Personal Development and Pickup Artists

[Holden McNeil]

Thanks Wulfen.

I've been intrigued by MM and related stuff for a while now, and it was only further enhanced when I read The Game (classic book, btw!). The biggest thing I've been careful about is becoming one of those "social robots" who are basically like you said - relying on practicing the scripts and routines and lines that other people tell them (which unfortunately end up working), without really showing their own personality or being themselves. So much so i'd likely go 1) comprehend the structure completely (that M3 model), then 2) use completely original routines/lines that fit in with it, that are specific to me. Is it just me, or does using canned routines from someone else seem totally lame? I'd feel incongruent as hell.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Wulfen

Holden:

Mystery Method is not a set of lines and routines. The book is filled with a lot of lines and routines, of course, but that's because they are used as examples for what the book tries to tell. And also because without the routines, the book would be 10 pages long lol

The core of the Mystery Method is the structure of the game. It's the skeleton of the interaction, it describes the stages through which the interaction has to proceed in order to achieve the desired result, i.e. the seduction. This is called the M3 method and consists of 3 stages: Attraction, Comfort and Seduction, each of them divided into 3 sub-stages. For instance Attraction is divided into: A1: Opener, A2: Female to Male attraction, and A3: Male to Female attraction, or Qualifying.

Now all these subdivisions might sound nerdy, but it's the most intuitive thing to learn in this world. He also explains why is it a bad idea to not proceed in the correct order: for instance why you should never qualify (compliment) a girl (A3) before she's attracted to you (A2), and that is because you're giving her validation for free, thus you appear needy, and she has been already validated so she has no reason to invest in you.

Technical? Maybe. Dense? For sure. Useful? You bet. The biggest risk for this book is that people use the routines in this book instead of grasping the structure and filling it with their own personality. But you gotta crawl before you walk so that in itself is not such a bad thing, as long as you understand the structure.

Hey Wulfen,

All this stuff is pretty interesting. I've never researched and tested out other PUA gurus other than Ross Jefferies, coming from the heavy NLP background that I do.

Have you had experience in the other systems (Mystery method? And my friend mentioned David DeAngelo)? If you have, could you give us a quick comparison?

P.S. Re: personal dev and PUA, I've benefited 3 ways from picking up Ross Jefferies' (Speed Seduction) stuff.

1) Powerful influence. His stuff is NLP, but distilled in an easy to learn way and geared specifically for powerful influence. Look beyond the seduction content if that's not what you want and you can still use the structures to fill in your own content.

2) Understanding of human relations, especially the differences between the sexes. Men and women are hotwired differently, and the principles helped me understand how and in what ways, and opened my eyes to the real dynamics lying beneath our day-to-day interactions.

3) Greater confidence. I used to mess myself up before I even could think of meeting someone new. Now I recognize that many times the other person probably has the same hang-ups, and I focus my attention on building a good state and having fun.

[Wulfen]

Holden,

That's what I do. My structure is Mystery Method, but I fill it with, mostly, spontaneous material, and I throw here and there some lines and tricks of my own that have proven very useful in the past. Maybe 70% spontaneous, 20% canned of my own and 10% canned from elsewhere but which fits my personality in a congruent form.

Another tip: if you're unsure about purchasing Mystery Method, just subscribe to the newsletter. It has many useful tips and excerpts from the book.

Beware of "The Game" and its morality. It's a mainstream book and it has to say some moral stuff in order to appeal to the masses. I don't like social robots and I don't think it's the way to go, but it's better to be a social robot than to be a chump. And it's better to be a social robot at the very beginning, so you can learn and later naturalize, than to never learn at all.

Every new thing you learn is at first unnatural to you. Until you internalize it, then it becomes a part of your personality. This is as true for playing guitar, as for public speaking, as for picking up girls.

The problems are the social robots that lack any depth of character, any personality or lifestyle. They will be social robots forever. But I've not seen many of those, they are the exception. Usually being a social robot is just a stage for the majority of us.

Oh, BTW, TylerDurden from The Game is not a social robot. He's a really cool guy. But Style had to put someone as the villain, and chose Tyler but in real life they get along pretty well.

[Wulfen]

Alvin,

Usually I try not to give personal recommendations on PU gurus, because I'm not affiliated with any of those, and, well, because I'm building my own website, so I'll say I'm the Ultimate Guru above all lol But since you asked, I will give you my personal recommendation, the guru that strikes most true for me is (...drumroll...):

Juggler

Juggler is on the camp of natural game, which means to develop the attributes that make you attractive to women, instead of relying on structure, routines and so on. Maybe it's not for beginners, but once you know your drill, Juggler is the best way to become a genuinely cool guy.

In fact, I'm a proud defender of this kind of natural game, and my website will be about becoming a cool guy, instead of learning lines and routines. What I'm doing is similar to Kloudiia's blog, but maybe more oriented to a guy's perspective.

For Juggler, there was a compilation of posts for free on the internet. Is a compilation of his best posts on ASF, done by some dude called TheGuru. There was a time that it was for free around, but it seems that since juggler is selling it now on his website, is no longer available (just googled for it but can't find it). You can also get his posts archive at ASF (www.fastseduction.com).

A guy which is very similar to Juggler is Zan, though Zan does not have much material around.

David DeAngelo is great to start. His books are pretty straightforward, though in my opinion he gives too much importance to "Cocky and Funny", and, while I think it's worthwhile, it's just a partial view of seduction. But it's a good place to start. His smaller books like "Bridges" or "The 8 types of men that naturally attract women" are pure gold. Is very important to know the distinction between a lover and a provider, and the difference between being dominant and submissive, in a relationship.

The Venusian Arts Handbook, as I said, is nerdy, but useful. Mystery has covered all the basics and left nothing to chance. If you manage to master Mystery Method and nothing else, you'll still be pretty good. But as I said, try to get the structure, don't get lost in the trees so you don't see the forest. Another good place to start.

I personally don't like Ross Jeffries too much. For starters, his NLP materials are in english, which is not my primary language, so they are not that useful to me. And then, his NLP "tricks" sound like manipulation to me. Maybe it's a limiting belief of mine, I might try using NLP in the future just to see how it goes, but from what I've read it didn't struck a chord with me. However, it seems to work nevertheless, or so they say. I must remark again that I don't think his material is bad, just that it seems incongruent with my personality, and that's why I've avoided it. As always, YMMV.

It's very important that you also learn to be a good lover in bed. There are many free websites about sexuality. Try to learn about sex as much as you can. There's is also David Shade's book which seems to be the bible for ASF people, though I find it a little weird with the hypnosis stuff and such, but it has many many valuable tips. My own advice: in bed, be dominant, but focus on her pleasure first. Foreplay rules. Being good in pickup will help you get them, being good in bed will help you keep them.

After picking her up and sexing her, you need to manage the relationship with her. That is, if you want a relationship. I recommend relationships before one-night stands because they are more emotionally fulfilling, and, let's face it, most people who learn pickup actually long for the emotions of having a person that truly loves them. For relationships, I can only recommend one person: Franco. Grab his archive at ASF and read it. Twice. But still, for Franco I'm biased since I consider him a mentor and I personally appreciate him very much. YMMV. But he's the best.

These for the basics. There are more advanced materials but it's best to read a bit, practice a bit, and so on, than to devour tons of material and get a mess in the head. If you try any of those please report back, it will be very insightful for the rest.

[Holden McNeil]

Originally Posted by Wulfen

Oh, BTW, TylerDurden from The Game is not a social robot. He's a really cool guy. But Style had to put someone as the villain, and chose Tyler but in real life they get along pretty well.

You totally read my mind there.

That's good to know, too. One of the first posts I ever saw on fastseduction was by TD, and I thought he was really cool until all this negative stuff started surfacing. Now he doesn't seem so bad!

[Alvin]

Hi Wulfen,

Wow, great post with lots of material to act on! Anything that gives me a sneak peak into the hearts and minds of how people work fires up my curiosity instantly!

Just a little about Ross, NLP & why I love him so much. The trouble with traditional NLP is that there's a lot of jargon involved, great for the NLP junkies (yours truly), not so great for the layman.

What Ross' done with his Speed Seduction material is re-package the NLP communication skills (half of which come from hypnosis, making it a power-packed deal) in an easy to learn and replicate manner...which was why I used to introduce it to beginning NLP junkies with an appetite for knowledge and the willingness to look beyond 'surface structure'.

Fast Seduction 101: Art of Pick-up and Seduction bookmarked for future ref I was just wondering about how this stuff applies to relationships (Ross glosses over that) so thanks for the Franco lead!

[Dating Specialist]

Hmm, I see an indirect connection here.

Franco - Relationship - Kloudiia (me)

I should grab his stuff too then? Thanks Wulfen for the info!

[Wulfen]

Kloudiia, caveat emptor: Franco has a very male-must-be-dominant approach to relationships. Apart that he has always been polyamorous until recently (he's happily married and monogamous now, though).

However I can say in my experience that his stuff works like a charm. And it's not only me who says it, in the Relationships board at ASF, Franco is not a guru, is The Guru.

It might be interesting for you to read this since there you will see a radical male approach to relationships. Granted, it's radical, harsh and sometimes brutal, but it works perfectly. I have always followed Franco's approach to my relationships when I started the PUA path and the result is very fulfilling relationships for me and my girls.

You know what I would like to do? To take a masculine approach to relationships, but put it in more pleasant words, more or less like your blog, so I can reach a wider audience, for instance guys who think that male having the power in a relationship is sexist.

If you want to read Franco's archive of posts, is here:

ASF Zip archives

Search in that page for "Zarathustra", his nick. It's a zip with pdfs inside. The password for the pdfs is in a txt inside the zip. The 1st PDF is not that good because he was beginning to write in ASF. I'd start with the 2nd one.

EDIT: much better for starters, to read his (now discontinued) newsletter here:

Franco Seduction

Here his thoughts are more structured than in the forums archives, and is a little less harsh, but with the same philosophy.

[Merovingian]

Yeah, I agree that Juggler's stuff is what people need to learn. This is the kind of advice most men need.

Zan is similar in that he is all about adjusting mindset, but whereas Juggler is teaching how to be a cool regular guy and how to tell stories, Zan teaches more how to make women fascinated.

Kind of like Juggler will teach you how to be Vince Vaughn, and Zan will teach you how to be Don Juan DeMarco.

Here is more info on both of these guys:

Wikipedia - Juggler

Wikipedia - Zan

There are also a few videos floating around of these guys that can give you more of an idea of their styles. You'll have to search, but here's one I found:

Zan in Chicago

What most people in the community teach is a type of manipulation. These guys just teach you how to be a better version of yourself that women find irresistible.

Direct to these guys:

Charisma Arts
Enlightened Seduction

M

[Merovingian]

Oh, and having said the stuff about Zan and Juggler in my previous post, Mystery's book is the best on the subject I have ever read. And as Wulfen and others have said, it is critical that you take from it the concepts and not just memorize every line and repeat them over and over again.

Great stuff in that book!

[Dating Specialist]

Originally Posted by Wulfen

Kloudiia, caveat emptor: Franco has a very male-must-be-dominant approach to relationships. Apart that he has always been polyamorous until recently (he's happily married and monogamous now, though).

However I can say in my experience that his stuff works like a charm. And it's not only me who says it, in the Relationships board at ASF, Franco is not a guru, is The Guru.

It might be interesting for you to read this since there you will see a radical male approach to relationships. Granted, it's radical, harsh and sometimes brutal, but it works perfectly. I have always followed Franco's approach to my relationships when I started the PUA path and the result is very fulfilling relationships for me and my girls.

You know what I would like to do? To take a masculine approach to relationships, but put it in more pleasant words, more or less like your blog, so I can reach a wider audience, for instance guys who think that male having the power in a relationship is sexist.

If you want to read Franco's archive of posts, is here:

ASF Zip archives

Search in that page for "Zarathustra", his nick. It's a zip with pdfs inside. The password for the pdfs is in a txt inside the zip. The 1st PDF is not that good because he was beginning to write in ASF. I'd start with the 2nd one.

EDIT: much better for starters, to read his (now discontinued) newsletter here:

Franco Seduction

Here his thoughts are more structured than in the forums archives, and is a little less harsh, but with the same philosophy.

Said it in this post title. Say it again: Thanks Wulfen for all these info.

[Antarananda]

Originally Posted by Merovingian

Kind of like Juggler will teach you how to be Vince Vaughn, and Zan will teach you how to be Don Juan DeMarco.

Here is more info on both of these guys:

Wikipedia - Juggler

Wikipedia - Zan

Speaking of Vince Vaughn, I watched the movie The Break-Up, and was amused to watch Vince's character in the opening scene at the baseball game using some very obvious (to those in the know) PUA techniques on Jennifer Aniston's character, including kino escalation Anyone else notice that?

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Antarananda

Speaking of Vince Vaughn, I watched the movie The Break-Up, and was amused to watch Vince's character in the opening scene at the baseball game using some very obvious (to those in the know) PUA techniques on Jennifer Aniston's character, including kino escalation Anyone else notice that?

Or how Ashton Kutcher (sp?) in The Guardian was using the 'being the prize' principle to pick up the female lead. Don't like Ashton, don't like the movie, but smooth moves.

[Erock]

Yeah it seems as if a lot of people here dislike the idea of using rehearsed stories or lines, and I agree 100% that you cannot maintain a relationship or even go beyond the first few minutes if you use all canned material.

But.... I think it's a fantastic attraction tool to allow yourself the opportunity to really get to know a girl. Zan himself said "I may not be the guy that can get a girl alone easily, but I know that if I spend an hour with her she will love me" (Or along those lines) It doesn't make sense why he couldn't have some canned material to help him get alone with girls easier?

To me I kind of equate canned material with girls that put on make up, do their hair up nice, and wear short skirts. It makes them more initially attractive to the opposite sex. Nothing more than initial attraction. Even I, lover of beautiful women, will not be with a girl if she has nothing more than that initial attraction. That's the way I think of canned material-a courteous way of getting you in the door.

[JAlvy]

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one interested in self-development as well as pick up arts. In fact, after taking a look at the age range poll, I'd venture to say a good number of the guys on this board have at the very least been exposed to some type of pick up material.

Wulfen, your posts have been very worthwhile so far. Where is the best place to start building a foundation for becoming a pickup artist? I've read/watched/listened to material, but stopped it when I realized I was just becoming a "keyboard jockey", but without the posting. So for the past few months I've focused more on self development and losing weight. Now that my looks are starting to get where I'd like them, I'm beginning to delve back into material. Do you recommend taking a workshop? I suppose it's just that I want to see an approach, before I ever attempt one myself. Do PUAs ever just let an AFC... shadow them for a night?

[Michael Chui]

JAlvy, go and do it. You've already been to the best place to start: now go and say hi to some girls and start practicing.

[00melo00]

When I'm doing this I don't use any theory I just use improv. I'm not very good at it (I'm beginning to get some succes now) but I think you will have a much more solid foundation if you do and learn it this way.

And like Chui said, just do it. If you are in a bad state then put up your mp3player on and get some track going on in your ears that will pump up your state! It's just all in the head.

And If you're beginning with this, then you shouldn't aim for the succes that will make you nervous. Just aim for the fun and the succes wil follow. And I once had the succes I want and discovered that the fun itsself was way cooler by the way.

What I think is fun to do is going with a buddy to some place where nobody knows you and then kick yourself COMPLETELY out of your own comfortzone. If you get positive responses then you will make new believes too out of those experiences.

I did stuff like:"Hey I find you very cute and want to know you better", this was way out of my comfortzone! Or like a badboy opener (I guess in America Badboy isn't that popular as in the Netherlands): turning a girl and then checking her out and enjoy it. I did it a few times and it was fun but not my style though.

It's like if you want to do this you gotta FEEL it! Not know it, it must be an emotion to you and everything. I'm saying if this only sounds logical to you then you tend to be a KJ for a little while longer I guess.

Do you recommend taking a workshop?

Only when you have too much money, I never took a workshop because succes can be made on your own. I really did everything myself and sometimes went to a lair meeting of the dutch forum (which is a really good lair by the way! they give excellent advice) so there is no need. By the way if you live like in New York there should also be a lair or something to join, google it.

[TeeZee]

I have seen the PUA community in a large city and it's a real mixed bag, just like the PUAs and material. Some stuff is great (DYD, ZAN, Stephane) and some stuff is misogynistic hocus pocus. Even the guys I like have stuff I don't like, so I disregard. Some guys in the community are great, some are lame (usually due to lack of experience and wanting a quick fix). The people who end up the happiest are the ones who keep an open mind and stick to what they know is right, and if they don't know what is right, then THAT is the first order of business before trying to pick up girls. PU is a great entry point for people who really need to get their whole ************ together.

So it is now becoming a buyer beware situation. The number of guys calling themselves PUAs has skyrocketed. There is a lot of info on the web about 'the community' and I suggest doing some research before paying some 22 year old kid $2000 to take you to a bar and watch him go up to girls and ask them when they floss!

[00melo00]

ask them when they floss!

Routines suck anyway... learn it the improv way it's way cooler.

The only routines I use are routines I found out myself. They are mostly cool oneliners or bodylanguage stuff. I learned the bodylanguage routines from Badboy by the way, allthough he doesn't call them routines thats just me

But saying hi to new people is always a cool thing to do, most of them will smile a bit and stuff, I do it occasionly too because it's fun! Sometimes when I'm with my dad in the car I even wave to other people in other cars

[JAlvy]

Perhaps somebody can help clarify something about pick up artistry for me. I know a lot of the movement is rooted in evolutionary biology, and the ideas of survival and replication as our purpose in life.

My question is, if survival and replication are really so important, why does it seem like none of the "gurus" are settled down and have actually... replicated? Like, if you can't attract a woman, then by definition you are sterile. But, if you don't have a child, then, by definition, aren't you still sterile?

I suppose it all comes down to actually determining what one wants and going for it. But I just wanted a little more clarification before I embarked on a certain path.

For those of you that are in the community, do you plan to ever get married? Ever have kids? Or do you just live relationships "in the moment"?

[Stevejabba]

Originally Posted by ViceVirtue

I've had the desire to learn about personal development and find resources like this one for years, and the way I ended up here was actually through the pickup artist community. I read "The Game" because it seemed interesting and then I digged a bit deeper into ASF and found a few people referencing Steve Pavlina... and the rest is history. I was actually waiting for a thread like this one to pop up, because I bet there are quite a few people here from that community.

Interesting...

I am one of the best and most well known PUA's in london (with a totally natural style)..It seems almost inevitable to me that PUA stuff ties in with self improvement per se..

p.s Great forum

[Dr Gonzo]

Originally Posted by micth

So i think they disagree on this point, where Steve doesn't think you need all this 'outer game' stuff (eg mystery method, etc) because raising your consciousness will achieve the same results

I'm not going to defend any specific technique here, but I will say that guys who haven't had success in this area of their life are best off using a technique, any technique, because it gives them a foundation. It's like anything:

1. Unconscious incompetence
2. Conscious incompetence
3. Conscious competence
4. Unconscious competence

The guys at stage 2 when they first find the community most definitely need stage 3 - they need a "method" or technique or something quantifiable to do - this gives them the leverage to get experience and get to stage 4.

Saying all you need is to raise your consciousness is like saying a guy can master investment or health without specific steps - it's not like that. The point at which you start talking about "raising your consciousness" or anything isomorphic to that is once you've already completed stage 3 - be it intentionally or through lucky chance.

Gonzo

[Dr Gonzo]

Originally Posted by Wulfen

Kloudiia, caveat emptor: Franco has a very male-must-be-dominant approach to relationships. Apart that he has always been polyamorous until recently (he's happily married and monogamous now, though).

I realise this isn't necessarily the forum to be discussing this, since a lot of readers won't have the background on who Franco is or where he's coming from. I love his stuff and think he's one of the most interesting guys on ASF, however this forum does have quite a few polyamorous people so I think it's relevant in that sense.

Where I part ways with Franco is the exact point you have identified - I'm not polyamorous "for now", or as a temporary stage - I hope I never stop being this way, and although you can never say for sure, I don't really see why this would change for me. It's not like one day I'm going to suddenly decide that everything I believe about relationships is wrong. I am poly, and always will be as far as I can make out. Franco still rocks though, and if monogamy is working for him, more power to him.

It might be interesting for you to read this since there you will see a radical male approach to relationships. Granted, it's radical, harsh and sometimes brutal

Cast off the social programming that says there is something wrong with being a man, and giving women what they truly want and you will see that there is nothing "brutal" about it - just as women are not "brutal" for expressing fully their feminine nature, even if men cannot always understand it and are sometimes hurt by it.

You know what I would like to do? To take a masculine approach to relationships, but put it in more pleasant words, more or less like your blog, so I can reach a wider audience, for instance guys who think that male having the power in a relationship is sexist.

Stop trying to reach the mainstream in a mealy-mouthed way. You will never reach people who aren't willing to challenge their assumptions, no matter how much you mince your words. What is being said is so countercultural that it requires a paradigm shift. Paradigm shifts always shock at first, until they sink in. At first it seems radical, then it makes sense, then it seems like it was always that way and then at that point the original, socially conditioned point of view seems to be the radical and extreme one.

Gonzo

[Isis Kali]

OK...educate me here, please. No, honest. I want to know.

So...are you guys being PUAs in order to just get laid more and pat yourselves on the back for being really Zen about it? I'm not understanding. Or, are you trying to make yourselves more conscious men in order to meet and relate to conscious women?

As a very attractive woman with very attractive female friends, I just don't like the thought that there are these roving men looking to get with us so that they can brag and make a game out of our affections. It seems predatory. I don't get it.

I know that many of you mentioned the negativity that wrongly-utilized PUA technique can create. I'd love an explanation by the guys on this board (who I hold in very high regard) as to what being a PUA means to you. I'm hoping that it's not just being "Jack the Lad", and is more along the lines of presenting your best face forward in order to find a great woman.

And what makes someone the "best pickup artist" somewhere? The most numbers? Needing to buy a huge, economy-size box of condoms? Feeling poetic as you ride into the sunset and don't call the next day? I'm sorry, me and my girls have shot many of you guys down. You can smell players from a mile away.

I apologize if I sound a bit on-edge about all this, but I just saw another friend get hurt by some jerk who thought that he had mad game, but was cheating or something. I've seen much ugliness done to some really great women at the hands of men who thought that five minutes of their magical time was such an honor. It doesn't seem like PUA is something that is done for the greater good of all involved.

[Michael Chui]

Think of it in terms of a Venn Diagram: PUA in one circle, PD in another, and there's an overlap. A number of people who have posted in this thread are in the overlap.

(Note: I'm not technically in either circle. But it's always been hard to define me. My motivation for studying PUA techniques (and occasionally applying for experimentation) was to understand how and why they work.)

[openeyes]

Originally Posted by Isis Kali

OK...educate me here, please. No, honest. I want to know.

So...are you guys being PUAs in order to just get laid more and pat yourselves on the back for being really Zen about it? I'm not understanding. Or, are you trying to make yourselves more conscious men in order to meet and relate to conscious women?

I originally studied it because relationships (on all levels) are very important to me and I wanted to improve my ability to understand and relate to women. With that being my priority more than sex, I usually don’t take things nearly as far as I could (at least not anymore). Instead most of my interactions are in the “intimate friendship” category: lots of massage, cuddling, occasional kissing, and plenty of talking and good humor/playfulness shared. Early on I found that I could take things about as far physically as I wanted, but that more emotional intimacy usually results from close friendships than dating, hence why friendship has been my focus. If/when getting physical is my intent, that’s quite simple to accomplish now.

Most guys that haven’t studied PUA tactics focus on the numbers of people they’ve been with because it’s a real challenge for them. For men who’ve grown up with a scarcity mindset in regards to sex, it may be a big deal and something to really brag about. Once one experiences just how abundant it can be one can relax and seek out what one really enjoys the most. Maybe that really is intercourse for some. For me it is often simply kissing and cuddling (in part maybe because it's so much less complicated, and is easier to do with multiple people without so much threat of jealousy). It took plenty of experience to be sure of that though, and that’s where a bit of PUA skill helped.

I know a lot of nice, decent guys that just want to be with a girl (or two) long term, and refuse to even think of learning any type of skill that would help them in this endeavor. Instead they do their best to buy the girl's affection, paying for dinner, movies, concert tickets, and so on. That's something I refuse to do. Instead I provide women with experiences that few other men are apt to share with them, often bringing out the kid in them and just having fun. Encounters involve little to no money spent, and if we have a root beer float we each pay for ourselves, then go climb a tree I don't like the idea of buying anyone and feel it's demeaning to both parties. I just want people to share and create beauty with.

[Dr Gonzo]

Originally Posted by Isis Kali

OK...educate me here, please. No, honest. I want to know.

It would be a pleasure.

So...are you guys being PUAs in order to just get laid more and pat yourselves on the back for being really Zen about it? I'm not understanding. Or, are you trying to make yourselves more conscious men in order to meet and relate to conscious women?

Both. And if you think there is something wrong with getting laid more I'd encourage you to consider where that belief comes from. More sex, love, affection and fun is ALWAYS a good thing.

As a very attractive woman with very attractive female friends, I just don't like the thought that there are these roving men looking to get with us so that they can brag and make a game out of our affections. It seems predatory. I don't get it.

Well of course, but then that assumes that the reason guys get involved in the "PUA community" is to "brag and make a game out of your affections". I'd encourage you to consider where that belief about men came from too. I've met quite a few guys through this community, some I've got on with and have a lot of respect for, others less so, but I've never yet met a guy looking to brag or to make a game out of girls affections. Most guys get into this because they want to be more attractive and share more positive experiences with girls they find attactive - reread that sentence and consider if it isn't exactly the same reason most girls get into fashion, beauty and all the other things women do to get quality men. I don't think there's anything predatory about that.

I know that many of you mentioned the negativity that wrongly-utilized PUA technique can create. I'd love an explanation by the guys on this board (who I hold in very high regard) as to what being a PUA means to you. I'm hoping that it's not just being "Jack the Lad", and is more along the lines of presenting your best face forward in order to find a great woman.

You pretty much hit the nail on the head, with 2 minor exceptions:

1. I'm not looking just to present my best face, but also to improve myself so that I've got something even better to present.

2. I'm not looking for a great woman, I'm looking for great women. The community is full of guys with all sorts of different relationship orientations, some want a monogamous long term relationship, others want lots of casual relationships, I personally am polyamorous and want lots of great girls I can have meaningful and satisfying relationships with. There aren't a huge number of truly poly guys in the community, it tends to be either guys looking for a one-on-one relationship or guys looking for lots of casual sex, but the incidence of polyamorous people IS noticably higher than the overall average in society at large, probably because the community encourages people to challenge their assumptions, overcome their social programming and consciously make decisions for themselves. These are all good primers for becoming poly.

And what makes someone the "best pickup artist" somewhere? The most numbers? Needing to buy a huge, economy-size box of condoms?

Sadly this is often what gets idolised in "the community". Probably because a lot of guys haven't had much success with women and they think sleeping with a lot of people is somehow glamorous.

I'd encourage you to consider that you characterised yourself as very attractive, less attractive girls may glamourise looking like you, it is only because you look like you do that you realise it is a thin veneer and that beauty is not as glamorous as it seems to these less genetically fortunate women.

Think of it this way: Take a moderately attractive woman, who has always felt secretly jealous of the prettier girls who get all the attention when they go out together. Give her a makeover and make her one of the glamorous girls who gets all the attention - how long before she realises she doesn't really want lame guys approaching her all night trying to buy her attention with drinks, asking her mundane questions about her life and generally boring her to tears? How about how long until she feels like everyone relates to her only on the level of her physical appearance and can't see past that?

It's the same with a guy who improves himself (and for men, it's not so much appearance but character which he has to improve), at first he glamourises being the cool guy who gets all the chicks, then he realises it's not really what it was cracked up to be, and that there has to be more to life than validating himself by the reactions he gets from women.

So the thin veneer of glamour which both men and women aspire to in terms of feeling and being more attractive is only perceived as a veneer, and as basically worthless, once you've had the opportunity to see if from the point of view of the attractive person. It's all very well to judge people wanting this, but unless you've walked in their shoes you can't really fully understand where they are coming from.

I wholeheartedly encourage people, both men and women, to make their own mistakes in this as well as other areas of their life. We learn best by doing.

For me, what makes someone the best "pickup artist" is if he is truly happy with his relationships with women, if he gives more good feelings to women than other guys, and if he always acts ethically (which is a prerequisite, since acting unethically always eventually sabotages true happiness).

Feeling poetic as you ride into the sunset and don't call the next day? I'm sorry, me and my girls have shot many of you guys down. You can smell players from a mile away.

It sounds like you have been hurt by a "player" in the past. I can't speak for the community at large, but my friends and I have as little respect for guys who lie and cheat to get girls as you do. The better side of the community is not about this, on the contrary it's about being more authentic.

That is why I doubt you have "shot many of us guys down" - we are not talking about the same guys.

Gonzo

[Velvet]

Doctor Gonzo:

Your reply was well-written and most of it made sense, and I am glad that Isis Kali asked the eloquent question that inspired it.

This reminds me, in a way, of the "Rules" brouhaha from about 10 years ago. Some desperate/hurt women read the book to learn how to "catch a man," and manipulate him into marriage, and some more thoughtful women read the book and applied whatever nuggets of wisdom (amongst the more objectionable text) for empowerment.

Some men (and women) got upset thinking it was a text book on how to become a gold-digging shrew, but the reality is that it was just another explanation for the mating game and how men and women approach relationships differently. Fairly benevolent and applicable stuff if not taken as gospel, and if used with compassion.

I do question whether all of your brethren are as thoughtful and honest about their intentions as you are, Gonzo. After all, it's called "seduction" and being a "pickup artist"--these terms are pretty drenched in negative connotations.

In the pick-up literature I've seen (links provided in this very forum), I see women referred to as numbers--"8s" and "10s"--which I find chilling and dehumanizing, not to mention judgmental. Something tells me you're not factoring in her SAT scores here.

Also, someone asked about parenting upthread and I'd be curious to hear a reply about that. With all this picking up (and presumably putting back down) where does child-rearing fit in? Does the ultimate PUA vision include a world full of single mothers? Seems to me we've got that situation already and it's not benefiting anyone.

There is one nit I'll pick with your post, though:

Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo

More sex, love, affection and fun is ALWAYS a good thing.

I dunno, is any part of that true? Is more sex "always" a good thing? There are times in a woman's cycle when she is more likely to want sex, and times when she wants to be left alone. Is it possible to have "more love"? (How are you defining love here?) Is "more fun" always a good thing? Whence this "more more more" mentality? I would respectfully encourage you to consider where that belief comes from.

Other than that, thanks for your clarifying post.

[mattsonn]

There seem to be a lot of men here who are doing just fine, but nonetheless like the lifestyle of going out and meeting women they don't have any connection to (aka "sarging"). Which is fine. I'm not going to address that group.

But Velvet, what if you were a man who's never had a women look twice at him? Wouldn't you be worried that you'd never get married? And keep in mind that it's crushing for a guy when no women don't pay attention to him.

I would say that maybe 20% of all guys fall into that category, and that is the group that the PUA community appeals to most. Good or bad, PUA provides advice where mainstream society hasn't.

An additional 50%? of men get some attention from women and will probably get married, but feel like they have no control in their relationships. Another unhealthy situation.

To address the reaction that you got about men ranking women on a scale of 1-10........well, duh. Men have been doing that since the beginning of time. No one except idiots take it seriously.

[Michael Chui]

On the numbers bit,

It's not that women are being numbered. Rather, women are being ranked on their sexual appeal. I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that one man's 10 is another man's 5. You'd see that fairly clearly on sites like HotOrNot (or whatever it's called nowadays), whose founder got some of his first users in... his parents. Both of'em. (link)

The reason for the numbers is that you don't, and shouldn't, go after a woman you don't think is good-looking, for whatever reason. It's bad for you and it's bad for her.