Some Stuff About PUA (very long)

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"The Way of The Superior Man" by David Deida.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is actually an excellent book about projecting that which is true within you instead of putting on a mask in order to hustle people. Which I think may be part of what cardo is getting at, that we can use techniques and still remain genuine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeap!

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Deida

Yugoslav

[guids]

im going to break that whole post down into one little snippet that will explain all:


Being socially adept, if it does not come naturally must be learned, you go through stages if you really want to be a real "social person/pick up chicks", one of these stages is all this PUA BS, it IS something you have to do, false sense of security etc. Unfortunately most of the boneheads who do this [censored], will never progress to being truly adept at getting a long and "liking" people. Until you truly love the company of women, you are just a pig looking for somewhere to stick it.

[KJS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That said, here are the things that bug me about PUA:

-Everyone who spouts the philosophy seems to be convinced that all girls are basically the same deep-down, at least when it comes to what they are attracted to (see Vehn's "Women like men." comment). I simply don't believe this

[/ QUOTE ]

You cheer when your favourite sports-team scores? Yes? So do all the other supporters of your favourite sports team when they score.

You jack off to porn? Yes? So does 99.9% of the people on this board when alone and confronted with the nudy girls.

On a hot day, you crave something cool to drink? Yes? So do other people.

Do all these things mean all those people in these groups mentioned are exactly alike? Fat chance.

Yet they react in certain ways in certain situations.
You do realize that something trivial like advertizing is `guilty` of the same approach?

All these bad marketeers taking advantage of the poor sheep to get them to buy stuff they do not need?


[ QUOTE ]
While I don't doubt the effectiveness of that approach, I see no reason while being confident and in control would preclude actually being nice to someone.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you also have no clue really. Why are you assuming stuff without knowing what the hell you are talking about?

And based on that misconception you judge? How can I be taking you serious as a discussion partner?

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny how the PUA apologists always seem to be the biggest d-bags.

KJS

[daxtrader]

[ QUOTE ]
Until you truly love the company of women, you are just a pig looking for somewhere to stick it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo. That's deep.

[Anacardo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is probably a lost cause thanks to the awfulness of the OP, but I wonder if by heroic effort this thread can somehow be turned to the conversation I wanted to have, i.e. pragmatism vs. idealism and their interactions with each other, as applied to PUA, and not the conversation we're doomed to have, i.e., Cardo and Cardo [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

cardo i like you but this makes no goddamn sense.

i have no idea how pragmatism or idealism apply here. unless you're saying that an idealist hopes that some chick notices how good he is at fencing and they develop a rapport and eventually start [censored], whereas a pragmatist is ensuring he establishes kino within two minutes on all the bar chicks he's relentlessly hitting on.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point is this.

Take this argument, with its two kinda-fake-but-still-kinda real sides. Strip all the logical fallacies and name-calling and [censored] and I still perceive the essential core of an argument that basically goes like this.

PUAs - "Look, get real. This is what works, this is what the world is like, this is how it is."
Nerds - "But it's wrong!"

Even after you sort out all the [censored] you're still left with this, and they're both cases with merit.

This argument is old as time and has a thousand different faces. Pragmatism vs. idealism, being a man of the world vs. being a saint, being 'successful' vs. being 'pure,' etc. etc. ad infinitum. It's the contest between... the one word I know to describe it is 'arete,' a Greek word meaning, essentially, 'commitment to excellence,' and the concept of virtue found in Christianity and various other big-time religions. They've been shouting at each other for thousands of years, and that's what I see here, too. I have always been naturally inclined towards the latter side of the fence, but I think true wisdom comes from a synthesis of both of them, and that's really, really hard to achieve.

[Anacardo]

[ QUOTE ]
im going to break that whole post down into one little snippet that will explain all:


Being socially adept, if it does not come naturally must be learned, you go through stages if you really want to be a real "social person/pick up chicks", one of these stages is all this PUA BS, it IS something you have to do, false sense of security etc. Unfortunately most of the boneheads who do this [censored], will never progress to being truly adept at getting a long and "liking" people. Until you truly love the company of women, you are just a pig looking for somewhere to stick it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Synthesis! Brilliant.

[KJS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is probably a lost cause thanks to the awfulness of the OP, but I wonder if by heroic effort this thread can somehow be turned to the conversation I wanted to have, i.e. pragmatism vs. idealism and their interactions with each other, as applied to PUA, and not the conversation we're doomed to have, i.e., Cardo and Cardo [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

cardo i like you but this makes no goddamn sense.

i have no idea how pragmatism or idealism apply here. unless you're saying that an idealist hopes that some chick notices how good he is at fencing and they develop a rapport and eventually start [censored], whereas a pragmatist is ensuring he establishes kino within two minutes on all the bar chicks he's relentlessly hitting on.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point is this.

Take this argument, with its two kinda-fake-but-still-kinda real sides. Strip all the logical fallacies and name-calling and [censored] and I still perceive the essential core of an argument that basically goes like this.

PUAs - "Look, get real. This is what works, this is what the world is like, this is how it is."
Nerds - "But it's wrong!"

Even after you sort out all the [censored] you're still left with this, and they're both cases with merit.

This argument is old as time and has a thousand different faces. Pragmatism vs. idealism, being a man of the world vs. being a saint, being 'successful' vs. being 'pure,' etc. etc. ad infinitum. It's the contest between... the one word I know to describe it is 'arete,' a Greek word meaning, essentially, 'commitment to excellence,' and the concept of virtue found in Christianity and various other big-time religions. They've been shouting at each other for thousands of years, and that's what I see here, too. I have always been naturally inclined towards the latter side of the fence, but I think true wisdom comes from a synthesis of both of them, and that's really, really hard to achieve.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cardo, I think perhaps you are not making a clear enough separation from the tools, the application and the results.

So what i am observing here is that the apologists are quick to point out that the tools are just that, tools and follow it up with "don't hate on it because some people overdo it". When people who are not apologists or critics chime in with "there is some good stuff in there", they are validating the tools. Not necessarily the application [see references to misogyny etc] and the results ["great for picking up incest victims"] however.

Your critics side seems to not address the tools at all, focussing heavily on the application and results. The "it's wrong" does not focus on the tools that the apologists say are good (ie, having confidence, projecting a strong self image) but rather the application of those tools--which in the wrong hands can result is the mistreatment of women or a degree of "success" with women that the critics find discomforting.

Like bison, El D and some others in this thread have pointed out some synthesis is achievable. This is where your personality comes in! For me the truly wise pay attention to the source of wisdom but not to a degree that they are blind to any possible usefulness. So I may not agree with all the subtexts of PUA but I will admit to being intrigued by some aspects. That alone is a reason to not discount it out of hand, for me.

KJS

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
im going to break that whole post down into one little snippet that will explain all:


Being socially adept, if it does not come naturally must be learned, you go through stages if you really want to be a real "social person/pick up chicks", one of these stages is all this PUA BS, it IS something you have to do, false sense of security etc. Unfortunately most of the boneheads who do this [censored], will never progress to being truly adept at getting a long and "liking" people. Until you truly love the company of women, you are just a pig looking for somewhere to stick it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what Cardo was saying? Or you were saying at some point? There was no way I could get through Cardo's OP, lol.

IMO this is exactly what the community is. A group of guys trying to get to that place. Everyone is at a different stage and many never make it to their ultimate goal (the end is specific to the individual so I'm not going to define it).

Yugoslav

[guids]

Its kind of what cardo was saying. I dont think there are too many guys on this board that have gone through the whole social progression. And it does exist, its not like its different for everyone, 99% of people who just have "it" when dealing with the opposite sex, and arent regarded as pigs/attentionwhores/douches/paying for lessons, go through this progression. I just thought Id clear it up.


and for the record, there are like 2 guys on this board that arent stuck in the douche bag PUA part of things.

[Alamo]

[ QUOTE ]

Funny how the PUA apologists always seem to be the biggest d-bags.

KJS

[/ QUOTE ]

You are entitled to your own opinion, and if I am a d-bag according to you, then so be it.

If you think that sitting behind a keyboard judging people you do not know does not fall into this category, so be it.

Fact is that this whole PUA stuff changed my life for the better, and I insist I do not treat women badly. So if I see generalizations like the one I reacted on in my post, and it is obvious to me it is all based upon hear-say, and no real knowledge of the concepts is obvious, I will react. D-baggy as it might be in your eyes.