The PickUp Artist
I just ordered two books to add to my library. The first by Mystery is The Pickup Artist: The New and Improved Art of Seduction and the second is Neil Strauss's The Game.
I have looked at these books before but didn't own them so thought it was about time to add them to my personal library. I recently recommended them to a friend of mine for her son who she said was depressed over his lack of ability to get a date. At first, I started to give the same old tired advice. "Just tell him to be himself and a woman will find that attractive." "Bullshit," I thought to myself. "Give him a copy of 'The Pick Up Artist' by Mystery or 'The Game' by Neil Strauss and let me know how it goes." Two months later? My friend tells me her son is no longer depressed and is dating and learning how to interact with women.
Score one for Mystery and Strauss. Zero for dumb advice on how to "be yourself."
I have looked at these books before but didn't own them so thought it was about time to add them to my personal library. I recently recommended them to a friend of mine for her son who she said was depressed over his lack of ability to get a date. At first, I started to give the same old tired advice. "Just tell him to be himself and a woman will find that attractive." "Bullshit," I thought to myself. "Give him a copy of 'The Pick Up Artist' by Mystery or 'The Game' by Neil Strauss and let me know how it goes." Two months later? My friend tells me her son is no longer depressed and is dating and learning how to interact with women.
Score one for Mystery and Strauss. Zero for dumb advice on how to "be yourself."
posted by Helen at 9:43 AM
116 Comments:
And of course you'll steer him to Chateau Roissy for additional inspiration...
"Be yourself" is stupid. It's a perversion of the right way to do this: "Know thyself."
You might also try How To Succeed With Women by Louis and Copeland.
Look. Most girls have been hit on since they were 8. By the time they're 18, they've caught on to the game, know all of the come ons and how to counter them.
This is what I know. Say you're at a party, and across the room you see a girl who you think might be attracted to you. If she is, she will smile and show you the palm of her hand, by waving or brushing back her hair. If she does not smile and show you the palm of her hand, do not go anywhere near her or she will destroy you.
Rule #1: Do not approach her. Let her come to you. If she really is attracted to you, she will. If not, she won't.
Of course, it goes without saying that it helps, in fact it's essential, that you're well dressed, well scented, well groomed, and well mannered. What she wants is to find a man, so be one.
If she's interested, she will touch your arm. At that point, make a date. A date is a specific time-limited activity (45 minutes) at a specific place at a specific time. Dinner, wine and roses are out. Start with something completely casual, a light lunch or coffee, at a public place, where she will feel safe. (You have know idea how scared she is--she wants to find a man, not a jerk.)
Strike up a conversation.
Rule #2: Never ask her a question she can say no to. This is the tricky part, because you have to constantly be thinking ahead. For example, do not ask "Would you like to go out with me?" Instead, say "Meet me at Starbucks at noon." It's the difference between an interrogative question and an imperative command.
Ask her open ended questions about herself, and shut up and listen. Let her talk. And this is very important. While she's talking look in her eyes and tilt your head slightly to the left. Again, this is body language. It makes her think you're really listening to her, then she will open up.
But you're not really listening to her, not to the words she says anyway. Words are meaningless. Listen to her tone, watch her gesticulations and mannerisms. She's communicating to you with body language too. Pay attention.
If all goes well, make a second date. "I really enjoyed your company, meet me at the Olive Garden for lunch tomorrow." You have to allow the romance to build.
Be confident, self-assured, witty, and self-deprecating. Let her open up to you, let her come to you. When she touches your leg, she's interested tonight.
Now it's time for dinner and wine, but roses are still out. You have to know the language of flowers. Give her a tulip or a sunflower, or whatever her favorite flower is, which you should know by now. You should also know her favorite color, song, movie, place to go, etc., and researched them.
Do not take her back to your place, and whatever you do, do not go back to her place. Take her to a hotel. And take it from there.
I'm not a PUA exactly, but I feel like I discovered some of the principles on my own (decades ago, when I needed them). I think the most important realization was that "being yourself" was good with your male friends, not for attracting women. This is probably true for a majority of men, possibly a large majority.
Is it dishonest? To paraphrase a Dilbert strip (about another subject, but still pertinent): "If it makes you feel better, wait until she lies first."
So when she says, "What I really value in a man is intelligence," feel good that it means outsmarting her is a win-win by her rules.
Louis & Copeland
Mystery
Tynan (Make Her Chase You)
Tyler Durden (Blueprint Decoded)
Roosh V (Bang)
Roissy
Delusion Damage
Logan Edwards
Neil Strauss (The Game)
David DeAngelo
Books of Revelation.
GawainsGhost --
"Of course, it goes without saying that it helps, in fact it's essential, that you're well dressed, well scented, well groomed, and well mannered. What she wants is to find a man, so be one."
Because Barry Linden was such the man?
Seriously, don't smell like a saw-mill, but if you catch a gal while wearing powder and scents, expect to spend the rest of your life in them.
I recall a guy telling me once, long ago, "Women want to work for or vote for Phil Donahue or Alan Alda. But women want to marry and have sex with Sean Connery or Yul Brenner. Therefore, never let a chick tell you how to be. Their taste in men changes with the weather."
Sage advice.
Sorry, ZorroPrimo, your friend was only half right. Women want to marry Phil Donahue or Alan Alda, and they want to f*ck Sean Connery and Yul Brenner. This is why hard-working, loving, good-guy betas find themselves trapped in loveless, sexless marriages and why bad-boy alphas get laid. And it will continue as long as women act like...women.
The Game is about how Strauss gets involved in PUA and meets Mystery. It's really good. Has a lot of background on Mystery. It almost feels like a gay romance between Strauss and Mystery.
At least reading PUA is one way to overcome the parental deficiencies when a boy is raised without a father in the house. One problem is that most women will just give the advice "be nice, helpful, polilte, and honest and all will work out." It doesn't. This is like advising you to prpare to buy a new or used car by just telling the salesman you need a good deal from him.
Whether women like it or not, admit it or not, what they often say they are attracted to in men is often nothing like what they reward with their behavior. Dennis Prager makes the point that unlike men, women are seldom taught to overcome their female nature. Many women won't even admit there is a female nature. And as men retreat from society, female nature seems more and more to be *human* nature. All men and women know men must control their male nature for success.
When boys and men have troubles they must toughen up. Women girls and women have problems we must all work to reform the world.
Helen, I wonder how much the PUA material helps in getting a relationship. It is aimed at getting laid through expert manipulation of shallow women. I am not sure it would be good advice to follow if a person is interested in forming a relationship.
Trey
"When boys and men have troubles they must toughen up. Women girls and women have problems we must all work to reform the world."
That is so true it is funny. Well put.
Trey
@Trey: "It is aimed at getting laid through expert manipulation of shallow women."
And I suppose martial arts are all about getting people to beat the living sh!t out of each other?
I won't presume to guess if you have actually read their books or seen their DVD programs, but I have, and shallow manipulation has nothing to do with it. The preponderance of materials I have reviewed strongly suggest, at their core, nothing more than a focused effort at self-improvement. Far from sleazy ploys smacking of NLP-style hypnotism that cons a woman out of her panties, the bulk of what I have reviewed exhorts men to literally be better men, to not fall for women's tests that separate the alphas from the betas, to stand up for yourself, and to be confident in your own skin.
...you know. Shit that shrinks usually talk about.
Tmink: I agree. Here is a blogpost that might amuse you about the PUA advice industry.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-juicy-bits/201105/enough-gender-profiling-ii
TMink,
Wielded properly, PUA can be very effecting in getting a relationship, for the reason that most guys are pretty good in the comfort aspects of LTRs, but stink at generating the attraction and sexual energy necessary to get a woman to want to be with you in the first place.
Mystery-style PUA has three phases:
-Attraction
-Comfort
-Seduction
If you are going for a serious relationship, you just don't do the third part until much later. You don't have to do your PUA in clubs and bars, you can do it at work social events, movies, or "day-game." It's really just a matter of approaching women, and not being bothered if/when they reject you. The more relaxed a guy can be about the whole thing (which comes with practice), the more attractive he can be to women, who generally speaking are put off by lack of confidence, neediness and clinginess.
Helen,
This is God's work, teaching a young man to de-program. Tell your friend's son to also listen to the clips of the Tom Leykis Show that are all over YouTube. He heavily emphasizes that young men should not worship women as a whole or sacrifice their careers and lives at a woman's insistence.
Mystery and Strauss' books are good to start, but beyond that the Internet is by far the best place to learn. Field reports, Roissy, and some of the more relationship-oriented game blogs. Check out Susan Walsh's Hooking Up Smart website and the "Being Male Blogs" sidebar for links to other good stuff.
ZP wrote: "the bulk of what I have reviewed exhorts men to literally be better men, to not fall for women's tests that separate the alphas from the betas, to stand up for yourself, and to be confident in your own skin."
There was not much of that in the smattering of the PUA stuff I skimmed. Sounds like I was wrong. Thanks for using your info to give me a better understanding of the approach.
Trey
Topher, thanks to you for the clarification as well. I appreciate how both of you disagreed civilly. It made it easy to accept your points.
Trey
Cham,
Most of what that article you linked is criticizing is female advice like "The Rules" that tells women to be more difficult so that men will "value" them. This is so incredibly backwards and is a huge projection. Women respond better to men who are a little than to men falling over themselves to spend time with them, so advice columnists assume it works the other way too. It doesn't. A man wants a woman he is attracted to and enjoys being around. The more difficult you make his life, the LESS he will enjoy the relationship.
The problem is that most men don't have the balls to dump a chick acting out like this, so women think it actually works in attracting men who want to be with them. In reality they just get doormats and guys who think they can't do better.
She throws in a shot at pickup seminars at the end by citing a fictional case from a television crime drama in which an aspiring PUA went on a killing spree, which is another common marker of writing stupidity today, citing fictional television programs as if they reflected reality.
The notion that pickup seminars teach men to be "serial killers" is insane. Mystery is emo to the core and wants to be loved by women. Neil Strauss is a self-identified feminist. The best thing for women's safety is that men learn how to attract and keep women.
"There was not much of that in the smattering of the PUA stuff I skimmed."
Depends what you skimmed. There IS a lot of shitty PUA advice out there, mostly by guys who learned the basics and then decided it was so easy anybody could teach it. The "inner game" advice (be your best, stand in your frame) is by far the best.
"Topher, thanks to you for the clarification as well. I appreciate how both of you disagreed civilly. It made it easy to accept your points."
Sure. Trouble is there are so many flavors of game now, from one-night stands to marriage. Check out marriedmansexlife.com for a guy teaching men how to use game principles to improve their marriages. (Dr Helen, you should interview this guy). Feminists go nuts about it but he gets dozens upon dozens of emails from guys who tell him he saved their marriages.
"Women respond better to men who are a little"
unavailable.
Slip of the brain.
Let me clarify this point as well:
"The best thing for women's safety is that men learn how to attract and keep women."
This is not because lonely men will become serial killers out of sexual frustration, serial killers like George Sodini are mentally ill people, not normal guys with inappropriate sexual sublimation. It's because a generation of men who can't attract and keep women, or are screwed over by a female-centric family law system, are hostile to women and will sit out the game if something threatens the safety of women. Check out thespearhead.com for a big crew of said hostile guys.
she wants to find a man, not a jerk
If that's so, and if she's so experienced, why is it that she'll end up dating a douchebag? and not just dating, but being seriously involved with him?
Women acquire things, and men are likewise acquired by women. Women are shoppers by nature: they love a deal/bargain/sale. A man who is superior to them in numerous ways is a bargain to her.
I do not regard any PU artist as empirically or inherently *right*; I read many sources and seek the overlap and agreement. On the whole, I have observed a strong agreement in that community that women choose their mates according to behavioral displays more so than objective facts (e.g., that a man is confident, has a master plan for his life and knows how to tell a joke is even more alluring to most women than another man who makes ten times the $$$, has a powerful job but is needy, clingy, insecure and acts like George Castanza). Outer game flows from inner game, in parlance.
Information such as you get from PUAs is like any other: it's obvious, or intuitive, or counter-intuitive. And most of the PUA info is counter-intuitive. Most men think it's a good idea to lavish expensive meals on her, to compliment her good looks, and to find a way to say "I love you" as soon as possible because "that's what chicks like."
They HATE that! They all reek of neediness and insecurity (and lots of manipulation).
It was back in the 1970s that someone told me that women occasionally test a man's boundaries (what PUAs call "shit tests"). It's a means of telling if a male is a wussy or the real stuff. Mystery says, "when she holds out a hoop and you jump through it, you've lost."
Not many guys realize that women are perpetually scanning men to sort them into alphas and betas. You really have to be observant, or she'll dump you for reasons you can't figure out.
Believe it or not, after reading this PUA stuff over the past 18 months, my opinion and respect for women has gone up considerably. Before, I thought they were all stupid, crazy and evil.
Now I realize they're just women.
@Cham: I read the article you linked.
That Dr. Ruti is as f*cking stupid as Kay Hymowitz, and honestly I am surprised a woman of your intelligence fell for her sniveling excuse for logic.
I mean really. The very impertinence of it all.
Telling someone who can't get a date to "be themselves" or that one day they will "meet someone" is very much like telling someone whose clothes are on fire not to worry, they'll eventually go out.
They might be dead first, but they'll go out.
ZoroPrimo is exactly correct, women, real women that is, hate that childish pickup crap. They see right through it and will laugh in your face. That's why the method I discussed above works so well.
All of this PUA is just some guys bragging about all of the sluts they fucked and somehow managed to get a book deal or start a seminar out of it. I'm talking about something completely different.
Do you want to date a woman or a slut? Do you want a woman to make love to you, or do you want to get fucked by a slut?
I posted this article from The Daily Beast the other day, and I'll post it again.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-05-19/slut-walks-are-organized-by-liberal-feminists-but-dont-help-women/full/
Now, look at the pictures of the sluts marching down the street. Then look at the picture of the author, Kirsten Powers. Who would you rather go out with?
Kirsten Powers is lovely. She's an intelligent, articulate, accomplished woman, because she holds herself to a higher standard. When she was single, she went out looking for a handsome, intelligent, articulate, accomplished man, who holds himself to a higher standard. A PUA has zero chance of attracting her, no matter how much money he has, because she sees right through him at first glance.
Now, how do you make yourself attractive to a woman like her? By being the best dressed man in the room. You don't need to wear Armani, but you do need to wear tailored clothes that fit and look good. And if she approaches you, how do you conduct yourself? Like a man.
All come ons are clumsy, all innuedoes are inept, and none of them work. Or rather they will work with some slut off the street, but she's only looking for some stupid guy that she can exploit or ruin. Oh, yeah, she'll fuck you, in more ways than one.
To be attractive to a woman, you have to be a man. Be polite and courteous, be funny, and pay attention to her. Her body language is telling you everything you need to know. In less than thirty minutes, you will know whether she's really attracted to you and wants you to ask her out. But you don't ask her out--you simply make a date.
Start very casually, coffee, a light lunch, maybe a picnic in the park on the weekend or an outdoor festival of some sort, and let the romance build. Never touch her unless she touches you first. In the beginning, it's simply let's meet, talk and get to know each other. She will definitely let you know when she's ready to take it to the next level, if you pay attention to her.
This is what I know about a woman. She wants to be happy, she needs to be safe, and she has to be free. So let her. Be a man and let her come to you.
I rant about marriage all the time, and I have serious problems with the marriage contract, but I'd marry a woman like Kirsten Powers in a heartbeat. Because I know she wouldn't abandon, betray or bankrupt me. Rather, she would complement me as I would complement her.
Sluts on parade aren't worth the time of day. I leave them to the PUAs who don't know real women, and who will end up broke when their silly little scheme blows up in their faces.
Do you want a woman to make love to you, or do you want to get fucked by a slut?
You say this as if it were a rhetorical question. It is not.
I might agree with you that PUA stuff is not an ideal path to a deep, meaningful, unicorns-and-hearts relationship, but I definitely disagree with your assertion that Game only works with "sluts".
Anyway, I think you have misidentified the goal of PUAs, and you are making the common mistake of applying your own values as if everyone shares them exactly.
I think it is deeply unfortunate that prostitution is illegal in most states. If it was legal it would save a lot of people time and effort.
Just for a dissenting opinion I was successful being nice, kind and respectful. All of the guys I know who are happily married were the same way and consider pick-up artists to be smarmy assholes. Generally they occupy the lowest wrung in the male hierarchy.
Most guys lack self-confidence. If one of these books can get them out there where they can interact with women then that is fine. If they take the advice literally then they are asking for trouble. All of the pick-up artists I knew in high school are divorced now and I am not the least bit surprised.
Superficial people have superficial relationships.
Dr. Helen: How about: "Instead of spending tens of thousands of dollars in a psychiatrist who will help you explore the childhood roots of your troubles, invest a far smaller sum in advice and practice in developing specific social skills."
@GawainsGhost:
Mystery dated A-list actresses and models. One of his wingmen stole Miss Indiana away from her model boyfriend. Tom Cruise met Mystery and based his character in Magnolia on Mystery and several other PUAs.
PUAs don't date sluts. You're making shit up.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ha ha, good one ZP.
Women's violence against men is always so funny.
[...at the local night club]
ME: Golly! There sure are some hot looking women here.
PUA: Better get your game on.
ME: Huh?
PUA: Be ready to say just the right thing so the women warm to you.
ME: Like what?
PUA: Well, just to break the ice and get the conversation flowing, compliment her shoes. Chicks dig on thinking their footwear is top notch.
ME: You're shitting me.
PUA: No, seriously. When a woman thinks she's wearing classy shoes, it makes her feel like a winner.
ME: Hmmmmm... Shoes...A winner... I can do that!
[slides up next to a woman as hot as Kim Kardashian]
ME: Hey.
HER: Hey, back.
[deftly lowers eyes to see her shoes]
ME: Wow. Nice shoes.
HER: Thanks.
ME: Seriously, the last time I saw shoes like that was at the finish line at the Kentucky Derby!
@Campy: Happy now?
george said...
Just for a dissenting opinion I was successful being nice, kind and respectful.
You're lucky, then. Based on my observations and experience, doing that usually makes a man prime victim material for personality-disordered women. Plus, how certain are you that your friends are truly happily married? I've seen marriages where the guy gave the appearance to all observers that he was happily married, when in fact he was being abused, exploited, cheated on, etc.
I laugh at all the PUA stuff. Mostly, it's designed to get men with low self-esteem to get to have sex with women with low self-esteem.
Not that this is necessarily a bad thing.
What really gets me is all the acronym nonsense: PUA, HMV, AMOG etc etc etc... it's enough to make you LOL.
Adolescent bollocks. Most alpha males don't feel a need to conquer lots of women to prove their masculinity, and they certainly don't have to surround themselves with an elaborate system of rules and assumed behavioral traits, either. The true alpha male doesn't need to constantly reaffirm his masculinity, either. Hell, most alpha males I know don't even know or care that they are alpha males, which I would suggest is the mark of the true alpha male.
Oh, and by the way: picking up drunk women in bars is pretty much the bottom of the barrel in terms of male behavior.
I'm not making anything up. You're buying the bullshit of braggarts. And 90% of the actresses in Hollywood are sluts, so your point is?
Memorable women I've dated and bedded: a former Ms. San Deigo, she was beautiful; a professional jazz dancer from Venezuela, she was hot; a synchronized swimmer from Corpus. The list goes on. My method works.
I don't need stupid lines, clumsy come ons, inept inuendoes. I don't need to make any moves. I just dress well, look good, smell good, conduct myself in a manner befitting a man, and wait for her to come to me.
When I was in high school, I did a lot of drama. We went to 30 tournaments a year, plus one act play. So I simply collected names, addresses, phone numbers of drama girls all over the state, made myself a little black book, which I kept hidden under the spare tire in the trunk of my car.
Summer of 78, I packed my best clothes, got some maps, pulled out my little black book, went down to the bank and withdrew all the money I had saved from doing odd jobs since I was 8, got in my car, and set out.
It was a simple plan really. Pull into town, check into a hotel, start making phone calls, setting up dates. I don't need to come on to her. I just wait for her to come to me. If she wants to go back to the hotel, great. If not, fine. On to the next town, and the next name on the list.
At the age of 17, I had more girls than most guys date in their lives. You want to believe the bullshit of braggarts? Go ahead. That's not bullshit, and I'm not bragging. I am telling you that my method works; it has for 35 years.
I'm not bragging.
Yeah, doesn't sound like it. (eye roll)
You and Kim are missing the point of PUA methods, and of the original post. Of course a real alpha male doesn't need that stuff. If you're perfection on a stick like GG, you do fine. A depressed kid who can't get a date might need some silly shtick from an outside source to get him pointed in the right direction.
Being a dick about it doesn't help him.
At the age of 17, I had more girls than most guys date in their lives. You want to believe the bullshit of braggarts? Go ahead. That's not bullshit, and I'm not bragging. I am telling you that my method works; it has for 35 years.
Congratulations. You have managed to completely miss the point. If what you are saying is true, then you are a natural alpha. And being a natural alpha, you have absolutely no idea what it is that you do or how you do it. You can't successfully tell other men how to behave any more than Magic Johnson could coach basketball.
What Game is, at its core, is articulating and synthesizing natural Alpha behavior. This allows non-Alphas to attract women as if they were Alphas. It is real, it is scientific in the historical sense of science, and it is extraordinarily effective with all women. Unsurprisingly, both natural Alphas and women who have not thought the matter through tend to hate the very idea of Game, as has been demonstrated in the comments above. Natural Alphas hate losing their monopoly and women fear discovering they chose a synthetic Alpha rather than a natural one.
Women aren't actually lying when they mislead men, they are merely being incomplete. When they say they want a nice, polite man who respects them, they are assuming that he is someone they are already attracted to. They have no idea how a man attracts them; asking a woman what attracts her is about as effective as asking a duck about what it would prefer in a duck call.
Those who attempt to argue against Game, almost always in ignorance, are foolishly arguing against that which has been hypothesized, tested, and proved with a much larger sample size than any drug ever approved by the FDA.
Women initiate all sexual contact. If you haven't figure that out yet, well, then what does that say about you? Other than that you're a groper or an idiot.
Men do not pick up women. Women pick out men. It's as simple as that.
So conduct yourself as a man and wait for her to come to you.
All ths PUA crap is just that, crap. Oh, I've glanced through several of the books, and just laughed.
Definition of a man: know money, know clothes, know woman.
Definition of a boy: no money, no clothes, no woman.
A boy may have any number of sluts throwing themselves at him, just to see what they can get off him, but he will never attract a woman.
It only takes me about 20 minutes on the first date, for which I will spend maybe $5 (two cups of coffee), to determine whether she's a slut, just another stupid, spoiled, conceited little girl, or a woman. If the latter, I'll make another date. If the former two, I'm done. I mean, hey, I did buy her a cup of coffee, but that's all I going to spend on this relationship, because there is none.
When I was teaching high school, there were these two guys in one of my classes, best friends tied at the hip. They were always together. I happened to like them, because they were good students.
One day I was at the bookstore (great place to meet women, by the way), shopping around, and I came across the paperback, "How To Pick Up Girls." I looked through it. All it was was a series of stupid one-liners. But since it was only $4.95, I bought it, took it to school, and gave it to these two guys.
On Friday, these guys went around the lunchroom, sitting in front of every girl, and trying some stupid line on them. Monday, all the girls at school were laughing at them.
That's what I think of pick up artists. They're a joke.
There is only this, being a man. Being well dressed, well scented, well groomed, and well mannered. Attracting a woman, waiting for her to initiate sexual contact, and then taking it from there.
Maybe a serious relationship will develop; maybe it won't. Either way, you conduct yourself as a man. Period.
These PUAs, with their books and seminars, never got out of high school. And if they'd have been even half as succussful as I was in high school, they would't need to be selling their bullshit. Which doesn't work.
Wow. When you get over this shyness problem and come out of your shell, you're going to be a hoot at parties.
It's pretty clear. GawainsGhost has women falling all over each other beating a path to his bedroom because of his super-awesomeness. Meanwhile, Game theorists might sometimes tell you that rather than being a last-place nice guy, you can have more success by being more of a jerk.
I see no conflict here.
"You and Kim are missing the point of PUA methods, and of the original post. Of course a real alpha male doesn't need that stuff."
----
I agree, and I'd go further than that. GawainsGhost is just a harmless braggart, but Kim is the type of chivalrous guy that is causing men all their problems.
Just like Joe Biden or chivalrous family court judges or chivalrous male lawmakers looking out for the Little Lady.
Kim has never really pinpointed why he obviously feels that he is an alpha male / Real Man. Because he can beat up everyone in the world? Because he has a good education like doctor or lawyer? Because he is a senator? Because he is a heavily muscled jailbird who bites into people like a dog at the least provocation?
I dunno why Kim is an alpha and why he only has alpha friends. But his utter lack of empathy for other men is exactly what MRAs should be seeing and railing against. I really mean it.
From the Amazon review:
After two years, Strauss ends up becoming almost as successful as Mystery, but he comes to an important realization. His techniques were actually off-putting to the woman he ended up falling in love with.
Getting to the serious love stage might require being yourself at some point.
I don't know all the characters here, but I read Kim's comment as coming from a female. No offense meant either way.
And yes, the falling-in-love stage is different, but the kid who needs advice in the original post is not thinking along those lines yet (or probably shouldn't be).
Some boys really need a boost in self-confidence. Society hammers them. At least some of the PUA material tries to help them with showing confidence and telling them how women really behave and react.
I can't understand the posters here who seem to want to beat up on those boys (HEE-HAW, they is shit) and who have absolutely no empathy. Anyone interested in eliminating some of the shit that is dumped on boys today - in contrast to girls - should find these braggarts dispicable.
I'm putting $5 on Kim is a chick.
"Oh, and by the way: picking up drunk women in bars is pretty much the bottom of the barrel in terms of male behavior."
Definite chick shaming line. Probably from someone who got nailed while hammered.
Men of all ages really need some information about how women really behave.
Obviously.
I have seen it over and over again that some guy tells me how his wife is also his best friend (he says he "has her trained" and elbows me with a laugh) and that he will never get a divorce.
And ... I don't have to say any more, because I think others here have also seen what sometimes happens.
Women really wind up with money and they control the views in society. Women who separate men from their money are still held in high esteem, but look at men who do that to women (just as much scum as the women who do it to men, actually).
Why NOT get some real information about how women behave? PUAs are giving the information that is closest to reality at the moment. Chivalrist men are the furthest away from reality, and psychologists and therapists and all the rest are not far behind the chivalrist men.
"I'm putting $5 on Kim is a chick."
-------
Pay up. I accept PayPal. He's a full-of-himself male.
By the way, here's a problem that occurs with married men who have some distorted view of women:
A guy at work some 15-20 years ago - I still remember it clearly - thought that he was having a heart attack at work.
Side note: He was married to an ex-secretary at our work, who was a single mother. She singled him out - he was becoming a high earner, although he was an absolute nerd with no experience with women - and he married her and adopted her kid. She instantly quit work and sat home on his money.
Anyway, he thought he was having a heart attack. Everyone at work offered to drive him to the emergency room. He picked one of the guys, and he only needed to call his wife to tell her he would be late. She had a strict rule that if he wasn't there at 6:30 p.m. for his dinner, he wasn't getting any from her.
He called her, and she screamed at him that if she was late for her yoga class (he had to watch her kid), then he was really going to pay for it.
Everyone was kind of stunned. She could not care less about him.
He went to the hospital and was ultimately told that he was having an anxiety attack. Not his heart.
He absolutely denied that his wife ever said that and just put it out of his mind. She never said it. She wasn't like that. She wasn't just with him for his money and support.
And THAT'S how chivalrous men think, and THAT'S why they are sometimes fleeced.
Helen,
Mystery's first book, 'The Mystery Method', is better than the newer one you ordered, as the former provides more tactical strategy.
Also excellent is 'Bang' by Roosh Valizadeh.
Those are the best 'How to' books.
Pickups artists have proven that the vast majority of women have no capacity to discuss how women think.
Yes, you read that right.
A woman is no more capable of discussing female psychology than a 12-year-old child is of writing a textbook on child psychology.
Topher, Cham,
A book like 'The Rules' is a perfect example of how little women know, rather than how much. 'The Rules' would be far more effective if a man applied those to a woman, rather than a woman applying those to a man.
And howcome women have to cite a book written 16 years ago? That all ya got?
This superb article explains how hopelessly solipistic the female mind is.
Almost no dating/relationship advice written by women is of any value. Women just don't understand the female brain well enough to comment on it.
Kim's ignorant comment is the response of a woman who does not like being figured out.
Game works in marriages as well. And it works on smarter women more than on dumber women.
Anyway, Kim is too ignorant to discuss the subject intelligently. She has a long way to go before she understands how women think.
Gawain'sGhost clearly has very limited experience with women. I see it all the time, and can see it in the first few sentences of a comment from such a poser.
A weak braggart who needs to grandstand on the Internet. Pathetic.
What is funny is that these unsuccessful men are still denying that doing well with women is a LEARNABLE SKILL.
A LEARNABLE SKILL.
What sort of weak loser denies that, particularly when so much fine material exists out there?
Vox wrote :
What Game is, at its core, is articulating and synthesizing natural Alpha behavior. This allows non-Alphas to attract women as if they were Alphas. It is real, it is scientific in the historical sense of science, and it is extraordinarily effective with all women.
Bingo.
Yet so many people still can't get it (or otherwise deny this truth since it re-arranges their understanding of the world).
Vox's comment is so good that it should be featured in entirety in Helen's next post.
@kmg:
1. Yes, Mystery's first book is much better. And Roosh's book is likewise highly thought of in PUA circles.
2. With all due respect to the ladies, yes (and YES!) the female mind is a quivering hive of solipsism. I am stunned at the female's ability to believe whatever makes it feel good about itself. [Seriously. You want to make a woman lie? Make her angry. You want to make her believe ridiculous shit? Package it so it makes her feel good about herself.]
3. Vox's comment re "natural alphas" has been addressed by Tyler and other famous PUAs. When a man is a natural at anything (or even a woman) there is no impetus for self-examination and study. When you are a beta, you need to overcome and therefore become cognizant of your actions. Thus you learn. It is because of this that the natural alphas are of little use in teaching Game; the PUAs are the Ph.D.s of the dating scene.
Spirited discussion. And highly thoughtful (with relatively little acrimony). One of the reasons I like Dr. Helen's site so much more than others.
My understanding of modern-day Game is limited. I don't read the sites, and I've only listened to an abridged audio version of the Strauss book (I liked the Courtney Love parts).
My feeling, based on my experience and anecdotal knowledge, is that I don't buy the hype of "it works on all women" or that the concepts are inviolable. I think the principles are mostly correct, but the fundamental value of Game is that it sometimes will work, whereas the natural shy beta inclination (be nice, be unobstrusive, don't rudely intrude on the nice lady) will never work.
The kid who can't get a date needs to be told that the right strategy is to approach the woman immediately after eye contact. Not because if you wait 10 minutes the whole deal is ruined, but because if you don't order the kid to go up to her, he won't go then, he won't go 10 minutes later, he won't go ever. That's why Game "works."
Or, perhaps I should say, that's the biggest reason it works. Like I said, I do think the principles are mostly sound, if not quite as solid as the laws of physics.
The best explanation of Game I have ever heard or read (and honestly, this is all it is):
"You see that guy over there? The guy with all the women fawning over him? You see how he acts? You see how he makes casual conversation, jokes and sometimes busts women for their outrageous behavior (shit tests)? You see how he is?"
BE THAT GUY!
It's all about being the kind of man women respond to. Whatever that is.
And that's it. In a frikkin nutshell. Everything else is details. It's not about scams or cons or anything. It's nothing but the study of what makes women pay attention to men.
Period.
Putting Mystery, The Rules, The Game, PUAs, Beta and Omega Males aside, perhaps the problem isn't having some sort of magic assistance to help meet the opposite sex but more so a lifetime of soccer games, ballet lessons, video games, enormous amounts of homework, tutoring sessions, obscene parental oversight so that every minute of the day is monitored we are left with a bunch of young people that have almost no social skills that will allow them to easily introduce themselves to somebody they don't know.
Most definitely young people today are socially crippled. I could blame the iPod/text/Gameboy culture, but it's too easy a target. This has been going on for decades. Read the book "Bowling Alone" to see how badly fractured American society has become. There used to be a time when we spent lots of time with our coworkers (e.g., bowling teams). Today we have bogus and superficial bonding retreats and other horseshit that is sold to HR geeks.
As re men who socialize poorly with women, see the first two chapters of "No More Mr Nice Guy" by Dr. Robert Glover. Best explanation of the rise of beta men I have ever seen.
A friend of mine in High School was a semi-successful PUA. What I observed then and since is that PUA is NOT about picking up every women, but in learning to quickly identify which women you can pick up and how to do so. With those women the techniques these authors discuss are high successful, but this is still a far cry from "any" woman.
I'm also not convinced you can really teach this since it requires a certain level of assholery that nice guys aren't capable of (I read several PUA sites for a while and couldn't handle it. The mysogony was way too deep and I have no interest in women who find that appealing.)
@Helen
Just curious if your friend's husband is in the picture. Not a criticism of her, but most of my friends (and myself) definitely needed help like this. We were raised by single mothers, and even though we got help late, it made a huge difference when we did get it.
As for any ladies offended by 'game' trust me, my previous meek and polite self was far, far more offensive obviously. I lived the 'be yourself' motto about as far as it would go. I wasn't happy and neither were girls that might have been interested but I never approached. It should be a good experience dealing with a guy that takes the time to learn what girls actuall like (not what they say they like, BTW).
Morgan,
Good point. I wonder if boys without Dads have a harder time knowing how to approach women or they get a woman's view from mom etc. about how to do it that may not be effective.
I'm very surprised by the number of people who keep equating the techniques taught by Mystery and the like to "cheesy pick up lines". This is absolutely nothing of the sort.
One of the key principles is taking your own personal experiences that demonstrate why you are a superior candidate and creating a routine where you are able to communicate this in such a way as to come across great every single time.
Imagine how effective it is to be able to walk up to any woman and perfectly communicate your best traits in an entertaining way that captivates. I know what my go to stories are. I know what the winners are, and they're well practiced just like if I were giving a presentation at work.
These aren't cheesy pickup lines. They're the best things about yourself that demonstrates your value.
And in the end, that's all this is about. There is an endless supply of men who are demonstrating their value in a number of ways.
Why wouldn't you want to be better than them at it?
(Btw, anyone who keeps mentioning money: when Mystery started he didn't have a dime and was bumming rides to the clubs so he could get out a meet people. It's not about money.)
I do think that boys without dads probably have a much harder time because their moms teach them the wrong things. I had a dad, but my dad didn't really tell me anything about women. My mom always told me to be nice, and to be myself.
Well, myself was socially awkward, and being nice is incredibly ineffective. And it's shocking how hard it was for me to change my mindset about this, at first. When my friend told me techniques which I now know to be PUA techniques, I resisted them -- being nice was the right way! Who cares if your way works and my way doesn't; my way should work, therefore I'll keep doing it!
It wasn't until later that I saw the utter futility of continuing to use the same failed strategies over and over, and when I finally opened up to trying something different, I had tremendously more success.
GawainsGhost: You're a liar. Nobody with that much self-confidence would need to gas about it at such length on the Internet.
Enough of words. Actions speak louder than. Helen spoke, the young man acted, he won. You can't unsay those simple facts.
@Helen & Morgan:
I don't mean to carp on the issue, but if you want the answer to why guys who grew up with Moms and no Dads (or Dads who were pricks and alienated their sons) have a rough time with women, read chapters 1 & 2 of "No More Mr Nice Guy" by Dr. Robert Glover.
There's your answer.
I'll also note that I once thought the way many opponents of PUA think -- it's disrespectful and manipulative.
But here's what I realized. When I was being a "nice guy," if I followed my thought process out to the end, I was being far more manipulative and underhanded than with "game."
Here's the thinking for a "nice guy" strategy: I treat a woman nicely without her doing anything to deserve it. Over time, my nice actions toward her add up, until eventually she realizes that I've been so nice to her, she should really give me a chance romantically. It's basically a way of guilting her into a relationship.
Now, this doesn't actually work, but the thing I realized was that when I did something nice, I was expecting a corresponding acknowledgement of my niceness which would culminate in giving me a date. I was expecting a return on my investment of niceness.
When you think about it, it's actually more cynical and manipulative than "game" is. If you do it right, "game" helps a person to express himself in a way that is perceived positively by most people (or most women, though it typically applies to everyone). Having started as a "nice guy," I now find the "nice guys" to be the manipulative ones. At least people who practice "game" are upfront about their motives, which I think is a far superior way to be.
@Rob:
See my previous post to Helen & Morgan.
No More Mr Nice Guy, by Dr. Robert Glover. Your post is all about Chapter 1.
Ha, finally someone says it. "Be yourself" is what a guy who's designed his whole life around scoring babes says to a normal guy to sabotage him. I've seen dudes wearing $600 of "casual" clothes who treat GQ as their bible tell that to the chubby geeks wearing slacks with track shoes. Brutal survival-of-the-fittest tactics at play there. Some species have sperm plugs, we've got "be yourself".
I like Archie's (the comic book character) maxim. "Always be yourself, unless you're a creep; then, be someone else."
Works for me.
Regarding: Be yourself.
If your self likes to walk around wearing dirty hole-filled teeshirts, if your self is 100 pounds overweight, if your self speaks using mostly cuss words, then maybe one needs to take an inventory of their self. Your self may need a bit of an overhaul. Sure, be yourself, but think about who that person is and what the takeaway from that is.
This whole topic was dealt with much more succinctly several years back by John Ross (yes, the author of Unintended Consequences)in his 2003 and 2004 Ross in Range columns. See, for example,
http://web.archive.org/web/20070110024257/http://www.john-ross.net/advice.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20070503123349/http://www.john-ross.net/abby.htm
For those who think "game" is only good for having sex with loose women, I would say that the way I used it was to make myself much more attractive to women so I could get married to a good, Christian woman.
One of the things I like about it is that it enables me to treat her well without her losing interest in me. The problem for a genuinely "nice" guy, who wants to treat women well, is that much of their inherent psychology is against you. Women really, honestly aren't attracted to guys who they primarily perceive as "nice," they are attracted to guys who they primarily perceive as "confident."
With confidence, you can treat a woman well without turning her off. But without it, you'll lose her in the space of one sentence, even if the underlying sentiment is otherwise the same.
So what I appreciate about it is that it allowed me to attract a good woman and helps me to keep her, and it affords me the ability to keep her attracted to me without having to mistreat her to do it.
Awesome thread, everyone! I actually coached two years for a major company that was associated with the PUA stuff, even if I still resist calling myself a "pickup artist."
I think "being yourself" is the right answer, only it's the worst thing to tell a guy who's inexperienced with women, because most of those guys don't know who they are yet (owing to the societal factors some of you have mentioned).
Once I got a lot of experience with women and developed more confidence in myself, I saw that I was most likely to attract women who are similar to me. And THAT'S when being myself really pays off.
And just in the name of shameless self-promotion, here's my blog: www.gkdating.com
To quote Oscar Wilde, "Be yourself-- everyone else is already taken."
I have been happily married for over 25 years. I have been following this PUA stuff for the last year, not to get more women, but to relate better with my wife. I think it has value. She is a highly educated professional who supervises many other professionals. However, she sometimes relates to me as if we were in a hunter/gatherer society, and expects me to be a Tarzan rather than the retired nerd I really am. I can play a role, as long as I know what the role is.
Wow. All a man needs to know is that he will never go so low that a dog and a woman won't go with him. Get a dog, and if some woman comes into your life, and the dog doesn't like her, get rid of the woman.
Dicken's advice was this: If, in middle age, you feel like marrying again, just go to your room and take poison. Don't mess around with hanging, that's common.
"I do think that boys without dads probably have a much harder time because their moms teach them the wrong things."
Kids who grow up without dad have a harder time at practically everything but landing in jail, dropping out of high school, and getting pregnant before they are 20.
Trey
1. I'm a man, not a woman. If you were older than 15, you'd probably have recognized my name from my old website, which was moderately successful in its day, and at which I discussed topics like politics, guns, music, cars and women, in no specific order.
2. I'm 56 years old, and I've been sexually active for 40 of them. When it comes to dating women, there's not a whole lot you're gonna teach me. I'm not an adolescent, so I don't have to send "+1" text messages to all my little buddies when I've scored. Nevertheless, if one takes away the quarter-century or so in which I've been married or otherwise monogamous, my "number" is fairly impressive -- good enough for me, anyway, and that's all that counts.
3. The polite term for these wannabe sexual predators is "pick-up artists". We used to refer to them as "wankers", because, mostly, they were, and are just that. The infallible clue to a wanker is a boy/man who's only interested in dating/sleeping with beautiful women. That's a dead giveaway to a pathetic level of self-esteem right there. Some of the nicest women I've dated have not been the best-looking ones in the room. It's called the "Avis" principle (look it up if you don't know what I mean).
4. Sadly, because our modern Western society has become infantilized, and "25 is the new 18" (Jesus wept), it would appear that boys in their mid- to late 20s are trying the learn the stuff we once figured out for ourselves in our late teens. Only now, instead of figuring it out for themselves (like real men), they're trying to learn the PUA "techniques" from these so-called "experts" like Roissy, Roosh and the like, who -- color me surprised! -- are using this "expertise" to sell books, speaking engagements and "coaching" courses. (By the way, coaching boys how to seduce girls is about half a level below teaching Sociology in college, on the alpha-to-omega activity scale.)
5. If your idea of a fun Saturday night is a six-pack of Red Bull and two hours of youporn.com, you're only marginally less pathetic than a guy who's studied "Game" and heads off to the nearest bar filled with drunken young women. Get a clue.
6. Best advice for dealing with women is simple: grow a pair. Don't let them boss you around, ALWAYS be ready to walk away from a relationship or marriage if life becomes unbearable, and don't be driven by your dick. There: I've just saved you hundreds of dollars that you would have just blown on your next "Increase Your HMV" or some such bullshit seminar.
I can't wait to see what the stellar PUAs will look like when they get to my age. (Think: Donald Trump, only with much less money.)
Tmink: That is not all that dadless boys do well. They get addicted to drugs, become homeless, rage and murder people better than just about everybody too. It's an entire subset of people standing on a street corner waiting patiently for something good to happen to them and wondering why it isn't happening fast enough. Small wonder dadless boys don't excel at dating. Fortunately, for the PUA industry, there is a growing potential customer base looking for a quick fix to what is a much larger character challenge.
Cham, you're conflating a study of how to attract women with development of character.
People with character problems should develop their character for its own sake. Not to attract women.
Conversely, you imply that well-developed character coincides with attractiveness to women. It doesn't really, especially among younger women who have more sexual value.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kim sez: "If you were older than 15, you'd probably have recognized my name from my old website, ..."
---
You're not very convincing because you aren't seeking the truth, you are trying to strongly differentiate yourself, on one side, from all of the pathetic losers in the world, on the other side. It's all strongly ego-driven and thus fairly worthless.
You'd make a good bully, but not a good scientist.
Judging from Kim's last comment, I think we can see why he gets so much tail - he's an asshole. I like how he tells us he doesn't have to tell other people when he gets laid, in the middle of telling us how much he gets laid.
Way too much chest-thumping going on on this thread from guys who are telling us what losers Mystery and Roissy are.
"Real men don't need to learn game" sounds like a creative comeback, but doesn't really help the large cadre of otherwise-successful men in modern American who find themselves unable to attract women.
Felt I wanted to add my two cents. I personally thing "being yourself" can work. Problem is most people have no idea the pure depth of this statement.
Being yourself means completely and unapologetically (sp?). You must be at peace with your decisions and have the confidence of knowing yourself. In other words you must like yourself. If someone doesn't like you that is ok since you don't need their approval.
If they demand you change, you refuse them. If you have a need or want that you wish to go after then do it. You will not put it aside for the girl. This breeds the confidence and assertiveness necessary to become attractive to women. Most men try to act like this but there is a nagging feeling that they should feel guilty about want or acting a certain way. Like their needs are not worthy to be discussed or put on the same level of other people.
read the book No more Mr. Nice Guy! and it opened my eyes to a lot of my own failings and reasons behind my actions.
My take is that you do need to be yourself. But to take it to the proper level is a very difficult exercise. most non-jerks are instead nice guys and their current mindset has them rolling over for women, but you never respect someone you can push around. If you can gain the necessary confidence in your actions by knowing yourself and acting as yourself, you can set boundaries and stand up to the woman in your life. If she can respect you then she can love you.
But I don't WANT to "pick someone up" or "get" dates, like someone putting a trap out for a mouse. I believe it's supposed to work by two people who are in the same class, office, workplace, choir, or other group simply gravitating towards each other over time. That way, when you go out, you're already a little in love with each other, and you're going out to have a great time, not for a "job interview."
I should add that, of everything I'm looking for, sex isn't even on the list, let alone the top of it. And PUA just sounds like some seedy, sordid game that takes place in "singles bars," where everybody seems to be there for one thing, and it ain't emotional companionship. As lonely as I've been in life, that seems even sadder.
I'm doubling down. $10 says Kim is an UGLY chick. With PMS. And lots of hair in the wrong places.
[That or Chuck Pelto has changed his screen name.]
$20 says Kim's got a better grouping with a .45 in his off hand than I ever will in two. He's not my bestest buddy pal, but he ain't a chick.
Frankly, he's just told guys 90% of everything they need to know. Have character, Know how to recognize character, and have the balls not to let yourself get stomped on.
How *anybody* could call that "Being an Asshole" is beyond me.
LOL Boxing. If I had a dollar for every time some loser's called me an asshole just for speaking my mind, I'd be able to afford a pair of matched AyA side-by-sides in 16ga.
ZorroP: I can see why you're doubling down on when you're losing. I'll bet it's quite a common occurrence in your life. I'm a guy -- and not even remotely good-looking.
Topher: if you're a successful man, you shouldn't have to seek out women -- women are drawn to successful men like ants to honey. If you believe you're successful but are still socially inept, then you need to redefine your parameters of "success".
JG: I'm anything but a bully. I say what I think needs saying, and you can either accept what I say, or move on. Either way, I'm indifferent.
Oh, look. She brought her fluff with her!
Miss your original site Kim. I've been lucky enough to trip over a couple of your comments at this and another site I tend to look at in the last couple of days.
I may not always agree with your comments, but I knew I was going to be entertained.
Cheers!
Grumpy Old Badger
Holy Sock Puppet, Batman!
Kim, you've been around the block, you know you DON'T post right after your sock puppet out of the clear blue sky.
Bejesus.
In other news, Kim sez:
"JG: I'm anything but a bully. I say what I think needs saying, and you can either accept what I say, or move on."
---
No, I can also not move on and not accept what you say and start to make you positively look foolish.
Gee, I finally have a mission in life. LOL
This comment has been removed by the author.
TMink said...
"I do think that boys without dads probably have a much harder time because their moms teach them the wrong things."
Trey
11:53 PM, May 24, 2011
Boys whose mothers abuse them and their dads have a much harder time as well. I suppose that falls under the category of being taught the wrong things, in a way.
There's also the possibility that the same thing that causes no dad to be around causes kids to be useless criminals.
So it kind of looks like they are criminals because no dad is around.
@JG: Remember, "If there were no laughter, there would be no Tao."
It would help Kim's argument if he wouldn't use "and I've gotten laid with plenty of chicks" as though it's anything in his favor. That should not be the criterion.
In any normal conversation I'd completely agree with you. But it's the only metric the PUA crowd has any interest in. Kim shoots better than me, Grumpy Old Badger can kick my ass in a hand fight (*and* shoot better than me, sigh), and all manner of real-life personality spectrum is out there. (I'm neat in my own ways, too). But the PUA guys are by self-definition one-issue reductionists.
1st sign you belong to the Cialis crowd: you *brag* about your proficiency with the gun that doesn't droop.
There are sex perverts and serial killers who are brilliant with a pistol. That you use firearms proficiency to legitimize your masculinity is proof you have none.
Zorro: for $10, feel free to quote anything I wrote above where I brag about my firearms prowess. It'll be a chance to get your lost $$$ back.
Pathetic.
As for the "sock puppet" comments... did you guys get to see how protective you are of the PUA honchos?
It is, as they say, to laugh. Anyway, fun is over, kiddies. I have better things to do, like drain the cat's boil.
Good luck with the drunk girls, and with the "morning after" regret-rape charges.
You have fun with the cat's boil, and be sure to brush afterwards.
Kim has extremely little knowledge of how female attraction circuits work, and is desperatly trying to rationalize to himself how, at age 56, he has not missed out on a ton in life.
Pathetic. I can see right through the ruse.
'Kim' is not Kim du Toit, is he?
Cat fiiiiiiigggghhhhtt!
David,
Thanks for the links to the John Ross columns. The whole site looks like a goldmine of interesting ideas. I'm bookmarking it.
kmg... sorry, but I had to laugh when I read your two consecutive posts. The first was about as wrong as anything could be; the second was correct. Yes, I am Kim du Toit.
Care to re-think any of your little slurs on me?
Well, to be fair about it, Kim, you have been "missing out" on dressing up like Don Johnson and ordering Mai Tais at bars playing techno music. OTOH, you have played in a rock band, confronted apartheid, and been one of the most influential and entertaining gun bloggers ever, while staying married to a woman as headstrong as yourself since roughly the Cambrian and bringing kids up right. Even if I like science fiction and you hate it.
Kim,
That is even worse, in fact.
As someone who correctly grasps how damaging feminism has been to America, and how the system is rigged against men, you ought to have a better understanding of Game.
Read Roissy. Or read Hawaii Libertarian/Athol Kay (who discuss Game for married men to enrich their marriage). Even Dr. Helen now is a proponent of teaching young men Game.
For you to oppose Game while thinking you oppose misandry is the same as wanting smaller government while expanding entitlements.
I don't see how any thinking person can possibly disagree with Vox's comment above (May 23), but you apparently do.
That your first comment was indistinguishable from what a rabid feminist would write, would lose you much of the respect you would have gained from a decade of blogging and appearing to be sympathetic to Men's Rights.
Again, Vox's comment wins the thread.
Kim du Toit could educate himself immensely by reading Vox's comment again and again.
Yet another problem with Kim do Toit's assumptions is that he thinks being married for 25 years is the pinnacle of male prowess.
Rather, it is a below-par accomplishment.
It is easier to get a woman to select a man to be her provider, than for a man to bed many women without being their provider. Many women marry their 'Beta' provider after they spent their 20s sleeping with alphas and PUAs.
So it is much harder to succeed as a PUA than a man married for a long time, and the former is envied by more men.
This is not what is ideal for society, of course. But the culture and legal system has long since stopping making marriage a safe bet for men, so men acting in their own interest is not just understandable, but frankly overdue.
David,
You're welcome on the John Ross columns. Do note that he doesn't seem to maintain archives himself -- they're links to wayback machine files. If you like a particular column, I'd suggest saving it yourself or printing it out, as I've not had consistent success with wayback files always being available.
Post a Comment
<< Home