From a recent blog post:

People just don’t understand what love is, so they suffer. Most Westernized people think love is when you can’t live without someone or some object. Any doctor will tell you that actually sounds like a disease.

Atisha, a Buddhist monk in the 10th Century echoed what love really is:

“Love is the wish for others to be happy.”

Love is the wish for others to be happy? I disagree.

Merely wishing others to be happy, without taking tangible action to help them achieve happiness, is not love. It is mental masturbation. And delusional, if a person thinks that intending love makes up for their unloving actions.

I do agree with Erol that an addiction to someone is not love. But I have seen and heard far too many people who are convinced that they “love” someone because they feel loving, or intend good things for the other person, while actually treating that person badly, even abusively.

What you feel and intend matters to you. Other people only experience your actions, not your feelings or intentions.

When you want someone to be happy and you take action to help them achieve happiness, then you love them.

Luckily, you can take action whether or not you feel loving feelings, and whether or not you wish the other person happiness in that moment. That freedom gives you tremendous power to love, even in less-than-ideal circumstances. Loving action is a choice you can make, a habit you can build.

At the end of the evening, an attractive young woman said she is usually shy because she cares too much about what other people think. During some of the workshop exercises, she was able to not care what others thought of her, and found it liberating. She wanted the ability to not care what others think in the rest of her life.

I gently pointed out that while not caring what others think can be liberating, it can also be problematic. Would you really want ignore how your actions affect other people to the point that you hurt or offend them? Or maybe suffer serious consequences, such as getting fired? Probably not.

Do you focus on failure or success, or notice both?

“Caring too much” about what others think often means focusing on what doesn’t work, even if it’s 1% of interactions, and ignoring what does work, even when that’s 99% of what you do.

People in the U.S. are taught that they should be “independent” and “autonomous,” which often means not caring what others think. At the same time, we’re supposed to be nice, caring, kind people, treat others well, and conform to social norms. The result is often oscillation between over-concern with others think, and exaggerated lack of concern.

Rather than thinking in digital, black-and-white, all-or-nothing terms — either focusing obsessively on what others think (strong external reference ), or ignoring their responses (strong internal reference) — it’s often more useful to think in analog terms. How much does it benefit you and others to consider other people’s preferences and responses in situation X? What ratio of attention do you want to give what is working (so you can do more of that) vs. what isn’t working (so you can adjust your behavior, if appropriate)?

Some years ago I shifted my own focus from what others thought of me (or rather, what I imagined they thought of me) to noticing how well what I do is working. That greatly improved my comfort in social situations. My social skills got a lot better, too.

For improving your own and your clients’ responses to other people, I recommend Steve Andreas’s excellent book Transforming Your Self: Becoming Who You Want to Be. Written so non-NLPers can use it, the book is loaded with useful distinctions and exercises. You’ll find detailed instructions for adjusting perceptions in ways that will help you and your clients notice and correct behaviors that cause problems with others, while maintaining a strong and appropriate sense of self.

My busy dating life gives me plenty of opportunities to learn more about relationships. Which brings me to today’s topic, personal (relationship) chemistry.

What is personal chemistry?

My dictionary defines personal chemistry as the emotional and psychological way two people relate to each other, especially when experienced as a powerful mutual attraction. Example: “Their intense sexual chemistry almost tempted them into an affair.” When you’re not attracted to someone, that’s “no chemistry,” and when you dislike them on sight, that’s “bad chemistry.”

Take a moment now to vividly recall 3 experiences:

1. A time you met someone with whom you had great chemistry.
2. An interaction where you expected good chemistry, perhaps because the other person was smart or physically attractive, but instead you felt no chemistry.
3. A time when you had bad chemistry with someone. You immediately felt uncomfortable or disliked them — perhaps before either of you spoke!

Now compare: How easy was it to get and stay in rapport with each person?

Personal chemistry = rapport

In “good chemistry,” people have good rapport. Because their communication styles match or complement each other, and they make similar assumptions, it’s easy to create rapport, and they rarely bump each other out of rapport.

In “no chemistry,” people have a much harder time establishing rapport. Because of differing communication styles, habits, and assumptions, these people tend to disrupt what rapport they have.

In “bad chemistry,” people may be drastically out of rapport. Or they might be deep in negative rapport, where each person’s behavior triggers conflicting responses in the other.

Types of relationship chemistry

As you know from your NLP training, there are many ways to get in rapport with people. Personally, I like to think of chemistry in terms of:

• Sexual chemistry — physical attraction and rapport, which can occur with or without emotional rapport. Sexual chemistry alone can produce attraction to someone you don’t even like. (I disliked the first boy I had a crush on. What a weird, creepy feeling!)
• Romantic chemistry — a special type of emotional rapport that generates feelings of romantic love. When romantic and sexual chemistry occur together, people often refer to it as couple chemistry, dating chemistry, or marriage chemistry. Romantic love can also occur in friendships, without sexual chemistry or physical desire.
• Emotional chemistry — the kind of emotional rapport you have with people you immediately like and want to be friends with.
• Activity chemistry — you want to do particular activities with this person, even if you don’t have much else in common. This is your favorite hiking partner or gaming buddy.
• Team performance chemistry — great sports teams and music groups have physical rapport that helps the players play synergistically. In business, great teams have functional rapport that helps them perform at their best.
• Creative chemistry — you work well creating together. Every great jazz ensemble has this. So do synergistic inventors, engineers, programmers, artists, and improv theater groups.
• Intellectual chemistry — something I share with my NLP development buddies. When I work with equally talented people with whom I don’t have good intellectual rapport, we don’t accomplish nearly as much.
• Empowerment chemistry — you could also call this spiritual chemistry, though I dislike the term because it implies a belief in spirits that not everyone shares. When you interact with someone on this level, the two of you empower each other and help each other develop as human beings.

What kinds of chemistry work for you?

As you think back to your best, worst, and ho-hum relationships, notice what patterns of chemistry (or lack of it) work best for you:

• What kinds of chemistry work well in your romantic relationships? Friendships? Work relationships?
• Where is it important to not have certain kinds of chemistry? Since my father did intellectual work, he enjoyed not having deep intellectual rapport with my mother. It gave him a chance to rest his mind and reconnect emotionally.

Even sexual chemistry is largely a learned skill. If you’d like more chemistry in your life and relationships (or you’d like to disrupt some chemistry that causes you problems), cultivate and apply your NLP rapport skills.

Joy

Buy on Amazon

Gary Chapman’s book The 5 Love Languages: The Secret to Love That Lasts explores common convincer strategies for love. Chapman calls them love languages.

When someone gets plenty of convincing evidence they are loved — evidence that fits their convincer criteria — they feel loved and appreciated. In Chapman’s words, their “emotional gas tank” gets filled.

When people don’t get convincing evidence of love — or worse, when they get convincing evidence that they are not loved — their emotional gas tank gets depleted and they feel unloved, unappreciated… and often hurt, hostile, resentful, etc. This can happen even when they are receiving lots of love — because it’s in a form they don’t recognize as love.

Most people respond to several love languages, yet have one they prefer most. That is the love language that fills their emotional gas tank the fastest. It’s also the love language whose opposite emotionally depletes them the most.

The 5 Love Languages

1. Physical Touch such as a hug, a hand on the shoulder, cuddling, sex. For people who use Touch as their primary love language, not being touched can feel like punishment, and getting pushed, slapped, hit, or sexually abused can be especially traumatic.
2. Words of Affirmation such as “I love you,” “It means a lot to me when you tell me you love me,” or “You are a wonderful friend.” For people who use this convincer, hearing harsh words and criticism quickly drain their emotional gas tank.
3. Quality Time means spending time together, often doing something one or both people value. If your partner loves hockey and you hate it, and they use the Quality Time love language, going to a game with them because they value it could mean a lot to them. Not spending time together depletes people who use this love language.
4. Acts of Service can be done with the loved one, or apart from them — the easiest way to distinguish this convincer from Quality Time. Harmful actions emotionally drain people who prefer this love language.
5. Gifts: people with this love language make a big deal out of even small gifts. They talk about them, show them off, display them. Not giving gifts — especially on occasions where they might expect them — drains these people.

How the 5 languages of love can make or break relationships

When couples court each other, Chapman says, they typically use a lot of the love languages, so both people’s needs get met.

However, once a relationship gets established, people tend to get lazier and express love primarily in their own love language. That works find if both people use the same convincer… but most couples don’t.

The result is a relationship where both people sincerely express their love for the other in the ways that would most satisfy themselves… yet each person ends up feeling unloved.

Classic example: His primary love language is Acts of Service, so he works hard to support the family, keeps the house and car in good repair, mows the lawn, and takes out the garbage. His wife thinks he doesn’t love her because he never brings her flowers (Gifts) or tells her he loves her (Words of Affirmation). He feels unloved because her verbal praise and gifts are meaningless to him; he wants her to do things for him the way he does things for her.

My coaching trainers say that a lot of the relationship problems they see in the couples they coach stem from people not feeling seen, heard, and appreciated by their partner. Teaching these couples to use the five languages of love often improves a bunch of relationship problems fast.

I find the love languages meta-program a very useful distinction. I use it with friends, dating, and relationships. This winter I also used it to more quickly recharge my emotional batteries after surgery, and reduce my emotional depletion during a rough relationship breakup.

I find that stacking activities so they express multiple love languages makes for a stronger love experience. For instance, I could just touch someone — but if I give them a massage (Physical Touch) as an Act of Service, I also say some heartfelt Words of Affirmation, and we make the whole situation Quality Time, it’s a better experience for both of us.

As an NLP modeler, I have noticed some additional fine distinctions in the love convincers. For instance, eye contact is important to some people, unimportant to others. Nevertheless, I think Chapman has done a good job of covering the basics. Love Languages are a great distinction we NLPers can put to good use.

Lovingly,

Joy

###

Additional resource: The Five Love Languages of Children.

• Make friends and keep them
• Become more popular and attractive to others
• Get dates and keep partners
• Reduce conflict and negativity in your life
• Get more support from others
• Keep people around you happier

You already know this skill. You learned it during NLP training, and use it during interventions.

But you probably haven’t generalized it to everyday life. (Most NLPers don’t.) This subtle shift in language can make a big difference.

Association and disassociation cues

What skill do I mean? Associating and disassociating people using language and other cues.

When doing change work, you can disassociate a client by telling them to “observe that younger you, over there.” To keep the client disassociated, you then describe the people in the representation as “that you,” “she,” “him,” or “they,” while gesturing toward the representation and away from the client.

When building a resource state, you use “you” language, present time, and associated sensory cues to associate the client into the experience: “And as you feel that good feeling, now, notice where the center of it is in your body.”

That’s great for change work, but what about the rest of life?

Avoid these association mistakes!

A couple years after my NLP training, I began to notice the ways my NLPer friends and I used association and disassociation cues in everyday life. Our casual language often associated people around us into negative states and experiences! We didn’t mean to do it; it happened automatically while we had our “talking to a client” filters turned off.

I also heard even skilled NLPers accidently associate and disassociate people during interventions. Several times I watched an NLP professional skillfully work a demo subject or client out of a deeply unresourceful state… only to accidentally plunge them back into it by using “you” language to talk about the person’s problem!

Do a language experiment

I decided to experiment with changing how I used association and disassociation cues in everyday interactions. No more “You know when you…” language for my negative stories!

Until then I had used a lot of association cues with negative content. I decided to do the opposite most of the time:

1. Help listeners associate into desirable, positive, and empowering experiences and resources. If you have something good to share, help your listeners experience it too.
2. Help listeners disassociate from negative, unpleasant, and disempowering experiences and attitudes. If you talk about hardships and problems, keep people disassociated. If they talk about problems in an associated way, help them disassociate.

I began by changing one thing: the way I used pronouns — words such as I, you, we, they, he, she, someone, and a person. Later I added other linguistic cues. Eventually I also added gestures and body language.

What happened?

1. My results with clients improved.
2. People feel good around me, so they like me more, find me more attractive, and give me more support.

Before I tell you how to quickly change your automatic association cues, let’s do a quick review.

How sensory cues affect association and disassociation

As you know, when you mention or describe an experience, people understand what you say by building mental representations of it. Association and disassociation cues tell your listeners how to represent point of view.

Association cues include:

• Referring to “you,” “we,” “us,” and “this.”
• Using the person’s name: “John, read this now.” (Sometimes naming a group the person belongs to will also associate them, especially if you also use other linguistic cues: “Like you, most NLPers enjoy learning.”)
• Specifying present time: “As you experience that now…” or “As you’re experiencing that now…”
• Spatially enclosing the listener in the context: “As you’re in that experience now…”
• Speaking and acting as if something is real; using words like “because” and “of course.”
• Using your listener’s experiences as examples. This works especially well if the experiences are sensory-based. Tip: specify some submodalities.
• Gestures that suggest something is in or on the person’s body, or surrounds them.
• Associated sensory cues: “Hear with your own ears, see with your own eyes, feel your body.”
• Specifying submodalities that require your listener to associate: “As you notice the temperature of the air around you now…”

Disassociation cues include:

• Referring to “they,” “he,” “she,” “someone,” “a person,” “one,” “it,” and “that” in representations, and to yourself and your own experiences as “I.”
• Using names to specify people other than the listener, and groups they don’t belong to.
• Specifying past or future time, especially if qualified as not happening now: “You used to do that.”
• Spatially distancing the listener from representations: “As you see and hear those people way over there…”
• Speaking and acting as if something is unreal; using words like “if.”
• Unreal and hypothetical examples: “If you listened to an elephant playing a piano…”
• Gestures that suggest that what you refer to is distant.
• Sensory cues for disassociation: “As you observe that from over here, notice how distant it seems.”
• Specifying only submodalities appropriate to disassociation: vision and hearing, but no tactile cues.

Fortunately, you don’t have to consciously keep track of any of this if you use my strategy and…

Create a “mental movie screen” over each listener’s head

You can’t know exactly what representations other people will build in order to understand what you say. However, you can approximate their representations, and get a pretty good idea of whether your words and gestures will trigger association or disassociation.

I didn’t want to spend weeks or months retraining myself, and you probably don’t either. Instead, use the fast process below to drastically improve your awareness and cue choices within days.

Creating awareness of association cues

1. Imagine talking with a friend.
2. Create a small movie screen over your friend’s head. You will use it to display your friend’s internal representations. (Note: People who visualize less clearly can pretend they see the movie screen, knowing their subconscious mind sees it clearly. Or they can substitute a “sportscaster” voice that will describe their friend’s representations, and adjust the rest of these instructions accordingly.)
3. Say something that includes association or disassociation cues. I suggest pronouns — “I,” “you,” “them” — because they so strongly evoke point of view.
4. Have the screen show the mental movie your friend will probably make in order to understand what you say, and include the soundtrack.

   You want a movie that will give you the information you need, without associating you into the content. To do this, see and hear the movie from Observer position (so you see your friend, their movie, and how the two relate), put a frame around the movie screen, distort the sound so it seems to come through speakers facing your friend, or use whatever tricks work for you.

5. When you use associating language, have the movie screen show your friend associating into their representation of what you say. When you use disassociated language, have the movie screen show your friend disassociating from their representation. At this point, don’t try to change anything. Simply notice the new information. Practice with both positive and negative content, and adjust as needed.
6. Imagine utilizing the information you get from the screen to improve your word choices. How do you want your friend to receive your communication? If your intent matches their movie — if you want your friend disassociated, and they make a disassociated mental movie — you already chose appropriate cues. If your intent mismatches your friend’s movie, change your language cues.
7. Do imaginary practice with more people and varied content. To have a client to access a traumatic memory, or to get rid of an obnoxious person, you might want to associate someone into negative content, or disassociate them from positives. Build in flexibility and choice!
8. Once you like the results, use New Behavior Generator to install the pattern:
   • Create a disassociated movie of you using your new skill successfully. Your movie should show the screens over people’s heads, their movies, and your responses.
   • Adjust your disassociated movie until you like it.
   • Step into your movie and experience it associated from beginning to end. Do you like it? Do you feel confident and congruent? Do you want to change or improve anything?
   • Step out to make adjustments, step in to check how they work.
   • Continue until the whole movie works the way you want it to.
   • Repeat the New Behavior Generator pattern with 2 more examples.

Initially, you will probably simply notice when you use pronouns in ways that mismatch your intent. Soon your mind will start to anticipate people’s likely responses before you even open your mouth. You’ll notice mismatches between your language and intent, and make corrections before you speak.

For most of us who know NLP, most interactions happen in everyday life outside NLP interventions. How we use everyday language affects our important relationships, our interactions at work, even who likes and dislikes us. We can use association and disassociation cues to uplift and empower people, separate them mentally from their problems, and help them feel good. That benefits the people around us, and it benefits us as well.

Want to experiment?

1. Calibrate how you us associative and disassociative cues in everyday interactions now. How do people typically respond to you?
2. Switch to using cues that associate people into good experiences, disassociate them from bad ones.
3. Calibrate how people’s responses change, immediately and over time.
4. Post your results in the Comments below.