The Pick Up Artist

[Trimmer]

So Island Girl, is this just a standard neg to see if he'll supplicate and grow compliant? It is almost like he is talking about a wild dog pack. This is what one thinks of during social interaction?

I like to call it "intercourse." I feel smarter, and it also make me feel tingly in my special parts...

[Taramere]

if I make a seemingly rude remark, it shows I'm not intimidated by her and that I think she isn't anything special. She will start thinking "wow, this guy isn't supplicating... he actually has value".

 

Let's keep a bit of perspective here. Provided you're relatively sober, and bearing in mind that a lot of the guys in a club who are approaching women will be doing so while off their faces on alcohol or ecstasy, she's probably more likely to think "at least this one isn't a drooling animal or a struck-with-love-for-all freakshow."

[Island Girl]

So Island Girl, is this just a standard neg to see if he'll supplicate and grow compliant? It is almost like he is talking about a wild dog pack. This is what one thinks of during social interaction?

 

Its weird when the retort supports the point huh?

 

Spot on! :lmao::lmao:

[gypsy_nicky]

When I was 14 there was a particular boy who had a crush on me. I didn't fancy him back. I felt an odd sense of guilt and unease about his lovelorn behaviour. Then suddenly his behaviour towards me did an about turn. He started getting extremely hostile, and the obvious reason was that he felt humiliated by the unrequited feelings. I felt guilty and to blame - as well as stressed out about the hostility. So I responded in a placating manner, in keeping with that guilt and in the hope that if I kept on being nice to him it would reduce the anger (and, I suppose, the humiliation) that I felt responsible for him feeling.

 

If I'd understood basic psychology better at that age, I'd have realised that when you respond like that you're simply rewarding and encouraging bad behaviour. He just got worse to the point where he'd grab any social situation he could to try to make an idiot of me. My older brother started getting wise to what was going on, and told me "deal with it, or I'll have to" (which obviously he didn't want to do as he was a couple of years older than the guy). He - my brother - told me that the only response I should be giving to this guy's unpleasantness was flat out coldness or bitchiness. Never, ever niceness. That his feelings weren't my problem, and I shouldn't be taking his sh*t.

 

So that was what I did. The coldness and the bitchiness. We ended up pretty much just loathing the sight of eachother, and at no point throughout any of it did I feel any attraction towards him. He was just a negative figure in my life who I tried to steer clear of as much as possible.

 

Nah man. I beg to differ.

 

Dealing with unrequited love is hard-mainly on the rejecter, because social norms has imprinted a script for the chaser (you see it all the time in the movies) as an underdog who could either derive a win win situation- your affection or the affection of society should you reject him.

 

Whereas the rejecter is in a no-win situation because of not having a social script: saying yes to someone you don't like makes you miserable and the chaser too-break up with him and you led him on. Saying no crushes the chasers ego and you get social disapproval.

 

But you have to realize that your not rewarding BAD BEHAVIOR. Its because being 'nice' actually sends mixed signals of hope and joy. If you'd had been firm with your stance but by not being too harsh and cruel, the guy would've backed off.

[Taramere]

Nah man. I beg to differ.

 

Dealing with unrequited love is hard-mainly on the rejecter, because social norms has imprinted a script for the chaser (you see it all the time in the movies) as an underdog who could either derive a win win situation- your affection or the affection of society should you reject him.

 

Whereas the rejecter is in a no-win situation because of not having a social script: saying yes to someone you don't like makes you miserable and the chaser too-break up with him and you led him on. Saying no crushes the chasers ego and you get social disapproval.

 

Good grief. 14 year old girls aren't responsible for the feelings of every boy who gets an unrequited crush on them. Or do you take the view that unless they manage to avoid existing around any males they don't fancy, they're leading them on? If they respond in a friendly, polite manner to boys who are being friendly and polite to them, but who they don't actually fancy...are they leading them on or are they just behaving in an appropriately non-bitchy social manner?

 

Look at this, once again

 

if I make a seemingly rude remark, it shows I'm not intimidated by her and that I think she isn't anything special. She will start thinking "wow, this guy isn't supplicating... he actually has value".

 

Seriously, it's just basic psychology and it works. If a woman is compliant, accepts me and doesn't give me sh*t for approaching her, I have no need whatsoever to neg her, I will immediately get to talking, creating connection etc.

 

Do you see the attitude of entitlement in there? From his perspective, the woman has two choices. She will either immediately accept his company and form a connection with him, or she gets insulted.

 

This presumes an obligation on women to respond in any kind of set manner to men who take a fancy to them. There is no such obligation. If a guy approaches by pretending he's "just being friendly" it doesn't mean they have to be his friend for the evening if they don't want to be. If he approaches with some ludicrous novelty act, they're not obliged to respond in an interested manner even if it's a lot of old crap and they'd rather be getting on with their conversation.

 

If he approaches armed with an attitude that he's going to insult them if they have the temerity to not permit him into the group, they're not obliged to think "Oh gosh, how daringly rude....never met a complete stranger in a club with an attitude before. Normally the drunks and coked up guys who approach in clubs are so incredibly polite and gentlemanly. This is something completely fresh, new and different. Goodness!"

 

 

But you have to realize that your not rewarding BAD BEHAVIOR. Its because being 'nice' actually sends mixed signals of hope and joy. If you'd had been firm with your stance but by not being too harsh and cruel, the guy would've backed off.

 

Tell you what. You go off and be a girl or woman for a few months, then come back and let us know how you get on in dealing with some of the guys who approach you, or who think you owe them something by virtue of being female. You might find that being polite, firm and reasonable isn't, in fact, always enough. Go put your mascara on and give it a try.

[gypsy_nicky]

I was on your side. even when you were 14!

 

True, I will agree that a 14 year old doesn't have enough experience to unravel these things. So my bad too.

 

What's also interesting is even if both sexes meet unrequited chasers later in life they still don't know what to do. That's the social script I was talking about. Plenty of it for a chaser, none for the rejecter.

 

But what I was saying- because unrequited love is usually felt intensely by

the chaser, every act, every gesture every form of being nice WITHOUT letting them know your side of the coin (not interested) will be interpreted as a go signal.

 

Oh and I wasn't discussing PUA stuff. Just this particular unrequited love thingie.

 

 

Good grief. 14 year old girls aren't responsible for the feelings of every boy who gets an unrequited crush on them. Or do you take the view that unless they manage to avoid existing around any males they don't fancy, they're leading them on? If they respond in a friendly, polite manner to boys who are being friendly and polite to them, but who they don't actually fancy...are they leading them on or are they just behaving in an appropriately non-bitchy social manner?

 

Look at this, once again

 

 

 

There's no obligation on women to respond in any set manner to men who take a fancy to them. If a guy approaches by pretending he's "just being friendly" it doesn't mean they have to be his friend for the evening if they don't want to be. If he approaches with some ludicrous novelty act, they're not obliged to respond in an interested manner even if it's a lot of old crap and they'd rather be getting on with their conversation.

 

If he approaches armed with an attitude that he's going to insult them if they have the temerity to not permit him into the group, they're not obliged to think "Oh gosh, how daringly rude....never met a complete stranger in a club with an attitude before. Normally the drunks and coked up guys who approach in clubs are so incredibly polite and gentlemanly. This is something completely fresh, new and different. Goodness!"

 

 

 

Tell you what. You go off and be a girl or woman for a few months, then come back and let us know how you get on in dealing with some of the guys who approach you, or who think you owe them something by virtue of being a woman.

[gypsy_nicky]

I've recently read "the game" but not quite done yet.

 

Strauss mentions the alpha male found in college/HS jocks, popular peeps etc etc and Tom Cruise. How they are all natural and flow with their charisma with women. And how average geeks like him should emulate this behavior.

 

What he failed to mention was that these men actually possess the physical attributes that go hand in hand with being a ladies woman.

 

What's intriguing about the PUA is the message it sends that you don't have to fit the mold of these type of men to pull in highly attractive women or a lot of women.

[Taramere]

I was on your side. even when you were 14!

 

Know what? I just tried (unsuccessfully) to edit my post - because I had another read of yours and I thought "I've been hasty here - this poster is acknowledging the damned if you do damned if you don't position that rejectors are in." So I'm sorry I didn't read it a bit more carefully. My excuse is that I haven't had my coffee yet.

 

But what I was saying- because unrequited love is usually felt intensely by the chaser, every act, every gesture every form of being nice WITHOUT letting them know your side of the coin (not interested) will be interpreted as a go signal.

 

Yes, I see that. I know you weren't talking about the PUA thing, but there's something similar at work. The PUA is seeing a "target" and I think as soon as he identifies her as such, he assumes that she'll have some kind of response to him...either positive or negative.

 

If she's simply indifferent to his advances....well, they never seem to really deal with that. There's talk of "bitch shields" or "red, amber and green lights" - but indifference doesn't seem to be something that occurs to the PUA as a potential response. Similar to the way someone with unrequited love can't quite grasp that the object of their adoration doesn't love them, hate them, despise them or whatever else....but simply doesn't really think about them. Or maybe it does occur to them, but they just brush it off. The woman's "only a 6" or whatever.

 

If it occurs to the unrequited lover for even a second that indifference is in the equation with someone they really want, I think that's often when they'll start trying to get even a negative reaction in preference to an indifferent one....and the negging thing seems to feed into that. I think more of the psychology that's being applied is being applied by the PUA on the guys doing the course than on women they're trying to pick up. Lots of grand promises and ego saving devices on offer, for however much it is they charge on these seminars.

[gypsy_nicky]

good points. Although I don't advocate PUA's treatment of women, negging an indifferent woman if done properly (from the book) will actually open her up because of the conceived belief/theory that women tend to act more on emotion than on logic (this in no way implies that women are stupid, but women rationalize things logically based on what they're feeling). This would be especially easy on a woman whose self esteem is damaged.

 

But, and a big but. Don't we, haven't we seen this type of behavior from women as well? If you would look at teen, women's magazines, even way back, it gives dating secrets advice etc on how to attract and ensare a man, mainly by playing up on his emotions-meaning lots of preening, flirty voice tone mannerisms etc. Or how about the mind games women play which are actually discussed and published in these magazines.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, I see that. I know you weren't talking about the PUA thing, but there's something similar at work. The PUA is seeing a "target" and I think as soon as he identifies her as such, he assumes that she'll have some kind of response to him...either positive or negative.

 

If she's simply indifferent to his advances....well, they never seem to really deal with that. There's talk of "bitch shields" or "red, amber and green lights" - but indifference doesn't seem to be something that occurs to the PUA as a potential response. Similar to the way someone with unrequited love can't quite grasp that the object of their adoration doesn't love them, hate them, despise them or whatever else....but simply doesn't really think about them. Or maybe it does occur to them, but they just brush it off. The woman's "only a 6" or whatever.

 

If it occurs to the unrequited lover for even a second that indifference is in the equation with someone they really want, I think that's often when they'll start trying to get even a negative reaction in preference to an indifferent one....and the negging thing seems to feed into that. I think more of the psychology that's being applied is being applied by the PUA on the guys doing the course than on women they're trying to pick up. Lots of grand promises and ego saving devices on offer, for however much it is they charge on these seminars.

[Taramere]

But, and a big but. Don't we, haven't we seen this type of behavior from women as well? If you would look at teen, women's magazines, even way back, it gives dating secrets advice etc on how to attract and ensare a man, mainly by playing up on his emotions-meaning lots of preening, flirty voice tone mannerisms etc. Or how about the mind games women play which are actually discussed and published in these magazines.

 

I can recall getting those messages from teen magazines when I was growing up, but I didn't take them seriously. The notion of consciously doing all those things to get attention was just ludicrous.

 

If I think back to times I've been talking to a guy and it's gone well then yes, with hindsight I was probably doing those things you describe. Sometimes I'll catch myself doing it at the time...but it's not some conscious, "I'll flick my hair now, in a couple of seconds I'll touch his elbow - oooh, hahahahaha. That's hilarious, you're so funny" etc process. I'd feel ridiculous and fake to consciously cultivate all those mannerisms.

 

But yes....you could be right in that some women are putting those teachings into practice in a very conscious manner, and very possibly those are often the women who the PUA are meeting in clubs, as doing all those things may have a bearing on the value they're allocated by the PUA.

[sally4sara]

I've recently read "the game" but not quite done yet.

 

Strauss mentions the alpha male found in college/HS jocks, popular peeps etc etc and Tom Cruise. How they are all natural and flow with their charisma with women. And how average geeks like him should emulate this behavior.

 

What he failed to mention was that these men actually possess the physical attributes that go hand in hand with being a ladies woman.

 

What's intriguing about the PUA is the message it sends that you don't have to fit the mold of these type of men to pull in highly attractive women or a lot of women.

 

This is where the teachings turn around and bite the student in the rear the worst. You take guys who seek the teaching because they feel a lacking within themselves. Ineffectual is a word I'm sure they identify with. So they adopt this tactic and the measure of success is based on one fluctuating aspect - getting sex with women too out of their league for longevity and/or lots of women. They start to use this to measure their worth.

Its is a flawed life because it is a self destructive habit to place your own self worth on the actions and reactions of others. We really have very little control over other people - when they think for themselves they have the power to effect your own self worth. Later, when the fella wants a more stable life, how does he continue to think good things about himself without continuing this aimless practice. What happens when he is just an old dude crawling the bars? He will have to neg more and more ladies? Won't he just become the creepy and rude old guy regular? What happens if the trouser snake stops working or the catch an STD? What will they place their worth on then?

Much like a physically beautiful young lady; she must find something else to place her self worth on or as time and life march on, her self worth erodes away.

 

I just feel it is negligent to tell these unsure guys who feel ineffective that they will be "improved" with every girl they convince to have sex with them.

[GoodOnPaper]

I just feel it is negligent to tell these unsure guys who feel ineffective that they will be "improved" with every girl they convince to have sex with them.

 

They (the ineffective guys) may or may not be "improved" but if they gain some sense of empowerment over their own personal life -- a sense that, at least to some extent, they can choose a partner -- it has to be worth it.

 

Never being able to attract anyone for casual sex, I was forced to shortcut to the "stable" life to have any kind of relationship. Unfortunately, marriage and kids is not the holy grail that it's portrayed to be. My personality isn't naturally suited for the numbers game that the PUA community advocates, but I can't help but think that I would be in a marriage that I was more satisfied with if I had at least tried that game.

[Phateless]

They (the ineffective guys) may or may not be "improved" but if they gain some sense of empowerment over their own personal life -- a sense that, at least to some extent, they can choose a partner -- it has to be worth it.

 

Never being able to attract anyone for casual sex, I was forced to shortcut to the "stable" life to have any kind of relationship. Unfortunately, marriage and kids is not the holy grail that it's portrayed to be. My personality isn't naturally suited for the numbers game that the PUA community advocates, but I can't help but think that I would be in a marriage that I was more satisfied with if I had at least tried that game.

 

Feeling like you have no options romantically is very emasculating. Having a larger pool of women to choose from only means you're more likely to make a true and genuine (and lasting) connection.