| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Sakata Gintoki
32 Posts
On May 11 2012 11:49 squattincassanova wrote: I raw dogged her and give her my DNA. Ever since then, shes been "liking" my Facebook posts trying to get my attention. If you're her Facebook friend then post us one of her pics. It doesn't have to be her profile pic and you can easily omit her name so that we don't go tracking her down. I'd be interested in seeing how hot she is. | ||
|
squattincassanova
United States650 Posts
On May 11 2012 11:58 Sakata Gintoki wrote: If you're her Facebook friend then post us one of her pics. It doesn't have to be her profile pic and you can easily omit her name so that we don't go tracking her down. I'd be interested in seeing how hot she is. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YlWum.jpg) On the right ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JdZmC.jpg) | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
Pretty sure most people wouldn't call it that if it was a guy cheating on his wife. | ||
|
Xiphos
Canada7507 Posts
On May 11 2012 12:24 sunprince wrote: Pretty sure most people wouldn't call it that if it was a guy cheating on his wife. Double standard for the win amirite?  | ||
|
Sakata Gintoki
32 Posts
Pretty hot - she looks better in the second pic. Looks like this pornstar... Actually I'll probably get warned if I post the link but go to xhamster.com and type in Ballet Dancers (J65) to the search. | ||
|
r.Evo
Germany14080 Posts
On May 11 2012 10:50 sunprince wrote: There's a world of difference between experimenting with practical applications of legit science, and experimenting with practical applications with pseudoscience that was debunked decades ago. To go back to the acupuncture example, serious athletes try to apply an understanding of exercise biology to improve their performance. Quack athletes try to apply an understanding of acupuncture, qi, or other bizarre pseudoscience to imrpove their performance. The former is a scientific approach and the other is not. Check out The Skeptic's Dictionary sometime. It has articles on NLP, acupuncture, and other bullshit, and reading it might help you develop some critical analysis skills when it comes to science. ... So "Pickup" is "practical application of legit science" but "reframing a situation" is part of "NLP" and therefor absolute bunkers? You just have issues with the label, that's all. I'm pretty sure if I would have said "the concepts of anchoring and reframing are well known psychological themes which imply that..." you wouldn't even have noticed it. You just saw a word you don't like and had to be like "OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG MUST TELL HOW WRONG THAT IS, I DONT CARE IF THE CONTENT IS RIGHT!!!1". Next time I answer someones question properly and in-depth feel free to actually try and rip apart my answer - not the label it's given. That might help develop you some skills when it comes to thinking outside your world of boxes and labels. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On May 11 2012 13:18 r.Evo wrote: So "Pickup" is "practical application of legit science" but "reframing a situation" is part of "NLP" and therefor absolute bunkers? I'm not sure why you're having such a hard time understanding this. Reframing might work, just like sticking needles in someone's skin might work, but neither work for the reasons that NLP and acupuncture think they do. Reframing comes from family systems therapy, which actually is considered legitimate science. Richard Bandler simply took the concept and twisted it to fit his theories of programming people. On May 11 2012 13:18 r.Evo wrote: I'm pretty sure if I would have said "the concepts of anchoring and reframing are well known psychological themes which imply that..." you wouldn't even have noticed it. I actually don't buy the concept of anchoring at all. The idea obviously has its roots in Pavlovian conditioning, but there's no evidence to show it works. Just anecdotally and off of personal intuition, I suspect that any effect it sometimes has should actutally be credited to kino (which actually is empirically proven to work). | ||
|
r.Evo
Germany14080 Posts
Since your only trust concepts or techniques which have been empirically proven to work in scientific studies there won't be much left when it comes to how males and females interact and how males can get an advantage in said "battle". | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On May 11 2012 14:15 r.Evo wrote: Good luck finding pickup material that has non-anecdotally evidence. Since your only trust concepts or techniques which have been empirically proven to work in scientific studies there won't be much left when it comes to how males and females interact and how males can get an advantage in said "battle". I don't think there's actually a problem with using material based on anecdotal evidence. The problem is when you rely on anecdotal evidence or pseudoscience as an authority for your game. It's fine to practice, learn from anecdotal material, and draw on hard science as an authority. Basing your entire approach to pickup on a pseudoscience such as NLP (i.e. Ross Jeffries's Speed Seduction and its followers), on the oher hand, seems like a poor idea. If NLP was new and its material was untested, it would make sense to try it out; but now that its already been discredited then why would you learn it? To use a Starcraft analogy, in the early days of SC2, it would be fine to copy the strategies of Player X who's having some success. But once people started developing build calculators, crunching the numbers, and it became obvious that Player X had no idea what he's talknig about, and that only some of his builds work, then why would you want to continue learning from him? | ||
|
Geosensation
United States256 Posts
On May 11 2012 06:41 squattincassanova wrote: Yeah, I'm going to Hell..... Funny thing was, I didn't even realize it till 30 minutes later after we were making out. I was shocked when I found out but she was giving way too much IOIs. I just kept going I guess. She kept complaining how her husband is never there and is over seas. If it wasn't for me, it would have been some other guy. I have no faith in women anymore. So many cheat. Maybe your opinion of women is so low because the ones you get with are whores and thus the willingness to get with a stranger they just met... Faithful women who aren't cheaters probably don't out looking to get slammed by random dudes. | ||
|
squattincassanova
United States650 Posts
On May 11 2012 14:57 Geosensation wrote: Maybe your opinion of women is so low because the ones you get with are whores and thus the willingness to get with a stranger they just met... Faithful women who aren't cheaters probably don't out looking to get slammed by random dudes. Why do I get the feeling that you are judgmental and that you don't really have any women in your life? | ||
|
squattincassanova
United States650 Posts
| ||
|
bonedriven
258 Posts
 " What's the best response? | ||
|
Sakata Gintoki
32 Posts
On May 11 2012 17:47 bonedriven wrote: When a pretty girl says to you:" I'm not pretty. " What's the best response?Whenever you detect a shit test, the answer is always to tease. By Roissy: An example of a subtle neg to tease: “Do these jeans make my ass look fat?” “uhh.. yup.” – then smirk. She’ll playfully slap or shove you, tell you to shut up, and forget all about her ass. Teasing gently can be a very difficult thing for men to understand. You see, when you first start game you’re too big of a pussy to talk to women. Most men will try it a few times, get shut down, and then drop the game “bullshit” to become even more ardent betas. The few that keep trying beyond the failures will reach the ‘honey peak’ where they’re masters in their shiny new world, number and fuck closing like a boss. In an attempt to get even better, they push further into what they think is ‘alpha’ and end up being assholes. Eventually you settle back into the Money Spot and all is well again. The same thing will happen when you try to tease. You’ll find you’re good at it, get over-confident in yourself, and shift from teasing to just plain insulting (insults are only to be used on fat chicks). Be careful and watch for that! If you find you’re starting to drift from the happy medium into asshole territory, go back to a canned list of teases that you know work (You should be writing down the ones that work as you go for future reference). Pro-Tip: As far as canned material is concerned, it may not be new to you but it certainly is to her! | ||
|
squattincassanova
United States650 Posts
On May 11 2012 17:47 bonedriven wrote: When a pretty girl says to you:" I'm not pretty. " What's the best response?Tell her being not confident is really unattractive, then move on to the next girl | ||
|
squattincassanova
United States650 Posts
On May 11 2012 18:09 Sakata Gintoki wrote: Whenever you detect a shit test, the answer is always to tease. By Roissy: An example of a subtle neg to tease: “Do these jeans make my ass look fat?” “uhh.. yup.” – then smirk. She’ll playfully slap or shove you, tell you to shut up, and forget all about her ass. Dear god, don't say "YUP" better answer: "Define fat" a much better tease. Walking on the fine line bro! | ||
|
r.Evo
Germany14080 Posts
On May 11 2012 14:30 sunprince wrote: I don't think there's actually a problem with using material based on anecdotal evidence. The problem is when you rely on anecdotal evidence or pseudoscience as an authority for your game. It's fine to practice, learn from anecdotal material, and draw on hard science as an authority. Basing your entire approach to pickup on a pseudoscience such as NLP (i.e. Ross Jeffries's Speed Seduction and its followers), on the oher hand, seems like a poor idea. If NLP was new and its material was untested, it would make sense to try it out; but now that its already been discredited then why would you learn it? To use a Starcraft analogy, in the early days of SC2, it would be fine to copy the strategies of Player X who's having some success. But once people started developing build calculators, crunching the numbers, and it became obvious that Player X had no idea what he's talknig about, and that only some of his builds work, then why would you want to continue learning from him? I'd still try and learn the builds which DO work from him. I've never recommended that someone should "base his entire approach to pickup on NLP". I'm saying that it's a great toolkit which can improve your game and other things when you apply it right. Sorry that I'm not into dumb black/white concepts. Those work neither in "normal" life nor in pickup. Some things are white, some are black - most of the possible solutions to a problem in those areas are pretty damn grey. PS: The "define fat" line one post above is great. Do ittt, you won't regret it. =P | ||
|
FractalsOnFire
Australia1756 Posts
On May 11 2012 16:08 squattincassanova wrote: Why do I get the feeling that you are judgmental and that you don't really have any women in your life? The good 'ole Madonna/Whore complex | ||
|
Geosensation
United States256 Posts
On May 11 2012 16:08 squattincassanova wrote: Why do I get the feeling that you are judgmental and that you don't really have any women in your life? I'm in an almost 5 year relationship, and yes I'm judgmental. People come and talk shit in this thread because it always seems to pop up and I generally like to check out threads that are up on general. Someone earlier commented how you are the one bumping it every day so it seems you are bringing this on yourself, so you shouldn't really complain. You know what's really awesome? Not having to wear a condom and not worrying about getting an STD. | ||
|
squattincassanova
United States650 Posts
On May 11 2012 19:13 Geosensation wrote: You know what's really awesome? Not having to wear a condom and not worrying about getting an STD. You better hope your gf doesn't bump into me haha! I don't wear condom some times. Its called get the girl really into you and then have them do an STD test. Duh! | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
OSC
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
WardiTV Invitational
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
|
|
|
EPT
