The system, PUA and others

[ThaWholigan]

*Shrugs* All I can say is, from my own personal experiences, that by the vast majority, guys who studied PUA are creepy and manipulative, and their egos seem to grow astronomically. Whereas before PUA they might have given me a shot, after PUA I'm the 3 who is cock-blocking their target.

 

If I get even a whiff of PUA around a guy, I flee in the other direction.

Fair enough.

 

I maintain that not every guy who learns/reads PUA is like that, and that there is an entire wealth of information that doesn't include being creepy or manipulative.

[GoodOnPaper]

I offer get the impression that awkward men don't want awkward women (or women who would like them) because of a self-hatred complex. "I don't want to belong to a club with such low standards that they'd accept me." So, if a woman likes him without him needing to change, she MUST be low-quality.

 

Kind of . . . but having experienced this myself, I wouldn't describe it quite this way. We all want women who like us. The problem is that after being beaten down for years and convinced that you are undesirable, it is very difficult to accept that out of the blue and without changing a thing a woman will want to spend the rest of her life with you. PUA emphasizes the need to work very hard to get results. It's more like you feel that "it shouldn't count unless you bleed for it" as opposed to it being a low-quality issue. I think how this sort of thing plays out with individual couples can be highly variable depending on who chooses whom and whether there is an attraction imbalance.

[ascendotum]

Yeah, I'm sure awkward guys just LOVE awkward, average women. Come on, Tha, I know you wanna defend your tribe here, but let's not pretend that PUA isn't at least a little motivated by the idea that even though you're a fat, short, balding guy you too could score a model.

 

Most I know actually did. Also guys that were shy where happy to have a shy gf, guys that were un-adventurous home bodies were happy to have non social gf, guys that were boring with no sense of humor where happy to have no sense of humor gf, guys that had insecurities were happy to have girls with insecurities. Women are less tolerant of 'awkward', imo.

You threw in the extra word 'average' though to describe the women. Generally speaking the average guys were fine with average girls. The over riding aspect as part of the 'average' package was that the woman not be over weight, and I know when you live in a country were 1/2 the population is overweight, this results in a distortion of men's perceived shallowness.

 

TW - I also think you come across as much more nuanced (as regards others) and articulate than a few 'mild' aspergers guys I know.

[TheBigQuestion]

The distinction between being able to speak to and relate to women and knowing how to act so as to increase/not destroy the attraction they already feel towards you is paramount. Many men don't get it, and for them, PUA does help. There are several posters in this thread who say as much, and none of them are the creepy, manipulative scumbags that so many of the women posting in this thread insist the men who heed PUA suggestions and guidelines are.

 

If you hate PUA because you perceive it as somehow diminishing your dating options, that's one thing. It's another thing entirely to make grand, sweeping generalizations about its worth and the character of those who read it and put its suggestions into use while CLEARLY not having anything but the most shallow understanding of what PUA is and how it works, and no concept whatsoever of its breadth and variety. Yeah, you're all 100% right. Negging, ignoring, peacocking, and all other hallmarks of the Mystery Method comprise the alpha and omega of PUA. And that creepy guy with the funny looking clothes who asked you if your nails were real? Yeah, he's representative of just about every guy who has ever read any of the literature. No, there are no competing or contradicting views and philosophies under the umbrella of the maddeningly expansive and informal term "PUA." It's ALL about just sleeping with as many different women as possible. NO PUA has EVER written anything about relationships or marriages. Yeah, you have it all figured out.

 

This thread is unbelievable but hardly surprising.

Edited November 7, 2012 by TheBigQuestion

[todreaminblue]

The distinction between being able to speak to and relate to women and knowing how to act so as to increase/not destroy the attraction they already feel towards you is paramount. Many men don't get it, and for them, PUA does help. There are several posters in this thread who say as much, and none of them are the creepy, manipulative scumbags that so many of the women posting in this thread insist the men who heed PUA suggestions and guidelines are.

 

If you hate PUA because you perceive it as somehow diminishing your dating options, that's one thing. It's another thing entirely to make grand, sweeping generalizations about its worth and the character of those who read it and put its suggestions into use while CLEARLY not having anything but the most shallow understanding of what PUA is and how it works, and no concept whatsoever of its breadth and variety. Yeah, you're all 100% right. Negging, ignoring, peacocking, and all other hallmarks of the Mystery Method comprise the alpha and omega of PUA. And that creepy guy with the funny looking clothes who asked you if your nails were real? Yeah, he's representative of just about every guy who has ever read any of the literature. No, there are no competing or contradicting views and philosophies under the umbrella of the maddeningly expansive and informal term "PUA." It's ALL about just sleeping with as many different women as possible. NO PUA has EVER written anything about relationships or marriages. Yeah, you have it all figured out.

 

This thread is unbelievable but hardly surprising.

 

 

what is peacocking please explain?

[ThaWholigan]

The distinction between being able to speak to and relate to women and knowing how to act so as to increase/not destroy the attraction they already feel towards you is paramount. Many men don't get it, and for them, PUA does help. There are several posters in this thread who say as much, and none of them are the creepy, manipulative scumbags that so many of the women posting in this thread insist the men who heed PUA suggestions and guidelines are.

 

If you hate PUA because you perceive it as somehow diminishing your dating options, that's one thing. It's another thing entirely to make grand, sweeping generalizations about its worth and the character of those who read it and put its suggestions into use while CLEARLY not having anything but the most shallow understanding of what PUA is and how it works, and no concept whatsoever of its breadth and variety. Yeah, you're all 100% right. Negging, ignoring, peacocking, and all other hallmarks of the Mystery Method comprise the alpha and omega of PUA. And that creepy guy with the funny looking clothes who asked you if your nails were real? Yeah, he's representative of just about every guy who has ever read any of the literature. No, there are no competing or contradicting views and philosophies under the umbrella of the maddeningly expansive and informal term "PUA." It's ALL about just sleeping with as many different women as possible. NO PUA has EVER written anything about relationships or marriages. Yeah, you have it all figured out.

 

This thread is unbelievable but hardly surprising.

It doesn't surprise either ....

[verhrzn]

The distinction between being able to speak to and relate to women and knowing how to act so as to increase/not destroy the attraction they already feel towards you is paramount. Many men don't get it, and for them, PUA does help. There are several posters in this thread who say as much, and none of them are the creepy, manipulative scumbags that so many of the women posting in this thread insist the men who heed PUA suggestions and guidelines are.

 

If you hate PUA because you perceive it as somehow diminishing your dating options, that's one thing. It's another thing entirely to make grand, sweeping generalizations about its worth and the character of those who read it and put its suggestions into use while CLEARLY not having anything but the most shallow understanding of what PUA is and how it works, and no concept whatsoever of its breadth and variety. Yeah, you're all 100% right. Negging, ignoring, peacocking, and all other hallmarks of the Mystery Method comprise the alpha and omega of PUA. And that creepy guy with the funny looking clothes who asked you if your nails were real? Yeah, he's representative of just about every guy who has ever read any of the literature. No, there are no competing or contradicting views and philosophies under the umbrella of the maddeningly expansive and informal term "PUA." It's ALL about just sleeping with as many different women as possible. NO PUA has EVER written anything about relationships or marriages. Yeah, you have it all figured out.

 

This thread is unbelievable but hardly surprising.

 

Then please explain, oh Wise One...

 

What exactly is the difference between PUA and just general social skills? The difference PUA and just relating to fellow human beings?

 

What do guys get from PUA that they wouldn't get from the myriad of books out there on general social interaction regardless of gender? Those have been around for years and years. So what gaps is PUA filling exactly? Why are guys paying an exuberant amount of money for things they could learn by checking out books in the Business section of the library?

[Taramere]

But that's not what it is.

 

Had my personality really changed when I started to apply some of the things I learned?

 

Not really. I'm still the same awkward guy with autism. Only I can actually socialize if I need to. I can read body language and seduce a woman who is attracted to me. Before, I couldn't even pull the ones who liked me. Dare I say, despite the many flaws that I found in PUA, if it wasn't for that I would still be a clueless virgin.

 

My reading of you, from the board, is that you have quite a strong personality. That your clear about your values, what you like and don't like, have passions (eg music) etc.

 

However, I was responding to I'maJerk's comments.

 

Women go for STORY. They want to feel that the guy she is so captivated by got his personality from life experiences, and NOT from downloading last month for a low 3-figure dollar sum of money. They want to feel that the guy worked up the nerve to go talk to HER, and not that this was all part of a day's "Sarging" as he works on getting rid of his "approach anxiety".

 

My experience of PUA (other than reading The Game, looking at a couple of PUA boards and talking fairly extensively about it to a couple of male friends) is that of being on the receiving end of "sarging". On one occasion, it was transpired that the guys who had approached me and my friends were, in fact, attending a course (we found that out by quizzing them on how they'd all met - we were curious as they didn't really gel convincingly as a group fo friends).

 

In that particular case, it really was as I'maJerk described. It was before I'd read up on PUA, but you wouldn't need to read up on something like that to guess what was going on. There were various painful aspects to it, but primarily we guessed that these were guys who had difficulty talking to women...and they confirmed (with some embarrassment) that they'd been on this course.

 

It was a little like being abroad, and being cornered by somebody who has absolutely no interest in you as a person, and isn't connecting with you on any level...but nonetheless is determined to use you as an object they can practice their English on. When I've talked to men about PUA there is always this sense that they expect me, as a woman, to be friendly and approachable with men who are chatting me up "for practice".

 

To a certain extent, I will...because I regard being friendly and approachable as part and parcel of being sociable generally. However, some of these PUA followers seem to have contemptuous, disrespectful (and occasionally downright belligerent) attitude towards women. Being friendly and welcoming to people who talk about women as "plates to juggle" or "HB7" or other derogatory terms just isn't in my social remit.

[todreaminblue]

Maybe they're offended because, like me, they prefer their men a little awkward, a little raw and honest. I hate the smoothed over veneer PUA seem to have given nerd men; with their "skills" come an inflated sense of self, and they ignore girls who would have been perfectly happy and accepting of them the way they were.

 

I think of the guy i liked two summers ago.... the one who ended up in porn. I liked him quite a lot, until he started pulling what you all identified as player moves. Trying to make me jealous, negging me, ignoring me and flirting with other girls. My interest in him plummeted. If he'd just been himself, he wouldn't have needed the games.

 

I don't need games to be attracted to a guy. But I do need honesty. I'd rather a guy fumble and murmur his way through a conversation with me, then give me a back-handed compliment. I'll give the former guy ample chances. I'll flee from the latter one.

 

 

I agree, I much prefer honesty because games confuse me unless i know the rules and i pull away from confusion i don't embrace it i need to simplify not complicate any area of my life including a love life......i do believe however good guys can be mistaken into thinking this will get a girl to stay with them by pulling moves....no game will ever be enough to get a girl to stay with someone......that girl has to want to stay because eventually the game will cease and the real guy comes forward because a good guy will want to be himself and stay true to his heart

 

 

if it has been a game to get a girl who likes the game obviously she wont stay she liked the player and the game not the man behind the game moves..i hate freaking games with hearts involved .i would forgive a guy who though the could get me that way if he was honest...a good guy cant help but be good.......because if i begin to be attracted to someone

i like the man( i would have been interested in him to begin with).....no games.....just him......but thats me.......deb

[TheBigQuestion]

Then please explain, oh Wise One...

 

What exactly is the difference between PUA and just general social skills? The difference PUA and just relating to fellow human beings?

 

What do guys get from PUA that they wouldn't get from the myriad of books out there on general social interaction regardless of gender? Those have been around for years and years. So what gaps is PUA filling exactly? Why are guys paying an exuberant amount of money for things they could learn by checking out books in the Business section of the library?

 

The difference is that having social skills is a necessary but NOT a sufficient condition for being able to maximize attraction with women. Several men in this thread alone have stated on more than one occasion that they had no trouble interacting with people and the opposite sex in general, but that this ultimately meant diddly squat when it came to being able to approach and attract women romantically/sexually.

 

As to your second series of questions, it's quite simple. The books in the business section of the library might help you make a wicked sales pitch or how to talk to people confidently. Some of those principles will apply to attracting women, sure, but in their base form have limited applicability. Those books don't necessarily tell you about the body language or speech patterns that maximize attraction (although they might touch on those qualities as to be more successful in business). The gist of it is that while there is some overlap between "how to deal with people"-type books and PUA material, the former does not account for specific and unique scenarios presented by romantic-sexual interaction with the opposite sex. And considering how much you claim to loathe anything that could be characterized as manipulation within the context of dating, a lot of the materials you are alluding are WAY, WAY more manipulative at their very core than the vast majority of PUA.

 

And as I'm sure has been pointed out on LS many times, the vast majority of PUA material is out there free of charge or can be obtained via illegal download. The guys who actually pay money for "boot camps" and conferences are a tiny majority of the guys who derive some benefit from reading PUA materials.

[ThaWholigan]

The difference is that having social skills is a necessary but NOT a sufficient condition for being able to maximize attraction with women. Several men in this thread alone have stated on more than one occasion that they had no trouble interacting with people and the opposite sex in general, but that this ultimately meant diddly squat when it came to being able to approach and attract women romantically/sexually.

 

As to your second series of questions, it's quite simple. The books in the business section of the library might help you make a wicked sales pitch or how to talk to people confidently. Some of those principles will apply to attracting women, sure, but in their base form have limited applicability. Those books don't necessarily tell you about the body language or speech patterns that maximize attraction (although they might touch on those qualities as to be more successful in business). The gist of it is that while there is some overlap between "how to deal with people"-type books and PUA material, the former does not account for specific and unique scenarios presented by romantic-sexual interaction with the opposite sex. And considering how much you claim to loathe anything that could be characterized as manipulation within the context of dating, a lot of the materials you are alluding are WAY, WAY more manipulative at their very core than the vast majority of PUA.

 

And as I'm sure has been pointed out on LS many times, the vast majority of PUA material is out there free of charge or can be obtained via illegal download. The guys who actually pay money for "boot camps" and conferences are a tiny majority of the guys who derive some benefit from reading PUA materials.

Precisely. I never paid a penny for PUA. I attended one free seminar, and that was at the behest of a friend I met at an autism meet-up. He also happened to be a part-time model so even his looks did not help him.

[verhrzn]

The difference is that having social skills is a necessary but NOT a sufficient condition for being able to maximize attraction with women. Several men in this thread alone have stated on more than one occasion that they had no trouble interacting with people and the opposite sex in general, but that this ultimately meant diddly squat when it came to being able to approach and attract women romantically/sexually.

 

As to your second series of questions, it's quite simple. The books in the business section of the library might help you make a wicked sales pitch or how to talk to people confidently. Some of those principles will apply to attracting women, sure, but in their base form have limited applicability. Those books don't necessarily tell you about the body language or speech patterns that maximize attraction (although they might touch on those qualities as to be more successful in business). The gist of it is that while there is some overlap between "how to deal with people"-type books and PUA material, the former does not account for specific and unique scenarios presented by romantic-sexual interaction with the opposite sex. And considering how much you claim to loathe anything that could be characterized as manipulation within the context of dating, a lot of the materials you are alluding are WAY, WAY more manipulative at their very core than the vast majority of PUA.

 

And as I'm sure has been pointed out on LS many times, the vast majority of PUA material is out there free of charge or can be obtained via illegal download. The guys who actually pay money for "boot camps" and conferences are a tiny majority of the guys who derive some benefit from reading PUA materials.

 

 

Is it ever possible to just assume that no matter how deep your bag of seduction tricks goes, maybe some girls just don't like the guy?

 

Maybe the reason ThaWhalogian failed is not because he didn't know seduction tips, but because the girls just weren't into him enough. It's impossible to test whether those same girls would have been into him if he knew PUA.

 

Maybe guys who succeed with PUA succeed despite PUA. Maybe they didn't need PUA to begin with, they just finally ran into a girl who liked them. It's impossible to know, because we can't compare mirror worlds where he had PUA in one and not-PUA in another.

 

No one has explained the necessity for these seduction tricks. No one has explained why its necessary to "build" attraction. If a girl isn't attracted to you, yeah, maybe you can MAKE her be with tips and tricks.... but how fake, how inauthentic, how manipulative (literally.)

 

Why not set sights on just finding a girl you don't need to manipulate?? Why do guys give SO much credit to PUA? Why not give credit to continuing on-wards and finally getting lucky?

 

And what materials am I alluding to??

[TheBigQuestion]

Is it ever possible to just assume that no matter how deep your bag of seduction tricks goes, maybe some girls just don't like the guy?

 

Maybe the reason ThaWhalogian failed is not because he didn't know seduction tips, but because the girls just weren't into him enough. It's impossible to test whether those same girls would have been into him if he knew PUA.

 

Maybe guys who succeed with PUA succeed despite PUA. Maybe they didn't need PUA to begin with, they just finally ran into a girl who liked them. It's impossible to know, because we can't compare mirror worlds where he had PUA in one and not-PUA in another.

 

No one has explained the necessity for these seduction tricks. No one has explained why its necessary to "build" attraction. If a girl isn't attracted to you, yeah, maybe you can MAKE her be with tips and tricks.... but how fake, how inauthentic, how manipulative (literally.)

 

Why not set sights on just finding a girl you don't need to manipulate?? Why do guys give SO much credit to PUA? Why not give credit to continuing on-wards and finally getting lucky?

 

And what materials am I alluding to??

 

Of course it's possible that the girl just won't like the guy. All PUA materials emphasize that rejection is a very real part of the whole experience.

 

As far as ThaWholigan's experiences, he can speak for himself, but he's explicitly stated that he screwed up plenty of interactions with women that were attracted to him because he was unable to capitalize on the situation, or because he scared them off entirely.

 

No, it isn't impossible to know. Is it impossible to test scientifically? At this point, yes, I'll concede that. But guys who start reading some form of PUA and apply it report incremental improvement in their interactions with women. To deny giving it any credit for improvement altogether just because there's a chance the guy was going to start improving anyway is a bit presumptuous.

 

No one has argued the NEED for PUA advice because it isn't necessary to do so. Some guys DO need it. Is it the ONLY solution? No, but it DOES help.

 

One being able to actually create attraction out of nothing isn't a universally accepted idea either. It's more about making her hotter for you and not screwing up what's already there, a point which has been repeated COUNTLESS times in this thread.

 

Again, my use of PUA has been exceptionally limited, but I don't really believe in luck. If men waited around for luck to bring them women, a majority of them would be permanently celibate. Waiting for luck to bring you what you want in life is a sucker's way of living. People are better off being proactive.

[Taramere]

Why not set sights on just finding a girl you don't need to manipulate?? Why do guys give SO much credit to PUA? Why not give credit to continuing on-wards and finally getting lucky?

 

I think it's that "I have a strategy that creates outcomes" thinking....but human connection tends to be a very instinctive thing. I wrote on a thread that asked what women do in order to attract men. Answering a question like that, I think in terms of things I've "caught myself" doing.

 

In PUA it all seems very planned. Planning out all these things that other people will do spontaneously and instinctively. I'll touch a man's arm and then notice that I've touched it...but I don't think "now I'm going to touch his arm/lean in towards him, flick my hair, make eye contact".

 

Part of PUA (the part I find more acceptable) seems to be about telling men when and how to do these things that are a part of normal flirtation. How to read and respond to signals. What I wonder is whether some men fail to perform flirtatious actions instinctively (and without needing to be taught them) because the desire to implement strategies and control situations has an adverse impact on their ability to respond to women instinctively.

 

In those cases (if there are such cases) I wonder if PUA would worsen the situation by encouraging that strategic (versus instinctive) behaviour around women.

[ThaWholigan]

Is it ever possible to just assume that no matter how deep your bag of seduction tricks goes, maybe some girls just don't like the guy?

 

Maybe the reason ThaWhalogian failed is not because he didn't know seduction tips, but because the girls just weren't into him enough. It's impossible to test whether those same girls would have been into him if he knew PUA.

 

Maybe guys who succeed with PUA succeed despite PUA. Maybe they didn't need PUA to begin with, they just finally ran into a girl who liked them. It's impossible to know, because we can't compare mirror worlds where he had PUA in one and not-PUA in another.

 

No one has explained the necessity for these seduction tricks. No one has explained why its necessary to "build" attraction. If a girl isn't attracted to you, yeah, maybe you can MAKE her be with tips and tricks.... but how fake, how inauthentic, how manipulative (literally.)

 

Why not set sights on just finding a girl you don't need to manipulate?? Why do guys give SO much credit to PUA? Why not give credit to continuing on-wards and finally getting lucky?

 

And what materials am I alluding to??

 

It's not about the "tricks" .

 

And perhaps the only credit that I give PUA is in actually instilling me with some ability to hold a conversation with a woman I'm attracted to and who is attracted to me - without f*cking it up. That has been more important than anything else I've learned with regards to attraction.

 

Let me point a few things out here: You cannot MAKE a girl attracted to you if she isn't in the first place. Maybe you are right and we don't need PUA, but all I know is I was f*cking up with girls who actually were interested without it. They themselves have told me so after the fact that they were previously interested until I messed it up. After I learned some of the PUA I learned, I realized where I messed up.

 

HOWEVER - if the attraction is already there, then the point where at least the PUA I have read has helped me is in NOT F*CKING IT UP!!!! This is the most important part. It's not about tricking anybody to me. There are PUA books that are geared towards that, but I do not read them and neither does any man who actually has a code of ethics. That is the necessity of it. To be able to maintain an attraction that was already there.

 

It also was helpful to read the "manipulative" stuff, because whenever girls had a bitch-shield or anything like that - I avoided them! I instead tried to find girls who were interested in me, and indeed I was even approached and able to handle BEING approach - because of PUA .

 

I would never have gotten involved with my FWB without it either. I would have messed it up royally and I would still be a virgin, and clueless.

 

Make no mistake, a LOT of PUA is BS, I have already said this a great deal. I know this. But that doesn't mean all of it is first of all, and that doesn't mean that I am somehow doing something wrong by learning from it. And yes, I would also attribute it to luck - after all we are somewhat up to chance in finding someone who is attracted to us. But if you keep messing it up, then something is wrong.

[verhrzn]

I think it's that "I have a strategy that creates outcomes" thinking....but human connection tends to be a very instinctive thing. I wrote on a thread that asked what women do in order to attract men. Answering a question like that, I think in terms of things I've "caught myself" doing.

 

In PUA it all seems very planned. Planning out all these things that other people will do spontaneously and instinctively. I'll touch a man's arm and then notice that I've touched it...but I don't think "now I'm going to touch his arm/lean in towards him, flick my hair, make eye contact".

 

Part of PUA (the part I find more acceptable) seems to be about telling men when and how to do these things that are a part of normal flirtation. How to read and respond to signals. What I wonder is whether some men fail to perform flirtatious actions instinctively (and without needing to be taught them) because the desire to implement strategies and control situations has an adverse impact on their ability to respond to women instinctively.

 

In those cases (if there are such cases) I wonder if PUA would worsen the situation by encouraging that strategic (versus instinctive) behaviour around women.

 

Good point. And I think that's why the majority of women are repelled by PUA. Because it's so fake. It's manufactured flirtation. It's strategic planning.

 

Strategy is not romantic. I enjoy writing code, but I do not want to "code" my love life. I want it spontaneous and natural.

 

I also don't like the idea of being controlled. It's one thing if a man touches me because he is instinctively creating a physical bond with me. But the idea that a man is thinking," All right, now I'm going to touch her arm-oops, lightly, don't over do it... okay, now pretend you're interested in what she's saying, goooood..." is just kind of skin-crawling.

 

It's the difference between being a chess piece in someone else's game or being an equal opponent.

 

And I also can't shake the "atmosphere" of PUA. This idea that women 1) don't know what they want 2) need to be "maneuvered" into liking you and 3) that women somehow always have the upper hand in dating.

 

I just always catch a whiff of au-du-superiority about the guys who turn to PUA, overlaying this at times intensive self-hatred.

 

I think "normal" guys, guys who go through life seeing women as equal, guys who don't hate themselves, have had difficulty dating, and learned through experience. (Trying and failing, and learning.) But it seems less planned on their part, less strategic.

 

There's a reason some guys are drawn to PUA, instead of just trying and learning for themselves.

[ThaWholigan]

I think it's that "I have a strategy that creates outcomes" thinking....but human connection tends to be a very instinctive thing. I wrote on a thread that asked what women do in order to attract men. Answering a question like that, I think in terms of things I've "caught myself" doing.

 

In PUA it all seems very planned. Planning out all these things that other people will do spontaneously and instinctively. I'll touch a man's arm and then notice that I've touched it...but I don't think "now I'm going to touch his arm/lean in towards him, flick my hair, make eye contact".

 

I think that guys are too results based definitely. Part of PUA is actually breaking men out of that mode of thinking, that depending on the outcome. I don't know what the bootcamps are like because I've only been to a seminar.

 

There are parts of PUA that focus on routines and plans of action. But I do not study those because I obviously know by now that social interactions are not planned .

Part of PUA (the part I find more acceptable) seems to be about telling men when and how to do these things that are a part of normal flirtation. How to read and respond to signals. What I wonder is whether some men fail to perform flirtatious actions instinctively (and without needing to be taught them) because the desire to implement strategies and control situations has an adverse impact on their ability to respond to women instinctively.

 

In those cases (if there are such cases) I wonder if PUA would worsen the situation by encouraging that strategic (versus instinctive) behaviour around women.

 

It certainly can, that is why there are different sections of PUA that teach different things for such problems. Such a man would do better to be able to improvise. In that sense, an acting class would be better than a bootcamp, and less expensive too. But I'd also get him to read Tao Of Badass or Bobby Rio's book.

 

Of the things I don't like in PUA, and there are quite a lot, I really do not like the routines. Sometimes they are fun as a party trick, but I'm not really into it. It's better to integrate some natural social tendencies when interacting with women into your overall behavior socially.

[ThaWholigan]

I think "normal" guys, guys who go through life seeing women as equal, guys who don't hate themselves, have had difficulty dating, and learned through experience. (Trying and failing, and learning.) But it seems less planned on their part, less strategic.

 

It's exactly the same thing that I do. What's the difference?

[Taramere]

I think that guys are too results based definitely. Part of PUA is actually breaking men out of that mode of thinking, that depending on the outcome. I don't know what the bootcamps are like because I've only been to a seminar.

 

I'd never encountered anything quite like it before. I don't think any of us had. It was a pub that had a lot of people, including us, drinking outside on the pavement. About 6 had come to talk to us. I had the feeling that they were part of a larger group..and when I looked across the street I could see a load of them sitting watching attentively, so I knew something was up.

 

It was their bad luck, on their first "field trip" to pick two lawyers and a psychologist. We were nice to them, but were kind of challenging them to actual conversation (as opposed to the odd stilted - and really not very friendly, conversations they were trying to have with us). After we found out about the seminar, they went back over to the group. We watched them consulting, and then called them back over.

 

Then somebody else came over and obviously sent them off in search of different targets...probably not happy with the way we were controlling things. It was funny. I wish I'd known about PUA...I could have read their field reports the next day.

 

It certainly can, that is why there are different sections of PUA that teach different things for such problems. Such a man would do better to be able to improvise. In that sense, an acting class would be better than a bootcamp, and less expensive too. But I'd also get him to read Tao Of Badass or Bobby Rio's book.

 

Of the things I don't like in PUA, and there are quite a lot, I really do not like the routines. Sometimes they are fun as a party trick, but I'm not really into it. It's better to integrate some natural social tendencies when interacting with women into your overall behavior socially.

 

I think something like a dance class (Latin American style) would be a good way for a man to get more comfortable around women. I went to classes for a while a few years ago. It was very interesting to see the different ways men would approach the matter of holding and leading.

 

Some men were very confident and take charge, others were limp and lacking in confidence. I absolutely hated dancing with the limp-holding ones. Even ones who were good looking...I'd just think "oh no, not him." The confident, take charge ones were by far the most fun to dance with....but there's a balance in dancing between being strong and take charge, and the man being controlling to the point where he's not really "feeling" the woman.

[ThaWholigan]

I'd never encountered anything quite like it before. I don't think any of us had. It was a pub that had a lot of people, including us, drinking outside on the pavement. About 6 had come to talk to us. I had the feeling that they were part of a larger group..and when I looked across the street I could see a load of them sitting watching attentively, so I knew something was up.

 

 

It was their bad luck, on their first "field trip" to pick two lawyers and a psychologist. We were nice to them, but were kind of challenging them to actual conversation (as opposed to the odd stilted - and really not very friendly, conversations they were trying to have with us). After we found out about the seminar, they went back over to the group. We watched them consulting, and then called them back over.

 

Then somebody else came over and obviously sent them off in search of different targets...probably not happy with the way we were controlling things. It was funny. I wish I'd known about PUA...I could have read their field reports the next day.

 

Poor guys, they must have been complete robots. But if they were that poor after the seminar, I cannot imagine how terrible they would have been before.

 

I actually think that there are some guys who wouldn't benefit from PUA. Me personally, I'm no fool so I can use something like that and do well without doing anything questionable or following "strategies" in a flowing conversation . Some other guys.....I dunno. Improv would be better well spent. If I were to recommend some PUA for guys like that, it would be Carlos Xuma's work, and he doesn't identify as PUA at all.

 

I think that I should write my own book for autistic guys personally .

 

I think something like a dance class (Latin American style) would be a good way for a man to get more comfortable around women. I went to classes for a while a few years ago. It was very interesting to see the different ways men would approach the matter of holding and leading.

 

Some men were very confident and take charge, others were limp and lacking in confidence. I absolutely hated dancing with the limp-holding ones. Even ones who were good looking...I'd just think "oh no, not him." The confident, take charge ones were by far the most fun to dance with....but there's a balance in dancing between being strong and take charge, and the man being controlling to the point where he's not really "feeling" the woman.

 

I don't know about that. Somedude does Salsa and it hasn't worked for him at all. But then PUA never worked for him either .

 

Nonetheless I think you have a point, being comfortable around women is actually very important, and something that you may not get from PUA if you cannot interpret the material well enough.

 

Dancing for confidence might be a good idea for some. I think that PUA is certainly not the only means for one to gain confidence with women at all. But in terms of the nuances of socializing on a romantic level, I don't think it should be discarded as simply "manipulative work for creeps".

[Janesays]

I understand that men generally don't like being called creepy, but that doesnt change the fact that I (and apparently some other women) are creeped out by it. I'm sorry, but that's how I feel. And just like I will never be able to convince some of you that it's completely unnecessary and not effective if one wants to pursue real, sincere, genuine love, you will never be able to convince us that the men who practice the "techniques " aren't creepy guys we'd have no romantic interest in.

 

So I guess we're at a stalemate. Our only real option is to agree to disagree. And we will continue to live with and love our men that think it's a bunch of silly nonsense....and you can seek out girls who somehow think pua is sexy and cool.

 

Good luck.

[ThaWholigan]

I understand that men generally don't like being called creepy, but that doesnt change the fact that I (and apparently some other women) are creeped out by it. I'm sorry, but that's how I feel. And just like I will never be able to convince some of you that it's completely unnecessary and not effective if one wants to pursue real, sincere, genuine love, you will never be able to convince us that the men who practice the "techniques " aren't creepy guys we'd have no romantic interest in.

 

So I guess we're at a stalemate. Our only real option is to agree to disagree. And we will continue to live with and love our men that think it's a bunch of silly nonsense....and you can seek out girls who somehow think pua is sexy and cool.

 

Good luck.

I don't want a girl who thinks it's cool . I'm not a PUA

[MrCastle]

and you can seek out girls who somehow think pua is sexy and cool.

 

Good luck.

 

Meaning the majority of women? I like my odds!

 

Look, you can reject it all you want, but you simply don't know who is or who isn't a pua.

 

It's not like guys tell you "Oh yeah, I'm a pickup artist" and you determine whether or not you want to date him, with some girls saying oooh, he's a pickup artist, nice! or eww he's a pickup artist, what a sleaze.

 

Attraction is not a choice. It is an emotional response.

 

Pua teaches men how to be confident, how to stop coming across as needy, how to touch women during their interactions without feeling shy or awkward. It basically gives them an electric jolt and tries to speed up the process of understanding women through experience by giving you a comprehensive outline of what works on most women and what doesn't.

 

You wouldn't be able to tell good puas from natural guys.

 

Of course I've seen some in real life that don't execute properly and come across as awkward or trying too hard, but the fact remains, there are guys out there who make it seamless.

 

It's not your choice to fall or not to fall for a pickup artist. You don't get to make that logical decision.

 

I've often made it clear what kind of girls I find attractive both physically and personality wise, yet I've fallen for girls who didn't fit that mold. Why is that? Because attraction is not a logical choice you decide to make or not make.

[ThaWholigan]

I don't want a girl who thinks it's cool . I'm not a PUA

And I do want a sincere and committed, genuine relationship too! I don't use "techniques" - I simply am better at talking to women who I am attracted to who are also attracted to me. And I'm no creep .

 

The end.

[Janesays]

Meaning the majority of women? I like my odds!

 

Look, you can reject it all you want, but you simply don't know who is or who isn't a pua.

 

It's not like guys tell you "Oh yeah, I'm a pickup artist" and you determine whether or not you want to date him, with some girls saying oooh, he's a pickup artist, nice! or eww he's a pickup artist, what a sleaze.

 

Attraction is not a choice. It is an emotional response.

 

Pua teaches men how to be confident, how to stop coming across as needy, how to touch women during their interactions without feeling shy or awkward. It basically gives them an electric jolt and tries to speed up the process of understanding women through experience by giving you a comprehensive outline of what works on most women and what doesn't.

,

You wouldn't be able to tell good puas from natural guys.

 

Of course I've seen some in real life that don't execute properly and come across as awkward or trying too hard, but the fact remains, there are guys out there who make it seamless.

 

It's not your choice to fall or not to fall for a pickup artist. You don't get to make that logical decision.

 

I've often made it clear what kind of girls I find attractive both physically and personality wise, yet I've fallen for girls who didn't fit that mold. Why is that? Because attraction is not a logical choice you decide to make or not make.

 

I know, for a fact, that no one I've ever been seriously interested in is or ever was a pua. I've talked about this sort of thing before and the ones that actually heard of it thought it was silly nonsense and make fun of the men who practice it.

 

And as I said before, my fiance was a 32 year old virgin before I met him, so you can't say HE was this closet pua master.

 

I know what and who i like. You can label me this silly emotional ninny who is confused by the rules of attraction, but you'd be wrong. The evidence from my past simply doesn't match your accusations.