And there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s just that your response very clearly implied that George Clooney, millionaire movie superstar heartthrob, is a pickup artist.
No, I’m trying to get you to post more about your beliefs. That will do vastly more than any attempt of mine to show that you are callous. Like your technique system, it’s all about managing appearance, exactly what you’d doing now. Spinning out damage control.
And yes, your wording tells volumes about your beliefs. The fact that you think they’re just words is very telling.
Keep up the good work.
haha my bad I guess. PUAs generally aren’t famous for anything except being PUAs because it’s an easy way to cash in. For the most part a PUA is just a normal guy living an ordinary life with a very un-ordinary social/love-life, so when someone says “I’ve never met one that’s happy” it’s like, you probably have, you just didn’t know it because they don’t go around bragging about it.
On a side note some celebrities do use pick-up principles. Russell Brand has read The Game and uses concepts from it all over the place in his flirting. They don’t necessarily make it an identity (neither do I, pick-up is just something I do on the side, I identify myself by my life-long hobbies/business, but I figured “Hi, I’m a pick-up artist!” would be a good way to jump into this thread with both feet haha), but they probably don’t have as much re-wiring to do being a famous celebrity compared to the shy IT techie.
- TWTTWN
Okay, the first time you mentioned Megan Fox I thought you were being flip, but you keep referring her as if she represents the lower limit for beauty or something. So now I’m dying to know whether you think that a woman who falls short of looking like Megan Fox is automatically average or unattractive?
Attractive doesn’t equal Megan Fox. Not looking like Megan Fox doesn’t mean “average looking”. It feels ridiculous typing this out, but I feel the need to state the obvious here.
Pointing to extremes to make an argument probably impresses people on other boards, but around here it just makes people yawn. But you keep doing this.
If you have a pretty GF, does she suddenly become less pretty when she’s in the presence of Megan Fox look-alikes? I’m interested in hearing your response to this question because in my experience, someone who’s mature and self-assured isn’t concerned with the “status” of other people in relation to themselves or others. So the attractiveness of other women has no bearing on how they see their SO. It just doesn’t. They don’t become less attracted to their SO because a hunk or hottie walks in the room.
You’re reminding me of a image conscious alpha male wannabe I used to date. He was always looking over his shoulder looking at what other people had, who they were talking to, who they were with.
I’m pretty open about my beliefs. If I was just going to manage my appearance and try to get everyone to like me, I wouldn’t have bothered to post or I would have posted like the guy earlier in the thread who kept putting “quotations” around game stuff to distance himself from it.
I guess I’d just have to ask you: Is a psychologist (ie - someone who understands human behavior and views people through that lens because of his understanding) callous to you?
Because if so, then I can entirely see why you wouldn’t like the way I talk or view social dynamics and interpersonal relationships and we don’t need to do this back-and-forth bit any further.
- TWTTWN
Society thinks Megan Fox is physically attractive so I’m just using her name as short-hand to represent the concept of “physically attractive by society’s current standards” (since she would be considered ugly by society in other time periods).
If society holds Megan Fox as a representation of physically attractive, then by definition a woman who falls short of looking like Megan Fox is less attractive to society than her. Most women don’t look like society’s currently popularly accepted representation of physical attractiveness, so they would be average in comparison.
I agree. I can just write out “society’s currently popularly accepted representation of physical attractiveness” every time instead of “Megan Fox” so we can get off this tangent, but man, even for me that’s typing a lot. 
To someone else who enters the room and is going by physical attractiveness, she would. Do you disagree with this?
If a woman’s husband doesn’t send her flowers on Valentine’s Day, but then on top of that all her friend’s husbands sent them flowers, she’s more likely to be annoyed with her husband than if no one had received any flowers.
Agreed. Once you know the person beyond the first glance, their value is based on more than just their looks. That’s why my example was girls walking into a bar VS girls you’ve been friends with for years.
So in your above example, my GF’s value is based on her all-around personality since I’m deeply involved in a relationship with her, so while if she rolled out of bed on a Sunday afternoon with crazy bed-head, smeared make-up, threw on some baggy sweatpants, and we went out and walked into a room full of women dolled-up to the 9s, she would look less physically attractive than them, but I wouldn’t ditch her for those other girls because her value to me has, over time, become more based on her personality than just her looks.
I think you’re projecting your dislike of him onto me. I don’t care at all what other people think of who I’m with, as long as who I’m with is attractive to me. But I’ve also met hundreds of women over the years, so I’m comfortable with myself instead of being image conscious.
- TWTTWN
Why would you think to do that, though? “Attractive” stands on its own; no one should need a reference point to understand what this word means.
(And I actually think she looks as plain as plain can be. Seriously, her face has zero character. I’m a hetero woman, but still, she rates a gigantic “meh”.)
But that’s not what I asked. “Less attractive than an idealized standard” is not equivalent to average or unattractive.
When I look at the mirror, Megan Fox, Halle Berry, and Angelina Jolina are the last people I’m thinking about. I find myself attractive based on what I see in the mirror, and that’s it. Likewise, when I see my boyfriend, I don’t evaluate him based on what George Clooney looks like. The thought would never occur to me.
“Most women” span the gamut between homely and drop-dead gorgeous. So this sentence makes no sense and further compounds the ridiculousness of using Megan Fox as a benchmark for attractiveness.
Uh yeah. It would never occur to me to downgrade someone’s attractiveness based on the people around them. Either someone possesses the right combination of features and attitude that make them hot or they don’t.
Why would you draw distinction between physical appearance and her personality?
The point is that its superficial to evaluate a person’s attractiveness as it compares to other’s people. If you’re focused on status, I can see why you have this position, because status is nothing except what other people think.
This might be true, but I do sense that you have a fixation with status and appearance.
And I honestly don’t dislike that guy. I feel sorry for him because I can’t imagine he’s all that happy.
Attractive doesn’t stand on it’s own if you’re talking about physical attractiveness since everyone finds
(And I actually think she looks as plain as plain can be. Seriously, her face has zero character. I’m a hetero woman, but still, she rates a gigantic “meh”.)
You have high self-esteem and that’s great, but the average random man who doesn’t know your personality, looking at you in a bar (or photo, etc.) where you’re surrounded by the idealized standard will find you less attractive than if you’re in a photo where you’re surrounded by a bunch of extremely ugly women. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Because he’s your boyfriend and you evaluate him on more than just his looks because you know him. Like I do with my girlfriend as I explained in the last post. If you didn’t know him at all, and he were in a photo surrounded by a bunch of men who were your perfect ideal physical specimens, you would probably choose one of the other men over him. Unless your boyfriend is your perfect ideal physical specimen in which case I applaud you finding that!
He could probably win you over amongst all the other guys with his personality and everything, but like I say, I’m talking about people who don’t know eachother and only have a first impression to judge by.
You’re not downgrading them consciously, it’s just that their relative attractiveness changes. This is used in sales all the time…A BMW costs a jillion dollars because if everyone had a BMW it’s relative value would diminish. At the end of the day it’s just a car.
A horror movie that terrified you the first time you saw it, after you saw a dozen scarier ones, the original one would seem far less scary. It would still be scary, but it’s relative scariness would diminish.
Because when she walks into a bar, like the original example I used way back at the start of this Megan Fox stuff, all you have to go by is her physical appearance. Her personality doesn’t come out until you get to know her. Thus, most men’s heads in the room will turn as she walks into the door even if she has low self-esteem under her physical looks whereas they won’t for the plain girl who’s personality is A+…until they get to know her.
This is a thread about pick-up and attraction…I’m not sure what you’re expecting the discussion to be focused on if not attractiveness and comparing people to eachother (whether it’s the nice guy to the alpha jerk or the plain jane to the supermodel).
You’re free to believe what you like about me, I’m just explaining basic concepts of attraction. If you go out to an area full of men and doll yourself up in a push-up bra and minidress and no guys look at you, then sure, nobody in society cares about appearance or instinctively responds to it…but I doubt that’s what would happen.
It doesn’t mean a plain jane girl beside you won’t get any attention, but you will get the vast majority of it.
However, if as you’re walking into that room a dozen playboy models walk in beside you, you haven’t changed at all but the men in the room will notice those girls more because your relative value has changed.
- TWTTWN
P.S. I’m using extreme examples that apparently make everyone here yawn because most of the cites I’d pull out are from within the pick-up community (since they’re the ones studying this stuff) and I imagine would be automatically dismissed since mainstream psychology hasn’t really touched this area as it’s relatively new.
On top of that, it’s a complete mind-fuck compared to the oldschool “you have to exude the compatible pheromones, we’ve studied lab rats for this” stuff. There are people in the community who’ve gone from meeting a total stranger to a sexual relationship with hundreds of women using this skillset (I personally know a guy who I’ve gone out with for a year now and have watched him pull 70+ girls using these concepts).
You may think that lifestyle itself is icky, but in terms of experimenting and collecting results, that’s pretty convincing. This isn’t a few guys who got lucky a few times standing up on some mountaintop spouting advice based on their gut feelings.
- TWTTWN
But I’m not talking about “everyone”. When we speak of attractiveness in general terms, people usually just go by use their own reference point. Likewise, when someone says “people like tasty food”, they don’t go through the trouble of specifying a standard like filet mignon. We all know what tasty means and we all know what attractive means, even if personal standards slightly differ.
It’s a silly statement because it hasn’t nothing to do with what I asserted earlier about confident women. At any rate, I’m assuming that an average random man will either find me attractive or not. If I’m only “pretty” to him because all the other women are hags, the truth is I’m not really all that attractive to him; I’m just the best thing around. That’s not attraction, that’s settling.
I simply don’t appraise men like you apparently appraise women. If I were skimming through photos of men, I wouldn’t need to look at every single photo before deciding which guys are hot. I assess each one independently of the other.
My boyfriend may not be a perfect ideal specimen, but I’m attracted to him in absolute terms. He possesses the right combination of characteristics that does it for me. I’d hasten to guess that this how the vast majority of people are, otherwise they’d always be discontent with what they had.
I still say the same thing. Even if I only had first impressions to go by, his baseline attractiveness is has nothing to do with anyone else. He doesn’t become less attractive just because someone more handsomer or whatever is in the room. And he doesn’t become more attractive either. This is because I’m looking at all the men as individuals, and if none of them meet for personal criteria for attractive, then none of them do. If some of them, then some of them do.
I don’t grade on curve.
People are nothing like cars to me.
No, a woman with low-self esteem exhibits it in visual ways. You can see it in how she carries herself, the look in her eyes, the way she talks and reacts to other people. They radiate it just the way creeps radiate creepiness. Just like these so-called low status men radiate low statusness.
A woman with low self-esteem probably wouldn’t even be at a bar by herself to begin with, which actually was my point. Low confidence handicaps women just like it does men because it limits their socializing.
Doesn’t the whole PUA thing get tedious after awhile? Having to buy ridiculous clothes for “peacocking”? Hanging out in clubs and bars all the time? Always having to be “on” with your PUA shtick?
Except that tons of men will still drool over her, hit on her, sleep with her, and do double-takes as she walks by even though their girlfriends are beside them, if she’s physically attractive. If a guy is physically attractive he still has to have high self-esteem/value to get that sort of attention, and even then he generally has to make the moves to lead it to sex. That’s all I’m saying.
I don’t disagree with this, but women have a supportive society that encourages them to present themselves as best as possible, whereas men are currently insulted for trying to present themselves as best as possible (aka learning pick-up to attract women).
As I’ve said before, peacocking can simply be wearing a blazer when no one else is, or a t-shirt when everyone else is dressed up. Are those ridiculous clothes to you?
If you like to socialize, clubs and bars are fun. And as I’ve said before, the “shtick” becomes your personality over time so down the road there’s no being “on”, you’ve merged your old self and your new self so now you’re just being yourself with people.
- TWTTWN
For men the rule is compete or die. You either understand and adapt to this or you become a consequence of it.
Do you realize how angry women would be about life if this were true of them as well as (to say nothing of instead of) men?
Dear God.
Bars and clubs are just places where the male-female interaction commonly takes place for young people. There’s no requirement to meet women in bars.
In fact, it’s easier to pick women up away from the club scene, because everyone there has their guard up. The point of pickup is to make confident, casual, non-creepy approaches to women you’d like to meet wherever you find them. Coffee shops, bookstores, street fairs, night classes, commuter trains, shopping malls, you name it.
And as noted above, peacocking is finding a distinctive personal style that works for you. The clothes don’t have to be ridiculous. In fact, if you feel ridiculous in them, you shouldn’t be wearing them. The point is to feel confident and look good. Being in shape is part of this too. Not crucial, but you’ll do better if you’re in shape.
Jesus on a jetski. You sound like me after reading Roissy or watching violent TV shows while drinking cheap bourbon and not taking my effexor.
We all compete anymore. Men, women, apes, everyone. It’s the curse of being alive on a planet that sometimes wishes we were dead.
But a lot of us seem to get what we need somehow. Maybe it’s a more mundane process, y’know? Not a goddam chimp fight every time? Is that possible? (I’m not just asking Jacq. I’m asking everybody.)
I don’t feel like I was in any sort of chimp fight when I met the men I’ve dated and/or married. They also didn’t pick me up, act like “alphas” (I have no idea what that even means), or use sales techniques on me. I met both my late husband and my current fiance online, in the first case on a dating site and in the second case here.
Of course, I also don’t wear makeup or heels, getting my hair done means I put conditioner in it, and getting a manicure means I got out my nail clippers.
My late husband was extremely introverted and had a social phobia, but he made me laugh and he made me think and he accepted me for who I was. My fiance is much more extroverted, just as funny if not more so, and the kindest person I know.
These are the guys I consider my dream men, and I don’t think I’m as much of an outlier as all that. Maybe, though.
If you don’t know what an alpha is then how do you know you have not been picked up by them? And sales techniques have never worked on anyone ever.
Because I’ve never been picked up. I don’t do bars and I never dated strangers. Well, I had a couple of hilariously bad blind dates, I guess. I’ve always dated friends.
And yes, sales techniques work on me. Some advertising is quite effective on me.
As I said upthread, I am in sales. I have been for over 10 years as a salesperson and sales manager. Sales works, for the most part, not by disguising itself as something else. It generally takes an incredibly stupid salesperson to think they are somehow being undetectable. Sales work when the person is willing to go along with the technique, not when they are oblivious to it.
In my experience most people are not aware of most of the effects of the sales techniques used on them. Even people who are not incredibly stupid. In fact on Friday a book smart friend of mine claimed that advertising has absolutely no effect on him.