BKA's guide on how to pickup women.... and lizard people

[Marblehead]

I guess he told us, Huh?

[bax44]

I'm not the type of person who believes that spirituality is so far separated from this life that we're in now. In fact, I believe they are both tightly intertwined.

 

Human relationships, sex, sexuality, plays a HUGE part in our lives and is one of our most primal desires (the desire to love and be loved, to procreate, etc)

 

There is no other place BUT a spiritual forum to discuss these things. How does anyone hope to manager greater spiritual awareness if they can't get over a little sex talk?

 

 

Ah, and here we have something interesting!

 

As long as these "games" only exist "early on" in the "mating dance," or as long as "some" of these "truths" only apply to the "drunk teen and 20 something" crowd, then we can safely ignore them, pretend that we are above them, that if you just "be yourself" you'll find the person "you deserve" and "who deserves you."

I never ignored anything. In fact I acknowledged they exist and that I have in fact engaged in this behavior plenty of times. I also never said "being yourself" will work for anyone. I said its worked for me for the most part and other times not so much.

But we all change our behavior in different circumstances, from the way we look, dress, behave, speak, what we speak about, who we associate with, etc. You don't talk with your mates the same way you talk to your parents, and you don't talk to your parents the way you talk to your grandparents, your teacher, a child, your lover, your lover's parents, your lover's ex.

Of course everyone puts on different masks for certain things. Most of the time it isnt even conscious. However to knowingly try and decieve someone and put on a totally false persona just to get something seems ill concieved TO ME. It might be fine for you or a million other people. But to me it seems off. And I admit to having tried PUA tactics in the past. I felt disgusted with myself, and actually landed me less results than just going with the flow and "being myself"..

Different human relationships means different behavior on your part. The only people who don't change their behavior in different social situations are those unable to read social cues.

 

What makes it so uncomfortable to think that changing one's behavior can change the way one approaches, or is approached by, the opposite sex?

 

Does it disrupt our social narrative that love is always honest and true? That beneath all of our biology and social conditioning there is a true and incorruptible human spirit which years to find its soul's mate?

 

Maybe it's just the language?

 

You wouldn't tell your friend to "be a douchebag and bang that hottie" over there, but would you tell him to "man up and strike up a conversation with her"?

I think your deliberately just missing the point, You also seem to make sweeping generalizations which you feel apply to everyone. I already acknowledged that for you or whomever perhaps taking the route of being a "douche" or whatever is great for you, and if this leads you to happiness with women, great. I also acknowledged that changing your behavior with certain women will in fact work. But will it be satisfying? I know for me its not, and thats what I was saying. And you are making my argument out to be like I believe in true love and soul mates and all that fairy land stuff. I dont.

Well do you really think that a teen or 20 something male (not a small demographic on this board, if "the usual suspects" (of which I am sure i am one) are an accurate representation) really wants to just TALK to the girl? Really wants to just go out for dinner? How about we home in on what they (we?) really want:

 

Sex. Someone to love. Someone to love us. Someone to spend time with. Someone to hold and cuddle up with when its cold outside. Someone to show off to our friends and family and society to prove that we're worth, it, we've done something with our lives. Someone to take of us when we feel sick.

 

Whatever floats your boat. Why don't we cut through the bullshit and just admit what we really want (might be variable amongst people) and why don't we admit what REALLY gets you what you want

 

Is buying a book going to get you _____?

 

Is "being a man" going to get you ______?

 

Is "being a douche" going to get you ______?

 

Idk, why dont you enlighten me on what REALLY gets me what I want? Because you seem pretty upset that I dont have to turn into a giant douchebag in order to attract quality women. And for me, sex isnt on the top of my priority list. . Companionship is great but Im cool enough with myself not to need to pretend I need it that badly to where Im going to intentionally mislead someone, even if that improved my chances.

Edited January 3, 2014 by bax44

[Sloppy Zhang]

You're doing a very good job of missing the point.

 

My "issue" is the talk of acting out a role of dominant male to trick women into going home with you, or humiliating other men so that you look better by comparison, or similar things. Like the thread awhile back about a guy wanting to use his energy to manipulate women into sleeping with him. That's spiritual development?

 

Of course sex is part of spirituality. But to me, sex for sex sake, when you don't give a shit about who it's with, and just want to score as much as possible, and will even belittle or trick people to get it, is NOT.

 

The original point of this thread was cool. The direction it's taken is a bit sad for a place like this.

 

I'll talk sex with you all day if you want to talk about the kind that respects everyone involved, and happens out of genuine, truthful interaction and a undeniable urge to be with a person you just seriously connected with.

 

To equate my arguments with being against the talk of sex or calling sex non-spiritual is to really see in black and white.

 

 

I guess we started splitting hairs and going down the rabbit a hole a while ago.

 

Getting into talk of "is anyone really ever genuine" is a very different, though very related, I'll grant you, conversation.

 

And everyone sees it from their own perspective. Because you know your motives, don't presume to know mine. No, they aren't too far from each other, but don't project what you know of yourself and your group of friends on me.

 

Maybe it is just an age thing. Why should I worry about the games kids have been playing since way before my time to get laid? Just because I'm over it doesn't mean someone ten years younger than me should be.

 

I just have issues with the "power hungry, status seeking, notches on the bed frame, I want to be a god to women and men" type spirituality.

 

It combines odd versions of what it means to be a man, with some metro-sexual, narcissistic tendencies, a little objectifying of both men and women...somehow with "spirituality"...

 

Whatever it is, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

I agree it's a very fine point. What's that saying, "a matter of a few degrees"? Just a few degrees off in one area and you have the difference between a "genuine guy" who is just "good with women" and a "dominant asshole" beating up other guys to fuck their girlfriends.

 

I don't agree with, say, Dorian Black's methods, but I do agree that they work.

 

I wouldn't personally use them, because I'm not after meaningless sex. But if I was talking to someone who did just want sex, I'd give them the option, and tell them why it works.

 

I'd wager a large amount of people on this "spiritual forum" are not after anything spiritual. Instead, they have just denied (or society has just denied) what they really want- money, status, power, respect, women, self esteem, whatever- for so long, that they use spirituality as an outlet or an excuse.

 

It's the same reason we see so many "solo cultivation"threads, where really it's just horny young men looking to masturbate without the same, so they try to make it spiritual.

 

I say cut the crap. If you want sex, just say you want sex and go get it.

 

But I also want to cut the crap in the other direction. Yes, there are plenty of "good guys" out there who are "good with women" who are just "being themselves." And there are plenty of guys out there who are "being themselves" and are lifelong virgins. Telling them to be themselves and be genuine and not "play games" can be hurtful and confusing, and is simply not true.

 

There are things that men can do which women find attractive, and those are the common threads between the "douchebags," "assholes," "bad boys," and "nice guys" who get laid or have long term relationships which involve sexuality (because upping your notch count and being in a long term relationship with a single woman who wants to have sex with you is on the same spectrum, just like how your pals and Dorian Black are on the same spectrum; it's a matter of a few degrees)

 

The trick is to read between the lines and find out what it is women really find attractive when they say "I just want a guy who can come up to me, strike up a good conversation, buy me a book/drink/coffee, and then ask me out."

 

Hint: It's not buying the book. And telling people it is the book is counter productive, and every time someone says it's about buying the book, I'll call bullshit and make no apologies.

 

Just like I'll call bullshit on anyone who says being an asshole, being a douchebag, playing games, and whathaveyou "doesn't work." Because it does. And modulating your behavior based on the situation does not exclude you from being able to have a fulfilling long term relationship with a human being. In fact, I've had many fulfilling interpersonal encounters that would NEVER have happened if I hadn't learned the rules of the game.

 

And I will never apologize for it.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Of course everyone puts on different masks for certain things. Most of the time it isnt even conscious. However to knowingly try and decieve someone and put on a totally false persona just to get something seems ill concieved TO ME.

 

And this is the crux of my point.

 

What is the difference between unconsciously shifting behavior- between talking to your boss to your friends to your family, and consciously shifting behavior to talk to women?

 

Some boys learned this behavior from a young age- they were surrounded by women, they learned how to talk to women. And so, they put on a different "mask" and most of the time it isn't even conscious. And so, when they "be themselves" they have success.

 

But not all boys went through that process. In which case, they have to learn that behavior, and consciously apply it.

 

How is that any less genuine than what people do all the time anyway? I argue that it's not.

 

I argue that telling people to just "go with the flow" might be counter productive if they don't know how to even be "in the flow" (talk competently with the opposite sex) in the first place!

 

Is it a "false persona" when you don't swear around your boss?

 

Is it a "false persona" when you tease a girl in a way that you wouldn't tease your best friend?

 

In both cases I argue no.

 

Will doing the same things as a douchebag get you better success with women than doing other things? Yes. Do I think you have to be a douchebag? No. Do I think speaking to the opposite sex in ways they find appealing is manipulative? No. Do I think this automatically makes the interaction disingenuous? No, and I think it's incredibly hypocritical to think so, and detrimental to some out there to say such.

 

If you ask your buddies who are good with women how they're good with women, they'll shrug and say "I don't know, be yourself." It's worked out for them and it has worked out for you.

 

What do I tell my buddies who aren't good with women? I tell them to act like a douchebag, or an asshole. Why? Because after 25 odd years of virginity and no close female friends, it's obvious that "being themselves" is not a very good route to starting an interpersonal relationship with the opposite sex.

 

And you know what? These guys are HAPPIER after they have had successful interactions with women. Because not being able to interact successfully with women, and not knowing WHY, is not a very pleasant way to live life.

[Wells]

I agree it's a very fine point. What's that saying, "a matter of a few degrees"? Just a few degrees off in one area and you have the difference between a "genuine guy" who is just "good with women" and a "dominant asshole" beating up other guys to fuck their girlfriends.

 

I don't agree with, say, Dorian Black's methods, but I do agree that they work.

 

I wouldn't personally use them, because I'm not after meaningless sex. But if I was talking to someone who did just want sex, I'd give them the option, and tell them why it works.

 

I'd wager a large amount of people on this "spiritual forum" are not after anything spiritual. Instead, they have just denied (or society has just denied) what they really want- money, status, power, respect, women, self esteem, whatever- for so long, that they use spirituality as an outlet or an excuse.

 

It's the same reason we see so many "solo cultivation"threads, where really it's just horny young men looking to masturbate without the same, so they try to make it spiritual.

 

I say cut the crap. If you want sex, just say you want sex and go get it.

 

But I also want to cut the crap in the other direction. Yes, there are plenty of "good guys" out there who are "good with women" who are just "being themselves." And there are plenty of guys out there who are "being themselves" and are lifelong virgins. Telling them to be themselves and be genuine and not "play games" can be hurtful and confusing, and is simply not true.

 

There are things that men can do which women find attractive, and those are the common threads between the "douchebags," "assholes," "bad boys," and "nice guys" who get laid or have long term relationships which involve sexuality (because upping your notch count and being in a long term relationship with a single woman who wants to have sex with you is on the same spectrum, just like how your pals and Dorian Black are on the same spectrum; it's a matter of a few degrees)

 

The trick is to read between the lines and find out what it is women really find attractive when they say "I just want a guy who can come up to me, strike up a good conversation, buy me a book/drink/coffee, and then ask me out."

 

Hint: It's not buying the book. And telling people it is the book is counter productive, and every time someone says it's about buying the book, I'll call bullshit and make no apologies.

 

Just like I'll call bullshit on anyone who says being an asshole, being a douchebag, playing games, and whathaveyou "doesn't work." Because it does. And modulating your behavior based on the situation does not exclude you from being able to have a fulfilling long term relationship with a human being. In fact, I've had many fulfilling interpersonal encounters that would NEVER have happened if I hadn't learned the rules of the game.

 

And I will never apologize for it.

 

The voice of reason.

[i am]

Hard to argue with anything there.

[bax44]

Sloppy zhang you keep acting as if Im totally disagreeing with you.. You continually project Yor and your friends reality onto what im saying like its gospel. For the 4th time I say if thats what works for you then great.. My thing is it didnt work that great for me with getting with women and when it did it felt hollow and actually led to less attraction for the girl.. The fact that these "tricks" actually worked on certain girls made me less atrracted to them and started any potential relationship off set on a false premise. The popularity of PUA websites and books attest to the fact that what you are saying has some merit. But please stop pretending that its true for everyone, because I can assure you it most certainly isnt..At all.

[Sloppy Zhang]

The voice of reason.

 

Is it bad if I like a post that just agrees with mine? it's like liking your own posts.... I'm all about self love though

[i am]

I just saw something that scared me!! I liked a Sloppy Zhang post, and what it then said was "you AND Dorian Black like this". Could it be true??

 

Maybe it's time to retire

[i am]

Is it bad if I like a post that just agrees with mine? it's like liking your own posts.... I'm all about self love though

 

There's a guy around here who regularly likes his own posts. Not sure if you want to emulate him, though...

[Sloppy Zhang]

Sloppy zhang you keep acting as if Im totally disagreeing with you.. You continually project Yor and your friends reality onto what im saying like its gospel. For the 4th time I say if thats what works for you then great.. My thing is it didnt work that great for me with getting with women and when it did it felt hollow and actually led to less attraction for the girl.. The fact that these "tricks" actually worked on certain girls made me less atrracted to them and started any potential relationship off set on a false premise. The popularity of PUA websites and books attest to the fact that what you are saying has some merit. But please stop pretending that its true for everyone, because I can assure you it most certainly isnt..At all.

 

It's not that you're disagreeing, it's that you're missing a very subtle point

[bax44]

I think too a lot of what we are discussing comes down to how much importance one places on picking up women. It seems in our society it is percieved as the end all be all. If this is the way one determines their own self worth then I suppose obtaining these skills by any means necessary is desirable. I guess for me I am at the point where seeing how many times a week I can hook up just isnt that important anymore..So in fairness I am coming at this from a different perspective but I still maintain deviating Too far(notice I said Too far) from someones natural character will result in hollow interactions and relations with the opposite sex, and the one night stands definitely get old.

Edited January 3, 2014 by bax44

[bax44]

It's not that you're disagreeing, it's that you're missing a very subtle point

 

Oh?

[Sloppy Zhang]

I just saw something that scared me!! I liked a Sloppy Zhang post, and what it then said was "you AND Dorian Black like this". Could it be true??

 

Maybe it's time to retire

 

Haha, maybe it was a mistake??

 

Hopefully it's just a matter of a few degrees of where that post fell on the spectrum of this discussion.

 

I find it so funny, sometimes when I talk to people, that we can say the exact same things but if we tweak it just a little differently, we can sound like we are on completely other sides!

 

Earlier you made a post about your friends who were good with women and I agreed 100% with your posts.

 

But at the same time I was in 100% agreement with some of Dorian's posts.

 

I'm not looking at whether someone is a "nice guy" or a "douchebag" or whatever. I'm looking at the mechanics of their interactions with women.

 

These mechanics can lead to healthy or toxic human relationships. They can lead to one night stands or can lead to long term fulfilling monogamous relationships.

 

I also think it depends from which side you approach the situation. It's hard for me to explain because I sometimes think about things in a weird way

 

But you can approach it from the angle of the "douchebags" and why they are so good at "banging sluts." You can approach it from the "best guys you'll ever meet" who are so "good at meeting women and starting relationships." I think the underlying mechanics are going to be the same, it's about the applications of those mechanics that determine where on that spectrum you'll fall.

 

Just a little bit this way, you're Dorian Black dominating guys at the discotheque. Just a little bit this way, you're the stand up guy respectfully dating his long term girlfriend.

 

Ironically, if you ask both of those guys what their secret is, they'll probably say the same thing: just be yourself

[Sloppy Zhang]

I think too a lot of what we are discussing comes down to how much importance one places on picking up women. It seems in our society it is percieved as the end all be all. If this is the way one determines their own self worth then I suppose obtaining these skills by any means necessary is desirable. I guess for me I am at the point where seeing how many times a week I can hook up just isnt that important anymore..So in fairness I am coming at this from a different perspective but I still maintain deviating Too far from someones natural character will result in hollow interactions and relations with the opposite sex, and the one night stands definitely get old.

 

Oh no man, you're going in the wrong way! I thought we were close

 

The mechanics used to pick up a woman at a bar and have sex with her that same night and never see her again are the same mechanics used to meet a girl, have a successful 3 dates, have nice sex, keep seeing her, bring her around the friends and family, marry, and continue to have a fulfilling (lifelong?) relationship.

 

Or whatever your picture of a relationship is

 

It's about how you apply those mechanics, what ratios you use, how and where you act, that determine where you'll fall on the spectrum of Douchebag <-------------------> Good guy.

 

From an outside observer looking in, and in this case I mean someone who is not good with women, who has never kissed a girl, had sex, dated a girl, or been in any sort of relationship (short or long term, sexual or non-sexual) with an individual woman, these mechanics are a mystery.

 

If he asks a douchebag or if he asks a good guy how they are successful with women, they'll both say:

 

"I don't know man, just be yourself."

 

To which our 30 year old virgin will respond "that's what I've been doing."

[Marblehead]

I find it so funny, sometimes when I talk to people, that we can say the exact same things but if we tweak it just a little differently, we can sound like we are on completely other sides!

It's easier if you are an Anarchist. Nobody expects you to agree with them no matter what they say.

[Sloppy Zhang]

It's easier if you are an Anarchist. Nobody expects you to agree with them no matter what they say.

 

As surprising as this may sound to some of this thread's readership, easiness doesn't appeal to me.

 

I'll let you make of that sentence what you will

[bax44]

Oh no man, you're going in the wrong way! I thought we were close

 

The mechanics used to pick up a woman at a bar and have sex with her that same night and never see her again are the same mechanics used to meet a girl, have a successful 3 dates, have nice sex, keep seeing her, bring her around the friends and family, marry, and continue to have a fulfilling (lifelong?) relationship.

 

Or whatever your picture of a relationship is

 

It's about how you apply those mechanics, what ratios you use, how and where you act, that determine where you'll fall on the spectrum of Douchebag <-------------------> Good guy.

 

From an outside observer looking in, and in this case I mean someone who is not good with women, who has never kissed a girl, had sex, dated a girl, or been in any sort of relationship (short or long term, sexual or non-sexual) with an individual woman, these mechanics are a mystery.

 

If he asks a douchebag or if he asks a good guy how they are successful with women, they'll both say:

 

"I don't know man, just be yourself."

 

To which our 30 year old virgin will respond "that's what I've been doing."

 

Oh no man, you're going in the wrong way! I thought we were close

 

The mechanics used to pick up a woman at a bar and have sex with her that same night and never see her again are the same mechanics used to meet a girl, have a successful 3 dates, have nice sex, keep seeing her, bring her around the friends and family, marry, and continue to have a fulfilling (lifelong?) relationship.

 

Or whatever your picture of a relationship is

 

It's about how you apply those mechanics, what ratios you use, how and where you act, that determine where you'll fall on the spectrum of Douchebag <-------------------> Good guy.

 

From an outside observer looking in, and in this case I mean someone who is not good with women, who has never kissed a girl, had sex, dated a girl, or been in any sort of relationship (short or long term, sexual or non-sexual) with an individual woman, these mechanics are a mystery.

Yes man I mostly agree with all this lol. Your argument has somewhat changed, perhaps thats what has caused the confusion. A few pages ago you were saying how you had to pretty much be a douchebag to women in order to get most of them and this is what they responded to.. I have been saying all along that this I totally disagreed with hence why I was saying it didnt really work for me or many I know. My point has been that deviating too much from ones natural character Might increase that persons chances, but eventually the training wheels have to come off.. And "being yourself" is of course malleable etc etc.. what Ive been arguing against is the strict douchebag approach which I thought you were totally backing. And the "mechanics' a lot of time arent mechanical at all, we cant really forget that sometimes ( a lot of times actually) people are just attracted to each other and theres really no choice involved. what someone percieves as another using tactics or acting is simply two people with great chemistry. A lot of times it dont matter what you say to a women, shes just going to dig you, and vice versa. The black and white that Dorian is talking about is mostly what I find to really not ring true.

If he asks a douchebag or if he asks a good guy how they are successful with women, they'll both say:

 

"I don't know man, just be yourself."

 

To which our 30 year old virgin will respond "that's what I've been doing."

Edited January 3, 2014 by bax44

[BaguaKicksAss]

Here's a humorous story to go along with the theme of this thread .

 

So today I was out and about doing chores.....

 

This guy comes up to me...

 

Guy: "hello"

 

Me: "hi"

 

Guy: "you are beautifu"

 

Me: "thank you :)"

 

Guy: "what is your name?"

 

Me: "actually tells him my name since he was actually being nice about it"

 

Guy: "want to go for coffee"

 

Me: "no thanks, I"m good" (said in a nice way)'

 

Guy: "are you sure?"

 

Me: "yes, but thank you"

 

Guy walks off....

 

30 seconds later I hear my name called

 

Guy: "do you have $2.50?"

 

ROFL

[Sloppy Zhang]

Yes man I mostly agree with all this lol. Your argument has somewhat changed, perhaps thats what has caused the confusion. A few pages ago you were saying how you had to pretty much be a douchebag to women in order to get most of them and this is what they responded to.. I have been saying all along that this I totally disagreed with hence why I was saying it didnt really work for me or many I know. My point has been that deviating too much from ones natural character Might increase that persons chances, but eventually the training wheels have to come off.. And "being yourself" is of course malleable etc etc.. what Ive been arguing against is the strict douchebag approach which I thought you were totally backing. And the "mechanics' a lot of time arent mechanical at all, we cant really forget that sometimes ( a lot of times actually) people are just attracted to each other and theres really no choice involved. what someone percieves as another using tactics or acting is simply two people with great chemistry. A lot of times it dont matter what you say to a women, shes just going to dig you, and vice versa. The black and white that Dorian is talking about is mostly what I find to really not ring true.

 

Mm, I don't know man, my argument hasn't changed much. My wording and my approach has, though.

 

I think the douchebag and the good guy approach and mechanics are fundamentally the same.

 

So, yeah, the good guy getting attraction from women is going to be doing the same things the douchebag is doing.

 

The ratios, the scope, the scale, the intensity, it all varies, and that's why we have the different "types" of guys.

 

On some level, yeah, some women are just not going to be into you. And on some level, yeah, some women are going to really be into you.

 

But this:

 

what someone percieves as another using tactics or acting is simply two people with great chemistry.

 

I don't think is accurate and it comes down to language use.

 

"Using tactics" implies that the guy is consciously making a certain "play."

 

This may or may not be the case.

 

Regardless of whether or not the guy is using "tactics," the mechanics he uses (consciously or subconsciously) the underlying man/woman interaction, is going to be unchanged.

 

THAT is what I think there is great benefit in studying, understanding, and teaching.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Here's a humorous story to go along with the theme of this thread .

 

So today I was out and about doing chores.....

 

This guy comes up to me...

 

Guy: "hello"

 

Me: "hi"

 

Guy: "you are beautifu"

 

Me: "thank you :)"

 

Guy: "what is your name?"

 

Me: "actually tells him my name since he was actually being nice about it"

 

Guy: "want to go for coffee"

 

Me: "no thanks, I"m good" (said in a nice way)'

 

Guy: "are you sure?"

 

Me: "yes, but thank you"

 

Guy walks off....

 

30 seconds later I hear my name called

 

Guy: "do you have $2.50?"

 

ROFL

 

Are you sure that wasn't the LOCH NESS MONSTER???

 

[bax44]

Mm, I don't know man, my argument hasn't changed much. My wording and my approach has, though.

Well when your on a message board this can definitely make it seem like things are shifting. cool though

I think the douchebag and the good guy approach and mechanics are fundamentally the same.

agree to disagree. as long as your not being a pushover I dont think there really the same, but agree to disagree.

So, yeah, the good guy getting attraction from women is going to be doing the same things the douchebag is doing.

 

The ratios, the scope, the scale, the intensity, it all varies, and that's why we have the different "types" of guys.

Ok. Just your opinion, also we are really getting into semantics here haha.

On some level, yeah, some women are just not going to be into you. And on some level, yeah, some women are going to really be into you.

 

But this:

 

 

I don't think is accurate and it comes down to language use.

 

"Using tactics" implies that the guy is consciously making a certain "play."

You dont think that chemistry accounts for a lot of what you see? All im saying is that when you see two people interacting you very well could be misinterpreting a guy "acting" or whatever when really hes just feeding off the interaction.. We really are very close in what we are saying haha... in one of your posts you clearly stated you consciously were altering your behavior and telling your friends to do so in order to attract women. If you dont wanna call it using tactics fine. but again semantics.

THAT is what I think there is great benefit in studying, understanding, and teaching

Hey agreed. Anyways I think I totally get where your coming from and always feel like I can learn stuff even when disagreeing with someone. Ive experienced the broad spectrum of interacting with women..from the shy dude when i was younger, which some of the girlfriends I had were surprised about because I was a very good athlete,etc..this almost made them more attracted as they saw I was humble despite my success in baseball.to sometimes trying PUA things..to really accepting more of myself and just letting myself be(not overthinking) in any interaction with women.. ultimately for me this has been the best and sounds like you have ways that work for you..this has kind of been my point. There is no black and white when it comes to this stuff really

Edited January 3, 2014 by bax44

[Sloppy Zhang]

All im saying is that when you see two people interacting you very well could be misinterpreting a guy "acting" or whatever when really hes just feeding off the interaction.

 

It doesn't matter whether or someone is consciously doing it or not, the successful guy is going to do the same things that other successful guys do (good guys, douche bags, whatever) and the successful guy is going to be doing the things that unsuccessful guys AREN'T doing.

 

The intent, or lack of intent, is not the determining factor, it's the moves that he's making.

 

I change my behavior and I tell my friends to change their behavior so we do the things that guys who are "naturally" good with women do.

 

The guys who are "naturals" don't think about it, in their mind they're just "doing their thing." Really, their actions are the same as ours.

 

Ironically, the more you practice, the more "natural" it becomes until it becomes a part of you. The difference between us "new naturals" and the "natural naturals" is that we know what we did, we understand the process. The other guys are "just going with it." Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose, but they don't really know why.

 

But at the end of the day, the actions taken and the results received are the same.

Edited January 3, 2014 by Sloppy Zhang

[RongzomFan]

Its all about looks.

 

PUA stuff is nonsense.

[Seeker_Of_Truth]

Homeboy broke, gotta get to the library. Lotsa free books, lotsa ladies!

 

But me I just have a lotta girl friends girls who are friends, they be good to me and do the introducin.