SEE/ILI duality thread split - PUA discussion

[totalize]

Thoughts on PUA:

It's good to encourage people to "better themselves." I think most of the knowledge imparted is either intuitive and obvious [wash your hair, don't be obse, etc etc] and it's a little bit sad that to get this advice across, it had to be put in the context of a "magic get laid button." The aspect of PUA which basically teaches people how to treat themselves better is fine imo. It's just the part about giving advice about how to treat other people that sucks. I think it's sad that people have to be "taught" how to interact with the other sex, but also the type of interactions they're promoting are really shallow. It's bad that our society somehow got to the stage where men need to read a "manual to get laid" and treat this as like, the highest stage in life, lol.

[Chae]

Thoughts on PUA:

It's good to encourage people to "better themselves." I think most of the knowledge imparted is either intuitive and obvious [wash your hair, don't be obse, etc etc] and it's a little bit sad that to get this advice across, it had to be put in the context of a "magic get laid button." The aspect of PUA which basically teaches people how to treat themselves better is fine imo. It's just the part about giving advice about how to treat other people that sucks. I think it's sad that people have to be "taught" how to interact with the other sex, but also the type of interactions they're promoting are really shallow. It's bad that our society somehow got to the stage where men need to read a "manual to get laid" and treat this as like, the highest stage in life, lol.

Some good points right there Go on if you like, I'm curious about your opinion.
What you say also matches Sx/So, did you notice?

[totalize]

Some good points right there Go on if you like, I'm curious about your opinion.
What you say also matches Sx/So, did you notice?

I didn't notice haha but in retrospect, sure, I can see that [sx/so].

PUA I think is fundamentally negative. Most of them are trying to preach a "tactic" to getting laid with someone you find in public place that you think is highly attractive. That type of behaviour isn't bad (because, well, I'm inclined to it too), but they are basically dehumanising the opposite sex, and imo the best part about the opposite sex is its humanity, i.e. the whole dimension of human interaction. The more human the better -- what they basically describe is the best way to bust your nut in someone.

So they're treating it like a game, and for me, there are gamey-aspects of "the chase", to speak. Sure it plays out a bit like a game, not exactly a competition, but there are "tactics" required. But it's not a means to an end, and I like to think that I treat people basically decently or honourably. Not all the time, but most of the time -- and never in mind do I have something "ulterior". There is something that I find "just wrong" about PUA that I can't quite put my finger on, but thinking about it, I think it must be the dishonesty.

And the shame. They're advocating people to stand outside a cafe or something asking 100 people for their number in order to get one #, or go to clubs sober and try to ask as many girls as you can for their #... it seems pathetic, unmanly, shameful behaviour, to tell other men to behave in this way.

[Resonare]

Thoughts on PUA:

It's good to encourage people to "better themselves." I think most of the knowledge imparted is either intuitive and obvious [wash your hair, don't be obse, etc etc] and it's a little bit sad that to get this advice across, it had to be put in the context of a "magic get laid button." The aspect of PUA which basically teaches people how to treat themselves better is fine imo. It's just the part about giving advice about how to treat other people that sucks. I think it's sad that people have to be "taught" how to interact with the other sex, but also the type of interactions they're promoting are really shallow. It's bad that our society somehow got to the stage where men need to read a "manual to get laid" and treat this as like, the highest stage in life, lol.

That is actually the best part of game. Most people do not communicate properly with other people, either because they don't know how to or are too afraid to express themselves.

PUA I think is fundamentally negative. Most of them are trying to preach a "tactic" to getting laid with someone you find in public place that you think is highly attractive. That type of behaviour isn't bad (because, well, I'm inclined to it too), but they are basically dehumanising the opposite sex, and imo the best part about the opposite sex is its humanity, i.e. the whole dimension of human interaction. The more human the better -- what they basically describe is the best way to bust your nut in someone.

Stop watching the bad practitioners.

So they're treating it like a game, and for me, there are gamey-aspects of "the chase", to speak. Sure it plays out a bit like a game, not exactly a competition, but there are "tactics" required. But it's not a means to an end, and I like to think that I treat people basically decently or honourably. Not all the time, but most of the time -- and never in mind do I have something "ulterior". There is something that I find "just wrong" about PUA that I can't quite put my finger on, but thinking about it, I think it must be the dishonesty.

You may want to do some research on female nature before condemning men for having ulterior motives and being dishonest.

And the shame. They're advocating people to stand outside a cafe or something asking 100 people for their number in order to get one #, or go to clubs sober and try to ask as many girls as you can for their #... it seems pathetic, unmanly, shameful behaviour, to tell other men to behave in this way.

If you think that is game then do more research.

[totalize]

That is actually the best part of game. Most people do not communicate properly with other people, either because they don't know how to or are too afraid to express themselves.

Implying that "game" is properly communicating with people lol.

Stop watching the bad practitioners.

A community is obliged to stop the worst elements of it from acting like idiots. PUA community doesn't seem to care about its bad practitioners or the low quality values they are pushing on impressionable young men.

You may want to do some research on female nature before condemning men for having ulterior motives and being dishonest.

lol. PUAs confirmed for actual betas?

If you think that is game then do more research.

I already know what game is and the sentence is meant to be intentionally dismissive, but...

http://www.puatraining.com/blog/pick...need-to-master
http://www.pualingo.com/game-theory/outer-game/

What about these things would you call "proper communication" with a person? They're just "tips and tricks to get your dick wet."

This is a good article: http://attractioninstitute.com/the-d...ttractive-man/ It's a bit cringey actually but it emphasises the particular point well enough.

We should be teaching our boys how to be confident, capable and physically disciplined young men. After that -- everything comes naturally. Interaction with the opposite sex is the natural result of putting men and women in a room together. Once a person has the correct manner of character, there doesn't need to be anything else. It's building the character in our young people that's the problem, not whether they can follow the "sex manual."

There's no conspiracy by women to deny men sex. There's nothing unfair about the demands that the two sexes place on one another in terms of behaviour and norms. That's life. If you have the correct character you will be fine, and that character will never be developed by reading into "game". What men need are strong role models who teach them proper ethics and how to behave in civilised society, how to stand up for what they believe in and how to stand up for themselves, how to cultivate personal interests and be passionate about them. Then eventually everything will fall into place and men can have real, satisfying, and emotionally-beneficial relationships with women. The rest is just post-modern garbage.

[Resonare]

Implying that "game" is properly communicating with people lol.

Again, showing your ignorance. Game is about improving yourself and that includes your communication skills.

A community is obliged to stop the worst elements of it from acting like idiots. PUA community doesn't seem to care about its bad practitioners or the low quality values they are pushing on impressionable young men.

Interesting, what makes you say this? Did you derive this rule by yourself?

lol. PUAs confirmed for actual betas?

Some are and some aren't, though I can already tell what kind of male you are from the gender of the people who agree with your opinion

I already know what game is and the sentence is meant to be intentionally dismissive, but...

http://www.puatraining.com/blog/pick...need-to-master
http://www.pualingo.com/game-theory/outer-game/

What about these things would you call "proper communication" with a person? They're just "tips and tricks to get your dick wet."

This is a good article: http://attractioninstitute.com/the-d...ttractive-man/ It's a bit cringey actually but it emphasises the particular point well enough.

We should be teaching our boys how to be confident, capable and physically disciplined young men. After that -- everything comes naturally. Interaction with the opposite sex is the natural result of putting men and women in a room together. Once a person has the correct manner of character, there doesn't need to be anything else. It's building the character in our young people that's the problem, not whether they can follow the "sex manual."

There's no conspiracy by women to deny men sex. There's nothing unfair about the demands that the two sexes place on one another in terms of behaviour and norms. That's life. If you have the correct character you will be fine, and that character will never be developed by reading into "game". What men need are strong role models who teach them proper ethics and how to behave in civilised society, how to stand up for what they believe in and how to stand up for themselves, how to cultivate personal interests and be passionate about them. Then eventually everything will fall into place and men can have real, satisfying, and emotionally-beneficial relationships with women. The rest is just post-modern garbage.

Again, you have not done your research. A quick search on google on even a site like Urban Dictionary returns this...

"With regards success with women, and as opposed to outer game, your inner game is the opinion you have of yourself (your self esteem) and the pursuits in life that make you interesting and successful. This all contributes to your self confidence. A confident person is more likely to score with women.

A strong outer game can for a short while give an impression of confidence and help to attract women. However, without a strong inner game, it may be difficult to retain women you have attracted since they will soon realise that you have little going on in your life that would want to make them stick around.

The inner game can be worked on and improved as much as the outer game, and indeed the two concepts are highly linked to one another. A strong inner game will help with the outer game when it comes to general banter with a woman since you will have plenty of things going on in your life to talk about!"

Not completely accurate but the gist is clear. Inner game is completely about self-improvement which also helps with approaching women and dealing with other people in general.

[totalize]

Again, showing your ignorance. Game is about improving yourself and that includes your communication skills.

Noo-oo, you missed the point. Normal communication skills are things that come both naturally to people, and as a consequence of socialisation from birth. Having to read a rulebook about it is not normal.

Interesting, what makes you say this? Did you derive this rule by yourself?

No, that's just a common thing. You are expected to police the behaviour of people in the same group as you. All organisations follow this basic social rule.

Some are and some aren't, though I can already tell what kind of male you are from the gender of the people who agree with your opinion

Mmmm if I had to read websites about game to figure out how to speak to women I wouldn't go around making comments about the qualities of other men. Just saying.

PUAs and their followers are a tiny minority and most men look on not with hidden admiration but confusion at the justification for these behaviours.

Again, you have not done your research. A quick search on google on even a site like Urban Dictionary returns this...

"With regards success with women, and as opposed to outer game, your inner game is the opinion you have of yourself (your self esteem) and the pursuits in life that make you interesting and successful. This all contributes to your self confidence. A confident person is more likely to score with women.

A strong outer game can for a short while give an impression of confidence and help to attract women. However, without a strong inner game, it may be difficult to retain women you have attracted since they will soon realise that you have little going on in your life that would want to make them stick around.

The inner game can be worked on and improved as much as the outer game, and indeed the two concepts are highly linked to one another. A strong inner game will help with the outer game when it comes to general banter with a woman since you will have plenty of things going on in your life to talk about!"

Not completely accurate but the gist is clear. Inner game is completely about self-improvement which also helps with approaching women and dealing with other people in general.

That is in so many words what I literally just said to you. Except that what I said is that these are inherently positive qualities and what you said is that these are qualities which are good for getting laid. The difference is obvious. Self-improvement for its own sake shows discipline and strength. Doing it because you are a PUA and you want to get better at picking up girls is desperate and sad -- especially when that is a natural outcome of the former anyway.

[Resonare]

Noo-oo, you missed the point. Normal communication skills are things that come both naturally to people, and as a consequence of socialisation from birth. Having to read a rulebook about it is not normal.

Just a little more insight into what makes a bad communicator - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-e..._b_838795.html

A lot of people think they are good communicators when they are not. Most people are guilty of several bad communication habits, even the mouthiest people who claim to be great at it.

No, that's just a common thing. You are expected to police the behaviour of people in the same group as you. All organisations follow this basic social rule.

So you agree that you feel as though you are obligated to police the social behavior of the group then?

Mmmm if I had to read websites about game to figure out how to speak to women I wouldn't go around making comments about the qualities of other men. Just saying.

Actually, I barely read the stuff on talking to women. I thought my posts quite clearly implied that I'm an advocate of inner game but I guess it wasn't clear enough for you.

PUAs and their followers are a tiny minority and most men look on not with hidden admiration but confusion at the justification for these behaviours.

That is in so many words what I literally just said to you. Except that what I said is that these are inherently positive qualities and what you said is that these are qualities which are good for getting laid. The difference is obvious.

He's probably right. The thing about true game is that getting better with women is actually a byproduct, the main goal is to be the best you possible and strength and mastery come along with that.

[Persephone]

PUA works, be it for guys or for gals. There are common triggers that you can learn and that activate certain behaviours.

[totalize]

Just a little more insight into what makes a bad communicator - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-e..._b_838795.html

A lot of people think they are good communicators when they are not. Most people are guilty of several bad communication habits, even the mouthiest people who claim to be great at it.

Sure. I'm not claiming that everyone is a great communicator. Quite the opposite—but um, the "inner game" that you see being promoted on pua sites doesn't even match what you've linked.

So you agree that you feel as though you are obligated to police the social behavior of the group then?

What group? You're calling me a pua now?

Look, you're missing the point, or perhaps I worded it poorly. You can't take the whole of the group and say "oh well just forget the bad apples." The question is why the bad apples are drawn to the group? Why are they so loud in it? They are as equally representative of the group as the good apples. Groups are judged by their collective appearances, not just by their good appearances only.

Actually, I barely read the stuff on talking to women.

One assumes the stuff on talking to women is important for a 'pick up artist'.

Also, if you just like reading things about self-improvement, why bother to jump in to argue the point about PUA stuff? If it was the case that there's a massive distance between the two things, and between the "bad" and the "good" here, why would you post in the way that you did?

[Resonare]

Sure. I'm not claiming that everyone is a great communicator. Quite the opposite—but um, the "inner game" that you see being promoted on pua sites doesn't even match what you've linked.

Is that so? Then why does a quick search on google return this?

With regards success with women, and as opposed to outer game, your inner game is the opinion you have of yourself (your self esteem) and the pursuits in life that make you interesting and successful. This all contributes to your self confidence.

For the last time, actually do the research.

What group? You're calling me a pua now?

Look, you're missing the point, or perhaps I worded it poorly. You can't take the whole of the group and say "oh well just forget the bad apples." The question is why the bad apples are drawn to the group? Why are they so loud in it? They are as equally representative of the group as the good apples. Groups are judged by their collective appearances, not just by their good appearances only.

You're missing the point here but that is neither here nor there.

One assumes the stuff on talking to women is important for a 'pick up artist'.

One (with sense) assumes everyone needs help to varying degrees.

Also, if you just like reading things about self-improvement, why bother to jump in to argue the point about PUA stuff? If it was the case that there's a massive distance between the two things, and between the "bad" and the "good" here, why would you post in the way that you did?

Are you seriously incapable of fathoming how getting better with women and working on self-confidence are not two mutually exclusive goals? I back the real PUA content because many people do not even know how to properly communicate with other people in general, let alone women specifically. For those people the content is helpful, just because it's not helpful to me does not mean it's not helpful in general.

[totalize]

Is that so? Then why does a quick search on google return this?

The research is adequate. Your problem is assigning the qualities of the particular to the whole.

Are you seriously incapable of fathoming how getting better with women and working on self-confidence are not two mutually exclusive goals? I back the real PUA content because many people do not even know how to properly communicate with other people in general, let alone women specifically. For those people the content is helpful, just because it's not helpful to me does not mean it's not helpful in general.

My distaste re: pua isn't, as I said previously (and not implication; explicitly), the part where people work on themselves for the sake of improving themselves. The problem you seem to have is that you can't separate this element from the broader movement without de-attaching yourself from the broader movement. It's like "oh yeah I love pua but erm I only like the small part of it that I happen to like, but the whole thing is still awesome" without acknowledging all the not-awesome parts.

Why should self-improvement fall under the pua category? Self-improvement is great. If you aren't developing game for the explicit purpose of becoming a pick up artist, why identify with being a pick up artist at the same time as turning around and saying "I'm not a pick up artist"?

Stop sitting on the fence. Choose a side already.

[Resonare]

The research is adequate. Your problem is assigning the qualities of the particular to the whole.

Evidently not. You keep saying you can't find content on these matters that I've found easily through google so obviously you're not doing your homework.

My distaste re: pua isn't, as I said previously (and not implication; explicitly), the part where people work on themselves for the sake of improving themselves. The problem you seem to have is that you can't separate this element from the broader movement without de-attaching yourself from the broader movement. It's like "oh yeah I love pua but erm I only like the small part of it that I happen to like, but the whole thing is still awesome" without acknowledging all the not-awesome parts.

Again, you're assuming malpractice actually represents the subject. The bad PUAs that are teaching guys to fake confidence and not work on themselves so they can quickly get women are not representative of game, they are 9/10 douchebags looking to make a quick buck. These guys get found out quickly anyway and sometimes people need to see fake game so they can spot and appreciate the real deal better down the line.

Why should self-improvement fall under the pua category? Self-improvement is great. If you aren't developing game for the explicit purpose of becoming a pick up artist, why identify with being a pick up artist at the same time as turning around and saying "I'm not a pick up artist"?

Stop sitting on the fence. Choose a side already.

What fence? I've already stated exactly where I stand on this. People need help in different parts of game to varying degrees so just because I personally don't need help with that aspect doesn't mean the next guy doesn't.

[totalize]

You keep saying you can't find content on these matters

Er, no I didn't. I explicitly did not say that. I'm not trying to deny there's some kind of thing where they try to teach you to be more confident or speak better or whatever. That's just not the point. I'm not denying that exists (since again I explicitly said it does), I'm telling you that you can separate the positive elements of character building from the broader movement of teaching men to treat women poorly to make themselves feel better. Is that a separation you don't want to make?

Again, you're assuming malpractice actually represents the subject. The bad PUAs that are teaching guys to fake confidence and not work on themselves so they can quickly get women are not representative of game, they are 9/10 douchebags looking to make a quick buck. These guys get found out quickly anyway and sometimes people need to see fake game so they can spot and appreciate the real deal better down the line.

I am unconvinced that there's a low percentage of pua-teachers and pua-learners that have a poor time understanding that their behaviour is sad and inappropriate, and ranging to borderline illegal to actually illegal (like Roosh level). Also you are not going to convince me by linking me to random things. This is the impression I got of the community by observing it and its subcultural movements. Like, I'm not accusing you of being in that % necessarily.

What I have a hard time understanding is why you won't expressly separate yourself from it. #

What fence? I've already stated exactly where I stand on this. People need help in different parts of game to varying degrees so just because I personally don't need help with that aspect doesn't mean the next guy doesn't.

This is not me being a white knight here.

It's actually genuinely bad for your mentality. Like, your self-perception. The sex aspect, anyway. If you just take their advice and work out and become more assertive, ok and ok. But if you're that guy standing on street corners asking 100 people for their phone number because some fag on the internet said that you have to learn man, you have to learn attrition, then that's not mentally healthy, you have to teach yourself to be rejected by being rejected loads of times by people who are more attracitve than you, that is not normal. It doesn't matter how much you "need the help". Find women you like and who have a spark with and approach them and if it works out it works out and it doesn't. Men have been doing it for a hundred thousand years. There's no science or trick behind it.

[Resonare]

Er, no I didn't. I explicitly did not say that. I'm not trying to deny there's some kind of thing where they try to teach you to be more confident or speak better or whatever. That's just not the point. I'm not denying that exists (since again I explicitly said it does), I'm telling you that you can separate the positive elements of character building from the broader movement of teaching men to treat women poorly to make themselves feel better. Is that a separation you don't want to make?

Again, you're assuming malpractice actually represents the subject.

A teacher goes around teaching kids 1 + 1 = 3, is she actually teaching mathematics? No, she is not because the fundamentals of it are that 1 + 1 = 2. It doesn't matter if she uses the same symbols and labels as mathematics, it is not maths or at least is incorrect depending on your definition.

Bad PUAs contradict game, so stop lumping their teachings in with it. This is why I keep telling you to do your research and see that there are people teaching maths and there are dumbasses teaching 1 + 1 = 3 which you keep saying is a negative element of maths when it isn't maths at all or is just incorrect. If this analogy doesn't reach you then this is getting to the point where I feel bad for you.

I am unconvinced that there's a low percentage of pua-teachers and pua-learners that have a poor time understanding that their behaviour is sad and inappropriate, and ranging to borderline illegal to actually illegal (like Roosh level). Also you are not going to convince me by linking me to random things. This is the impression I got of the community by observing it and its subcultural movements. Like, I'm not accusing you of being in that % necessarily.

Right, thanks for confirming that I'm wasting my time responding to you.

This is not me being a white knight here.

Sure you aren't.

[totalize]

You have a poor ability to observe the group of which you make sycophantic defences. You should try to make your own observations and thoughts rather than copying theirs

[Resonare]

If this analogy doesn't reach you then this is getting to the point where I feel bad for you.

Right, thanks for confirming that I'm wasting my time responding to you.

[Chae]

Hm, I haven't quite uttered my perspective yet. There we go. Starts out ranty, has a happy end.

What I find incredibly sad is the fact that we have to teach each other how to get along. Just let that sink in.

I'm queer so my views on heterosexuality are skewed, yet what I see is another way of constructing the ways of male-female interactions in a redundant way. Everything could flow naturally but then... along comes this `artist´ (second euphemism for today) with rules and regulations and "do this when that". This person is super convincing as he appeals to the construct of masculinity. Aka, traits that are actually harmful and not inherent to the man. Even the gentleman way of picking up is harmful. The man, again, acts. It's not genuine. It's like starting a giant loud rock concert because unplugged seemingly isn't good enough

In these realms, a man first has to become one. He's not a man by default, which is ridiculous. If you have that chromosome combination, you're a man, period. In pickup 'artistry´, you can see the difference in biological sex and gender role construct pretty well. Vice versa for women, women have to be this and that and act like this and that, PUA perpetuates that, same old. Back to my initial point: interaction.

If PUAs would care about women, they'd invite MULTITUDES of them to their seminars.

The good part: I've read how they interact in communities, how they basically just want to impress one another and don't even care about the females. The comments they are writing about fellow members are covertly romantic and full of actual love and respect like whaaat. My theory is that most of them are gayer than they pretend to be, that's why they reject it so ardently Which makes me like and understand them since I'm also a bit gay. The agenda is set, I have to befriend them, they are nice.

That was my input. Goodbye, I'll grab my rainbow flag and ascend to LGBT Elysium. Pick up artists, you can follow meeee

[Chae]

Unrelated thought but (I contributed below actually), I love it when you use this meme

Mine is this one, old-school:

for future usage