PUA: My First Impressions...

[HopelessRomantic76]

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.

 

I agree with this and all the men should read it.While pua imo is good if it helps a socially retarded man become social i think people have to realize the intial stages are about LOOKS.

 

If i fidn the guy physically attractive and the few minutes we spoke he seemed somewhat interesting to talk to im giving him a chance iff im not physcially attracted to him theyres no spell he can put me under to want to go out on a date with him and possibly sleep with him

 

If you are an average or unattractive guy it a numbers game you have to approach till you find a girl who will tolerate you physically

[tman666]

I think the most "bold worthy" part of your original post, Hokie, is the fact that your gut is telling you that PUA doesn't fit your personality or mesh with your outlook. We could pick apart the ethical dilemmas associated with PUA all day, but when it's all said and done, if it isn't for you, it isn't for you.

 

If casual sex is something you really want, I think you'll be able to go out and get it without the parlor tricks. A person can't learn charisma and confidence from a book.

 

Sorry for the "beta" post, bros.

[dasein]

I think the most "bold worthy" part of your original post, Hokie, is the fact that your gut is telling you that PUA doesn't fit your personality or mesh with your outlook. We could pick apart the ethical dilemmas associated with PUA all day, but when it's all said and done, if it isn't for you, it isn't for you.

 

If casual sex is something you really want, I think you'll be able to go out and get it without the parlor tricks. A person can't learn charisma and confidence from a book.

 

Sorry for the "beta" post, bros.

 

IMO your last paragraph is highly slanted, not "beta," as it discounts any meaningful discussion and POVs expressed in the thread in favor of the same old platitudes and epithets. "Casual sex?" "Parlor tricks?" "Can't learn confidence and charisma from a book?" Your posts don't usually contain such slant. Is it informed slant?

 

Whatever hokie decides to do after safe return from his deployment, I hope that includes proactive steps to gain more control over his sexual life via whatever methods, call them PUA parlor tricks or otherwise.

[Pyro]

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.

 

now can you see why PUA is looked at negatively for the most part here on LS?

 

Typically women don't like hearing over and over that they are at fault for a group of men striking out over and over.

 

I will say too that after reading this thread I don't find the PUA tactics to be as bad as they are portrayed. I am all for guys becoming more social in order to have the courage to meet women.

 

I have seen the word 'seduce' thrown around in this thread and if by seduce they mean to tell the woman whatever she wants to hear in order to get her in bed (lying) then that is where the negative view of PUA comes from......well that and what you posted above.

[tman666]

IMO your last paragraph is highly slanted, not "beta," as it discounts any meaningful discussion and POVs expressed in the thread in favor of the same old platitudes and epithets. "Casual sex?" "Parlor tricks?" "Can't learn confidence and charisma from a book?" Your posts don't usually contain such slant. Is it informed slant?

 

Whatever hokie decides to do after safe return from his deployment, I hope that includes proactive steps to gain more control over his sexual life via whatever methods, call them PUA parlor tricks or otherwise.

 

Absolutely agree with the bolded.

 

I'll be the first to admit that I've never studied any PUA material, and that my opinion on it is mostly based on what I've heard from others and from what I've seen amongst my own male peers.

 

So basically, yeah, there's a chance I could be wildly mis-informed about what the PUA community teaches and espouses. I'll give credit where it's due.

 

Everything I've ever heard though about PUA, whether it be word of mouth or personally observed, seems to entail some sort of element or theme that getting fast pussy is the end goal. To me, it's material written by and for guys who are after one thing: sleeping with as many women as possible.

 

I'm all for the idea that some guys probably need a game plan in order to practice being charismatic and taking things in a direction they want them to go. I'm not a teetotaler by any means. I don't buy that the women that this stuff works on are "victims" because to me, that kind of stuff will not work on girls who aren't receptive to the end result anyway.

 

BUT, it seems like it's counterproductive to "sell" such methods to guys looking for stable, longer term, exclusive relationships. Maybe I mis-read Hokie's posts in this thread (wouldn't be the first time), but I got the sense that he's looking for more beyond nut busting.

 

And hey, if PUA can help him achieve his goals, I'm all for it. I just question whether or not it's the right tool for the job.

Edited December 3, 2012 by tman666

[dasein]

I have seen the word 'seduce' thrown around in this thread and if by seduce they mean to tell the woman whatever she wants to hear in order to get her in bed (lying) then that is where the negative view of PUA comes from......well that and what you posted above.

 

I use "seduce," and "learning seduction" preferred over "PUA," (but use that for convenience also) because most of the PUA hate here and elsewhere derives from improper labelling in an industry containing as many differing POVs as there are people selling them. The seduction industry labelled itself "PUA" as a convenient pragmatic acronym for a male demographic, unaware and likely uncaring that that label would then be used lazily, perjoratively and dismissively to aggregate many otherwise totally disparate business entities for the purpose of broad negative characterizations.

 

In actuality, including all the competing businesses and sources within PUA under one label is the equivalent of including LS as a PUA source. LS doesn't seem like a PUA site, does it? But LS does provide dating advice to men and sells advertisement space, fitting even a strict definition of PUA, "male dating advice for money." So in PUA hate logic land, condemnations of "PUA" are effectively condemnations of LS also. Once more, -their- logic, not real logic.

 

Another example would be classifying Walmart and Nordstrom as "retailers," and then forming a bad impression of Nordstrom based on buying a cheap watch at Walmart, because, you know, they are both stores in the retail industry. Or hating on Taco Bell because one got a bad leg of chicken at KFC, both restaurants, both owned by Pepsi. Or trying to run DOS on a Mac, because, you know, Macs are computers and DOS is for computers. Of course logic and reason never trump ill-conceived, preconceived notions IRL, "PUA is BAD! Fire BAD!" whether the PUA tactics in question come from a Hitler Youth website or LS, if there's anything about dating advice for men there, "that's PUA and PUA BAD!" Threads like these end up resembling a conversation with monomaniacs in a 19th century asylum or Capt. Ahabs. "Gotta get that white whale, or you know, anything big and white will do, harpoon that minivan lads! Avast!"

 

@ thread, is it sinking in, even a little, how utterly moronic making negative... or even positive... assessments of PUA is as opposed to a particular product, book or business? Even a little bit? "The latest Grisham book sucks, so I'm not going to read "To Kill a Mockingbird." It must suck too because they are both legal thrillers and based on my reading of that one Grisham book, I know with adamant, repetitive, monomaniacal, cliche babbling certainty that Ms. Lee's book sucks too!" Or the permutation, "Well I read one legal thriller, and it was OK, but it's those bad legal thrillers I haven't read that suck, watch out for them, I hate them." Even more contorted and perverse.

 

Have also dealt with the "lying" issue to the point of redundancy in this thread. Anyone can lie. No one would buy training in that. PUAs don't sell that.

[TheBigQuestion]

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.

 

I understand that you first learned about it here. I never said that there weren't exceptions.

 

However, you missed my overall point, which was that you are making a mistake conflating the posters here who use questionable evolutionary science to justify their insulting thoughts about women with "PUAs." The posters you are referencing either disavow/dislike PUA altogether or have no clue about it either way. There are no pickup artists who post here even semi-regularly.

[USMCHokie]

Maybe I mis-read Hokie's posts in this thread (wouldn't be the first time), but I got the sense that he's looking for more beyond nut busting.

 

And hey, if PUA can help him achieve his goals, I'm all for it. I just question whether or not it's the right tool for the job.

 

I don't exactly know what I'm looking for...I know that I want the real deal relationship, and I think I'm more naturally inclined towards that, but I don't feel that I want to be in one in the near future. I honestly still feel like I don't compete out there against the other guys and that mentality prevents me from trying to go after what I really want. Instead, I've gone through life accepting what I have been able to get.

 

I just want some sort of feedback to know that I'm desirable enough to be able to chase after what I want; even though I don't even know what that is...

[Mme. Chaucer]

However, you missed my overall point, which was that you are making a mistake conflating the posters here who use questionable evolutionary science to justify their insulting thoughts about women with "PUAs." The posters you are referencing either disavow/dislike PUA altogether or have no clue about it either way. There are no pickup artists who post here even semi-regularly.

 

No, really. The ones I am talking about identify themselves as PUA.

[jcrew11]

The OP should just do "Nothing" to improve himself or his social abilities. Just remain the same person you always were, and the women will come running to you. Older men who are 30 and older have more success with 20-30 year old women because they are smarter and wiser, and employed and richer. Just wait until you are 30 years old and your dating life will improve.

[TheBigQuestion]

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.

 

It's simple really. Men who label themselves PUAs are PUAs. Men who are active in PUA communities are PUAs. On the other hand, men who read through a few e-books and articles and find those materials helpful but who do not necessarily embrace the lifestyle (although, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, there really isn't any one PUA lifestyle) are not PUAs. Men who are reading a few articles but not really doing well with approaching women are clearly not PUAs just by the definition of the term.

[TheBigQuestion]

No, really. The ones I am talking about identify themselves as PUA.

 

Then you won't mind PMing me a few names?

[Mme. Chaucer]

Okay, just for the heck of it I clicked on the first of dasein's list of "reputable" sites that wouldn't be hateful. First forum I went to was "PUA Lounge." The first thread I looked at there contains this gem:

 

One minute you tell them you like their spontaneity then the next minute you tell them that they are too crazy for you and you wouldn't make a good match. You reward them for good behavior and punish them for bad, just like you would a dog. And if they are too good, then you make up stuff to punish them for, just to keep them in check.

 

Granted, there really were several innocent posts on that short thread, but of course this one stood out to me.

 

I really hope that any one of you guys reading this thread won't have any issues understanding why a membership that includes people who post things like that is considered nasty by women in general, in spite of the not-so-bad guys who are also there.

[Sun Devil]

No one has proven that pua does not work. I do not understand why there are so many women who are against it. Is it that they can't handle the fact that they are easily manipulated by it, or is it that they think it gives men too much power?

[dasein]

Okay, just for the heck of it I clicked on the first of dasein's list of "reputable" sites that wouldn't be hateful. First forum I went to was "PUA Lounge." The first thread I looked at there contains this gem:

 

You sure he wasn't commenting on -this- book? Don't do like taramere did with the "femc-nt" thing and then cause me to spend time going there only to find it is an offtopic, justified comment or something not relating to PUA.

 

How to Make Your Man Behave in 21 Days or Less Using the Secrets of Professional Dog Trainers: Karen Salmansohn, Alison Seiffer: 9781563056260: Amazon.com: Books

 

I really hope that any of you reading this thread won't have any issues understanding why an industry that includes books such as the above is considered nasty in general, in spite of the not so bad books that are also out there.

 

The only logical conclusion to be drawn from the above single "train your man" example is that the entirety of the female relationship and bride industry (FRBI) is just a cult that men find rightfully offensive. Ladies, don't stoop to parlor trick FRBI techniques to get men involved in relationships, just be yourself. Anyone can get a relationship, why would you pay -money- to a FRBI who is just ripping you off? I can assure you all, as a man, that I know with certainty no women need these books. I'm a man, so you see I know what women need and don't need.

 

The only kind of relationship you will get as a FRBI is a shallow, meaningless one that leads to disappointment with men of low quality. No one needs FRBI, you can't learn what's necessary for a meaningful relationship from some FRBI book. What offends me personally about FRBI is that using FRBI techniques to manipulate a man into a relationship is dishonest and deceitful, let alone so many FRBI practitioners have bad attitudes about men generally and are the types who are prone to bash and blameshift to men. All of the FRBI types who post here have hateful misandrist attitudes and constantly cite to weird memes I don't like. Finally, I would -never- fall for any of those techniques expressed in those FRBI books. Women try to do those to me all the time and I see right through it. I'm not going to ever walk down the aisle for some cheap FRBI tactics, and laugh at the loser women who resort to such. My opinion on FRBI is rock solid, set in stone, and once I get around to reading a FRBI book, it will become even more adamant! Any attempts to describe good things about FRBI will result in me repeating the above paragraph in essence, til the end of time, ad infinitum, ad astra per astra, as long as the grass is green.

 

But Chaucer, we aren't idiots. I know what you did. Taramere posted about thread titles, so you went and looked at those, who knows how many, and found no fuel there, so you started digging into threads until you found an offensive post.

 

For the record, I have no idea whether those sites are "reputable" or not, not endorsing any of them. I took the top search results, and then went and looked at several pages of thread titles under various topics on each, because the point I was countering was taramere's generalization that "the average PUA forum contains lots of strong misogynistic and juvenile content as evidenced by thread titles." That's how she phrased the generalization, so that's how I approached looking into its veracity. I'm not going to go post counting to refute a different claim with what I know is going to end up being 1% or less of the individual posts express the equivalent of the -one- you found, or if I did would it make any difference?

Edited December 3, 2012 by dasein

[Necris]

Seriously, there are loose, sex-hungry sluts out and about in abundance these days. You guys don't need to lame techniques to get laid. Oh, wait, you want the really attractive women, right? Even so, again, the really attractive women that you get using these tricks aren't going to be that smart. So, I guess, if getting laid is the objective, go for it. But, just remember you have to look at yourself in the mirror in the morning. The bottom line is that you have lied and deceived someone in order to meet your objective.

 

You just don't know how hard it is for some guys who don't naturally have "it", how much effort they have to put into this stuff. I'm a guy and I'm not even looking for sex, there's nothing wrong with me being a virgin, but I do want a relationship but it seems its becoming increasingly more impossible to achieve this, I can barely even get a date, I've only had a handful of dates my whole life and never a second date. I'm usually rejected way before I actually get to go on a single date with a girl.

 

I've been looking into PUA material myself though I feel like Hokie right now I'm not sure what to really make of it. My scam senses are definitely tingling and while I'm not looking for random sex like some guys I do have some glimmer of hope that maybe it will help me get a relationship one day. Unfortunately I feel that I'm just that guy that isn't compatible with any woman as I'm just not the guy that women like, something about me just makes me that way.

[Mme. Chaucer]

How to Make Your Man Behave in 21 Days or Less Using the Secrets of Professional Dog Trainers: Karen Salmansohn, Alison Seiffer: 9781563056260: Amazon.com: Books

 

I really hope that any of you reading this thread won't have any issues understanding why an industry that includes books such as the above is considered nasty in general, in spite of the not so bad books that are also out there.

 

What industry are you talking about? The publishing industry?

 

Sorry, but that's not a very strong analogy.

[Necris]

What industry are you talking about? The publishing industry?

 

Sorry, but that's not a very strong analogy.

 

Why? Isn't it similar? Its just influencing human behavior using psychology.

[jcrew11]

No one has proven that pua does not work. I do not understand why there are so many women who are against it. Is it that they can't handle the fact that they are easily manipulated by it, or is it that they think it gives men too much power?

 

Yeah, I think women are just angered that most men turn into polygamous players that use it for evil, and cheat with women, lead them on, and have one night stands. Women think it turns men into pigs and players who can't be controlled.

[pbjbear]

Yeah, I think women are just angered that most men turn into polygamous players that use it for evil, and cheat with women, lead them on, and have one night stands. Women think it turns men into pigs and players who can't be controlled.

 

I have talked to probably over 30 PUA users and only met one who used it to find a relationship. The vast majority of PUA users HURT women and do it so willingly

[Anela]

Okay, just for the heck of it I clicked on the first of dasein's list of "reputable" sites that wouldn't be hateful. First forum I went to was "PUA Lounge." The first thread I looked at there contains this gem:

 

Oh, that was supposed to be a list of sites that weren't nasty? I was really tired last night and didn't realize that. I don't know if my post mentioning rsd made it through, but if it did, I posted that as another example of idiots who revel in this BS.

[jcrew11]

I don't exactly know what I'm looking for...I know that I want the real deal relationship, and I think I'm more naturally inclined towards that, but I don't feel that I want to be in one in the near future. I honestly still feel like I don't compete out there against the other guys and that mentality prevents me from trying to go after what I really want. Instead, I've gone through life accepting what I have been able to get.

 

I just want some sort of feedback to know that I'm desirable enough to be able to chase after what I want; even though I don't even know what that is...

 

Honestly, I think you should join a Catholic church, and ask the priest if he can set you up with some of the single women at church. If you want marriage and monogamy, you can't go wrong with going to Church.

[Mme. Chaucer]

If you have no interest in seeing this guy again and want to turn the game around, turn this into a literal game to make him work for it. Internally accept the fact that you are interested in having a one night stand with him and never seeing him again. See how many push-up's you can make him do. See how uncomfortable you can make him. Think of embarrassing situations from movies like American Pie. Use your imagination to get creative.

 

 

Why are you supposed to internally accept that you're gonna have a one night stand with him before you make him do push-ups? I don't get it.

[jcrew11]

I have talked to probably over 30 PUA users and only met one who used it to find a relationship. The vast majority of PUA users HURT women and do it so willingly

 

I thought PUA tactics aren't supposed to work on women? Aren't they cheesy and lame?

[Mme. Chaucer]

I thought PUA tactics aren't supposed to work on women? Aren't they cheesy and lame?

 

Lots of people fall for the cheesy and lame. Look at all the guys who buy PUA "courses" and stuff.