Post: #26

On the looks debate, it's game denialism, pure and simple.

If you believe a pasty, balding, relatively short, skinny fat, ginger guy like Tyler ever got girls, then looks can't matter THAT much. Same with Style.

I've had this debate before. Most of the gurus aren't classically good looking guys. They are generally average looking dudes, some of whom work out, but most of their success is because of their game.

If you don't believe these plain guys are fucking, then why believe anything else that they say?

And if you only take advice from pretty boys, what value is there in that advice? If you aren't handsome, can you get away with stopping a stranger on the street? Talking to a group of three at a club? Obviously you can't, so why try? Right?

Granted that none of these gurus are disfigured, but some of those mugs should convince you that looks are only a small part of the equation.

In the vast majority of cases, looks don't matter.

Now there are some visual aspects that do come into play, but above average facial attractiveness is not a deciding factor.

The real problem is applying men's logic to how women should respond. She doesn't want what you want, and won't do the same things that you do. Lotta dudes don't get that, even experienced ones

WIA

Post: #27

Forking out 3000 dollars for a pua bootcamp.

Post: #28

(12-04-2014 10:20 AM)Distant Light Wrote:  Overall the community doctrine really turns me off promotes a brotherhood-like vibe which when you look at it it's just GUYS meeting MORE GUYS trying to fuck girls. Many lack female friends and go out in groups like every other dude "on the prawl".

I don't mind the brotherhood, but you brought up probably the only point I hadn't seen made already in this thread (that I feel strongly about).

Most guys only want to have male friends and next to zero or zero female friends.

Fundamentally they think they have to go out and find the women and hunt them down.

When you surround yourself with women (or at least have a lot more female friends/acquaintances than it seems the community guys do), guess what, you get WAY more comfortable around them and you get introduced to women with YOU already being the prize.

I'm probably going to have a New Year's party at my place this year and if I didn't have a GF I can practically guarantee you I'd have multiple girls vying for my attention because of all the girls I know bringing other girls or the "connector" guy friends bringing girls and me being talked up by them on top of me being the host.

I actually value and cherish my female friendships. Some are mostly social/superficial but I get value from all of them.

Post: #29

- The no "female friends" rule is complete bullshit. If you have the proper frame control in that dynamic, anything is possible in terms of networking/status.

- Overuse of ad nauseum pickup lines. If you're inner game is tight, then everything should come out smooth and natural as peanut butter.

- Spam approaching. I find that this will cause you to be even more self-conscious in your interactions with women because it becomes artificial instead of organic.

- Scrupulous attention to body language, vocal tonality, etc. Useless drivel such as, I've messed up on this line now her interest has dipped 10%. Come on people, it's human nature to make mistakes.

Post: #30

'She is not rejecting you, she is rejecting your game.'

Yeah it is sometimes true, but often your game is perfect but she doesnt like your look or your status.

Post: #31

Pride male if your game is perfect, your looks and status will NOT matter. Game gets results, it's not about passing some checkpoints in the eyes of some men. It's about doing the things that will make the lizard allow your willy to pass into her fanny, simples.

Post: #32

(12-04-2014 03:31 PM)Moma Wrote:  Pride male if your game is perfect, your looks and status will NOT matter. Game gets results, it's not about passing some checkpoints in the eyes of some men. It's about doing the things that will make the lizard allow your willy to pass into her fanny, simples.

Nobody has perfect Game. It is a fallacy to believe that perfect Game techniques are all that you need. Game does get results, but looks and status are important, not emphasized enough.

Post: #33

Dantes, you are going around in circles. You can only improve game. You cannot change your height, your race or penis size. So stop complaining about the smaller things and work on the big things. Perfect game is what you run to get the lizard to spread. If she spread, it was perfect game. If not, it was imperfect game. Simples.

Post: #34

What I think he means as what will qualify as "perfect game" to one girl will not work on the other. Game is malleable.

Post: #35

1. Leaning in. In clubs you have to lean in or otherwise you can't spit your game since she won't hear you.

2. Not using direct game during the day. I use it often and it works.

Post: #36

(12-04-2014 04:23 PM)RougeNoir Wrote:  1. Leaning in. In clubs you have to lean in or otherwise you can't spit your game since she won't hear you.

Why not have her lean in to hear you?

HSLD

Post: #37

(12-04-2014 04:47 PM)HighSpeed_LowDrag Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:23 PM)RougeNoir Wrote:  1. Leaning in. In clubs you have to lean in or otherwise you can't spit your game since she won't hear you.

Why not have her lean in to hear you?

HSLD

If I'm over 6 ft and she's 5'1, you think I won't converse with her since I would have to "lean in." "You better stand up on a ladder if you want to talk to me, bitch, since I don't lean in, like the betas do!" Get real.

Post: #38

(12-04-2014 05:35 PM)RougeNoir Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:47 PM)HighSpeed_LowDrag Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 04:23 PM)RougeNoir Wrote:  1. Leaning in. In clubs you have to lean in or otherwise you can't spit your game since she won't hear you.

Why not have her lean in to hear you?

HSLD

If I'm over 6 ft and she's 5'1, you think I won't converse with her since I would have to "lean in." "You better stand up on a ladder if you want to talk to me, bitch, since I don't lean in, like the betas do!" Get real.

That's not my point at all. Exceptions can be reasonably made for extremes like that.

But you're attempting to refute my point with a contention that is 1) at the extremes of what could be expected in general (plenty of guys gaming girls the same height as them), and 2) not obviously related to your original point, which from my reading was about ambient volume, not height difference.

HSLD

Post: #39

Look at who neil and tyler are, both live very interesting lives. Neil writter for Rolling Stones and knows rock and movie stars, look at his look before and after pre game. Tyler owns a multi million dollar company, traveled the world, has alot of connections, both are very high value guys. While they may not be ideal physical wise theirs lives and socil value and their game which they have bern doing for over a decade trumps that.

Post: #40

(12-03-2014 02:36 PM)Dalaran1991 Wrote:  Then there's this asshole called Mark Manson. I once digged his stuff, then I found out he is just a hypocrite businessman who is more about selling his products to MEN AND WOMEN than actually giving a shit. He writes a lot of introspective thoughts that draw in a lot of purple pill guys, and his "vulnerability" thing sound very new-agey. Good luck running up front a girl in club displaying your vulnerability "hi I just wanna talk to you". Sure you don't need to be perfect, but as much as girls are concerned you better damn well be a good clown and they don't give a flying fuck about your vulnerable side. Hence all the "keeping frame" thread on here.

He also makes his products gender-neutral now. What the fuck? Of course, that means 2x customer base.

I cannot agree more. I read his book Models and beyond the basic filler of lifestyle improvement, his overall message is trash. Vulnerability as he describes it only acceptable in small doses and if she already thinks you're alpha. That book was hard to read because it is so pedantic but he is acting hooking up a couple foreign girls makes him an international playboy.

The myth that thirstiness kills your chances.

I don't mean continuing to pursue after she has completely disrespected you but you can't be too sensitive. I have had a few bangs this year from girls that I typically would have gave up on but just happened to first meet me at a shitty time. I don't disagree that girls should be making time for you as your game gets better but as you're starting out you got to be persistent, as long as you aren't catching oneitis.

Post: #41

Good thread

I hate the whole spam approaching thing . Especially the concept that talking to chicks you've just approached is by default always good social proof as any onlookers will assume you already know them. Even if you are obviously just hitting on them and getting shot down.

Bullshit

I have met guys from other forums, not this one, who shark round the bar hitting on everything that moves. Unless you are in a big dark multiple room club you can see it a mile off. I even had female friends tell me they were getting warned in the toilets by random girls they don't know to watch out for that guy(s). These girls hadn't even been hit on by them (yet) but they can see what they're at clear as day.

Fine doing as many approaches as you want, just I don't agree with the idea that it's impossible to overcook it and getting labelled by onlookers as a sleaze, weirdo or desperate. Some guys need to learn to dial it down when in smaller more chilled venues. Particularly if it's a venue you are going to be returning back to frequently

Post: #42

(12-04-2014 09:37 PM)Blunt Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 02:36 PM)Dalaran1991 Wrote:  Then there's this asshole called Mark Manson. I once digged his stuff, then I found out he is just a hypocrite businessman who is more about selling his products to MEN AND WOMEN than actually giving a shit. He writes a lot of introspective thoughts that draw in a lot of purple pill guys, and his "vulnerability" thing sound very new-agey. Good luck running up front a girl in club displaying your vulnerability "hi I just wanna talk to you". Sure you don't need to be perfect, but as much as girls are concerned you better damn well be a good clown and they don't give a flying fuck about your vulnerable side. Hence all the "keeping frame" thread on here.

He also makes his products gender-neutral now. What the fuck? Of course, that means 2x customer base.

I cannot agree more. I read his book Models and beyond the basic filler of lifestyle improvement, his overall message is trash. Vulnerability as he describes it only acceptable in small doses and if she already thinks you're alpha. That book was hard to read because it is so pedantic but he is acting hooking up a couple foreign girls makes him an international playboy.

I need to have that "vulnerability" (honestly showing emotion, etc.) stuff beaten out of me. It always fails.

Post: #43

Mostly just all the fucking weirdo PUAs, though I agree with a lot of the above posts as well

Post: #44

Since there are so many areas that we disagree with, which game basics do you actually AGREE with?

Post: #45

(12-04-2014 10:51 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  On the looks debate, it's game denialism, pure and simple.

If you believe a pasty, balding, relatively short, skinny fat, ginger guy like Tyler ever got girls, then looks can't matter THAT much. Same with Style.

I've had this debate before. Most of the gurus aren't classically good looking guys. They are generally average looking dudes, some of whom work out, but most of their success is because of their game.

If you don't believe these plain guys are fucking, then why believe anything else that they say?

I would like to disagree with this sentiment. It is quite common amongst 'PUAs' and I think it's fine to be a 'game denialist' in this respect.

I actually don't believe 'RSDTyler' ever got girls. I saw some of his videos a while back, and it was extremely difficult for me to believe he had ever had sex. Not just his looks, but everything about him. He even replied to one of my comments on his youtube video, and I've never heard a grown man talk like such a child.
But assuming he has had sex, I would say that given that he put such a large effort into cultivating 'verbal convincing' of girls that he was high status, that it ballooned into a well-known dating coaching company, he probably isn't a good model.

I think people like Chris from goodlookingloser offer a much better, generally-applicable model. Tyler can't hold a candle to Chris in terms of girls and proof, and all Chris does is cold-approach, have a casual chat whilst being physically forward, and then invite her home/to his car etc.

This debate has probably been done to death, but when a girl comes up to you cold, or meets you for an online-arranged date, and she is smiling and eager before you have even exchanged a word, there is no possible explanation other than "she is sexually attracted to the way you look, or some other information about your status discovered beforehand".

So my main gripe with 'Game/PUA concepts' is:

• The idea that 'sexually attractive' is something you 'do', rather than something you 'be', is ungrounded. At most, sexual attraction by 'doing' can come from 'display'. E.g. you subtly provide proof of attractive traits which she cannot see or doesn't know about.
• That you should spam approach. I went out to clubs with a guy like this a few times, and its completely counterproductive. The girls can feel your 'rushed' vibe. You can approach several girls in a night, but take your time.
• That you should focus on approaches above all else. No - you should focus on making yourself more attractive above all else, and approach a 'medium' amount.
• That you should spend any money to learn 'game'. All the tactics you need to know are here in this forum.
• That you should 'go for the makeout' before you are alone.
  

What I agree with:

• You should push, and go for the lay that night or first date.
• You should put enough effort into approaching or meeting girls, that you become comfortable doing so.
  

Post: #46

Pushing for the bang on the first date. There are quite a few cultures in which women expect to bang a good man on the 2nd or 3rd date. However, that being said, I still think you should push as far as you can take it on the first date, but you should not give up if she doesn't put out. Have some patience and go out with her two or three more times before nexting her.

Sometimes it seems like there is some contradiction between cat-string/making-a-woman-chase-you and being aggressive. If you play the game well, but never make a physical move on the woman, many times she will finally break and attack you, but it may take awhile. I once had a Nicaraguan woman physically attack me after I had hung out with her like four or five times without making a move. I knew it was killing her, but I was cool with it because I had another steady girlfriend. She finally just planted a kiss without any warning and I took it from there. Again, however, it was like the 4th or 5th date.

Post: #47

Phoenix, Chris from goodlooking loser is six foot plus, with lean muscle. So are you saying that if one is 5'8, chubby ginger with girly hands and average penis (5.45) inches, they should give up on sex because they don't meet the basic requirements?
I was clubbing in Toronto a few years back and I saw this jet black Kenyan guy with thick glasses and an ill fitting jacket move around with this gorgeous white lizard. This guy looked nothing like Chris. How did he pull this off?

Post: #48

@Moma. Shit I believe in

attraction is divided into attraction, comfort building and seduction
IOIs, IODs
last minute resistance
not buying girls drinks and yachts
disarming cockblocks
preselection
demonstrating high value
social proof
alpha fucks beta bucks
light peacocking, kino escalation
anti slut defence
shit tests, agree and amplify
evolutionary psychology etc etc
basically Mystery, Heartiste and Roosh.

Post: #49

(12-05-2014 10:50 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

(12-04-2014 10:51 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  On the looks debate, it's game denialism, pure and simple.

If you believe a pasty, balding, relatively short, skinny fat, ginger guy like Tyler ever got girls, then looks can't matter THAT much. Same with Style.

I've had this debate before. Most of the gurus aren't classically good looking guys. They are generally average looking dudes, some of whom work out, but most of their success is because of their game.

If you don't believe these plain guys are fucking, then why believe anything else that they say?

I would like to disagree with this sentiment. It is quite common amongst 'PUAs' and I think it's fine to be a 'game denialist' in this respect.

I actually don't believe 'RSDTyler' ever got girls. I saw some of his videos a while back, and it was extremely difficult for me to believe he had ever had sex. Not just his looks, but everything about him. He even replied to one of my comments on his youtube video, and I've never heard a grown man talk like such a child.
But assuming he has had sex, I would say that given that he put such a large effort into cultivating 'verbal convincing' of girls that he was high status, that it ballooned into a well-known dating coaching company, he probably isn't a good model.

I think people like Chris from goodlookingloser offer a much better, generally-applicable model. Tyler can't hold a candle to Chris in terms of girls and proof, and all Chris does is cold-approach, have a casual chat whilst being physically forward, and then invite her home/to his car etc.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I've already had this debate. Though many think my point is subtle and ill-supported, I feel that it is not.

WIA

Post: #50

(12-05-2014 11:48 AM)Moma Wrote:  Phoenix, Chris from goodlooking loser is six foot plus, with lean muscle. So are you saying that if one is 5'8, chubby ginger with girly hands and average penis (5.45) inches, they should give up on sex because they don't meet the basic requirements?
I was clubbing in Toronto a few years back and I saw this jet black Kenyan guy with thick glasses and an ill fitting jacket move around with this gorgeous white lizard. This guy looked nothing like Chris. How did he pull this off?

Nobody is saying an average or below average guy can never pull a decent chic. But can that Kenyan cat do it consistently? That's the key. We don't know what the backstory is in that scenario. She could've been a social circle girl he'd been chasing for awhile. He could've met her off seeking arrangement, or maybe they were just friends and he was a beta orbiter. I know a dark black dude in L.A. who use to roll with this hot blonde girl. He wasn't banging her, he was just an orbiter. She only liked him as a friend. But if you saw them out you'd probably assume that was his girl.