PDA

View Full Version : The Game - Neil Strauss



IdleRich
23-09-2010, 12:55 PM
I know it's old news but I read it yesterday. Not, as I originally feared, a self-help book for those unable to attract the opposite (ie female) sex but a story of one man's descent into a world of Pick-Up Artists (PUAs) and misogyny. An absolutely readable and awful book that describes the way that Neil Strauss (or Style as he dubbed himself) rose to the top of a secret community of people who dedicated their whole life to swapping tactics for approaching, chatting up and, effectively, mind-controlling or hypnotising as many women as possible.
Strauss cunningly represents himself (I suspect at least somewhat dishonestly) as someone at slightly one remove from the community as a whole, someone who is both attracted and repelled by the power he (claims to have) gained to chat up and bed any woman he desired. In the end he leaves the community having recognised the shallowness of constant phone-number acquiring and found true love. He also misses no opportunity to point out how different he is from the majority of hangers-on and self-styled PUAs who become so addicted to The Game that they leave their jobs and home to hang on the words of pulling gurus such as Style and Mystery (they all give themselves stupid names - a bit like on dissensus but stupider) which means that he is able to get the book out and leave himself as someone who still retains some vestige of humanity. He has cake and eats it quite effectively basically.
Anyway, I have to say I loved reading the whole sordid, depressing thing and I wonder if anyone else has read it and what they think.

http://www.pualingo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/mystery_method_neil_strauss_style_pua_peacocking.j pg

A picture there of the uber-pullers Mystery (left) and Style.

bobbin
23-09-2010, 02:05 PM
their mind control techniques must be more powerful than i can imagine.

baboon2004
23-09-2010, 03:01 PM
For a second I thought you'd erroneously placed a thread about a new hip-hop concept album in the Art & Lit forum.

Mr. Tea
23-09-2010, 03:16 PM
their mind control techniques must be more powerful than i can imagine.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/13/article-0-0067E9E400000258-987_468x286.jpg

massrock
23-09-2010, 05:03 PM
Would like to hear from nomad on this one.

Mr. Tea
23-09-2010, 05:10 PM
Would like to hear from nomad on this one.

.....


Mystery couldn't get it up and Style came in like two minutes, rolled over and fell asleep.

comelately
23-09-2010, 09:39 PM
http://www.dissensus.com/showthread.php?9091-Books-with-life-changing-qualities

We had quite the thread of death with this one!

swears
23-09-2010, 10:01 PM
That pic of the guys looks incomplete without a snarky comment from Gavin McInnes underneath.

I know a fella who is well into this book, goes on about it all the time, giving everybody advice on what to say, how to act, the philosophy behind it all...

never actually talks to any women, though.

padraig (u.s.)
24-09-2010, 01:31 AM
We had quite the thread of death with this one!

yeah I thought of that as soon as I saw this. good times. skimmed back through, stand by everything I said 100%, in the interests of keeping the peace will leave it there. vivi e lascia vivere & all that.

one thing however - the term "pick-up artist" always puts me in mind of "A Hunger Artist" which, yes, is a rather jarring incongruity.

scottdisco
24-09-2010, 09:17 AM
quality thread that, i'd forgotten all about it. Vim negging himself to get in the mood for wanks, brilliant

scottdisco
24-09-2010, 09:21 AM
He has cake and eats it quite effectively basically.

i've not read it so totally take w salt but from what you say this seems very reasonable, there's an air of 'doth protest too much' to the guy it seems... ...this is of course obscuring the real issue, which is does Nigella flick her bean to Fred Durst, or to Zizek?

droid
24-09-2010, 09:24 AM
quality thread that, i'd forgotten all about it. Vim negging himself to get in the mood for wanks, brilliant

His finest moment!

Mr. Tea
24-09-2010, 09:36 AM
Hahaha, oh god, THAT thread.


I learnt how to help women to squirt [...] because of 'the community'

More like comeallovermyfacebaby, amirite??? And all thanks to The Community! Is that like the Muslim community or the LGBT community, only it's the squirting community?

DannyL
24-09-2010, 09:44 AM
Quite ironic seeing my comments there, as I am the one who lent the book to Rich. (I found it in a church jumble sale, honest). I'd forgotten about that thread.

I thought it was thoroughly entertaining, but I strongly suspect he's a massive liar - not so much about the PUA techniques working, but his own distance from "the community" and what he actually did etc.

I still think basic techniques for improving confidence = not so bad, but systematising all into an alleged "science", introducing profits from workshops etc = not so good, and it's got an exploitative misogynist worldview embedded which he doesn't really examine.

swears
25-09-2010, 12:45 AM
I still think basic techniques for improving confidence = not so bad, but systematising all into an alleged "science", introducing profits from workshops etc = not so good, and it's got an exploitative misogynist worldview embedded which he doesn't really examine.

I sort of think it's funny to imagine all these George Costanza looking guys using Jedi mind tricks on plastic valley girls.

"HELLO, you will sleep with me, btw you're annoying and dumb."
*waves hand across her face*
"OMG, I, like, totally feel attracted to you!"
"Just another day in the life of a fly guy, my friend."
*hitches up 44 inch polyester slacks*

IdleRich
25-09-2010, 11:56 AM
"Vim negging himself to get in the mood for wanks, brilliant"
Guess I'm gonna have to read that thread.


"HELLO, you will sleep with me, btw you're annoying and dumb."
*waves hand across her face*
"OMG, I, like, totally feel attracted to you!"
"Just another day in the life of a fly guy, my friend."
*hitches up 44 inch polyester slacks*
That's pretty much what happens when he meets Britney Speares - he says "think of a number between one and ten" and she chooses seven (as, apparently, seventy percent of people do) and he guesses it correctly and she is completely dumbstruck - eventually she comes out with something along the lines of "OMFG, we have this incredible connection".

Corpsey
25-09-2010, 12:13 PM
They all seem like complete cunts but I do quite like the idea of being forced to chat up women, since I can't really see how I ever will otherwise. So maybe I'll give them 500 dollars so they can force me... :slanted:

Either that or attach electrodes to my nuts and give one of my mates the remote control.

comelately
26-09-2010, 11:45 AM
yeah I thought of that as soon as I saw this. good times. skimmed back through, stand by everything I said 100%, in the interests of keeping the peace will leave it there. vivi e lascia vivere & all that.

one thing however - the term "pick-up artist" always puts me in mind of "A Hunger Artist" which, yes, is a rather jarring incongruity.

Yeah I stand by pretty much everything I said too, I just don't buy the mysogyny and aspiration thing. That said, I am quite attracted to the Zizekian critique of new age stuff as well as other critiques of the human potential movement - and I think these critiques can also be applied to the pick up community very effectively.

I think I put over Sean Messenger's LVO3 as an approach more resembling a new-agey approach and less a wannabe fratboy thing. Sean has now released a free archive of every audio and video class - I believe he now teaches children in Oakland. http://lvo3.websitetoolbox.com/?forum=117644

As I said before, 'The Game' is full of mendacity, misdirection and time distortions. He spent many months getting hypnotised by Steve Piccus and Hypnotica. He is still in the community, and he was rumoured to have "approach anxiety" quite recently.

Er Mr Tea, I think the Lesbian community is already the squirting community. To be honest, and I will probably get accused of bragging again but it's nothing others are incapable of, I've taught/enabled/empowered women to have 5 minute orgasms giving me head, and more.....and I'm part of an Ongoing Tantric ecstatic dance group in the Netherlands, so my powers will only increase.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3ALwKeSEYs

Mr. Tea
26-09-2010, 12:01 PM
http://www.explosm.net/db/files/Comics/Rob/superpower.png

Thing is, I like sex enough as it is, and I can't really get into the mindset of treating it as this subject you can take a 'masterclass' in or spend years learning from a wizened old man in some remote Tibetan monastery. The word 'tantric' just makes me think of Sting and his famous 12-hour sex sessions to save the rainforest. Ugh.

swears
26-09-2010, 12:10 PM
A girl came up to me last night at the bar and says "I saw you asleep on the train the other day, really liked your suit and glasses." So you see, I can pull girls in my sleep. :P

padraig (u.s.)
26-09-2010, 02:51 PM
I just don't buy the mysogyny and aspiration thing

yeah, there's a shock.

you may not buy it, but it buys you.


To be honest, and I will probably get accused of bragging again...

no one accused you of bragging. that would imply you have something to brag about.

I dunno man, what's even the point, you're already the absolute pinnacle of self-parody. anything I could add would just be redundant.

padraig (u.s.)
26-09-2010, 02:55 PM
this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n2IVF9a2IA)

and

this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-q__knBahs&feature=related)

swears
26-09-2010, 03:42 PM
So that's what goes on at Scientology seminars...

comelately
26-09-2010, 04:52 PM
no one accused you of bragging. that would imply you have something to brag about.


First part is untrue. Second point is logically invalid.


I dunno man, what's even the point, you're already the absolute pinnacle of self-parody. anything I could add would just be redundant.

That's quite the compliment. Thank you!

Dunninger
26-09-2010, 06:20 PM
I've taught/enabled/empowered women to have 5 minute orgasms giving me head, and more.....and I'm part of an Ongoing Tantric ecstatic dance group in the Netherlands, so my powers will only increase.


that's just wonderful

Mr. Tea
26-09-2010, 09:29 PM
Soon comelately will be able to make every human female on Earth climax simultaneously merely by thinking about it. I reckon that's what all this '2012' stuff is about - the combined explosive yield of 3,000,000,000 orgasms tilting the planet's axis...


that's just wonderful

In such an amazing sentence, it's the use of "empowered" that stands out as the real gem, I think.

padraig (u.s.)
26-09-2010, 09:41 PM
First part is untrue.

the accusation - which imparts way too much gravity, more accurate would be like bemused derision - was that you were ridiculous. for people to think you were bragging they'd have to believe you, which I'm about 99% sure 99% of them don't, at least in re: your supposed various & sundry magical orgasm powers, tho probably not so much about the wonderfulness/non-shittiness of the p-u-a ting either. but bro really before you get all bent out again like last time I'm just saying if the whole pick-up thing really is a wonderful mystical utopian quest of rampant non-misogyny and you personally are the king of highly improbable physical acts involving the female orgasmic response then surely you don't need to spend your time convincing people on message boards about it. like aren't we distracting you from your latest libidinously lascivious tantric dance marathon right now? just saying.

padraig (u.s.)
26-09-2010, 09:44 PM
also who wants to put $ down on the chance that c.l. comes back with some line about how I/anyone else is just too bitter/jealous/uptight/[insert similar adjective here] to appreciate, yunno, the greater glory of systematizing pick-up lines.

Mr. Tea
26-09-2010, 09:52 PM
surely you don't need to spend your time convincing people on message boards about it. like aren't we distracting you from your latest libidinously lascivious tantric dance marathon right now? just saying.

Tea's Third Law of the internet: every time you make an online boast about your sex life, you delay your next actual encounter with another person by three months.

padraig (u.s.)
26-09-2010, 10:12 PM
Thank you!

ok tho bro I was just thinking that I actually have to thank you b/c you are just too too jokes bro like a neverending fount of delirious internet quotation like the white whale of outrageous message board sex claims like you never thought it could exist until you see it F2F knowhatimsayin, givin a bro hella internet laffs stories for days & days.

what I'm saying is: enough with all this negging let's just hate-fuck and get the inevitable over with. bonus points if you can empower me to have a 17-minute orgasm.

lanugo
27-09-2010, 01:35 AM
If Machiavelli gives sound and universally applicable advice in Il Principe on how to aquire, increase and retain power by exploiting human weaknesses, I don't see why it shouldn't be equally possible, given a sufficiently high motivation to investigate the matter, to actually come up with pretty reliable and efficient tecniques to be successful in the much more mundane area of life that is dating. Considering the inherent comicality of the situation of human mating it is perfectly plausible to assume that the one who pushes the ridiculousness to the limit will, in fact, be also the one to attain the greatest success in this particular endeavour - just as in the amoral sphere of politics it is the extraordinarily ruthless actor who will be triumphant in the end. Thus, "pick-up artists" can only be said to be misogynistic in the same sense that Machiavellians can be said to be cynical or unscrupulous: their behaviour merely reflects the most expedient way to have the firmest possible grip on certain realities of life. In this sense, life itself is misogynistic or inhuman. This being said, Tea and padraig, why don't the two of you just piss off and start masturbating over the pictures of those bodybuilder type females you posted in the "Hot New Skool Babes" thread? You would love some good manhandling by those fine ladies, wouldn't you?

zhao
27-09-2010, 04:06 AM
also who wants to put $ down on the chance that c.l. comes back with some line about how I/anyone else is just too bitter/jealous/uptight/[insert similar adjective here] to appreciate, yunno, the greater glory of systematizing pick-up lines.

yes i will surely put money down on the chance that you, padraig (u.s.), are a joyless self righteous bore with a giant stick up your ass ALL the fucking time.

zhao
27-09-2010, 04:11 AM
If Machiavelli gives sound and universally applicable advice in Il Principe on how to aquire, increase and retain power by exploiting human weaknesses, I don't see why it shouldn't be equally possible, given a sufficiently high motivation to investigate the matter, to actually come up with pretty reliable and efficient tecniques to be successful in the much more mundane area of life that is dating. Considering the inherent comicality of the situation of human mating it is perfectly plausible to assume that the one who pushes the ridiculousness to the limit will, in fact, be also the one to attain the greatest success in this particular endeavour - just as in the amoral sphere of politics it is the extraordinarily ruthless actor who will be triumphant in the end. Thus, "pick-up artists" can only be said to be misogynistic in the same sense that Machiavellians can be said to be cynical or unscrupulous: their behaviour merely reflects the most expedient way to have the firmest possible grip on certain realities of life. In this sense, life itself is misogynistic or inhuman.

this is pretty much on the money.

in every kind of human endeavor, we can become better at anything we choose to do. how to use one's increased abilities in any sphere is another question. it is what it is. there are good things about it, and there are bad things about it.

zhao
27-09-2010, 04:48 AM
Tea and padraig, why don't the two of you just piss off and start masturbating over the pictures of those bodybuilder type females you posted in the "Hot New Skool Babes" thread? You would love some good manhandling by those fine ladies, wouldn't you?

petty plebs like these are so insecure that when ever someone shares their out of the ordinary aspirations or experiences, they just can not wait to try to shit on it, while high fiving eachother like highschool jocks trying to ridicule anyone who is a bit different.

zhao
27-09-2010, 05:12 AM
is the Machiavellian way of looking at life extremely sad and depressing? yes i think it is. but we live in a system of subjugation, power, and injustice, which is the real underlying sad and depressing thing. and Machiavellians are in a way simply realistic about it.

i personally do not choose to spend most of my energies on figuring out how to thrive in the system, be it climbing the corporate ladder or mastering the dating game, but it is not for me to judge those who do choose to excel in whatever.

and i believe that one attains universal truths and reach higher spiritual levels when they work on something, anything, diligently enough over the years and become adept, be it sound sculpture or tantra.

slowtrain
27-09-2010, 06:14 AM
....and I'm part of an Ongoing Tantric ecstatic dance group in the Netherlands, so my powers will only increase.



I don't mean to get involved in this argument (I don't anywhere enough about the subject, I've never 'picked up' a girl.....)

but this must be one of the most hilarious statements i have ever read




anyway, i generally find that if i am very nice to everyone, i feel good about myself for being such a good person, and being nice is often very helpful

Mr. Tea
27-09-2010, 11:36 AM
Padraig and I are 'plebs' for not taking seriously the online boasts of someone apparently dedicated to becoming a sort of new-age sexual Ubermensch through participation in 'ongoing tantric ecstatic dance'?* Chairman Zhao lays down the law once again. :rolleyes: But then, anything that helps you on your unique personal path of spiritual empowerment towards Ultimate Truth must be pursued at all costs! :cool:

*wasn't there a Mike Myers film about that a few years back?

http://hoboken411.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/the-love-guru-mike-myers-jessica-alba-justin-timberlake.jpg

Mr. Tea
27-09-2010, 11:44 AM
and i believe that one attains universal truths and reach higher spiritual levels when they work on something, anything, diligently enough over the years and become adept, be it sound sculpture or tantra.

Yeah, being able to pull birds whenever you want. Or attaining higher spiritual truths, as I like to call it.

Everytime I think you couldn't possibly sink further into self-parody, you somehow prove me wrong...

bobbin
27-09-2010, 03:39 PM
christ on a bike. there are a couple of people who i think for me will now enduringly be associated with a mental image strongly resembling mystery and style up there.

if you think it's desirable to subversively manipulate people into having sex with you, then you are a rather depressing excuse for a human! it's quite simple. and don't tell me that all personal interactions are based on forms of manipulation, because that would make you a rather depressing excuse for a human.

paidraig and tea, i'm happily with you plebs :)

baboon2004
27-09-2010, 04:53 PM
I think Ianugo makes an interesting point though.

bobbin
27-09-2010, 05:07 PM
I think Ianugo makes an interesting point though.

which one?


Thus, "pick-up artists" can only be said to be misogynistic in the same sense that Machiavellians can be said to be cynical or unscrupulous: their behaviour merely reflects the most expedient way to have the firmest possible grip on certain realities of life. In this sense, life itself is misogynistic or inhuman.

this one? i suppose it is interesting, in the sense of being unusually craven and intellectually lazy.


This being said, Tea and padraig, why don't the two of you just piss off and start masturbating over the pictures of those bodybuilder type females you posted in the "Hot New Skool Babes" thread? You would love some good manhandling by those fine ladies, wouldn't you?

or is it this witty and thoughtful riposte?

baboon2004
27-09-2010, 05:40 PM
Ha - no, just this:

"If Machiavelli gives sound and universally applicable advice in Il Principe on how to aquire, increase and retain power by exploiting human weaknesses, I don't see why it shouldn't be equally possible, given a sufficiently high motivation to investigate the matter, to actually come up with pretty reliable and efficient tecniques to be successful in the much more mundane area of life that is dating."

It would be a heartless exercise, but I agree with his point - people are easily swayed by manipulation, alas. I think everyone's had that experience of being 'wowed' by someone, and then afterwards regretting having been so easily swayed for what, in retrospect, seem pretty shaky reasons. Hence, room for manipulation.

Oh shit, just me?

Not advocating manipulation at all, just that I can see how systematic manipulation would be possible.

Leo
27-09-2010, 06:12 PM
i'm an old married dude, so wtf do i know about this but...my question is: when all is said and done, what do the pick-up artists actually have to show for themselves?

my guess is they get turned down a lot more often than they admit, but even if they do succeed in getting laid, what have they actually gained? a fun hour (or few minutes, as the case may be)? they certainly don't end up with any genuine friends, because most people see them as blatant manipulators/users.

yes, i have no doubt that they sometimes attain their "goal." it's just that their goal is one that doesn't have any real value.

Mr. Tea
27-09-2010, 06:14 PM
For the record, I think it'd be pretty cool to have the confidence to chat up any woman you liked the look of - and have a good chance of success, I mean - and if you picked up some tips from a book, so what? It's not even necessarily mysogynistic either, that all depends on why you're really doing it and your attitude to women generally. And if you can show a girl a good time in the sack, so much the better.

What makes me alternately laugh and cringe is the idea of there being this whole "community" dedicated purely to pulling and the elevation of it from something completely normal and worldly, that almost everyone does at least sometimes, into some kind of mystical personal-growth quest. All this talk of "enabling" and "empowering" (to say nothing of zhao's marvelous "attaining higher spiritual levels", as if life is some sort of karmic video game with power-ups to collect and bosses to defeat) is vaguely new-agey and self-helpy while at the same time oddly corporate-sounding; I like to think of this combination as 'assholistic'. It just puts me in mind of 'workshops' where name-badged delegates watch PowerPoint presentations and then discuss things in a circle while some goon writes random words on a flipchart.

For a good example of why the "community" aspect makes my skin crawl, consider:


We got into the sex club because my ladyfriend's parents are members.
Now maybe this just makes me a laughable old-fashioned prude, but if I had to choose between that^ and lifelong celibacy, I'd start to think seriously about the latter...I mean a 'sex club', seriously? To say nothing of one of which your partner's (or your own!) parents are members...it just makes the whole thing sound about as sexy as a bridge club or knitting circle. "Sorry, I'd love to come out for a pint after work, but I've got Sex Club tonight." Tell me there is something just a *bit* weird about that sentence.

Dunninger
27-09-2010, 07:22 PM
It would be a heartless exercise, but I agree with his point - people are easily swayed by manipulation, alas. I think everyone's had that experience of being 'wowed' by someone, and then afterwards regretting having been so easily swayed for what, in retrospect, seem pretty shaky reasons. Hence, room for manipulation.

Oh shit, just me?

Not advocating manipulation at all, just that I can see how systematic manipulation would be possible.

I don't think anyone doubts that people can be manipulated. Con artists, politicians, sect leaders, a lot of people do it. I think Mr. Tea, padraig etc. just oppose the idea that in the case of PUAs it's an act of self-improvement. Just because the human psyche has ways to exploit it, it doesn't mean it's natural and ok to do so.
Ironically beginning PUAs are manipulated the same way as they manipulate by letting them feel bad about themselves ("hey, you're just an average frustrated chump"), taking their money for books, seminars, dvds etc. and then reinforcing the mechanisms that let them feel bad in the first place (number of sex partners = self worth).

grizzleb
27-09-2010, 07:34 PM
For the record, I think it'd be pretty cool to have the confidence to chat up any woman you liked the look of - and have a good chance of success, I mean - and if you picked up some tips from a book, so what? It's not even necessarily mysogynistic either, that all depends on why you're really doing it and your attitude to women generally. And if you can show a girl a good time in the sack, so much the better.

What makes me alternately laugh and cringe is the idea of there being this whole "community" dedicated purely to pulling and the evelation of it from something completely normal and worldly, that almost everyone does at least sometimes, into some kind of mystical personal-growth quest. All this talk of "enabling" and "empowering" (to say nothing of zhao's marvelous "attaining higher spiritual levels", as if life is some sort of karmic video game with power-ups to collect and bosses to defeat) is vaguely new-agey and self-helpy while at the same time oddly corporate-sounding; I like to think of this combination as 'assholistic'. It just puts me in mind of 'workshops' where name-badged delegates watch PowerPoint presentations and then discuss things in a circle while some goon writes random words on a flipchart.

For a good example of why the "community" aspect makes my skin crawl, consider:


Now maybe this just makes me a laughable old-fashioned prude, but if I had to choose between that^ and lifelong celibacy, I'd start to think seriously about the latter...I mean a 'sex club', seriously? To say nothing of one of which your partner's (or your own!) parents are members...it just makes the whole thing sound about as sexy as a bridge club or knitting circle. "Sorry, I'd love to come out for a pint after work, but I've got Sex Club tonight." Tell me there is something just a *bit* weird about that sentence.
This is the authoritative post in this thread. I loled a good few times. Cosmic video game is brilliant.

comelately
27-09-2010, 08:15 PM
For a good example of why the "community" aspect makes my skin crawl, consider:


Now maybe this just makes me a laughable old-fashioned prude, but if I had to choose between that^ and lifelong celibacy, I'd start to think seriously about the latter...I mean a 'sex club', seriously? To say nothing of one of which your partner's (or your own!) parents are members...it just makes the whole thing sound about as sexy as a bridge club or knitting circle. "Sorry, I'd love to come out for a pint after work, but I've got Sex Club tonight." Tell me there is something just a *bit* weird about that sentence.

*shrug* Ideas regarding sexuality are different in continental Europe. Your parents probably had sex at some point.....me going to that sex club probably isn't anything like a typical 'community' experience anyway. Calling something or someone weird is the very epitome of a meaningless neg 99% of the time.

padraig (u.s.)
27-09-2010, 08:37 PM
well it's officially a dissensus thread now that zhao has chimed in with some nonsensical gibberish


when ever someone shares their out of the ordinary aspirations or experiences

their "out of the ordinary" aspirations to pick up women & get laid, are you for real?


while high fiving eachother like highschool jocks trying to ridicule anyone who is a bit different.

the irony of you saying this in direct response to one of the churlishly sophomoric response I've ever seen on Dissensus is almost certainly lost on you I realize

(also back the hell off high school jocks bro, how is that you the master of all things personal enlightenment are the perpetrator of such cliched stereotype as if athletics couldn't be/aren't a totally valid path to all your higher truth b.s.)

Mr. Tea
27-09-2010, 08:40 PM
*shrug* Ideas regarding sexuality are different in continental Europe. Your parents probably had sex at some point.....me going to that sex club probably isn't anything like a typical 'community' experience anyway. Calling something or someone weird is the very epitome of a meaningless neg 99% of the time.

Whatever, if you enjoy it I'm not trying to stop you. And yes, idea about sex are different everywhere you go, but I would hazard a guess that most people even in the great country of Europe are probably not members of sex clubs...dogging, cottaging and blowjobs in alleyways happen in Britain too, after all...

Edit: fair enough, you got me, 'weird' in and of itself is not a devastating critique. But I think you're barking up the wrong tree if you're trying to make out that anyone who doesn't go to sex clubs (i.e. 99% of people) must be prudish or scared of sex (the 'your parents had sex at some point' bit).

padraig (u.s.)
27-09-2010, 08:55 PM
Calling something or someone weird

yeah I will actually agree with you here. I think I was pretty clear in the original thread that the issue is/was never promiscuity, or people's fetishes or whatever. sex clubs, not my thing, other consenting adults wanna do it, 100% cool. same goes for (pretty much) whatever as long as all involved are - main point - mutually consenting. that's really where the whole PUA thing runs into trouble, granted it's a much grayer area than any kind of non-consensual act (also I hear (kinda) the argument that in a sense (some) women are at least open to being picked up & that this is all just an enhancement of what happens naturally - I don't really buy it, but I least hear it). really what it means is that like I been saying if c.lately & whoever wants to do their thing sure I'm not exactly thrilled by it but it's not something explicit where you can draw a definitive line, ultimately it's still up to each person to make decisions they find morally acceptable.

also I think anyway attacking a PUA thing specifically is a bit of missing the forest for the trees, in that it's largely symptomatic of broader issues in re: gender, gender relations, alienation, etc what have you anyway

padraig (u.s.)
27-09-2010, 09:09 PM
why don't the two of you just piss off and start masturbating over the pictures of those bodybuilder type females you posted in the "Hot New Skool Babes" thread? You would love some good manhandling by those fine ladies, wouldn't you?

oh but you are too clever my good man, I shall think fondly of this delightful and stirring repartee next time I'm skimming through one of your overwrought grad student philosophy reference diatribes on AIDS denialism and the like

(for the record - ahem - gina carano is a Muay Thai & MMA fighter, not a bodybuilder. bit of a difference. & not that matters, but no, I wouldn't mind a bit of manhandling, not at all. I think my Muay Thai would have to get a lot better first tho given that her last 2 boyfriends are arguably the best 2 American MT fighters of the last decade)

also for the PUAs sake I feel I should tell you you're not doing them any favors with all that Machivellian bit. yeah that's just what's needed for dating to become more realpolitik...

comelately
27-09-2010, 09:13 PM
Whatever, if you enjoy it I'm not trying to stop you. And yes, idea about sex are different everywhere you go, but I would hazard a guess that most people even in the great country of Europe are probably not members of sex clubs...dogging, cottaging and blowjobs in alleyways happen in Britain too, after all...

Yes....but I remember mentioning going to the club to an older Dutch friend some time on, and although he probably wasn't the sort of person to go, he had certainly heard of the club and found the revelation very non-shocking.

With regards to padraig's last comments, I indeed find some pua tactics to be more than a little distasteful. I think running cold-reads where you say the same thing every time is over the line. I think ridiculously structured ways of getting past what is called 'last minute resistance' are pretty nasty etc. And as I suggested earlier, it is possible to be critical about some aspects of new-age thought while using other aspects of it for positive purposes. People josh about my little dance group, and fair enough I guess, I am the only UK male on it. However, there are several lesbians as well (who like me), and indeed around 45 women of all ages and background. And indeed part of what we get to do is discuss and play with these wider issues of gender, gender relations, alienation etc.

IdleRich
27-09-2010, 10:08 PM
Even if you think that the techniques described in the book are not in themselves mysoginistic it's pretty hard to argue that the constant references to women as numbers from one and ten and the general level of constant and extreme objectification of women really is - and very much so.

Mr. Tea
27-09-2010, 10:21 PM
oh but you are too clever my good man, I shall think fondly of this delightful and stirring repartee next time I'm skimming through one of your overwrought grad student philosophy reference diatribes on AIDS denialism and the like


Oh jesus, I'd forgotten that - I was just thinking about the thread about psychedelics and therapy, and his insistence that medication for a debilitating mental illness is bad because it robs people of their right to be artistically and romantically depressed, and that this goes doubly for psychedelics because it offends some student's notion of protecting the authenticity of his drug experience from the intangible corrupting tentacles of Kapital. Next up: the Apollo hoax?

lanugo
27-09-2010, 11:38 PM
Speaking of which, the documentary "House of Numbers" I mentioned back then which challenges the standard scientific/political theory of HIV/AIDS has actually been released ever since and I can only encourage everyone to watch it, do further research and make up their own mind. It is nothing short of mindblowing what the film has to say about the glaring confusion in the scientific community about the exact definition of AIDS, the shocking unreliability and inadequacy of every available HIV testing method, the cooking up of global AIDS statistics, and, most of all, the lack of definitive scientific evidence for a chain of causation between HIV and 'AIDS'. The film is certainly NOT promoting a conspiracy theory of any kind but merely gives a forum to numerous experts on the matter - renowned scientists, journalists, former UNAIDS employees, AIDS-infected patients - who raise well-founded doubts concerning the mainstream HIV/AIDS orthodoxy.

zhao
28-09-2010, 05:23 AM
no one has ever denied AIDS on this forum, only ever questioned the official story.

but i suppose questioning = denial to these 1 dimensional fucktards.

comelately
28-09-2010, 07:04 AM
Even if you think that the techniques described in the book are not in themselves mysoginistic it's pretty hard to argue that the constant references to women as numbers from one and ten and the general level of constant and extreme objectification of women really is - and very much so.

I don't equate objectification with hatred as easily as you, but obviously you have a point. I think you will find that the numbers really aren't used that much anymore. There's an idea in some paradigms that you have to do certain things differently with '9s and 10s', but there is actually more involved in being a '9 or 10' than looks anyway and it has more to with one's perception of her value as perceived by other people than your personal 'objectification' - though in some cases as a (possibly pathetic excuse for a) human being, you will be attracted to somebody because you perceive others are attracted. As I say, a lot of paradigms don't really bother with numbers. That still leaves you with stuff like HBBigTits, which is not unproblematic, but night clubs are about sex and are going to be about objectification to one extent or another. As I said over a year ago, it wasn't all shamanic dance spaces in Leicester Square prior to 5 years ago.

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 10:02 AM
no one has ever denied AIDS on this forum, only ever questioned the official story.

Where's the banging-your-head-against-a-brick-wall emoticon?

This is the exact same logic as saying "But we're not denying Darwinian evolution, we're just questioning it [because we're tacitly hostile to it]". For evolution you can substitute all sorts of things - the historicity of the Holocaust, for example.


but i suppose questioning = denial to these 1 dimensional fucktards.

Your supreme un-selfawareness would be almost endearing if you weren't so fucking obnoxious at the same time.

scottdisco
28-09-2010, 10:11 AM
oh i remember that AIDS thread. i remember


Seeing that UNAIDS is unable to present well-founded data that differentiates HIV infections and AIDS cases I become suspicious and begin to wonder whether the purported HIV/AIDS "epidemic" in Africa does exist at all.

i also remember Nomad being on form and patiently going through loads of things for Ianugo, although as a neat summary i'd say


Nobody dies from AIDS, they die from AIDS-related complications, usually an opportunistic infection or cancer.

was pretty helpful

zhao
28-09-2010, 10:26 AM
This is the exact same logic as saying "But we're not denying Darwinian evolution, we're just questioning it [because we're tacitly hostile to it]".

Darwinian evolution most CERTAINLY needs to be questioned. many many aspects of his work, and their various interpretations, has been continually questioned since its publication by the scientific community, and to fruitful results.

on this PUA thing, the sexist and misogynistic dimensions involved is very much apparent and obvious to all. and here is someone actually involved in this stuff, who is saying that it is not necessarily all about sexism and misogyny, and that there are other dimensions which he claims are beneficial to his personal growth, and perhaps to others as well.

this is interesting. to me and maybe others. and i would like to read what he has to say without miserable fucks like you and padraig acting like dismissive self-righteous pricks from the get go. it's boring: "oh here is an easy target for us to make fun of, and we can act like the moral authority and come down on this guy, because it's safe and easy to attack someone who is into The Game".

it's much too easy to reduce these guys to the lowest stereotype image, and apparently that's all you are interested in doing. and this is not productive in the least. not to mention fucking ANNOYING.

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 10:30 AM
...was pretty helpful

Yeah, but all that has behind it is decades of rigorous, peer-reviewed medical and scientific evidence. Which, in my all-important personal opinion, is pretty flimsy when weighed up against this video by some guy I saw once on YouTube a couple of years ago. He was pretty persuasive, plus he's a lone maverick voice-in-the-wilderness and therefore almost certainly correct.

zhao
28-09-2010, 10:32 AM
AIDS need to be questioned for sure. perhaps not the existence of the epidemic (i differ somewhat to lanugo), but for sure the official story of what it is, what it does, and its (lack of) cures.

but lets start up that thread again if you want to go there. and maybe try to keep this one on topic?

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 10:40 AM
Darwinian evolution most CERTAINLY needs to be questioned. many many aspects of his work, and their various interpretations, has been continually questioned since its publication by the scientific community, and to fruitful results.


OK, fruitful results have come from 'questioning' the theory in the sense of 'continually refining and extending it in the light of new scientific evidence'. The 'questioning' I was referring to was the kind that suggests that the entire theory is wrong from top to bottom because of a deep-seated belief in literal divine creation.

zhao
28-09-2010, 10:41 AM
OK, fruitful results have come from 'questioning' the theory in the sense of 'continually refining and extending it in the light of new scientific evidence'. The 'questioning' I was referring to was the kind that suggests that the entire theory is wrong from top to bottom because of a deep-seated belief in literal divine creation.

that's exactly what i'm saying about AIDS fucktard.

droid
28-09-2010, 10:43 AM
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/tdomf/156715/argpyr.jpg

zhao
28-09-2010, 10:43 AM
on this PUA thing, the sexist and misogynistic dimensions involved is very much apparent and obvious to all. and here is someone actually involved in this stuff, who is saying that it is not necessarily all about sexism and misogyny, and that there are other dimensions which he claims are beneficial to his personal growth, and perhaps to others as well.

this is interesting. to me and maybe others. and i would like to read what he has to say without miserable fucks like you and padraig acting like dismissive self-righteous pricks from the get go. it's boring: "oh here is an easy target for us to make fun of, and we can act like the moral authority and come down on this guy, because it's safe and easy to attack someone who is into The Game".

it's much too easy to reduce these guys to the lowest stereotype image, and apparently that's all you are interested in doing. and this is not productive in the least. not to mention fucking ANNOYING.

seriously though, Tea and Padraig, go fuck yourself with your constant condescension and banal dismissal of other view points. this thread would be a lot better without it.

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 11:06 AM
that's exactly what i'm saying about AIDS fucktard.

Then why quote at length people who have been explicitly denying that HIV causes AIDS when you started that thread, oh wise one? You weren't saying 'here is a new and interesting piece of research that refines or expands our knowledge of HIV/AIDS', you were giving a platform to irresponsible idiots promoting the ludicrous idea that AIDS is caused by the drugs given to HIV carriers, rather than the virus itself. This isn't 'refining' anything, it's turning established knowledge on its head and is demonstrably untrue.

And don't try and hide behind some pathetic "devil's advocate" stance, either. There is nothing to advocate here. It's like someone saying "well maybe we should at least listen to the Holocaust-deniers, because while-I-don't-agree-with-them-exactly-of-course, it could stimulate interesting debate". What is there to debate? Either the fucking thing happened, or it didn't. This might sound like a hysterical analogy, but misinformation about HIV - whether from AIDS denialism or Catholic anti-condom propaganda - may well already have killed millions of people.

padraig (u.s.)
28-09-2010, 11:12 AM
and here is someone actually involved in this stuff, who is saying that it is not necessarily all about sexism and misogyny

if you'll pay even a bit of attention you'll notice we've managed to find some at least semi-common ground with the individual in question and have a bit of reasonably civil discourse (albeit while retaining our skepticism), granted I realize that's not conducive to your temper tantrums


self-righteous pricks...we can act like the moral authority

remind you of anyone you know? say...a certain hip Berlin graphic designer/DJ (Kode9 approved!) with a "colonial bone to pick" and a hard-on for tossing out ill-considered, hollow moral condemnations by the bucketful? the irony, again, being that the whole PUA thing couldn't possibly be more Western (in the zhao non-approving of sense) what its liberal borrowings from sociobio and evo psych, its essentially industrial assembly line approach to dating, its whole classic self-help approach, and so on.

of course if you did actually want to learn more about the PUA thing there are only, what, a whole mess of websites devoted specifically and only to that

zhao
28-09-2010, 11:15 AM
Then why quote at length people who have been explicitly denying that HIV causes AIDS when you started that thread, oh wise one? You weren't saying 'here is a new and interesting piece of research that refines or expands our knowledge of HIV/AIDS', you were giving a platform to irresponsible idiots promoting the ludicrous idea that AIDS is caused by the drugs given to HIV carriers, rather than the virus itself. This isn't 'refining' anything, it's turning established knowledge on its head and is demonstrably untrue.

And don't try and hide behind some pathetic "devil's advocate" stance, either. There is nothing to advocate here. It's like someone saying "well maybe we should at least listen to the Holocaust-deniers, because while-I-don't-agree-with-them-exactly-of-course, it could stimulate interesting debate". What is there to debate? Either the fucking thing happened, or it didn't. This might sound like a hysterical analogy, but misinformation about HIV may well already have killed more people than the death camps.

i see that you looked hard and long for a quote from me remotely resembling denial... better luck next time :)

because some information brought up by the deniers in the case of AIDS is valuable, involving demonstrable truths which are at complete odds with the official story.

as much as you love to compare everything to the holocaust, not everything in the world is as cut and dry as "did or did not happen", whether you like it or not, Tea.

john eden
28-09-2010, 11:26 AM
it's much too easy to reduce these guys to the lowest stereotype image, and apparently that's all you are interested in doing. and this is not productive in the least. not to mention fucking ANNOYING.

But how is this any different from your recent thread slagging off hipster DJs?

I think this thread has been pretty good on the whole and whilst polar opposites have emerged, quite a few people on both sides have written things about relationships and dating which have been very interesting.

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 11:33 AM
i see that you looked hard and long for a quote from me remotely resembling denial... better luck next time :)

Sigh...where did I accuse you, personally, of AIDS denialism? I didn't. I said you were giving a platform to AIDS deniers and, by darkly hinting that the "official story" of AIDS "needs to be questioned", implicitly supporting them. Why do you have such a problem with the official HIV-causes-AIDS line, and so much time for people who refute it, if at least a teeny part of you doesn't thrill to the thought that maybe HIV doesn't cause AIDS? {Science/the Establishment/The West} 0 - 1 {internet conspiracy pundits/Kung-Fu masters}! Wa-hey! :cool:



because some information brought up by the deniers in the case of AIDS is valuable, involving demonstrable truths which are at complete odds with the official story.

O RLY. Such as? Nomad (edit: and padraig, in fairness) answered all that pretty comprehensively in the AIDS thread, I can't be arsed to go back and quote it all.


as much as you love to compare everything to the holocaust, not everything in the world is as cut and dry as "did or did not happen", whether you like it or not, Tea.

Yeah, I guess you're right. Maybe the Holocaust kind-of happened.

padraig (u.s.)
28-09-2010, 11:40 AM
look bros I'm sorry I brought up AIDS. let's take it back to that thread or a new AIDS thread tho if dudes wanna talk about it (my views in short remain pretty much the same, I'll refrain from saying more in the interest of getting back O/T, you can probably guess them anyway).

john eden
28-09-2010, 11:44 AM
i see that you looked hard and long for a quote from me remotely resembling denial... better luck next time :)

because some information brought up by the deniers in the case of AIDS is valuable, involving demonstrable truths which are at complete odds with the official story.

Surely this is what science is all about - questioning?

I don't really see the need for a seperate, youtube-based denialist community when groundbreaking research that overturns the paradigm can appear in peer reviewed scientific journals?

john eden
28-09-2010, 11:46 AM
Fair point padraig.

Is this PUA stuff the male equivalent of "the rules" or "men are from mars / women are from venus" etc?

Or are both completely degraded versions of hetero maleness and femaleness?

IdleRich
28-09-2010, 12:26 PM
"I don't equate objectification with hatred as easily as you, but obviously you have a point."
Fair enough, maybe hatred is the wrong phrase but I find something equally unpleasant about reducing people to number-rated objects that aren't even worth hating.



"I think you will find that the numbers really aren't used that much anymore. There's an idea in some paradigms that you have to do certain things differently with '9s and 10s', but there is actually more involved in being a '9 or 10' than looks anyway and it has more to with one's perception of her value as perceived by other people than your personal 'objectification'"
Ah ok, I'm just going on what I read in the book really - in that it's quite common for someone to say something along the lines of "Oh my God, a nine!" as some big-titted blonde walks in to the bar.


"That still leaves you with stuff like HBBigTits, which is not unproblematic"
What's that, Hard Body Bit Tits?


"but night clubs are about sex and are going to be about objectification to one extent or another. As I said over a year ago, it wasn't all shamanic dance spaces in Leicester Square prior to 5 years ago."
And music and dancing. And some people even take drugs I've heard.

Corpsey
28-09-2010, 12:38 PM
I was wondering why women kept saying '3' and '1.2' when I walked past them in bars. :o

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 12:48 PM
I think it's pointless to try and pretend that everyone doesn't objectify other people at least sometimes and at least to a certain extent, or that recognising this makes you a terrible person. Go to a party, bar, club, beach or whatever and there will be some people of the appropriate sex you find drop-dead gorgeous, some you can maybe imagine gettin' wid under the right circumstances and some you find frankly unattractive (assuming you're neither asexual nor so undiscriminating that you'd happily screw pretty much anything with a pulse). Assigning numerical grades seems objectionable simply because it makes the whole thing that much more explicit.

(There's another problem I have with it, namely: how is the scale calibrated? Is it linear or logarithmic? Is a '10' only 1/9th more attractive than a '9', or twice, or ten times as attractive? Maybe it's an absolute scale, and a '10' represents a theoretically perfect beauty? Is a '5' defined as the population average?

I propose:


hotness quotient H = log10(P/A)

where P = how much you'd like to shag the person in question
and A = how much you'd like to shag the statistically average person of the appropriate sex

which is a relative scale in that it is automatically calibrated to your inherent background horniness. It has the advantage that it ranges from +inf to -inf and so can be used to grade anyone of arbitrary attractiveness or repulsiveness. 'Hot' people are +ve, 'unhot' people are -ve and someone who's exactly average rates as a 0.

The guy who does xkcd.com should do a cartoon about this - probably has done, in fact...)

zhao
28-09-2010, 01:01 PM
lol. times D (desperation quotient) and I (inebriation level)





hotness quotient H = log10(P/A) X D X I

where P = how much you'd like to shag the person in question
and A = how much you'd like to shag the statistically average person of the appropriate sex

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 01:05 PM
Ha, yeah, zhao and I can clearly agree on one thing - H depends very sensitively on blood alcohol level. Desperation is built into A, though - it increases with the length of time since you last got laid, effectively reducing your lower hotness threshold for potential partners.

Corpsey: don't worry, maybe they were just estimating the size of your knob?

droid
28-09-2010, 01:12 PM
Ha, yeah, zhao and I can clearly agree on one thing - H depends very sensitively on blood alcohol level.

Corpsey: don't worry, maybe they were just estimating the size of your knob?

Or your IQ?

Corpsey
28-09-2010, 01:16 PM
Or the number of people left on earth there would have to be for them to consider having sex with me in order to repopulate the planet?

STN
28-09-2010, 01:19 PM
I maintain that boredom is a more powerful aphrodisiac than booze.

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 01:38 PM
I maintain that boredom is a more powerful aphrodisiac than booze.

I was wondering why I always get an inexplicable hard-on while reading your posts, hyur hyur snurk snurk *sharp nasal inhalation*.

STN
28-09-2010, 02:01 PM
No, no, that's because I'm a stone-cold 10.

Mr. Tea
28-09-2010, 02:08 PM
No, no, that's because I'm a stone-cold 10.

Oh yeah, that too.

*sproing!*

slowtrain
01-10-2010, 07:06 AM
Does the guy who does XKCD post here or something???

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/beautiful_dream.png

comelately
01-10-2010, 03:30 PM
I sort of get it. But I don't think it is one of XKCD's sharper moments. It's missing a 4th picture of the same woman in a club with a drink and a player feeding her some line and her giggling.....

Leo
01-10-2010, 03:55 PM
I sort of get it. But I don't think it is one of XKCD's sharper moments. It's missing a 4th picture of the same woman in a club with a drink and a player feeding her some line and her giggling.....

but she'd probably be laughing AT the "player" rather than with him. :-)

Mr. Tea
01-10-2010, 04:13 PM
I want to see some of the lines this book recommends you don't use:

"If I said you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me?"

"Is that a ladder in your tights or a stairway to heaven?"

"Can I take you out to dinner? Oh, well will you let me buy you a drink at least? Huh. I guess a sympathy shag's out of the question..."

"No, you misheard, I'm on the SEXY offenders' register!!!

:cool:

comelately
01-10-2010, 08:03 PM
but she'd probably be laughing AT the "player" rather than with him. :-)

Well, maybe, if XKCD wanted to be bizarrely humourless and lacking in observation.

Leo
01-10-2010, 08:52 PM
Well, maybe, if XKCD wanted to be bizarrely humourless and lacking in observation.

or realistic. ;)

btw, love the seemingly thoughtful, casual yet clearly passive-aggressive response to everything, is that one of the techniques that drives the chicks wild? i genuinely don't care in the least what you get up to. go crazy, have fun, more power to you. i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on getting laid.

comelately
02-10-2010, 12:18 AM
btw, love the seemingly thoughtful, casual yet clearly passive-aggressive response to everything,


i genuinely don't care in the least what you get up to. go crazy, have fun, more power to you. i just find it funny that......

Casual yet passive-aggressive you say? Pffffffffftttttttt

zhao
02-10-2010, 05:07 AM
i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on getting laid.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on playing records.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on playing chess.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on cooking.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on growing flowers.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on watching birds.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on drawing pictures.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on taking photos.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on wearing clothes.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on decorating your home.

i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on making money.

all these silly people in the world... why do they waste so much time with frivolous, unimportant activities? why can't they be like me, and spend time doing something useful or interesting?

i am in the position to judge others because obviously MY passion/obsession/area of interest is IMPORTANT while other people's are STUPID.

slowtrain
02-10-2010, 06:44 AM
Or maybe everyone is just kinda silly/funny?

I'd probably agree with that sentiment (to some extent)

zhao
02-10-2010, 09:13 AM
Or maybe everyone is just kinda silly/funny?

exactly. people into The Game are not any more or less silly than people who are into the stock market or programing beats (all of whom in all likelihood either conscously or subconsciously do it to get laid anyway).

i dunno. a few psychologists (like that silly Austrian dude), would place libidinal drive at the underlying center of motivation for most human activities besides survival. so if you buy that to any extent, these Players are actually just more honest about it, and instead of going at it in round about ways, tackling the thing itself head on.

anyhow, does anyone think this "comelately" might be an alias of one of the regular posters? only because he started posting here when the last conversation about this started, was MIA for 2 years, and then came back within a few hours of this new conversation on the same topic starting. :slanted:

comelately
02-10-2010, 09:44 AM
Haha, it's not the first time I've been accused of being a sock-puppet. I am real real and hyperreal!

DannyL
02-10-2010, 12:05 PM
or realistic. ;)

btw, love the seemingly thoughtful, casual yet clearly passive-aggressive response to everything, is that one of the techniques that drives the chicks wild? i genuinely don't care in the least what you get up to. go crazy, have fun, more power to you. i just find it funny that so much time, effort, discussion, practice, training and importance is placed on getting laid.

I agree that the training aspect seems deeply weird, and I'm sure is pretty much about extracting money from suckers, but you're surprised about time, effort, discussion and importance being put into sex and relationships?! Come off it!

DannyL
02-10-2010, 12:13 PM
or realistic. ;)


I think the weirdest (?) thing about it is that some of it does work. Or can be made to work at least, by the right person. There's a deeply strange clip on Youtube taking from one of Louis Theoreux's programmes, of a guy called Ross Jefferies (mentioned in The Game - and not an attractive man) employing the techniques on a pretty young air hostess, and it seems to work absolutely fine for him, much to Louie's incredulity. He then gives it a go himself and is completely bemused and baffled when he eventually gets a girl's number. There's a core of truth to the techniques, I think. Whether it's ethical, misogynistic, morally repugnant or whatever is a different kettle of smooth-talking fish.

Leo
02-10-2010, 01:01 PM
all these silly people in the world... why do they waste so much time with frivolous, unimportant activities? why can't they be like me, and spend time doing something useful or interesting?

i am in the position to judge others because obviously MY passion/obsession/area of interest is IMPORTANT while other people's are STUPID.

oy vey! reading a little much into my comment, i think.

IdleRich
02-10-2010, 03:39 PM
"I think the weirdest (?) thing about it is that some of it does work. Or can be made to work at least, by the right person. There's a deeply strange clip on Youtube taking from one of Louis Theoreux's programmes, of a guy called Ross Jefferies (mentioned in The Game - and not an attractive man) employing the techniques on a pretty young air hostess, and it seems to work absolutely fine for him, much to Louie's incredulity."
You showed me that clip, I don't think that Ross Jefferies is as ugly as everyone says.

zhao
02-10-2010, 08:15 PM
oy vey! reading a little much into my comment, i think.

perhaps a little. but it's the general gist of what most people here are saying.

padraig (u.s.)
02-10-2010, 11:17 PM
i am in the position to judge others because obviously MY passion/obsession/area of interest is IMPORTANT while other people's are STUPID.

well nah you've totally missed the point then certainly the problem never was frivolity of all things.

(aside from which, pot-kettle-black times a thousand)


these Players are actually just more honest about it

to be honest bro I'm so tired of that tired line of reasoning. that these dudes of all people are claiming greater honesty. as it if weren't entirely possible to just be honest w/o all that guff as if the only way to be "more honest" was to devote yourself to the systematization of delivering glib lines which are, let's be honest, anything but honest. again I'll leave moral judgments to man's own consciences but please enough with the more honest talk, which honestly only ever sounds like assuaging of somewhat guilty aforementioned consciences.

padraig (u.s.)
02-10-2010, 11:23 PM
It's missing a 4th picture of the same woman in a club with a drink and a player feeding her some line and her giggling.....

with all respect statements like this are the reason I struggle to take you at all seriously dude. do you reckon that perhaps there's just a tiny possibility that somewhere in the world there are women who would laugh in the face of that player and his lines...

I reckon quite a few people wound it humorous anyway as quite a few people doubtless find the Game to be humorous (or some mixture of humorous & sad), tho you are of course free to ignore them as well as the humorless xkcd, and go about your business.

slowtrain
02-10-2010, 11:26 PM
Wouldn't it be more honest to admit you just want a good fuck and will do it at womens expense with little regard for anything more than yr own orgasm?

Or are they already admitting that?

Apologies if I'm way off... A lot of this seems to be waaay over my head

zhao
03-10-2010, 02:17 AM
well nah you've totally missed the point then certainly the problem never was frivolity of all things.

(aside from which, pot-kettle-black times a thousand)

no that is exactly what is happening.

when have i ever told people what they're into is sad and stupid? (saying hipster djs suck doesn't count. what would count is if i said djing is sad.)


to be honest bro I'm so tired of that tired line of reasoning. that these dudes of all people are claiming greater honesty. as it if weren't entirely possible to just be honest w/o all that guff as if the only way to be "more honest" was to devote yourself to the systematization of delivering glib lines which are, let's be honest, anything but honest. again I'll leave moral judgments to man's own consciences but please enough with the more honest talk, which honestly only ever sounds like assuaging of somewhat guilty aforementioned consciences.

very clear that it is you who is missing the point by a mile.

i was not talking about honesty of Method. i was not talking about procedural honesty of how to go about it. i was talking about the honesty of directly pursuing that which we all want (by all i mean 99% of men. if you are in the 1% fair enough. but i seriously doubt it) pragmatically, in the real world today.

again, your condescending reduction of what these guys do to "feeding lines" is simple minded. what they actually do is try to maneuver with greater success within the status quo of social contexts, with their given value systems, transactional regulations, rules and structures, however arbitrary, silly, sad, or unfair these values and structures may be.

someone said what is funny is that it works. of course it works. a lot of this stuff is just common sense. people behave in certain patterns, this is undeniable, and if you can discern those patterns, deconstruct them and understand them, you can use them toward your own advantage.

with that said, it is a bit ironic that i'm defending these guys. because my own game is at its best when i'm the least conscious of playing it, when i'm least aware of the rules, and sometimes (often?) when i'm breaking them. i mostly rely on intuition, spontaneity, simple classic charm and wit, and almost never think in terms of The Game.

but my game would certainly improve if i did pay a bit more attention to some of these things lol. i don't know much about it, but just judging from a few youtubes i watched while waiting for my rice to cook earlier this evening, it is nothing more or less than the systematic and logical breaking down of social convention. like becoming a better interviewer, athlete or politician. it is what it is.

what is interesting is the articulation of social dynamics that i have never heard anyone articulate before, but we have all surely experienced (watching a few of these vids i was like OMG i have encountered that scenario a thousand times, and now i kinda see what i did wrong in half of them!)

a simple example: i start chatting up a beautiful woman at the bar, and within the first few minutes she says "buy me a drink?" 9 times out of 10 in the past i would have, in my ignorance, bought her that drink, to show my generosity, whatever. but the reality, however sad or silly, is that by immediately buying that drink (jumping through the hoop she holds out), i have lost respect in her eyes. and what usually happens is at most a few more minutes of conversation, and she walks away.

(of course we are talking about the majority here, there are always people who do not behave in these patterns, who live outside of convention, but they are exceptions. my GF is an exception, and i am very glad/thankful that she is.)

lyndon243
03-10-2010, 04:21 AM
their mind control techniques must be more powerful than i can imagine.
Yeah, your definitely right. ;)

DannyL
03-10-2010, 01:07 PM
This is an interesting read (apart from some horrible anti-semitism):

http://www.puahate.com/showthread.php?t=6075

Alleges that Neil Strauss' relationship with Lisa Leveridge (Courtney Love's bassist) which was the denouement of the book, was just a big publicity stunt. The whole forum seems to be run by angry blokes who feel they've been conned by PUA companies.

I am finding this stuff compellingly readable.

Warning: vast swathes of that foum NSFW due to porn images posted.

DannyL
03-10-2010, 06:03 PM
You showed me that clip, I don't think that Ross Jefferies is as ugly as everyone says.

http://i1.lelong.com.my/UserImages/Items/0710/21/klaq77%4011.jpg

Mr. Tea
03-10-2010, 08:00 PM
Wouldn't it be more honest to admit you just want a good fuck and will do it at womens expense with little regard for anything more than yr own orgasm?

Or are they already admitting that?

Apologies if I'm way off... A lot of this seems to be waaay over my head

How is it necessarily at a woman's "expense"? If half of what comelately is saying is true, he can make women climax pretty much by winking at them - of course, this is an Internet Sex Boast and all usual caveats apply - but it's stupid and old-fashioned (and, ironically, sexist) to assume that every casual hook-up is a case of a man 'taking advantage of' a woman. Plenty of women like casual sex, you know, or at least have had casual sex without having been 'tricked' into it.

Mr. Tea
03-10-2010, 08:10 PM
a simple example: i start chatting up a beautiful woman at the bar, and within the first few minutes she says "buy me a drink?" 9 times out of 10 in the past i would have, in my ignorance, bought her that drink, to show my generosity, whatever. but the reality, however sad or silly, is that by immediately buying that drink (jumping through the hoop she holds out), i have lost respect in her eyes. and what usually happens is at most a few more minutes of conversation, and she walks away.

That sounds to me like something a woman who's into "The Rules" would do - which is basically the female equivalent of "The Game", right? (I'm not convinced most women, even especially hot ones, are than conniving and tricksy - though maybe I'm just being hopelessly naive here). Which would just seem to back up the xkcd cartoon about 'Rules' women and 'Game' men being perfectly suited to each other...

DannyL
03-10-2010, 08:20 PM
I think the problem with the line Zhao's posted is that it assumes there's some sort of magical key to female responses and behaviour. Some women might feel they're in the presence of someone cool if you don't buy them a drink, some might think you're cheap, someone you buy a drink for might be all over you. That's one of many things wrong with this stuff - it's trying to extract rules about social interaction, but seems to miss the fact that - newsflash - people are different.

There's the odd bit of interesting stuff in PUA material but a lot it is fantasy island bollocks. And the cod-evolution psychology underlying it even more so.

Check out these heros to see some real life MASTER PUAs in action:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd7K4XuJ91Y&feature=player_embedded

Would you take advice from any of these men?


(Warning: those of a low embarrassment threshold, this may be more than you can bear).

swears
03-10-2010, 08:45 PM
Here's a clip from that Louis Theroux thing, creepy as fuck:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn_oqEOtLYU

Are those weird little pauses and modulations in his voice part of the routine?

I think what's immoral about all this is the lying to women, telling them you think they're really special or creative, when all you really want to do is put your knob in them.

zhao
03-10-2010, 09:51 PM
I think the problem with the line Zhao's posted is that it assumes there's some sort of magical key to female responses and behaviour. Some women might feel they're in the presence of someone cool if you don't buy them a drink, some might think you're cheap, someone you buy a drink for might be all over you. That's one of many things wrong with this stuff - it's trying to extract rules about social interaction, but seems to miss the fact that - newsflash - people are different.

all people, men AND women, follow fairly rigid rules of interaction in social situations within any society. there is etiquette, there is perceived value, there is negotiation based on those values. there are multiple layers of largely unsaid and often subtle codes, rules and behavior patterns -- and most of us are so used to them that we don't even see them, or recognize them as such. we simply act accordingly and if we ever stop to to think about these things at all, which is very rare, we think "well naturally, that's the way it is".

like i said, there are many exceptions. but they remain exactly that: exceptions.

9 out of 10 times, 99 out of 100 times, people will behave predictably, and respond predictably (to body language, language, etc.)

do you think it's possible to improve success rate at job interviews?

what do you think the phrase "social skills" mean? or do you think they don't exist, and that the concept was invented by con-men who are out to steal your money?

Tony Flavourmore
03-10-2010, 11:00 PM
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g194/solecrusader/35cid88.jpg

pattycakes
04-10-2010, 12:33 AM
the book is a good fun read but if you actually have to resort to this shit then i just don't know...

slowtrain
04-10-2010, 05:57 AM
How is it necessarily at a woman's "expense"? If half of what comelately is saying is true, he can make women climax pretty much by winking at them - of course, this is an Internet Sex Boast and all usual caveats apply - but it's stupid and old-fashioned (and, ironically, sexist) to assume that every casual hook-up is a case of a man 'taking advantage of' a woman. Plenty of women like casual sex, you know, or at least have had casual sex without having been 'tricked' into it.

Well sure it doesn't have to be at their expense (poor phrasing on my part) let's just say it would be more honest to admit you want a casual fuck and thats that. ...Or is that what the PUA's are saying? (I'm confused)

DannyL
04-10-2010, 08:07 AM
all people, men AND women, follow fairly rigid rules of interaction in social situations within any society. there is etiquette, there is perceived value, there is negotiation based on those values. there are multiple layers of largely unsaid and often subtle codes, rules and behavior patterns -- and most of us are so used to them that we don't even see them, or recognize them as such. we simply act accordingly and if we ever stop to to think about these things at all, which is very rare, we think "well naturally, that's the way it is

I agree with that there are codes of behaviour that may go unoticed. I don't agree that these are rigid, and I don't agree with this, as applied to attraction/seduction/pulling:


9 out of 10 times, 99 out of 100 times, people will behave predictably, and respond predictably (to body language, language, etc.).

I think that's quite a narrow view of people. Also, I think a one size fits all approach - which is essentiallly what these people are selling - is doomed to failure. Much as it pains me to admit it, there isn't a magic line or routine I can learn that will make every women I encounter throw herself at me. I can improve my chances, sure, by dressing a bit nicer, approaching more women, developing self-confidence and its expression, even learning the odd canned "routine" or line - but this stuff is pretty much common sense. And I think out of all of these, the "approaching" loads of people is the key, it's pretty much a numbers game. It strikes me that most of the reported successes of PUA material come out of this fact - it gives people a bit of licence and encouragement to go and chat girls up, the rest of it is luck, with a bit of charm/confidence throw in rather than "the material". It really isn't worth paying exorbitant fees to internet rip off merchants to learn some overhyped set of "secrets". Or even worse, paying a grand to go on a "Boot Camp". Or do you think this is good value for money? Take a look at that video above - would you really trust a single one of those people to tell you *anything*?

Further, as in the example you gave above, PUA material sells a mindset where it's all a big competion and the two genders are basically at war. This is all justified with pisspoor references to evolutionary biology and leads to some really stupid arbitary behaviours which might be apporpirate and might not be. When you read a little bit of this material (via forums in my case) you realise for the vast majority of cases. it's American college kids flundering around, and dealing with basic shyness or whatever. For those people who are a bit socially inadequate or fucked up, I wouold argue learning all the stupid shit beyond buying some new clothes would retard any progress, and they''d be better off with a therapist.

In short, I'm not arguing that you cannot improve your chances, however, the idea that the PUAs have access to some set of secrets about human behaviour, and that it's a really deep science, man, is a load of bollocks. The reaons this stuff is written is so they can hype a product to sell. It really is a predatory and horrible business, run by a load of cunts - which is why the forum above, PUAhate, exists.

I have spent too much time thinking about this, but luckily I feel close to burn out.

Mr. Tea
04-10-2010, 10:18 AM
Well sure it doesn't have to be at their expense (poor phrasing on my part) let's just say it would be more honest to admit you want a casual fuck and thats that. ...Or is that what the PUA's are saying? (I'm confused)

I don't know, I'm not a "PUA" and I've not read this book. All I was getting at was, I think it's old-fashioned, sexist and simply untrue to assume that if a man and a woman have casual sex, it's because the man has "tricked" the woman, or "taken advantage" or whatever. It just seems to come from the attitude that when a single man is out on the town, it's taken as a given that he's after sex and that's it, whereas a woman in the same situation is looking for a potential husband, a man who's going to be a good father etc., or at least someone to have a "relationship" with*. Which is clearly bollocks, I mean with the advent of reliable contraception there's no reason why women shouldn't be just as up for no-strings fun as men are, and I think on the whole that's basically the case these days.

Of course, there's honesty and then there's 'honesty' - unless a woman is *exceptionally* 'up front', I doubt she's going to respond well to "Hello, would you like a casual fuck?". But just because you haven't explicitly said that, it doesn't follow that you're misleading her or anything nefarious like that.



*which is all of a piece with the idea that women don't really enjoy sex, and do it as a sort of 'favour' to men in return for emotional/financial security, etc. Again, a stupid and obsolete attitude, and one that's not exactly complimentary to men, either.

muser
04-10-2010, 11:08 AM
im not condoning the PUA techniques but I think its worth noting things like NLP, suggestion, "mind control" etc are things that we do naturally anyway most of the time we just dont realise we are doing it or being affected by it. So these kind of things are just stepping back from it and then taking it to extremes. I havnt read the book but I saw the louis theroux doc, it came across as pretty creepy and the guys all seemed like pretty sad individuals.

Slothrop
04-10-2010, 11:57 AM
im not condoning the PUA techniques but I think its worth noting things like NLP, suggestion, "mind control" etc are things that we do naturally anyway most of the time we just dont realise we are doing it or being affected by it. So these kind of things are just stepping back from it and then taking it to extremes.
I'm not sure that this is logical, but it seems that if you're going to step back from something and codify it into a system and so forth you'll get held to higher moral standards than you would if you were just doing something 'everyone does'. I mean, it's actually saying "I've noticed that a lot of flirting actually involves subtle psychological manipulation, and I think that's just great and want to do it more."

Also, just becasue there's a sliding scale from A to B doesn't mean that if A is okay then B must be too.

martin
04-10-2010, 02:10 PM
I'm more amazed with the backwards premise that these guys are coming from. I mean, it's hardly a well-kept secret that women dislike men who come on all strong after 2 hours of knowing them, or that whining about how your life sucks would put anyone off. For some reason, they've translated it into a set of codes about timing periods between phone calls and being rude about ear rings. It's a bit like those Fighting Fantasy gamebooks, where women have set up a load of traps and you have to get through it in one piece. The response from the angry nerds on that anti-PUA thread Danny linked to shows they've seen through that scam, but they still seem relatively bitter and confused. Basically, anyone who pays someone who offers them the chance to "have ANY woman you want!" might as well send me 400 for some magic beans.

Incidentally, Whitehouse used sections of the 'October Man Sequence' (apparently some killer PUA linguistic seduction technique) on one of their CDs a while back. I dunno...I preferred 'My Cock's On Fire' meself...

comelately
04-10-2010, 09:32 PM
That sounds to me like something a woman who's into "The Rules" would do - which is basically the female equivalent of "The Game", right? (I'm not convinced most women, even especially hot ones, are than conniving and tricksy - though maybe I'm just being hopelessly naive here). Which would just seem to back up the xkcd cartoon about 'Rules' women and 'Game' men being perfectly suited to each other...

I don't accept that 'The Rules' is the female equivalent of 'The Game' - it's not really a case of most women being conniving or tricksy as such. Women frequently test men for alpha traits, usually the reasoning will be a subconscious. But the drink test is win-win for them - they either get a free drink, or a potentially fuckworthy guy. I don't want to get weighed down with the whole drink scenario, different 'players' play that game in different ways and do well. But how many drinks do you buy before you're you're trying to get them drunk? It's rarely going to be a good idea to buy a woman more than one drink, and you're probably not going to want to buy that drink in the first 5-10 minutes.

I'm not saying there are no girls who wouldn't laugh at a player, sure there are. But not as many as you think. Women have different ethics and morality to men, in both content and structure. That doesn't make them bad or wicked or mean they must have read 'The Rules'. It makes them women - which to, just to make sure I'm not misunderstood, doesn't mean that a woman who laughs at a player isn't a woman. Though actually, just because a woman laughs at a player, doesn't necessarily mean she won't go home with him 20 minutes later.

There's also this idea that people in 'the game' today are doing all the same shit that the guys in that book were doing. That's simply not the case.

The Louis Theroux doc wasn't about pickup. There was a short section with RJ (who I do respect in a funny sort of way, but Speed Seduction is 95% stupid) but most of the program was about pre-Secret 'Think Yourself Rich' programs. And there are a lot of money-grabbers in the PUA community - this is because if you can pay your bills 'teaching pick-up' then it means you don't have to work a day job and this makes it a lot easier to find time to meet and hang-out with women. The PUAHate forum is funny but also pretty retarded. Generally I would advocate avoiding 'the community' itself, take what you need (if you need it) and move on.

Btw, I'm not very good at winking.

slowtrain
05-10-2010, 04:36 AM
I don't know, I'm not a "PUA" and I've not read this book. All I was getting at was, I think it's old-fashioned, sexist and simply untrue to assume that if a man and a woman have casual sex, it's because the man has "tricked" the woman, or "taken advantage" or whatever. It just seems to come from the attitude that when a single man is out on the town, it's taken as a given that he's after sex and that's it, whereas a woman in the same situation is looking for a potential husband, a man who's going to be a good father etc., or at least someone to have a "relationship" with*. Which is clearly bollocks, I mean with the advent of reliable contraception there's no reason why women shouldn't be just as up for no-strings fun as men are, and I think on the whole that's basically the case these days.

Of course, there's honesty and then there's 'honesty' - unless a woman is *exceptionally* 'up front', I doubt she's going to respond well to "Hello, would you like a casual fuck?". But just because you haven't explicitly said that, it doesn't follow that you're misleading her or anything nefarious like that.



*which is all of a piece with the idea that women don't really enjoy sex, and do it as a sort of 'favour' to men in return for emotional/financial security, etc. Again, a stupid and obsolete attitude, and one that's not exactly complimentary to men, either.

No, I definitely agree with you. I haven't read the book either, or really done any research outside of this thread, I was just going on the sort of concept that the 'Game' is providing you with a system to get women into your bed..?

And speaking purely in that scenario, wouldn't it be more honest to admit that you are using concepts from 'the game' to have casual sex with women, simply because you want to have casual sex with women? Regardless of whether the woman genuinely wants casual sex as well, it seems like that isn't really the concern of the PUA....

comelately
05-10-2010, 07:34 AM
No, I definitely agree with you. I haven't read the book either, or really done any research outside of this thread, I was just going on the sort of concept that the 'Game' is providing you with a system to get women into your bed..?

And speaking purely in that scenario, wouldn't it be more honest to admit that you are using concepts from 'the game' to have casual sex with women, simply because you want to have casual sex with women? Regardless of whether the woman genuinely wants casual sex as well, it seems like that isn't really the concern of the PUA....

I think this is a ludicrous sleight of hand, predicated on the idea that women have to be tricked into giving up something. A lot of women rather like sex, including casual sex, and love *to be seduced* - a good 'PUA' will manage expectations regarding what's going to happen after the sex, that could be motivated out of self-interest but by no means necessarily. What does 'genuinely want' even mean in this scenario? Ethical realist balderdash really has no place here.

Leo
05-10-2010, 01:00 PM
how do PUAs handle an ongoing relationship with one woman, versus one-off casual sex with a variety of women? are they generally emotionally mature enough to put aside the manipulative mindgames and show some genuine feelings, or do they continue acting out? or do they typically cower away from a single ongoing relationship altogether?

scottdisco
05-10-2010, 01:17 PM
how do PUAs handle an ongoing relationship with one woman, versus one-off casual with a variety of women? are they generally emotionally mature enough to put aside the manipulative mindgames and show some genuine feelings, or do they continue acting out? or do they typically cower away from a single ongoing relationship altogether?

that's a good question, i wonder about that too. presumably they have 'left the life' if they sack off the revolving door in favour of one person?

i had never heard of either the Rules or the Game before i read these threads - though since i haven't been laid this year, that's perhaps not surprising ;)

Mr. Tea
05-10-2010, 02:06 PM
i had never heard of either the Rules or the Game before i read these threads - though since i haven't been laid this year, that's perhaps not surprising ;)

*adjusts pimping hat*

You just need to hit the town with ol' Uncle Ollie, he'll hook you up with so fiiine young lay-deez - very reasonable too, mate's rates, get me? :cool:

Ahem.

Anyway, I was gonna say: zhao's chat about rigid rules and predictable responses makes me think of some 'player' in a bar, with a little laminated flowchart that shows you how to perform an optimum chat-up procedure, and prepared lines printed on flash cards...

baboon2004
05-10-2010, 03:57 PM
Have any women at all posted on this thread? Good.

Therefore, can we just stop short this debate by all agreeing on the obvious fact that women are evil and must be stopped at any cost, and stop beating around the bush with quibbles about the best ways to break them.

lanugo
05-10-2010, 05:11 PM
Anyway, I was gonna say: zhao's chat about rigid rules and predictable responses makes me think of some 'player' in a bar, with a little laminated flowchart that shows you how to perform an optimum chat-up procedure, and prepared lines printed on flash cards...

This is a typical example of the mental process seemingly underlying each and every one of your critically "humorous" posts: You take someone's generalized statement about the human experience realm and immediately try to ridicule it by imagining some slapstick scenario that is supposed to illustrate the absurdity and preposterousness of any attempt to objectify human behaviour. The comic hyperboles you keep making up in response to certain universal statements only serve to make clear your deep conviction that because of its grand complexity and preciousness and unpredictability immediate first-person subjectivity or human experience in general will always elude final analysis.

Rejecting any kind of determinism when it comes to our sacrosanct private lives - of course, as a scientist, there's no doubt for you about the mechanistic processes at work in regard to the subject matter of the natural sciences - you always act like the apostle of common sense who has come to rid the world of all those abstruse theories and generalizations and replace them with a healthy dose of capito-individualistic To each his own. But guess what: Human life, our lives, are as regular and predictable as any other phenomenon we observe and understand.

By denying and declaring for unreal any rigid mechanisms of social interaction you're really just confessing to your own blindness to the subtlety with which they manifest themselves in the real world. For all I know, being able to detect them is a privilege of psychopaths, demagogues, artists and philosophers, any way.

DannyL
05-10-2010, 05:54 PM
That's you told, Ollie.

In this instance, though, he happens to be right. Some of the stuff on the PUA forums is just insane.

"What you need to do is DHV man, then run a NLP Switch routine, then take her up the kino escalation ladder". A lot of it is beyond parody.

No wonder there's a whole forum of guys posting about how it fucked them up. I agree with comelately in that there's a lot of trolling on there but lots of stuff very relevant to this discussion.

http://www.puahate.com/showthread.php?t=3317

zhao
05-10-2010, 08:20 PM
i would personally be much happier, and believe the world would probably be a better place, if people really were "all different", and behaved according to their own free will, having each been thinking for themselves their entire lives.

but this is simply not the case. perhaps especially not in the context of socializing and mating rituals.

all of my long term girlfriends have been "exceptions" to the "rules", women who are absolutely atypical. and the sort of people who come to Dissensus are probably like me, who are, and get along with the "exceptions" -- and this i think contributes to some perceptual distortions.

but i don't want to make some kind of "us clever ones VS. the sheep-like masses" dichotomy, because even the "exceptions" sometimes fall into certain behavior patterns dictated by society, and all the time fall into other ones.

notions of attractiveness, notions of social value, status, and desirability -- when each of you walk into a bar, house party or coffee house and scan the room, i bet most of us, most of the time, share similar, not as much ideas as "feelings", about these things.

and especially when it comes to sex. for while we may prefer conversations with intelligent people who don't fit stereotypes, i bet most of us would like to sleep with the same stereotypically fit girls.

comelately
05-10-2010, 09:37 PM
Chris Rock pointed out that on a first date you don't get to meet the person, you get to meet 'their representative'. So I find these questions about whether 'PUAs' are capable of having a relationship to be pretty silly. Some are, some not so much. Quite a few 'community gurus' recommended that those lacking in relationship experience get a girlfriend and stick with them, at least for a while. Others say better stay single until you can be with a woman out of 'genuine choice' (not an unproblematic concept)


That's you told, Ollie.

In this instance, though, he happens to be right. Some of the stuff on the PUA forums is just insane.

"What you need to do is DHV man, then run a NLP Switch routine, then take her up the kino escalation ladder". A lot of it is beyond parody.

No wonder there's a whole forum of guys posting about how it fucked them up. I agree with comelately in that there's a lot of trolling on there but lots of stuff very relevant to this discussion.

http://www.puahate.com/showthread.php?t=3317

A whole forum? As opposed to a quarter of a forum? Oh no doubt a lot of this stuff is beyond parody. But 1) Like it or not, some people do make that shit work for them and 2) There are a lot of pua forums where you will get laughed at for a statement like that. This is not 2005. A lot of PUA forums would have been filled up with 'routines' 3-4 years ago but that will rarely be the case today. It's an evolving community - one part of its evolution are the forming of 'anti-pua' sites, but these sites are very much still part of the community. So when they say 80-90% of the community is bullshit - that applies to the PUAHate forum as much as anything else. The people who get the most attention in the community are the marketer types, and they're the most likely to be full of shit. And there are those who are very good 'players' but aren't very good at teaching, and teach to fund their lifestyle. Sounds a bit like university really.

btw, the aforementioned Sean Messenger put up a torrent pack of his own tutorials on TPB. - http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4817165/Sean_Messenger

Leo
05-10-2010, 10:08 PM
So I find these questions about whether 'PUAs' are capable of having a relationship to be pretty silly.

no, it's a reasonable question. when someone's life revolves around manipulation, scheming and mind games, it seems like there could very well be a problem with transitioning to real relationships and honest emotions.

slowtrain
05-10-2010, 10:22 PM
I think this is a ludicrous sleight of hand, predicated on the idea that women have to be tricked into giving up something. A lot of women rather like sex, including casual sex, and love *to be seduced* - a good 'PUA' will manage expectations regarding what's going to happen after the sex, that could be motivated out of self-interest but by no means necessarily. What does 'genuinely want' even mean in this scenario? Ethical realist balderdash really has no place here.

Yeah, I agree with you there, all I am saying is that it doesn't appear (from what little I've read anyway) that the woman's perspective is really all that important, it seems for the PUA that as long as she has sex with him that is all that matters...? That was what I was meant by 'genuinely want', it doesn't matter to the PUA whether she does want casual sex with him, or whether he has made her think she wants to have casual sex with him through whatever techniques, he doesn't actually care which of them, its the final outcome (sex) is all that matters?

(So wouldn't it be more honest to admit this...?)

(Or am I a million miles off?)

comelately
05-10-2010, 10:27 PM
no, it's a reasonable question. when someone's life revolves around manipulation, scheming and mind games, it seems like there could very well be a problem with transitioning to real relationships and honest emotions.

Well yes, a lot of people generally do struggle to form positive interdependent mutually beneficial relationships. I don't accept for one minute that this is a problem that is particular to or even significantly more pronounced in the pick-up community. "Real relationships" still (imho) require conscious work anyway.

comelately
05-10-2010, 10:33 PM
Yeah, I agree with you there, all I am saying is that it doesn't appear (from what little I've read anyway) that the woman's perspective is really all that important, it seems for the PUA that as long as she has sex with him that is all that matters...? That was what I was meant by 'genuinely want', it doesn't matter to the PUA whether she does want casual sex with him, or whether he has made her think she wants to have casual sex with him through whatever techniques, he doesn't actually care which of them, its the final outcome (sex) is all that matters?

(So wouldn't it be more honest to admit this...?)

(Or am I a million miles off?)

*shrug* I don't really accept the paradigm you're putting forward, but I think it would depend on the PUA. I would say that, generally speaking, it's not exactly ideal if a woman wakes up and regrets having a one night stand with you. That probably does not answer your question though.

baboon2004
05-10-2010, 10:45 PM
no, it's a reasonable question. when someone's life revolves around manipulation, scheming and mind games, it seems like there could very well be a problem with transitioning to real relationships and honest emotions.

The older i get, I must admit the less casual sex/any kind of emotional games interest me. Sex with someone you really like is on another plane...is this normal?

comelately
05-10-2010, 10:54 PM
The older i get, I must admit the less casual sex/any kind of emotional games interest me. Sex with someone you really like is on another plane...is this normal?

Well yes, intimacy is great (and I've had a 9 year relationship). But I've had intimate sex with women I hadn't known for long, and a bit of banter in the first few minutes of interaction did not prevent said intimacy from occurring. Some 'PUA schools' actively encourage emotional vulnerability and the like. Even Mystery (who has problems, let there be no doubt) says that 90% of the game is played 'in comfort' and teaches (rightly or wrongly) that a man must show that he is able and willing to 'emote'.

Mr. Tea
05-10-2010, 11:41 PM
This is a typical example of the mental process seemingly underlying each and every one of your critically "humorous" posts: You take someone's generalized statement about the human experience realm and immediately try to ridicule it by imagining some slapstick scenario that is supposed to illustrate the absurdity and preposterousness of any attempt to objectify human behaviour...

I accept that most people are, in a very general and fundamental way, driven by a core set of inbuilt desires, instincts or whathaveyou. But how those basic libidinal urges manifest themselves in behaviour is incredibly complex and surely cannot be second-guessed by some kind of glib if-she-does-X-then-say-Y-in-response algorithm-type approach.



But guess what: Human life, our lives, are as regular and predictable as any other phenomenon we observe and understand.

Reeeaaally. Is that so? An astronomer can tell you, to within an excellent degree of certainty, where the Earth or the Moon or any other other celestial body will be a year from now. Can you say the same thing about yourself? You could be exactly where you are now, or you could be dead. You may find yourself living in a shotgun shack! You may find yourself at the bottom of the ocean!

If our lives are so predictable, why does the insurance industry exist?

zhao
06-10-2010, 03:51 AM
tea, you are forgetting that we live in society, subscribe to its proscribed values, and almost always abiding by its codes of conduct.

especially in the context of socializing and mating rituals.

notions of attractiveness, notions of social value, status, and desirability... these things we all share.

Mr. Tea
06-10-2010, 02:40 PM
I have to say, zhao, I love your "all women basically act and think the same, apart from all the women I've ever dated or fucked, who were all exceptional unique individuals" jive. :D

IdleRich
06-10-2010, 05:17 PM
"If our lives are so predictable, why does the insurance industry exist?"
Surely the insurance industry is able to thrive in the way that it does precisely because it is possible to predict with some accuracy the likelihood of given events - at least for large groups of people. Of course the problems come in when the sample is smaller. It's a cliche to say that people are predictable in large groups but extremely unpredictable individually but from experience it seems to be true.

zhao
06-10-2010, 05:20 PM
I have to say, zhao, I love your "all women basically act and think the same, apart from all the women I've ever dated or fucked, who were all exceptional unique individuals" jive. :D

no need to look anywhere else for picture perfect examples of human predictability other than your posts, Mr. Tea.

Mr. Tea
06-10-2010, 05:33 PM
Surely the insurance industry is able to thrive in the way that it does precisely because it is possible to predict with some accuracy the likelihood of given events - at least for large groups of people. Of course the problems come in when the sample is smaller. It's a cliche to say that people are predictable in large groups but extremely unpredictable individually but from experience it seems to be true.

Well exactly - an insurance company has a good idea how many houses will burn down, out of a million houses over one year. That's a very different proposition from knowing exactly when one particular house will burn down.


no need to look anywhere else for picture perfect examples of human predictability other than your posts, Mr. Tea.

I knew you'd say that.

DannyL
06-10-2010, 06:03 PM
tea, you are forgetting that we live in society, subscribe to its proscribed values, and almost always abiding by its codes of conduct.

especially in the context of socializing and mating rituals.

notions of attractiveness, notions of social value, status, and desirability... these things we all share.

... and these guys here - http://www.puahate.com/showthread.php?t=7937 - are selling an insight into that. I find it hard to believe that anyone would learn anything from these men, or that they employ "pick up" techniques that work or that they ever ever ever get fucking laid. NSFW.

IdleRich
06-10-2010, 06:47 PM
"Well exactly - an insurance company has a good idea how many houses will burn down, out of a million houses over one year. That's a very different proposition from knowing exactly when one particular house will burn down."
Well if the analogy holds that would suggest that by applying the same technique to a lot of people (women) then you are likely to get the response you want from at least some of them. Though possibly not the one you like best. Not very romantic though.

DannyL
06-10-2010, 07:00 PM
Well if the analogy holds that would suggest that by applying the same technique to a lot of people (women) then you are likely to get the response you want from at least some of them. Though possibly not the one you like best. Not very romantic though.

Indeed. It's a numbers game. Comelately said above that some people make it work - well, sure if you appraoch lots of people in social situations, you'll get some positive responses. But is this "techniques" or whether it's just going up to loads of girls. Also, I suspect those who make it work best are those who're convetionally attractive to begin with. I think the idea that someone with the looks/height of Neil Strauss will start copping off left, right and centre is a bit unbelievable. Same for those guys in that video.

IdleRich
06-10-2010, 07:21 PM
"Indeed. It's a numbers game. Comelately said above that some people make it work - well, sure if you appraoch lots of people in social situations, you'll get some positive responses. But is this "techniques" or whether it's just going up to loads of girls."
Well, if that's the "secret" then I think that it's something a lot of people worked out a long time ago - but surely it's more than that, it's got to be learning what is gonna get the best result from the most people as well. Still, if that's what it boils down to, it's not that much.


"I think the idea that someone with the looks/height of Neil Strauss will start copping off left, right and centre is a bit unbelievable."
Is height really that important or are you just saying that because you're seven foot three?

comelately
06-10-2010, 10:18 PM
well, sure if you appraoch lots of people in social situations, you'll get some positive responses.

This is by no means the case for all men, or even half. And anyway, there's a big difference between a positive response and actually taking the woman home or getting to date her.

DannyL
07-10-2010, 06:50 AM
Really, I'd say most men don't do this at all.

PUAs do. I suspect that's the big difference, and where most of the results come from. I'm sure there's other stuff in there that "works" - basics about confidence, not being a completely fawning dickhead etc but most of it strikes me as selling water by the river.

Anyway, everyone should watch that video! Those men do not get laid!!

comelately
07-10-2010, 07:20 AM
Really, I'd say most men don't do this at all.


You misunderstand. Some men, quite a lot of men, could approach hundreds upon thousands and barely get a positive response. There is more to it than that.

Those guys in that video may well suck, but that video does not really tell you that much given the circumstances. It's entertaining for sure.

zhao
07-10-2010, 07:34 AM
I knew you'd say that.

no you didn't. liar.

zhao
07-10-2010, 07:53 AM
selling water by the river.

what do you think about those classes corporate execs pay for to become better leaders?

how about relationship counseling where what they teach can be basically boiled down to "be nice to eachother"?

DannyL
07-10-2010, 09:40 AM
comelately: I did get you. Just from my observations anyway, it'sthe numbers game/approach thing, more than "technique". I am sure some of it works, to a degree, but there's a hellacious load of bullshit attached, and the further it gets away from go up to people, and be a bit funny/charming. YMMV.

ZhaoL: Why are you feeling compelled to defend this stuff? I'm sure some of it works to a degree as I said. I'm also sure plenty of it is embedded in a bunch of ludicrous bullshit - AMOGing, negging, stupid neo-Darwinian theorising by uninformed halfwits.

benjybars
07-10-2010, 05:49 PM
when i worked in a bookshop he neil strauss came to do a signing. twice.

massive, MASSIVE wasteman.

comelately
07-10-2010, 07:50 PM
comelately: I did get you. Just from my observations anyway, it'sthe numbers game/approach thing, more than "technique". I am sure some of it works, to a degree, but there's a hellacious load of bullshit attached, and the further it gets away from go up to people, and be a bit funny/charming. YMMV.

I don't really disagree. I think sometimes the bullshit attached is what enables men to make the approaches, and does give them a map to help them chart progress and enable iterative 'progress'. The map is not the territory of course, and some of the maps are pretty retarded - which obviously causes problems for some.

Being a bit funny and charming is also a big ask of some people; it can be learnt of course.

baboon2004
07-10-2010, 09:31 PM
The 'double-cold-approach threesome':

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqFPQq3pm-w

john eden
07-10-2010, 09:41 PM
"that whole monogamous settling down thing, that's what people are going for right now"

L O L.

baboon2004
07-10-2010, 09:46 PM
that dude has the zeitgeist on lockdown.

john eden
07-10-2010, 09:48 PM
that dude has the zeitgeist on lockdown.

He literally has the awesome shit, coming right out of his ass.

Mr. Tea
07-10-2010, 10:02 PM
The reason I was taking the piss out of this idea of having set 'lines' to 'feed' to your intended is that unless you're chatting up some giddy bimbo who'd giggle and simper if your read out the phone book to her, I'm pretty sure genuine wit and spontaneity is going to go down a hell of a lot better than rehearsed patter.

Of course, they may be ways you can learn to be more spontaneous and witty, but to a large degree I think it's probably just something some guys have and others don't. It's all intimately linked with confidence. I think what's key is knowing when you've drunk just enough to give you that crucial courage and verbal fluency, but not so much that you're slurring or having to grope for words too often.

Dr Awesome
08-10-2010, 12:40 AM
or having to grope for words too often.

I'd be more worried about groping full stop. ;)

Mr. Tea
08-10-2010, 07:55 AM
What a lot of men don't realise is that a quick grope is actually an excellent way to break the ice.

Thanks Neil!

DannyL
08-10-2010, 05:19 PM
The reason I was taking the piss out of this idea of having set 'lines' to 'feed' to your intended is that unless you're chatting up some giddy bimbo who'd giggle and simper if your read out the phone book to her, I'm pretty sure genuine wit and spontaneity is going to go down a hell of a lot better than rehearsed patter.

Of course, they may be ways you can learn to be more spontaneous and witty, but to a large degree I think it's probably just something some guys have and others don't. It's all intimately linked with confidence. I think what's key is knowing when you've drunk just enough to give you that crucial courage and verbal fluency, but not so much that you're slurring or having to grope for words too often.

I have written far too much on this thread already but... We all have rehearsed little lines and routines anyway, favoured jokes, stories or routines, sets of things we do when meeting new people. Learning some of these in a formal sense seems a bit ridiculous but a lot of social interaction is pre-rehearsed, so I can sort of see the logic. Tea - I could imagine you up late at night with a dictionary, crafting some truly terrible puns.

STN
08-10-2010, 07:15 PM
We all have rehearsed little lines and routines anyway, favoured jokes, stories or routines

I GAVE HIM A BIIIIIIIIRCHING!!!!!!!!!

sorry

swears
09-10-2010, 01:45 AM
I think this thread is so long because you all really want to know the PUA magical secrets/tantric sex tips.

swears
09-10-2010, 01:47 AM
Actually the best way to attract women is to get a girlfriend. You wait ages for a bus and three come along, etc... where were these girls when I was single?

DannyL
20-10-2010, 07:35 AM
In an attempt to get it out of my system, I've revived my Livejournal to write a little piece about pick up and all the reading I've done it with a few links etc:
http://danalcapone.livejournal.com/36437.html

Sectionfive
21-10-2010, 03:14 AM
Threads with life-changing qualities

pattycakes
21-10-2010, 03:52 AM
not sure if this has been posted cos i can't be arsed reading the whole thread but,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn_oqEOtLYU

if that's not enough to put you off...

Ory
22-10-2010, 12:21 AM
Of course, they may be ways you can learn to be more spontaneous and witty, but to a large degree I think it's probably just something some guys have and others don't.

so they should just give up? far better to give it a shot, no matter how ridiculous or morally bankrupt one may find these tactics to be.

skimmed a few pages of this thread, no doubt i've heard all the arguments before. polemicists pulling up the most egregious examples to make their "point" etc..

all i have to say is there's definitely a level-headed approach you can take to this whole thing, avoiding all the misogyny/frat-bro awfulness. there's a great video of Tyler from RSD (real social dynamics) deconstructing the community and why people get into PUA, it gets a bit meta but it's interesting. actually as i recall, his advice is "learn what you can then get out, because this probably isn't something you want to be stuck in for most of your life". truer words have never been spoken.

padraig (u.s.)
22-10-2010, 03:05 AM
far better to give it a shot...however morally bankrupt one may find these tactics to be.

well, that's fine reasoning, nothing to take issue with there I suppose.


skimmed a few pages of this thread, no doubt i've heard all the arguments before. polemicists pulling up the most egregious examples to make their "point" etc..

bro it must suck to be such a wise jaded internet guru who's totally seen everything and can just magically wave his hands and glibly dismiss everyone's points (sorry, "points") into some lazy generalization about polemics. not that you've resorted to polemics I'm sure. it must get lonely up there on your pedestal of dismissal. I'd climb up there and keep you company but I can't imagine what we'd talk about, no doubt you've heard it all before...

Ory
22-10-2010, 10:12 AM
pretty much :D

edit: i read all your posts in this thread and tbh it doesn't sound like you're too familiar with what goes on in the community and what its main tenets are. at the very least, watch a few DVDs of each of the major actors (RSD, MM etc, or one of the superconference ones to get a taste of each one).

droid
22-10-2010, 11:38 AM
http://www.antifeministtech.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/picarddoublefacepalm.jpg

baboon2004
22-10-2010, 03:27 PM
Actually the best way to attract women is to get a girlfriend. You wait ages for a bus and three come along, etc... where were these girls when I was single?

You weren't giving off the correct "I'm really not that bothered" vibes. Annoying, isn't it.

pattycakes
12-11-2010, 06:54 PM
i first heard about this book on a boat to sweden. there was a young norweigan sailor on there who i was having a few drinks with at the bar. he had on these crazy boots that had 4 or 5 inch soles, something (what i discovered after reading the book) like what mystery would wear, and he'd spiked his hair up with gel. he was going on about it, how it had changed his life. how he used to be a nerd but now had these amazing powers and had managed to have 2 threesomes after about a year of practice. in my drunken state this all sounded great, plus there were lots of scandinavian females dancing all nasty on the dancefloor. my interests were piqued. got nicely sauced up and went to bed. forgot about it all the next day. after a week or two, i was in a bookshop in stockholm and saw the book on the best seller's table, my memory was jogged, i opened it up, had a quick leaf through, 'nice' i thought to myself. but at the time i was living with a gf there so it was useless. put it to the back of my mind again and didn't think about it for half a year or so. till round about the time when the gf left me. yeah, must have been about then. i googled it and found a pdf, thought why not, and read it in 2 days.

was quite the page turner, made it all sound fairly simple. just go out and learn how to not feel bad if you make a tit of yourself. one of the first steps on the road to becoming a pua was to go to a public place and say hi to every female you see. learning how to deal with rejection n stuff... i don't think it ever even crossed my mind to actually go out and try any of the steps. felt too unnatural. too weird.

actually, long story short. i dl'ed a torrent or two of videos, audio and documents (mostly from the 'top' guys) and tried to see if there was anything useful in there. the more and more i read, the more i realised that a lot of it was common sense and shit that a lot of us do naturally anyway. and the stuff that didn't fit into that was just kind of weird and icky. i have a feeling i've negged a few girls before. but not in a conscious 'ha, i'll lower her self esteem so she feels like she has to prove something' way. more as just a kind of joke, which they laughed at. in fact thats pretty much the steez that works, making em laugh and being natural. im not bad at being silly n cracking jokes, and its something that just happens without having to think about it. and i think that's my problem with this whole thing, the way this system is supposed to work requires a certain amount of planning and canned responses n stuff. in short, that's just wack. wack wack wack.

DannyL
24-01-2011, 11:33 AM
If anyone still has any doubts that PUA is totally retarded, they should have a read of this news story - noted PUA Gunwitch shoots a young women in the face on NYE:

http://jezebel.com/5726841/noted-pick+up-artist-allegedly-shoots-a-woman-in-the-face

And if you want proof that will make you laugh like a drain:
http://www.puahate.com/showthread.php?t=10496

Former pickup artists detail the most socially moronic things that they ever did in the name of PUA. I found this thread an absolutely unbelivable comedy goldmine.

(Warning: that thread is okay but generally that site is NSFW).

Mr. Tea
09-03-2012, 09:34 AM
Hahaha...

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/pickup_artist.png

Randy Munroe, spot on as always.

baboon2004
09-03-2012, 10:05 AM
I like the fact that none of them has a face.

rubberdingyrapids
13-04-2012, 11:30 AM
http://negging.com/

Bangpuss
13-04-2012, 11:53 AM
Dan, is that really Neil Strauss on the PUA forum, or some guy pretending to be him? I've read a few of "Neil Strauss"'s posts and he does claim to be the same Neil Strauss who wrote The Game. Remarkable that he still posts in those forums so long after he claims to have left the 'community'. For me, that's more evidence that he was actually way deeper into that shit than he claims to have been in the book.

With regards this PUA shit, there is no doubt some valuable advice in there. But like with any self-help regime, adhering slavishly to a single doctrine is a recipe for something just as bad as the malady you were trying to cure in the first place: you become an obsessive, one-dimensional bore. It's best with all these things to pick and choose what works for you, and not become part of a 'community' dedicated to the singular pursuit of said goals. Because that's how you end up wearing Jesters' hats and using terms like 'sarging' with no sense of irony. A slippery slope.

comelately
13-04-2012, 11:44 PM
That XKCD strip........shows a real lack of understanding of so much. Not his audience and how to troll obviously.

Leo
04-02-2016, 08:00 PM
As long as we are reviving old threads, I wonder how Lanugo feels about RooshV and this whole Return of Kings kerfuffle?

pattycakes_
29-02-2016, 01:18 PM
This is great for anyone with an interest in Neil Strauss

http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episodes/episode_667_-_neil_strauss

Leo
12-11-2018, 10:37 PM
yeah, this sure was a crazy thread!

bumping it for this, his story of dealing with the California wildfires:

Lessons I Learned From Losing Everything Two Days Ago
https://www.neilstrauss.com/advice/losing-everything/

a twist towards the end, can't imagine the emotions through the course of this ordeal.

hope all our cali dissensians are safe.

Corpsey
13-11-2018, 10:29 AM
I copped this book once upon a time and hid it under a pile of porn and nazi memorabilia

Can't recall if I ever tried out any of its creepy techniques, I think I fundamentally lacked the balls to do it, which is really the insurmountable problem with a lot of this stuff

I remember seeing Strauss being interviewed on youtube and he had the weediest voice and demanour imaginable, if all that stuff really worked for him it's truly a terrifying prospect

Corpsey
13-11-2018, 10:30 AM
They all seem like complete cunts but I do quite like the idea of being forced to chat up women, since I can't really see how I ever will otherwise. So maybe I'll give them 500 dollars so they can force me... :slanted:

Either that or attach electrodes to my nuts and give one of my mates the remote control.

Ah young Corpsey

Hiding the fact you'd already bought the book, weren't you?

You pathetic BETA BOY you'll never get a sniff of a quiff