|
We are extremely close to shutting down this thread for the same reasons the PUA thread was shut down. While some of the time this thread contains actual discussion with people asking help and people giving nice advice, it often gets derailed by rubbish that should not be here. The moderation team will be trying to steer this thread in a different direction from now on.
Posts of the following nature are banned:
1) ANYTHING regarding PUA. If your post contains the words 'alpha' or 'beta' or anything of that sort please don't hit post.
2) Stupid brags. You can tell us about your nice success stories with someone, but posts such as 'lol 50 Tinder matches' are a no-no.
3) Any misogynistic bullshit, including discussion about rape culture.
4) One night stands and random sex. These are basically brags that invariably devolve into gender role discussions and misogynistic comments.
Last chance, guys. This thread is for dating advice and sharing dating stories. While gender roles, sociocultural norms, and our biological imperative to reproduce are all tangentially related, these subjects are not the main purpose of the thread. Please AVOID these discussions. If you want to discuss them at length, go to PMs or start a blog. If you disagree with someone's ideologies, state that you disagree with them and why they won't work from a dating standpoint and move on. We will not tolerate any lengthy derailments that aren't directly about dating. |
On June 06 2013 05:30 Slardar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:16 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 00:03 Slardar wrote:
My dating luck has been akin to that StarCraft priorities picture 2 pages back. Yeah, quite bad. I'm too particular about ladies, not to say my standards are high or anything... you don't get great odds with 1 or 2 dice. There are and have been plenty of men for whom women is a relatively low priority, yet manage to do well with women. The most successful men throughout history have never been Casanovas (e.g. PUAs); rather, they have been conquerors/kings/leaders (e.g. men with power/wealth). Blaming your low dating success on not prioritizing dating is just an excuse to feel better about the real problem: you have low sexual marketplace value. If you were a high-value man, it wouldn't matter if you didn't prioritize women; they would flock to you of their own accord. So if you want better dating "luck", go increase your value. Work on your education and career, hit the gym and improve your body, develop your social skills, etc. Although that is good general advice, I'm not deprioritizing dating. I'm just being very picky with the girls I like and they just so happen to not be interested.
I see, thanks for clarifying.
In that case, it sounds like you're aiming for girls who are higher value than you are, which leaves you with three options: increase your own value, aim lower, or accept that your dating "luck" will remain rather poor.
|
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor.
Assert yourself and don't look like a slob. Helps if you actually have stuff in common instead of the contrived garbage you hear at clubs/bars. Probably the worst place to pick up women unless you just want to fuck.
|
On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor.
So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc.
|
On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor.
Assert yourself and don't look like a slob. Helps if you actually have stuff in common instead of the contrived garbage you hear at clubs/bars. Probably the worst place to pick up women unless you just want to fuck.
Most PUA's just wana fuck. That's kinda the point and that's why clubs and bars are fucking awesome! Although you still don't need to be in a club or bar to get a fun night with a beautiful woman 
|
On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor.
Assert yourself and don't look like a slob. Helps if you actually have stuff in common instead of the contrived garbage you hear at clubs/bars. Probably the worst place to pick up women unless you just want to fuck.
Couldn't agree more. Half the people here act like PUA artists the other half actual give good advice about not being a douchebag or acting like someone you're not.
|
On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc.
The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all.
Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be.
|
On June 04 2013 17:24 gedatsu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2013 22:11 TOCHMY wrote:
I've had a full beard for like 2 years, and I quite enjoy having it. It suits me I feel.
What does one do when the girl wants me to shave and pulls the "do it for me" card?
I don't wanna shave T_T This one is easy. Picture the following: your girlfriend starts wearing a stupid-ass haircut ( obligatory), stops working out and gets chubby, or no longer puts on interesting underwear. You ask her to change it, but she says this new thing suits her. Would you want her to change it anyway? Then do what she asks now. Otherwise, enjoy those grandma panties.
If something bothered me then I would mention the bother. Then, it's entirely up to them whether or not they choose to modify their behavior. If someone keeps doing things that bother you that you've mentioned have bothered you;.. well, the writing's on the wall.
On June 05 2013 00:59 gedatsu wrote:
Addendum to my last post: if there's another reason for your beard then that obviously changes things. Maybe you have some sentimental attachment to it, or you know for a fact that you look really stupid without it. But just "I like it" is not good enough if you want to have any say on what your partner looks like.
We have a say in what people look like by virtue of the fact we allow them to be in our lives.
----
I have long hair. If someone has a problem with my hair then I'll consider their position. If it's too much of a problem for them, and I've decided I'm not willing to change, the connection will dissipate naturally. No hard feelings; horses for courses.
I've found that I much prefer to spend my time crafting a life of my choosing, and allowing people into it that match me, rather than chasing external objective measures of "value" in hopes of finding what I think I want or need.
There's a large number of vastly diverse humans on this planet, and in the future could be many many more. Potential high-quality connections are as abundant as sacrificed expressions of who we are. The hard part is figuring out who the hell "you" is. I've just turned 26 and I'm only scratching the surface.
|
On June 06 2013 14:13 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc. The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all. Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be.
You're demonstrating a misunderstanding of basic economics.
Mainstream neoclassical economics considers "value" to be the price something would bring in an open and competitive market. The fact that different buyers might be willing to pay different amounts doesn't change the fact that value is an objective measurement of what something would end up selling for if presented to all of those buyers.
Sexual marketplace value is similarly an objective measurement. Thought it might be difficult or impossible to measure as precisely as, say, the value of a corporate share, you can nevertheless estimate that value, and determine what might increase or decrease that value.
|
On June 06 2013 19:06 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 14:13 Ghostcom wrote:On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc. The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all. Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be. You're demonstrating a misunderstanding of basic economics. Mainstream neoclassical economics considers "value" to be the price something would bring in an open and competitive market. The fact that different buyers might be willing to pay different amounts doesn't change the fact that value is an objective measurement of what something would end up selling for if presented to all of those buyers. Sexual marketplace value is similarly an objective measurement. Thought it might be difficult or impossible to measure as precisely as, say, the value of a corporate share, you can nevertheless estimate that value, and determine what might increase or decrease that value.
In my experience your "value" is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe shes "higher value", so will she. Having muscles and money definitely helps, but in the end simply believing you're good enough for her will make a bigger difference.
Improving yourself and your life helps with this. It's hard to convince yourself you should be dating supermodels if you have a beer gut and live in your parents basement, even if you are in high masters :D
|
On June 06 2013 14:13 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc. The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all. Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be.
I think there are a few problems with it. It's inaccurate since it's an estimate, it's subjective since everyone is attracted to different types and it's shallow since it becomes less relevant the more you get to know someone. And I suspect that using concepts from economics to model human behavior isn't so simple as assigning values to humans, which I personally find icky and dehumanizing in this context - after all you don't see PUA brag about "I met a wonderful girl last night", but rather it's "I met a HB10 last night after superb negging and kino" which immediately makes me wonder how the girl would enjoy being described like this.
|
On June 06 2013 05:30 Slardar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:16 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 00:03 Slardar wrote:
My dating luck has been akin to that StarCraft priorities picture 2 pages back. Yeah, quite bad. I'm too particular about ladies, not to say my standards are high or anything... you don't get great odds with 1 or 2 dice. There are and have been plenty of men for whom women is a relatively low priority, yet manage to do well with women. The most successful men throughout history have never been Casanovas (e.g. PUAs); rather, they have been conquerors/kings/leaders (e.g. men with power/wealth). Blaming your low dating success on not prioritizing dating is just an excuse to feel better about the real problem: you have low sexual marketplace value. If you were a high-value man, it wouldn't matter if you didn't prioritize women; they would flock to you of their own accord. So if you want better dating "luck", go increase your value. Work on your education and career, hit the gym and improve your body, develop your social skills, etc. Although that is good general advice, I'm not deprioritizing dating. I'm just being very picky with the girls I like and they just so happen to not be interested.
I feel you! I date like one girl a year because I want girls to completely blow me away. It´s not enough if they´re pretty they have to get stuck in my head. On the other this is probably only a bad excuse for not talking to more girls. Anyway, it is a stupid habbit because everytime it does not work out - which is pretty often, like you know - I feel bad. Plus I´m missing out on potentially great girls. Or their friends...
Well some weeks ago I swore to myself, to change that.
|
On June 06 2013 19:19 Killscreen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 19:06 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 14:13 Ghostcom wrote:On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc. The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all. Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be. You're demonstrating a misunderstanding of basic economics. Mainstream neoclassical economics considers "value" to be the price something would bring in an open and competitive market. The fact that different buyers might be willing to pay different amounts doesn't change the fact that value is an objective measurement of what something would end up selling for if presented to all of those buyers. Sexual marketplace value is similarly an objective measurement. Thought it might be difficult or impossible to measure as precisely as, say, the value of a corporate share, you can nevertheless estimate that value, and determine what might increase or decrease that value. In my experience your "value" is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe shes "higher value", so will she. Having muscles and money definitely helps, but in the end simply believing you're good enough for her will make a bigger difference.
"Your StarCraft 'skill' is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe your opponent is 'higher skill', so will he. Having APM and game sense definitely help, but in the end simply believing you're good enough to beat him will make a bigger difference."
Can you spot the error in that line of reasoning?
|
On June 06 2013 20:24 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 19:19 Killscreen wrote:On June 06 2013 19:06 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 14:13 Ghostcom wrote:On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc. The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all. Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be. You're demonstrating a misunderstanding of basic economics. Mainstream neoclassical economics considers "value" to be the price something would bring in an open and competitive market. The fact that different buyers might be willing to pay different amounts doesn't change the fact that value is an objective measurement of what something would end up selling for if presented to all of those buyers. Sexual marketplace value is similarly an objective measurement. Thought it might be difficult or impossible to measure as precisely as, say, the value of a corporate share, you can nevertheless estimate that value, and determine what might increase or decrease that value. In my experience your "value" is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe shes "higher value", so will she. Having muscles and money definitely helps, but in the end simply believing you're good enough for her will make a bigger difference. "Your StarCraft 'skill' is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe your opponent is 'higher skill', so will he. Having APM and game sense definitely help, but in the end simply believing you're good enough to beat him will make a bigger difference." Can you spot the error in that line of reasoning?
Yes, you are comparing something tangible and quantifiable to something that isnt.
|
On June 06 2013 19:48 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 14:13 Ghostcom wrote:On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc. The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all. Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be. I think there are a few problems with it. It's inaccurate since it's an estimate, it's subjective since everyone is attracted to different types and it's shallow since it becomes less relevant the more you get to know someone.
As I've already explained, the fact that people are attracted to different types has no bearing on your value, just as people being willing to pay different amounts for different cars has no bearing on the value of a car.
On June 06 2013 19:48 Grumbels wrote:
And I suspect that using concepts from economics to model human behavior isn't so simple as assigning values to humans, which I personally find icky and dehumanizing in this context
All of economics models human behavior. It's just typically concerned with human financial behavior rather than human sexual behavior. The fact that you find it "icky" and "dehumanizing" simply means you don't like it, not that you have a logical argument for why this is correct or incorrect.
On June 06 2013 19:48 Grumbels wrote: - after all you don't see PUA brag about "I met a wonderful girl last night", but rather it's "I met a HB10 last night after superb negging and kino" which immediately makes me wonder how the girl would enjoy being described like this.
You should read some actual field reports instead of making stuff up. I don't agree with PUAs on a number of key issues, but this is a bit of a mischaracterization.
Also, who cares "how the girl would enjoy being described"? You attribute far too much importance to the theoretical feelings of other people, feelings that have no bearing on the issue.
|
On June 06 2013 20:30 Killscreen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 20:24 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 19:19 Killscreen wrote:On June 06 2013 19:06 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 14:13 Ghostcom wrote:On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc. The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all. Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be. You're demonstrating a misunderstanding of basic economics. Mainstream neoclassical economics considers "value" to be the price something would bring in an open and competitive market. The fact that different buyers might be willing to pay different amounts doesn't change the fact that value is an objective measurement of what something would end up selling for if presented to all of those buyers. Sexual marketplace value is similarly an objective measurement. Thought it might be difficult or impossible to measure as precisely as, say, the value of a corporate share, you can nevertheless estimate that value, and determine what might increase or decrease that value. In my experience your "value" is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe shes "higher value", so will she. Having muscles and money definitely helps, but in the end simply believing you're good enough for her will make a bigger difference. "Your StarCraft 'skill' is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe your opponent is 'higher skill', so will he. Having APM and game sense definitely help, but in the end simply believing you're good enough to beat him will make a bigger difference." Can you spot the error in that line of reasoning? Yes, you are comparing something tangible and quantifiable to something that isnt.
Sexual marketplace value is just as tangible and quantifiable as StarCraft skill.
Incidentally, the point I was making is that your perception of your value cannot change aspects of your value such as your financial status, physical stature, or social status. Sure, confidence helps, but simply believing you're good enough for a supermodel will not change the fact that she will not date an unemployed basement dweller with any amount of confidence. On top of that, too much confidence looks absolutely stupid if there is nothing to back it up.
|
On June 06 2013 20:30 sunprince wrote:
Also, who cares "how the girl would enjoy being described"? You attribute far too much importance to the theoretical feelings of other people, feelings that have no bearing on the issue.
Would you share these descriptions with girls you meet? If not, why not?
|
On June 06 2013 20:39 Mstring wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 20:30 sunprince wrote:
Also, who cares "how the girl would enjoy being described"? You attribute far too much importance to the theoretical feelings of other people, feelings that have no bearing on the issue. Would you share these descriptions with girls you meet? If not, why not?
I'm not a PUA, so I don't communicate using silly jargon like that. On top of that, Grumbels's "description" incorrectly portrays how PUAs actually describe girls. Check out some actual examples here, here, and here.
However, your point is still irrelevant. I might describe a coworker to others as incompetent, without sharing this description with said coworker; would you take issue with this? Since the answer is probably not, I can only assume that the special consideration demanded for girls is a matter of putting them on a pedestal instead of treating them like human beings.
|
On June 06 2013 20:42 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 20:39 Mstring wrote:On June 06 2013 20:30 sunprince wrote:
Also, who cares "how the girl would enjoy being described"? You attribute far too much importance to the theoretical feelings of other people, feelings that have no bearing on the issue. Would you share these descriptions with girls you meet? If not, why not? I'm not a PUA, so I don't communicate using silly jargon like that. However, your point is still irrelevant. I might describe a coworker to others as incompetent, without sharing this description with said coworker; would you take issue with this? Since the answer is probably not, I can only assume that the special consideration demanded for girls is a matter of putting them on a pedestal instead of treating them like human beings.
I don't recall trying to make a point, could you quote it?
I'll ask a different question given this new information: Would you talk to girls you meet about what you post about in this thread or even show them your forum posts? Would you tell them about what you are doing to increase your "value" in the "sexual marketplace"? If not, why not?
Regarding your coworker example: I don't like to say (or even think) things about people that I wouldn't say to their face. You're projecting all that stuff about pedestals.
|
On June 06 2013 20:45 Mstring wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 20:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 20:39 Mstring wrote:On June 06 2013 20:30 sunprince wrote:
Also, who cares "how the girl would enjoy being described"? You attribute far too much importance to the theoretical feelings of other people, feelings that have no bearing on the issue. Would you share these descriptions with girls you meet? If not, why not? I'm not a PUA, so I don't communicate using silly jargon like that. However, your point is still irrelevant. I don't recall trying to make a point, could you quote it?
I'm referring to the implied point behind your question. Don't be deliberately obtuse, it's not conducive to an effective discussion.
On June 06 2013 20:45 Mstring wrote:
I'll ask a different question given this new information: Would you talk to girls you meet about what you post about in this thread or even show them your forum posts? Would you tell them about what you are doing to increase your "value" in the "sexual marketplace"? If not, why not?
You failed to address my point on irrelevance. Again, why does it matter whether or not I would show them?
|
On June 06 2013 20:35 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 20:30 Killscreen wrote:On June 06 2013 20:24 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 19:19 Killscreen wrote:On June 06 2013 19:06 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 14:13 Ghostcom wrote:On June 06 2013 13:42 sunprince wrote:On June 06 2013 13:38 VayneAuthority wrote:
some people read way too much of those pick up artist books lol, all this talk about value has me rolling on the floor. So in other words, you're resorting to fallacy because you don't actually have any logical argument to make, nevermind the fact that field of economics has a well-established history of studying dating in terms of value, supply/demand, etc. The field of economics is simply just such a great place to look for validation of theories, being such an exact science and all. Whilst there is definitely something to the question of value, it is really not as a objective measurement as a lot of PUAs try to make it out to be. You're demonstrating a misunderstanding of basic economics. Mainstream neoclassical economics considers "value" to be the price something would bring in an open and competitive market. The fact that different buyers might be willing to pay different amounts doesn't change the fact that value is an objective measurement of what something would end up selling for if presented to all of those buyers. Sexual marketplace value is similarly an objective measurement. Thought it might be difficult or impossible to measure as precisely as, say, the value of a corporate share, you can nevertheless estimate that value, and determine what might increase or decrease that value. In my experience your "value" is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe shes "higher value", so will she. Having muscles and money definitely helps, but in the end simply believing you're good enough for her will make a bigger difference. "Your StarCraft 'skill' is precisely what you perceive it to be. If you subconsciously believe your opponent is 'higher skill', so will he. Having APM and game sense definitely help, but in the end simply believing you're good enough to beat him will make a bigger difference." Can you spot the error in that line of reasoning? Yes, you are comparing something tangible and quantifiable to something that isnt. Sexual marketplace value is just as tangible and quantifiable as StarCraft skill.
Im not sure how you define "sexual marketplace value", but Im talking about social value, roughly what we call popularity, being considered cool, desireable etc, and that is highly contextual. A person can have really high value in some situations and really low value in others. It's entirely contextual and therefore definitely not as tangible and quantifiable as sc2 skill
Incidentally, the point I was making is that your perception of your value cannot change aspects of your value such as your financial status, physical stature, or social status. Sure, confidence helps, but simply believing you're good enough for a supermodel will not change the fact that she will not date an unemployed basement dweller with any amount of confidence. On top of that, too much confidence looks absolutely stupid if there is nothing to back it up.
You're overestimating the importance of these superficial values. Social status is so much more important than money and looks. Thing is, if you behave as a high status individual ( not as someone faking it ) you will be perceived as one, and thus becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
I know plenty of guys who by your standards are low value individuals and they do just fine with women. I also know guys with good jobs who are fit and could barely get laid in a womens prison with a bunch of pardons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
