I was just wondering, are all pickup techniques condemned to a lifetime of shame and prohibition?
On one hand, there are some old pickup concepts that are definitively wrong. Things like:
Shit tests
DHV paranoia
Fake alpha males
Etc, etc, etc
But on the other hand, there are some other commonly used psychological principles that, conceived the right way, can be more beneficial than when ignored.
Things such as
Confidence and passion can attract a girl
Qualification can make the girl invest on you and solidify the attraction
Touching a girl (kino) helps to make her see you as a potential sexual partner
And many others
So, where is the line? How do you keep all the good stuff and get rid of the bad one?
(08-11-2012 01:17 AM)mikemintz Wrote: [ -> ]I was just wondering, are all pickup techniques condemned to a lifetime of shame and prohibition?
On one hand, there are some old pickup concepts that are definitively wrong. Things like:
Shit tests
DHV paranoia
Fake alpha males
Etc, etc, etc
But on the other hand, there are some other commonly used psychological principles that, conceived the right way, can be more beneficial than when ignored.
Things such as
Confidence and passion can attract a girl
Qualification can make the girl invest on you and solidify the attraction
Touching a girl (kino) helps to make her see you as a potential sexual partner
And many others
So, where is the line? How do you keep all the good stuff and get rid of the bad one?
The confidence thing isn't a pickup thing, that's been around since, well, forever. I also think qualification is a bit overrated, and honestly, it tends to come naturally from having higher self-esteem.
Being physically more assertive (or kino) is one good thing PUA promotes, as well as getting rid of oneitis.
But really, even the most dedicated PUA person will tell you that more important than lines and lingo is going out and increasing your interactions. Taking one or two useful principles out into "the field" is a much better use of your time than sorting the "good" PUA stuff from the "bad".
(08-11-2012 06:17 AM)Trickster Wrote: [ -> ]Taking one or two useful principles out into "the field" is a much better use of your time than sorting the "good" PUA stuff from the "bad".
I don't think they are mutually exclusive.
To reach mastery, there are three main elements: knowledge, mentors and experiences.
Yes, one can argue that having many experiences with little knowledge is better than many knowledge with little experiences, but hell, at the end you want to have both.
But coming back to my main question:
Yeah... you may be go over each particular PUA technique and evaluate is usefulness individually, but that might be both inefficient and relative.
And the end of the day, my question is, is there any general characteristic all the good pickup techniques have that all the bad techniques lack?
(08-11-2012 01:55 PM)mikemintz Wrote: [ -> ]And the end of the day, my question is, is there any general characteristic all the good pickup techniques have that all the bad techniques lack?
I suppose that the "good" pua stuff tend to emphasize aggressiveness and assertiveness - stuff like "direct game" and "kino."
The bad stuff gets yourself in your head over thinking things. Shit tests. Trying to get "in state". Routines. Value. Amogging.
Anything that is a natural side effect of being high self-esteem, confident, assertive, sexual and socially skilled is good. PUAs can stick labels on these things and write routines about them, but that doesn't make these behaviors PUA. These behaviors are part of being a healthy, confident man.
Anything that moves you away from being all that I described above is bad. Anything that messes with your self-esteem, gets you in your head, fucks up your beliefs about women or social interactions in general, or impedes your growth is bad. And some of PUA does just that.
Having standards was not invented by PUA (i.e. qualifying a girl and seeing if she's a match with you). Being sexually interested in girls and showing it certainly was not invented by PUA's (i.e. being assertive and kinoing and sexually escalating). Being passionate and interesting existed before PUA too I'm afraid.
Just because PUA describes some things that are obviously attractive, doesn't mean these things are owned by PUA.
I don't think that many PUA-concepts are bad on their own. If you look at Mystery's DHV-theory for example: it shows guys what kind of a man girls are attracted to. Yes, you should become a guy who's a protector of loved ones, respected by other men etc. But trying to show it to other people is a bad thing. The same thing with shit tests: they show what women generally expect a guy to be. You should try to become the guy who has those qualities and can pass the tests automatically. I think sometimes paying attention to shit tests is a good thing e.g. a girl is trying to step on your toes and you realize you are acting weak. It's ok to force yourself to react in the right way instead of doing what you feel like and watch the girl lose her respect for you.
It's just lots of wrong use of good ideas and some overanalyzing and oversimplifications.
Quote:I don't think that many PUA-concepts are bad on their own. If you look at Mystery's DHV-theory for example: it shows guys what kind of a man girls are attracted to. Yes, you should become a guy who's a protector of loved ones, respected by other men etc. But trying to show it to other people is a bad thing.
If my memory serves me right, then Mystery's DHV's were ALL about showing off qualities to other people (women), and even MAKING UP STORIES about yourselves to impress her. It's not about BEING that man, it's a technique to make her think you're that kind of man. Which goes against everything we believe in.
(08-11-2012 04:54 PM)Halo Effect Wrote: [ -> ]Anything that is a natural side effect of being high self-esteem, confident, assertive, sexual and socially skilled is good. PUAs can stick labels on these things and write routines about them, but that doesn't make these behaviors PUA. These behaviors are part of being a healthy, confident man.
Anything that moves you away from being all that I described above is bad. Anything that messes with your self-esteem, gets you in your head, fucks up your beliefs about women or social interactions in general, or impedes your growth is bad. And some of PUA does just that.
Having standards was not invented by PUA (i.e. qualifying a girl and seeing if she's a match with you). Being sexually interested in girls and showing it certainly was not invented by PUA's (i.e. being assertive and kinoing and sexually escalating). Being passionate and interesting existed before PUA too I'm afraid.
Just because PUA describes some things that are obviously attractive, doesn't mean these things are owned by PUA.
First 2 paragraphs is money. Completely agree.
About the later part, I'm kind of confused.
I would argue that, at the core level, VERY LITTLE was invented by PUA. Confident guys expressing their sexual desires to women? There were many before puas. Insecure guys showing off to get validation? There were many of those before puas too!
What the PUA movement intended to do was to decipher the behaviors that lead to success with women more often than not, and teach them so you wouldn't have to go decipher them by yourself.
Now, take any common science. How many years took for chemistry or medicine or physics to be where it is today? How many currently known as wrong theories were consider valid at a certain point? it was the best they had at that time. Should we recognize what is good under today's standards and leave what is considered wrong behind? Of course. Should we condemn old scientists for thinking of theories we now know are wrong? Hell no. Most likely, those mistakes were what made possible to be where we are today.
But the point is, as much as there have been some naturally attractive qualities going on for centuries - being confident, for instance - many people didn't knew them before they found the PUA community.
Hell, many of those "obviously attractive" characteristics I didn't know before entering the PUA world. And I'm sure that many other guys were exactly where I was.
I don't know how was it in Mystery's times, but now days you find a fair number of puas that teach more good stuff than bad stuff.
(08-11-2012 05:30 PM)Halo Effect Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:I don't think that many PUA-concepts are bad on their own. If you look at Mystery's DHV-theory for example: it shows guys what kind of a man girls are attracted to. Yes, you should become a guy who's a protector of loved ones, respected by other men etc. But trying to show it to other people is a bad thing.
If my memory serves me right, then Mystery's DHV's were ALL about showing off qualities to other people (women), and even MAKING UP STORIES about yourselves to impress her. It's not about BEING that man, it's a technique to make her think you're that kind of man. Which goes against everything we believe in.
I remember Mystery also said you should as soon as possible build yourself a life and become the guy who doesn't need to make up any dhv stories. But otherwise that's what I said in the last sentence of the part you quoted. You should be that guy but not have a need to brag about it. But I think in his dhv-techniques Mystery sets a really good foundation on what a high value guy should look, act and be like (if you discard the psychological games and magic tricks). Most pua stuff was more about undermining value and focusing on humor, teasing and dominance or even stating that value doesn't matter at all (like RSD). It set many many guys on the wrong track, making guys confident but acting like idiots who are very miscalibrated socially and don't have any value.
If you just take what Mystery says about value and become that guy, you'll actually get quite far. If you are an interesting guy with a lot to offer socially and mentally, the women will naturally be drawn towards you. That is imo the value of Mystery's stuff, how well he managed to portray what gives a man value in front of a woman and how important that is for building attraction.
(08-12-2012 04:32 AM)dr. love Wrote: [ -> ]Most pua stuff was more about undermining value and focusing on humor, teasing and dominance or even stating that value doesn't matter at all (like RSD). It set many many guys on the wrong track, making guys confident but acting like idiots who are very miscalibrated socially and don't have any value.
Humor and and dominance are themselves a form of value.
There are girls who doesn't know my 'cool' lifestyle, but because I'm confident and funny, they get attracted.
The problem was no that that they were humorous or dominant, but rather, that they were doing it wrong. Humor and dominance, again, are awesome by themselves.
So at the end it was the right act (being funny) in a poor performance (being miscalibrated).
PUAs deserve credit for spreading the idea that a man of character can also be sexually assertive. Both concepts were around, you could learn to grow your character and you could be a player but I think it were the PUAs that made it obvious that we could have pussy and still have honour. However, the way they teach it is counter-productive.
For all their lip service to developing the qualities of a man of hight value, they don't really teach it, or they get you to "fake it until you make it," which doesn't really work. They do two things right to get guys in the move: they give guys a head start, by teaching the moves, lines and behaviours, and they help them get early successes that keep guys engaged and motivated.
However their techniques backfire: you learn to minimize rejection, avoid it or diffuse it, not to grow your balls and deal with the consequences. You may have hight status, but your issues remain unscathed and you have just invested an insane amount of time to cover them up.
All they teach is behaviour when this stuff is essentially emotional.
A man of value is not necessarily a man of high social status, but one that faces his woes and dares to act on his desires and needs.