An opinionated guide to making friends
blog.aadilali.com
blog.aadilali.com
How to make friends, the real version: 1. You're only going to have a handful of true friends 2. Everybody else is basically in the same tier, regardless of how "meaningful" the topics you discuss in your awkward social interactions are 3. What you're really after is a solid and varied set of acquaintances 4. These relationships are transactional at heart, even if its highly obfuscated
To your points:
1) the article kind of says this. Their "T1" friends are very small. 2) are they? I have people I really connect with on computers, tech, etc and others I am friendly with and we can hang but past that there's just nothing except two civil friendly ppl hanging out. This is aside from the people I'm _really_ close with. 3 & 4) why would anyone want a variety of acquaintances, that's just aiming for everyone in your life being transactional? I loathe this idea, to just be surrounded by people who have varied interests but so much emotional distance as to not be there. I have had fun in groups like that, but if that was _all_ my social relationships I would feel terrible.
As a test, change your birthday in Facebook to tomorrow. See what happens. Hint: all your 'friends' will wish you happy birthday.
Not that that's some benchmark, but anyone who really knows you well will think 'wait, isnt your birthday in June?'
Anyways, I'm a decently outgoing dude who has lived all over the US and met tons of people. I think less than 10 would even know if I died tomorrow, and probably 3 would care enough to attend a funeral. At least, that's how many call or text once or so a year just to ask how things are going, not wanting anything in return at all. Rare. Excluding family, current coworkers and such.
This is a big factor. It's not easy to maintain a long distance friendship.
The SF social playbook is exhausting because some of the people literally are false, and hanging out with you primarily for financial gain but pretending they're not. Some are also acquaintances who're just there because of work, but openly acknowledge it. Those don't invalidate real but distant friendships.
Foulweather friends are what people usually refer to as "real" friends. These are the ones that can be depended upon to act like a friend regardless of what's going on.
This is more a guide for fairweather friends. Difference between a fairweather friend and an acquaintance really just comes down to how much you enjoy their company. Yes, there's still plenty of value offered by someone who's only a fairweather friend.
But what stresses and ruins friendships are fairweather friends that pretend to be foulweather friends. Or a mismatch in expectations/understanding.
I do think it's healthy to understand your relationships and friendships, it doesn't make one type of friendship more "real" than another, but it does help prioritize where you should probably spend emotional/social resources.
I think "distant friend" is a better term for that because it acknowledges the continuum of friendship isn't a binary value. Some are closer, some are further. People move back and forward along it as you and they age and change.
But whether it's by your choice or theirs, the result is the same: they won't be around when it's tough. But if it's by your choice, you'd never know if you didn't ask, sometimes people exceed expectations. In my experience, it doesn't hurt to ask for the favor; people are rarely offended when you consider them a closer friend than they are as.
"Fairweather friends" are not friends. They're "close acquaintances" at best.
The word "friend" is tossed around so easily in the US culture. "This is my very good friend Eric" can mean you know him from work.
But it hasn't always been like that, "friend" use to mean something more. I feel like it's not specific to "friend", but a general growing trend in America to use superlatives for everything. Like "I ate the most amazing fries yesterday".
This removes all meaning, all nuances, from the language. But it does a lot of virtue signaling and sells better.
And it makes sense, because Frenchmen are terrible sellers, and Americans are good ones.
Unfortunately it also mean I now have an automatic filter pass on American speech to tone it down.
What would you expect from a culture where "literally" is so (incorrectly) overused it now usually means the exact opposite[1]
I really hate this as well. It's like people have forgotten that "acquaintances" and "friends" are two different things, and just use "friend" to cover both.
I think it cheapens what "friend" really means.
One my favorite intro's to a movie was Up. The amazing part is how deeply it communicated emotions without using any words.
Talk is cheap, characters in movies and shows will start saying they love each other after having met a week or two before. That's an L word, but it aint love.
In the end, I think these are different kinds of socialization, and these all work when both parties are on the same page.
To me, problems seem to mainly come from people on average decreasing their understanding of other systems of value.
I'm not saying there's anything cheap or false about other friendships! The "transaction" is generally something along the lines of "interesting thoughts in exchange for interesting thoughts" or "invitations to cool parties in exchange for being a fun party guest". It's just different from true friendship, where you don't care anymore what the other person has to offer you.
You don't have to be particularly outgoing or charming, but you should at least be polite and respectful. By getting together regularly with the same people, you will build familiarity, which can develop into friendship. Maybe not as strong a relationship as the best friend you had when you were younger, but so much better than being lonely.
This is undoubtedly true in my experience.
If the shared interest is goal orientated, like a team sport competition, or rehearsing toward a performance with an amateur theater group, then friendships are more likely to develop than not.
Also, if you are open to letting other people teach you stuff. ie: New skills, facts, or viewpoints -- they will tend to hold a favourable opinion of you, and it makes the whole process a breeze.
1. Find a couple of group events that you are interested in
2. Show up relentlessly, go in with no expectations
3. Gather contact details and KEEP IN TOUCH WITH PEOPLE
4. Eventually, find a way to add value to the group
If you are not comfortable with groups, an alternative is to reach out to people you think are interesting and meet them one on one.
"What must I do, to tame you?" asked the little prince.
"You must be very patient," replied the fox. "First you will sit down at a little distance from me--like that--in the grass. I shall look at you out of the corner of my eye, and you will say nothing. Words are the source of misunderstandings. But you will sit a little closer to me, every day . . ."
The next day the little prince came back.
"It would have been better to come back at the same hour," said the fox. "If, for example, you come at four o'clock in the afternoon, then at three o'clock I shall begin to be happy. I shall feel happier and happier as the hour advances. At four o'clock, I shall already be worrying and jumping about. I shall show you how happy I am! But if you come at just any time, I shall never know at what hour my heart is to be ready to greet you . . . One must observe the proper rites . . ."
I find the graph of “most people’s friends vs my friends” wherein the author proudly implies that his social situation is optimized due to his discovery of life hacks like “talk to people at night” and “play video games with people.” to be kind of silly.
Agree with this. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but it's not the same thing as friendship.
I have two friends and that's all I need.
Everyone else is an acquaintance.
Maybe my standards are too high but that's all I need.
For me, “bring me a pack of cigarettes at 5am because I’m broke and just went through a breakup” would be a high-water mark for “close friends”
It’s neat how everyone experiences friendship differently!
> When secure people assume that others like them, this is a self-fulfilling prophecy termed “the acceptance prophecy.” Danu Anthony Stinson, a psychology professor at the University of Victoria in Canada, hypothesized with her colleagues that “if people expect acceptance, they will behave warmly, which in turn will lead other people to accept them; if they expect rejection, they will behave coldly, which will lead to less acceptance.”
I tried using this "technique" for my online interviews and the difference is night and day. I am 10x more comfortable and open, actually connecting with the people I talk to (usually I am too cold and stiff, especially in the first 10 minutes).
[1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2022/08/making-ke...
Thinking of bumping her to coffee acquaintance bc I think she feels obligated to bring her wares when I agree to meet up.
I’m way more educated, have a better job, 10y younger, more worldly and more successful. She’s never going to be anything more than a platonic person I know in my small town. Many of you would assume she’s ‘sketchy’ and I’d put money on that assertion.
However it’s nice to chat with someone unlike me. I’m always frustrated with sprint stuff, broken systems, and the crap you deal with on cutting edge of AI.
She likes crafting, turtles and her grown kids. I offer her encouragement in her small business and give her ideas to improve it. Probably the most wholesome acquaintance I’ve had in years.
The main split that I see over and over again is that men are much less likely to accept you into their group, but much less likely to reject you once you're in (they are tribal). Women are fast to make acquaintances and have larger (mostly healthier) social circles, but are less loosely tied to groups.
My achievements etc are more to highlight the fact that it’s not and shouldn’t be weird for us to be friends, in this age of hyperoptimizing relationships for personal gain, though I see how it can come off.
I’m also someone who posts on HN, so I kinda have to set the scene for why I’m here. Obviously if I was the local shopkeeper this whole story would be much more mundane.
My achievements etc are more to highlight the fact that it’s not and shouldn’t be weird for us to be friends, in this age of hyperoptimizing relationships for personal gain, though I see how it can come off.
Really, we are cut of the same cloth, just my life went way easier and I was fortunate enough to get to where I am without falling through the cracks. I only judge people on their actions as I perceive them, not who they happen to be.
I thought you were an asshole while reading through, then when I got to the end I was just confused.
"Success" is a loaded term; it can mean wildly different things to different people. I assume you meant financial success in particular.
This is so true that in the absence of qualifiers, I consider "success" to be a meaningless buzzword.
There are enough people on this site, online and IRL that honestly, unironically and proudly think like this. It really gets to me.
So yea, forgive me for flexing a little to show “I’m one of you” but it’s not the small town folks I want to feel superior to, it’s people who would have just passed her by when she was in trouble. I was apparently the 5th person to pass and the only one to ask if she was OK.
But yea, I’m not really good at expressing myself tbh so I can appreciate that without knowing me I prob seemed like an ass.
Talk to more people.
By that, I don’t even mean have more friendly conversations with people.
Just literally say more words to more people. It can be talking shop or exchanging pleasantries with a service provider.
Don’t ask why, just suspend disbelief, try it and see for yourself
I know some people who love to talk about themselves, but conversation with them is often one-sided.
It's no surprise some of these people wonder why they have trouble making friends.
But I developed all those learnings and skills through self-reflection once I was in the game.
There are so many people who think they have social difficulties or are not friendly people because they don’t talk to people at all.
It seems almost too simple or stupid to most intelligent people to consider that maybe the root of all their struggles can be solved by simply talking to more people.
"The first step is always the hardest."
And what you’re saying is that the next step is to learn how to also use cin instead of just cout.
>
> It seems almost too simple or stupid to most intelligent people to consider that maybe the root of all their struggles can be solved by simply talking to more people.
In the case of someone with social anxiety (which is of course not everyone who struggles with relationships), this is basically like telling someone with depression that they should just try being happy instead.
If you’re depressed, of course you should try to be happy. Are you going to try to be sad instead? That’s only going to exacerbate the problem.
Changing your self talk (and CBT as an extension) has been shown to help depression. That alone should convince you that trying to be happy is better for depression than trying to be sad.
By your logic, exposure therapy shouldn’t work. According to you people who are afraid of something should not do said thing because they are afraid of it.
However if people who are afraid of something did said thing inspite of being afraid of it, they would have a chance at not being afraid of it.
So I think you’re way off base here and stand 100% by what I said
Have you ever googled the words, "platitude" and "depression"? Its clearly not just me.
> If you’re depressed, of course you should try to be happy.
You're missing the point and dont understand why this is not useful advice.
> Are you going to try to be sad instead? That’s only going to exacerbate the problem.
Are you also the type of person who tells homeless people they should try and be fortune 500 CEOs instead?
It's hard for me to imagine that someone would actually enjoy that. But perhaps it's just me.
You don't need a guide, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Everyone you meet is working on something they think is awesome, and they all think that what their peers are doing is awesome, and everyone and everything is awesome all the time, because they have no mundane responsibilities and spend their days dreaming about an awesome future.
It's different when you're an adult and you do a lot of what you because you have to and not because it's awesome, and you're surrounded by people who also mostly do things because they have to, and talking about those things with them is sordid and kind of unpleasant for both of you, and the crazy dreams of awesome you used to have are kind of a childish phase that many people leave behind.
Talk about a bubble. I literally don't know anyone - not one person - who is working on something they think is awesome.
I have asked this question 50-100 times and not once have I gotten an interesting answer. It's always "I'd travel" with no realization that for most people, travel is boring very quickly. After a couple of weeks most people just find it their new life. Yet another museum, yet another church, yet another temple, yet another market. But AFAIK most people never think about it because they're unlikely to actually not have to worry about money?
Another: not everyone is comfortable in a group of strangers. If they make you nervous, you might clam up and never get past the edge of the circle. A forever stranger.
If you are one such person, you might struggle with advice about attending events and meetups. You might have more luck meeting strangers one or one.
In my opinion, meetup groups whose sole purpose is to socialise tend to feel awkward and weird.
And just like dating, not everyone you meet will be a match. It's not a reflection of your personality or theirs. Don't get too invested in the outcome.
Wait, what??!?
> Easiest way to kick off this friendship chain is by inviting your friends to meet your other friends and just generally being happy to connect people
Merging friend groups can be risky business. You are usually not the same person in different contexts, but you have to chose one person to be if you start merging your different friend groups (that's not to say you shouldn't do group hangs, but depending on how different your friends it can be much more difficult to pull off than this implies, especially for people who are a bit socially awkward)
As an example, some of my friends are into computers, some aren't. I dont talk about computers that much with the group that's not interested in that. Its not that im not me or that i am hiding my love of computers from that one group, its just that a different aspect of me is at the forefront.
You probably have different conversations with friends, than friends + partners. You're still yourself, just fitting the conversation to the group.
Regardless, the point im trying to make is, just because you are friends with group a, and group b, does not mean throwing everyone together will result in a group that meshes well.
I would say I'm not myself Infront of extended family or at work though. Those are groups of people you need to get on with despite not necessarily being socially compatible. Whereas friends should accept you for who you are. You might have different interests with different circles, but you should still be at ease being yourself. If you have one circle of Christian friends and one circle of S&M wife swapping friends and they each don't know about the other facet, you're probably keeping some element of yourself from each group.
But the reality is that everyone modifies their behavior based on who they're around. They're always being themselves, of course, but adapt to the social mores.
Regarding meetings that deteriorate when they get too large: I've seen some success in allowing ours to subdivide into smaller groups. ...on Discord at least where it's easy to jump to another voice channel. Perhaps it could work in the right physical setting too. (But Discord makes screen-sharing and hearing everyone easy compared to in person.)
The pattern for our meetings is like this: ~30 sec. introductions, ~5 min show and tell (what you're working on and/or a problem you ran into), then based on the above, deep dives into what people are interested in discussing/helping others with/or prepared presentations.
Depending on how large the group is, at some point, usually just before the deep dives, I offer: "We have multiple rooms to split off into what would be useful for you to discuss. Feel free to do that anytime."
Sometimes I identify common interests, or a burning question and someone that can help them--and suggest they move to another room/channel.