Common Scents and Science

I’m embarrassed to admit it, but I once placed a personal ad. We’ll call it an experiment. I liked the perfume Poison at the time. I didn’t know anyone who wore it, but my theory was that if I liked it, the woman who wore it and enjoyed it would likely share a romantic chemistry with me. I reasoned that because perfume preference was intensely emotional, other preferences and the entire personality would follow and be pleasing as well. I supposed one can’t prove or disprove a theory with a single data point. But I didn’t have any desire to continue the experiment.

So, when the novel and then the movie Perfume came out, I was intrigued. The subtitle scared me though: The Story of a Murderer. The film is visually beautiful, but it received mixed reviews because it’s a movie where it is impossible to relate to or feel sympathy for the antihero, Grenouille. He says, “The soul of beings is their scent.” “The intoxicating power of the girl’s smell made it clear to him that he must learn how to preserve scent.” He murders women in search of the perfect Perfume. He is captured and sentenced to execution. On the day of his execution, Grenouille is brought before the crowd wearing the perfume made from the virgins' scent. This essence of love and beauty induces the executioner and the crowd to declare him to be innocent. How could someone who smells like the innocence of a virgin be guilty of anything? Yes, very far fetched, but hey, it’s not science.

Maybe it’s a guy thing. Science says that even sperm have a sense of smell, in fact, a very good sense of smell. A study in the journal of Analytical Chemistry (reported in Discovery News) proved that their sense of smell is so good that even a highly diluted ovarian scent will cause the little boys to turn tail and swim in its direction. The researchers used mouse sperm, but are confident it’s a man thing.

Another study at the University of New Mexico hinted that perhaps men can tell (albeit subconsciously) when a women is ovulating. A psychologist by the name of Geoffrey Miller had the genius idea to get funding to go to the strip clubs. Seriously, if you can believe this, he took his colleagues to area gentlemen clubs and counted tips on lap dances. (Listen up, this is all in the name of science.) They apparently then interviewed the women and asked them if they were on the pill and when their last menstrual period was. (Apparently this type of pick-up line actually works.) What they discovered was that the amount made in tips on lap dances was directly proportional to their fertility: $70 around the time of ovulation, $35 while on the rag. (Women on the pill averaged consistently at the low end because the hormone mimics early pregnancy.) The researchers suspect there is a correlation, at least in part, between tips and body odor. THIS is science.

So what should we do with all this information? How can we apply this practically to our everyday lives? Women, keep that thermometer and calendar handy so you know when you’re ovulating. Mark that as the day to ask for your raise at work. Know that you are glowing. You are invincible and men are under your control! Men, before you tell a woman that you like the scent she’s wearing, consider that it may be Poison, or even Obsession, but then again, she may just be ovulating.

Fall

Any Questions?

It's the end of the year and a new job came looking for me. I've just finished several rounds of interviews with two different companies and screenings by two others. First you have to answer the recruiter’s questions, then his boss’s questions. If you pass, they’ll set up a telephone interview with the HR department of the company in which you’re interested. Then, you may have a technical interview with a panel or an individual. If they’re still interested and you’re still interested, they will invite you to their home office for a face-to-face interview – I guess to see if your body matches your brains. During this half-day interview, you’ll be peppered with questions. The only difference I can tell between this process and terrorist interrogation techniques is that they don’t use waterboarding - yet. At the end they’ll give you a few minutes to ask some questions of your own if you have any breath left. They really do expect you to ask questions, though. It shows you’ve done your homework if you ask intelligent questions. This game of questions typically lasts from 4 to 8 weeks with emails in between.

Books are published on this stuff: 1000 Interview Questions for Hiring Managers. “What are your strengths?” “What are your weaknesses?” “Why do you want to work here?” “What motivates you?” “Do you like Piña Coladas?”

The last time I was looking for a job, one company flew all the candidates they had pre-screened to San Francisco for the day. They put each of the prospects in their own room and rotated interviewers. The interviewers would move from room to room asking each applicant questions. Then, at the end of the day, the interviewers got together and compared notes. The experience was kind of like speed-dating for business. (I got the job, but they never used the speed-dating interview process again.)

Why couldn’t this process be improved? Why couldn’t we just come up with one really good question? If you answer that, you’re in. Some of the interviewers I’ve talked to don’t even seem to have a path or a line of questioning. Once, an interviewer told me to keep talking until he could think of more questions(!) All these questions could lead to a job that may last two years, five years, or, if you’re really lucky, a career.

I got to thinking. Isn’t that what dating is all about?... Finding Mr. Goodbar or finding Ms. Rockstar? Didn’t you start this type of thing in primary school? “What’s your favorite color?” “Did you like the Lion King?” “Do you watch the Simpsons?” “Does your dad make a lot of money?” Then, as we grow older, wiser and more mature, our questions improve. (Remember, this is mate selection – presumably, to help us find the “fittest” of the herd.) “Do you like Jazz?” “Do you like sushi?” “Do you drink Mojitos?” “How do you take your coffee?” "Do you have any tattoos?" I guess if you get the wrong answers, you ask someone else.

Maybe we ought to be starting with questions like, “have you ever been convicted of a felony?” “Tell me why you left your last lover.” “Would you mind if I called the father of your last boyfriend/girlfriend? What would he tell me about you?” "Do you have any sexually communicable diseases?" “Is there anything in your past that might preclude you from running for public office?” “Where do you see yourself in five years?” (I actually used this one once.) The easy part is coming up with questions. The tough part is knowing what the “right” answer is. “Hey, we both like long walks on the beach. Woohoo. We must be compatible. Kismet!” Puhleez. Most of the questions we ask are worth as much and demand a rhetorical, “So what?” “So what if we both take our coffee with a splash of cream, no sugar?” “So what if we both like to talk on the phone?” (I don’t.) “So what if we both want to win the lottery?” (I won’t.) What does that tell you?

It’s like 98% of our DNA is in common with a chimpanzee. So, we’re trying to weed out that 2% with our questions. I think compatibility is highly over-rated. One book I read, Blink, says that we often make decisions without knowing why and without being able to defend them logically. First impressions are usually right. The book says that we gather data about someone and often immediately know whether we like them or not. In fact, I’ve been told that I make a pretty good first impression. I’m just afraid that means that the perfect woman for me is an amnesiac. That way I could make a good first impression, endlessly.

Back to my decision on which company to work for. I created an elaborate decision matrix for four different employers. I ranked and weighted 15 different criteria. It pointed to a clear choice. Logical, right? I didn’t like the answer that the decision-matrix-Ouija-board gave me. So, in business, as in love, I’m going to go with my heart.

WSJ: Foreigners Think Sarcasm a Bit Too Clever

In Global Era
By PHRED DVORAK
Wall Street Journal
November 5, 2007; Page B1

Computer Sciences Corp., a U.S. technology consultancy with offices in 49 countries, last year made a peculiar request to the company that teaches English to its employees around the world. CSC wanted the company to give them lessons on detecting sarcasm.
Bente Holm Skov, CSC's European director of learning, says even employees who understand their colleagues' English are often stumped by their senses of humor. One French worker took offense when a British colleague jokingly referred to a fellow Brit as "not too clever" on a conference call.

GlobalEnglish Corp., which offers online English lessons for corporations like CSC, doesn't yet offer sarcasm tips, but it is working on it. The company says it is one of many quirky requests it has fielded as English -- already the lingua franca for global commerce -- spreads further inside multinational corporations as well. Clients have sought help in navigating different cultures, understanding Arabic or Indian accents, and speaking English with eloquence, says Mahesh Ram, GlobalEnglish's vice president of business development.

The demands on GlobalEnglish and other companies in the field suggest that employees don't always grasp the meaning of what a colleague says, even if they are speaking the same language.

I Just Love Sarcasm

Who was the genius who invented sarcasm? She must have said to herself, "Hmm, I think I'll say the exact opposite of what I mean, roll my eyes and call it the truth. Oh, and if you can't see my eyes, I'll put a little intonation in my voice that will mean I don't really believe what I'm saying and neither should you. Then, if you if you don't get the clues from my face and or my voice, I'll just put two positives together and call it a negative. As in, 'I'm going to push the car. Yeah, right. Get your mother to push the car.'" Then, who, upon hearing these words could not easily, logically, and immediately, discern the truth and veracity of the utterance. Is this not an inventive, genius logical math major at work. Got it? Ok, let's see how it works. "Thanks. Nice, job, buddy." Did you almost say "You're welcome. I'm glad you appreciate all the preparation and thought I put into it?" You missed the eye roll, didn't you? Translation: "Loser! You failed."

Sarcasm -- cousin to the pun, the lowest form of humor -- is the unsophisticated sibling of irony. Some would say they're twins. One of the Oxford English Dictionary's definitions of irony is "a figure of speech in which the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used". How could that possibly be the same as sarcasm? Irony, the "sophisticated" one, is an indirect form of communication, often used to convey feelings. Sarcasm, on the other hand, usually implies criticism of the target. (That is, if he "get's" it.) I can't think how sarcasm could be used in a positive way to encourage or build up. As a practical matter, it usually conveys disapproval, contempt, and scorn. That's not verbal abuse, is it? Hell, the Geneva Convention bars that of POWs. How has our civilization come so far without a "Geneva Convention" for relationships.

Perhaps we fail to see the humor. Sarcasm, if related to the pun, must be funny. It must be the sophistication in me, but I don't find it funny standing in front of the firing squad with a blindfold on waiting for the sound of Don Rickle's mouth as the executioner's rifle to put me out of my misery.

Maybe sarcasm should be confined to law. I think it should be used more often as a legal maneuver. I want to lobby to outlaw perjury and replace it with sarcasm. "I wasn't lying on the witness stand, I was being sarcastic." While we're at it, there wouldn't be the need for the Fifth Amendment anymore, either, then. You could say anything you want on the witness stand and it could be understood either by the prosecution or the defense. How could you incriminate yourself with the "Sarcasm Defense?" How could you prosecute anyone for a serious bomb threats? "Sure, I said there was a bomb on the plane, but I was being sarcastic. I rolled my eyes"

Would you believe they've even conducted scientific research on sarcasm. (I wonder what these researchers home-life was like.) The researchers discovered that the subjects had "impaired sarcasm scores" when they had the equivalent of a pre-frontal lobotomy. Frankly, I find my sarcasm scores increase with a bottle in front of me. I found it amusing that the authors of the research paper couldn't escape sarcasm even when describing an imaging scan of the brain: "Note that in the picture, ... left is right."

Another thing I found amusing about the scientific article was it's source: University of Haifa, Israel. Couldn't the Jewish authors just as easily have stayed home and asked their mothers for some good Yiddish sarcasm? "Oy, you never call, you never write, you don't care if your mother dies."

Along the same line, there's a book for those who are a sarcastically impaired on How to Raise a Jewish Dog. Instead of "Sit" or "Come," it's "Fine. Do what you want. I hope you have a nice life." I say, save it for the dog. "Why don't you just sit there, or are you going to come when I call you?" If his prefrontal lobe is not damaged, maybe he knows the answer. You could use the same logic to write a book called "How to Raise Emotionally Damaged and Intellectually Confused Children through Sarcasm and Verbal Abuse."

Some say that sarcasm is an equal to wit. At the very least, they say it takes a certain wit to engage in the repartee that requires you to think of what you want to convey, then utter the opposite. A wit, however, is one with exceptional intelligence. If wit is the gun and sarcasm is the bullet, my advice is, before you pull the trigger on that remark, make sure your gun is loaded.

To be sure, sarcasm does have it's place. It has its place, just as sadism has it's place in sex. Sarcasm has it's place, just as a B-2 bomber has its place in shock and awe. Sarcasm has its place in the arsenal of control as a thinly veiled attack. Sarcasm has it's place just as "whatever" or "sure" have a place in in our lexicon to condemn a person's point of view. Sarcasm has a place in setting the tone for future discussion which abandons honest discussion. Sarcasm has its place in frustrating and sabotaging legitimate conversation.

And, no, I'm not being sarcastic.

Teapot

Ojo

I'll post more, but this is one of my favorite pictures that I've taken. It's like a social commentary in a flash moment in time.