|
On February 21 2012 19:51 squattincassanova wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 18:42 B.I.G. wrote:
I think this crap might be useful to learn some basic skills about how to present yourself and how to start talking to a girl while keeping the awkwardness level as low as possible. But actually making a sport out of getting as much women as possible as some of these guys are doing is just really fucking sad. Just about every guy would if they could. Too bad they don't have the skills or the balls to learn it.
So, if they could, most guys would "make sport out of getting as much women as possible?" Lol, just lol. Interacting with girls isn't like winning a game of baseball or Starcraft. The way you put it sounds like you are dehumanizing them, and turning them into objects that you can practice on or conquer.
|
From an evolutionary standpoint there is NOTHING more important than getting laid; more important in today's society is having the option. You can only choose from the women who are attracted to you. Attraction doesn't just happen. It's a science. Whether you prefer a long term relationship, multiple long term relationships or one night stands game is a method of obtaining what you want. I think the condemnation from many in this thread is barely concealed jealously. Why else would you care what two people you've never met do?
|
But PUAs - responsible PUAs - don't use people. They create experiences. The women they have one night stands with aren't under any romantic delusions. You have to understand that while men are almost universally romantics women are ruthlessly pragmatic about relationships.
|
On February 22 2012 03:15 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 03:09 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
From an evolutionary standpoint there is NOTHING more important than getting laid; more important in today's society is having the option. You can only choose from the women who are attracted to you. Attraction doesn't just happen. It's a science. Whether you prefer a long term relationship, multiple long term relationships or one night stands game is a method of obtaining what you want. I think the condemnation from many in this thread is barely concealed jealously. Why else would you care what two people you've never met do? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needsScience disagrees with you.
Well survival and reproduction. Survival kinda comes first.... but I think TheGeneralTheoryOf probably implied that was a given  . If I am about to die, starving, and haven't drank water in 5 days and hallucinating in a desert, you are probably right that I am not thinking about getting laid.
|
Calgary26001 Posts
On February 22 2012 03:09 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
From an evolutionary standpoint there is NOTHING more important than getting laid; more important in today's society is having the option. You can only choose from the women who are attracted to you. Attraction doesn't just happen. It's a science. Whether you prefer a long term relationship, multiple long term relationships or one night stands game is a method of obtaining what you want. I think the condemnation from many in this thread is barely concealed jealously. Why else would you care what two people you've never met do?
This is a pretty flimsy argument. The general population being healthy is based on much more than birth rate. And the thing you would care about would be birth rate, not sex rate. PUAs are not subscribing to that - trying to impregnate as many girls as possible - are they? Then why even raise the topic?
|
Calgary26001 Posts
On February 22 2012 03:18 squattincassanova wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 03:15 Chill wrote:On February 22 2012 03:09 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
From an evolutionary standpoint there is NOTHING more important than getting laid; more important in today's society is having the option. You can only choose from the women who are attracted to you. Attraction doesn't just happen. It's a science. Whether you prefer a long term relationship, multiple long term relationships or one night stands game is a method of obtaining what you want. I think the condemnation from many in this thread is barely concealed jealously. Why else would you care what two people you've never met do? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needsScience disagrees with you. Well survival and reproduction. Survival kinda comes first.... but I think TheGeneralTheoryOf probably implied that was a given . If I am about to die, starving, and haven't drank water in 5 days and hallucinating in a desert, you are probably right that I am not thinking about getting laid.
It's just such a stupid comment.
|
That's really where it's at with women. Survival and replication. It's evolutionary. Back in tribal days the male who could best offer a woman a chance to survive and reproduce (and obv. from a biology perspective those who do not reproduce are irrelevant) was the tribal Chieftan or his friends. women are attracted to 'bad' or 'dangerous' men in part because they believe (consciously or unconsciously) that they can handle difficult situations. This is also why women are attracted to strong and dominant males.
|
On February 22 2012 03:20 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 03:09 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
From an evolutionary standpoint there is NOTHING more important than getting laid; more important in today's society is having the option. You can only choose from the women who are attracted to you. Attraction doesn't just happen. It's a science. Whether you prefer a long term relationship, multiple long term relationships or one night stands game is a method of obtaining what you want. I think the condemnation from many in this thread is barely concealed jealously. Why else would you care what two people you've never met do? This is a pretty flimsy argument. The general population being healthy is based on much more than birth rate. And the thing you would care about would be birth rate, not sex rate. PUAs are not subscribing to that - trying to impregnate as many girls as possible - are they? Then why even raise the topic?
huh?
|
Calgary26001 Posts
On February 22 2012 03:22 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
That's really where it's at with women. Survival and replication. It's evolutionary. Back in tribal days the male who could best offer a woman a chance to survive and reproduce (and obv. from a biology perspective those who do not reproduce are irrelevant) was the tribal Chieftan or his friends. women are attracted to 'bad' or 'dangerous' men in part because they believe (consciously or unconsciously) that they can handle difficult situations. This is also why women are attracted to strong and dominant males.
Do you have anything to back this pseudoscience?
|
On February 22 2012 02:17 squattincassanova wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 01:53 Chill wrote:On February 21 2012 19:51 squattincassanova wrote:
Just about every guy would if they could. Too bad they don't have the skills or the balls to learn it. On February 21 2012 07:05 squattincassanova wrote:
The matter of fact is, life is not fucking black and white and not every thing is this way or that way. ? O_o A lot of men use this "I have morals" as an ego defense mechanism. You all too often hear guys say "That is rude, I would never do that to a woman! She deserves better!". This is typical white knight behavior. You see it on the internet ALL the time.
This is pretty un-insightful. It's quite 'nerd-turned-pickup-artist', which is of course what you are. Of course there are white knights (as chill said) all around the internet, that are saying things like that because they feel threatened and are socially weak. But there are also guys who could easily get mad pussy but go after different things in life. You are quite blinkered if you think the only and most important thing for all guys is women and fucking.
|
|
|
Calgary26001 Posts
You see a lot of condemnation. I see it as reactionary. I think this game is great and people should do whatever they want. They should use strategy to have the best efficiency possible. But don't try to make the argument that your way of living is better than the alternatives and don't use psyedoscience referencing how we lived before society formed to justify what you're doing.
I wish people used this thread to understand the process and strategy better. I wish they didn't use it to justify or condemn the actions.
That's it 
|
The underlying reason and urge for sex is on the basis of reproduction. That's where the primal urge comes from. But in today's society, we have higher consciousness thought and social conditioning that prevents us from doing a lot of things that we actually urge to do. We know that if we have a kid... we will have to pay child support.
Ever read Lord of the Flies? When anarchy arises, people revert back to their primal levels.
Hey, I'm not pushing PUA on anybody. The more guys bad with women out there, the more awesome I stand out. All cool with me. Every girl I meet online tell me how many creeper assholes they meet online and all the lame messages they get and how I am so much different.
|
Calgary26001 Posts
|
Calgary26001 Posts
On February 22 2012 03:32 squattincassanova wrote:
Ever read Lord of the Flies? When anarchy arises, people revert back to their primal levels.
When's the last time you experienced anarchy? How is this relevent is any way?
Hey, I'm not pushing PUA on anybody. The more guys bad with women out there, the more awesome I stand out. All cool with me. Every girl I meet online tell me how many creeper assholes they meet online and all the lame messages they get and how I am so much different.
You are, however, belittling anyone who can't do it, is unable to try, or chooses to live otherwise. That shouldn't be part of this thread.
|
It's not just online that men creep out women. Bars are just as bad. Virtually every guy there is either going to be A) too scared to approach B) too self defeated to even consider they could have the girl C) so drunk that when they do approach they came across as a drunken buffoon or D) immediately supplicating themselves by telling the girl how hot she is and if she wants a drink. Men don't understand women and that's reason why you have so much anger and frustration by AFCs towards women.
|
I also had another thought occur to me. I really think that the amount of time spent of PUA for some people can be excessive, to the detriment of other skills. You might actually turn out to be quite a boring person if you have spent so long learning your game. You might actually end up 3 years down the line in a relationship (if the girl isn't completely braindead) being quite boring to your girlfriend, seeing as your ability as a PUA isn't even remotely interesting to her and is irrelevant beyond 'getting her'. That is of course if you ever want to be in a committed relationship. And if you don't want that, then I would definitely not say you are a typical guy, I would just say you are certain type of guy.
|
On February 22 2012 03:29 sc4k wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 02:17 squattincassanova wrote:On February 22 2012 01:53 Chill wrote:On February 21 2012 19:51 squattincassanova wrote:
Just about every guy would if they could. Too bad they don't have the skills or the balls to learn it. On February 21 2012 07:05 squattincassanova wrote:
The matter of fact is, life is not fucking black and white and not every thing is this way or that way. ? O_o A lot of men use this "I have morals" as an ego defense mechanism. You all too often hear guys say "That is rude, I would never do that to a woman! She deserves better!". This is typical white knight behavior. You see it on the internet ALL the time. This is pretty un-insightful. It's quite 'nerd-turned-pickup-artist', which is of course what you are. Of course there are white knights (as chill said) all around the internet, that are saying things like that because they feel threatened and are socially weak. But there are also guys who could easily get mad pussy but go after different things in life. You are quite blinkered if you think the only and most important thing for all guys is women and fucking.
Easy brah. Its one phase of my life. Once I learn it, I move on to other things, like getting married, building a family, building wealth, and then climb Maslow's hierarchy.
Obviously I'm not going to be doing pick up till I'm 50. Its a 2-3 year phase in my life where I want to get it handled while I'm still young, have the energy to pull it off. Plus its easier when you're younger, but not too young, because its easier to get rid of bad habits. Try removing a limiting belief from a 70 year old vs a 10 year old. The 10 year old is easier to change.
|
On February 22 2012 03:38 sc4k wrote:
I also had another thought occur to me. I really think that the amount of time spent of PUA for some people can be excessive, to the detriment of other skills. You might actually turn out to be quite a boring person if you have spent so long learning your game. You might actually end up 3 years down the line in a relationship (if the girl isn't completely braindead) being quite boring to your girlfriend, seeing as your ability as a PUA isn't even remotely interesting to her and is irrelevant beyond 'getting her'. That is of course if you ever want to be in a committed relationship. And if you don't want that, then I would definitely not say you are a typical guy, I would just say you are certain type of guy.
Everything requires its own skill set. Learning to pick up a girl is different than learning to keep a girl. Part of pick up, depending on what your goals are... include relationship management.
Its just like working a muscle, if I do pull ups every day, I'm not going to have bigger legs. Same thing. Whatever specific thing you want to get good at, you have to work on it.
|
Yeah I'm not trying to single you out, you do have an absolutely marvellous body (which I wish I had) and I'm sure you're an interesting guy. I'm not trying to denigrate PUA rather just put it in perspective. And it seems like you understand the perspective because you have accepted their are other phases in life and different 'modes' people are in. It's just hard to reconcile that with your earlier statement that men who don't engage in this behaviour are somehow afraid or incapable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
