Does anyone have observations about the cognitive processes that people go through when someone who is a “known quantity” turns up wearing a strong pherosignature?
There have been comments about mothers reacting to pheromone use.
Do we just “forget” the previous pherosignature of the person and begin responding in accord with the current pheros? Do we go through a painful period wondering if the person was abducted by aliens? (or equivalent)
On the flip side, what happens when someone wears something like A314 daily – AND THEN RUNS OUT! (heh!)
Another facet of phero-fascination – is it not the case that the person who is puzzled about how the person is having such an “effect” is still unconsciously and compellingly affected? Is it possible, by alertness or mental focus or will, to ignore pheromonal messages?
How stressful is the cognitive dissonance of an “at odds with my experience of this person” pherosignature? How stressful is trying to resist/ignore a chemical messenger.
Interesting questions. Very!
Do they really go into some sort of OD-mode, like “does not compute”? Or do they start asking questions? “What’s wrong, you don’t seem like your normal self these days”?
I personally need more testing to actually reply accordingly, but you alerted me to something I’ll definitely keep in mind.
Thanks
(reps on the way … err, no. I need to spread more love first)
I’ve always been concerned about starting to “depend” on pheromones, and having people get used to a certain “pheromone signature,” then having it go away. I suspect that is one good reason to vary, mix, match, and sometimes suspend wearing pheromones at times. Keeps people guessing too…
A314, I am still to figure out. I try not to run out. But wrt none, Sapolsky’s work on what happens to washed-up former alpha baboons is instructive. (Chance for everyone to express their lingering grudges, not much fun).
I get that same vibe as you describe after having worn -None around people for a few days. It gives them a chance to ‘put me back in my place’. After stopping A314 suddenly in an all-male (25-35 yo) setting, the result appears to be becoming just one of the boys again and occassionally laughed at once again (I am not a natural ‘alpha’). When wearing A314, they feel ‘constrained’ and cannot laugh at me like they want to occasionally. After stopping the A314, they are also eager to put me ‘back in my place’ but there is not the ‘vengeance’ that comes after abruptly stopping -None.
Now with regards to Mark’s point: “is it not the case that the person who is puzzled about how the person is having such an “effect” is still unconsciously and compellingly affected? Is it possible, by alertness or mental focus or will, to ignore pheromonal messages?”.
I think it is possible to ignore pheromonal messages only if you have a good instinct for a person’s true nature. For example, before I knew about pheromones, I once had a super sleazy friend who emitted lots of Alpha- and probably Beta-Androstenol. He made friends easily and was good with the ladies. Now he acted like a gentleman in front of the ladies but was completely two faced behind their backs - basically saying stuff like ‘she’s an easy lay’, etc. I could tell that despite the ‘friendly’ vibe he was emitting there was something shifty about him and did not trust him. On the other hand, we got on well generally in other ways and I could not help but be friends with him as we were living in similar locations and knew mutual friends. I was definitely affected by the -Nols that he was emitting as well but just did not trust the guy. On the other hand, many others seemed to be fooled by his pheromone signature as he was quite charming and social.
The lesson here may be: the less congruent a person acts to their pheromone signature, the more people there will be who largely ignore the pheromone messages.
This is a fascinating thread and raises questions I’ve also had. I’d be interested in seeing if there is a way this could be tested. The congruency issue is one which I’d imagine is important to many here, although I get the sense most people here are interested in enhancing their natural qualities, not disguising (or altering) them.
On the women’s side of things, I think this may play out (*disclaimer, as I’m still waiting to receive my products, I haven’t tested anything yet but am going by other’s replies on the forums or Jasmin’s notes) in Instant Sexiness A vs B. My personality goes towards the “A” side…strong and on occasion, dominant. If I wore “B” to “lighten up” my personality and exhibit a more kittenish sexual persona, I do believe it could cause some confusion or consternation. The issue of cognitive disassociation r.e. gender becomes further confused because women probably have an easier time of being phero-disassociative than men because society tends to look down more on an alpha woman than a beta (imo, of course), so she could play these roles with perhaps a bit more flexibility/permissiveness than a man.
I’m trying to locate an earlier thread with little success..
It was about alternating between using and not using pheromones on successive dates…(as mentioned above too)
We can suppose there is a “visual field” – what is physically impinging on visual sensors – and that there is a “visual world” – what is represented and noticed and figured in one’s mental models (conscious and unconscious). “Seeing” is an interaction between one’s mental processes and the world, not a passive or given thing: our eyes are in constant motion to build our representation of the world, and the motion is ~not~ random!
Can we also consider that there is a olfactory/pherosensory field – what we happen to have available to our physical sensors – and an olfactory/pherosensory world: our “interpretation” of the field and of pherosignatures, as air currents pass us and as we turn or tilt our heads to “sniff out” the world and people in it?
We have at least three kinds of visual field sensors: foveal, macular, and peripheral.
Any guesses on our olfactory/pherosensors? One, three, three hundred? It’s the oldest, most directly wired to the pre-frontal brain …
I’m remembering those theories about people being auditory, visual and kinesthetic (modes).
I always find that interesting. Though it seems the people I see/hear seem to have more than just one mode, it’s difficult to decide which one they mainly ‘belong’ to..
Yes - having a primary sensory channel is human, not connected to speaking a particular language.
But the “Signal Idioms” will change in other languages, as in Spanish:
Puedo ver eso – I can see that.
Claro – (Clear) I hear you.
Le consigo – (He with himself) I get you.
“Claro” would seem like a visual-primary signal, but in my experience, “Claro” is what one Spanish-speaking person says to another in acknowledging a verbal instruction. So “I want you to … etc.” is answered “Claro” in the same sense as ‘I hear you loud and clear (as a bell.)’
I just started reading Chandler Burr’s “Emperor of Scent” which is about Luca Turin and his quest to figure out HOW we smell. It’s fascinating, and if you are interested in scent, you will love this book. Also, it has definite applications for phero study because the more you learn about how smell works, or what the theories behind it are, the more this cocktail of pheros and their associated behaviors may begin to come together. Presently there are two schools of thought on smell: the shape school (that we smell by receptors that are perfectly shaped to recognize certain scents, like how your digestive system works by enzymes locking into molecules to break them down) and the vibrational school, that says scents give off a vibrational signature that we smell (or “hear as scent”).
Read the book or search on Wikipedia for Luca Turin, vibration theory of olfaction, shape theory of olfaction, etc.
