On People Who Post WAAAY Too Often READ!!!!!!!!!!!!
Blue_Eyed_Devil
all this stuff I have learned... or at least TRYING to.
While I am on this subject, let's look at a couple of guys in
particular, who shall remain nameless (B--k G-y and Ma---an75)...I'm
sure there are others who I haven't noticed....
You guys suck. Esp. the first one. This guy has a BIG fucking brain
and all he seems to use it for is typing in this NG all goddamn day.
Have you even TRIED the newbie mission yet? If I am not mistaken, you
live in Tampa? JESUS CHRIST what I wouldn't give to be down there
playing this game. Are you retarded? My friend in FL is 27 and he has
fucked 3 cute 18 yr olds in the past 2 months. What have YOU done? BTW
he is average looking, not much money (although he does have a decent
car and a pool at his apt.), nothing really special about him... not too
much in the way of skills but he WORKS IT. Get off your ass, stay away
from this NG for a few days, and apply your newfound knowledge. Then
come back and tell us what you have learned. This NG is supposed to
give you tools to go get laid, not provide you with a debating forum.
With all this garbage you post about morality and everything else you
CANNOT POSSIBLY be meeting any women.. DUH!
Now for the 2nd guy, every time a new person posts he feels the need to
respond. Why is beyond me because by his own admission he has fucked
exactly ONE (1) UG since he started this stuff. If I am wrong please
correct me. I understand that you live in a small town with not many
chicks, but FUCK man stop posting this shit. You are in NO POSITION AT
ALL TO GIVE ANYONE ADVICE ABOUT SEDUCTION because you CANNOT EFFECTIVELY
DO IT YOURSELF (YET!). I understand that I am in no position either,
and very rarely will I post advice unless it is a sit. I have fucked up
before.
It comes down to this.... I DARE BOTH OF YOU to NOT POST HERE FOR 3
DAYS!!! 3 DAYS! 72 HOURS! STOP! Go OUT and APPLY what you have
learned so far then you really can provide USEFUL info here. PLEASE!
I don't mean to come down too hard but you guys need it. I am almost as
bad. So let's start a new trend....
I will if you will...
B.E.D.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Book Guy
Blue_Eyed_Devil <blue_ey...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8tb3tq$soq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> It comes down to this.... I DARE BOTH OF YOU to NOT POST HERE FOR 3
> DAYS!!! 3 DAYS! 72 HOURS! STOP! Go OUT and APPLY what you have
> learned so far then you really can provide USEFUL info here. PLEASE!
> I don't mean to come down too hard but you guys need it. I am almost as
> bad. So let's start a new trend....
Sure. I always do what other guys tell me to do. Every single time.
Especially when they put it so forcefully and definitively. I just can't
RESIST a big macho display ... oooeee, getting hot already ...
--
book_guy at yahoo dot com
Book Guy
"To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun Tzu
DanTheMAN
gives a fuck - just go out in real life, seduce some babes (or at least
try, then come back here and post RESULTS, not USELESS OPINIONS).
DanTheMAN.
In article <7M9K5.28736$rD3.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
"Book Guy" <book...@atchoo.com> wrote:
>
> Sure. I always do what other guys tell me to do. Every single time.
> Especially when they put it so forcefully and definitively. I just
can't
> RESIST a big macho display ... oooeee, getting hot already ...
>
> --
> book_guy at yahoo dot com
> Book Guy
> "To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun Tzu
>
>
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Blue_Eyed_Devil <blue_ey...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8tb3tq$soq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > It comes down to this.... I DARE BOTH OF YOU to NOT POST HERE FOR 3
> > DAYS!!! 3 DAYS! 72 HOURS! STOP! Go OUT and APPLY what you have
> > learned so far then you really can provide USEFUL info here. PLEASE!
> > I don't mean to come down too hard but you guys need it. I am almost as
> > bad. So let's start a new trend....
>
> Sure. I always do what other guys tell me to do. Every single time.
> Especially when they put it so forcefully and definitively. I just can't
> RESIST a big macho display ... oooeee, getting hot already ...
Book Guy demonstrates that he hasn't comprehended a single word...
>
> --
> book_guy at yahoo dot com
> Book Guy
> "To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun Tzu
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
Alan Palmer
>
> Man, can you stop being so analytical about everything, nobody really
> gives a fuck - just go out in real life, seduce some babes (or at least
> try, then come back here and post RESULTS, not USELESS OPINIONS).
>
I've been waiting for this to come up :-)
Just about all of us have a way in which we prefer to relate to the
world. It's a preference like handedness.
If you're right-handed, you could probably force yourself to sign
cheques with your left hand, if you wanted to. It would feel awkward and
clumsy, but you could learn to do it. With time your left-handed writing
would improve, but would probably never be as good as your right-handed
writing.
Similarly, most of us here have a strong preference in the way we
understand the world. For some of us, that preference is intellectual
and analytical. Rather than simply get out there and crash and burn, and
learn from experience, we'd rather have a conceptual, theoretical
understanding of what we're dealing with. It feels "natural" to approach
the problem (of being an AFC) this way. It's the way we tend to approach
every new problem. We're good at this and it some jobs (eg
Mathematician) this style works brilliantly.
I get the impression you pride yourself on being a practical
down-to-earth person. Do you value hard facts, experience, learning by
trial-and-error? Does your job require you to use those strengths? Do
you "naturally" approach a new problem in this particular way?
You have a particular preference in the way you relate to the world.
People like Book Guy and me (and others here) have a different style.
Our style seems as natural to us as your style does to you. In learning
a more practical style, we experience difficulties. Just as you might
experience difficulties learning a more analytical style. Just as most
guys seem to do whene trying to learn the emotional "feminine" style
that many chicks use. It's like writing with the "wrong" hand.
In learning seduction, us "intellectuals" are tempted to fall back on
what's worked for us in the past - analytical reasoning. We're sorely
tempted to avoid the very things we're weakest at - relating to chicks
in an emotional, expressive way.
When it comes to seduction, there's no substitute for real-world
experience. For some of us, it's all too tempting to try to replace that
clumsy awkward experience with the comfortable, familiar act of
theorising. And that's a mistake.
Book Guy, may I make a suggestion? Give creative writing a try - short
stories, poetry, scripts. Try an introductory course, see if you like
it.
Judging by this ng, I'd say you enjoy expressing yourself :-) Not only
would writing give you an outlet for that, it would give you the
opportunity to meet like-minded HBs:-)
If you do any performance-type writing (eg performance poetry), you'll
meet even more :-) I get the feeling you would enjoy performing for an
audience.
And if you find you do have a flair for poetry, well, you just might
find a practical down-to-earth use for that :-)
Book Guy
1. You're trying to analyze why the other guy doesn't analyze. Your long
analysis, of why he should read long analyses which he otherwise wouldn't
read, is most likely not going to be read. But thanks for the support
anyway. ;-)
2. Thanks for the suggestion about creative writing. It's my second
profession (the one that doesn't pay the bills). So, umm, can I skip the
introductory level and start in right at intermediate? Again, ;-)
3. Performing? Theater has off and on been my life. My current plan is to
get a better day job (maybe another 6 mo's of certification for some
middle-level sys admin) so that I can spend less time working and more time
creating, to eventually get back to writing for theater.
But no, none of that has anything to do with whether or not I'm still an
AFC. What I do tonight does, though ...
--
book_guy at yahoo dot com
Book Guy
"To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun Tzu
Alan Palmer <al...@sci-log.apana.org.au> wrote in message
news:39FA1598...@sci-log.apana.org.au...
Alan Palmer
>
> heehee too funny
>
> 1. You're trying to analyze why the other guy doesn't analyze. Your long
> analysis, of why he should read long analyses which he otherwise wouldn't
> read, is most likely not going to be read. But thanks for the support
> anyway. ;-)
Yeah, I felt the irony while writing it :-)
The points I meant to make, but failed to make clear:
* posters on this ng have different styles of relating to the world and
themselves;
* folks tend to assume that other people are just like them and so have
the same relating style; WRONG! consequently ...
* ... practical down-to-earth types often can't understand those who
like to think analytically; analytical types often can't understand why
practical types have no interest in analysing the underlying concepts;
chicks can't understand why guys don't think the way chicks do, and vice
versa;
* I'd like to see folks here show some tolerance for other people's
styles;
* boosting your weakest style is hard work; "intellectual" AFCs have
extra work to do: not only learning what to do and say, but doing so
using their weakest style of relating; "practical down-to-earth" AFCs
have it easier;
* when all is said and done, ya still gotta get out there and do it; no
escape;
Uh oh, I hope I'm not posting waaay too often ... yes I am ... time for
a field trip :-)
AVeryPsychicMale
>>
>> Man, can you stop being so analytical about everything, nobody really
>> gives a fuck - just go out in real life, seduce some babes (or at least
>> try, then come back here and post RESULTS, not USELESS OPINIONS).
>>
>
>
>I've been waiting for this to come up :-)
>
>Just about all of us have a way in which we prefer to relate to the
>world. It's a preference like handedness.
>
>If you're right-handed, you could probably force yourself to sign
>cheques with your left hand, if you wanted to. It would feel awkward and
>clumsy, but you could learn to do it. With time your left-handed writing
>would improve, but would probably never be as good as your right-handed
>writing.
Mickey Mantle, a natural right-hander, hit 373 of his 536 home runs from the
LEFT side of the plate....
madd...@my-deja.com
Fuck you buddy.
Not that its really your business, but when I post a lot its because
I'm bored at work! My job is to monitor computer systems, handle any
problems that come up. Usually its pretty quiet so I surf, coming to
ASF (might as well learn something useful). Its not like I'm sitting
at home, missing opportunities by 'theorizing' on USENET.
The other guy is right, about analytical thinking. I have a heavy
background in mathematics and computers, so attempting to understand
underlying theory first comes natural. I also know that theory only
takes you so far - practical experiance is irreplacable. I DO go out,
I'm going to the club tonight.
What the hell is wrong with telling the newbies where the web sites
are? Maybe I LIKE helping guys just getting into this! Generally, any
advice I give is either 1) something I do have experiance with, 2)
something directly referring to canon material, 3) a simple opinion,
or, of course, 4) telling people Ray's insane.
btw - what's your scorecard buddy?
--
"Chivalry is dead. Women killed it." - Dave Chapelle
Book Guy
This is a false premise: the premise that if you post lots you don't go out
lots. Or, to put it differently, the premise that if you can think you can't
do.
Important for us persistent posters to remember.
In fact, analytical people might even go so far as to believe the opposite
of some of our peers here at this benighted newsgroup: that if you can't
think, or avoid machismo as the only mode of advice, or express yourself
clearly (or at LEAST grammatically: geez, looser/loser), then perhaps ...
no, it's too obvious.
Oh, and by the way, I don't consider myself intellectual, analytical,
cerebral, or even particularly verbal. Don't know WHERE people got that idea
...
--
book_guy at yahoo dot com
Book Guy
"To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun Tzu
<madd...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8tdra7$3aj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Blue_Eyed_Devil
About fucking ZERO that's why I am WORKING AT IT.
>
> --
> "Chivalry is dead. Women killed it." - Dave Chapelle
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
~~~~~/ Blue Eyed Devil \~~~~~
madd...@my-deja.com
trying to motivate me.
I was actually reading ASF before I went out to psych myself up - your
post just hit me the wrong way and pissed me off.
You are right though, while theorizing may help point you down the right
path, it will NOT get you laid by itself.
Good luck man!
yaritai
I just want to point out that being over-analytical and thinking things
through so thoroughly is precisely what you need to STOP doing to convert
yourself AFCdom to PUAdom.
Stop thinking about the "best way" to approach, the "best" things to say,
what everything she says means, what she may or may not do/say in reaction
to your approach, why she said it, etc., etc., etc.!!!
Just STOP, because it's exactly that kind of thinking that is causing you to
be an AFC!
I am talking from experience. I am a thinking, analytical, logical person
too and I realized that was singly responsible for my lack of action and
confidence. Remember that chick logic is not logical, so you can think about
things as much as you want and it won't amount to shit, really. Develop the
confidence to not care about how any individual chick is going to react.
There are more out there to go hit on if it doesn't work out. Be fully aware
that many will not react as positively as you hoped. Some will try to make
you feel like an asshole for talking to them. That's OK! Just move on. There
are tons, if you stick with it, that WILL talk to you, show interest, etc.
My scorecard? I've posted it previously. Am I an established PUA? Hell no,
but I am light years beyond what I thought I would be, and it's all because
I stopped "thinking" about every little minutia.
Reading ASF is great. The websites are great too. But the single most
important thing before you can put anything else to use, is to be out there
hitting on chicks. You have to develop your own style and incorporate all
this advice into it. Discard what doesn't work for you. The confidence will
come from experience, not thinking about it. And then there's the fact that
you need to establish a baseline.
Here's what I mean. If you're a guy who never goes out and tries, you have
no idea what will happen it you do, even when you don't know shit about
PUing! You could go out there and find that with the confidence to approach,
you're a natural and don't need to over-analyze everything because you can
do fine without it. Or you may realize that you need all the help you can
get. But you have to hit on dozens, no, hundreds, of women to find out what
your natural baseline is first, BEFORE you study up on every single detail
of PUAing.
Ignore this if it bothers you. I'm just trying to help using my own personal
experience as a referrence. I went from a total AFC to getting unprecedented
success in the space of TWO MONTHS. If they tell you it takes a long time,
it's bullshit. Like Tony Robbins said, the hard part is making the decision.
Actually doing it is easy.
yaritai
<madd...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8tf62n$um$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Book Guy
For you. It may also be true for me. Please recognize, that the fact that
I'm posting lots, merely indicates that I have some free time (tied to a
computer). I'm also out every single day approaching. I guess I should
include that in my posts?
Here, Y, here's a deal: every time I get into a logistical metaphysical
debate from now on, I'll also, just as an aside, post the day's tally. Like
this:
today at the mall (aside from usual interactions with sundry unattractive or
male people): three hellos, 2 smiles at strangers (all HBs); of the 3
hellos, 1 responded so I chatted for approx. 5 mins; including mild kino,
brief initiation of value-elicitation, found out she's a smoker (likes
cigars - Freud?) and saw needle-marks on her arms, so ejected; this morning
at the grocery store, chatted my favorite sales clerk, used semi-pattern on
the subject of water and swimming (she's on HS swim team) for practice (too
young); approached HB in hardware aisle about the plunger she was selecting,
fun chat about which one is better, giggling, her sister (UG!) arrives with
baby in cart, ascertain that sister is single and HB has child (shield? no,
kid called her mommy) and eject; 2 hellos at drugstore, including one with
whom I sort of closed (longer version of story: she came back after visiting
ATM and I got her number but don't intend to call her) by means of serious
smooth-talk on subject of clean shiny hair and happy-in-the-shower ideas; 3
HBs together at gym with serious bitch-shields, used mild negs about their
aerobics outfits (Oh, how 1970s of you!) got giggles but no dropping of
shields - they were on a "hen holiday" but I still got the ego-boost of
seeing the AFC musclebound types jealous about my approach.
See, I'm out there. But that's a boring story, cuz I don't want to have to
figure out how to string it together. PS - broke 185 lbs unaided on bench
(personal worst exercise, flat-back bar-bell bench-press, I guess so much
childhood soccer stunted my pecs or something). But you don't care about
that either.
--
book_guy at yahoo dot com
Book Guy
"To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun Tzu
This is dull shit. None of these is a very interesting interaction, I wasn't
really interested in any of the HBs (although I suppose a true PUA would
indeed seek, by to fuck any one who might be available before rejecting
her)
--
book_guy at yahoo dot com
Book Guy
"To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun Tzu
yaritai <yar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8tg15l$om5$1...@nsv3001.zaq.ne.jp...
pua_...@my-deja.com
Hey BookGuy,
Cool post. Found it funny and amausing.
Just wondering: How old are ya, and where do you live?
As far as people posting too much, I don't think it's a problem when
people give good advice. It's only a problem when people give shit
advice, and there are many of them on here. (some are supposed to be
PUAs!)
take care
Cal
yaritai
I don't see a problem with posting, nor do I see it as preventing you from
making the attempts. There's always a couple of hours left in the day to do
all that.
What I meant to say, and what helped me tremendously, was to stop thinking
about all the possible scenarios and implications arising from them.
Thinking about all that, I realized, just didn't help me. In fact it hurt
me, because it made me hesitate, made me fake, made me search for the
'right' thing to say instead of just allowing myself to "be myself", as you
would put it.
It's a hard habit to get out of, but if you allow yourself to believe in it
for just a while and at least try it once, maybe it will work for you.
Glad to see you're out there. This, at the very minimum gives you the
opportunity to get struck by lightning. (Some HB9.5 *could* come up to you
and seduce you.) And the fact that you're making approaches and talking to
them allows for the chance that one of them takes an interest and takes more
initiative with you.
Interesting day you had. Man, you've got some pretty bad luck on your side,
if that's anywhere near typical. Is it? If it is, go to a new pond and fish
there!
I was thinking that, if you do approach many women when you're out, then you
MUST be talking to some fairly decent chicks at times. Just on odds alone,
it's gotta happen. Two thoughts on that...
1) You're perhaps psyching yourself into downgrading them for your own
psychological benefit of not attempting a PU in the first place. (You heard
me say that one before though...)
2) When you do talk to a 'qualified' candidate, is it possible that you're
not recognizing the signs of interest that she might be throwing at you?
You're a smart guy, seem to take every step possible so as not to offend
anyone, etc... Sounds like you've got lots of good qualities going for you.
If you're approaching 10-20 qualified (for you) chicks a week, then there
must be SOME that are interested and you're not realizing it. I realized
that this was the case for me the day I decided to just *assume* they're
interested until I'm given a VERY strong sign or verbal abuse that indicates
otherwise. Sometimes, I would be convinced that she wasn't into me because
of a lack of enthusiasm or whatever, but as I pushed on, bingo! Turns out
it's either just her personality or she doesn't know how to appear
interested, or it's the game she likes to play or whatever. There's a
million reasons, but the end result was usually that they are not nearly as
uninterested as I thought. Are you pushing forward to the point where she
actually puts the brakes on? (Yeah, this is not always a good strategy, but
after doing this for a while, I learned to become more aware of when a chick
really is interested and when she's not. After a while, you won't always
need to do this.)
Have you tried not thinking? Give it a shot. Give everything a shot. Don't
wait for a strategy you like to come along. After all, that's what the 3s
rule is based on. As much as it is for her to not identify you as a wimpy
guy without the guts to approach, it's also so that you don't have the
chance to give yourself a million reasons not to approach or to think about
everything so much that you lose your chance. You're doing the approaches,
it sounds like. That's good. Now, keep going and hit harder! Go for as many
yards as possible and stop only when you get tackled.
yaritai
"Book Guy" <book...@atchoo.com> wrote in message
news:0xMK5.5031$R4.4...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Book Guy
yaritai <yar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8tgmed$cc0$1...@nsv3001.zaq.ne.jp...
> I don't see a problem with posting, nor do I see it as preventing you from
> making the attempts. There's always a couple of hours left in the day to
> do all that.
>
heehee
> What I meant to say, and what helped me tremendously, was to stop thinking
> about all the possible scenarios and implications arising from them.
> Thinking about all that, I realized, just didn't help me.
I get your point. It's all about "not thinking, just doing" in some manner
or other. I genuinely feel like I'm doing that, and so I'm a bit surprised
that my radical posting rate has somehow suggested to you that I'm not. If I
think about it afterwards, or ponder metaphysical implications at some other
time, there aren't HBs in my lap while I'm posting, so I'm not exactly into
SS mode, right? Or would you prefer that every post be rendered in
Ericksonian subjunctive: "Could you imagine, me going out to approach hot
babes, if you will, ..."
>
[snip]
> Interesting day you had. Man, you've got some pretty bad luck on your
side,
> if that's anywhere near typical. Is it? If it is, go to a new pond and
fish
> there!
>
Yeah, that's typical. Usually even at major "pick up" places I seem to have
the capacity to attract society's eccentrics. I'm wondering about just how
low-quality the people are around me. That's another reason I spend lots of
time on the internet - there isn't any intellectual stimulation out there.
For example, the only bookstore we have is a damned Barnes and Noble about a
thirty minute drive away. Surrounded by stupes, I tell ya.
> I was thinking that, if you do approach many women when you're out, then
you
> MUST be talking to some fairly decent chicks at times. Just on odds alone,
> it's gotta happen. Two thoughts on that...
>
> 1) You're perhaps psyching yourself into downgrading them for your own
> psychological benefit of not attempting a PU in the first place. (You
heard
> me say that one before though...)
>
There is this possibility. I don't know how to prove or disprove it
verbally, but I'm going to make a point, from now on out, of approaching
ALL women whom I initially, from a long distance, rate as 7 or better. That
means, if they barely make my grade, then I'm going in for at least a
"hello." That at least will prevent me from breaking the 3-second rule
because of potentially feeble excuses. We'll see if that solves the
slim-pickings problem.
> 2) When you do talk to a 'qualified' candidate, is it possible that you're
> not recognizing the signs of interest that she might be throwing at you?
Yeah, definitely. I can't tell you how many times, at High School and
College reunions and in e-mails and other connections with past friends, the
women have opened up to admit that "if only you'd seemed interested I would
probably have responded." So maybe I'm still doing that to myself - cutting
myself short, not trusting that I am valuable to her. I'm learning.
[[But this begs a question. Really, should I listen to what those past women
SAY they want? It's entirely possible, that they've gained 300 pounds and
have re-met the "new" me and so are really interested and really desperate
and so are pretty much rationalizing what went on in the past. Likewise,
there are plenty who DID say no, and now CLAIM they would have said yes.
Resentment? Naaaah ... Chick logic allows them to think of themselves as
perfect people back then, and also to exonerate themselves from any actions
they might have actually performed, in order to rearrange reality in such a
manner as to expect the male to take all responsibility for it. But that's a
different issue.]]
> You're a smart guy, seem to take every step possible so as not to offend
> anyone, etc... Sounds like you've got lots of good qualities going for
you.
> If you're approaching 10-20 qualified (for you) chicks a week, then there
> must be SOME that are interested and you're not realizing it. I realized
> that this was the case for me the day I decided to just *assume* they're
> interested until I'm given a VERY strong sign or verbal abuse that
indicates
> otherwise. Sometimes, I would be convinced that she wasn't into me because
> of a lack of enthusiasm or whatever, but as I pushed on, bingo! Turns out
> it's either just her personality or she doesn't know how to appear
> interested, or it's the game she likes to play or whatever. There's a
> million reasons, but the end result was usually that they are not nearly
as
> uninterested as I thought. Are you pushing forward to the point where she
> actually puts the brakes on? (Yeah, this is not always a good strategy,
but
> after doing this for a while, I learned to become more aware of when a
chick
> really is interested and when she's not. After a while, you won't always
> need to do this.)
>
Well, honestly, I'm approaching about 10 or 12 a week, and in the last month
have made three or four number closes, none of which I'm too excited about
calling. Realize I'm 34, so I'm after the 26 to30-year-old crowd ideally
(no, not because I "should be", but because those are the women I find most
appealing because of my OWN criteria, really, criteria which include not
having to deal with the "girly girl" problems of younger women), and they're
hard to find for me. The pickings are really really slim. I sit at home and
look at a phone number and think to myself, would I want to show a really
rock-hard penis to that woman and let her do whatever she wants with it and
then do other things to her she hasn't even thought of? And the answer is
consistently "no," because she's not hot enough. This is either, because I'm
damned picky, or because I have some other "issues", or ... because she
isn't hot enough.
So the best advice you could give me, Y, would be to clue me in to where the
Tampa HBs hang out. I'm stunned at the obesity and stupidity, and frustrated
at my opportunities. And no, Barnes and Noble does NOT count as an
intelligent bookstore.
> Have you tried not thinking? Give it a shot. Give everything a shot. Don't
> wait for a strategy you like to come along. After all, that's what the 3s
> rule is based on. As much as it is for her to not identify you as a wimpy
> guy without the guts to approach, it's also so that you don't have the
> chance to give yourself a million reasons not to approach or to think
about
> everything so much that you lose your chance. You're doing the approaches,
> it sounds like. That's good. Now, keep going and hit harder! Go for as
many
> yards as possible and stop only when you get tackled.
>
It just never ceases to amaze me, how people assume I'm thinking too much. I
quibble with the very existence of the concept, but, presuming I accept your
semantic construct, I guess I'd just ask, do you have any evidence - from
the actual narrative descriptions of my behaviors - of times when I
over-analyzed in the heat of battle? No. You're extrapolating, from the
manner in which I post here, that I behave in some manner that would DIFFER
from your OWN behavior. The extrapolation is false.
So, again, all that may be true. For you. I hope you aren't thinking too
much. ;-) I'm not. You can tell I'm not, from the descriptions I've given of
actual events. Analyzing after the fact, is an act that aids me in
performing the act more effectively. Why wouldn't it? Oh, I see, because it
might not FOR YOU. Geez. Next thing you'll be telling me to move to your
city or something ...
Chris
Yaritai,
This is not a flame :) I just wanted to agree with you, then add my
own thoughts. SS is aimed at getting women to turn off their "monkey
mind" (the analytical, rational part of the mind) and start responding
from the fourth level of the mind, where they dwell on amazing
possiblities, romantic thoughts, etc. Now in order to do that, you
must GO FIRST...you have to be able to stop analyzing theorizing,
rationalizing, go into that place in your mind, and speak to a woman
from that level. The patterns aren't going to work for shit if you
yourself can't have the experiences they describe, first.
Now that being said, I wanted to add something else to this thread.
There is a disturbing trend in this newsgroup of prefacing advice
with "Well, I'm still an AFC, and this isn't field-tested, but I
thought of something you could do..." FUCK THAT! This is soo
counterproductive. Guys, if you don't have a technique that has been
field-tested BY YOU and has worked, please don't post it. Book Guy, I
don't mean to pick on you, but I have seen you doing this. You often
seem to add to threads simply because you want to get your own thoughts
in there. Your welcome to have your own thoughts and theories, of
course, but if you go around posting them w/o fieldtesting them, you
may end up fucking someone else over. What happens if a newbie comes
to this group, reads some untested theory that's been posted, takes it
as worthy and uses it, and fails? More than likely he'll generalize
that this entire group is full of shit and go back to his old AFC
ways. Do you really want to be responsible for keeping others caught
in the old patterns of behavior that you used to be trapped in?
Please, guys, if your going to post, either post field reports or
techniques and theories that have been fieldtested time and again and
proven worthy of adding to the PUA stock.
Chris
Book Guy
But on the other subject you raise:
Chris <cra...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8ti16u$1jb$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Guys, if you don't have a technique that has been
> field-tested BY YOU and has worked, please don't post it. Book Guy, I
> don't mean to pick on you, but I have seen you doing this.
Wrong. You assumed I did, by imagining words I didn't write and attributing
to me attidues I don't have. Quote it and I'll point out how you've
misunderstood it. Otherwise, don't make it up out of the blue without being
able to quote it.
> You often
> seem to add to threads simply because you want to get your own thoughts
> in there.
Yes. This is entirely a different concept from the first one you accuse me
of.
>Your
No. "You're".
> welcome to have your own thoughts and theories, of
> course,
Gee thanks for your approval. Or would you say, "you're approval"?
> but if you go around posting them w/o fieldtesting them, you
> may end up fucking someone else over. What happens if a newbie comes
> to this group, reads some untested theory that's been posted, takes it
> as worthy and uses it, and fails?
Right.
First, I didn't post without field-testing. Second, I don't think this
end-of-the-world scenario will happen.
And third, I'm not repsonsible for his behavior. I might say something and
he might read it and then use it and lordie knows if someone else does
something then must I totally accept responsibility for it. What the FUCK
kind of Ray concept is that? You'll be linking SS and hypnosis to rape next,
if you follow that line of reasoning. His actions are his, and my opinions
are mine, and I make not apologies for EITHER.
Sorry, guys, didn't mean to post concepts that threaten your sense of mental
ability, by actually having lots of ideas and big words with many syllables
in them. I realize it's necessary for some of you, who feel you don't want
the rest of the world to know what level your intellect is really at, to
assert that others who display intellect must somehow be inferior and bad. I
am sorry your insecurities prompted this sort of alpha display.
From now on out I use just short word. Ugh. Babe hot. Me fuck. No thought on
how. You do same. Beat chest. It work. Or not.
Irony over. If you don't like it don't read it. Please don't suggest we
censor it.
THIS (semi-flame) WAR IS OVER.
No more comments from me on the concept of posting "too much" or any other
false accusations. Plenty of other comments will be forthcoming, on other
subjects.
Blue_Eyed_Devil
madd...@my-deja.com wrote:
I don't take any offense at your reply, it's just that I see a lot of my
own loser traits in you guys, posting too much and all, and I called
both of you on it since I am trying to move away from the behavior
myself.
Believe me, I am a lot harder on MYSELF than you know :) Esp. after
last night where an overweight but cute girl was slobbering all over me
at the gas station on the way home and I didn't even try to PU her (my
friend told me later she was staring HARD).. don't hesitate goddamnit!
I will give you a lot more credit than Book Gay, at least you go out
when you can and TRY, and don't post annoying dissertations every day
:)
--
~~~~~/ Blue Eyed Devil \~~~~~
DanTheMAN
I think one of the key things in life is to be able to SWITCH between
states. Let me explain.
I don't consider myself AFC, PUA, or anything else. I am not labeled.
Some days I will be down and moody, some days I will be confident, some
days I'll feel like a million. The key is to be able to say to
myself: 'ok, Dan, you are going out tonight, forget about the bad mood,
and feel confident'. So I mean switching between states.
Or the analytical stuff that you are talking about. I can go ahead and
type here on this subject until tomorrow morning. I like to talk about
it. I am an analytical person (degree in Comp. Engineering, very
mathematically inclined). I can analyse stuff until the cows come home.
BUT I choose to SWITCH myself out of this state if it's not
productive. And talking ABOUT women certainly does not help in MEETING
them.
If I meet a girl (or a person for that matter) who is analytical, I
switch myself into that state too, if she is superficial, I keep the bs
talk up.
That's why I'll conclude here by saying that it's important to be able
to SWITCH between whatever states. Even more if you are an analytical
person, you should be able to say to yourself: 'hey, my mind is telling
me that too much analysis when it comes to women is useless, so let me
go practice, and analyze later'.
Some people feel bad for NOT ANALYSING something. If you are that kind
of person, reward yourself afterward by going over in your mind about
what and how happened, etc., etc. Try to give yourself a BREAK and
stop analyzing every once in a while.
Regards,
DanTheMAN.
Book Guy
<thenewu...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>I think one of the key things in life is to be able to SWITCH between
>states. Let me explain.
Yeah. That's exactly why posting lots on this
newsgroup bears very little relation to how
one behaves with women. I just switch states.
It's important to practice switching states,
and I value being able to control my states.
Of course I'm still learning to modify and
manage my states, but knowing which state to
get into and how to get there is part of the
battle. Some shrinks call it
"compartmentalizing", although that's a
slightly different concept. Clinton is
evidently a brilliant compartmentalizer.
(see? your explanation for why NOT to post,
applies just as easily to explaining why TO
post)
AVeryPsychicMale
And in doing so you become a CHAMELEON.
AVeryPsychicMale
>>states. Let me explain.
>
>
>Yeah. That's exactly why posting lots on this
>newsgroup bears very little relation to how
>one behaves with women. I just switch states.
>It's important to practice switching states,
>and I value being able to control my states.
>Of course I'm still learning to modify and
>manage my states, but knowing which state to
>get into and how to get there is part of the
>battle. Some shrinks call it
>"compartmentalizing", although that's a
>slightly different concept. Clinton is
>evidently a brilliant compartmentalizer.
It's called being a CHAMELEON.
Anonymous
respect.
"AVeryPsychicMale" <averypsy...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001101145441...@ng-fl1.aol.com...
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
Jack
>
> You know, if you posted more like this here.....you would get
> a little more respect.
>
Except for one thing. "Ray" meant it as an insult. He can't grasp the
concept of being able to be comfortable in any given situation. Even
Albert Ellis said that being able to be a "Social Chameleon" was a
valuable skill in relating to others. And he said it back in the 60s...
--
John C. Ryan, Jr., M.Ed.
<----------<< =+= >>---------->
Sources for Basic Information
(IOW, Do your own homework)
http://www.pickupguide.com - Maniac High
http://www.seduction.com - Ross Jeffries
http://www.fastseduction.com - Formhandle
http://members.home.net/odious - Odious
-----------
Available for Advisement, Consultation, and Suggestions
=+=
(To reply to me directly, reverse "oohay")
jake...@my-deja.com
> So the best advice you could give me, Y, would be to clue me in to
where the
> Tampa HBs hang out. I'm stunned at the obesity and stupidity, and
frustrated
> at my opportunities. And no, Barnes and Noble does NOT count as an
> intelligent bookstore.
>
Had to delurk to help out here.
Holy Mother? Where do you live in Tampa? This place is crawlin
with HB's. Have you heard of Ybor City? Full of em.
Hyde Park:? Full of em. You need to move your ass to the soho
district where all the young professional women live
[post college chicks 24-34 like you were looking for] If your
single you have no escuse for not moving closer to the action.
Just my view of this fine city. Enjoy
Jake
Book Guy
Jake. Thanks for your advice. I'd like some more specifics on
Tampa, if you could spare the time. Would you email me, or let
me know here at the newsgroup that the deja email you've posted
from is OK for me to use. Thanks. (do the obvious to de-spammify
my email address below)
--
Book Guy
book_guy at yahoo dot com
jake...@my-deja.com
> Jake. Thanks for your advice. I'd like some more specifics on
> Tampa, if you could spare the time. Would you email me, or let
> me know here at the newsgroup that the deja email you've posted
> from is OK for me to use. Thanks. (do the obvious to de-spammify
> my email address below)
>
> --
>
> Book Guy
> book_guy at yahoo dot com
> "To subdue the enemy without fighting is the highest skill." Sun
> Tzu
I never check the deja one. Drop me a line at
Jake_mfer at yahoo dot com