When interacting with new people on social platforms, subtle social cues often reveal underlying cognitive and emotional patterns. A recent interaction illustrates this perfectly.
I received a friend request from an individual from the chat group I moderate on a social media platform. Rather tha just randomly accept, I PMed the individual, whilst checking his timeline. Cue amber warning: it looked like he had recently joined the platform and, notably, had already accumulated 98 friends, all female. This alone signals a preoccupation with social validation and impression management and often is a ref flag as to what is likely to ensure. However as I was waiting for an online zoom in just over 15 minutes, no point starting anything, so I decided to engage.
Test 1: I saw he claimed to be from Dublin, so I asked if he was a Leinster supporter. His immediate response was to question if I was a Toulouse lady, instantly recognising my likely allegiance and demonstrating the cognitive shortcuts humans use to categorise others. According to social identity theory, group affiliations shape perceptions and trigger automatic in-group/out-group assessments. The speed and confidence with which he identified me reflect a combination of awareness and preconception, a subtle display of social acuity often used to assert dominance in small interactions.
Test 2: As the conversation progressed, his behaviour revealed a classic ego pattern. He engaged with me while simultaneously disappearing from our chat window, indicating multiple conversations running in parallel. Test 3: When I called him out for this, he reacted with discomfort, ultimately resorting to defensive measures, including compliments framed as flattery as you can see from the above and a sudden block when confronted with manners and accountability.
This behaviour aligns with ego-protective mechanisms: when self-image is threatened, the fragile ego prioritises self-preservation over genuine engagement. The combination of disappearing acts, attention-seeking, and avoidance demonstrates the psychology of a self-validating loop; he needed admiration to maintain self-worth, but could not tolerate any challenge to it, especially from a Toulouse supporter.
The humour in the situation is almost textbook. Here is someone who has actively been seeking validation from dozens of women, acquiring friends like collectible trading cards, only to evaporate from a conversation when the spotlight shifts to accountability for his behaviour. His need for constant affirmation, paired with a lack of tolerance for critique, reads as a humeous illustration of modern social ego at work. The sudden block after minor confrontation is almost performative, a digital tantrum masquerading as self-protection, highlighting the irony of an ego so inflated it cannot survive a polite request for manners.
The human need for external validation is well-documented in psychology; individuals with fragile self-esteem or high ego investment often seek out relationships that confirm their desirability or social status. In this case, the speed and selectivity of his friend acquisitions suggest an acute dependence on social reinforcement to support his self-concept, no doubt assisted by plenty of needy women eager to stroke his ego and feed his sense of importance.
This interaction provides a clear case study of how recognition, social identity, ego, and validation needs intersect in online behaviour. His instant recognition of my affiliation, coupled with a fragile response to accountability, reflects the dual forces of cognitive shortcuts and ego maintenance. The fact that his 98 friends appear to be only female, and the ready availability of needy women to stroke his ego, reinforces the psychological principle that self-worth is often externally constructed, particularly in new social environments. The resulting pattern is part attention-seeking, part avoidance, and entirely ego-driven, offering both insight and amusement for observers.
He failed all 3 tests as I suspected so no loss at all really…
