swears
preppy-kei
Nah, the leagues are there and a huge deal. It's a bit more complicated than that, but most people will judge you on looks and money.
Books with life-changing qualities
- Thread starter baboon2004
- Start date
-
- Tags
- psychic self defense
Nah, the leagues are there and a huge deal. It's a bit more complicated than that, but most people will judge you on looks and money.
Tentative Andy
I'm in the Meal Deal
The leagues need you to keep believing in them in order to work though.
Sorry to sound pseudo-deep.
Sorry to sound pseudo-deep.
If you're ugly, you're fucked. It's true.
it's not. and never has been, ever.
confidence, intelligence, humor, all of these things trump looks and money.
if you believe you need to be good looking to sleep with beautiful women you have a lot to learn.
the Marquis famously said "intelligence is the single most seductive quality". he was not super good looking. but legend has it he was able to make anyone, girl or boy, take off their pants and bend over just by looking at them. (only to prove a point, not standing behind dood's take on ethics or morality)
it's not ugliness which defeats people, it's the low self esteem and lack of confidence, which comes with and is often a result of their perceived (often by themselves) ugliness which fucks them up.
my ex is a good friend of Vincent Gallo. he used to call her up and ask her for advice on how to talk to women, being insanely, impossibly shy, and having a super low self esteem. she told me it's exactly like talking to a pimply teenager, not a super model.
but of course my argument has its limits. i mean if you are the elephant man (not the dancehall artist) it probably won't matter much how much charsima you got.
Last edited:
Tentative Andy
I'm in the Meal Deal
Well, I do think that for a woman to sleep with you she would have to find you physically attractive while she was sleeping with you. But I think what needs to be emphasised is the affect having a certain force of personality can have over time in terms of making a prospective partner reconsider what sort of looks they would usually be attracted to. If a person becomes attracted to someone on a 'personal' level - which can cover many things, and doesn't have to mean the deep meeting of minds it is sometimes made out to - they can sort of 'make' themselves like their looks to, without fully realising that they're doing it.
I do agree that money and status are often way overstated in importance.
If you believe it doesn't level the playing field dramatically then I could say that same. I'm talking from my perspective here, like if a girl was trying to flirt with me. If there was a girl who was really quite charming but didn't really look like she'd be someone I'd pursue without incentive, it is likely I could acquiese. So the charm factor does add a bonus onto the looks right there.
However if the chick was busted or fat, the game would end right there. She could be intellectually and emotionally my divinely ordained soul-mate and if she was busted or fat, no dice.
You'd think this makes me a superficial bastard, but really I'm looking for girls with a bit of both. "Girls with stuff" I think was the phrase.
swears
preppy-kei
I had a couple of really awful, doormat style relationships in my early 20s, combined with general depression and very low self esteem, being stuck in a rubbish job and missing out on various opportunities, etc... I still feel very cynical about dating, it does seem like a market where some people have way more to offer than others.
I'm very happy in a relationship with someone I adore at the moment though, so no more moaning... until I get dumped, haha.
sure it's always better to be good looking. not arguing that.
but show me a guy who is good looking and rich, and show me an average or even a bit below average looking guy who is not rich, but completely comfortable with, and sure of, himself, who is intelligent and funny and not afraid to go after what he wants, the second one will get the girl almost every time.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
I went through a short phase of trying out these seduction techniques. The things that I didn't like about this game-playing were (I'm not too sure whether this is a fair portrayal of the practice - it was a long time ago):
- some of the strategies that you are supposed to use work by undermining women's confidence/destabilising them: 'negative hits' for instance. I guess that blokes' naive strategy for snagging someone is 'upbuilding', not chipping away at the prey, whatever (mutual) advantage may ensue
- it becomes tempting to practise your techniques on women you have no interest in, thus leading them on (I think this is encouraged within the 'community' (?))
- I found it hard to move from the analytical thinking involved in the game-playing and begin to act spontaneously again
- I began to feel like I had got one up on the non-game player; which, even though may not actually have been the case, was probably not the healthiest state of affairs
- some techniques involve implicit suggestion; lying, really. One particularly effective one I found was to talk *as if* a long and auspicious shared future was already assumed (even on the first date) - no explicit promise or statement of intent was issued, but the value of the technique was in her feeling subconsciously as if it had been - highly misleading!
- some of the strategies that you are supposed to use work by undermining women's confidence/destabilising them: 'negative hits' for instance. I guess that blokes' naive strategy for snagging someone is 'upbuilding', not chipping away at the prey, whatever (mutual) advantage may ensue
- it becomes tempting to practise your techniques on women you have no interest in, thus leading them on (I think this is encouraged within the 'community' (?))
- I found it hard to move from the analytical thinking involved in the game-playing and begin to act spontaneously again
- I began to feel like I had got one up on the non-game player; which, even though may not actually have been the case, was probably not the healthiest state of affairs
- some techniques involve implicit suggestion; lying, really. One particularly effective one I found was to talk *as if* a long and auspicious shared future was already assumed (even on the first date) - no explicit promise or statement of intent was issued, but the value of the technique was in her feeling subconsciously as if it had been - highly misleading!
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Being a sleaze, when you walk past a target, it's not like anyone else, it's, you walk past, you know you have to do something about it. You know you are the only one who can really help. That's what drives me. Period.
I know that we have an opportunity and, er, to really help for the first time and effectively get in people's pants, and I'm dedicated to that. I'm gonna, I'm absolutely, uncompromisingly dedicated to that.
......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Wow. DHVs, they'll just read about them in the history books. I just go through that tech, literally. It's not how to run from a DHV. It's PTDHV - how to shatter or confront resistance. You apply it, then boom.
*Mission Impossible riff*
Last edited:
don_quixote
Trent End
isnt that a bit dangerous?
padraig (u.s.)
a monkey that will go ape
people have made some really interesting points.
the notion that anyone who questions the good taste of pick-up "artistry" must be motivated by bitterness or jealousy is 1) repugnant & 2) bollocks. it's akin to that old line about feminists - oh yeah it's all the bitter ugly ones, all they really need is a good shagging, etc etc. it also conveniently sidesteps responding to any of the actual criticisms raised.
you're also misrepresenting what I've said. there's obv a world of difference between flirting/gaming/seduction/etc & cold-blooded emotional manipulation. no one objects to the former of course & truth be told the latter wouldn't bother me nearly so much if dudes like comelately didn't come along acting like the pursuit of casual sex was some manner of deep, mystical quest.
I question "it's fun for both parties". who's judging that, you? sometimes it is, of course. again, tho, you're missing (or distorting) the point - no one objects to sex or singles bars. that stuffiness bit is, as mentioned, a strawman. it's actually quite funny tho to see dudes try to defend womanizing by claiming that any critics are just too morally uptight.
the notion that anyone who questions the good taste of pick-up "artistry" must be motivated by bitterness or jealousy is 1) repugnant & 2) bollocks. it's akin to that old line about feminists - oh yeah it's all the bitter ugly ones, all they really need is a good shagging, etc etc. it also conveniently sidesteps responding to any of the actual criticisms raised.
you're also misrepresenting what I've said. there's obv a world of difference between flirting/gaming/seduction/etc & cold-blooded emotional manipulation. no one objects to the former of course & truth be told the latter wouldn't bother me nearly so much if dudes like comelately didn't come along acting like the pursuit of casual sex was some manner of deep, mystical quest.
I question "it's fun for both parties". who's judging that, you? sometimes it is, of course. again, tho, you're missing (or distorting) the point - no one objects to sex or singles bars. that stuffiness bit is, as mentioned, a strawman. it's actually quite funny tho to see dudes try to defend womanizing by claiming that any critics are just too morally uptight.
Last edited:
Only in the standard missionary position.
Which I would never stoop to anyway. I'm a playa, yo.
padraig (u.s.)
a monkey that will go ape
that's obv true & following from that women (& queer ppl of course) are also capable of all kinds of messed up stuff; w/the obv caveat about who's generally acting from a position of power & so on...
the latter is, if not in all or even most of its forms, merely an extension of the former. anyway it's not a question of hating the game - rather of disliking certain players for the way they play.
true. but you have full control over how you play & whether you put winning (as well as how you define "winning") over fair play. there's nothing compelling people to be jerks.
that is quite an interesting take on it zhao - tho I dunno as I agree that the pick-up artist thing is really as liberating (especially in terms of class - who's benefiting here, really?) as you make it out to be.
anyway, more generally, I'm not losing sleep over it. if dudes want to try to idealize their skirtchasing (or wouldbe skirtchasing) as some kind of noble calling then whatever. just when some dude pops up with a bunch of corny, shite rationalizations for the same old BS I'm going to call him on it.
padraig (u.s.)
a monkey that will go ape
well, you know, it's still in beta testing.
comelately
Wild Horses
I can't login at work. I had a reply ready but then lots of other people posted. I was busy tonight, I'll try to post on Saturday. To be honest, I find padraig adorable - his style of argument is so manipulative and unintegrous that for him to take a hardline stance on manipulation means that surely either he's a hilariously ironic gimmick poster or else just plain nuts.
It's Wrong!
I actually wrote on a community messageboard that trying to portray going out to pull women as some sort of 'meditation/spirit-quest' was pretty ridiculous. But more later.
It's Wrong!
I actually wrote on a community messageboard that trying to portray going out to pull women as some sort of 'meditation/spirit-quest' was pretty ridiculous. But more later.
swears
preppy-kei
That's it man, you've nearly got his pants off with these negs, now move in on the target and destroy!
padraig (u.s.)
a monkey that will go ape
yeah clearly I have to be either ironic or crazy.
I'm not taking a hardline stance on anything. I think you perhaps think I feel I'm morally superior somehow? I don't. I'm not a gallant, virtuous defender of women (or anyone else) from some kind of nefarious pick-up artist scheme. I just think you, and more generally this whole pick-up/pulling thing, are full of it if you pretend it's anything other than dudes being skeezy (to varying degrees - & not that skeeziness in & of itself is a bad thing) & trying to figure out better ways to get laid. anyway, whatever. go ahead & say your piece. I'll look forward to reading it on Monday.
I'm not taking a hardline stance on anything. I think you perhaps think I feel I'm morally superior somehow? I don't. I'm not a gallant, virtuous defender of women (or anyone else) from some kind of nefarious pick-up artist scheme. I just think you, and more generally this whole pick-up/pulling thing, are full of it if you pretend it's anything other than dudes being skeezy (to varying degrees - & not that skeeziness in & of itself is a bad thing) & trying to figure out better ways to get laid. anyway, whatever. go ahead & say your piece. I'll look forward to reading it on Monday.
Last edited: