PUA: My First Impressions...

[mickleb]

Yes, partially as to the singular label. No, though, it isn't just "sources," but an industry, despite, like PUA, not findable in any industry listing or SIC codes, one much older and larger than PUA, just conducted mostly via print media, books and magazines.

 

 

 

"Uncomfortable" doesn't really sum up the types of vitriolic, hostile reactions contained in these PUA discussion threads fairly, does it?

 

And no, other than men taking issue with -specific- marriage advice such as what is contained in "The Rules," for example, I don't see any vitriol at all directed against women seeking marriage, convincing their man to marry. I think men innately tend to depersonalize such things, and so find them less offensive.

 

But we are talking apples and oranges. Sex is something many women want to do, just need persuasion. Surely women are not so manipulable that they can be hypnotized into having sex... they want to, and IME enjoy it more when we seduce them. This is old hat, ancient even. Kierkegaard wrote "The Seducer's Diary" in 1843 (though it was not intended as a PUA manual, but part of an ethical treatise) Marriage, though, is a lifetime commitment. So manipulation towards sex may be objectionable, but does it really even compare to manipulation towards marriage? And to preempt and reiterate, no PUA counsels dishonesty. That's the -old- way, and won't sell to boot. No one needs to buy "lying class," that's free.

 

 

 

I disagree, and don't think many men would care, certainly not to the extent of repeating vehement, rigid denouncements and excoriations over and over regardless of any reasoning presented to the contrary.

 

 

 

I feel the same, or would post on a PUA forum where I might build a foundation to sell all my incredibly sage dating advice instead of giving it away here for free.

 

I guess the PUA industry grew in a secretive manner, to some extent - if women had been exposed to it, it wouldn't have been so successful? I'm afraid its secretive, exclusive air does lend it a touch of the Mason's Lodge (very sinister!) In addition, most women found out about the more controversial aspects of it, when they did hear about it. Can you appreciate that it hasn't done a great job of getting women to accept it as harmless?

 

I know comparing men getting sex to women getting married isn't an exact science. I was just trying to compare the most common male/female desires. I agree that marriage is (supposed to be) for life. But I guess, the number of men a women has slept with is for life too! I think a lot of women feel protective towards, especially younger and naive, women, who may believe that guys who want to sleep with them want to have relationships with them. Yeah, she (fkn hopefully!) enjoys the sex but she's not going to enjoy thinking she wasn't special enough to make the guy stick around, and she's certainly not going to enjoy the stigma that is still strongly attached to women who have sex outside of relationships.

 

The idea that a guy could happily sleep with random girls and then (when he decides he wants a relationship) dismiss another girl (who's slept with random guys) as a slut who is not worthy of being his girlfriend is ridiculously hypocritical, IMO. It's something that doesn't seem to be actively challenged by the PUA industry, but that is actually encouraged.

 

Anyway, having spoken to various guys on here, I have learnt there is more value to the PUA industry that I once thought, although I have to admit I'm still sceptical about a lot of it. It was my intention to try to help those blokes who see the benefits of it to understand why many women dislike what they hear about it. I don't know if I've done that at all, but I too get tired when these polarized debates appear and no progress is made on either side.

 

As for Hokie, I think that playing the field is something he has to get out of his system. I just hope he learns how to promote his charming, witty and intelligent self to the ladies without p*ssing anyone off. Don't be a douche, Hokie, don't be a douche...

Edited December 3, 2012 by mickleb

[TheBigQuestion]

 

 

 

Anyway, having spoken to various guys on here, I have learnt there is more value to the PUA industry that I once thought, although I have to admit I'm still sceptical about a lot of it. It was my intention to try to help those blokes who see the benefits of it to understand why many women dislike what they hear about it. I don't know if I've done that at all, but I too get tired when these polarized debates appear and no progress is made on either side.

 

No one is mystified as to why women dislike PUA given the very limited and skewed information most of them have been provided about it. We get it. Really.

 

What IS mystifying is why, after being repeatedly told by men who have used it and benefited from it, men who are not these disgusting, predatory pigs that some women INSIST every person who has interest in PUA is, after being shown time and time again that PUA is not a singular movement with ANY real unifying philosophy, women still insist on holding onto their highly visceral dislike of everything PUA. You're pretty much the only one in this thread who is willing to see any value in the movement, and actually listening to what is being said rather than finding new and creative ways to belittle, insult, and shame men who have expressed any interest in PUA. You're open to new ideas and willing to learn, and that's admirable. You're entitled to your skepticism. At least you aren't being dogmatic about it. I have no dog in this fight, really. I just know enough about PUA to speak up when exaggerations, mischaracterizations, and blatant falsehoods about it are being so freely and forcefully propagated.

 

Most of the sources from which women first hear about PUA, such as daytime TV talk shows or that reality show from a few years back, purposely cast the entire movement in a light that is simultaneously silly AND predatory because showing it in any other way would compromise ratings.

[MrCastle]

This is crappy behavior without a doubt. However, PUA on the whole is not really the same thing at all. Women are right to feel pissed off in a situation equivalent to the one you just described, but that equivalent is not PUA.

 

And on a somewhat separate note, I'm really waiting to be enlightened as to the "lies" and "deception" in PUA. Although I'm not a PUA and don't claim to be an expert, I've read more about it than most people here, and I'm yet to see any PUA writing that encourages flat out lying to women. In fact, most of them outright condemn it because of how badly it can backfire.

 

Good luck getting a straight answer on that. Most people who are speaking on this topic have a very small working knowledge of it and just label it.

 

It's improvement like any other self improvement. You can take photography classes to improve your eye for taking photos. Some photographers are sleazy and try to get girls to take their clothes off. So do photography classes teach people to be sleazy and low class?

[MrCastle]

No one is mystified as to why women dislike PUA given the very limited and skewed information most of them have been provided about it. We get it. Really.

 

What IS mystifying is why, after being repeatedly told by men who have used it and benefited from it, men who are not these disgusting, predatory pigs that some women INSIST every person who has interest in PUA is, after being shown time and time again that PUA is not a singular movement with ANY real unifying philosophy, women still insist on holding onto their highly visceral dislike of everything PUA. You're pretty much the only one in this thread who is willing to see any value in the movement, and actually listening to what is being said rather than finding new and creative ways to belittle, insult, and shame men who have expressed any interest in PUA. You're open to new ideas and willing to learn, and that's admirable. You're entitled to your skepticism. At least you aren't being dogmatic about it. I have no dog in this fight, really. I just know enough about PUA to speak up when exaggerations, mischaracterizations, and blatant falsehoods about it are being so freely and forcefully propagated.

 

Most of the sources from which women first hear about PUA, such as daytime TV talk shows or that reality show from a few years back, purposely cast the entire movement in a light that is simultaneously silly AND predatory because showing it in any other way would compromise ratings.

 

This x1000000. Close the thread.

[dasein]

I guess the PUA industry grew in a secretive manner, to some extent - if women had been exposed to it, it wouldn't have been so successful?

 

It's not that it was secretive, just that it started on the net when women weren't on the net. The first I heard of it was in the early preweb 90s, Ross Jeffries "Speed Seduction" a gussied up NLP technique, and the net was a boy's club then. Moreover, I don't think PUA really cares about being accepted by women because women don't buy the product.

 

The idea that a guy could happily sleep with random girls and then (when he decides he wants a relationship) dismiss another girl (who's slept with random guys) as a slut who is not worthy of being his girlfriend is ridiculously hypocritical, IMO.

 

Will just agree to disagree on this, my posts on that topic are too numerous already.

 

Anyway, having spoken to various guys on here, I have learnt there is more value to the PUA industry that I once thought, although I have to admit I'm still sceptical about a lot of it. It was my intention to try to help those blokes who see the benefits of it to understand why many women dislike what they hear about it. I don't know if I've done that at all, but I too get tired when these polarized debates appear and no progress is made on either side.

 

Fair enough, scepticism is a virtue. I don't think the above attitude, or the way you express it politely, is the type that male posters find annoying in these discussions.

[Taramere]

But most of what I've read is not so benign at all. Some of the most outspoken PUA cultists (which is what they seem like) on this board seem unable to write about women without denigrating us. The focus on what is perceived as women's universal weaknesses used in order to take advantage of women is offensive to women. Lots of weird cultural memes, such as women only having our youth and reproductive organs to offer society or to a relationship with a man, are elevated, as is other funky evo-psyche. And the whole shebang fosters a sick "us against them" mentality.

 

Yes. One of the popular defences of PUA is that it makes interactions between men and women more fun and playful. I'm all for that. However, the whole "PUA is fun for all" thing is a bit like listening to a lecture on how to have the happiest Christmas ever. A bit more convincing when delivered by somebody who isn't Ebeneezer Scrooge.

[TheBigQuestion]

Yes. One of the popular defences of PUA is that it makes interactions between men and women more fun and playful. I'm all for that. However, the whole "PUA is fun for all" thing is a bit like listening to a lecture on how to have the happiest Christmas ever. A bit more convincing when delivered by somebody who isn't Ebeneezer Scrooge.

 

I fully admit that I could be wrong about this, but it's been my experience that the posters to whom Mme Chaucer refers in the post you quoted are not actually PUAs at all. In fact, some of them (in particular, the only one who openly despises women but hasn't posted here in a while) don't think highly of PUA because dedicating one's life to attracting women is weak, effeminate, base, and so forth. I think I know the small handful of people she's talking about. Most of these guys are, on the contrary, chronically dateless, even involuntarily celibate. It's almost as if y'all make no distinction between trolls, actual PUAs, and everyone else. To the best of my knowledge, there are NO regular, veteran LoveShack posters currently active who actually are PUAs. And furthermore, the guys who DO have good things to say about PUA while also acknowledging a more dodgy side to it(me and other guys who have posted in this thread) never express the kinds of internet-based memes about women that Mme Chaucer referenced.

Edited December 3, 2012 by TheBigQuestion

[Failboy]

I fully admit that I could be wrong about this, but it's been my experience that the posters to whom Mme Chaucer refers in the post you quoted are not actually PUAs at all. In fact, some of them (in particular, the only one who openly despises women but hasn't posted here in a while) don't think highly of PUA because dedicating one's life to attracting women is weak, effeminate, base, and so forth. I think I know the small handful of people she's talking about. Most of these guys are, on the contrary, chronically dateless, even involuntarily celibate. It's almost as if y'all make no distinction between trolls, actual PUAs, and everyone else. To the best of my knowledge, there are NO regular, veteran LoveShack posters currently active who actually are PUAs.

 

Yeah.. I'm far from a PUA.. VERY FAR. And I don't like a good portion of it.. but to them, anybody who opposes their views is degraded to whatever. Like those feminists in that Video vom Toronto lol. Everybody who wanted to go to that event was some sort of rape-apologist to them. Yet when it comes to men who are actually real rapists, they wouldn't even dare to talk crap to their faces like that.

[Anela]

This attitude is a major reason why PUA has women all up in arms. Speaking generally, "we" don't want to be lied to so guys can "bang" us, or, for that matter, have anything to do with us.

 

I never even heard of PUA before I came to LoveShack. Once I did, I started investigating on the net.

 

I think that the "social lubrication" aspect of it is fine, and if figuring out some lines or gimmicks to start conversations that might lead to dates and maybe sex and / or relationships, and to have a support group type deal about it can help shy, socially awkward guys - I think that's fine.

 

I've rarely come across someone who was using PUA tactics to get a relationship, though. On another board, I saw pua's and polyamorists, working to get guys who said they wanted relationships, to admit that if they could get away with it, they'd love to be having sex with all sorts of women.

 

If someone needed an opening to genuinely get to know me, that's one thing, but don't come at me with parlour tricks and think that I'm going to be a convenient hole for them to poke for the night.

 

But most of what I've read is not so benign at all. Some of the most outspoken PUA cultists (which is what they seem like) on this board seem unable to write about women without denigrating us. The focus on what is perceived as women's universal weaknesses used in order to take advantage of women is offensive to women. Lots of weird cultural memes, such as women only having our youth and reproductive organs to offer society or to a relationship with a man, are elevated, as is other funky evo-psyche. And the whole shebang fosters a sick "us against them" mentality.

 

If shy and awkward guys are using those things to gain confidence - well, I see it more as those insecure guys using it to try to push women down so that they can feel superior. I don't believe that is good for the guys or for anyone.

 

Also, the whole marketing extravaganzas make it unpalatable to me. I feel the same way about other self help money-makers, Amway, "The Rules," Scientology and Pat Parelli's appropriation of "natural horsemanship." It all engenders skepticism.

 

Agreed.

[Anela]

That's the equivalent of saying youtube has a strongly misogynistic, juvenile element to it in light of the gravity of many of the videos and comments posted. Technically true, but far from reflective of the whole picture, or of all such forums.

 

But let's go straight to the source, shall we?

 

For example, just googled PUA forums, this one came up first:

 

PUA FORUMS | The Official PUA Site

 

This one second:

 

General Discussion

 

and then:

 

Stylelife Academy Public Forums

 

Pick-up Artist Forum • Index page

 

AskMen.com Lounge - Message Boards

 

Surveyed maybe 1000 thread titles over ten minutes. 0 had any misogynisitic, juvenile content. Not a single thread title, certainly nothing even close to "femcunts" or even "harridans."

 

Or perhaps you'd care to point some out the strong misogynistic or juvenile threads and content on some of these sites. One does have sexy lingerie women ads popping up. LS does too from time to time.

 

there's also rsdforums.

[movingon12]

I'm not a man, and I've never studied PUA techniques, so my knowledge of what it involves is limited to what I've read on here and that silly MTV programme whose name escapes me. However, from my experience, there are 6 scenarios:

 

1) a guy approaches you in a bar - that instant, subconscious, continuation of the species evaluation takes places, and he is attractive to you. He asks your name, offers you a drink, you have that same old conversation (where are you from, what do you do) that people have had in bars since the dawn the time. When he asks for your number, you give it to him. When he calls the next day, you answer the phone.

 

2) a guy approaches you in a bar, he's attractive to you. He tries to read your palm, or give you a personality test, or whatever it is he thinks will work. When he asks for your number, you give it to him. When he calls the next day, you answer the phone.

 

3) a guy approaches you in a bar, he is not attractive to you. He asks your name, offers you a drink, you politely make your excuses and leave.

 

4) a guy approaches you in a bar, he is not attractive to you. He tries to read your palm, or give you a personality test, or whatever it is he thinks will work. You decide that while he's not relationship material he seems interesting and might be fun to have a chat with for a while. When he asks for your number, you give it to him (I've never found a way to avoid this without being horribly rude). But when he calls the next day, you don't answer the phone.

 

5) a guy approaches you in a bar, alarm bells start ringing - he's rude, has bad hygiene, seems creepy, desperate, whatever. He offers you drink, you say no thanks and leave.

 

6) a guy approaches you in a bar, alarm bells start ringing, he tries to read your palm etc.... you say no thanks and leave.

 

So, as I see it, these clever pick up techniques will work to get a girl who isn't attracted to you, to speak to you when she otherwise wouldn't. Whether she will actually go on to sleep with you depends on whether you can light the missing spark between you and/or whether she herself is just looking for a ONS.

 

If you're talking about 'conning' a women into bed - I'm sure that's possible, just as it's possible to con someone to hand over their life savings. But if that's the only way that a man can make a connection with a woman, I suggest he needs counseling rather than pick up techniques.

 

If PUA techniques give an otherwise insecure man a bit more confidence when speaking to women, then great. I would hate to have to make the first move, and I have the greatest respect for guys who are brave enough to put themselves out their and risk rejection. But in the majority of cases I don't think they're really necessary. My husband picked me up with 'hi what's your name?'. There was no elaborate technique involved - just 2 people who liked the look of each other having a flowing conversation.

[Taramere]

It's almost as if y'all make no distinction between trolls, actual PUAs, and everyone else.

 

And how do you elect to distinguish between those groups? I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong to draw distinctions, but how would you go about doing it? Because I have to say, I'm not clear about what the difference between somebody who is interested in reading about PUA and applying it in their dating life, and somebody who is a PUA might be.

 

Nor am I clear why somebody who holds politically incorrect views that offend most people is necessarily a troll whereas another who constantly tries to bait others into endless time-wasting arguments isn't a troll. If both fluctuate between earnestness and troublemaking depending on who they're speaking to/long to squabble with, surely they both have elements of trollishness and elements of being regular posters. So no, I don't necessarily distinguish to the extent that you might.

Edited December 3, 2012 by Taramere

[Sun Devil]

One thing I notice is that the people who do not like pua is that they seen to not understand pua itself. They say that pua involves lying and making yourself someone you are not. I have read pua and even visited their forums and not once did I see the suggestion of lying or changing who you are except to be more sociable. I do not understand how these people are arguing about something that they do not know. Someone show me proof that pua does not work.

[USMCHokie]

I finally got through all the posts from last night...and great discussion so far. Thanks everyone!

 

Anyway, the "hatred" that women seem to have for the notion of PUA interests me. Normally, logic would dictate that an idea that people genuinely believe does not work would garner indifference, rather than hatred. For some reason, the ShakeWeight comes to mind. I genuinely believe that it is a useless piece of junk and that those who actually buy and use it are fools...but I have a general indifference and ambivalence regard its existence. I do not hate the ShakeWeight. And I do not hate the company that markets and sells them because others actually buy and use it.

 

So if women truly believe that "smart" women would never fall for PUA tactics, then why don't they share a similar indifference to its marketing and use? Why hate on something that they believe only works on the stupidest of women? Is there more to the story...?

 

Sure, you can make the "victim" argument, but are these women actually "victims"? I speculate that one reason why women associate PUAs with sleazy, dirty, and unscrupulous men is because of the quality of men that actually are able to attract women (including themselves). If I was a woman, I'm sure I would hate myself and hate the PUA community if some dude I would never ever ever date under normal circumstances had managed to seduce me and stick his peepee inside of me. If the "PUA" was actually desirable to the woman, would we still here the same complaints and hatred? Perhaps it's the PUA community that is opening women up to dating and/or sleeping with men they would never consider dating. And women don't like that.

 

Just a thought.

[Taramere]

I finally got through all the posts from last night...and great discussion so far. Thanks everyone!

 

Anyway, the "hatred" that women seem to have for the notion of PUA interests me. Normally, logic would dictate that an idea that people genuinely believe does not work would garner indifference, rather than hatred. For some reason, the ShakeWeight comes to mind. I genuinely believe that it is a useless piece of junk and that those who actually buy and use it are fools...but I have a general indifference and ambivalence regard its existence. I do not hate the ShakeWeight. And I do not hate the company that markets and sells them because others actually buy and use it.

 

So if women truly believe that "smart" women would never fall for PUA tactics, then why don't they share a similar indifference to its marketing and use? Why hate on something that they believe only works on the stupidest of women? Is there more to the story...?

 

Sure, you can make the "victim" argument, but are these women actually "victims"? I speculate that one reason why women associate PUAs with sleazy, dirty, and unscrupulous men is because of the quality of men that actually are able to attract women (including themselves). If I was a woman, I'm sure I would hate myself and hate the PUA community if some dude I would never ever ever date under normal circumstances had managed to seduce me and stick his peepee inside of me. If the "PUA" was actually desirable to the woman, would we still here the same complaints and hatred? Perhaps it's the PUA community that is opening women up to dating and/or sleeping with men they would never consider dating. And women don't like that.

 

Just a thought.

 

What about the possibility that we might hate it precisely because for a lot of men it doesn't work? That for all the "seduce any woman" promises, they still can't get laid and grow increasingly angry and frustrated about it by the day?

 

I think some men are so caught up with resentment about the "women have it easy, they can get laid whenever and they think their vaginas are gold plated" that they overlook two things.

 

1. The vast majority of us probably have no desire to go out and get laid by any Tom Dick or Harry, so the fact that it can happen with a snap of the fingers means nothing. It doesn't feel like any sort of victory or power. basically it probably wouldn't be all that enjoyable for most women, if they value emotional connection, and there'd be slut shaming to contend with on top of that...so where's the victory?

 

2. Unless you are our partner, we don't care either way whether you get laid. It has no impact on us other than that if we have to deal with you daily then it's probably better that you are getting regularly laid because..the crucial point...men who aren't getting laid and are frustrated and angry about it are unpleaseant to be around. Even worse if they've been sold all these false dreams and expectations on the internet. Who do they blame? Cherchez la femme.

 

Regardless of what gets boasted about on the internet, PUA has been on the scene for lots of years now and yet there are still multitudes of men out there not getting laid and feeling annoyed about it, reading the PUA sites, gravitating to the more bitter ones where they feel more at home, and getting embroiled in all this self loathing and rage against women.

 

I reserve the right to think it sucks. All these false, noisy promises of "any woman you want" that are proven over and over again to be a lot of nonsense. It's you guys who make these promises to eachother - not women. Yet somehow, we end up carrying the can for it.

[MrCastle]

What about the possibility that we might hate it precisely because for a lot of men it doesn't work? That for all the "seduce any woman" promises, they still can't get laid and grow increasingly angry and frustrated about it by the day?

 

I think some men are so caught up with resentment about the "women have it easy, they can get laid whenever and they think their vaginas are gold plated" that they overlook two things.

 

1. The vast majority of us probably have no desire to go out and get laid by any Tom Dick or Harry, so the fact that it can happen with a snap of the fingers means nothing. It doesn't feel like any sort of victory or power. basically it probably wouldn't be all that enjoyable for most women, if they value emotional connection, and there'd be slut shaming to contend with on top of that...so where's the victory?

 

2. Unless you are our partner, we don't care either way whether you get laid. It has no impact on us other than that if we have to deal with you daily then it's probably better that you are getting regularly laid because..the crucial point...men who aren't getting laid and are frustrated and angry about it are unpleaseant to be around. Even worse if they've been sold all these false dreams and expectations on the internet. Who do they blame? Cherchez la femme.

 

Regardless of what gets boasted about on the internet, PUA has been on the scene for lots of years now and yet there are still multitudes of men out there not getting laid and feeling annoyed about it, reading the PUA sites, gravitating to the more bitter ones where they feel more at home, and getting embroiled in all this self loathing and rage against women.

 

I reserve the right to think it sucks. All these false, noisy promises of "any woman you want" that are proven over and over again to be a lot of nonsense. It's you guys who make these promises to eachother - not women. Yet somehow, we end up carrying the can for it.

 

I would counter that with--what are these men supposed to do?

 

I know women would rather these guys look at it like "ah well, I'm not getting women...maybe one day. I just have to keep being who I am and my dream girl will come "

 

That's not reality. Coming from someone who was constantly friend zoned, I didn't want to keep living life that way. I wanted results, and I wanted them now. Why were men less attractive than I getting dates? Why was I alone on the weekends and they weren't? I wasn't going to sit around hoping one day it would all pay off; I had to get to the bottom of what I was doing wrong.

 

Now, there were women who found me physically attractive, and I thought things would be in the bag, but like clockwork, I'd say or do something that landed me in "only see you as a friend" status.

 

I came across some PUA material, and started getting more successful. I wasn't banging supermodels the very next day, but I was improving in steps. A new connection made in class here, an invite to a campus party there, a new phone number here, etc, and building blocks were being put in place.

 

To be quite honest, I don't think I've changed who I am at all, just how I market myself. My personal beliefs and interests never changed, my outlook on life outside of dating hasn't changed, my looks haven't changed. I'm just better at selling myself. PUA helped me do that. It got the ball rolling. It pushed me to improve myself and figure out what I was doing wrong.

 

Where are these unsuccessful men supposed to turn to when they want results? Very few of them are content with living life the way they've been doing it. PUA is not a perfect system, but it gets the ball rolling. You take what you need and ignore what you don't. The stuff I got from it, most men who are even moderately successful with women would attest to it. It would be common sense to them. Well, it wasn't common sense to me at the time, and I needed a wake up call.

[Taramere]

I would counter that with--what are these men supposed to do?

 

I do think they should try, and I support them getting dating advice. But realistic advice.

 

Okay, here's an example. The other day I was posting on one of those short guy threads. Now I have met plenty of guys who were significantly shorter than average and had no problems whatsoever with women, but if a man is complaining that he's short, can't get women whatever he does etc etc then I have to assume that he's telling the truth.

 

I said something along the lines of people who are average or generally considered below average having to work that bit harder for that bit less. I wasn't suggesting it was fair, but I think most people would probably concede that it's reality. Needless to say I was ranted at for saying it, but I wasn't trying to hurt anybody's feelings....but if a person wants a partner, and isn't scoring with the kind of partner they would hope for it might be that they're going to have to think about trying a bit harder for a bit less.

 

In PUA (and this applied with the Rules too, which I read once and found ludicrous) a lot of the charm for the reader is that the theory appeals to the ego and, in many cases, sells a bit of false hope. "You are the prize!"

 

 

I came across some PUA material, and started getting more successful. I

wasn't banging supermodels the very next day, but I was improving in steps. A new connection made in class here, an invite to a campus party there, a new phone number here, etc, and building blocks were being put in place.

 

To be quite honest, I don't think I've changed who I am at all, just how I

market myself. My personal beliefs and interests never changed, my outlook on life outside of dating hasn't changed, my looks haven't changed. I'm just better at selling myself. PUA helped me do that. It got the ball rolling. It pushed me to improve myself and figure out what I was doing wrong.

 

That's great. I'm really pleased it worked out for you. It sounds like you had the wherewithall to take that material and use it in a way that was right for you.

 

 

Where are these unsuccessful men supposed to turn to when they want results? Very few of them are content with living life the way they've been doing it. PUA is not a perfect system, but it gets the ball rolling. You take what you need and ignore what you don't. The stuff I got from it, most men who are even moderately successful with women would attest to it. It would be common sense to them. Well, it wasn't common sense to me at the time, and I needed a wake up call.

 

If PUA gets the ball rolling then great. If it doesn't - and I think we've seen plenty of times on here that it doesn't work for everybody - then at some point they're going to have to lower their expectations - just as women who are very keen to get married might lower their expectations. It certainly isn't the stuff fairytales and romantic movies are made of, it's not advice that would make anybody a millionaire...and I'm pretty sure it's not in the list of things a PUA guru would advocate, but it might be the only realistic option.

[MrCastle]

I do think they should try, and I support them getting dating advice. But realistic advice.

 

Okay, here's an example. The other day I was posting on one of those short guy threads. Now I have met plenty of guys who were significantly shorter than average and had no problems whatsoever with women, but if a man is complaining that he's short, can't get women whatever he does etc etc then I have to assume that he's telling the truth.

 

I said something along the lines of people who are average or generally considered below average having to work that bit harder for that bit less. I wasn't suggesting it was fair, but I think most people would probably concede that it's reality. Needless to say I was ranted at for saying it, but I wasn't trying to hurt anybody's feelings....but if a person wants a partner, and isn't scoring with the kind of partner they would hope for it might be that they're going to have to think about trying a bit harder for a bit less.

 

In PUA (and this applied with the Rules too, which I read once and found ludicrous) a lot of the charm for the reader is that the theory appeals to the ego and, in many cases, sells a bit of false hope. "You are the prize!"

 

 

 

That's great. I'm really pleased it worked out for you. It sounds like you had the wherewithall to take that material and use it in a way that was right for you.

 

 

 

 

If PUA gets the ball rolling then great. If it doesn't - and I think we've seen plenty of times on here that it doesn't work for everybody - then at some point they're going to have to lower their expectations - just as women who are very keen to get married might lower their expectations. It certainly isn't the stuff fairytales and romantic movies are made of, it's not advice that would make anybody a millionaire...and I'm pretty sure it's not in the list of things a PUA guru would advocate, but it might be the only realistic option.

 

Well that's why I felt I had to change because I could never settle. I think my expectations/requirements are fair. I'm looking for the female version of me. I know I exist, so there has to be others out there like me who exist, in female form. Things like not doing drugs, being motivated, being open minded, etc, as well as match me physically in term of attractiveness.

 

The problem was these women were friending me. I didn't drop my standards in order to be successful, my standards are still the same, except now I'm getting dates from those same kind of women who weren't into me before.

 

I think if people work on themselves, they can get who they deserve. I don't think anyone should have to settle. If you want better than what you're getting, become better. The more you improve yourself, the bigger your market.

 

I think sleazy people are going to be sleazy regardless. I don't think PUA teaches someone to become a sleaze.

 

I've read my fair share of PUA stuff and I absolutely adore women, as I always have. I respect them, and see them as equals, and want nothing more than to find a woman later on in life that I can release all my love onto as I've never been in love.

[Imajerk17]

So where, Taramere, do you suggest guys find this so-called realistic advice? Keep in mind there are no male success stories on LS, at least none that didn't involve the guy taking on PUA.

 

Also, many women have been in relationships with guys who.are trainwrecks, meanwhile probably passing up decent guys. We see it on here all the time. I'm not trying to knock anyone so much as I'm saying that there is something going on here. What happened to make these women go for the trainwreck and pass up all those good guys in the process?

 

I really feel you can't blame a guy for wanting to know what was really going on, and not the "peaches-and-cream" version of the story that most women seem to give. So they turn to PUA.

Edited December 3, 2012 by Imajerk17

[USMCHokie]

In PUA (and this applied with the Rules too, which I read once and found ludicrous) a lot of the charm for the reader is that the theory appeals to the ego and, in many cases, sells a bit of false hope. "You are the prize!"

 

And this is what I found most annoying about PUAs...they found anything and everything besides themselves to blame for striking out. It was ridiculous some of the delusional logic and justification that they created in their minds to explain why a girl wasn't interested after he made all the "right moves"...and PUA does sell that notion...the notion that "you are the prize" and if things go south, more likely it was an incorrect application of techniques or a super bitch you were dealing with rather than the cold hard truth that you were not desirable to the woman.

[grkBoy]

I think the only good possible benefit of PUA is if it drives socially inept men to become socially adept.

 

If it takes the guy from just sitting in the corner and thinking life is unfair to going up and talking to women, then it's a big plus.

 

Even more if it drives the guy to take some personal interest in his own self-value. So suddenly he's learning to dress and carry himself better, and then even later discerning between the women he shouldn't be messing with versus those he should.

 

What I mean by "women he shouldn't be messing with" are the very flakes who seemingly think good looks and bedroom skill are all you need in life, and thus their own low self-esteem continually allows the cheesy sides of PUA to lure them into more situations they'll regret later.

[Taramere]

So where, Taramere, do you suggest guys find this so-called realistic advice? Keep in mind there are no male success stories on LS, at least none that didn't involve the guy taking on PUA.

 

I'd suggest they find it in the real world. Instead of going to clubs, getting outdoors and doing activities where they're liable to meeet people in a more normal, natural environment. Whitewater rafting, horse-riding, ski-ing, a course of tennis lessons...taking a few weeks off and going backpacking is a great way for anybody to shake off social shyness.

 

Doing activities that they're good at and where they'll shine. A guy you've never looked twice at can suddenly quadruple in attractiveness when he's exercising a talent like music or art.

 

I'm somewhat in agreement with the "trolls" who say that there should be much more to those men's lives than obsessing over meeting women. It would be better if they met women as a by-product of doing something they genuinely enjoyed and were good at. How many people genuinely enjoy/are good at standing around in a crowded bar speaking to people? It's a pretty dull and artificial way to meet anybody (and a fabulous way to make an introvert feel extra self conscious and uncomfortable)...but as it went in The Game, that's pretty much all any of them seemed to do. go to clubs and hit on women. Way to be an interesting, well rounded person.

 

Also, pushing for introductions through friends and family, and maybe some of the PUA stuf will help a man to get past the friend zone in those situations and start making things happen romantically....but it seems to me that tips for getting off with women should be an ancillary thing to be practiced in the course of a man actually living his life, rather than the main event.

Edited December 3, 2012 by Taramere

[Mme. Chaucer]

Most of the sources from which women first hear about PUA, such as daytime TV talk shows or that reality show from a few years back, purposely cast the entire movement in a light that is simultaneously silly AND predatory because showing it in any other way would compromise ratings.

 

I first heard about PUA right here on LoveShack, from posts typed by the PUA guys themselves. THEY are the ones who immediately gave me a clear impression that it was a crappy thing.

 

I then looked it up on the Internet and read. I promise you, I was not looking to confirm a negative bias. I was looking at PUA sites full of PUA guys. I just wanted to know. But my poor general opinion of the whole "movement" did not come from anywhere besides pro-PUA guys.

 

Here on LS, there are 2 members (exactly) who have helped me understand that PUA stuff actually helped them in a positive way and when they express that they always do it without negative talk about women. Since they're both on this thread, I think it's okay to identify them - Imajerk and TW.

[Imported]

I'm not a man, and I've never studied PUA techniques, so my knowledge of what it involves is limited to what I've read on here and that silly MTV programme whose name escapes me. However, from my experience, there are 6 scenarios:

 

1) a guy approaches you in a bar - that instant, subconscious, continuation of the species evaluation takes places, and he is attractive to you. He asks your name, offers you a drink, you have that same old conversation (where are you from, what do you do) that people have had in bars since the dawn the time. When he asks for your number, you give it to him. When he calls the next day, you answer the phone.

 

2) a guy approaches you in a bar, he's attractive to you. He tries to read your palm, or give you a personality test, or whatever it is he thinks will work. When he asks for your number, you give it to him. When he calls the next day, you answer the phone.

 

3) a guy approaches you in a bar, he is not attractive to you. He asks your name, offers you a drink, you politely make your excuses and leave.

 

4) a guy approaches you in a bar, he is not attractive to you. He tries to read your palm, or give you a personality test, or whatever it is he thinks will work. You decide that while he's not relationship material he seems interesting and might be fun to have a chat with for a while. When he asks for your number, you give it to him (I've never found a way to avoid this without being horribly rude). But when he calls the next day, you don't answer the phone.

 

5) a guy approaches you in a bar, alarm bells start ringing - he's rude, has bad hygiene, seems creepy, desperate, whatever. He offers you drink, you say no thanks and leave.

 

6) a guy approaches you in a bar, alarm bells start ringing, he tries to read your palm etc.... you say no thanks and leave.

 

So, as I see it, these clever pick up techniques will work to get a girl who isn't attracted to you, to speak to you when she otherwise wouldn't. Whether she will actually go on to sleep with you depends on whether you can light the missing spark between you and/or whether she herself is just looking for a ONS.

 

If you're talking about 'conning' a women into bed - I'm sure that's possible, just as it's possible to con someone to hand over their life savings. But if that's the only way that a man can make a connection with a woman, I suggest he needs counseling rather than pick up techniques.

 

If PUA techniques give an otherwise insecure man a bit more confidence when speaking to women, then great. I would hate to have to make the first move, and I have the greatest respect for guys who are brave enough to put themselves out their and risk rejection. But in the majority of cases I don't think they're really necessary. My husband picked me up with 'hi what's your name?'. There was no elaborate technique involved - just 2 people who liked the look of each other having a flowing conversation.

 

 

You forgot all the:

 

 

7) A guy doesn't approach you, because he is too nervous on how to go about it and has zero idea on what to do or say.

 

8) A guy approaches you and just stammers, excuses himself and to go slam his head against a wall repeatedly while you're like wtf

 

9) A guy approaches you, that you are attracted to and he proceeds to crash and burn immediately and your attraction is gone.

 

10) There's a lot more, it can be very bad.

 

No, seriously, lots of guys have no idea. Girls might not need a lot of instructions....never mind Cosmo and all the other magazines as well as women's books on how to get a guy, get a guy to marry you and so on...but guys do. When you're reacting to something, you can get by with what comes naturally. When you're initiating things out of nothing and are expected to guide most of the beginning phases, you should maybe know what you're doing and that does not come naturally.

[Mme. Chaucer]

 

So if women truly believe that "smart" women would never fall for PUA tactics, then why don't they share a similar indifference to its marketing and use?

 

For the same reason I "hate" companies and individuals that make money out of predatory and dishonest marketing aimed at what we'd consider "easy marks" like the very elderly. Even though I'd never fall for them. I hope.