The Tao of Dating: 5 Principles to Overcome Any Challenge in Your Love Life

I get many letters like this from readers (both male and female):

"I met this guy, and he took me to dinner, and it was really romantic, but he did/didn't try to kiss me, then he called/didn't call back, then he asked/didn't ask me out again, and what does it all mean is he interested what should I do help help help."

Now, many of you think I have magical powers. And it's absolutely true. For example, I can make whole plates of pasta vanish in seconds and order beer in 12 languages.

However, reading the minds of your dates whom I have never seen nor met is not one of those powers. I missed that boat of psychic ability.

Additionally, trying to parse each individual situation for an ultimate answer doesn't work so well, because there are millions of situations and often no ultimate answer.

However, just a few reliable principles can solve a whole bunch of problems. I've found the following five principles pretty handy. They form the backbone of the Tao of Dating book for women and men, and here they are:

1. Abundance, or wealth-consciousness.

Anaїs Nin once said, "We do not see the world as it is; we see the world as we are." Thus you have the choice to see the world with a lens of wealth-consciousness or poverty-consciousness. Do you see scarcity, lack and limitation around you, or wealth, possibility and abundance?

The mindset you choose bears directly upon the success of your love life (and your success in general). Scarcity-consciousness - e.g. "all the good ones are taken" - begets neediness, and neediness is not attractive.

Big-heartedness and self-sufficiency, on the other hand, work much better. Even the Bible has something to say about that: "For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken away even that which he hath."

Seems kind of mean, but it's just the way of the world: wealth begets wealth. So even if you don't have a companion, act as if there is an unlimited supply of what you want available to you already.

And you know what? There is. Because even if only one thousandth of one percent of the 6.5 billion people in this world are cool enough to be eligible for your companionship, that's, oh, 65,000 folks. That's enough dates to tide you over for a whole month.

2. Enlightened self-interest.

This one has three words in it. 'Enlightened' means that you make decisions by considering the long-term consequences of your actions. Short-sighted decisions - e.g. "I know he's a bad boy, but it'll be so much fun" - usually end in tears and/or heartbreak.

'Self' means that your welfare takes priority, just like in the pre-flight announcement where they say put on your own oxygen mask first, then help others in the case of an emergency. To be able to take care of anyone else, you need to take care of you first. Simple, totally non-negotiable, and often neglected.

'Interest' means that you're signing up for your fulfillment and joy, not your pain. If a relationship is making you miserable and unhappy - like that of my friend Holly who was being put down and punched up by the man she was supporting financially - consider ending it. Because fulfillment is a feeling, not a person. So if you're not getting fulfilling feelings in a relationship, chances are you're with the wrong person.

3. The Be-Do-Have paradigm (vs. Have-Do-Be).

Many people think like this: "If I have a great partner, then I can do the things that people with partners do, and then I can be happy." That's actually the tail wagging the dog. The proper sequence is: "If I am a happy, self-sufficient, generous and charming person, then I will have a great life and do things that feel good and make me attractive, and then, as a pleasant side-effect, will have fabulous companions who are naturally attracted to my life."

Successful change begins at the level of identity and belief, so first, be the kind of person you want to be. From the right beliefs will flow the right actions, or te (the middle word from Tao Te Ching) naturally and effortlessly, from which will come right results.

4. Yin-Yang (Feminine-Masculine) Polarity

The Taoists say that two poles are necessary for energy to flow: the receptive or feminine yin and the projecting or masculine yang. We see this in nature: water runs from high to low; electricity flows between cathode and anode; magnetic force goes between north and south poles.

This is especially true of human relations. Without polarity, relationships fall flat, whether in heterosexual or same-sex couples: someone has to wear the pants.

As a man, if you take on too much yin, you risk turning into an indecisive wimp, which is not necessarily appealing to women. Having an open heart is great; just remember to keep your spine also.

As a woman, if you take on too much yang, you risk turning into a facsimile of a guy, which may be admirable but not necessarily attractive. Strength is great, but remember that femininity is what draws in the masculine.

5. Get out of your own way.

Recently a very intelligent woman wrote to tell me she couldn't date guys who were less smart than her, because they bored her. And when she finally found a guy who was smarter than her, she found herself competing with him and putting him down out of insecurity, thereby driving him away. Basically, she could not win.

So much pain in dating is self-inflicted and has to do with upholding our own importance or appeasing the ego.

Therefore I will state here without proof that there is no greater waste of your energy than upholding your own importance. Get used to the idea that it just doesn't matter.

The Buddhists have this nifty concept called anatta, or no-self. It basically means that nothing in the universe has a fixed identity - especially you. If you're breathing and have a heartbeat and just read this phrase, billions of things changed in your mind and body right now. So you're fundamentally not the same you were five seconds ago, let alone five years ago. So quit trying to defend something that essentially isn't there.

Whether or not you fully buy into this concept, it's a handy notion: with no ego to be rejected, insulted or hurt, you're much more likely to have an open heart and take risks in love. You're also more likely to be kind, compassionate, and fun to be around.

When you practice anatta, all the energy that was used for judgment, competition and defensiveness can now be used for a better purpose: practicing the loving.

Waiting for the world to arrange its circumstances perfectly to allow you to start loving, to paraphrase Ramana Maharshi, is like wanting to cover the world in leather so you can walk barefoot. It is much simpler to wear shoes. The time to love is always now.

So if your best thinking got you here, perhaps it's time to start something new: practice abundance; take the long view; be the change you want to see; and open into even greater loving.

Join me in Los Angeles for a reading of The Tao of Dating for Women: The Smart Woman's Guide to Being Absolutely Irresistible on Wed 15 July at 7pm at Book Soup.
Visit my blog: www.TaoOfDating.com
Join me on Facebook
email: dralex(at)thetaoofdating.com

Follow Dr. Alex Benzer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dralexbenzer

Comments

[dragpagyaltsen]

Nantucketsunset,

You speak as if intelligence was a one dimensional, monolithic, and unitary, attribute. It is not. There are myriad intelligences, rather than one, in a human being.

Yes, one person in a relationship may have a greater analytic capacity than the other; yet, the other partner may have a much higher intuitive capacity; etc. These are intelligences rather than a single, unitary, intelligence. I would submit that it is MUCH more important for a balance of complementary intelligences to be present between both partners in a relationship.

Check out Ken Wilber and David Deida's work...

[nantucketsunset]

OF COURSE there are multiple intelligences. There are multiple human qualities and talents that are beautiful and equally-valid and deserving of respect, love, nurturing, encouragement, admiration. You don't need to direct me to read some books so that I can learn this.

When using the word "smart", generally people are talking about a certain kind of intelligence. The *article* used the word "smart". That's what I was talking about. About women who are smart, who have a certain kind of mental, analytical intelligence. What our culture regards as the definition of "smart", that's what I meant. You are criticizing me for no reason.

I'm afraid that most women who are very smart can't be completely satisfied in a close, companionate, romantic relationship with a man who is not smart, regardless of his emotional intelligence, his ability to craft with his hands, his good looks, his wealth, etc. I'm not saying those men can't be loved, admired, lusted after, etc., but to spend the next 30 years with them in a harmony of thought and life decisions? No. Besides, most men who are of average smartness are repelled by women who are very smart, at least when it comes to a long-term committed relationship. Though maybe you can find an example of such a relationship in your books.

[DrJulienArbor]

Your description of the manner in which relationships "should" be conducted appears to be more Confucian... if anything.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLwjmeAqqw8

[DrJulienArbor]

Your title may sell books, but it has nothing to do with Taoism (more correctly spelled Daoism). You're presentation of yin and yang as a relationship of duality is far too simplistic and fails to represent the circle or whole in which yin and yang are contained within the taijitu. Yin and yang are interdependent and complementary rather than being polarized as you are suggesting. Taoism has its roots in what is commonly referred to in the West as shamanism and arose in a matrilineal society.

It would be more appropriate to say that without harmony "a relationship goes flat".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt75vonma94

Te (De) also means virtue... and you can look up Ursa Major and Dipper Mother for yourself.

[banh]

It seems that female ego will not absorb what this guy is saying. The masculine nature of modern American women and the feminine nature of modern American men put us in a "tail spin". We've reversed roles, and we are looking at the same chasm. I don't think Puff Post is the right venue for your insights Dr. Benzer. I agree with your article- great piece! If I had access to a printer right now, I'd have a copy for my briefcase. You are speaking of evolution in love, transcendence from the brainstem love styles we so commonly engage in, and simple awareness of who we are, what we are doing. American women have developed especially big heads. In the social websites like Match.com, etc, the female ego is extremely overpowering. In one profile you might read self descriptions that conjure up cartoon characters of Jekyll and Hyde, Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Ghandi, and Cinderella...ALL in the same "sweet" girl who just wants a good man. This is where your article nails it. If a woman "leads" with a mentality of disappointment, distrust, suspicion, and hawkish scrutiny of men combined with a big head about her superiority over others, be it real or imagined, what will she find? Please, ladies out there, you can't wear the pants and be treated like Cinderella at the same time. Nice dream, but not reality. Listen to this very smart man.

[nantucketsunset]

The author does NOT have a good understanding about "issue 5", if he thinks that a smart woman is just being snobby or superficial when she doesn't want to be in a serious relationship with a man of average intelligence. It's more fundamental -- for intelligent women, sharing mutually-rewarding conversation and compatible mental speeds is crucial in a serious relationship. They can't be contented with eye candy, wealth without substance, or a good cook who doesn't have much going on upstairs, in the same way as many men can.

Even if smart women try to compromise with average fellas, by concealing their insights, quick conclusions, work honors, etc., it doesn't work, because ordinary men become resentful when dating smart women. They feel less capable than she, that she can survive without them, that she is stifling herself to not stand out too much, that she'll have more career and financial success than they will. They feel that a man should be more capable, stronger, smarter than his mate, so they go looking for an ordinary woman they can outshine.

Even the smartest men seek out mates who are less intelligent than they are. Therefore, women of average and below-average intelligence win out, in terms of being in committed relationships with men. That leaves women in the top 5% band in terms of intelligence with nowhere to turn for male companionship. Don't blame highly-intelligent women for acknowledging the reality of their situation and being true to themselves.

[HarrietteTheSpy]

I disagree about smart women having no companionship. The great guys I have dated --and the ones I know -- all love my intelligence and women's intelligence in general... in fact they like being with a smart woman, even if it means smarter than they are. (those guys you speak of are not the only ones out there!).

You know, this whole article is so... grounded in the autobiography (and thus predilections borne of one's specific upbringing and needs met or not) of the author.

peace and love, hts

[nantucketsunset]

Harriette, you've had a wonderful experience with men, and I bet you live in a large coastal city. I am from a dilapadated town in the US rustbelt-B­ible-belt-­cornbelt. The men I grew up with are not the men you are describing.

Granted, what I've learned about men has been skewed by having lived many years of my adult life in Europe, including 11 years in the UK.

In the UK, women are MUCH further behind than in the US. I think of people my age, less than 5% of British women have an undergraduate university degree.

And probably less than 10% of men my age there do.

So for me to get a master's, and begin a PhD - well, when men who were interested in me learned that, it was as if I had bubonic plague.

A few years ago, the only female CEO of any FTSE 100 company (a list of the largest UK companies) was an American, which came as a shock to no one that an American would be the one woman in a hundred.

I knew a lot of men; I worked and interacted with some of the smartest, most sophisticated men around. They might like and respect smart women, but they don't want to marry them - it's too much of a "threat" to their dominance.

Though I'm sure that some Europeans are more conservative on that issue than some Americans.

[Chip W]

Not to dispute your points, but you misread what the author said.
Anaїs Nin once said, "We do not see the world as it is; we see the world as we are."

[nantucketsunset]

I don't think that I misread what the author said. Maybe you did!

Why not dispute my points, so we can know what you think you and the author are right about, and I'm not.

[gulopartisan]

Just one comment about this extended commercial:
The airline instructions do not enjoin all to take care of "self" first. They explicitly say that if you are traveling with someone who might need assistance with the mask, then you should (implicitly, suppress the natural instinct to put THEIR interest ahead of yours and) put on your mask first (so that you will be able to assist them without hinderance). Anybody who can twist that into "enlightened self-interest" doesn't have any relationship advice I want.

[William Salmon]

listen.... you should always put your own mask on first any way... i think you are splitting hairs when it comes to this analogy.... its just a very basic form of desription and you are looking too deep.

[ohiodem250]

As usual, these articles make me more discouraged. It's a vicious cycle: I read these types of articles because I don't get dates, then the article makes me think I'm not what I'm supposed to be so I get dejected, which puts me in less of a mood to try and meet people.

[Egghead]

Aw. I know exactly what you mean. I rarely read relationship advice columns anymore. They pretty much say the same thing over and over in slightly different words. And they're founded on the premise that you HAVE to have a date to be happy. Even the ones who say "be happy in your own skin!" always follow it up with ". . . . and you will get more dates!"

Anyhoo, I think if you're over the age of 25, you probably already know what to do: be the person you want to be, be pleasant to everybody, don't dish out or tolerate abuse. And reading relationship articles makes you feel bad, don't read 'em; seriously. Do something you enjoy that doesn't make you feel bad.

. . . And you will get more dates!

Kidding. But seriously, you'll feel better, and if you're actually buying books or magazines that contain said advice, you will save oodles of money and time.

[nantucketsunset]

Hon, don't read these types of articles, then.

No one has THE answer, really, especially pop psychology writers, who usually have great intentions and sometimes good insights, but who might skim the surface sometimes or skew the importance of certain things or view things a little oddly because it's through their own particular lenses.

You ARE what you are supposed to be, right here, right now, and you deserve to have a good relationship.

That doesn't mean people shouldn't try to improve themselves, but don't assume that you are not good enough just because of what some stranger writes in a blog-type of setting.

None of us are liked by everyone we meet, and there are probably only a handful of folks out there in each city or geographical region who would be great mates for us. The trick is to meet as many people as you can, while being genuine, relaxed, calm, and interested in them, so you can sift through the haystack to find your needle. :-) Be out there in the world, and interact with all sorts of folks.

Take heart, there are many good, deserving people who don't have a relationship now, and there are many people who are pretending to be in a good relationship while actually feeling miserable. At least we don't have that to worry about!

[RRonin]

Here's MY advice, take it for what it's worth:

1. Look for people who are comfortable in their own skin. They are not hard to spot, they aren't slaves to fashion, and they are happier than most folks.

2. Look for people who have a postitive relationship with a parent (or parental figure, step-mom, etc) of the opposite sex.

3. Look for someone who isn't afraid to be the butt of a joke, or laugh at themselves. EVERYBODY has a GREAT sense of humor when they're trying to impress you, but someone who TRULY has a great sense of humor can laugh at themselves, and often.


4. Look for people who seldom get angry or upset. People who are even tempered are people you want to spend time with.

5. Look for people who delight in little things. Many people are only happy when they're on a dream vacation or some extravagant, once in a lifetime experience. Avoid people with "bucket lists". LIFE it's own self is the once in a lifetime experience.

[tchoupitoulav]

RRonin-Maybe you should write an ariticle. Your points are valid and well taken. I needed to read these today you just don't know. I'm going to become a fan.

[Conk]

Well said. Totally agree.

[hellameangirl]

Good points, especially #3. I knew something was off w/ my ex, when we were at a party and everyone had a good-natured laugh at a gaffe he made. The whole car ride home was miserable, he really just couldn't take it, and we didn't last.

[nantucketsunset]

Before dinging someone because he/she doesn't have a close relationship with the parent of the opposite sex, take a look at that parent and see if they deserve a close relationship.

This is a superficial way of rating and tossing potential mates, and I've seen it happen a lot.

The person who does not have a close relationship with one or both parents, who had a nightmare parent but who is nothing like that themselves, who coped as well as possible with their upbringing, who is stable and strong today, who learned a lot from the family situation, is probably a better bet than the person who lives in a fantasy world and pretends that all is well with a cruel, unstable, mean parent just because that's what "society" feels that family life should be like.

[melodramy]

I have dated people from both scenarios and you are 100% correct.

[MJinCanada]

I like your #5. The first time I saw my husband, we were both participating in a local Shakespeare production. While waiting for everyone to arrive for rehearsal, he was standing on one leg playing a flute (like Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull). Just goofing around but I was fascinated by the novelty. I, on the other hand, was knitting baby booties for a pregnant friend and it struck him that he was ready to look for someone to settle down with.

So, in short, there we were, each doing our own thing, and hey! That was 23 years ago.

[Susan60]

I really can't date a stupid man. However, I have rarely found men as smart as me, (don't care what you all think) so what I've done is try to find men who are as smart as me in their fields of expertise. My husband is a pop culture savant. He's also great as his job, knows a lot about music and likes to read books. Can I beat him at trivial pursuit? Most times, but he's wicked on the pop culture categories.

[Mogamboguru]

It's good that you are married already.

Because I wouldn't want to date you for sure.

[nantucketsunset]

I don't know Susan60, but I'm guessing that your disinterest would probably be mutual.

This lady was simply explaining how she compromised in order to have a marriage, and where her partner does excel, which she respects him for.

[jumperpin]

Rigorous training and discipline seem so much easier.

[Bunny Themelis]

I love the Tao, but I did not like the way you described point 4. You said that a man taking on too much yin could turn into "a wimp" (a negative), while a woman taking on too much yang is "admirable" just not as attractive. I dislike that the feminine is described this way, which is more closely aligned with Western gender-roles than it is with Taoist concepts of masculine and feminine energies.
This, I think, strays from the true spirit of the Tao Te Ching, which describes the Tao as the mother of all things. In fact traditionally "feminine" qualities are favored over traditionally masculine ones all over the Tao Te Ching. Flexibility is deemed superior to rigidity, fluidity is better than a fixed state, doing nothing is favored over endless action. But you get little sense of this in your writing here. In fact I think the very idea of a man having to have "a spine" (which is in direct opposition to his open heart!) is pretty ego-based. And I doubt American men, for the most part, really need to focus on being MORE masculine. I find the strongest men have a sophisticated expression of the feminine within them, that their open heart is actually the root of their strength.
Sorry, from this short article it seems you are peddling the same ol' dating advice through a very superficial lens of Taoism.

[shiggityx2]

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who was confused by point #4. Taking on too much yin as a man would somehow make me an indecisive wimp, and yet in a woman this same yin force would make her more attractive? There are so many layers to our sexuality and although there is obviously a biological component to some traits, an overly literal interpretation of the Male/Female aspect of the Tao seems to be a Western mode of thinking. Most of the rest seems to me like sound advice and confirms a portion of the limited wisdom I have gained in my life.

[Judyisacutie]

Yes, a man with an open heart is very attractive. Enjoyed the Tao conversation here.

[HarrietteTheSpy]

I like you--great comment.

[saltpeter]

Discussing yin/yang is not to describe the separate polarity that Alex is speaking of (that's more in keeping with the Christian Heaven and Hell paradigm that has caused too much distress for individuals for too many centuries). When I think of yin/yang, I think of those polarities being part of one whole. That to me suggests that both men and women individually should learn to embrace both the masculine and the feminine within which in turn makes them a more complete person who can project a wholeness to others. Jung discusses this as the Anima/Animus and he borrowed many of his ideas from Eastern ideas. The damaging idea of male and female personas remaining separate and distinct leads to the warped false romantic notion that one should find one's "other half". This suggests that a male persona is useless without a female persona and vice versa. There is no one out there is who is your "other half". No one other person "completes" you. There are only those who help you complete yourself. That is what yin/yang is about, finding inner balance by surrounding ourselves with those who support that journey and ridding ourselves of those who do not.

[Conk]

Wow, a list that actually does offer up something of substance. Well done. We can apply these ideas to other aspects of our lives, not just romance. If only 10% more people understood or were enlightened, the world would be a profoundly different place. Bravo Doctor!

[jcham]

Susan Sontag said it much better: "What is most beautiful in virile men is something feminine; what is most beautiful in feminine women is something masculine." My husband and I enjoy the "dance," the effortless mix that enables both of us to express all of ourselves.

I, too, reject your aside of using Hillary Clinton as your example of a woman becoming a "facsimile" of a man. She is the perfect example of a strong woman, of whom there are many in my family. Only a weak man would feel threatened by that.

The smart professional women I know would not be fulfilled in a relationship where they ALWAYS played the role of the submissive partner. None of us wants to be pigeon-holed into always playing the same role.

Otherwise, I enjoyed your ideas.

[Dr. Alex Benzer - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for the comment.

May I bring your attention that Sontag talks about *virile* men and *feminine* women who've already got the the masculinity and femininity part taken care of. From there, the taijitu (or yin-yang) symbol has a dot of the opposite color in each of the fields, which is indeed what amplifies the appeal.

Polarity is indeed a dance. And, as in the dance, both partners have more fun when one person is clearly the lead and the other follows. You can decide who takes on what role in the various spheres of your life.

[HarrietteTheSpy]

don't forget all the folks playing in the vast in-between...

[joycemorrison]

thanks for this post -- i needed to read this. those are things that i actually know, but just keep *forgetting*. i dugg the article so i'd be able to get back to it every now and then.

>"So if you're not getting fulfilling feelings in a relationship, chances are you're with the wrong person."

perhaps you have a suggestion on what's an effective way to let go?

[shoabear]

You had me until #4. Actually, you had me until midway through #4.

*someone* has to wear the pants?

Really? Is it that simple?

As a man, if you take on too much yin you risk turning into an indecisive wimp?

And then- as a woman, if you take on too much yang you risk being unattractive? A facsimile of a guy? And then you go on to use Hillary as an example? WOW.

I am surprised at the polarization and ignorance in these statements. As men and women we hold both masculine and feminine energies, yes. But you are conflating these energies with socially defined roles. It is up to each individual how they wish to express these energies. It is also up to each couple how they wish to hold these energies in their relationship. Your expression of there being "risks" for being too heavily yin or yang is falling too close to a binary mindset that perpetuates dangerous stereotypes.

[Dr. Alex Benzer - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for the comment. I only get so many words per article, so certain topics have to be summarized.

The feminine attracts the masculine and vice versa -- that's the way it's always been and the way it will always be. To a certain extent, you can express the kind of energy you want, and it can be context-dependent, but there is the biological fact that most straight men are predominantly yang and women are yin. I recommend that my readers play to their dominant energy and flow *with* the Tao, not against it. Pigeons *can* walk, but they're much better off flying.

As for the 'risks' -- if someone digs wimpy guys who always say "what do *you* want honey", then that's her prerogative, but it's rare. Most smart professional women I communicate with seem to find it unappealing.

[HarrietteTheSpy]

you are oversimplifying... yin does not equate with wimpy. and, on a separate level, submissive does not equate with wimpy. (being submissive can actual carry energy of power.)

and any time i read "biological fact" I want to run...