA […]
  • In AY14/15, after hearing from students, NTUSU successfully pushed for the S/U option to be available after exams, when it was previously available only before exams. NTUSU is constantly engaging both students and the management on this matter.

Note how the response is phrased. I leave the interpretation up to you, but I can tell you I oversaw its creation. By the way, the last sentence is true, even as it is broad. The point here is that students are given access to the outcomes of discussions involving the Students’ Union. As for the process, which is fundamental to participatory decision-making… that’s up to you to decide.

What the Students’ Union is, Now?

A few comments on the selection process based on my experience.

I was recruited due to my past experience as a member of a Union Committee before running for Executive. I believe this is a reasonable expectation to have for someone who is expected to represent the interests of students; aside from a desire to serve, it helps to have prior experience. But beyond demonstrating ability through your previous work, it is because you have made connections through your shared experiences.

“Connections” sounds like a dirty word, huh? But is it really? We know elected positions in the Council and across clubs, halls, and societies are almost always uncontested. It is the rule, not the exception. People ask why, but there really is no question. The simple answer is that succession planning occurs. Imagine you are a leader of some club or society. You would hope to leave it in good hands. You are now faced with a decision. Who do you pick to succeed you?

We can argue that the system is flawed if, and only if,

(1) Students are not given an equal opportunity to run for these positions, AND/OR

(2) Students who do apply are not evaluated fairly.

It is hard to argue (2) because most positions are uncontested. So, we focus on (1).

Now for the million-dollar question: did (1) happen with the transition of power from the previous Union Executive Committee to the current one?

I don’t know. Neither do I want to make any claim with absolute certainty.

What we can do is to look at the information we’ve been presented with, and you can decide for yourself.

What the Students’ Union Could Be?

Before evaluating what we have, consider this fascinating observation of mine.

The circle is closed, yes, but it is not impenetrable.

In the same Union Rally I attended to be elected, another position in the Exco was contested. Two people ran for it. One of them was unexpected. The unexpected one was dazzling in their purity, and I say that in the most respectful way possible. They had seen the club elections notice, and with pure hope, they had run for Union Rep, got elected by their students, and decided to run for the Exco with whatever they knew. Of course, the other candidate had done the same, but with a longer preparation runway. Only one of them was elected that night. Guess who won? You’d be surprised.

In the latest AY2023 Union Rally, the role of President was contested by the Union Rep of the Welfare Services Club. However, it seems that a technicality did not allow them to rally before the incumbent President was elected. Hmm… (It’s all reported on Soapbox – not my words!)

These two examples are few and far between. Still, they are sufficient to establish that theoretically nothing stops students from running for elections, whether as Union Rep at the club level or Exco members at the Council level. Theoretically. Please do not take this to mean that I am defending the current state of affairs.

The next question is: assuming students care enough to run (high bar in itself btw), do they know enough to run? If they do not know enough, can we argue that this results in unequal access?

Information Asymmetry, Example 1

Let’s backtrack into the election process again.

I knew I had to be elected into the SSS Club as Union Rep to become an Exco member later. I knew this because I was familiar with the election procedure. And I knew this because I knew someone who knew this. Of course.

I suspect that many students are not aware of this requirement.

The above does not mean that students are not allowed to run in club elections. In my case, the SSS Club elections in my time were open to all, and people were free to run for whatever positions they desired (- I think!). There was at least an email informing people that applications were open. There was an open “candidate evaluation process” which consisted of them pasting applicants’ entry forms onto big boards displayed in the foyer for passersby to gawk at. Was mine there too? I can’t remember – it’s been years. The devil may be in the details, but I don’t remember anything amiss.

But that’s missing the point.

Information Asymmetry, Example 2

Another thing I noticed is that the NTUSU Instagram page (managed by the Exco only, the Communications department in particular) does not list the names of the Union Representatives contesting for Exco positions. I chalked it up to lack of transparency initially, but on second thought, it makes sense in a pedantic way. The Union Reps have yet to officially hold any positions in the Council/Exco. So, there is technically no need to declare your interest in a specific Exco position until you get to the Council Rally, which is a closed-door event anyway. (This feels like the kind of argument phrasing that got the current SU PR department in hot soup.)

To be even more pedantic, one could argue that students have access to information regarding who their Union Reps are – you can find out via the results release of the elected positions via the ACC/NACC club documents. They’re just not widely publicised, so it takes a lot of effort to find out.

I repeat: information asymmetry.

Anyhoo, if we’re focusing on improvement, I would love to see more details of Union Reps interested in Exco positions being released by NTUSU moving forward. After all, if someone is going to represent my interest and that of 26,000 others, I feel like they deserve a certain level of public scrutiny and evaluation. Let me hear your pitch! Let me see your résumé!

To summarise, one thing is clear: there is a gap between the current communication of the SU’s election/decision-making procedures and students’ understanding of it.

The equation is simple: if students don’t know what to do or how to do it, they cannot do it.

I would say both the Union and the students share a responsibility on this matter – the former for conveying information, and the latter for seeking information. But suppose I am right in assuming that a severe information asymmetry is present at the moment. In that case, the onus is on the SU (led by the Exco) to resolve it. (This post is an attempt to rebalance this asymmetry, but I am old and retired!)

Conclusion: For Students, by a Student

Institutions – especially established ones – always tend towards inertia. There is little incentive to change what works if it has been working fine for the people who benefit most. But at some point, we will be knocked off our feet and then forced to recalibrate – who is this system benefiting? And if there is a discrepancy between what was promised and what is, how do we fix it? I can’t offer anything else more feasible, but I am genuinely encouraged to see that more students are challenging what we’re used to in hopes of something better. It may seem disingenuous for me to say this as someone who was part of “the establishment”, but after all… the goal of the Students’ Union was always to represent students’ interests, right?

If you’ve read this far – thanks, even if you skimmed everything. Here, I just want to share something personal. I didn’t know if I should post this or even start writing this. But acting almost on compulsion, I sat down at 2am in front of my laptop and started typing anyway. It is now 7:46am. I could not stop once I started. I guess I’ve wanted to say something for a long time, and after a long while, the time has finally come. Whatever it is, I hope students can continue to speak up on what matters to them.

P/S: If you think I’m doing this for attention – well, maybe. I could have posted this anonymously, but with the level of detail I went into, it was bound to be a matter of time before I was doxxed anyway. If there’s something in it for me (aside from more readers <3), I believe this post captures the transparency I wanted to achieve in my time in the NTUSU. Regardless, I hope there’s something that you can take away from this.

And those conclusions are for you to hold and act on, not me.

Final disclaimer: I tried my best to be accurate, but let me know if anything is false. I will revise my post, where reasonable, with credits to you. (Please don’t sue me.)

If you’re interested in something similar I wrote before, read this. It’s basically a precursor to this post.

Exclusive section for blog readers only, haha~

Just some additional sharing on a personal note. I was inspired to write this post by Lee Kuan Yew. Yes, you read that right. I was watching one of his speeches from the CNA Special “Lee Kuan Yew: In His Own Words” – specifically, his speech at the Swearing-in Ceremony on 13 September 1988.

In this speech, he delineates three criteria for evaluating political leaders. It struck a chord with me, which moved me to write this post. It’s cheesy but it’s true.

I am unsure if I can quote him here on this blog due to copyright concerns, so I will link the YouTube video with the timestamp instead for your leisure viewing (28:53-29:25). Watch with captions!

Alternatively, you can also find his full speech via this document publicly available for viewing (see page 2).

All about NTU Psychology

gwynethtyt2 Comments

Updated 20/7/22

Hello everyone and welcome to the world of Psychology! This post is written for poly/JC students considering a future with NTU Psychology. The sheer amount of online information can be daunting, so I have kept it to the essentials. I hope that it will be useful to you in making an informed decision.

All links open in new tabs.

Contents

[1] Curriculum: Overview, course structure, modules, lesson format
[2] Academic supplements: internships, research opportunities
[3] Work/future prospects: pay, career pathways
[4] Admission information: IGP for JC/poly
[5] Why NTU psychology: comparing NUS and NTU + some considerations 
[6] Scholarships available

For a future post: how to maximise chances of admission + student life

A bit about me for context

I graduated from the NTU Psychology programme in 2021 with Honours, Highest Distinction. I’m pursuing a Master’s degree in NTU now, researching social psychology. In addition, I’m the incumbent President of the Singapore Psychological Society (Youth Wing), which you should follow for more psychology opportunities! Oh and I also studied psych in poly.

In short, I literally have no identity besides “I do psych UwU”, but in exchange, I think about it ALL the time and that means I can deliver quality information to you, my dear reader.

How better than to start with some common misconceptions? Let’s see:

Common misconceptions

  • Psychology students can read minds or are more well-tuned to others’ emotions. Unfortunately, neither are true – though the second is a skill that can be developed with training based on psychological principles.
  • All psychologists deal with mental health. Not at all – clinical psychology is a popular discipline, yes, but it’s only one out of like, fifty (50) fields available. I’m serious.
    • Related misconception: psychology is a back-up plan for becoming a medical doctor (psychiatry). Let me put it out there now that there is virtually zero chance one can become a medical doctor with a psychology degree. The ONLY exception (available to the 1%) is if you go to graduate medical school.
    • You can become another type of doctor though (PsyD, PhD).
  • Psychology is easy because it’s commonsense knowledge. Yes, everyone has a natural tendency to try to understand other people, but here’s two things for your consideration: 1) you’re often wrong and 2) you don’t know that you’re often wrong. Psychology is also not easy because: STATISTICS IS COMPULSORY!!!
  • A degree in psychology means you are a psychologist upon graduation. Nope, you’ll need to pursue further studies – usually a Master’s degree.

These are not to scare you, merely to illustrate the realities of what it’s like to study psychology in Singapore. If you are willing to accept the above, it marks a great start for your journey ahead!  

Essential information

The full name of the NTU Psych degree as of 2022 is a BSocSci(Hons) in Psychology – short for Bachelor of Social Sciences. It used to be the Bachelor of Arts, and I believe the nomenclature change marks a transition to recognising it as more of a “science”. Some folks make a distinction between BA, BSc, and BSocSci, but imo it doesn’t matter.

What’s important is this – all students that enroll in NTU Psych are guaranteed an Honours degree. That means all students do a 4-year programme, since a conventional undergrad degree is typically 3 years. In comparison, an Honours is optional for NUS FASS.

To fulfill the honours requirements in Year 4, you will write a 10,000-word research paper (aka the fearsome Final Year Project) or take 2 additional higher-level modules in its place.

[1] Curriculum – click here for the full curriculum document.

Students take three types of modules in NTU:

  1. Specific stuff related to your degree (Major Requirements)
  2. General knowledge you need for the world (Interdisciplinary Collaborative Cores)
  3. The “have fun and S/U it” (Broadening and Deepening Electives)

For simplicity’s sake, we’ll only look at the first. Suffice it to say that the interdisciplinary cores will provide a good foundation. You will learn both skills (e.g. writing, critical thinking) and an appreciation of big trends in the world today (e.g. sustainability, big data). As for the broadening and deepening electives (every time I see this phrase I wanna laugh lol), use them as an opportunity to explore without fear of jeopardising your GPA. 

The modules that you take for psychology are split into two main types – the major-cores and major-electives. You will be clearing the 9 major-cores in the first two years, which are compulsory modules that the entire cohort has to take. These serve the function of exposing you to the diverse fields within psychology – e.g. social, biological, cognitive psychology – which can be poles apart in the methods and theories that they use. They’re all introductory-level modules, so don’t worry if you don’t have a H2 from JC.  

You will also be introduced to statistics from your very first semester. Even though students are only required to take two statistics modules (there are more, but they’re optional), you’ll realise that the subject matter bleeds into everything else. For example, to evaluate a journal article, you need to know what the numbers mean. Some students erroneously believe “oh since my future career goal is to become a therapist [for example], it’s not that important”. But without the numbers, we’re not a science at all. Either way, no matter how much mental gymnastics or procrastination you put yourself through, it will find its way back to you. So, you might as well tackle it head-on and set aside a lot of time to practice.

Most of the major-cores are lecture and exam-based. Lectures are usually 3 hours in a large lecture theatre or possibly online with COVID. Alternatively, it will be 2-hour lectures and 1-hour tutorials with more room for discussion. There is a heavy focus on content absorption and regurgitation. You will be expected to read a lot, from textbooks to journal articles. Some assignments will require you to write essays, where you will have to synthesise and evaluate the literature. There may also be presentations and posters to deliver. Nonetheless, the weightage of your grade is primarily determined by exams. Most of the exams are a combination of MCQs and short-answer questions.

Moving on to the major-electives. NTU Psychology offers over 50 (!) electives, though not all are available every semester. You won’t be taking all of them, of course. That’s why they’re called electives – because you get to choose. You won’t be taking them until earliest Y2S2, though it never hurts to plan ahead. 

Here are some examples of electives I’ve taken:

  • HP3002 Positive Psychology
  • HP3402 Social Cognition (fun fact: I’m the tutorial assistant for this now)
  • HP3708 Biopsychosocial Criminology
  • HP4104 Evidence-based Practice in Clinical Psychology

You might note a few things from the above. First, the topics are rather niche. You can think of them as “offshoots” of the core modules. They are also more integrative, e.g. social cognition blends social and cognitive psychology. Second, there are level 3000 and 4000 modules. Level 4000 modules are the most specialised, with a focus on the state of the art and application. Classes are smaller, with less lecturing and more student discussion. At this level, we move away from exams towards applying the knowledge to create new ideas and products. These are the modules that will stretch you the most. The instructors of those modules range from experts to superstars, who often have fanbases (LOL).

Single majors can expect to have a workload of about 15-18 AUs per semester, which is about 5-6 modules including the miscellaneous ones. This means you will be taking about 3-4 psych modules every semester. Double majors do a bit more, and 2nd majors are stressed a bit more because they have fewer modules they can S/U. Each module may further split into a number of quizzes, ranging anywhere from 2 to 5 (bless these students). The lesson is clear: consistent work is the only way to survive and thrive.

A brief note regarding the Final Year Project (FYP) that students will take in Year 4. I quote from the website:

The objective of the Graduation Project/FYP is to expose students to the elements that are inherent in independent research work in psychology. With the guidance of an advisor, the student will learn to identify a research issue in an area of psychology, conduct empirical, meta-analytical (use of secondary data), or library research, and write up a research report of about 9,000 to 10,000 words. 

“Empirical” just means “run your own study”, meta-analytical just means “take a bunch of existing studies and run analyses on them”, and library research means “literature review”. All worthwhile and fun. FYP is compulsory for GPAs >=3.9/5, optional for 3.75-3.89, and disallowed for those below 3.75. The third group will take two 4000-level modules in its place. You’ll graduate with an Honours regardless of whether you do your FYP, though it’s required for the award of Distinction and above.

You don’t have to worry about the FYP because it’s so far away. But if you need to ease your kiasuism, what you can do is to take your first semesters to find out more about the professors. Learn about their personalities, their work, their interests, and decide if you’re aligned with those aspects. If you have an idea of who/what you like early on, you can also volunteer as a research assistant at their labs to get a headstart. More on that below.

At some point, every student probably goes through the phase of “this was not what I was expecting”. If you want a clearer idea of what to expect, check out my guide to NTU Psych modules, where I cover the content, assessments, and personal tips for all modules I took.

[2] Academic Supplements

Research opportunities are useful if you are gearing for a career that is research-oriented. Internships offer an avenue to demonstrate your aptitude and interest in a field of work.

Research Opportunities

Research Assistantships (RAs): a university has two functions – to educate and to churn out research. Professors are conducting new research studies all the time, and many have “labs” – workgroups of students running projects spearheaded by the professor (known as the Principal Investigator). Students can volunteer (i.e. unpaid labour) to join labs to assist with these projects and learn about the research process. Early on, you’ll be assigned more menial tasks like coding responses, running studies and data cleaning, but as you gain more experience, you’ll ideally be empowered to contribute more. You might even land a co-author spot eventually!

The demand for manpower is ever-present, but so is the supply. Thus, you’ll have to be proactive in seeking out your professors and be able to articulate clearly why you have chosen their lab over others. The good news is you don’t have to limit yourself to the professors that have taught you – you could even go beyond the department if you wanted.

URECA: An acronym for “Undergraduate Research Experience on CAmpus”, this is an optional programme that allows students to conduct their own research project with a supervisor of their choice. It is available from Year 2 onwards for all students with a GPA of over 4.0. It’s 4AUs, which is the equivalent of a 4000-level module. In other words, it’s like a mini-FYP. The good news is that it’s pass/fail, allowing a rare opportunity for students to freely pursue their interests without having to worry about their GPAs. How your experience will play out is heavily dependent on your supervisor’s workstyle and preferences (this is a rule you should remember as you go along), but in general, all students are expected to submit a 5,000-word research paper as the final deliverable. They will also be credited as the first author alongside their supervisor. You probably will not end up with a ground-breaking discovery, but it’s an excellent foray into the world of research.

For more information, I wrote a review of my URECA experience here.

Internships

I only took one internship in poly – right before I graduated. Since I knew I wanted to pursue further studies early on, I wasn’t too worried about whether I had an internship or not. The pressure to obtain an internship under one’s belt can be daunting, though. In my conversations with friends, the stresses of applying for internships was a frequent topic.

There is no restriction on where and what kind of internships you can apply for. Additionally, the School of Social Sciences (of which the Psych department is under) offers the Professional Attachment Programme (HPAP) that students at the end of Year 3 can take. Students will receive 5AUs (pass/fail) in exchange upon completing 10 weeks of internship. The organisation in which you intern at must be approved by the Career and Attachment Office (CAO), though.

Juniors often ask me where to find internships. Honestly, I’m not very sure in light of my limited experience in this area. Three avenues I can suggest:

  • Ask your professors
  • Use platforms such as LinkedIn
  • Do your own research

Just because a job is not listed doesn’t mean it’s not there. One of my friends shared that she had landed an internship by proactively reaching out to companies that interested her even when they did not indicate that they were hiring talent. I was so impressed. I just applied for mine because I saw that they were recruiting via school email.

At the end of the day, before jumping into any research opportunities or internships, start by asking yourself: what value am I looking for out of this, and is it what I really need? Or am I merely doing it for the sake of having something on my résumé? Don’t just do it because you’re FOMO. Remember that every choice you make entails an opportunity cost. 

[3] Work/future prospects – ah yes the million-dollar question

Pay: An average fresh grad from NTU Psych can expect to earn in the range of $3000-3500.

Sectors (that I’ve seen my friends enter): civil service, private sector (HR, banks), research, marketing, clinics

  • To reiterate: to become a full-fledged psychologist, you need a postgraduate degree. It is not a negotiable, and takes years of investment and commitment. 

Key skills gained: critical thinking, writing, translating research, data analysis, interpersonal skills, possibly advocacy (HAHAHA)

[4] Admission Information

Indicative Grade Profile AY21/22 for Psychology

A levels

  • 10th percentile: AAC/B
  • 90th percentile: AAA/A

Polytechnic

  • 10th percentile: 3.72
  • 90th percentile: 3.92

[5] Scholarships

There are many scholarships for freshmen that NTU offers.

I might do another post on how to improve your chances at getting a scholarship/maximise your chances of getting into the programme based on my experiences of receiving the Nanyang Scholarship and NTU Research Scholarship, so feel free to give a like, leave a comment under this post, or even support me if you want to make it happen!

[6] Why NTU Psychology?

I cover various reasons why in my post comparing NTU and NUS Psychology, written with the input of my friends in the two programmes. That being said, I recognise that there are other universities in Singapore offering psychology, and they too are valid choices.

Some major concerns might be:

  • The major declaration system: NUS FASS allows you to change your major to something else, NTU doesn’t; you’re in for psych all the way
  • The module balloting system: NTU is fastest fingers, NUS is bidding
  • The S/U system: NUS allows seeing your grades before S/U, and NTU students have been up in arms for years about this, but it didn’t matter much to me
  • The location and living arrangements: NTU has first 2 years guaranteed hall, and I think NUS doesn’t have this

Student life

I originally wanted to include my experiences with hall living, overseas exchange, and student clubs in this post but in the interest of time I think I’ll save it for another post. Again, let me know if you’re interested by liking, commenting, or just reaching out!

Feel free to AMA by leaving a comment here or on the Reddit post I’ll probably be linking this to.

Final credits

This post and its format was inspired by the following “All about [Course]” series of posts which I am grateful for: law, nursing.

Resources and relevant posts

If you want to show some love, you can buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/gwynethtyt. You don’t have to, but it’d make my day.

Follow for more psych opps: Singapore Psychological Society (Youth Wing) | NTU Psychology Society

More on NTU life: Guide to STAR Wars and other FAQs