1027: "Pickup Artist"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Aaeriele
Posts: 2127
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:30 am UTC
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Aaeriele » Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:27 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:...


Way to come off as a condescending asshole.

J Thomas wrote:Here's what I think. We don't have proof whether humans are machines are not. Either way, when you try to predict what a person will do, it makes sense to treat them like they're predictable. When you negotiate with somebody, remember that you don't really understand them and they have full free will. Treat people the way that works for the particular situation.


Your entire post seems to miss the word "just" in that big sentence you quoted. The point is that "machines" are things that can be used to serve your own purposes. Humans are not something to just be used to serve your own purposes, they have their own desires and needs as well, which need to be respected.
Vaniver wrote:Harvard is a hedge fund that runs the most prestigious dating agency in the world, and incidentally employs famous scientists to do research.

afuzzyduck wrote:ITS MEANT TO BE FLUTTERSHY BUT I JUST SEE AAERIELE! CURSE YOU FORA!

Bharrata
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 7:57 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Bharrata » Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:42 pm UTC

mvdwege wrote:ddxxdd Has objected many times to being compared to a cold-caller.

Yet has anyone ever noticed that his posts are drenched in the language of a hard-seller? He's talking about 'closing the sale', and his earlier posts had a complete checklist of the stages of the PUA 'pitch'.

I've been caught by Multi-Level Marketing in my youth, and I am glad I got out, but I recognise the language. This is language that belongs in an MLM scam, and that he objects to being compared to that without even seeing that he invites that comparison himself speaks of a deep-seated cognitive dissonance.



Having done door-to-door cold calls in the past (Kirby Vacuums no less :shudders: :oops: ) and actually being successful at it, and then subsequently quitting because I couldn't continue to rationalize using people in such a blatant way for my paycheck - yeah, that is exactly what I was getting at, and anyone familiar with hard-sell techniques can read between the lines of ddxxdd's mindset.

He is the mark who has bought into the business, sold so hard on it that now he's selling it himself.

User avatar
Jave D
chavey-dee
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:41 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Jave D » Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:58 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:This might be a good time for you to read the Tao Te Ching.


Easily one of the best things you have said in this thread.

The Tao Te Ching is an excellent book. Some of my favorite parts, with my own commentary as relates to this topic:

"It is time to keep them in their place by the aid of the nameless Primal Simplicity,
Which alone can curb the desires of men.
When the desires of men are curbed, there will be peace,
And the world will settle down of its own accord."


Hmm, now what does the nameless Primal Simplicity mean? To some, apparently that means using PUA to get your fuck on. Does that curb the desires of men? No, it does not. I know this because I have done this. The problem is the desires - and the answer is not in trying to satisfy those desires, which PUA is designed to do.

"One who displays himself does not shine.
One who justifies himself has no glory.
One who boasts of his own ability has no merit.
One who parades his own success will not endure.
In Tao these things are called "unwanted food and extraneous growths""


In this thread, how many times have we seen the boast that "PUA techniques WORK!" or the claim that men who don't use them (men who "don't get it") do not find love or sex? This is boasting of ability. Or in the PUA terminology, a "Demonstration of High Value." The very term demonstrates a mentality of wanting to prove to another person how awesome and desirable a person you are, whether you do it with "social proof" (or having a "wing" to validate your awesomeness so you don't come across as being conceited) or trying to be an "alpha male." How many pro-PUArs in this thread have been justifying themselves and their behaviors? (Why should they feel the need to?) This passage describes the PUA thing to a T. Displaying yourself, so that you get laid and pick up women. Boasting of your own abilities in getting laid and picking up women ("field reports"). Parading of "success" (as measured by frequency and ease of getting laid).

And yet, on all this talk of alpha males and leaders, the Tao says,

"The highest type of ruler is one of whose existence the people are barely aware.
Next comes one whom they love and praise.
Next comes on whom they fear.
Next comes one whom they despise and defy."


Where do the majority of people in this thread (i.e., not the PUA-defenders) stand with regards to the ummm alpha males of PUA? Do the people seem to be loving and praising them? Not hardly. How about fearing? Eh. Despising and defying? It seems to me that a true alpha male, i.e. ruler, is not despised and defied nor feared, while the likes of 'Mystery' are. You can't learn to be an alpha male, a leader of men, or a good man, through reading tips on how to get chicks. It just doesn't work that way.

And what of the typical pre-PUA-mastery complaint that women take advantage of or cheat on or break one's heart? The moment in other words in which a guy decides "fuck this talking-to-women-like-human-beings shit, I wanna walk the way of the PUA!" Is the problem here really that women are just mean and not into guys who don't have "game?" Or is it something more specific to the person who has the problem:

"When you are lacking in faith,
Others will be unfaithful to you."


I think this is really the case. Most people in this society, men or women, have a lack of faith. In the PUA case, a faith that women are individually worthwhile, a faith that yes one can go without getting laid and it's not a disaster, a faith that you'll get over heartbreak as a matter of course, a faith that there is such a thing as a soulmate, a faith that you can enjoy life even if you have only one instead of the recommended five women at a time.

A lack of faith, born by an uncurbed (and indeed, fanned) male desire.

This is what I have personally learned in my years. There is no joy, no pleasure, no pickup, no sex, no girlfriend, as rewarding and giving of joyfulness and contentment as faith. A faith born of negating, not feeding, desire (and aversion). It is within, not without. It is not gained by adding notches to your belt. It is not gained by getting nor even trying to get a same night lay with a 10 and overcome her bitch shield and penetrate her anti-slut-defenses and make a high demonstration of value to avoid being an average frustrated chump.

Spiritually speaking, this is why PUA fails to give true development of character. Its... how shall we say... approach to viewing things is entirely wrong. As the Tao says, Racing and hunting madden the mind.

And that's all I have to say.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:00 pm UTC

Bharrata wrote:
J Thomas wrote:
Bharrata wrote:
Apart from men who get drunk and confused. Lots of men get drunk, some of them do stuff drunk that bothers them when they're sober.


Getting drunk and date-raping, or even without the date, is still rape.


Yes, it is. But my expectation is that the thinking involved is simpler, and you can't predict much about what kind of men do it, beyond that it's men who get drunk. More random, no particular pattern to it.


The pattern is men who either have no control over their drinking and their actions or men who are weak enough, internally, to rape a woman while drunk but won't while sober.


I've certainly been in the situation where I thought I would be getting laid and it was late and I was drunk but I didn't get what I expected...and the thought of rape to get what I expected never crossed my mind.

So excuse me if I judge anyone who would think that's acceptable or tacitly allow that to occur to be either weak or raised completely terribly.


I don't drink and I don't claim to particularly understand what it's like. Some men get so drunk they do things they firmly claim later they do not remember. Women too. The culture says this is true. I haven't experienced it myself. Some people go to sleep before they get that drunk. I don't particularly think you deserve a medal for not thinking about raping somebody when you were drunk. Different people get drunk differently. I'm glad you don't have a problem with that.

I do think that if you thought you might do something while drunk that you would consider reprehensible while in your right mind, that you really should be careful not to get that drunk. That would obviously include asking the barman ahead of time to cut you off when you reach some point. But this is all stuff I haven't experienced.

We get the actual consequences of our choices, not the morality stories that people make up.


Here's some stats for you:

http://www.rainn.org/statistics

"15 of 16 rapists will never spend a day in jail."


Soft statistics. They report a 16.3% chance that a reported rape will result in a felony conviction with prison time. They don't consider suspects who spend time in jail awaiting trial. Then they make sweeping assumptions about the number of unreported rapes etc. If we assume that rapists tend to repeat, then a much higher fraction of rapists will eventually get caught and go to prison. Unfortunately, I've seen nothing to indicate that the experience makes them less likely to rape again when they get out, assuming they do not die in prison.


And just to shoot your theories to shit about least initiative:

"Approximately 2/3 of assaults are committed by someone known to the victim...38% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance."


How does that affect my theories about initiative?

Now that I am even thinking about it a good third of my girlfriends have been assaulted or abused at some point in their lives, usually by a friend or family member, and that third is of course the ones who felt the need to share that with me.


Personal anecdote. Confirmation bias. Not that different from mine, though, particularly when I include women I didn't get closely involved with.

I can appreciate the intent behind your misguided attempts at objectivity about this, but go fuck yourself, rape and sexual assault are not cold statistics and there are a lot of broken people in this world, and yes, you'd probably be surprised how many dudes you wouldn't expect it from are capable of rape or sexual assault...and then how many do.


I doubt I'd be surprised. But I think the fraction is smaller than you think it is. Your source said 73% were by a nonstranger. Most people know around 10,000 people. That includes room for a small fraction to do a lot of rapes. My concern is that they would get away with it so often when they can be identified. I guess it makes sense. Various people have told me about their fathers who raped a lot of people -- school board principles and such. Occasionally some respected member of some community gets publicly accused of rape, and then more accusers come forth who had not tried or been ignored before. In general the people who tell those stories about their fathers have not seemed trustworthy to me, and the people getting suddenly hit with multiple rape charges are usually involved in politics so it could be done as a smear. But it could all be true too.
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:02 pm UTC

jpk wrote:Dude, he's going away. Gift horse, don't look it in the mouth.

Nice try, Odysseus.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

Bharrata
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 7:57 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Bharrata » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:04 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:...


What is this I don't even



first time ive ever had to even use that phrase, forgive me

tanthalas
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:53 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby tanthalas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:11 pm UTC

Shro wrote:
One last question for all the anti-pua regulars:

Why is it that I've observed growing up that the men who "played the game" were the ones who were successful with women, but the guys who talked to girls like human beings had no luck whatsoever?

Note: You is the generic "you" and is not referring to anyone in particular.

I don't know, I seem to think that guys who talk to human beings are pretty "lucky" for given values of luck. They're probably getting laid all the time, because most nice guys who treat human beings like human beings are usually taken. For some reason, women love being in long term relationships with guys who talk to them like human beings. These nice guys aren't part of this "sexual marketplace". So who is left available in the "sexual marketplace"? Assholes. And you. And damn are those assholes getting laid more than you. So not fair. You're a better piece of genetic diversity, a mere whiff of your major histocompatibilty complex differences should maker her lizard brain forever surrender and have your babies.

spoilered the rest
Spoiler:
But no, it's these assholes that get to sleep with these hot girls. Of course it's these assholes that sleep with those hot girls that you're attracted to. Now one of the solutions to the problem might be to look around and maybe see that there are a couple of nice girls that might be attracted to you. But you don't know about them, they're kind of unattractive, don't take care of themselves, and make you uncomfortable. You don't want to sleep with them. You're more concerned with that super hot woman that would make great friends and you'd rather just be around her and be her friend because her presence is just so intoxicating. But she'd rather have you as a friend and talk to you about all of her relationship problems and all the jerks she's dating and why can't she see you-you're right there-just waiting and so perfect for her! Those movies and tv, they tell you, that if you're just persistent enough, if you just hang around long enough, you too can get the girl! But that never ends up happening. She keeps dating jerk after jerk and when you finally get up enough courage to maybe ask her or a date or something, anything more she drops you with a single sentence. "I just want to be friends". And keeps dating assholes that may inflame her desires but don't make the least bit of common sense. She ignores men that respect her. Hold her in high regard. Are compatible with her. For assholes.

And you think, do I have to be an asshole too? You don't want to be an asshole, but assholes get the girl and you really really want to get the girl. You think your life will change if you are just finally able to get the girl. You're worried everyone thinks you're a loser because you've never gotten the girl and the message you hear, constantly is you're not a man unless you get the girl. You question your manliness. You want to be able to feel manly.You want society to think you're manly. Manly men get all the girls, but you're not thought of as manly until you start getting the girls. Chicken and egg. Your social brain is telling you to fuck. Your lizard brain is telling you to fuck. Your rational brain is telling you, well, yeah, okay, go along with them and get your fuck on.

OF COURSE ASSHOLES GET THE GIRL
That's what they do. That's what they're out for. They're getting all of the chicks and fucking them and not calling back the next day while they sob into their pillows telling you about the jerk that she really liked that didn't call back. You don't want to be that. These assholes view women as practically nothing but a masturbatory aid, and they will say anything and do anything and tell their lies to get women into bed. Women get hurt as a result. You like women, you respect women, and you don't want to hurt them. But it seems that's the only way they'll sleep with you!

So you start looking at what the assholes are doing to pick up women. They seem to pick up women in clubs, in bars, even just right off the street. So you're taught, no, don't speak to her rational brain, it's the lizard brain that you have to convince. It's the lizard brain that wants the sex. It's the lizard brain that will make her want to jump into bed with you with no regard to the consequences, because honestly, the lizard brain really really wants sex. So you learn to speak to the lizard brain. You learn how to shoot down objections from the rational brain. You inflame her desires while not necessarily appealing to common sense. In fact, you commonly and consistently shoot down her rational brain's objections to sleeping with you, because you know it's her lizard brain in charge of making the decision anyway. This is what jerks do. This are the behaviors you emulate because you just want to get a girl.

And lo! You get them. You get girls numbers, you're more "successful". Maybe you even take one home and sleep with them. Your hypothesis has been proven. Only assholes get the girls, so you have to act like an asshole to get these girls.

Now, there's nothing wrong with appealing to the lizard brain. It's when you deliberately try to get past these women's rational brain barriers and appeal solely to their lizard brain. Sometime their rational brain centers match up perfectly with their lizard brain. You go home, have a fun time, everybody's happy. But sometimes the lizard brain and the rational brain aren't so in sync. Sometimes the rational brain is a little impaired and can't restrain the lizard brain as much as it used to (like with alcohol).

Now we'll reintroduce another part of the brain, the social brain. Your social brain is the part of your brain that's dedicated to interactions with other people. Women have a pretty big social brain and one of it's tasks is to avoid conflict. Women are conditioned from a very early age that conflict is bad and should be avoided at all costs. This is not a personal thing, it's an instinctual social thing (weak members of the group were able to survive by not making the strong members of the group angry) compounded by current social conditioning. Now while you're inflaming the desires of her lizard brain, you're making her slightly uncomfortable to turn on her social brain. This will activate classic conflict avoidance behaviors; you're hoping for "people pleasing" and "giving in". So her lizard brain wants sex, her social brain is thinking about whether or not she's safe and her rational brain is trying to synthesize all these inputs and it's own ideas into whether or not she wants to go home with you. There's still a chance that you won't get the conflict avoidance behaviors you want from her social brain, she might just leave. Her lizard brain might not think you're sexy. Her rational brain might think it's a bad idea. It's okay, you'll move on, and try it on the next girl.

This is where the moral outrage comes in. That's predatory behavior when you look at it. You have a formula and you're on the prowl. You keep using it until it sparks just the right brain condition in some woman to get her to sleep with you. You do not care if she is making the wrong decision because you believe that she is empowered enough to make her own decisions. Even if she doesn't know you're deliberately messing with the parts of her brain that would get her to sleep with you.

But she does know that you're deliberately messing with parts of her brain, that's what the game is. She should have known. Women play the game to get stuff, men play the game to get laid. That's just how it is. These manipulative behaviors are only a response to women's own manipulations of men. All's fair in love.

Okay. Now I will posit that certain manipulative (mate-guarding, etc) behaviors in ancient women arose from the same reproductive drive that shaped those different (but still manipulative) behaviors in ancient men. In a previous era (not that long ago, sadly) women weren't even able to own property. It makes sense that certain behaviors would be favorable for their survival. Being able to keep a man. Making sure his resources were not diverted to another family/mistress so it was her offspring that benefitted most from whatever the man was able to provide. A behavior that would make sure someone stronger wouldn't kill/beat her by maybe offering the offender sex would have turned out to be a behavior that persisted, since women with that behavior would tend to be the ones to reproduce and make more offspring with the conflict avoidant social brain feature. So really, these manipulations started out as behaviors as a response to sexist behavior by ancient assholes throughout the eras, but for and example, we'll focus on those assholes that would beat their wives if they were displeased and it was in fact thought their right to do so (also not too long ago). What behaviors would be most useful to women in this situation? Avoid conflict. Please her husband. Don't get beat up. Don't die. Live long enough to have babies. But the conflict avoidant behavior also means that she'll let him have sex with her more often? "Giving in" is one of the conflict avoidance strategies she's learned. And there's no such thing as birth control at this point. So this behavior not only promotes not dying in the avoiding getting fatally beat up kind of way, which is a pretty important drive for an organism, and would be selected for evolutionarily like, obviously. But the behavior of just letting him have sex with her would have also been selected for, because it was those women that ended up reproducing. So this is a behavior that evolution just loves, it makes sure the organism doesn't die AND it provides for a mechanism for the propagation of the species.

Evolution does not care about morals. It is not a moral process. But we evolved a sense of morality for a reason.


Holy shit wall of text I'm stopping here for now.


So good. Thank you for this.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:13 pm UTC

Bharrata wrote:
J Thomas wrote:....


What is this I don't even


?? You've forgotten? I guess there's a lot of water over that bridge by now.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=81485&start=1760#p2909770

The Great Hippo wrote:
tanthalas wrote:To infer from that that his intention are purely to get in her pants is just ... wow. The fact that you can't even consider the possibility that someone could think, "I think this person is an awesome, interesting human being but I have no idea how to even approach her" without being an objectifying, misogynist pig who only wants notches under his belt is downright horrifying.
Well, to be fair, if you can't get up the gumption to talk with someone, how on earth would you figure out that they're an awesome, interesting human being? It's likely that a lot of times, they think they're an awesome, interesting human being because they're attractive, and behaving in a way that makes them more attractive.

This really is 'I-want-to-get-in-your-pants'. I don't think there's anything wrong with that! Just be honest with yourself, and (try to be) honest with the woman in question. Walking up to her and going "I FIND YOU HOT CAN I BONE YOU" is a little too honest; there's a balance to be struck between honesty and presentation. "I find you really interesting / can I buy you a drink / hey sup" works better as an opener.

When the goal with someone you're meeting for the first time is no-strings sex, there are two concepts you want to get across: 1) I want to have no-strings attached sex with you, and 2) I am not a mouth-breathing weirdo who is going to skin you, wear your skin, and use your skin as a portal to new dimensions. #1 is about honesty; #2 is about presentation. Some people have the honesty part down, but not the presentation; PUAs are all about the presentation and (as far as I'm concerned, anyway) not enough honesty. You can have way too little of both, too (and I think a lot of socially awkward people suffer from this--they're bad at presenting themselves and they're bad at being honest to themselves about what they actually want).


From what I've heard, PUAs are pretty much honest about #1. And then they're all about presentation.

What I've heard about them that I don't like is that they think they're manipulating women who would not want them, to want them. When it's actually women who find them acceptable and the guys are fooling themselves into thinking it's manipulation -- that's not so very bad. Not harmless, but not too important. If they succeed in manipulating women into doing things that are bad for the women (or bad for the PUAs for that matter), that's worse.

The important thing here is that both #1 and #2 are successfully relayed to your partner and everyone is clear and happy and enthusiastic with the result. There's nothing wrong with wanting 'notches under your belt' (remember, women might want notches under their belt, too!), so long as your partners are aware and enthusiastic.


So, say a PUA does that. They successfully relay #1 and #2, and everybody's enthusiastic. Is that OK? Maybe it's bad because for the PUA to even be a PUA he has to be riddled with insecurities deep underneath, and he's learned to fake confidence that he doesn't have, and so he really ought to show the woman what a pathetic dweeb he is because that's the real him? If the woman's enthusiastic now but later she decides he's a creep and she shouldn't have done it, does that make him retroactively bad?

Well, if he does a hard sell and barely gets her to go along. That doesn't sound good to me. I said before, if a car salesman does a hard sell and the customer unhappily drives the car off the lot, he has his commission. He's happy. But if you do a hard sell on sex and you wind up with somebody who's barely compliant, it's likely not to pay off nearly so well as if she actually wants to.
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

User avatar
rigwarl
Posts: 759
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:36 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby rigwarl » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:20 pm UTC

Hi guys! I think this is a good spot for an excerpt from my 7 Tips For Guys Who Feel Sorry For Themselves:

rigwarl wrote:2. Do you believe nice guys finish last? Good, because you're right! Nice guys are a great example of natural selection at work; they finish last because they have the worst approach to relationships. While “nice guys” isn’t a strictly-defined term, people don't usually it mean a guy who is friendly and caring; instead, it typically refers to some guy who gets close to a girl and watches movies, does homework, and goes out to eat with her on a daily basis. Yet he never tells her that he likes her, and he acts surprised when some other guy asks her out on a date and she accepts.

3. The polar opposite of the nice guy is the pick up artist. Their dating approach is the second worse, beaten only by the nice guy; in fact, the only reason pick-up artistry has ever improved any guy's dating approach for any guy is probably because it forced him to stop being a nice guy. Specifically, a 10-step pick-up artist guide will most likely make you do 9 stupid things, but if the 10th step is to actually ask a girl out, you're automatically better off than the nice guy- even if step 9 was to intentionally spill your drink on her and act like you don't care to show her that you are unable to feel sympathy, therefore you must be incredibly alpha and manly.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:26 pm UTC

ddxxdd wrote:How is someone's humanity disrespected if you're constantly reading their faces and body language?

I mean, aren't all humans a bunch of machines that project emotions according to a predetermined formula developed inside the brain? If I give my buddy vanilla ice cream because I know he likes it, am I treating him like a metal robot with an input and an output response?

One feature of the human machine is that I can make it willing to give me money by pointing a gun at it. This is widely deemed unethical.

At the same time, it is not generally deemed unethical to give someone ice cream in order to make them happy. What's the difference? I think a plausible answer is that people are willing to be given ice cream to be made happy, but not willing to be threatened to be made compliant.

This is key: people are machines, but in virtue of the kind of machines they are, they have wills. Any kind of behavior that affects a person is ultimately a level of mechanics. However, there is an ethical line between behavior that respects people's wills and behavior that disrespects them.

Thus:
ddxxdd wrote:Likewise, if there are certain ways to build attraction, and certain ways to determine if attraction is present, is it really inhumane to use that knowledge for mutual benefits?

The answer to this question depends on whether the people you're interacting with will that you use the knowledge that you're considering using.

This is Hippo's point: you can figure out what people will by asking them what they will.

WithinThisMind wrote:Let me be blunt - when you say there are factors that 'contribute' to rape, what you are in fact saying is that you feel the rapist was justified and the victim was asking for it.

Horseshit. If you're going to call someone sub-human scum on the basis of this claim, then defend it.
Last edited by TheGrammarBolshevik on Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:28 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:28 pm UTC

Aaeriele wrote:
J Thomas wrote:...


Way to come off as a condescending asshole.


Why the hostility?

J Thomas wrote:Here's what I think. We don't have proof whether humans are machines are not. Either way, when you try to predict what a person will do, it makes sense to treat them like they're predictable. When you negotiate with somebody, remember that you don't really understand them and they have full free will. Treat people the way that works for the particular situation.


Your entire post seems to miss the word "just" in that big sentence you quoted. The point is that "machines" are things that can be used to serve your own purposes. Humans are not something to just be used to serve your own purposes, they have their own desires and needs as well, which need to be respected.


Did I not get my point across? It is undetermined whether or not human beings are just machines. If we are, my own purposes have no more importance than your purposes, and our respect for each other's purposes means something special in terms of the respect that machines provide each other.

It would be a sort of social convention among machines.

You give the impression that you don't take this concept seriously. But ddxxdd might likely be taking it seriously. You are probably talking past him.

Very likely he can come to a mutual agreement with you about behavior. But it probably won't start from you mouthing moral platitudes that he has not bought into.
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

tanthalas
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:53 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby tanthalas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:41 pm UTC

I'd still like to hear ddxxdd or any other pro-PUA folks to respond to my earlier (earliest) question about the Golden Rule -- how would you feel if someone you didn't find attractive applied the same tactics on you? Or if someone got you to donate a chunk of money via a cold call, or a car salesman got you to buy a car that you didn't like?

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7366
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby The Great Hippo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:46 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:So, say a PUA does that. They successfully relay #1 and #2, and everybody's enthusiastic. Is that OK?
My primary contention with PUAs--not expressed within that post (since that post wasn't about my main contention with PUAs)--is that they aren't letting women in on the fact that they're practicing PUA, or even considering that maybe women don't want to have a relationship with someone practicing PUA.
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:This is Hippo's point: you can figure out what people will by asking them what they will.
Yes. This. For the love of God, ask women if they're okay with this. They fucking deserve to know the mechanics by which you are attempting to manipulate them. Doing otherwise is so incredibly disrespectful and irresponsible.

To use this ice-cream example: I give you ice-cream so you're happy and so you'll lend me a dollar. Is this a bad situation? Not if I tell you this is why I'm giving you the ice-cream.

People do this all the time. It's a little thing we call 'treating other humans respectfully'.
Last edited by The Great Hippo on Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:48 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:47 pm UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
ddxxdd wrote:How is someone's humanity disrespected if you're constantly reading their faces and body language?

I mean, aren't all humans a bunch of machines that project emotions according to a predetermined formula developed inside the brain? If I give my buddy vanilla ice cream because I know he likes it, am I treating him like a metal robot with an input and an output response?

One feature of the human machine is that I can make it willing to give me money by pointing a gun at it. This is widely deemed unethical.

At the same time, it is not generally deemed unethical to give someone ice cream in order to make them happy. What's the difference? I think a plausible answer is that people are willing to be given ice cream to be made happy, but not willing to be threatened to be made compliant.


People are willing to be given ice cream sometimes, when they think they understand and approve of the context.

I guarantee I know how to offer people ice cream and have them reject it. When a creepy guy offers you ice cream and you aren't sure why.... I bet I can offer 5 year olds ice cream and get them to reject it.

This is key: people are machines, but in virtue of the kind of machines they are, they have wills. Any kind of behavior that affects a person is ultimately a level of mechanics. However, there is an ethical line between behavior that respects people's wills and behavior that disrespects them.

Thus:
ddxxdd wrote:Likewise, if there are certain ways to build attraction, and certain ways to determine if attraction is present, is it really inhumane to use that knowledge for mutual benefits?

The answer to this question depends on whether the people you're interacting with will that you use the knowledge that you're considering using.

This is Hippo's point: you can figure out what people will by asking them what they will.


What they say they want will vary a lot by how you frame the questions.

On another tangent, It's widely agreed that behavioral methods work to change people's behavior. They tend to work slowly, and people who're good at it can speed it up some. They often work better when the people don't notice them. When you help somebody achieve their own goal this way, it's absolutely wrong to take credit for it afterward. It was their own effort, you only provided some of the environment.

What about using behavioral methods on people for your own goals? That's unethical. But people do it all the time without noticing that they do it. Should you stop because you notice? There's a giant industry devoted to doing this to everybody. Is it even possible to regulate it?

Apart from the rest of society, I think we each should learn how it works and try to notice what's working on us, and arrange to get reinforcement for the things we want reinforced in ourselves. This is something you can do without waiting for society to reach a consensus.
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7366
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby The Great Hippo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:50 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:What about using behavioral methods on people for your own goals? That's unethical. But people do it all the time without noticing that they do it. Should you stop because you notice?
No. Just make it clear to the people you're doing it to that this what you're doing. Most of the time, we're already aware.

EDIT: Also, at the risk of treading old ground--a lot of the pro-and-neutral PUA positions sound scarily close to "It's cool for men to brainstorm secret techniques to convince women to make better decisions concerning sex with men".

Just so we're clear, that's not actually cool.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:06 pm UTC

tanthalas wrote:I'd still like to hear ddxxdd or any other pro-PUA folks to respond to my earlier (earliest) question about the Golden Rule -- how would you feel if someone you didn't find attractive applied the same tactics on you? Or if someone got you to donate a chunk of money via a cold call, or a car salesman got you to buy a car that you didn't like?


I'm not pro PUA but I'll answer anyway.

First off, I'm currently married. We officially have an open marriage. It's OK for either of us to have sex with somebody else provided we discuss it with the other and get their agreement. It seemed like a good idea, and neither of us has ever done that. Every open marriage I've every observed with any scrutiny was a lie. They cheat because they don't actually want to go through with getting prior approval. I haven't cheated and I don't know whether our open marriage is a lie or not.

If I was single, and I noticed somebody trying to create rapport, I wouldn't mind. There's little enough of that. If they wanted sex with me and I didn't find them attractive, I'd say no. If I did find them attractive at that point, I'd look at whether I was up for it, and if so I'd say yes.

If they didn't want to take no for an answer, I might tell them how that made them seem unattractive. I usually don't mind giving people feedback like that.

I've never donated money from a cold call. I ask about their website and research the details. Cold callers like that are usually happy to give me what I want and get off the phone. I think they might tend o have a quota, and if I take too much of their time they fall behind on calls that might pay.

I have had car salesmen try to bully me into buying cars I didn't want. I said no. It's kind of fun provided I have the time. "No, these are not the cars I'm looking for." They only do it when they aren't busy. When I'm the only customer they have nothing better to do than keep trying until I drive away.

I can't be sure what I'd do in a new situation. I've seen psychological studies that claim people in general are not good at predicting what they'd do that they haven't done before.
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

tanthalas
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:53 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby tanthalas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:16 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:
tanthalas wrote:I'd still like to hear ddxxdd or any other pro-PUA folks to respond to my earlier (earliest) question about the Golden Rule -- how would you feel if someone you didn't find attractive applied the same tactics on you? Or if someone got you to donate a chunk of money via a cold call, or a car salesman got you to buy a car that you didn't like?


I'm not pro PUA but I'll answer anyway.

By "I'll answer anyway," you mean "I won't answer at all and instead go off on a completely irrelevant tangent"?

But for the sake of giving you (as well as anyone else) the benefit of the doubt, let me rephrase my question to make what I'm asking clearer: how do you feel about someone using premeditated tactics to get you to do something that you otherwise wouldn't do?

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7366
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby The Great Hippo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:22 pm UTC

It's a strange question, because I can't imagine doing something I don't want to do unless I have sufficient reason. If I don't want to sleep with you, and you somehow convince me--outside blackmail, extortion, or threat of violence--obviously, you somehow changed my mind. You convinced me to want to sleep with you.

The more relevant question for me: If I then found out that you accomplished this feat by reading through my diary, or getting all my exes together in a room and talking to them about what I find sexy, or even just attending seminars on how to properly seduce dudes--I'd feel violated, dirty, and pissed. Why? Because that's some shit you should have let me know up front. It is directly fucking relevant to my decision to sleep with you.

PUAs hand-waving this away by saying it's not relevant at all, or women already know the score, or women are better off with guys deciding what bits of information are relevant to this decision and which aren't--to me, that's the most infuriating piece of bullshit going on in this thread. You don't get to decide what's relevant.

Some women do not want to sleep with people using PUA tactics. RESPECT THEIR FUCKING WISHES.
Last edited by The Great Hippo on Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:24 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Shadowman615
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:29 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Shadowman615 » Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:22 pm UTC

ddxxdd wrote:One last question for all the anti-pua regulars:

Why is it that I've observed growing up that the men who "played the game" were the ones who were successful with women, but the guys who talked to girls like human beings had no luck whatsoever?


Not an anti-pua guy either, but my answer is:

I don't know why you observed what you did while you were growing up, but it does not reflect reality. What I've observed, and many other people have observed paints an entirely different picture. I had plenty of luck when I was single and always talked to women like human beings. So did many people I knew. But what either of us observed does not really matter. People have a way of selectively noticing details that prove what they may already think. It's pretty easy to start with a premise and work backwards from it.

But I think it's also that it's pretty easy to tell when someone "playing the game" is getting lucky, and not quite as easy to tell with people who are more discreet.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:25 pm UTC

tanthalas wrote:
J Thomas wrote:
tanthalas wrote:I'd still like to hear ddxxdd or any other pro-PUA folks to respond to my earlier (earliest) question about the Golden Rule -- how would you feel if someone you didn't find attractive applied the same tactics on you? Or if someone got you to donate a chunk of money via a cold call, or a car salesman got you to buy a car that you didn't like?


I'm not pro PUA but I'll answer anyway.

By "I'll answer anyway," you mean "I won't answer at all and instead go off on a completely irrelevant tangent"?

But for the sake of giving you (as well as anyone else) the benefit of the doubt, let me rephrase my question to make what I'm asking clearer: how do you feel about someone using premeditated tactics to get you to do something that you otherwise wouldn't do?


I did answer that. I expect people to do that, and I try to notice what I want.

I don't so much mind when they try it. I tend to mind when they want me to do things that should be obvious to them are opposed to my self-interest. But there's a lot of that going on.
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

dawolf
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:21 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby dawolf » Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:06 pm UTC

Clearly there is a massive difference between this

The Great Hippo wrote:reading through my diary, or getting all my exes together in a room and talking to them about what I find sexy,


and this

The Great Hippo wrote:or even just attending seminars on how to properly seduce dudes



false equivalencies don't help

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

!

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:09 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:It's a strange question, because I can't imagine doing something I don't want to do unless I have sufficient reason. If I don't want to sleep with you, and you somehow convince me--outside blackmail, extortion, or threat of violence--obviously, you somehow changed my mind. You convinced me to want to sleep with you.


Agreed.

The more relevant question for me: If I then found out that you accomplished this feat by reading through my diary,


That's generally considered socially unacceptable. Similarly if they hack my computer. I doubt they'd learn much that would help them, but it's creepy they'd do it.

or getting all my exes together in a room and talking to them about what I find sexy,


That would indicate an extraordinary level of dedication. I doubt my exes would be of much use either. I tended to very much treat them the ways they wanted to be treated, which was -- diverse. I think I'd be concerned about that. Mossad is famous for doing that sort of thing. They research just what sort of woman a man wants, and then provide him with exactly that and then when he's all relaxed they kidnap him. I can't imagine anything I'd done that would get Mossad interested, but there could be some other group that was less famous and less competent at choosing targets.

or even just attending seminars on how to properly seduce dudes--


I wouldn't have a problem with that. I would be interested in what she learned. It sounds like a fascinating conversation topic. I've noticed women using a variety of techniques. They do things to start conversations without making it look like they're approaching somebody. Some women use volunteer work as a way to approach men. They have a perfect excuse to start a conversation when they ask for help with the movement. Some act like they need help with something, when it turns out they're real competent. Men feel calm and relaxed when they are helping a woman who needs assistance. It's silly games that aren't very important.

Twice, girls who invited me into their rooms to help them with homework, started to kiss and then tugged with their boots on the extension cord that controlled all the lights in the room. This was a clear signal what they intended. Afterward they discussed it and agreed that it really didn't make much difference. I think they must have read it in a magazine or something.

I'd feel violated, dirty, and pissed. Why? Because that's some shit you should have let me know up front. It is directly fucking relevant to my decision to sleep with you.


I don't take that as seriously as you do. I probably would if I thought it made a big difference, though. Trying to come up with examples ... say there was a woman who lacked self-confidence, and some other woman got all intent on seducing me and then at the last minute in the dark they switched. Yuck. I might be fine with a project to build up somebody's confidence, but let me know!

And if it's part of a kidnap plot I'd think the other person would have an ethical obligation to tell me, but it's almost 100% certain they would not.

I think I have the same feelings you do, but my threshold is higher.

PUAs hand-waving this away by saying it's not relevant at all, or women already know the score, or women are better off with guys deciding what bits of information are relevant to this decision and which aren't--to me, that's the most infuriating piece of bullshit going on in this thread. You don't get to decide what's relevant.

Some women do not want to sleep with people using PUA tactics. RESPECT THEIR FUCKING WISHES.


Some women might feel that way about men who have been in prison. Or men who are bisexual. Or Republicans. Or Catholics. Morticians. People with occasional neurological defects. They might care about income ranges. Snoring. Taste for, or toleration of, some particular sort of kinky sex. Should men and women do a full disclosure of everything that might be considered a negative?

How about this -- you ask about anything you'd consider a deal-breaker, and they answer. Some things they might not know how to lie about. Like, if you ask about the GOP, do you want him to be a Republican or not?
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

Aceo
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:33 pm UTC
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, UK
Contact:

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Aceo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:13 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:I wouldn't have a problem with that. I would be interested in what she learned. It sounds like a fascinating conversation topic. I've noticed women using a variety of techniques. They do things to start conversations without making it look like they're approaching somebody. Some women use volunteer work as a way to approach men. They have a perfect excuse to start a conversation when they ask for help with the movement. Some act like they need help with something, when it turns out they're real competent. Men feel calm and relaxed when they are helping a woman who needs assistance. It's silly games that aren't very important.


You mean, they have interests and hobbies?! One of the recomended alternatives to PUA, how dare they!
GENERATION 19: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

dawolf
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:21 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby dawolf » Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:19 pm UTC

Aceo wrote:You mean, they have interests and hobbies?! One of the recomended alternatives to PUA, how dare they!


I have directly said to a friend who was single, that he should get more interests and hobbies as a way of meeting more girls.

I am sure some women do this as well.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7366
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby The Great Hippo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:37 pm UTC

dawolf wrote:Clearly there is a massive difference between this

The Great Hippo wrote:reading through my diary, or getting all my exes together in a room and talking to them about what I find sexy,


and this

The Great Hippo wrote:or even just attending seminars on how to properly seduce dudes



false equivalencies don't help
The issue isn't whether they're equivalent; the issue is whether both represent situations I take issue with--and notably, whether it's reasonable to expect women to take issue with them.

Do you know how we can find out if women take issue with seminars where we learn methods to seduce them? I'll give you a guess. It's three words...

Aceo
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:33 pm UTC
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, UK
Contact:

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Aceo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:39 pm UTC

It's not just a way of meeting more girls though, it can give someone something to talk about.
People with interests are Interesting. Also, to go along with your point, at these events you'll meet like minded people who you have something in common with. A perfect gateway to making new friends and/or more while allowing you to be more interesting to those outside of it.
GENERATION 19: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:10 pm UTC

Aceo wrote:
J Thomas wrote:I wouldn't have a problem with that. I would be interested in what she learned. It sounds like a fascinating conversation topic. I've noticed women using a variety of techniques. They do things to start conversations without making it look like they're approaching somebody. Some women use volunteer work as a way to approach men. They have a perfect excuse to start a conversation when they ask for help with the movement. Some act like they need help with something, when it turns out they're real competent. Men feel calm and relaxed when they are helping a woman who needs assistance. It's silly games that aren't very important.


You mean, they have interests and hobbies?!


No, I mean they do innocent little sneaky tricks to get their pick-up interactions to go smoother. I don't have any problem with it. I don't claim that it's equivalent to PUA. I have no objection to the interaction going smoothly.

One of the recomended alternatives to PUA, how dare they!


I don't know what PUA guys recommend instead. They might not want to use social icebreakers to reduce the awkwardness of making a pass, because they want to make their intentions completely plain. I dunno.

One time I was feeling generally exhausted during a deadline overrun, and I stopped to eat at a nice korean restaurant. The waitress was a beautiful korean woman who didn't speak english perfectly. I certainly wasn't going to harass her at work, and I felt too tired to boot. Without intending to I left my credit card with her and walked out. I was just about to get into my car when she came sprinting out with it, so graceful. She gave me her number without my asking (but she knew I wanted it). I felt a lot better then but still exhausted.

Leaving the credit card could have been a ploy if I'd thought to do it. It made me look like a harmless doofus. Of course there's the risk somebody would just take it....
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

dawolf
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:21 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby dawolf » Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:10 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:Do you know how we can find out if women take issue with seminars where we learn methods to seduce them? I'll give you a guess. It's three words...


yes some do?

Aceo
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:33 pm UTC
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, UK
Contact:

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Aceo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:28 pm UTC

dawolf wrote:
The Great Hippo wrote:Do you know how we can find out if women take issue with seminars where we learn methods to seduce them? I'll give you a guess. It's three words...


yes some do?


Do it in less than three. "Ask them". Hell, use it as a conversation topic next time your with some people.
GENERATION 19: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:29 pm UTC

dawolf wrote:
The Great Hippo wrote:Do you know how we can find out if women take issue with seminars where we learn methods to seduce them? I'll give you a guess. It's three words...


yes some do?


No, silly, it's Just Ask Them.

I once thought of setting up classes in how to tell whether somebody is lying. Participants would pay a rather large sum of money, and then they would practice lying to each other. Half the time it wouldn't be lies. Some of their money would be wagered each time on whether they could tell whether the person was lying. The target would win or lose money if he got away with the lie, but when he was telling the truth he often would not have anything at stake. So they would get back most of their fees if they were successful.

You learn to catch lies with practice. It has to be lies that matter to the liar -- people aren't the same when they lie about something that doesn't matter. The trouble is, this would also give people practice at lying and getting away with it.

If you were thinking about trusting somebody, and they'd taken that class, wouldn't you want to know about it?

It occurs to me that the PUA guys would do a lot better to market their stuff as "How to have fun showing women a good time". The focus would be on flattery, feeling good about yourself and about her, finding pastimes she enjoys to share with her, and the most pleasant possible seduction. Not about how to get a woman to have sex with you, but about how to make it a wonderful experience for her. Get women to provide a whole lot of input and do at least half of the teaching. Graduates might receive a great big distinctive lapel pin they can wear. Or maybe a medallion on a gold chain, their choice. It would be a selling point.
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

Aceo
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:33 pm UTC
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, UK
Contact:

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Aceo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:33 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:It occurs to me that the PUA guys would do a lot better to market their stuff as "How to have fun showing women a good time". The focus would be on flattery, feeling good about yourself and about her, finding pastimes she enjoys to share with her, and the most pleasant possible seduction. Not about how to get women to have sex with you, but about how to make it a wonderful experience for her. Get women to provide a whole lot of input and do at least half of the teaching. Graduates might receive a great big distinctive lapel pin they can wear. Or maybe a medallion on a gold chain, their choice. It would be a selling point.


Quite a bit better than the current focus. But why can't it be a class on talking to "people"? Confidence, introspection and so on would all be developed and, by extension, the whole "talking to women" could fall into place.
GENERATION 19: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

J Thomas
Everyone's a jerk. You. Me. This Jerk.^
Posts: 1190
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby J Thomas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:46 pm UTC

Aceo wrote:
J Thomas wrote:It occurs to me that the PUA guys would do a lot better to market their stuff as "How to have fun showing women a good time". The focus would be on flattery, feeling good about yourself and about her, finding pastimes she enjoys to share with her, and the most pleasant possible seduction. Not about how to get women to have sex with you, but about how to make it a wonderful experience for her. Get women to provide a whole lot of input and do at least half of the teaching. Graduates might receive a great big distinctive lapel pin they can wear. Or maybe a medallion on a gold chain, their choice. It would be a selling point.


Quite a bit better than the current focus. But why can't it be a class on talking to "people"? Confidence, introspection and so on would all be developed and, by extension, the whole "talking to women" could fall into place.


That's fine. If I had the time, I'd offer a competition. You do it your way, I do it my way, and we find out which market niche is larger.

If people generally were as rational as I am, I think you would win.

But now that I think again, I believe Dale Carnegie does just what you suggest, and that's very big. If it's me opening a new niche and you competing against Dale Carnegie, I think I'd probably come out way ahead of you. But it would take me quite awhile to catch up with Dale's classes.

Dammit, I should have patented this before I posted about it. Now anybody can do it. I've spent all this time here and I'm not going to make any money off it.
The Law of Fives is true. I see it everywhere I look for it.

tanthalas
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:53 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby tanthalas » Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:53 pm UTC

J Thomas wrote:It occurs to me that the PUA guys would do a lot better to market their stuff as "How to have fun showing women a good time". The focus would be on flattery, feeling good about yourself and about her, finding pastimes she enjoys to share with her, and the most pleasant possible seduction. Not about how to get a woman to have sex with you, but about how to make it a wonderful experience for her. Get women to provide a whole lot of input and do at least half of the teaching. Graduates might receive a great big distinctive lapel pin they can wear. Or maybe a medallion on a gold chain, their choice. It would be a selling point.

But that would make too much sense.

dawolf
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:21 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby dawolf » Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:19 pm UTC

Aceo wrote:
dawolf wrote:
The Great Hippo wrote:Do you know how we can find out if women take issue with seminars where we learn methods to seduce them? I'll give you a guess. It's three words...


yes some do?


Do it in less than three. "Ask them". Hell, use it as a conversation topic next time your with some people.



Here's the thing that confuses me, perhaps you could give your viewpoint.

1) Guy asks his brother for tips on picking up women

bad/ok?

2) Guy asks a friend for tips on picking up women

bad/ok?

3) Guy searches the internet for tips on picking up women

bad/ok

4) Guy meets up with a stranger for tips on picking up women

bad/ok?

5) Guy meets up witha group of strangers for tips on picking up women

bad/ok?

Aceo
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:33 pm UTC
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, UK
Contact:

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Aceo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:33 pm UTC

What's with the focus on "Picking Up Women" would be my response to that as a whole.
I don't understand what's confusing about what I said, how do you find anything out in the world about people other than by asking them people? You can ask a man if he practices PUA/techniques or whatever, and then you know about him. Now do the exact same thing with women.
GENERATION 19: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

dawolf
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:21 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby dawolf » Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:04 pm UTC

Aceo wrote:What's with the focus on "Picking Up Women" would be my response to that as a whole.




Ermm...because most guys want to marry, settle down etc in their lifetimes. A pre-requisite of this is to pick up a women (or for them to pick up you - but some picking up needs to happen). And this thread is about picking up women. Does that answer your question?


Aceo wrote:I don't understand what's confusing about what I said, how do you find anything out in the world about people other than by asking them people? You can ask a man if he practices PUA/techniques or whatever, and then you know about him. Now do the exact same thing with women.


It is one option. One I personally don't bother with as I am (not boasting) almost always in a relationship and don't feel the need to chat to girls about this stuff.

For others, it's a good thing to try.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7366
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby The Great Hippo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:08 pm UTC

dawolf wrote:Here's the thing that confuses me, perhaps you could give your viewpoint.

1) Guy asks his brother for tips on picking up women

bad/ok?
Okay.
dawolf wrote:2) Guy asks a friend for tips on picking up women

bad/ok?
Okay.
dawolf wrote:3) Guy searches the internet for tips on picking up women

bad/ok
Okay.
dawolf wrote:4) Guy meets up with a stranger for tips on picking up women

bad/ok?
Weird, but okay.
dawolf wrote:5) Guy meets up witha group of strangers for tips on picking up women

bad/ok?
Very weird, but okay.

Here's where it gets 'bad': When you walk up to a woman with a pick-up technique in hand, knowing fully well that if she was familiar with this technique and your intent to apply it, she would probably throw her drink in your face and tell you to buzz off.

The problem isn't that people are pooling together resources to pick up women; the problem is that they're not being upfront with women about it. They're just assuming women are familiar with all this, and okay with all this--because it's 'all in the game'.

This is what I mean when I repeat, again and again, 'Ask women' -- 'Talk to women'. The problem I'm describing is solved the moment you familiarize yourself with how the women you're hitting on actually feel about PUA techniques. If they're opposed, don't use them on them. If they're cool with it, then go for it.

It is not all in the game. Not all women are playing by the set of rules you think they're playing by. You need to take steps to make sure that the ones you're playing this game with know that you're playing this game.

So, yeah. That's one of the requirements of being a responsible sexually active adult.

Aceo
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:33 pm UTC
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, UK
Contact:

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Aceo » Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:17 pm UTC

From what I've read in this thread, and other PUA threads, it doesn't seem to be about the whole "long term relationship/marriage" thing, more about the "getting laid" with "HB7". So, really, the only way to develop one is to talk to women. A proper pre-requisite to "settling down" is kinda of you know... knowing the person in question.
GENERATION 19: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 836
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby DaBigCheez » Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:52 pm UTC

Yeah - the connotation I generally associate with "picking up" women is not that of "entering into the first step of what will hopefully and with a lot of luck blossom into a long-term relationship and marriage", but rather that of a one-night stand or short-term fling, primarily oriented towards sex, without the expectation of developing something lasting.

And that's fine - if that's what both parties are actually after.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

Remie
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:45 pm UTC

Re: 1027: "Pickup Artist"

Postby Remie » Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:03 am UTC

I read this comic, I read the thread, so help me I even went to a PUA forum.

All I can say is - Those people are fucking awful. I can only be glad that I am not attractive enough to be hit on by those people.

To all the guys defending PUA... No. No you are awful too. You are relying on rape culture, the way society makes it really fucking hard for women to disagree with men, which makes women want to gain the approval of men to ensure that they are not victimised, which tells women the only value they have is the one that men assign to them - to get to put your penises in their vaginas.

and for all the guys saying "But PUAs get laid and guys who treat women like real human beings don't!" - they may not be getting laid, but they can live in the knowledge that they are decent people and not reprehensible fuckwads who genuinely deserve to be exiled to the Ross ice shelf in naught but their crusty underdaks.

And this is why I hate almost everyone.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cubicquitous and 106 guests